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

Started Mar 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
papillon_65 OP Forum Pro • Posts: 25,263
Re: Food for thought - FF vs M4/3's cost

Mjankor wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

This is my thoughts, and what I'd buy if I chose to go with FF.

I'm not trying to build equivalent systems. My priorities are focal length, but not equivalence. I've never had an issue with DoF on m4/3s. I'm also not going to choose the cheapest FF, but rather one that represents good value and qualities that I like. Don't forget, if I'm going to go with FF, I'd expect a pretty significant image quality improvement over m4/3s, so getting an obsolete FF is not an option.

I think you'd have a hard time arguing there aren't some significant benefits from using the 5DII over the OMD. DOF control, post processing capability and higher ISO performance are still undoubtedly better on the Canon and the body cost is effectively the same as a new OMD, that's a great deal however you look at it.

So m4/3s (Prices all come from Teds cameras (Australia)

Current medium kit

OM-D + 12-50 kit $1400

75-300 $600

60mm Macro $600

Total $2600

Total weight 1.2KG

FF kit

Nikon D600 + 24-105 VR $3200

Sigma 150-500 $1100

Sigma 105mm Macro $800

Total $5100

Total weight 3.9kg

The only thing I'm iffy about is the Nikon D600. Nikon have had a field day with dirty sensors lately. Canon is an alternative, but I find their cameras to be insidiously boring and I don't like Sony's lens options.

Canon has the best lens choices for me personally, I can also use my OM lenses easily. Sony aren't really at the races compared to the big two for me, at least not in terms of lenses.

-- hide signature --

For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....

From looking at the 3200ISO pics from Imaging Resouce I'd rate the OM-D above the 5Dmk2 in a rather epic fashion.

Well I have the OMD and have used it extensively and I've been playing with a 5DII raw file and the difference is pretty obvious in favour of the Canon, as you'd expect.

If you want the Canon, go for it.

If you want to put its numbers in instead of the Nikon D600's go for it. The results will still be pretty similar. Knocking $1000 dollars off or so, by substituting in an obsolete DSLR isn't a great value equation in my opinion.

To me a camera becomes obsolete when it stops doing what it was designed to do. Approx £1K for a very capable full frame camera is great value and the lenses are often better value than some m4/3's offerings so I don't see an issue here. The 5DII will do things the OMD just can't, that's the value for me personally.

-- hide signature --

For the person who is good with a hammer, everything in life tends to look like a nail.....

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow