Hey, I just saw a thread in the Top Threads the other day asking for exactly this kind of camera. Now, here it is.
And OF COURSE the camera with less stuff and fewer features costs more, call it the 'coolness' tax, lol.
Canon 80D: It's Good Enough (TM).
steelhead3: A great choice for the demographics that Canon aims for.
Know what they like and like what they know?
Wow, noise is about a stop better than the 7DII?
Me, I enjoy being able to get dead-on focus at the minimum focus distance, or infinity, or anything in-between, in all kinds of light, with any lens, all over the frame. Never got that with my 6D, and looks like even with the best kludge to date, you aren't going to get that on your expensive Nikon dSLR, either.
But I guess it is better than nothing. And for these cameras, whose primary use is action I suppose, having the off-sensor PDAF and the mirror and a quick was to do microadjustment is the best overall option. It seems it should be easy enough you could reset it for whatever you are doing, then set again when you do something different.
Caerolle: Seems like not a bad lens for E-mount, but doesn't seem to add much for m4/3. I guess it is cheaper than the 25/1.4, but probably not as good, and faster than the 25/1.8 and 25/1.7. A 30/1.4 would also give you a little more DOF control than the 25/1.4, I guess.
I am guessing the 25/1.2 will be at least $1000, probably more. This is a totally different kind of lens, it isn't even an Art lens.
Seems like not a bad lens for E-mount, but doesn't seem to add much for m4/3. I guess it is cheaper than the 25/1.4, but probably not as good, and faster than the 25/1.8 and 25/1.7. A 30/1.4 would also give you a little more DOF control than the 25/1.4, I guess.
Hmm, now I get why Connect exists...
Caerolle: If I was going to shoot a lot of action, for sure I would have a dSLR for the OVF and for the off-sensor PDAF for continuous AS.
Fortunately, I only take some pics of my son playing rugby occasionally, and can get some decent shots with my mirrorless system, so I don't need two systems. Though if I had enough money, I would for sure have something like a 7D Mark II (NOT the old one, lol) and probably a 100-400/4.5-5.6 even just for that. Action is one thing that dSLRs are just way better at.
Funny, I just bought an E-M1, it got delivered to my house today (still at work, arrrggghhhh!). That options sounds great, I would just worry about the focus speed. I don't worry that much about getting 'the shot', just some decent ones for my son. Do you think the focus speed would be fast enough for amateur men playing rugby? And not 'amateur' as in Olympics, amateur as in some guys between 16 and 60 playing in a men's league, lol.
I think he meant focus performance?
Ah, thanks. That isn't too bad...
The main downside is that the 40-150 has about the busiest, ugliest background blur I have ever seen. Nasty. But, worth looking into this combo, at least renting and trying it out.
Battersea: Looking at the photo of the two cameras makes me wonder if mirrorless will ever come in multiple sizes for essentially the same camera. A larger size could hold two batteries and offer better ergonomics especially for those who often shoot with large lenses, have larger hands or just prefer a more spacious button layout. I know a grip provides some of that benefit but not all.
Still, one is a lens attached to a camera, and the other is a camera attached to a lens, lol.
For the funniest extreme of this, see some photos nzmacro has taken of his setup with some really fast really long 35mm lens with a small mirrorless attached. He does use a tripod though! ;)
400 is kind of on the long side. I really need to go to about 500 (35mm equivalent), not 800. And isn't that lens pretty slow, too?
I hadn't thought of a TC, have never used one. So, the 1.4 would get you to 210? That is a little on the short side, but would give about the same AOV that I got on the 100-400.
Is the aperture 2.8*1.4, too? Or something else?
Richard, since I far prefer mirrorless, that is very encouraging. Thanks! :)
Now if someone will just make me a m4/3 replacement for that 100-400/4.5-5.6. I have thought long and hard about the Olympus 75-300 and Panasonic 100-300, but both are slow, dark, and not that sharp. I wish there was a say 75-250/2.8-4 with fast AF for the m4/3 system. Even if it cost a couple of thousand, it would be worth it.
If I was going to shoot a lot of action, for sure I would have a dSLR for the OVF and for the off-sensor PDAF for continuous AS.
" a recreation of the first photographic optic lens from 1839. The lens is designed to work with modern analog and digital cameras, and will be available in Canon EF and Nikon F mounts "
Well, that makes sense...
grasscatcher: Make it $499 body-only, and I'd take one.
Better yet, give us the better IBIS on the GX8, as well as the removal of the AA filter. Then I'll buy the GX8.
I suspect the GH5 will have the best of both the GX8 and the GX85, plus even better video, but I don't want to wait until October for those goodies. :(
Except you won't like that either, it will be $1800 or something.
fedway: So that does mean Panny will be introducing a GX8 Mark 2 shortly with the improved shutter mechanism? It's like saying we acknowledge there is a major design problem with our old shutter. So why continue selling the old one?
And the sync speed is a whole stop slower than the GX7 was.
Jorginho: And so m43s just keeps developping and developping. These are not huge steps, but the stabilsed video in 4K is a very welcome and huge step for videographers. Shuttershock: I guess it is true it happens but on my GH4 it is veyr rare.
This also holds a lot of promise for the GH5. 20 MP, 5 axis stabilsation in video, no shuttershockI bet that Leica EVF (or something similar) will be in it. And with 5 axis something like HiRES might be on the drawingboard but I guess not in the GH5.
I wonder how well this all works with the 100-400 Panaleica (stabilisation)...
GX80/85: a very nice addition to the ever growing familly.
duly and interesting: That is what DPR stated in their review of either the PEN F or the GX8, I think the GX8. You can agree or disagree, but they did the evaluation, it isn't just some anti-m4/3 rantings.
BarnET: 0:24 It's also moving to a slightly lower resolution viewfinder
If it's the Gx7 panel it actually has a higher resolution of 2.7 million dots instead of 2.3 million dots of the Gx8.
What is lower is the magnification, and it is indeed field sequential which does come with the mentioned issues.
I would guess they mean if you use 4:3 mode. I didn't watch the video, though.