Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…

Started Apr 30, 2013 | Discussions
Moti
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,540
Like?
Re: Yes! But it depends...
In reply to MrScorpio, May 1, 2013

MrScorpio wrote:

What professional work do you do? Portraits? Architecture? Other? Controlled light or natural light?

We specialse in musical events and stage photography and also do professional portraits for musicians and actors. I am using both, controlled and anural light depending on the situation and what I shoot.

Just curious since my wife is a Portrait Pro and would never dream of shooting with mft for that...

I can perfectly understand your wife. I had lots of thoughts and hesitation before doing the move but as i said, i am very happy about it. Of course, my considerations may be different from hers.

As also suggested by Miketala, ask your wife to have a look at what this guy is doing:

http://www.damianmcgillicuddy.com/journal/

Damian is one of the leading fashion and portraits photographers and usen an OMD for most of his work.

Cheers

Moti

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MrScorpio
Senior MemberPosts: 1,351Gear list
Like?
Re: Yes! But it depends...
In reply to Moti, May 1, 2013

Strengthens my view that it is always more about the person holding the equipment rather than the quipment itself!

Moti wrote:

MrScorpio wrote:

What professional work do you do? Portraits? Architecture? Other? Controlled light or natural light?

We specialse in musical events and stage photography and also do professional portraits for musicians and actors. I am using both, controlled and anural light depending on the situation and what I shoot.

Just curious since my wife is a Portrait Pro and would never dream of shooting with mft for that...

I can perfectly understand your wife. I had lots of thoughts and hesitation before doing the move but as i said, i am very happy about it. Of course, my considerations may be different from hers.

As also suggested by Miketala, ask your wife to have a look at what this guy is doing:

http://www.damianmcgillicuddy.com/journal/

Damian is one of the leading fashion and portraits photographers and usen an OMD for most of his work.

Cheers

Moti

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --
 MrScorpio's gear list:MrScorpio's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 35mm f/2.0 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SW Anderson
Regular MemberPosts: 109Gear list
Like?
Re: Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…
In reply to Tvaclavek, May 1, 2013

". . . Get the olympus 9-18 for $500 . . ."


Good luck with that.  Regular price for the 9-18mm now seems to be $699, and when the gods of retail are smiling you can snap one up for $100 less.  The 4/3s 9-18mm can be had for $419-$500, but by the time you buy an adapter for M43, you might as well pay the big bucks in the first place.

Somehow, some way, competition among lens makers doesn't result in more-affordable first-rate ultrawide and wide angle zooms for M43 cameras.  That's something independent lens makers might want to do something about. Maybe instead of cranking out ever more me-too zooms for Nikon/Canon/Sony. Just a thought, anyway.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mh2000
Senior MemberPosts: 2,674
Like?
Easy!
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

First off, you get the kit lens which is pretty decent, then add the Oly 17, Sig 30 and Oly 40-150 and you have the entire range covered! That will leave around $500 for a body, more than enough except the top end.

Get refurbed body for $200 and add Oly 17, Sig 30 and Oly 45 and you're still under your $1000 limit.

The Pan 14 is still available off ebay for ~$150.

Those are my lenses, others want faster apertures, so get the Pan 20 and Oly 45 plus $200 body, most people will think you have the cat's meow of lenses.

There's also a $200 Sig 19.

If you are a "holy trinity" type of buyer (Oly 12, P/L 25 and Oly 45), you are still way under the Canon trinity in price.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ulric
Senior MemberPosts: 2,625Gear list
Like?
Re: No
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

tron555 wrote:

Very nice composition and color, but too much noise and smearing for ISO 200 IMHO. I think the new and improved E-PL5 sensor and better lenses would have done just a bit better. It's not all about the money for me since I only upgrade every 4-5 years, I want something that will work for me and I will be happy more than happy with. Thanks anyway for the suggestion.

Since money isn't all that important and you look at this as a long term investment: have you looked at Panasonic's 12-35 mm zoom?

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tjdean01
Senior MemberPosts: 2,130Gear list
Like?
Re: Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

It seems like getting sharp images from corner to corner throughout the focal range is basically impossible on any m4/3 lens! I understand that is also true of all other types of interchangeable lens, but it seems even prevalent with m4/3 lenses..... If the answer is yes, will the total cost be less than $1000 for the entire system? Any help will be very much appreciated!

My friend is buying a lot of Nikon FF lenses and the price he's paying is MUCH more than the m4/3s equivalent and the m4/3s, on average, at least match or outperform the FF ones he's buying.  And not many are buying the obviously superb $3-4000 Nikon lenses.

Anyway, the 75mm lens from Olympus has NO FLAWS other than what you already know when you buy it: focal length, 2 feet minimum focus distance, and the price.  The 60mm weather-proof macro is right on its heels.  The Panasonic 20mm is one of the most popular lenses ever with the only complaint being its unreliable focusing (25mm fixes this).  The Voigtlander lenses are also supposedly superb.

Honorable mention goes to the 45mm (but not sharp wide open).  Also, Panasonic makes 12-35 and 35-100 (constant 2.8s) zooms which at $1200, I'm guessing would impress?  Also, I don't know if there's a wide angle zoom that would show up the 7-14mm on any system?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrapperJohn
Forum ProPosts: 10,731
Like?
Is Canon too expensive when you buy L glass?
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

Is Leica too expensive when you buy even one lens for a M series?

M43 is a new system. It doesn't have a huge number of used lenses right now, so there's not a lot of downward pressure on lens prices on the used market. Mirrorless in general and M43 in particular has driven up the price of older Leica M lenses, too, by increasing the demand.

But, considering that the best M43 cameras are on a par with the best APS DSLR's, when equipped with glass of similar quality, it's about the same price, and a lot smaller.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
happypoppeye
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,789Gear list
Like?
Re: Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

tron555 wrote:

… Consider how many expensive lenses are absolutely needed, just to cover your basic needs?

...and there is your problem. You think you NEED multiple expensive lenses. My GF3 cost me $299.00, with lens. Thats it. Everything else is just a want. Every (ok, almost every) modern lens produced today is sharp and capable of producing stunning images.

I have been considering the purchase of an Olympus E-PL5, then; I came across this thread with a post like this: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51378681
It seems like very advance photographers (unlike myself) are spending thousands of dollars on very expensive lenses. After acquiring them, they are noticing these lenses are only sharp at certain apertures and focal lengths. It seems like getting sharp images from corner to corner throughout the focal range is basically impossible on any m4/3 lens! I understand that is also true of all other types of interchangeable lens, but it seems even prevalent with m4/3 lenses. It has made me reconsider (or at least put on hold) my purchase of the E-PL5. Coming from fixed lens cameras in the past, I have never experienced these kinds of issues, costs and probably aggravations when not getting sharp images. I have two very important questions to ask, and I hope someone here can answer them for me and maybe others. If I do purchase the Olympus E-PL5, are there two additional (reasonably priced) lenses I can purchase (1 short/1 long) besides the kit lens that will give me approximately 17mm to 140/150mm range? If the answer is yes, will the total cost be less than $1000 for the entire system? Any help will be very much appreciated!

 happypoppeye's gear list:happypoppeye's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 Mega OIS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
slimandy
Forum ProPosts: 14,629Gear list
Like?
Re: Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

What cameras have you come from? They are probably worse. You are just not allowing for how critical we get in gear forums. It's all relative.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

 slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Grobb
Senior MemberPosts: 1,229Gear list
Like?
Re: Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…
In reply to slimandy, May 1, 2013

I am coming from a Canon G12, and still have a Sony DSC-H5. Both cameras still work and have served me very well. They were considered the best cameras in their class when I purchased them. Since I only upgrade every 4-5 years, I like to get the latest and greatest (best bang for the buck) technology to try and future proof myself as much as possible.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/839|0/%28brand%29/Olympus/%28appareil2%29/665|0/%28brand2%29/Canon/%28appareil3%29/612|0/%28brand3%29/Olympus

It has been suggested that I go with 2-3 year old cameras and slightly outdated technology, but they do not have the sensor, processing power, AF speed, FPS, touch screen, etc… the E-PL5 has, which are very impressive IMHO.

I’m pretty sure shooting the E-PL5 with two very good lenses ranging from 14-150mm, and all the features it has should last me at least 4 years, or more. As time goes by and I feel the need to add lenses, I will get exactly what I need when that time comes. A nice fast prime will probably be my next lens, like the Panasonic LUMIX G 20mm f/1.7 or Panasonic Lumix 14mm f/2.5 G, if I need something wider.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
KenBalbari
Regular MemberPosts: 275Gear list
Like?
Re: Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013
Coming from fixed lens cameras in the past, I have never experienced these kinds of issues

tron555 wrote:

If you have never experienced these issues on your fixed lens cameras, then I think you will be more than happy with the kit lens.  Add, for $500 total:

40-150 for $149 (through 5/11)

45 f/1.8 for $349 (through 5/11)

Portaiture is the main place you would want to use narrow depth of field for subject isolation, and this is a perfect focal length for that. I suspect that kit will cover nearly all of your needs for now, for about $500 in additional lenses over the kit.

 KenBalbari's gear list:KenBalbari's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F30 Zoom Olympus E-330 Olympus PEN E-PL2
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
slimandy
Forum ProPosts: 14,629Gear list
Like?
Re: Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

tron555 wrote:

I am coming from a Canon G12, and still have a Sony DSC-H5.

As I suspected. Both great cameras. Both with obvious limitations. I am familiar with the G12 having used a friends, just as I was with the G9 and G11. I assume there was a G10 but if there was I never used that one.

A decent MFT camera will beat them for IQ, speed, lens choice and a host of other things, the caveat being increased cost. If you are happy with those you should be even happier with MFT unless the cost spoils it for you.

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

 slimandy's gear list:slimandy's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Fujifilm X-E1 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Franka T.L.
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,477Gear list
Like?
Well , its somewwhat
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

well, first and foremost, let's be fair to M4/3 and other mirrorless. Quality cost, and this is not just M4/3. Quality Lens that truly deliver quality image cost and that's the case with whatever system. But yes there is some true in the statement primarily ( and this is not M4/3 specific but also apply to other mirrorless ) because of the way the Mfrs do their lens ( and their lens pricing ).

And that's why I have always figure the mirrorless need also another lineup of lens that are catered for quality ( optically ) instead of compactness and I am not talking about fast expensive lens either. So instead of a compact 14-42 kit zoom or the 20mm/1.7, can we just have something like a decent 21mm/2.0 fully optically corrected. No it won't be a slim as the 20 but its likely still be able to be sized like the zoom but offer that 1.5 stop of speed and likely can be made to perform even at wide open. That same argument can apply to a sort as demonstrated by the Oly 45mm/1.8 , and quality can be had within reasonable cost ( provided we do not ask for speed and build at the same instance ) witness the Sigma 30mm and 19mm f/2.8

In fairness to the Mfrs again though, one must realize that there are very very few lens that are designed and capable to deliver truly across the field / even field performance at wide open and most would demand stopping down a slot or 2 to perform at their highest. And that's why fast fix focals also highly cherished by photographers then and now. A lens with f/2.0 , even stopped down by 2 , still give f/4.0 where a lens that say give that same coverage at f/4.0 would require f/8.0 ( which on M4/3 starts to challenge the diffraction limit ). That f/4.0 , aka 2 stop of light also might mean using ISO 800 vs that of using ISO 3200 , a not insignificant imaging advantage obviously.

So in due course I must say somewhat I do agree with the OP.

-- hide signature --

- Franka -

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
G1Houston
Senior MemberPosts: 2,219Gear list
Like?
You need one general purpose fast lens
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

tron555 wrote:

I’ve decided to look at getting an E-PL5, the Panasonic 14-45mm and Panasonic 45-150mm lenses. After reading many reviews on the Internet and this forum, I think this system would be

You are missing a "fast" lens to shoot in low light without flash; thus, the 20/1.7 is really critical for a starter kit.  You could get the 17/1.8 but it is more expensive and not sharper.  While the Panasonic 14-45 is slightly better, IMO, it is still a slow kit lens and not worth the trouble of paying more than the kit that comes with E-PL5.

For traveling, and general use, you may find a 14-150 + 20/1.7 to be a very versatile kit.  You use the 20 when the light is low and the 14-150 can stay on most of the time without having to change lenses.  If I remember correctly, the 45-150 is not a stellar lens, so if you are sensitive to price, get the very best lens you can afford and make do with what you have before buying another lens.

 G1Houston's gear list:G1Houston's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH1 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Art_P
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,125Gear list
Like?
First off
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

tron555 wrote:

MrScorpio… I have three questions for you.

  1. What is the difference in price between the 6D Canon and 2 lenses from 14-150mm and the E-PL5 and its 2 lenses from 14-150mm?

Did you mean to compare E-PL5 + 14-150 against 6D and 28-300?

If you are comparing 14-150 against 14-150, your comparing somewhat wide to fairly long against UW to somewhat long.  I'm thinking you meant 14-150 against 28-300 as these would have the same FoV.

  1. What is the difference in weight between the 6D/2 and 2 lenses from 14-150mm and the E-PL5 and its 2 lenses from 14-150mm?

Lessee,

6D                667g                    E-PL5       325g

28-135mm    540g                    14-45mm  195g

75-300mm    480g                   40-150mm  190g

total           1687g                                    705g

a difference of almost 1000g

prefer a single lens solution?

28-300mm 1.66kg                    14-150mm 280g

Even bigger difference.

Notes: I used the Panny 14-45, which is heavier than the Oly kit lens

also picked the 28-135 as I didn't find Canon in the 28-80mm range.

> What is the difference between total IQ between the 6D and the E-PL5 percentage wise?

Don't have the Canon gear, you'll have to run your own tests.

-- hide signature --

Art P
"I am a creature of contrast,
of light and shadow.
I live where the two play together,
I thrive on the conflict"

 Art_P's gear list:Art_P's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Art_P
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,125Gear list
Like?
Any system is expensive
In reply to Grobb, May 1, 2013

if you go on a buying frenzy.

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

Need to shoot handheld at night, need extra shallow DoF, need UW or super long? You're going beyond basic needs.

Need razor sharp at all apertures and focal lengths?  You're going to pay more for that in any system.

-- hide signature --

Art P
"I am a creature of contrast,
of light and shadow.
I live where the two play together,
I thrive on the conflict"

 Art_P's gear list:Art_P's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mittskitts
Contributing MemberPosts: 728Gear list
Like?
Re: Are m4/3 cameras too expensive when you…
In reply to SW Anderson, May 1, 2013

The $500 version (on sale) is the older 4/3 version of the 9-18mm, which is larger and heavier but I understand is still an excellent lens. The lowest I've ever seen a newer m4/3 9-18mm go for is $599 on the annual lens sale.

 Mittskitts's gear list:Mittskitts's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-1 iHS Olympus SH-50 Olympus Tough TG-3 Olympus PEN E-PL1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tedolf
Forum ProPosts: 17,479Gear list
Like?
Amen!
In reply to hindesite, May 1, 2013

hindesite wrote:

tron555 wrote:

… Consider how many expensive lenses are absolutely needed, just to cover your basic needs?

I have been considering the purchase of an Olympus E-PL5, then; I came across this thread with a post like this: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51378681
It seems like very advance photographers (unlike myself) are spending thousands of dollars on very expensive lenses. After acquiring them, they are noticing these lenses are only sharp at certain apertures and focal lengths. It seems like getting sharp images from corner to corner throughout the focal range is basically impossible on any m4/3 lens!

There you go.

These guys are not "advanced" photographers. They are more interested in the hardware than any photos it will produce.

No expensive lenses are "absolutely needed" for photography (in general). A few months ago I won a DPR challenge with a lens that cost me less than $20.

I wish some of the reprobates from other formats that post here would accept this.

You don't need expensive lenses to make great images.

Not at all!

-- hide signature --

Tedolph

 tedolf's gear list:tedolf's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:2.8 Pancake Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tedolf
Forum ProPosts: 17,479Gear list
Like?
The only thing that is expensive in u 4/3......
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.

Need to shoot handheld at night, need extra shallow DoF, need UW or super long? You're going beyond basic needs.

Need razor sharp at all apertures and focal lengths?  You're going to pay more for that in any system.

-- hide signature --

Art P
"I am a creature of contrast,
of light and shadow.
I live where the two play together,
I thrive on the conflict"

is wide angle.

Even there, the Samyang fisheye is a very good bargain.

Everything else you can shoot for about street price $300.00 or much less.

Tedolph

 tedolf's gear list:tedolf's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:2.8 Pancake Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Like?
Really?
In reply to tedolf, May 1, 2013

So the OP has stated clearly that he's not an advanced photographer, and you are going to suggest MF lenses that don't use the Multi-Segment (or ESP) metering of m43 cameras?

I enjoy using so-called legacy lenses on the GH2 for video, for photography, call me old fashioned I'd rather have AF.

Anyway, your comment in not surprising as you seem to be enjoy Ebay bargains, but I'm surprised that all the upvotes for your comment considering what the OP has told us about his abilities and needs.

 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
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads