Thom Hogan: Impact of mFT on Nikon DX line

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
erichK
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,968Gear list
Like?
Re: Good point also ..
In reply to Sergey_Green, 11 months ago

Sergey_Green wrote:

erichK wrote:

That is very much the point. I was very interested in the Nikon D800 until I tried shooting a friend's for awhile. There is no way I want to carry that much weight and equipment for the majority if shooting that I do, and no wau I want equipment that big and obtrusive when I'm somewhere like Rio de Janeiro or Mexico or even shooting almost anywhere where I want to image what is happening without disturbing it.

And I see where you are coming from with this. But the thing is, if you buy smaller and it returns you less (for the sake of the size that is), why pay like you would pay for the larger camera then. Should not the smaller cameras be also priced smaller as well?

Or to put it differently, if the mirrorless cameras do indeed cut into the Dx profits (and they probably do touch somewhere), would not they cut in even more had they been priced accordingly?

-- hide signature --

- sergey

I really don't see where it "returns me less".

As I read your restatement of this worn-out refrain, I can't help but note how much your like the logic of the editors of Newsweek in the 1930's, when they fired W. Eugene Smith from his first real job because supposedly compromised their "quality standards" by using 35mm instead of a Speed Graphic.  It also recalls the show of Cartier-Bresson's pictures I saw at the Chicago Art Institute in 2010: most of the magnificent images had a much lower resolution, dynamic range, etc than even a good digital point and shoot delivers today.  And most of them could never have been shot with a camera as noisy, bulky and awkward to carry and use as the dslr's that some are touting here.

Bigger is not always better, and in about 80% of my shooting, the OM-D can get the shot a - and often more- easily than a dslr would: quieter, more discrete, superb image-stabilization. For another 10%, the winter shooting with gloves, long telephoto and moderate CAF, the EM-1 should do just fine, though I'll keep my E-5 for some of that, too.

For final 5% - really fast CAF, very low light, very detailed landscape shots I may borrow a friend's D3s or D800 or 5DII or even rent one. I can find no reason to own that much depreciating gadgetry (over $10K once one has a second body and five or  really good lenses for gear I could seldom justify hauling.)

As you surely know as an experienced and serious photographer, it's the total kit that matters, and for half of that sum, I have put together a superbly discrete and portable one: OM-D, PL-5 (which, btw, costs $500 with 14-42 kit lens), 12-50 zoom, 12/f2, 45/1.8, 60macro, 75/1.8 and 45-200 zoom.  All in a slim, light Domke F5C bag that I can carry all day and easily and safely carry almost anywhere.

-- hide signature --

erichK
saskatoon, canada
Photography is a small voice, at best, but sometimes one photograph, or a group of them, can lure our sense of awareness.
- W. Eugene Smith, Dec 30, 1918 to Oct 15, 1978.
http://erichk.zenfolio.com/
http://www.fototime.com/inv/7F3D846BCD301F3
underwater photos:
http://www.scubaboard.com/gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/5567

 erichK's gear list:erichK's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-330 Olympus E-420 Olympus E-620 Olympus E-5 +16 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow