I am no longer a pro with a m4/3rds camera

I went to a seminar by a film director who shot Emma Thompson with a 5DII SLR. When he brought out the camera, she didn't believe it could do the job so he had to tell her there were other hidden "proper cameras" on the set to get her to take him seriously! She wasn't being awkward, just wasn't used to seeing an SLR used on a movie set that way.

I have had my GF1 for about 8 weeks and I have shot more with it than the previous year with my 5DII, that's what its all about at the end of the day, producing pictures. I won't be selling my SLR for a while though, m43 does not yet have enough lenses to create the kind of pictures I can get with the 5DII.
--
http://www.buchangrant.com

polarabbit said:

tompabes2 said:

While I completely agree with every word you wrote in your post, this is quite common.

For example, a manager will have to dress smart and maybe use clothes with a famous brand, and he will have to get an expensive car to show his customers that he and his company are successful. There are exceptions, of course, but this is usually the rule. I'm not saying that I agree with this (in fact, I don't), but that's the way it is.

For a professional, gear and appearence do matter. Of course you can always make a portfolio with the EP-1 and, if somebody complains that you don't seem to have professional gear, explain why you are using the EP-1 and show them your portfolio.

But I also have to say that if you're a professional, gear matters.

Because if you're a professional you must be able to shoot in the most difficult conditions, that's when fast lenses, fast SLR bodies, weather sealing and so on get involved. And while the EP-1 might be the perfect camera for the hobbyist, it might miss some features that are required for pro work, regardless of the artistic quality of your pictures.

Click to expand...

I can understand your point about speed if one is to be involved in work of fast moving objects ie sports but i do not get how an EP1 will not make a good camera for most other "professional" work in the hands of a good photographer. Many professionals use DRFs for paid work so I don't see how the EP1, with the ability to use both AF lenses (basically ANY mount with the wide array of adaptors out there) and MF lenses (M mount and others, again, with the appropriate adaptors), is not a suitable "professional" tool. But this is precisely what the OP was referring to - it is the misconception by the less informed that a camera such as the EP1 is not a serious enough photographic tool capable of producing "professional" quality pictures.

Click to expand...

The EP1 is not a pro-body:

• dual memory cards
• large battery
• weather sealed body
• min 300,000 cycle shutter
• robust body
• etc.

None of these affect image quality, but, if your living depends on you getting a shot or not, then it matters. So, no one is saying that the EP1 cant produce sellable pictures; but, its not a pro camera.. Oly doesnt even market the EP1 as a pro camera; which doesnt mean you cant make money from it.

Good for you!!!!

good riddance. The whole idea of "pro" photography is a trap of sorts. There are many people who do this because they love it, and yes, some get paid for it too.

If there are others who believe that professionalism has to do with the type of machine you carry with you, that's their little problem. In the middle ages the Holy Inquisition censored Leonardo and his flying machines because "nothing heavier than air could fly". And they said this with flocks of birds hovering over their little heads.

Funny stuff.....

Incidentally I sold today all my DSLR Oly gear, and bought the E-P2 with the 20 mm.

--
Galleries: http://www.dheller.net

“The sheer ease with which we can produce a superficial image often leads to creative disaster.” -- Ansel Adams

sean000 said:

Why would you worry any more or any less about m4/3 gear than DSLR gear? One can build a pretty complex multi-lens m4/3 kit after all. Not to mention the m4/3 forum has plenty of gearhead discussions that cover the pros and cons of various camera bodies, lenses, accessories, post-processing techniques, etc. While it may be true that a high-end DSLR has more features, switches, and dials; I would say the current m4/3 cameras are more complex and feature rich than entry level DSLRs like the Nikon D3000.

Click to expand...

Sean, when I stated worry I meant a couple of things. 1) Weight. 2) Size/Bulk 3) Theft/Damage.

There are many times my DSLR was left at home because it just wasn't a good choice. It would have been too big, or would have been heavy shooting all day in the hot summer sun, or would have been a bad choice to carry in a certain part of town, etc. I know these things may sound petty and probably don't bother most people, but to me I wanted small, compact, stealth, candid.

sean000 said:

Portability and video (or at least better video) seem to be the best reasons to switch from a DSLR to m4/3, but if you're a gearhead about your DSLR you will probably be a gearhead about your m4/3 gear too.

Click to expand...

To be fair, picking a m4/3rds camera can define one as being a gearhead. Trust me I love lenses, and bodies, etc. However I am not hung up on needing a pro body or the most expensive lens to do the job. I am humble in my approach to making decisions on what gear to purchase.

I do care your right, but at the same time I did consider a P&S (Yes going from an SLR to a P&S). The EP-1/Gxxx caught my eye as being the next best thing, a hybrid.

My OP wasn't meant to sound anti-DSLR. I love DSLRs! I just wanted to share a story that I thought was interesting. I didn't want to stir up a m4/3rds vs. the rest of the world debate. It's just human nature to judge one's performance or capabilities based on our expectation of what we consider the 'norm'. I don't really fault my client or my friend for having that opinion - they have every right to reject me. Hey if a plumber showed up to my house and said he could do the entire job with plastic tools I might question him as well )

sean000 said:

Well there is one upside to the marketing success of DSLR manufacturers: Before everybody and their grandmother had a DSLR people often assumed that excellent photographers take such excellent photographs because of their very, very, very excellent cameras. Now that so many people have DSLRs they realize there is a bit more to it than just the gear. So perhaps the upside is that once again photographers will be judged on their photographs and not on their choice of camera gear.

Click to expand...

Yes, very true. I think the EP-1/GF-1 would have never even came along if the consumer drive wasn't so strong. And I don't want to sound like a hypocrite. If it wasn't for 'consumer' based SLRs I myself would have never entered into the market. I guess they days the pool has become quite diluted and on the outside it looks as though it is no longer a specialized area of expertise. Of course you will always have your snap shooters and artists, but you no longer can point to someone in a line-up and determine who is who based on the camera in hand.

sean000 said:

As for me... I'm getting a GF1 to carry as my everyday camera because I do want a quality everyday camera. And yes I can get good results with a compact P&S, but I just get tired of the limitations of some cameras getting in the way of the process. It's less frustrating and more conducive to creativity for me to have a nice camera to work with. So yes... it is a little about the gear. I will also continue to use my DSLR gear for times when the features and lenses I have for my DSLR are better suited for the shots I plan to take that day. For me there is no reason a photographer can't use more than one format. It's just gear. Buy what you need and use it when you need it. If you no longer need it, sell it.

Sean

Click to expand...

Sean I agree with your points. Maybe 80% of why I like having a m4/3rds camera as opposed to an SLR is purely psychological, but hey the mental game is half the battle (and every bit helps these days

I computerised some newspapers years ago, well almost because they still used their dark rooms for the photographers. The last I did had a Kodak digital SLR camera, it was a suburban newspaper, and they bought the second generation Kodak, the cheap one, it cost $50,000 for the body. It had a big CCD though - 4 MP. Or maybe that was the size of the storage or RAM!!! I think they did even use it a bit - for black and white work, experimentally. Things keep changing - but back then, "Pro" gear wasn't cheap, and neither was developing the quantity of photos they took. Things have changed ...

Even though Isee myself as a serious hobbyist I would not hire a "pro" with m43!
Why?

To me a pro is prepared to carry around a lot of gear to get the best result.

And the matter of fact is that a 5d2 or d3 takes better pictures (with good glass) than a m43.

"Preparing for my execution now?"


--
Canon/Olympus Prosumer
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcusaxlund/
http://www.marcusaxlund.smugmug.com

5D mk2
24-105 IS f/4L
70-200 IS f/2,8L
17-40 f/4L
100 macro f/2,8
Canon EF 2x II Extender

Olympus E-P1
Olympus m4/3 14-42, f/3,5-5,6
Panasonic m4/3 7-14, f/4
Panasonic m4/3 14-45, f/3,5-5,6
Panasonic m4/3 45-200, f/4-5,6
Olympus FL-14
Olympus FL-50 R

I don't think the person was saying that m4/3 is equal to professional cameras. Iamatrix was merely making a commentary on perceptions and how at times we can get so bogged down by our gear that we miss out on enjoying the art of photography.

tompabes2 said:

For example, a manager will have to dress smart and maybe use clothes with a famous brand, and he will have to get an expensive car to show his customers that he and his company are successful.

Click to expand...

Dressing professionally is one thing. The tools you use are quite another. Of course for someone in a position where image is everything they may want their tools and their accessories to be as much a part of their image as their clothes... so I'm not disagreeing with you. However, photography is a creative profession, and creative professionals are generally granted a lot more leeway when it comes to image. If someone is hiring you for your talent, they of course want you to use the tools you are comfortable using. Or they should want you to.

tompabes2 said:

For a professional, gear and appearence do matter. Of course you can always make a portfolio with the EP-1 and, if somebody complains that you don't seem to have professional gear, explain why you are using the EP-1 and show them your portfolio.

Click to expand...

This is good advice, because they can ask any gear questions they have up front. Maybe it isn't right for a client to question your choice of gear, but it does happen. Personally I like to be up front about the gear I use and also how I like to work. There is a danger in this though... they might go with another photographer because they think that photographer has more professional looking gear. In an ideal world the clients would base their decision on the final product alone.

tompabes2 said:

Because if you're a professional you must be able to shoot in the most difficult conditions, that's when fast lenses, fast SLR bodies, weather sealing and so on get involved. And while the EP-1 might be the perfect camera for the hobbyist, it might miss some features that are required for pro work, regardless of the artistic quality of your pictures.

Click to expand...

This all depends on the types of professional photography you engage in, but yeah... for most pros that means quite a variety types of photography in a variety of conditions. So you do generally want robust high performance gear and redundancy.

tompabes2 said:

And if I were a couple that pays a lot of money for their wedding pictures, I would be really upset if somebody would show me a bunch of grainy pictures saying that they make an artistic B/W...

Click to expand...

But some people do like that style. Some people even pay a premium to get that style. That's why many pros use software to simulate a certain type of film and processing... grain and all. Many of these programs and techniques can really improve shots with digital noise by giving the noise a more organic looking grain effect. Some of my favorite shots were super noisy images that now look like they were shot with high speed BW film thanks to Silver Efex Pro.

tompabes2 said:

So, you see... I agree with you for the artistic part of your post, but if you're a professional and get paid I think that your equipment must be adequate.

Click to expand...

The OP's situation was kind of unusual though. It wasn't a wedding, and the OP said he is getting out of the biz as well. It was a previous client and the gig was to take casual candids for a website. I could see using an EP1 or GF1 for this for a variety of reasons:

• Available light capability as well as flashgun support
• Small camera might allow the photographer to get more natural shots rather than everyone smiling and posing... he can blend in with the crowd a bit more easily.
• Even if the high ISO shots without flash are a bit noisy, they will be for Web display and not large prints.

But yeah... if I were hired to shoot such a gig I would show up with both a m4/3 camera and my usual gig setup. I would use the m4/3 for some shots, the DSLR for others, and see how things go. I'm getting a GF1 with a pancake prime in January, and I will certainly take it with me to the next gig I photograph. My Nikon DSLR cameras will still be my primary cameras, but I will probably take some shots with the GF1, especially:

• During the ceremony if pictures are allowed. The last wedding I photographed allowed photography during the ceremony, and when I warned the bride about how loud the camera would be at the quiet moments she said, "I don't care... I want those pictures!" I know m4/3 isn't silent, but it's at least quieter... which would make me feel a lot better the next time bride asks me to shoot during the ceremony.

• During the reception for some of the candids. Yes I would probably use my DSLR with a flash bracket and/or diffuser for the bulk of the shots, but I can think of some moments that would be easier to capture using a less conspicuous camera.

So these cameras may not be designed for the rigors of daily professional use under a variety of conditions, but that doesn't mean they are not useful tools for a professional photographer to have in their bag. Many pros already carry compact P&S cameras along with their DSLRs for similar reasons.

Would I show up with only a m4/3 kit? If I was confident in my skill with the particular camera, and I had a backup, then yes... but I would probably explain my gear choice to the client ahead of time. I do that anyway since even if you show up with a DSLR some people question your brand of choice.

fad said:

Before the last of you disappears, please leave a video of an old man in an oxygen tent reminding us of your superior understanding of human reproduction.

Click to expand...

Reminding who? The extra-terrestrials visiting the uninhabitable wasteland that used to be Earth after the ecosystem collapses due to US CO2 emissions?

Remember that the best camera of yesterday (and i only mean 4yrs ago) was about the same image quality as an entry level SLR now (near as dammit for arguments sake) --- The tech moves faster than the re equiping cycle - its like super computers - they gave up and just perchased thousands of off the shelf PCs & Gforce graphics cards!

Cameras are now digital and we will see a massive increse in development very soon m4/3 is the start of a compleatly digital, image aqusition device - it will do stills and video it might evon go 3D one day - The diffrence between pro and consumer gear will be more about the accesorys you can use and the hard wareing of the gear - look at PA speaker - sound like crap compaired to Hi- Fi speakers... but do they use anything but PA - no, because they are too fragile.

Thats probably the best reason for PRO - not image quality - a m4/3 is on par with the old 5D....and now "old" nikon D200...

But this pace of change will mean that the traditional SLR will be fading and somthing more designed for the digital era from top to bottom will emerge - and then weddings and "pro" will change because the gear will, and you won't be able to get huge cams because no one will make them... its like trying to find a PC that is as big as a wardrobe... they did make them and they were "profetional" but now they are of a time and are not worthy...

wether this will change the perception of what gear will be adequit for use by a pro, who knows....for now I might just get an old film SLR (a very big one) gut it, and slip in my old 770uz

JRRS

John Knuhtsen said:

Is America a strange society ? Honestly I am european. These days we over here wonder what is happening to Tiger Wood, per example. We concentrate on his golfing only, and how many women he deals with is of no interest to us, actually it could be nice to him ! Not to mention the Clinton - Lewinsky affair.
Come to Europe my friend !

Click to expand...

Just came back from London on a business trip. Had some time to go out and take pictures - and was surprised to see just about everyone in the city with a DSLR around their neck. No matter where you went - touristy spots, shopping spots, the hotel, restaurants. It was fun observing people using pop up camera flashes, outside, of far away subjects. Just about all cameras were Canon or Nikon - and not just the smaller DSLRs, but some of their semi pro versions as well. You could hardly see people with compacts (and I didn't see any micro four thirds, and just one other person with an Olympus DSLR). It's either a DSLR these days, or just a camera phone. So pretty soon - to look like a pro - one will really need to start carrying a Hasselblad (like in the film days). A Nikon DSLR will not cut it. We had a discussion over dinner, and many of my European colleagues were considering buying a DSLR or upgrading their current ones. I mentioned that I'm considering selling my e-620 for a micro four thirds camera - and everyone thought I was nuts (especially since they all marveled out how small the 620 was, compared to what they had). Even in discussions, you're not taken seriously with an E-Px. And Europe is the same way as the US.

I used to believe this, but dslr's keep improving so fast, and the competition, alas, does not.

A good camera is a very complex system. For best results, and greatest flexibility, all the elements have to work together and be continually refined and improved.

For stationary shots, at normal distances, in good light at normal enlargements, a good p&s can do the job. M43 gives you some improvement, and more bulk.

But dslr's are the game changer in many, many ways. I use a 1dsIII for street photography, because nothing smaller does the job I want with the lenses I want. Certainly not my G1, alas.

Non-dslr's, as a group, are probably falling behind technically in the ISO race, in AF, in in-camera image processing, in dynamic range, in lens quality and variety, in flash in almost everything, in fact. To overcome this trend, a manufacturer would have to dedicate enormous resources, and even more intelligence, over a period of many years. This is not happening now, and may never happen.

Compare the new tele macros from Panasonic and Canon, for instance. The opportunity cost for not using a dslr just gets larger every year.

J R R S said:

But this pace of change will mean that the traditional SLR will be fading and somthing more designed for the digital era from top to bottom will emerge - and then weddings and "pro" will change because the gear will, and you won't be able to get huge cams because no one will make them... its like trying to find a PC that is as big as a wardrobe... they did make them and they were "profetional" but now they are of a time and are not worthy...

JRRS

Click to expand...

--
Frank
http://www.sidewalkshadows.com

ego sum via et veritas et vita

iamatrix said:

Sean, when I stated worry I meant a couple of things. 1) Weight. 2) Size/Bulk 3) Theft/Damage.

There are many times my DSLR was left at home because it just wasn't a good choice. It would have been too big, or would have been heavy shooting all day in the hot summer sun, or would have been a bad choice to carry in a certain part of town, etc. I know these things may sound petty and probably don't bother most people, but to me I wanted small, compact, stealth, candid.

Click to expand...

Those reasons are not petty at all... very good reasons in fact. I thought you meant that you worried about the technical differences between different camera bodies, lenses, etc. with DSLR gear more than m4/3 gear.

iamatrix said:

To be fair, picking a m4/3rds camera can define one as being a gearhead. Trust me I love lenses, and bodies, etc. However I am not hung up on needing a pro body or the most expensive lens to do the job. I am humble in my approach to making decisions on what gear to purchase.

I do care your right, but at the same time I did consider a P&S (Yes going from an SLR to a P&S). The EP-1/Gxxx caught my eye as being the next best thing, a hybrid.

Click to expand...

iamatrix said:

My OP wasn't meant to sound anti-DSLR. I love DSLRs! I just wanted to share a story that I thought was interesting.

Click to expand...

I apologize misunderstanding the opening part of your post. I've read some comments from others who treat those who completely dump their DSLR gear for m4/3 like they have found religion... an attitude that saddens me as much as someone who would turn down a photographer shooting with a camera they did not feel looked professional enough. Not that there is anything wrong with completely dumping your DSLR gear for m4/3, but it's also possible to have both and use both depending on your needs for that day. Just different tools for different situations.

iamatrix said:

I didn't want to stir up a m4/3rds vs. the rest of the world debate. It's just human nature to judge one's performance or capabilities based on our expectation of what we consider the 'norm'. I don't really fault my client or my friend for having that opinion - they have every right to reject me. Hey if a plumber showed up to my house and said he could do the entire job with plastic tools I might question him as well )

Click to expand...

It's just sad that he had that attitude even though he was familiar with your work. It reminds me that not too long ago a friend of mine, who had already seen some of my photography, saw my Nikon D200 with a big f/2.8 zoom on it and said, "Oh that's why your pictures are so good!" He had no idea that it was an offensive thing to say to a photographer, and it shows how little some people really know about photography. Which underscores my point of it possibly being a good thing that everyone and their grandmother now shoots with a DSLR. They will finally know first-hand that it's not as easy as it looks no matter what kind of equipment you use.

iamatrix said:

Yes, very true. I think the EP-1/GF-1 would have never even came along if the consumer drive wasn't so strong. And I don't want to sound like a hypocrite. If it wasn't for 'consumer' based SLRs I myself would have never entered into the market. I guess they days the pool has become quite diluted and on the outside it looks as though it is no longer a specialized area of expertise. Of course you will always have your snap shooters and artists, but you no longer can point to someone in a line-up and determine who is who based on the camera in hand.

Click to expand...

The funny thing is that shooting in a crowd with an EP1 or GF1 will definitely attract the attention of other photographers in the know. To most people you will just look like another snapshooter, but to many photographers you will look like a discerning artist who knows his tools. While the general public may not recognize your EP1 as a high-end camera, every DSLR photographer I know wants one to either replace or supplement their current gear.

And not to put down amateur photographers with DSLRS: I think it's a good thing that excellent cameras are more affordable than ever, and I'm sure that some of those DSLR-toting grandmothers are excellent photographers. Hopefully this all means that more people will become educated about photography and appreciate it even more as an art form.

iamatrix said:

Sean I agree with your points. Maybe 80% of why I like having a m4/3rds camera as opposed to an SLR is purely psychological, but hey the mental game is half the battle (and every bit helps these days

Click to expand...

I'm excited about getting a GF1 for all of the reasons you state, but I still get just as excited about going out for a shoot with my DSLR, lenses, tripod, and flashguns. I'm just looking forward to having a better small camera to carry every day. There are definitely times when it nice to shoot inconspicuously, and more often than that I just find myself frequently wishing that I had a better camera than my compact P&S when an unexpected photo opportunity comes along. That happens quite often here in the Pacific NW. The best time of day to shoot isn't always the golden hour. The highly variable weather here means it can happen any time of the day and last for only minutes. More times than I can count I've been biking to and from work, or out on my lunch break, and suddenly the light turns spectacular. If you're a photographer it's hard to not have a good camera on you at times like those.

Sean

--
Thanks,

Teski
http://www.tedescophotography.com

Jogger said:

polarabbit said:

tompabes2 said:

While I completely agree with every word you wrote in your post, this is quite common.

For example, a manager will have to dress smart and maybe use clothes with a famous brand, and he will have to get an expensive car to show his customers that he and his company are successful. There are exceptions, of course, but this is usually the rule. I'm not saying that I agree with this (in fact, I don't), but that's the way it is.

For a professional, gear and appearence do matter. Of course you can always make a portfolio with the EP-1 and, if somebody complains that you don't seem to have professional gear, explain why you are using the EP-1 and show them your portfolio.

But I also have to say that if you're a professional, gear matters.

Because if you're a professional you must be able to shoot in the most difficult conditions, that's when fast lenses, fast SLR bodies, weather sealing and so on get involved. And while the EP-1 might be the perfect camera for the hobbyist, it might miss some features that are required for pro work, regardless of the artistic quality of your pictures.

Click to expand...

I can understand your point about speed if one is to be involved in work of fast moving objects ie sports but i do not get how an EP1 will not make a good camera for most other "professional" work in the hands of a good photographer. Many professionals use DRFs for paid work so I don't see how the EP1, with the ability to use both AF lenses (basically ANY mount with the wide array of adaptors out there) and MF lenses (M mount and others, again, with the appropriate adaptors), is not a suitable "professional" tool. But this is precisely what the OP was referring to - it is the misconception by the less informed that a camera such as the EP1 is not a serious enough photographic tool capable of producing "professional" quality pictures.

Click to expand...

The EP1 is not a pro-body:

• dual memory cards
• large battery
• weather sealed body
• min 300,000 cycle shutter

Click to expand...

how many pro bodies have a min of 300,000 cycle shutter? that would disquality many non-latest DSLR bodies from being called pro bodies. how and who defines a "pro" shooter anyway?

is the M8/8.2/9 a pro body?

Jogger said:

• robust body
• etc.

None of these affect image quality, but, if your living depends on you getting a shot or not, then it matters. So, no one is saying that the EP1 cant produce sellable pictures; but, its not a pro camera.. Oly doesnt even market the EP1 as a pro camera; which doesnt mean you cant make money from it.

Click to expand...

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GALLERY: http://galay.fotki.com

Gary

Jogger said:

aroundomaha said:

Any job is about results, not appearances. Some of the best photography in the world has been on small, simple cameras.

Click to expand...

Not at all, e.g. you wouldnt expect a CEO of a major corp. to show up in track pants, sandals, and a stained undershirt to a board meeting. Like it or not, appearance matters in this world.

Click to expand...

no, not exactly sandals or stained undershirt but not necessarily a suit either.

think Apple, Google, Yahoo, just to name a few. have you ever seen Steve Jobs in a suit?

Jogger said:

Jogger said:

--
Aroundomaha
http://www.aroundomaha.com/
http://aroundomaha.smugmug.com/EP1

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GALLERY: http://galay.fotki.com

Gary

Photography history repeats itself.

If you used that new dry film stuff in small, hand-holdable cameras that then got wet developed, you were a rank amateur, real pros shot wet plates from tripods.

If you shot that 620 or 120 roll film instead of sheet film, you were a rank amateur, real pros shot sheet film.

If you shot anything other than a speed graphic, you were definitely an amateur photo journalist.

If you shot 35mm rangefinder, you were a rank amateur, real pro photographers shot 120/220 roll film - or speed graphics if a photojournalist.

If you shot an SLR, with that awful clatter-y mirror, instead of with a 35mm rangefinder like any self respecting pro journalist, you were clearly an amateur.

If you shot digital instead of film, clearly an amateur.

If you shot 5mp instead of 6mp, clearly an amateur.

I'm not saying that m4/3 is the next professional format - not unless somebody starts making more killer lenses. But there's a long, long pattern of resistance to innovation in photography.

Bob Krist, in his classes, urges people to carry point and shoots for travel photography because some of the time, that's exactly the camera you need to get the shot you need. Dave Black has had SI covers shot with point and shoots. However, I don't think either would show up to shoot a whole assignment with one.

I shot MF film for way too long because customers insisted... but after about the fifth time I shot MF film and DSLR both, and the customer used all DSLR images, I decided to not work with customers who wanted to tell the photographer how to be a photographer.

I have used my GF1 on a few gigs, but never alone; I had my DSLR and lenses hanging, and shot most that way, but the GF1 got some shots that I wouldn't have gotten with a DSLR. Thankfully my customers don't watch me shoot, because I'm convinced they'd be grumpy about the GF1. Some have been grumpy about shots with my G10 - not about quality, but months after running a photo from it, grumpy that the photo they loved so much and used was shot with a camera that their teenager also owned.

A professional camera best defined as whatever camera a professional photographer chooses to do the job properly.

Thankfully, photography isn't my main meal ticket, because if it was I'd probably offend clients who have more opinions than they have photographic knowledge.

There was (maybe still is) a car class in SCCA racing called GT Pinto. Start with a Ford Pinto, which had the same engine as you'd find in a Formula Ford racer, and then you can do almost anything to the suspension and engine tuning you want. The cars were frighteningly fast and agile. Driven hard and well, they were a purer race car (meaning, they amplified a driver's skill or lack thereof) than any showroom stock car.

But everybody thought the GT Pinto racers were clowns.

Watching them pass a 3 series BMW, on the OUTSIDE OF THE CORNER, your opinion of them as race cars might change...

fad said:

How many children you have is of no interest to you Europeans, as you excellent people use your superior understanding of sex to commit demographic suicide.

Before the last of you disappears, please leave a video of an old man in an oxygen tent reminding us of your superior understanding of human reproduction.

John Knuhtsen said:

It is very chocking for me to read ! With MFT we are talking about a sensor being half the size of fullframe, just like old halfformat film cameras. But nowadays with digital sensors the number of pixels seems to be rather unimportant. What is more important is noise. So a MFT camera is stronger, IMO, than a halfformat filmcamera and cannot be compared.

Is America a strange society ? Honestly I am european. These days we over here wonder what is happening to Tiger Wood, per example. We concentrate on his golfing only, and how many women he deals with is of no interest to us, actually it could be nice to him ! Not to mention the Clinton - Lewinsky affair.
Come to Europe my friend !

Click to expand...

--
Frank
http://www.sidewalkshadows.com

ego sum via et veritas et vita

Click to expand...

Its good that we have a choice though, unfortunately the indigenous population of North America weren't quite so lucky.
--
Tony
667....Neighbour of the beast....Form is temporary, glass is permanent.