two camera systems is cheaper than one?

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Alex Notpro
Contributing MemberPosts: 686Gear list
Like?
two camera systems is cheaper than one?
8 months ago

I've been "stuck" with two camera systems (Full Frame & Micro Four Thirds) now for almost a year... I really want to get down to one system, but it seems there is no way out:

1. If I sell the Micro Four Thirds system, the replacements for my (equivalent) 28-300, 200-600, 14-28, and image-stabilized 120mm macro would cost close to $4,500 - way more than the whole MFT system cost me. And that's substituting a Sigma 500mm for my 600mm-equiv MFT lens. Aperture equivalence is not a factor here because of the way I use these lenses, e.g. the macro is always shot at f/11 or smaller.

2. If I sell the Full Frame system, the replacement for the 85/1.8 alone would cost $1,600, plus there would be NO equivalent replacements for my 50/1.4 and 80-200 f/2.8 (there are no f/0.7 primes or f/1.4 zooms in MFT) or even the 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 kit lens (no MFT f/2.0 zoom that wide). The 35-100 f/2 (70-200 f/4 equivalent in FF) is $2,500.

How would you optimize this down to a single system cost-effectively? Looking for suggestions!

 Alex Notpro's gear list:Alex Notpro's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PM2 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Leica Nocticron 42.5mm Apple iPhone 5s +14 more
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow