Why I switched to an OM-D Locked

in one picture. my old 40D and 17-55EF-S lens and the OM-D with a 12-35 on it. if only I also had the sigma 10-20, canon 100mm macro & 70-300IS to put next to my other MFT lenses.

--
-------------------------------
www.pixelsquish.com

So why did you switch then or have I missed anything?

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lighthunter_de/

size

--
-------------------------------
www.pixelsquish.com

Size alone is probably not all but it's your thread and I leave it up to you if you want to tell us more details

I got a Canon 5D and Oly E-PL5 and wouldn't want to miss either of them.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lighthunter_de/

Still, there was a time there wasn't a choice, and choices mean, er. . . well, I forget what just now, but it means something iirc.   Just saying. . .

--
...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Little Big Man
.

I agree.  It isn't only size.  It is weight too.

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

http://camerasize.com/compare/#190,289

--
::> Knowledge is mother of efficiency.

What do you expect when you compare a toy camera with a proper one?

--
Any problem on earth can be solved by a well aimed Pomegranate...
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

Comparing the E-M5 to the Pentax Q, eh?  A more appropriate comparison would be the one below, showing the Pentax against the E-PL5.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#190,382

Although perhaps a better view is the one below, the Pentax Q against the E-PM2 - which shows the gulf in sensor size between the two.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#190,387

Michael

Q is smaller. So whats your point?

--
::> Knowledge is mother of efficiency.

Yes that surely shows something. I size was my priority in DSLR land I would probably had something like a 600D plus a Tamron 17-50. Still it is bigger as the mirrorless but it would fit in right in the middle between those.

To me the biggest advantage is that with a pancake a mirrorless fits into a coat pocket. Longer lens attached it hangs around my neck just like the other. Have to admit I am in for size and not so much for minimum weight. It is quite possible to have a full frame kit which won't break your neck. I went fora while with a 5D, Voigtländer 20+40+90 whichis about 1500g and none of the lenses is essentially bigger than the mft, with no AF though but full metal instead. Now with a new 6D it would be even less weight and bulk.

To me the E-M5 just overdid a bit on the size front. It decreases usability for me. Or let's sayFuji and Sony did a better job FOR ME to keep ergonomics up but herethe E-M5 polarizes.

His point is that it's the sweet sport between maintaining high quality performance and size.  Why stop with the Q in your example.  If it's just about size, they make cameras the size of a postage stamp nowadays.

Well maybe the toy camera could be a bit smaller than this Canon actually is?:-)

Tell it to OP who seems to think that size and weight are everything.

--
::> Knowledge is mother of efficiency.

Canon makes good cameras and the 17-55IS lens is amazing. But it is all large and heavy.

I will hold off of the Pana 12-35 for the moment, waiting for Olympus to come out with something (hopefully less prone to purple fringing and hopefully with a bit more range)... but the 12-35 looks "fitting" with the E-M5 in terms of size.

--
Slowly learning to use the Olympus OM-D E-M5.
Public pictures at http://debra.zenfolio.com/.

It's the combined difference of size + weight, both for the body and lenses. Moreover, it's an incremental difference each time you add a lens to the setup. Even if one is young and healthy, it's noticeably lighter to carry the MFT setup. It's both a physical and mental lightness.

He did not say size and weight is everything. He just said he is switching to an omd because of the size difference. After that everyone else's imagination took over.

I made the same switch after taking an involuntary bath when sailing in the archipelago with my 40D on me and it was drowned.  It recovered partly after some time but remained unreliable as soon as it was a little damp. I sold all my gear in one package with camera body for free.

The reason for me to choose the OM-D instead of a new Canon body was size and IQ. Tests indicated better IQ than the 40D, which I regarded as an excellent camera in all respects than size. To my opinion no Canon APS is significantly better. My most used lenses were APS ones so a FF didn't seem an alternative.

While I'm from the very start was very happy with my OM-D E-M5 I sometimes missed the ergonomics of the sturdy 40D. But  since I got the JB grip the OM-D ergonomics have improved a lot. It's now a joy to hold in my right hand when walking the streets which it wasn't without a grip.

On my 40D I used a Sigma 17-70 as standard zoom and a Sigma 10-20 as UWA, both very good lenses. I also had an old Sigma 70-210/2,8 with 1,4x extender, big and heavy.

On my OM-D the kit lens 12-50 make the same service as the 17-70. They're comparable regarding sharpness but the 12-50 is slower, which to some degree is compensated by the better high ISO performance of the OM-D. I'm one of those who like the kit lens, but it could be faster. I also have the 9-18 and it is good but not fantastic. As telephoto lens I use an Oly 40-150/4-5,6, which is amazingly good. I also have a Sigma 19/2,8 but to my eyes it's just a little bit sharper than the kit lens, though 1,5 stop faster of course.

My old setup was a Canon 30d + Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.  Love the IQ, but hate the bulk.

I downgraded from 30d to a Rebel XTi, then stay with Rebel series for lighter setup

I downgraded my Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS to a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 VC.

The setup was somewhat lighter, but not enough.

Now I find myself with both Micro43 and Sony NEX.

There was a time when I thought all photography begin & ends with canon;

Today, I believe all photography begins & ends with Micro43 or Sony NEX.  It' a mirror-less world, or soon to be.

I think you missed his point, which is easy to do as it was....well...pointless really...

--
Any problem on earth can be solved by a well aimed Pomegranate...
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/