this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024

33 points (100.0% liked)

Photography

4549 readers

2 users here now

A community to post about photography:

We allow a wide range of topics here including; your own images, technical questions, gear talk, photography blogs etc. Please be respectful and don't spam.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Photographer@lemmy.world

Question about switching to mirrorless and available systems (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by buffy@lemmy.world to c/photography@lemmy.world

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I know this topic has been discussed a lot before, but in my opinion there is no simple answer to this question.

Lately, I have been a bit disappointed with my Nikon DSLR kit (D3200) and thus I've been considering an upgrade. I got it many years ago, and it is undoubtedly a great, affordable camera that produces great images. I've had lots of fun with it and I can't complain about its performance when shooting -- given ideal conditions. When I am shooting more challenging subjects, however, I feel a bit hindered by my camera body/system. The points that bother me the most are:

Size. The D3200 is a very nice, compact, and lightweight DSLR, but it is still relatively big compared to modern cameras. It won't fit in a jacket pocket even without an attached lens. More current cameras with a higher image quality can be smaller than it is (but heavier). The situation is even worse for higher-end DSLRs.
Autofocus. Again, the D3200 is a fantastic camera if you are just using the center focus spot using the optical viewfinder and nothing else. Live view (contrast) focus is straight up unusable, and there are only 11 (phase) focus points or so if using the viewfinder. At least that's the case with "ordinary" Nikon lenses. I don't know how it performs with higher-end lenses, like the Sigma Art line.
"Low light" performance. I can't bump the ISO significantly before image degradation becomes obvious. Low light in quotes because that's the case even in fairly well-lit situations. Occasionally, I like to print on medium-sized paper (A3+), and if I need anything above ISO 400 to properly expose the image, it won't look that good printed. Of course, I can always stick to printing bright images large and save the "low light" scenes to smaller prints, so this isn't really my main concern.
Custom controls. I wish I could customize the camera settings a bit more. For example, on my camera, the back button AF/AE can be set to lock the AF/AE or as a back button focus. But in image preview mode, the same button "locks" the image so it can't be deleted. Thus, you need to quit image preview before using that button to trigger autofocus again. I would like to have a dedicated AF button so I can shoot straight from image preview if the opportunity arises. Another example of customization I can't do: settings like auto-ISO and shutter speed can't be capped/limited to a certain range. Let's say I want to use auto-ISO but prevent it from going above 400 to avoid too much noise (and decrease shutter speed but risk shaky images). Or the opposite: prevent the shutter speed in aperture priority mode from going below 1/100 to avoid shaky images and then change ISO instead. Well, I can't do either at the moment. Again, a nice feature to have, but totally something I can live with.

From what I have seen, cameras nowadays have gotten pretty good and they do look like a significant upgrade from 10-15 year old bodies. I guess all popular, entry-level, modern cameras (2019-) solve at least 3 of the 4 problems I listed above, so I don't think I can go wrong with any big brand. However, I'm having a hard time deciding with so many options and sensor size/formats available. My options so far are:

Nikon Z. Since I am already familiar with Nikon F lenses, I have read a lot about them and I know the strengths and weaknesses of many of those. That means I likely won't be disappointed if I switch to another system, and I want a certain lens that doesn't exist, or the optical performance is poor, or it is prohibitively expensive. The Z50, Z5, and Z6 all look amazing, and I can pick or switch between a full frame or cropped sensor easier than I would if I was stuck with a micro four thirds. They are more affordable than Sony.
Sony. They seem to be fantastic cameras, with great image quality and features. Sigma and Tamron options for Nikon are likely available for Sony as well. I'm just slightly afraid that lenses might be too expensive for what they offer. Their cameras look super compact and pocketable, which is a huge plus to me. Full frame (A7iii) or cropped (A6400) are also both available for a seamless transition.
Olympus. I think it is impossible to beat micro four thirds in size and affordability. It is perhaps the only system where you can get a wide angle, portrait, fast prime, macro, and telephoto that you can take everywhere in a small bag while not costing you a fortune. They also have pretty nice features, such as the "live mode"/"smartphone photography", where you can get a frame that was captured slightly before the shutter button was pressed. This must be so cool for wildlife. Olympus stabilization is also highly regarded, with people claiming it to be "gimbal-like". The E-M5 iii looks very appealing. My main concern is that I've never used a micro four thirds before and thus I don't know how much I'm letting go in image quality. I already feel that the dynamic range I get with the D3200 rocking a larger, cropped sensor could be better.

I am not considering:

Canon. I completely disagree with their "no third party lenses" policy. To me, that is unacceptable.
Fujifilm. There are barely any telephoto options and they are one of my favorite lens types to use.
Panasonic. I like what I read about the Lumix cameras, but they seem to be behind Olympus regarding micro four third still-focused cameras (apart from the G9). And I don't know much about the L-mount.
Hasselblad, Leica, etc. Too expensive. I want something that I can take with me everywhere and not worry too much if it gets damaged.

I would appreciate if you all could help me figure this out! Especially people who have used more than one modern mirrorless system or have recently transitioned from DSLR to mirrorless. Many thanks in advance!

Edited to add:

I forgot to describe how exactly I use my camera. I mostly shoot:

"Lifestyle" photos, like something cool I've seen while biking to work, walking in the park, visiting museums, etc.
Hiking, biking, backpacking photos, like landscape, close ups, macro, wildlife, etc.
Birds of all sizes.
Occasionally, street photography if there's some cool event going on.
I do like to shoot video, so something that would be 4K capable would be great.

all 36 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Durandal 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Just a couple minor points to add to your consideration. IDK what your budget is but buying a used flagship camera is often better than a new midrange camera. The main difference you’re going to not be able to easily compete with is newer sensor tech but there are some really stellar older cameras.

You don’t mention what kind of photography you’re trying to do and that would make difference.

I picked up a used canon 7D mark 2 for about $350 used it basically perfect condition. Because this was a prosumer flagship at the time it has all the bells and whistles of that era. It’s my primary wildlife camera. I picked up an Olympus OM-D E-M5 2 recently for about $450. Their prices have bumped up a lot I think because everyone is getting into street photography. I’ve been having lots of fun with it. Got a 7.5mm Rokinon fisheye and a 14-42mm zoom. Been fun doing closeups on insects and landscape stuff so far. It’s very compact and feature rich. M43 lenses are much cheaper entry point than APS-C and FF are so for just having fun it’s way cheaper to experiment. Having IBIS is really nice too.

Both cameras have tons of customizaility. They aren’t the low light champs a full frame would be but getting some faster primes has helped with that. I picked one up from UsedPhotoPro and the other from MPB. They do a good job going over the cameras and showing you the exact one you’re purchasing and they offer 6-12 month guarantees on all the stuff they sell which is nice.

It sounds like you really want something lighter weight so M43 might be a good way to go. There are some really nice cameras in M43. The prices even new are less. Flagship Sony, canon, Nikon are all in that 5-7000 range and flagship Olympus and Panasonic are like 2000-2500 new. Something I decided was to get a used M43 knowing that because it’s an open standard any lenses I got would mostly work between Olympus and Panasonic if I upgraded to a new body. It’s also a good way to get a “pro” style more DSLR like body if you want and a super small pocket camera style at the same time and have a collection of lenses to choose from as the whim suits.

--edit--

Okay either you edited while I was typing or I didn't see before what you said your types of photography were.

As happy as I have been with my canon DSLR... I agree with you ( and many others ). Canon's policy about 3rd party lenses is utter bullshit... and their first party glass is way overpriced. Only their L glass can really outshine anyone and it's stupidly overpriced... their regular stuff you're better with sigma and since their new R system stuff doesn't play nice with that it's a non-starter really. (Now if you wanted to go with DSLR, it's a different story but those are chunky and heavy... my wildlife rig weighs 8-10lbs depending on what I bring for just the camera itself)

With you starting your post about camera size and mentioning the nikon d3200.. which isn't a large DSLR... I really think the M43 format might be worth looking into. Another big advantage of M43 is even if the body is the same size, the lenses will be considerably smaller and lighter than comparable APS-C or FF lenses. So size and weight will be greatly reduced. The crop factor on M43 is 2x (as opposed to 1.5x nikon APS-C and 1.6x canon APS-C) so getting more "reach" with a lens for things like birds is easier with smaller focal length glass as well. Since most of them will have good IBIS since it's easier to stabilize physically smaller sensor as well. Not that new APS-C and FF cameras can't have good IBIS.. but for example my OM-D E-M5 2 has several stops of 5 axis IBIS on a camera from 2015. I can handhold shots at 1/2 second shutter speeds. Newer cameras will be even better. For hiking et al, the smaller size and weight will be a bonus. For street photography it's one of the go to systems because of the small size. Etc.

The 4K video is going to be a stickier subject and looking into hybrid cameras is much trickier. I recommend checking out petapixel's youtube. That's where the DPReview guys ended up and their stuff is great. It focuses on both still and video so a review of anything will be well rounded. https://www.youtube.com/@PetaPixel for their older stuff DPReview is still around for now as well https://www.youtube.com/@dpreview I also really like MicroFourNerds stuff if you wanted to look at a ton of different reviews focused on M43 system. https://www.youtube.com/@MicroFourNerds

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Thank you for such a great reply! I will try to address your points individually.

First, agreed that used flagship always beats brand-new midrange. I will likely buy a higher-end (not flagship) camera used, because that's what I do for basically everything (lenses, laptops, bikes, etc). I was a bit hesitant to state a budget because I am slightly flexible with it. However, I do not want to own a setup that costs more than $2k including everything. I was thinking about spending ~$500-750 on the body, and ~$1k-1.5k on lenses (long-term). I would like to have a compact, flexible kit lens, a long telephoto (I'm talking ~600mm equivalent), and a dedicated macro. Fast primes and pancake primes might be interesting depending on how I feel about the camera body. I know this is feasible with Nikon (given the FTZ adapter) and Olympus (as you know from experience). I am unsure about Sony.

I will likely do the same thing as you did, and buy from MPB, KEH, Adorama, UsedPhotoPro, etc. The local shops in my area pay too little for cameras and usually charge too much unless you are patient and find a gem. Also, the no-questions-asked return policy I can get online is much better than what local shops can afford to provide.

Second, I agree that the D3200 is a small DSLR. I've noticed that its size doesn't bother me most of the time, but it isn't a camera I can easily take with me everywhere. For example, it still can't fit in a pocket or small bag, so I need to carry a relatively large bag to bring the camera and one extra lens with me. That is definitely not the case with feature-packed, smaller mirrorless cameras, like the Lumix GX or the Sony A6x00 series. On the other hand, I would also like to have more dynamic range and "low light" performance than the D3200 when camera size isn't a problem. For that reason, I was considering avoiding mirrorless altogether and getting a Nikon F full-frame for situations where size isn't a problem (D610, D750, D810), and a compact point-and-shoot to carry around at all times (Z-V1, RX100). However, two things made me think that this might not be a good idea. One reason is that "good" compact cameras nowadays are the same price as arguably better mirrorless without much compromise in size, so why even bother with a point-and-shoot? The other reason is that I wouldn't be able to mix-and-match lenses, which would also be nice.

Lastly, I will be sure to check out PetaPixel's videos. I've seen a lot of MicroFourNerds' content and I agree that she is great.

I'm glad to hear you're enjoying the E-M5ii. I was thinking about getting the E-M5iii because of the 4K video. I skipped the E-M10 line due to the lack of weather sealing and "downgraded" processor (as MicroFourNerds recommended). The E-M1 is much heavier given that it is "for pros", so it kind of defeats the purpose of portability in my case.

[–] Durandal 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I agree that point and shoot or bridge cameras are a a little silly these days. I have been looking into the M43 stuff because I can add a few different sized and featured bodies while sticking with interchangeable lenses that are part of the same system. Some of the M43 bodies are absolutely tiny, especially if you're willing to give up the viewfinder and only use the back screen.

I saw you mention in another reply about how the newer M43 seem to be not doing compact cameras anymore. It's hard to say if that trend will continue or not... panasonic seems to be doing more of that sort of thing still and offering things across the spectrum of use cases. I feel like the popularity of street photography right now will likely make some new compact things show up eventually. I would point out, also, that the sony a7iii you're mentioning is basically the same physical size as the OM-1 series... but the lenses will be half the size. https://camerasize.com/compare/#777,918 so your total kit size and weight will be much smaller.

I watched countless videos looking at little M43 cameras before I picked up the E-M5 II. The weather sealing was definitely a big bonus for a little camera. I don't care about video at all, so I was happy to go with the slightly older version. The better hand held "high rez" on the E-M5 III is nice, though I've heard the build quality is a little more plasticy. Personal preference really.. .it does reduce weight a bit. As for image quality... I have been very happy with my results. This is one of the first cameras where I've been mostly happy with the JPEGs that come directly out of camera. I still shoot RAW+JPEG but I find myself only editing occasionally when sharing which is nice.

Don't get me wrong, the stuff that comes out of sony SLR style cameras is really good. They definitely do some good stuff in their sensors. And if you get their G series lenses, they are very nice... but expensive. You've just mentioned the size and carry weight a bit and I've fixated on that. When I'm out birding, I always run into other people as well... and the rigs that people are carrying for sony, nikon, and canon are all the same size. A lot of people carrying 150-600 or 100-400 lenses... and they're huge. That was one of the motivations for wanting a second camera and adding some M43 into my lineup.

One of the things that I have done with camera and lens purchases is go to flickr. You can search hashtags by item name. So when I was looking for M43 I was comparing the omd em5 ii vs the lumix gx8... so I just searched for those and you'll get a bunch of real world photos that people have taken to see what things looked like. Same thing for lenses... searching for a lens make and model... and you'll see that lens how it looks on multiple different bodies. A good quick way to compare a lot of real world stuff and not the clinical shots that reviewers use. Both are useful.

The advice I've always received, and it makes sense to me, is pick a lens system. Lenses hold value and last longer than camera bodies, especially with digital. So if there is a system that has a lot of lenses you like and options (seriously fck canon and their no 3rd party rules) it makes sense to get those and get a body to match.

Good luck on the search. Try not to let the spec overload get to you... at the end of the day most cameras are pretty good these days. Once you've narrowed to some of the better ones, anything you choose will likely make you happy. :)

--edit-- Added a full rez image from the first day I had the EM5II taken with the 14-42mm kit lens. Unedited JPEG out of camera just so you can see the detail, as that was a concern you voiced.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yes, I can totally see someone owning a GX8/85 and an E-M1X and pushing both to their full potential with interchangeable lenses, taking advantage of individual strengths. Should be really fun to just grab whatever fits in your bag and bring it with you.

I also understand that the size difference between Sony full frame and Olympus M43 is ridiculous, despite bodies being the same size, if you consider the whole setup. I do own one of those huge full frame DSLR super telephoto lenses, and it isn't exactly easy to shoot handheld. Doable, but less forgiving than a lighter setup. Moreover, I restrict its usage to birding almost exclusively, since it is a pain to carry that lens around. I'm sure image quality would be amazing if I had a nice full frame (or higher-end cropped) body to take full advantage of the lens for birding in challenging light, but I can't help but wonder if I would bring the smaller (M43) telephoto lens with me more often if I had one. Especially so if I take into account those situations where I am not "just birding", but walking around or hiking and I happen to spot cool birds that I'd love to photograph.

I like the flickr advice. I will check it out for sure. It should be especially helpful when comparing similar cameras. From what I've seen online from other sources, Sony in particular crushes M43 for low light video, but I haven't noticed much of a difference in stills. I guess nowadays it all boils down to personal preference. Camera Conspiracies has talked about full frame vs M43 in good light and in low light. Even though he is sometimes hard to follow due to his sarcastic style, I found those videos to be a great resource.

Also, thank you for sharing that picture! Honestly, the high resolution mode looks great to me, I would have nothing to complain about it. I might actually consider a lower-end camera to start experimenting with another system, as another fellow commenter suggested I should do for Sony (to get an A6000).

[–] Durandal 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Heh yeah... my supertelephoto is a commitment. I only carry it when I know that wildlife photos are what I'm doing. Ended up getting a monopod and a peak designs slide strap to help mitigate some of the weight. So I can sling it over my shoulder and carry it on my back now which helps. Highly recommend their strap system stuff if you haven't tried it... definitely lived up to the hype for me. I kept wanting another interchangeable lens camera for other days so M43 seemed like a good choice for my use case.

You're talking about wanting to do low light and particularly low light video... the newer sony stuff will just about blow anyone else away. I've heard good stuff about the panasonic's newer stuff... but sony is known for that. From what I've seen the quality of their sensor noise when it does start showing is more pleasant... more impulse noise than color... so you'll get salt and pepper noise which looks more like old film grain which can make things look more cinematic even.

If you want to compare dynamic range and usable ISO, DXOmark has lots and lots of charts for that sort of thing. I wouldn't take their stuff as the end all be all... read it more like a spec sheet so you can compare two different things. https://www.dxomark.com/sony-a6000-sensor-review-little-wonder/

The a6xxx series definitely sits at a reasonable price point for the bodies. IDK that much about their lenses or prices for that... but it does look like you could get a body for $300-600 on mpb in excellent condition. I have heard good things about the a6xxx series as well, so it could very well be a good jumping in point if you wanted to get into their ecosystem. Looks like DPReview did a few videos about that series of cameras... I'd check those out for sure. They like to split their videos into several sections... and have equal time for stills and video which will give a really good rundown of things usually.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

My next purchase if I were to keep the super telephoto would definitely be a big tripod/monopod combo. But I just sent it to KEH to fund the new body and lenses I'm getting. Let's see how it goes. Thanks for the Peak Design strap recommendation. I have the clip and quick release anchor links, and I must say I love both accessories. I'll make sure to check out the strap on my next trip to REI.

Regarding shooting video, there are basically two situations where I use the video mode:

Recording birds when it's early or late in the day. For that, I would need low light performance. But even if the image is noisy, who cares. It bothers me more when my mic captures noise from other people around.
B-roll for my outdoor trips (biking, hiking, snow sports, etc) to complement my action camera stuff. My gopro sucks in low light anyway, so I don't care if my B-roll video camera is going to suck as well. I shoot in 4K on it, so I feel like action videos with some cinematic depth of field from a mirrorless camera in 4K would look very nice as B-roll.

Actually, I just got back from my trip to the camera store to check out what they had available. I got to test Nikon, Sony, Olympus, and Panasonic. Basically all the camera models I had in mind.

Nikon was the most ergonomic by far. Holding their cameras feels so comfortable and natural, it's amazing. However, the moment I held the Z50, I noticed how it actually isn't that much smaller compared to the D3200. I mean, yes, it is slightly smaller, but not "oh, now we pocketable". So I checked out the Z5, which is roughly the same size as the Z50 anyway. "Go big or go home", I guess. The full frame kit lens, however, is much bulkier than cropped. I figured the whole full frame setup wasn't going to be small, but still it felt better than the Z50 in every other aspect. Buttons, for instance, are definitely a step up from cropped. Made more sense to me.
Sony struck me as more interesting than Nikon. That's because they have actually pocketable camera bodies for cropped (rangefinder style) and large bodies if we're talking full frame (SLR style). The A7iv was roughly the same size as the Z5, but the A6400 is so compact (unlike the Z50) that it is actually pocketable with a pancake-ish lens. True, most of their lenses are not small, but I could see a smaller lens working well as a nifty setup with an A6x00 body.
Olympus is actually rather impressive. Their bodies are so small and well-built, everything is smooth and easy to use. And yeah, those lenses are tiny. I was amazed by how compact they are. A full setup easily fits in a medium camera bag/insert. Sadly, it was the least ergonomic brand of all, but apart from that, I liked what I saw.
Panasonic was exactly how I thought it would be. Those modern bodies are inexplicably bulky. I'm assuming that's probably because of all the juice needed to handle heavy video loads. They are definitely catering to a different audience recently; the hybrid shooters who want cinematic video. If I were to get a Panasonic body, it would be an older, more compact model. Their build quality feels great, but the cameras are very big.

In summary, I have ruled out all bigger camera bodies for now. So, I'll have to pick between Sony A6x00 series, Panasonic GX or Olympus E-M5. I'll follow your advice and think about it further after checking out what sources like DPReview have to say.

[–] Durandal 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Included a picture of my 7D2 with 50mm next to my EM52 with 42mm to see the size difference "IRL". Thought it might be a fun comparison.

I wish I had some more useful information about the video side of things but it's really not my thing. The a7 (starting with the 3 or 4 idr) have been touting the dual native ISO thing which would be applicable to your low light video... but you're talking about the more expensive and slightly larger bodies.

Nikon was the most ergonomic by far. Holding their cameras feels so comfortable and natural, it’s amazing.

A little of that is probably because it's what you're used to... but a big thing about those larger bodies is that they are made to be comfortable in the hand. One of the reasons I wanted to upgrade from a mid DSLR to a full DSLR was to that it felt better in my hand to hold especially with larger lenses on it. It's always a trade off between ergonomics and size / weight. Something to consider is that many cameras have things you can add or change to adjust the ergonomics to a degree. The EM5 was just a tad too small for my hand but I got a little, inexpensive handle that adds like a centimeter to the bottom and a bit of a grip and now it's great to hold one handed. I wouldn't buy something that you hated but there's definitely things you can do to adjust them.

Sony struck me as more interesting than Nikon. That’s because they have actually pocketable camera bodies for cropped (rangefinder style)

Yeah... rangefinder style bodies are definitely going to feel more "portable". You sacrifice some of the in hand ergonomics, but if you aren't holding it for an hour or two straight staring at a bird waiting for it to do something... it's less of an issue lol. One of the points between the olympus em5ii and the lumix gx8 I was tossing around was the body style. The rangefinder style does feel different and slim for an EDC sorta camera for sure.

Olympus is actually rather impressive. Their bodies are so small and well-built, everything is smooth and easy to use. And yeah, those lenses are tiny.

The conversation about olympus vs panasonic circles around the lens stabilization a lot because they choose different methods and have evolved from that. On the older style cameras like my EM5II they chose to go with IBIS (full 5axis which has been really nice coming from a DSLR) so they don't include any stabilization in their brand lenses. That means their lenses can be half the size and weight which is really cool. It also means I get some stabilization on manual 3rd party lenses which is nice. The newer panasonic like the G9II, IIRC, handle IBIS on non-first party lenses better than olympus in their current flagships.. but it's one of those things where you have to look at each one. The cool thing is that M43 is M43... while you might have a lenses and camera combo here and there that isn't great... mostly they're interchangeable so you could get a small, cheap Olympus and later get a brand new panasonic and the lenses would still fit (which was my plan heh).

I have ruled out all bigger camera bodies for now. So, I’ll have to pick between Sony A6x00 series, Panasonic GX or Olympus E-M5.

It might be worth considering having more than one camera as the end goal. I realized I wouldn't get everything I wanted from one camera because having a large ergonomic dslr with nearly infinite battery life... and a tiny light mirrorless were mutually exclusive. With used sites it has gotten a lot more reasonable to have a couple systems. It sounds like the sony is really appealing to you and if you were going to buy into two systems Sony and M43 would be a solid choice, IMHO. You're going to have a good selection of bodies and lenses on the sony side so you can get some nice lenses and then update bodies if you want to later on. Also with how popular their stuff is I would imaging you wouldn't have a hard time selling your system if you changed your mind in a couple years either. M43 being an open standard has multiple manufacturers on board so it has a lot of good lens choices. There are some fun "artistic" lens makers like 7artisans and laowa making some interesting stuff and they usually make for sony and M43 so if you got into any of those your bases are covered.

So, I’ll have to pick between Sony A6x00 series, Panasonic GX or Olympus E-M5.

I have heard those 3 choices recommended over and over online. I don't think you can really go wrong with any of them. The video side is going to be the biggest sticky point with the older bodies. Even getting the EM5II I still kind of want a GX8... there's a couple features I like and the body style is appealing. I'm beginning to see why all these camera youtubers have a wall of tiny cameras behind them lol. Also... "lens acquisition syndrome" ... the struggle is real haha.

Thanks for the Peak Design strap recommendation. I have the clip and quick release anchor links, and I must say I love both accessories. I’ll make sure to check out the strap on my next trip to REI.

If you decide you like that system it definitely has a few fun things you can attach to those clips. I've got those little red dots hanging off all my stuff now. I got a hand grip (see picture above) on my DSLR. I got the wrist strap for the EM5II. I got the full size "slide" for my DSLR. I am considering getting one of the smaller ones or the adapter clips for the EM5II. I love the ability to add and remove as I go depending on how and what I want to carry. If you go to their site, they sell directly as well... and more importantly they have a "last call" for last years models that are being clearanced out as well as a certified and fully warrantied "pre-owned" section. I have gotten some good deals from them and all the pre-owned stuff has looked brand new but half priced. https://www.peakdesign.com/

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Ha, nice comparison between the huge Canon and the tiny Olympus.

The EM5 was just a tad too small for my hand but I got a little, inexpensive handle that adds like a centimeter to the bottom and a bit of a grip and now it’s great to hold one handed

I've definitely seen people selling bodies with those handles on Craigslist. From what I've noticed, they are pretty popular as a modular solution to improve handling. I'll definitely look into getting one regardless of my ultimate choice, since it will be a small camera.

Also, I'm aware of the Olympus vs Panasonic IBIS stuff, it is definitely something I'm taking into consideration because I guess IBIS might be better than OIS in general for the reasons you mentioned. The GX8 has IBIS, but I'm sure it pales in comparison to the E-M5iii (5 axis). I agree that it is great to just be able to add a more powerful body (like the G9ii) to your setup without having to use different lenses. Big plus for M43, since there's no difference in sensor size.

You mentioned

It might be worth considering having more than one camera as the end goal.

This is what I'm starting to realize. I'm definitely inclined to try out both Sony and M43 because they both shine at their own individual strengths. As you said, a rangefinder-style body is very nice as an EDC, while a bigger SLR style camera would do well for shooting-only days. It's great that you mention 7artisans and Laowa, those look like a lot of fun to me, definitely one of the reasons I want to switch to mirrorless.

At the moment, I'm trying to decide between Sony A6x00 (A6100 or A6400), or M43, either GX8 or E-M5iii. My local shop has a used GX8 available that I will probably check out. If I were to get a Sony or Olympus, it would have to be through MPB or UsedPhotoPro due to availability. I'll think about it and make a decision. My starting point would be one of the three options below:

Sony A6100 or A6400 + Sony E PZ 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS
Olympus E-M5iii + Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 EZ
Panasonic GX8 + Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-32mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH Mega O.I.S.

Plus one budget telephoto for whatever "kit" I end up deciding to get. But I'm definitely inclined to invest in both systems in the long term.

About Peak Design,

and more importantly they have a “last call” for last years models that are being clearanced out as well as a certified and fully warrantied “pre-owned” section

That's a great tip! I didn't know that was a thing. I'm browsing their pre-owned section now, that's actually amazing. Thank you for sharing!

Well, now I guess I'll start considering those three options and I might update the post once I have a more informed opinion. I'm not too worried because I'm sure all those three options are great cameras. I'll watch some videos and look at the side-by-side specs comparison spreadsheet more carefully.

[–] Durandal 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The GX8 has IBIS, but I’m sure it pales in comparison to the E-M5iii (5 axis). So panasonic was leaning towards stabilized lenses so they would work on any camera body... and olympus was leaning towards ibis so it was lens agnostic. So if you use a panasonic lens on a panasonic camera some of them will do a "sync" stablization which uses both in lens and in camera to make a "more stablized" total. There's so many details to keep track of heh. For me the IBIS on olympus being 5axis sounded really good and was well reviewed... and from what I had heard their lenses were sharper across the board. Not that the panasonic lenses are bad, just that the lower end (non pro stuff) was sharper overall. I liked that they're lighter weight as well so that I'm not getting a big "surprise this lens weighs as much as a small horse".

Olympus E-M5iii + Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 EZ

I have this lens for my EM5ii and it is quite sharp and tiny af. That's what's showing in that picture I posted, if you hadn't noticed. It extends when in use about 2x but still small. I have mixed feelings about the EZ portion of it but overall it's a really nice little lens for just wandering around. With the crop factor it's a 28-84mm which is a nice range for just an all around lens to do landscape, street, portrait. That bee photo I posted was that lens... the MFD is like 9 inches.

I grabbed a couple videos comparing the mark ii and the mark iii from some more M43 focused youtubers that I've liked just to give some comparison for you talking about those specific cameras.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biOmDEROWJ0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xh96vJ5MQEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bid2fAIxkNY

I was looking for a lumix GX8 but a couple big deciding factors for me were: better IBIS, weather sealing, and price. I could find the EM5II for 400ish... but the GX8 was staying around 600.

Plus one budget telephoto for whatever “kit” I end up deciding to get.

I don't know sony line-up at all really. The M43 side has some really cheap (even brand new) zooms that are well reviewed. a lot of the 40ish-140ish range (before 2x). Kind of puts you into that 70-300mm equivalency which is a really solid "walk around and take some wildlife pictures" sorta lens for me... and these are like the size of a soda can! Keep debating just getting one.. bhphoto has them new for like $130 on a sale right now... mpb has been sitting around 80-100 in "excellent" condition. Only reason I haven't is because I have those telephotos for my canon and it feels silly to duplicate heh.

That’s a great tip! I didn’t know that was a thing. I’m browsing their pre-owned section now, that’s actually amazing. Thank you for sharing!

Absolutely. :) I kept hearing how good the peak design "slide" was and vacillated for a long time because of the price. Glad I jumped on it though, I've been really happy. I have a ton of their stuff now and I love how they use that same quick connector and always give you a couple more than you need for putting on other stuff. They even sell a pack now of just the latch system so you can use it to adapt existing camera straps if you want for a cheaper alternative, which is kinda cool.

Something else I was going to bring up... there are a lot of camera and lens rental shops around... depending on prices you might be able to rent something to test out if they keep it in stock. Might be that these cameras are too old... IDK.

Another thing is you might find after a year of using that this or that feature is lacking or unused or whatever. I didn't think I needed a smaller camera for a while but I find myself this year wanting to just walk in the park with a little camera some days which spurred me on. You might find that you just enjoy whatever one you want and then want to fill the gaps with something else. These "used but checked and warrantied" sites like mpg et al really put my mind at east buying used gear so I felt like a lot of the pressure of price was eased.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I've been watching an insane amount of M43 videos lately.

Right now, I kind of feel like that the performance beast (high image quality days) + pocket rangefinder (travel or daily carry) is a really attractive setup, like Lumix G9 plus GX85, or E-M1X plus E-M5 III. I also found that I can indeed get all the lenses that I want (with professional quality) for under $2k (wide kit, two fast primes, macro, telephoto). Yes, that whole setup would be really light and small, to the point where camera and two or three lenses can be inconspicuously carried around in pockets.

I don't want to spend a ton, but I also think that I should "go big or go home". I want to feel the improvement, but without breaking the bank. Basically, my options remain the same (E-M5 III, GX85, etc). I'm trying to find something close to ~$500, and I'll make a final decision after KEH pays me if they really are keeping my Nikon lenses.

That bee photo I posted was that lens… the MFD is like 9 inches.

That was honestly great, I'm impressed. I've seen macro photos people have taken on M43, and they look great all the way from wide-angle to telephoto range. I guess the deeper depth of field and image stabilization is a huge plus for handheld macro, even though a full frame setup (with a different lens) will clearly capture more light and push the ISO further (or use a flash).

I don’t know sony line-up at all really. The M43 side has some really cheap (even brand new) zooms that are well reviewed. a lot of the 40ish-140ish range (before 2x). Kind of puts you into that 70-300mm equivalency

Yes, I would aim for 450mm+ full frame equivalent. From experience, I feel like 450mm in full frame is great, 600mm isn't much of an upgrade, and 800mm is awesome (but heavy).

For Sony, the best I could do on a budget would be the Tamron 70-300mm ($500 new, say $350 used) and the Sigma 100-400mm ($850 new, say $600 used).

For M43, there's the Olympus 75-300mm ($550 new, say $400 used) and the Panasonic 100-300mm ($650 new, say $500 used).

Options aren't bad for either, considering crop factor, size, and price. I would say they are virtually tied, with APS-C having a slight edge on image quality and video autofocus, and M43 winning on either reach (considering the 70-300mm) or weight and bulk (considering the 100-400mm without the hood) .

I would probably get one of those "do-it-all" lenses you're talking about, as well. They would be great travel assets, I think. But to be honest, I'm unsure how much of an improvement that would be, considering that carrying a wide plus a telephoto lenses is no big deal anyway if they are M43.

Something else I was going to bring up… there are a lot of camera and lens rental shops around… depending on prices you might be able to rent something to test out if they keep it in stock. Might be that these cameras are too old… IDK.

Unfortunately, shops around me only rent full frame flagship legends, so I'm out of luck. There's a local Olympus "borrow our equipment for free for 4 days" program, though. But they only lend their newest releases. I couldn't find an option to borrow both an OM-5 body and an all-purpose lens. Tomorrow I'll call them and see if that's possible.

Another thing is you might find after a year of using that this or that feature is lacking or unused or whatever

That's exactly why I'm hesitant to commit to one system or the other. I'm asking myself "do I really need something this light and tiny? Maybe I don't, perhaps my current setup is already small enough and I won't care much about a smaller camera. But maybe I do, and it will be a game changer when I realize it". The same thing for creepy Sony eye-tracking autofocus. Who knows if I will simply not care or absolutely love it. There's a possibility that I'll hate Panasonic contrast-only autofocus (I know it's straight up unusable on my Nikon D3200, while the D500 puts every other camera out there to shame). I might also not care the least and even forget that I don't have phase contrast AF. Well, the list goes on and on; IBIS, high-resolution mode, focus stacking, bracketing, flippy screen, yadda yadda yadda.

I guess I'll only find out when I pull the trigger on one of those. Options are too volatile right now, on all platforms: Craigslist, eBay, Roberts Camera, KEH, MPB, etc. I'll have consider my options carefully when I get my money from KEH.

What I've seen is,

Panasonic, there's a GX85 selling for $400 locally (craigslist), and a GX8 for $500+tax (local shop).
Olympus, UsedPhotoPro is the best, with a fairly used E-M5 III for ~$450+tax and refurbished for $635+tax.
Sony, A6400 for $610-$650 occasionally popping up on KEH, or the A6100 occasionally available for $500 on eBay.

I'll start with one of those bodes plus an all-purpose wide to mid range zoom and see how I like it for "everyday" stuff.

[–] Durandal 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I’ve been watching an insane amount of M43 videos lately.

haha.. I feel you. I binge watch videos about stuff when I'm researching it.

Right now, I kind of feel like that the performance beast (high image quality days) + pocket rangefinder (travel or daily carry) is a really attractive setup, like Lumix G9 plus GX85, or E-M1X plus E-M5 III.

I really couldn't come up with a "perfect camera" that covered every base... and honestly I think it's physically impossible for me. I like the feel of the larger full size DSLR bodies in hand and I like the little tiny M43... so having two makes the most sense for me. Since I'm fine with older bodies the prospect of getting two cameras for less than buying one new camera is appealing. Just a note.. the Lumix GX8 is an upgrade over the GX85 in a few ways without being THAT much bigger, so might look at that. I really leaned into picking a "system". I love my EM5II so far... but I know these lenses will work if I get a Lumix G9II or OM-1 later on so I feel better about investing. It's the same with my canon.. I've almost exclusively gotten EF glass so it can be used on a full frame body if I got one down the road. Practicality aside... I'm also just enjoying having different stuff with a different feel to mess around with so swapping systems (canon and olympus) is more fun than chore.

I want to feel the improvement, but without breaking the bank

The EM5II is from 2015... and it's so feature packed that I'm still learning the toys in it. The IBIS alone is a game changer for some stuff. Also "focus peaking" which is giving you focus indicators on manual lenses opens up a lot of manual lenses that I might have avoided before... which are dirt cheap comparatively and often lighter weight.

Yes, I would aim for 450mm+ full frame equivalent. From experience, I feel like 450mm in full frame is great, 600mm isn’t much of an upgrade, and 800mm is awesome (but heavy).

Yeah, absolutely has to do with what you shoot for sure. I have a 70-300 and felt it just was always a little too short for me so the upgrade to the 150-600 was worth it.. even though it's like a bag of bricks to carry lol. But I'm using it for long distance wildlife, mostly birds. The size and weight are definitely something I have to consider before I leave the house though... so it will be interesting to see in a couple years if I fully transition to M43.

I guess the deeper depth of field and image stabilization is a huge plus for handheld macro, even though a full frame setup (with a different lens) will clearly capture more light and push the ISO further (or use a flash).

Doing some macro stuff you can just shoot. If you really get into macro shots though... you will want a flash, and a diffusion hood no matter what camera system you use. Since I didn't want to invest in a ton of new glass for the occasional macro shot, I picked up an inexpensive set of extension tubes for my canon setup to do macro shots. I'm considering getting a set for my Olympus as well. It's a nice "hack" because it turns any lens you have into a macro (to different degrees) for $20-40 total.

I would probably get one of those “do-it-all” lenses you’re talking about, as well.

There are pros and cons with everything. A wide to telephoto is great for versatility but is going to be larger and you won't be able to get as fast of a lens overall. So it will come down to what you end up doing. If you end up getting a smaller camera that you carry everywhere, you might find you're leaning into one or another style and enjoying certain things more or less. I never liked prime lenses that much until I started carrying one around more but I have come to appreciate them. Also... with your discussion about low light, a prime lens will likely be good because they are so fast... especially once you start getting into the longer ranges. I really like this little 14-42mm but it's like f3.5-5.6... so I'm considering getting a really fast prime. 7artisans makes a 55mm f1.4 that's tempting me for around $130. Looks like it's on sale for $107 right now.. huh.. I'm not sure if I'm saving money or not because these are all starting to go into the "well... it's not THAT much" territory haha

That’s exactly why I’m hesitant to commit to one system or the other. I’m asking myself “do I really need something this light and tiny? Maybe I don’t, perhaps my current setup is already small enough and I won’t care much about a smaller camera. But maybe I do, and it will be a game changer when I realize it”.

I feel you there. I played that game for a loooong time. That's how I talked myself into getting an older body and investing in the lens system. I haven't regretted it yet, if that helps heh. I will point out that MPB has a 14 day return window... so if you get it and a week later you realize "wow.. this isn't it..." there are options. I don't know if there are any catches... I don't think so... but I'd make sure. I believe UPP does as well. No clue on KEH but their prices can't match MPB and UPP most of the time.

Options are too volatile right now, on all platforms: Craigslist, eBay, Roberts Camera, KEH, MPB, etc. I’ll have consider my options carefully when I get my money from KEH.

For me I ruled out everything but the "reputable" sites because I had a limited budget and if something like craigslist or ebay was a lemon it would be wasted money. With MPB and UPP... they warranty the items and are giving it a once over before they even list it... which gave me a lot more peace of mind. My camera body from UPP fell under a 1 year extended warranty even which was cool.

I’ll start with one of those bodes plus an all-purpose wide to mid range zoom and see how I like it for “everyday” stuff.

That's a good starting point. You might also consider a small prime lens like a 20mm or 35mm because they're so freakin' tiny and you can get a very fast lens in those sized for a reasonable price, they will be fun for shooting while wandering and if you go with a M43 you could probably stick it in a pocket (jack or cargo pants at least heh).

If you do finally decide on something I'd love to hear back and see how it goes. :) 📷

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

After careful consideration, I've got a used E-M1 Mark II from my local shop. I found it for fairly cheap ($300, plus $80 for 1 year warranty and tax). I decided to pass on the GX85 ($400 for body-only) and G85 ($500 including the general purpose kit lens + tele kit lens), despite the great price. Mostly because of my awful experience with contrast AF, where it was unusable compared to phase-detect AF on my D3200.

I found a Sony A6100+kit lens for $440 (amazing deal), but after looking into their lenses, I felt like they were too expensive to the point where it wasn't really worth it getting an entry-level camera. You know, with Sony you really need to go big or go home, unlike M43 where quality glass can be affordable. Basically, if I were to buy an $800 lens, it wouldn't make sense to skimp on the body. I still plan on getting a Sony in the future, but I'll probably save for a nice full frame (A7III, A7C, etc) or higher-end APS-C (A6600) instead.

I still don't own any M43 lenses to test the camera outside, but I'm inclined to get:

Compact kit like the lens you own (14-42mm);
All-purpose kit for travel/hiking (14-150mm or something);
To be determined between: fast and manual prime (wider angle, ~9-17mm-ish), long reach telephoto (~300mm-ish), or macro (~60mm-ish).

I will order the first lens now, and think things through for the next two possibilities. I honestly don't know how wide of an aperture I'll need yet, but I'll likely have an idea after feeling how the camera performs in low light with the kit lens.

I will keep you posted and update the original post soon relating my experience!

[–] Durandal 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I’ve got a used E-M1 Mark II from my local shop. I found it for fairly cheap ($300, plus $80 for 1 year warranty and tax)

That's a great deal, very nice!

I feel you on that lumix series. I like the way they look and they have good reviews, but the prices are inflated right now for some reason which sucks.

I found a Sony A6100+kit lens for $440 (amazing deal), but after looking into their lenses, I felt like they were too expensive to the point where it wasn’t really worth it getting an entry-level camera.

Absolutely where I ended up. I knew I could get myself in at a certain point and then upgrade and swap things around later as needed, so it wouldn't be wasted. I've been getting really good deals on some quality budget glass for the olympus. I did end up picking up that olympus 40-150mm for $80 in what appears to be perfect condition from mpb. I can tell it's a more budget lens because of some of the stuff being plastic... but the clarity of the glass is absolutely exceptional for that price... and it weighs nothing. I'll include the first couple pictures I took with it here.

For a lens that is half the size of a can of soda, it has that 80-300mm FF equivalent. I can see why people rave about this one as a starting telephoto.

I still don’t own any M43 lenses to test the camera outside, but I’m inclined to get:

Compact kit like the lens you own (14-42mm); All-purpose kit for travel/hiking (14-150mm or something); To be determined between: fast and manual prime (wider angle, ~9-17mm-ish), long reach telephoto (~300mm-ish), or macro (~60mm-ish).

So just so you can see the size of things... That's a Rokinon / Samyang 7.5mm Fisheye, then the 40-150mm Telephoto, and the 14-40mm EZ on the camera next to my computer mouse.

The only thing about those super zooms like the 14-150 is that you can sometimes sacrifice quality. IDK that much about that lens, but I got myself a little camera bag that's like 12 x 8 x 5 with a cross body shoulder strap for idk.. $15-20 online. It holds the camera, the lenses, the flash, the cleaning kit, the filters, the batteries, the charger, and the filters... and there's still room left lol. So Carrying a bunch of M43 lenses is super easy and light weight. Doesn't make me feel like I need to worry about super zoom coverage like I did with my canon. Always boils down to what kind of photos you think you'll be taking. My tactic was to get the 14-42mm based on recommendations online as a "walking in the park lens" to get used to the camera and then I've just been filling in the blanks as I go. Going on MPB and UPP and just poking around there's so many fun lenses in that $60-150 range that it's almost impulse purchases at that point. I'm still considering some of the manual ones from 7artisans as well... even new they're cheap and I keep hearing how they're good. I'm considering picking up extension tubes for my EM5ii to do macro shots at some point like I did for my canon. I still kind of want that 7artisans 3.5mm fisheye but I absolutely don't need... but it seems fun.

I honestly don’t know how wide of an aperture I’ll need yet, but I’ll likely have an idea after feeling how the camera performs in low light with the kit lens.

It's been interesting for me. For fast action in lower light... there is no escaping needing good sensors and fast lenses. But because of the IBIS and some of the fun tools olympus puts in their camera software (live composite is so cool... pretty sure the one you're getting has that)... I have been able to take stills in lower light by using longer exposures and still getting cleaner shots. So I had to kind of reset how I thought about the exposure triangle settings.

I will keep you posted and update the original post soon relating my experience!

I'm excited for you. Using this olympus from 2015 has convinced me that I absolutely want to get a modern flagship M43 camera at some point.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Absolutely where I ended up. I knew I could get myself in at a certain point and then upgrade and swap things around later as needed, so it wouldn’t be wasted. I’ve been getting really good deals on some quality budget glass for the olympus.

It is definitely true that money spent on Sony isn't wasted money. But at the same time, I was thinking, what's the point of spending $900 or more on lenses, and end up using them on an entry-level body? I don't know, it felt to me that it's better to save instead and get a higher-end camera and glass at once. Sony full frame must be so nice, especially for video, but I'll have to wait for now.

What I said above is definitely not the case for M43. I've just bought the tiny 14-42mm kit lens and it's set me back $500 for the whole initial setup (body + kit lens, including tax). With a longer telephoto (Olympus 75-300 or similar, ~$300), it will cover most of my use cases. For the price of either a nice Sony lens or body. And it's a camera that used to be their flagship model, so I feel good about the deal I got. It's very clear that you don't need to spend much to get the good stuff. Your hummingbird photo is a great example of the good stuff you can get out of a lens; affordable glass yielding a nice reach, sharpness, optical quality, and pleasant subject-background separation.

The only thing about those super zooms like the 14-150 is that you can sometimes sacrifice quality.

This is something that bugs me slightly about my 18-200 Nikon F DX (APS-C) lens. It is an awesome lens that I'm currently taking everywhere, but I wish it was sharper at times. I guess I will need to get used to switching lenses more often than I currently do. I also might want to experiment with sticking more to fixed focal lengths again. I noticed I always shoot at 28, 35, 50, 85, and very occasionally 105, 135mm full frame equivalent. 300mm or longer for wildlife. Needless to say, those are the most appealing focal ranges to most people and unsurprisingly, there are primes for all single focal length within this range. I'll look into my EXIF data and see what I can stick to initially, and try to zoom more with my feet. It will be an interesting journey!

I got myself a little camera bag that’s like 12 x 8 x 5 with a cross body shoulder strap for idk… $15-20 online. It holds the camera, the lenses, the flash, the cleaning kit, the filters, the batteries, the charger, and the filters… and there’s still room left lol. So Carrying a bunch of M43 lenses is super easy and light weight. Doesn’t make me feel like I need to worry about super zoom coverage like I did with my canon. Always boils down to what kind of photos you think you’ll be taking. My tactic was to get the 14-42mm based on recommendations online as a “walking in the park lens” to get used to the camera and then I’ve just been filling in the blanks as I go.

Yes, I still need to figure out a setup that would work for me. I'm currently using a crossbody bag to carry my Nikon and it works great. I will look into a similar setup that can hold the M43 camera and two lenses or so, plus two filters (CPL and ND), a lightweight tripod, and backup battery and storage. I'll need to get an SD card for my new camera on Bestbuy, so I might look into what bags I can find there. For the card, I'm thinking about a Sandisk V30. I'm not sure about higher speeds, where I'll be able to record high-bitrate 4K, but it does sound appealing. I'll think about it while my lens is on its way.

Going on MPB and UPP and just poking around there’s so many fun lenses in that $60-150 range that it’s almost impulse purchases at that point.

I've read good things about the Laowa 7.5 f/2 and Lumix 9mm f/1.7. I might get one of those two in the future as a wide-angle low-light. Or maybe either a 17mm or 25mm prime, since 35-50mm full frame equivalent looks very pleasing to me, as it does to most people. We'll see how it goes with the kit lens. I feel like a wider fast prime would be more useful, though, given that it would serve two distinct purposes.

It’s been interesting for me. For fast action in lower light… there is no escaping needing good sensors and fast lenses. But because of the IBIS and some of the fun tools olympus puts in their camera software (live composite is so cool… pretty sure the one you’re getting has that)… I have been able to take stills in lower light by using longer exposures and still getting cleaner shots. So I had to kind of reset how I thought about the exposure triangle settings.

I'm sure it does, since Nikon's optical stabilization technology from 2006 already goes a long way. I still think I'll get a fast and wide prime, given that I'm very interested in wide apertures for astroscaping. But at the same time I'm not sure how well a M43 would perform capturing the northern lights, the milky way, or a meteor shower.

I’m excited for you. Using this olympus from 2015 has convinced me that I absolutely want to get a modern flagship M43 camera at some point.

I'm pretty excited, too. I keep thinking about the new possibilities that might arise with this camera. This weekend, I shot a huge bull moose, 200mm cropped, handheld, optical stabilization only, on manual focus, at 1080p. The video turned out great, regardless. I am excited to try the same thing with IBIS, 4K, longer reach, and autofocus/focus peaking now!

[–] Durandal 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is something that bugs me slightly about my 18-200 Nikon F DX (APS-C) lens. It is an awesome lens that I’m currently taking everywhere, but I wish it was sharper at times. I guess I will need to get used to switching lenses more often than I currently do. I also might want to experiment with sticking more to fixed focal lengths again. I noticed I always shoot at 28, 35, 50, 85, and very occasionally 105, 135mm full frame equivalent. 300mm or longer for wildlife.

Yeah, you definitely start to find the spots where you need to fill in the gaps. I find that the middle of the focal range is where I notice the biggest need for primes. That 14-42mm is handling most of the "wide to normal" for me right now since I'm not doing full on portraits with this particular camera... if I was I'd probably look into something in the 35mm or 55mm super fast lenses specifically for that task. With birding I've never been able to deal with primes since things change so quickly... I'm constantly using the full range of my 150-600m on my canon... they never stay in one spot lol. I think for a "walking around EDC lens" the 14-42mm has been fantastic. Olympus lenses have surprised me with their sharpness on non-Pro level stuff. Something to think about if you're considering fast lenses in a range and wanting "most bang for your buck" is to consider what the difference is between them in aperture. That 14-42mm at it's widest is f/3.5.... that's roughly 2 stops of light and not a ton of DoF in practice. At it's widest though it's f/5.6 so you're talking about 3.5 stops of light and a more noticeable change in DoF. I kept hearing about the 20mm primes and such.. but since I already had this zoom it felt like it wasn't worth it because I was getting most of what I wanted out of it. I'm still considering that 7artisans 55mm f/1.4 II for a portrait lens because it's gonna offer more of a difference from what I have, but I don't really need it right now.

I'm just rambling off on a tangent though... sounds like you've got it figured out. :)

I would also suggest start looking around for extra batteries. There are some better brands of 3rd party batteries that people seem to like. I've heard really mixed stuff about wasabi... some people love it and some people say it sucks. I've had good luck with neewer and kastar so far. Reason being two fold... 1. if you bought used the battery is also gonna be used and have lower life than it did when it was new and 2. mirrorless cameras use battery much faster than DSLR. I picked up a kastar 2 pack of batteries with a dual charger for my EM5ii for $22 total online. It's been really nice so I can either carry a spare or just swap the low battery for a new one when I get home and not have to wait for any charging. Also aftermarket chargers all seem to work off USB-C which is really convenient as well.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Yeah, you definitely start to find the spots where you need to fill in the gaps. I find that the middle of the focal range is where I notice the biggest need for primes. That 14-42mm is handling most of the “wide to normal” for me right now since I’m not doing full on portraits with this particular camera… if I was I’d probably look into something in the 35mm or 55mm super fast lenses specifically for that task.

Well, yes. I do need to find the spots where I need to fill in the gaps and this will require some (significant) experience. I'm always reading a lot about stuff, and there's too much to learn regarding photography, still. For instance, I was trying to shoot the milky way this weekend under Bortle class 2 skies. The results were good, but not exactly great. I was thinking "yeah maybe a fast and wide lens will do". Now, I've read that people actually tend to stitch mid-focal length individual shots together instead. That's when photos actually look good, not so much when using those nice, fast, wide primes like the famous Rokinon or Simga lenses. Quite the surprise to me, honestly. That is just an example to illustrate my point, which is, there is usually a right(er) answer, but rarely an easy answer.

Regarding portraits, I used to like the strong bokeh of fast primes on a DSLR since my mom got a 50mm f1.8 for my old Canon years ago, but recently I've learned to appreciate short telephotos, too. 42mm gets you ~85mm equivalent, which is quite nice, just not very creamy at those apertures. I agree with your comment that it would only make sense if you were to get a 7artisans 55mm f1.4 or something.

With birding I’ve never been able to deal with primes since things change so quickly…

Yes, I too would use the whole 150-600mm range on my Tamron/Nikon all the time for birds. I think it's a known fact that for wildlife one gets primes for increased sharpness, but knowing that you will have to crop very frequently. And when you crop to the equivalent increased focal length on the zoom, you don't get the increased sharpness advantage. It's mostly a budget game, I think.

I would also suggest start looking around for extra batteries.

Agreed. I'm looking into buying a kit from Kastar (2-4 batteries plus USB charger), which is selling for $40-$70. As a matter of fact, cheaper than a single OEM battery ($80). Go figure. On my Nikon, two batteries would last me 3-4 days outside while backpacking (in theory, ~1000 shots). The EM-1 Mark II is rated for 440 shots per battery, so I think the OEM plus 2 extra will suffice. USB-C charging is a must, because that's what I use to charge my action camera's batteries and other devices using my portable power bank. I think a kit from Kastar will do.

It’s been really nice so I can either carry a spare or just swap the low battery for a new one when I get home and not have to wait for any charging.

Also agree. On a day or half a day out shooting, I usually use half a battery, swap it when I get home, and let the other one charge. It's simply practical.

I'm waiting for my Olympus 14-42 electronic zoom to arrive, which should be here on Monday. My next steps will probably be the extra batteries. Then, a Lumix 100-300mm for wildlife (or equivalent). I'm (really) excited to see where this is gonna take me. Look at this, selling a couple of Nikon F lenses to fund a completely new system -- relatively small changes in practice and likely not changing the end result much, yet such a different approach to the hobby. I feel like this journey is going to be fun!

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Digital Photography Review has great articles, buyers guides, and a side by side comparison tool: https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The E-M5 iii looks very appealing.

I have this one. It is lots of fun if you like so many creative control settings. You can do these ISO acrobatics that you wish for, and lots of other things too.

I am not much into video, but I think it does 4k.

don't know how much I'm letting go in image quality.

Being just an amateur, I guess it will be hard to notice any.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

I appreciate you sharing your experience and comments. Yes, the E-M5 iii does 4K.

I like your comment about image quality being equivalent. I mean it because what one sees online is mostly "micro four thirds is great, I switched and have not looked back!" or "ew, their image quality is hideous, I would stay away from that system". But I suspect most of the latter comments are made by people who read specs and pixel peep more than anything, or pros who shoot weddings and portraits and need to deliver very large prints for a living. I wonder how much is actually noticeable in the real world for a casual hobbyist.

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Personally I've got a Lumix G9 and I've been having a ball with it since I got it (I've got a link in my profile to where I share pics if you're curious)

I'm by no means an expert but my use case lines up quite a bit with yours so I felt like sharing

It's not bad to lug around and being able to have a couple lenses in my bag without worry is nice. But most of the time I just rock the 12-60mm Leica lens that came with it.

If you wanna pick my brain with questions about it feel free, though my lunch is about over so it's going to be a few hours before I get back to you.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm checking out your pictures and they do look great and sharp to me. It's great to know that you don't think it is a large camera to carry around with extra lenses, because the image quality is indeed amazing.

I would actually like to ask you a couple of things, if you don't mind. How often do you use high-res modes, and does it work well? If you shoot video, How do you feel about focus tracking? Are there any other "advanced features" that you feel like have been a game changer, like perhaps focus stacking?

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Thank you, it's always nice hearing that people like the shots.

Yeah it's really not bad to carry‡ and I usually will take my 100-300 mm lens★ with me with the kit lens when I go out hiking or just brjng the 100-300 mm with me on a bike ride.

I use the high res mode sometimes and it works really well, the new G9-2 has a better high res mode from what I hear but I unfortunately haven't tested it on the new version yet.

I have shot some video but I don't shoot much that would require tracking focus. It's more of a set it and forget it kind of thing. One thing I have used it for quite a bit is streaming video and it works fantastic for that.

In terms of advanced features, exposure bracketing is something I enjoy quite a bit. It allows me to more focus on framing and focus to nail a shot. But I've found myself not using that feature much lately. I'm not sure why I just don't bother lol.

I think my favorite advanced feature though is connecting it to my phone over WiFi and controlling it that way. It's so useful having a view from the camera on my phone and being able to control the camera. I've even done it with a tablet and it's so freakin nice. Literally having a live monitor for the camera for no extra cost that allows full control of the camera.

★ Probably my favorite feature of the Micro 4/3 system is the lens sizes, there's a huge variety of them and even the coolest lenses don't weigh a whole lot. The 100-300 mm one I mentioned here is barely larger than a standard 12 oz soda can when stowed.

‡ The hikes I normally go on are north of 12 miles with thousands of feet of gain, it's super chill to carry. I've got a peak design clip I use to put in on my hiking bag shoulder strap and my other lens is on the other strap. It's a pretty great setup.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Of course I like them. They are nice pictures!

I've actually just arrived from my trip to the camera store and I was amazed by how small those lenses are. I was expecting the M43 lenses to be rather small, but not that tiny! I can totally see how a full setup with a couple of lenses would fit in a small camera bag/insert.

Exposure bracketing is indeed something I wish I had. I assume I would use it all the time, because my snow and skies are blown out fairly often.

I think the wifi control is cool as well. I can do the same thing with my gopro and I love it. I can place the camera somewhere and just comfortably walk away and shoot from wherever I am!

The G9 looked appealing online, but after seeing it in-person today, I felt like the body looked to big compared to what I originally had in mind. I kind of want something pocketable when I'm not carrying a backpack with me. I don't think I would mind hiking with it, though. We do similar distances and elevation gains, and I also use the capture clip and I have nothing to complain about it. But for day-to-day stuff, I might prefer something smaller.

I will definitely look into Panasonic cameras with the similar features but a smaller form factor, like the GX9. Thank you again for making yourself available and your willingness to help me!

[–] JeyNessuno@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Older Sony mirrorless have most of what you're looking for. I got a Sony a6000 for 350€ and it has auto iso with cap (but not auto shutter speed with cap), pretty good custom controls although I wish for more, great size, great autofocus. It does lack great low light performance, I also struggle with that, but maybe a full frame would be better for that.

You may want to try it out for cheaper and then buy lenses, and once you're committed to the ecosystem buy a nicer more recent Sony.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

I almost got a Sony A6000 two months ago for that reason, to "try it out" and "review it" as a day-to-day camera. As you said, it is nice because you can progressively upgrade within the same system without having to switch entirely. I will follow the advice below and go to my local shop to hold one more recent Sony in my hands, given that they all have the same format as older models anyway.

[–] somethingp@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I started with a used Nikon d3300 a while ago, and then upgraded to an a7iv when it came out. I was mostly starting to feel the limitations of low light performance and slow autofocus on the d3300. For me the a7iv seemed like the right choice at the time, and I've been very happy with it. But I think if I were making the same decision now, I might choose the a6700. It's smaller, similar specs, cheaper, and most importantly for me, the apsc crop would be better for wildlife as it gives better reach. I recently went to Yellowstone and the number of times cool stuff was happening just a little too far away was a bit frustrating. If I had something like an a7riv or a7rv, it wouldn't be a problem because of how high resolution they are. But those cameras cost a ton more. But I'm still very happy with my a7iv and will not be changing cameras any time soon.

I would say that unless you have a lot of nice glass for the d3200 already, don't worry about switching to Sony. I think it really is the best brand for hobbyists because of how much affordable and excellent 3rd party glass is available for the system in both full frame and aspc. Just cannot be matched with any other system. Also, if you do want the crazy fancy stuff, the Sony G and GM lenses are some of the best in the game, and definitely have the most variety of lenses.

I would avoid m43. A lot of the newer cameras aren't particularly light or small. I think the Sony apsc cameras are often more compact and more affordable.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Thanks for the input! I am considering the A6400 and A7iii, given the amazing reviews they always get.

I don't own many expensive Nikon lenses, but I am planning on selling the more expensive stuff that I have to switch systems. That shouldn't really be a problem, since I got quotes from MPB and KEH that I'm happy with.

Sadly, you are spot on regarding micro four thirds and the path they are taking. If I'm not mistaken, Panasonic's last compact micro four thirds camera was the GX-9, released in 2018. Olympus' bodies are not smaller than other brands, either. Some of them even dwarf high-end, full frame DSLR bodies (e.g. E-M1X vs D750), while most are only slightly smaller than full frame mirrorless (e.g. E-M5iii vs A7iii). But honestly, something that bugs me a lot is exactly the situation that you were describing about your trip to Yellowstone. I live pretty close to the Rocky Mountain NP, so I'm there somewhat frequently. I must say, there were situations where I regret not bringing a long telephoto with me, and I own a nice one. I have a huge Tamron 150-600, but I can't hike with it on top of all the outdoor gear I'm bringing, so I only use it when I'm not walking that much.

Olympus, for instance, sells the 75-300 lens which is ridiculously small for the reach you can get. Especially if you compare that to a Nikon F cropped plus 80-400 or full frame plus the 150-600, the difference in size is jarring. At the moment, the only equivalent solution I see for Sony is a cropped body with the new Tamron 70-300, which is comparable in size to the E-M5iii plus the 75-300. Which isn't bad at all. I suspect this would be an image quality vs reach battle, where I could see either winning.

I also agree that micro four thirds is sadly becoming pricier and pricier. In contrast, the market for Sony cropped seems to be always hot.

Actually, I'll see if my local store will have Sony and Olympus bodies in stock so I can try them out some time this week. I've only ever handled a Sony ZV-E10 camera, I'm curious to see how the A6x00 series feels.

[–] somethingp@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I actually was using my 200-600 with a 1.4x teleconverter. For photos it was a little easier but particularly for video was harder. But honestly it's all great. I don't do crazy hikes with a lot of gear so I'm happy to lug my 200-600 around. And it usually gets me the shot or close to it. I'm not a professional so it's not like anything depends on me getting the shot. It's more about the journey anyway haha

Main thing is my a7iv no longer feels like it's limiting me like my d3300 did and more often than not, it is my own limitations

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I am not familiar with super long reach photography, but I love telescopes. As a matter of fact, the latest DPReview photography challenge winner got the shot using a M43 camera with a telescope. Maybe you could look into digiscoping for your next trip if you need insane magnifications like 1200mm-3000mm or more. That should be way cheaper than a modern, high quality lens with extra features like stabilization and blazing fast autofocus.

[–] somethingp@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

That's a good idea. I think in that situation the fancy stuff matters less than the magnification so the "cheaper" telescopes might make more sense. I'll have to look into it!

[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I use the Sony A7iii and have essentially zero complaints. Maybe the A7iv would have been nicer to get the fully articulating screen, but it hasn't been a significant limitation. I got the Sigma 60-600 for birds and wildlife and then I use old SLR lenses when I'm taking fun photos that don't need autofocus. I will eventually get the Tamron 35-150 for indoor sports. The Sony ecosystem is great with the huge selection of lenses, and while I don't like that third party lenses are limited to 15 frames per second, it's not as bad as Cannon's policy.

[–] buffy@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I actually had the opportunity to check it out in-person today! It is a fantastic camera, impressive build quality and ergonomics. Buttons feel great and the image quality delivers. I feel like Sony is a great system because you go from compact, cropped rangefinder-style to amazing image quality, full frame SLR-style seamlessly. For now, I would prefer to stick to something smaller than the A7iii/iv, though. I was pretty pleased with the A6400. I am currently considering a model from the A6x00 (which I can later upgrade to an A7) or a mid-range M43.