| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/15/2014 02:56:07 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by Yandrosxx:
I'll concede IQ is not quite to full frame IQ, but there mirrorless full frame products already on the market.
|
\
you cant call it a dinosaur until its extinct :P
i cant wait for the day until I can get a FF in a smaller body with AF that rivals a dslr. you may wish to trade compactness for IQ and AF speed and lens selection, not everyone wishes to. Luckily we have lots of choices. |
|
|
|
09/16/2014 09:14:23 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by Yandrosxx:
I'll concede IQ is not quite to full frame IQ, but there mirrorless full frame products already on the market.
|
\
you cant call it a dinosaur until its extinct :P
i cant wait for the day until I can get a FF in a smaller body with AF that rivals a dslr. you may wish to trade compactness for IQ and AF speed and lens selection, not everyone wishes to. Luckily we have lots of choices. |
Actually, as you probably know, you can get a FF Nikon D800 or D610 in a small body...it's called a Sony A7 and A7R (the A7R has the same 36mp sensor as the Nikon D800). The problem is, as always lenses (usually size). Sony's own problem to date has been putting out lots of new bodies, and fewer lenses. But their newly announced 16-35 F4 OSS Zeiss looks very promising for us landscape types. And it looks much smaller than the comparable Nikon 16-35 F4 I own, at a few hundred dollars more than I paid. I haven't done a real comparison though...just announced yesterday, and of course, no side by sides or tests yet. I think that's why Sony is going for only F4 on its lenses.
: Spec comparison, Sony is smaller and lighter -- thought still over a lb:
Sony: 18.27 oz (518 g) Approx. 3.07 x 3.88" (78 x 98.5 mm), 72mm filters
Nikon: 24 oz (680 g) Approx. 3.2 x 4.9" (8.13 x 12.45 cm), 77mm filters
But the Olympus's M43 models are indeed tempting (Panny's too, but in body IS means smaller leneses). The lenses for the smaller image circle are definitely smaller and lighter...the new pro lens line, with the new 7-14 F2.8 (14-28) being announced, is smaller than a full frame lens of it's specs. And having an even greater DOF at F2.8 isn't a problem for me.
Not as sure about IQ for the M43 models and the best glass....that's what's kept me away as a serious investment in M43 glass. I used my D600+70-200 F2.8 yesterday for a head shot session....after using my new Lumix FZ1000 almost exclusively for a month. The Lumix is pretty sharp corner to corner at ISO 125...sensor size softens it after that. But not really like the cuttingly sharp Nikon 70-200 F2.8 on the D600. Just blows you away.
If the pro lenses on the Oly could approach that...I might go that way. But only if they're significantly lighter than the Nikon glass. It would be nice to carry something as sharp as the Nikon 16-35 F4, 24-70 F2.8 and 70-200 (they can be F4) on two small bodies and coming in at less than 1/2 the weight. But there's also something a bit disconcerting for me to drop back to 16MP from 24...I like the extra freedom to crop and also the flexibility for larger prints.
Message edited by author 2014-09-16 13:49:33. |
|
|
|
10/06/2017 02:22:24 AM · #28 |
|
|
|
10/07/2017 10:26:44 AM · #29 |
I'd be curious to have some current input since in camera/technology years this thread was an ice age ago.
Since I just violated myself by putting a cell phone image on the front page I'm interested in suggestions on a good all 'round body/lens suggestion as a secondary to my D810.
I won't give up the anvil, but especially since I ride my motorcycle so much I'd like the option of a reasonably priced mirrorless camera.
It's a personal thing due to the way that their customer service told me "Too bad about your luck...." over a legitimate warranty situation a few years back, but I wouldn't take a Sony for free.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2017 10:33:34 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'd be curious to have some current input since in camera/technology years this thread was an ice age ago.
Since I just violated myself by putting a cell phone image on the front page I'm interested in suggestions on a good all 'round body/lens suggestion as a secondary to my D810.
I won't give up the anvil, but especially since I ride my motorcycle so much I'd like the option of a reasonably priced mirrorless camera.
It's a personal thing due to the way that their customer service told me "Too bad about your luck...." over a legitimate warranty situation a few years back, but I wouldn't take a Sony for free. |
I've been tempted to go for the lighter, M43 kit...I do have an older Lumix G5 and a few lenses. But the camera is not good to operate...they did address many of those issues later. I found image quality to be between ok and good.
I eventually succumbed to staying APS-C. For that, if you detest Sony, I would recommend a Fuji X-T20. I love mine...more than my X-T1, which has a few better features, but is very slow in comparison. The X-T20 has the same sensor as the X-T2, with a few missing ergonomic features, but it's like $700 cheaper. And unlike the X-T2, it has a touch screen.
Rumor has it the X-T2S is due out in the next 6 months, and it will finally have IBIS. I personally think that's important if you are into primes, like many users are. Even a few of the higher end zooms of fuji don't have IS!
Fuji is a great compromise for size, performance, and image quality. And the form fact is much better than the Sony 6000 series.
But look for yourself and compare image quality with the M43's. They keep getting better, and lens size definitely becomes an advantage over the other formats.
Message edited by author 2017-10-07 10:43:35. |
|
|
|
10/07/2017 07:49:11 PM · #31 |
If any of you are really interested in Olympus you can have look at my Flickr account that is full of full resolution images. I have the albums broken up into lens used with separate albums if I had a TC on the lens. I just picked up the Olympus MZ 300mm f4.0 IS Pro and shot with it for the first time yesterday and I have to say........that lens is absolutely amazing. If you follow the link to my Flickr I have one photo from that lens and one with the TC..............that's all I have edited so far.
I shot Canon for 20+ years and switched to Olympus about 3 years ago and could not be happier. I will post those two photos from the 300 here..................but go to Flickr for full resolution if you want.
This is the bare lens and I was 14.5 feet away. There is no crop on this shot other than going from 4:3 to 3:2.
This is with the TC and I was 25 feet away. The back of his neck and the tip of his beak was about 200px form the edge of the frame. I used PS to expand the canvas then Content Aware to fill in the blank canvas. After that, back to LR to crop for a pleasing composition.
As a wildlife photographer I love Olympus. I shot both those photos handheld from a kayak with 600mm of effective reach and 840mm of effective reach............no way could I do that with my old 1D and 500mm lens. |
|
|
|
10/07/2017 11:02:47 PM · #32 |
| My Olympus m 4/3 has better image quality than any of my DSlr's. To be fair, my DSLR's are not recent models, however. Also bought a Canon G7x recently. It has a slightly smaller sensor than the m 4/3 and still looks great. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 07:16:12 PM EDT.
