Food for thought - FF vs M4/3's cost

Started Mar 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 18,281Gear list
Like?
Re: Food for thought - FF vs M4/3's cost
In reply to tt321, Mar 25, 2013

tt321 wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

Vlad S wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

Anybody else getting tempted? (I'm not really interested if you think it's big and heavy and you've "been there done that",I get the point, I'm more interested if you are tempted over to the dark side by these kind of prices and value.)

I think it's quite unfair if you handicap one side by taking away all of its advantages, or at least it's raison d'être. If a user were not interested in the size and weight savings, then there's no reason to switch from APS-C either, and that format can be had even cheaper.

I'm not handicapping anything lol, I've acknowledged the difference, I'm more interested in those thinking of going the other way. I totally accept that m4/3's wins the size argument, it would be hard to argue otherwise.

But you are comparing the cheapest FF solution to the most expensive (almost) M43 one.

Opting for the PL5 will lower the M43 price quite a bit, but there is nothing you could do to further reduce the FF price yet, although hopefully this will change.

That is true, mainly because an OMD or GH3 owner are the most likely to be tempted IMHO.

-- hide signature --

For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Sigma DP3 Merrill Fujifilm X-T1 +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow