Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…

Started Apr 30, 2013 | Discussions thread
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Like?
Re: Any system is expensive
In reply to Art_P, May 1, 2013

Art_P wrote:

if you go on a buying frenzy.

Basic needs are usually covered by the kit lens... or maybe the two kit lenses.

Most of the better lenses in m43 are the faster f1.7 or f1.8 primes.

But yes you can cover from 28-400 with two zoom lenses as long as you are not expecting the ultimate IQ or DOF control that m43 can provide.

Photography is an expensive hobby.  I do think that m43 gear has gone a bit crazy with pricing in recent times compared to what's available with APS-C DSLRs considering that a Nikon 35 1.8 is $196 and a 50 1.8G $225.  So now you have your low-light needs covered.  And you can buy an Nikon DX 18-105 ($200) or a refurbished 18-200 ($500) or one of the Sigma or Tamron equivalents, with one of the 35 1.8 or 50 1.8 primes and you'll have 27-300 3.5-5.6 covered with low-light.

What you are paying for in m43 is small size. But m43 vendors don't seem to factor in the fact that it cost less to manufacture lens meant to cover a m43 sensor vs a FF lens.  There is no way in the world that the Panasonic 35-100 2.8 should cost $1500, close to the price of many FF 70-200 2.8 lenses.  And the 75 1.8, and great, but overpriced specialty lens.  $1000 w/ non-optional optional lenhood for a modest f1.8 aperture lens is I think where some get the impression that m43 gear is pricey.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 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