Camera for ethnographic/backpacking photography - fine art

OK, here we go. My current system is Nikon D80, lots of lenses, and Olympus E420 and 14-54. A very heavy system indeed for hiking Appalachian stream valleys looking for the ultimate waterfall shot, or backpacking over Guatemala, shooting traditional fiestas and dances in the Mayan highlands. My ultimate goal is fine art 8 x 12 to 16 x 20 prints to be exhibited in local shows here in South Texas. In the old days it was so much easier - a lightweight Nikon FE2 and three prime lenses - depending on metering and film used, the results were no different from the most expensive Nikon pro bodies at the time.

So, where to go next? Panasonic GF1? Olympus Pen? I know, I'd need new lenses, and the LCD for framing would take some getting used to. But that screen would be perfect for shooting from the hip for candid street scenes.

I had posted something similar over at Nikon, and I'm still very seriously considering the D300s, but I'd like to hear from m4/3 users. Would I be giving up anything in terms of base ISO image quality with the GF1? What are the caveats. It intrigues me as sort of a modern rendition of the FE2.

Comments? Thanks.
--
Gene in Deep South Texas
http://www.pbase.com/lahuasteca/

Check this thread out, it's quite recent:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1041&message=35645426

There, the OP switched from a D700 to an E-PL1. After a week-long travel to DC area, he came back quite impressed. Quoting him directly here:

"Overall, I really LOVE the output of the images from the camera.
...

I fully intend to use the PL1 daily and leave the D700 at home unless I know I'm shooting for very large print, commercial or fine-art images. I have no regrets of the purchase and in fact have it with me today, at work, w/ the D700 on my desk @ home."

Considering the choice between Oly and Panny, I personally think a PEN + 20mm is the best combo, and a better proposition to a GF1 + 20mm due to the IBIS and a tad better high ISO quality, at least in JPEG. You can read all about Oly's color rendition in the forum. Also, if you ask me, I prefer the P1 to PL1 due to the wheels and metal finish.

Only my 2 cents.

Both Penns are good cameras, but take a look at the overall system because camera bodies come and go. To me, I like Panny glass better and I think they've been more innovative. Note how everyone gravitates to the Panny 20mm.

Also, Panny, like Nikon uses OIS. If you like OIS in Nikon, you'll prefer to Oly IBIS. I look to the leaders on this and it's Canon, Nikon, Panny with OBIS, Olympus and Pentax with IBIS. Sony's newest system has made the change to OIS.

I'm just a girl, so I don't know all the technical points, I just follow the leaders on this.

SF Photo Gal
Canon 1Ds MkIII/Panasonic GH-1-LX-3-FZ-50

I love my E-PL1, although it's still somewhat new to me. You would do well to get one for your intended application, I think, especially with the addition of the 20mm f/1.7.

However, something about your post reminded me of this:

http://craigmod.com/journal/gf1-fieldtest/

One thing I really like about his review is that he points out that you can actually look people in the eye when shooting. That is a huge difference that I think you would find with any m43 camera. But I almost bought a GF1 because of that article (ended up going with the E-PL1 in the end). I still think you would enjoy using either camera. If you think you might need to use an electronic viewfinder, the consensus around here seems to be that the Oly viewfinder is better than the Panasonic one.

You won't go wrong with either.

Why not just stick with the E-420 and 15-54 and add the following lenses:

Oly 9-18mm and Oly 25mm f2.8. That would give you a pretty light kit and the E-420 is almost as small as the Pens. The E-420 and the 25mm f2.8 pancake would give a very small street/ethnographyic combination.

I'd be tempted to add the 40-150mm lens for add reach when needed -- it is small and light and a very nice lens.

The whole Oly kit would fit into a very small bag and would not be a weight burdon.
--
Jay S.

Too bad you can't get a body only GH-1. I enjoyed using the GH-1 and kit lens, but when I got the 20mm, it was completely different shooting experience. It's almost as compact as a GF-1, but has a high resolution EVF, articulating LCD, 1080/60 and 720/60 video with stereo mic, and the best m4/3 sensor. I don't even use a neck strap with it, just a wrist strap.

Unfortunately you can get just the body and the kit plus 20mm lens is about $1400 to $1500. Not bad though considering the kit alone was $1400 when it first came out.

I use a Canon 1DsIII professionally and it's such a pleasure to grab my GH-1+20mm and go!

SF Photo Gal
Canon 1Ds MkIII/Panasonic GH-1-LX-3-FZ-50

Gene J. Paull said:

OK, here we go. My current system is Nikon D80, lots of lenses, and Olympus E420 and 14-54. A very heavy system indeed for hiking Appalachian stream valleys looking for the ultimate waterfall shot, or backpacking over Guatemala, shooting traditional fiestas and dances in the Mayan highlands. My ultimate goal is fine art 8 x 12 to 16 x 20 prints to be exhibited in local shows here in South Texas. In the old days it was so much easier - a lightweight Nikon FE2 and three prime lenses - depending on metering and film used, the results were no different from the most expensive Nikon pro bodies at the time.

So, where to go next? Panasonic GF1? Olympus Pen? I know, I'd need new lenses, and the LCD for framing would take some getting used to. But that screen would be perfect for shooting from the hip for candid street scenes.

I had posted something similar over at Nikon, and I'm still very seriously considering the D300s, but I'd like to hear from m4/3 users. Would I be giving up anything in terms of base ISO image quality with the GF1? What are the caveats. It intrigues me as sort of a modern rendition of the FE2.

Click to expand...

Firstly the "from the hip" shots will not happen with any Pens, or the G-F1.

One problem with all the micro cameras is that none are weather resistant.

You will also need to have a battery pack, that will take normal batteries, because your hiking will likely exclude re-charging you kit. I think that rules out the micro-four thirds.

What Nikon lenses do you have, and which ones might you take?

Is video relevant (if it is you'll have to be able to transfer the video to a storage medium or buy more cards, cards being the best perhaps considering the environment and weight issues. Sell them when you get back I guess (I presume you can't rent them). You might be able to do a buy/sell deal with a dealer on memory cards.

Of all the micro cameras, the E-PL1 has the benefit of a waterproof case available for it. That would be handy with the waterfall shots! The 14-54 would work with the camera via the adapter, but I doubt with the waterproof casing?? Also the MkII version of your lens would focus on mFT better ... perhaps you'd try and trade it up if you bought an E-PL1? ..

If you bought a micro 4/3 and used third party lenses (you Nikon lenses) then the IBIS would assist those lenses. But you'd also need to buy the EVF-2 as well, to assist in focusing a Nikon lenses.

It might be worthwhile to sit down and add up all the weights of the camera and their lenses. If weatherproofing is worthwhile, you might be better of upgrading you Nikon to a superceded D300 (or a demo D300S which has the video), and buy a battery pack that will take normal batteries. And use the lenses you've got. It might not end up much heavier, and it'll be weatherproof and no power issues.

If video is not an issue, its also a shame the E-620 is not weatherproof, Its light and has IBIS, and the flip screen ... with the 18-180 lens, not a bad walk around. The Pentax K-7 is tempting - it has the lot, but for the flip screen and Nikon focusing.

Melbourne Park said:

You will also need to have a battery pack, that will take normal batteries, because your hiking will likely exclude re-charging you kit. I think that rules out the micro-four thirds.

Click to expand...

Batteries are a non-issue. All you need is a foldable solar panel to recharge the batteries. I had one with me on my last hiking trip - worked flawlessly.

Melbourne Park said:

Is video relevant (if it is you'll have to be able to transfer the video to a storage medium or buy more cards, cards being the best perhaps considering the environment and weight issues. Sell them when you get back I guess (I presume you can't rent them). You might be able to do a buy/sell deal with a dealer on memory cards.

Click to expand...

Storage capacity is an issue with all digital cameras, not only m43s.

Melbourne Park said:

Of all the micro cameras, the E-PL1 has the benefit of a waterproof case available for it. That would be handy with the waterfall shots! The 14-54 would work with the camera via the adapter, but I doubt with the waterproof casing?? Also the MkII version of your lens would focus on mFT better ... perhaps you'd try and trade it up if you bought an E-PL1? ..

Click to expand...

The waterproof case is BIG and for use while diving, it's not handy for above-surface work!

If you've already got the Oly 14-54 a Pen camera would be a great addition to your set. The lens focuses fine on the Pen and you already know its a fantastic lens.

If you've not already come across it, this page makes an interesting and relevant read at least:

http://craigmod.com/journal/gf1-fieldtest/

--
http://flickr.com/photos/stewartpratt/

If one of the goals in your trip is to make fine art prints, then I think you should not compromise on the equipment. Yes, smaller and lighter cameras are always nice, but they may compromise objectives.

You already have Nikon and Olympus cameras, buying a GF1 or Pen, plus a few lenses, is not a good move. Yes, it is harder to trek with heavier gear, but I also do it when I want to come back with the best possible images that I can get. There are plenty of excellent and light lenses for your current cameras. Heck, lots of fine art photographers even carry medium format cameras and systems...

If you are willing to compromise, sure, either a GF1 or Pen, or something else, can maybe get the job done. Just make sure you don't have to crop much later on.

Keeping in mind that, even if you accept that Pany lenses have some advantages over Oly lenses, its very possible to mix Pany lenses with Oly bodies but its not a great idea to use any of the longer Oly lenses with Pany bodies because then you have NO image stabilization. Not a huge issue on the wide angles and primes, but becomes one with mid-distance and tele lenses. The Oly allows you best of both worlds, the Pany allows you the best of one world...

-Ray

Gene,

I found your original thread... let's see. First you say:

Gene J. Paull said:

My current system is Nikon D80, lots of lenses, and Olympus E420 and 14-54.

Click to expand...

Then you say:

Gene J. Paull said:

In the old days it was so much easier - a lightweight Nikon FE2 and three prime lenses

Click to expand...

So why do you have "lots of lenses" now and "three prime lenses" back then ?

Thinking outside the box: how about getting a D700 and reusing your three prime lenses ? The body will probably weigh a few 100gr more than your FE2, but that should be a relief compared to the way you describe your current setup.

If you really have a need for long lenses, you could get a body with a higher megapixel count and crop: if you crop half of the pixels of a Canon 5Dmkii, you get about the same resolution as the D700 but your lens becomes about 1.4x cropped, so a 300mm gets the equivalent field of view of a 420mm after the crop.

I know we had an interesting exchange in another thread about replacing a "good old days" SLR with primes by a µ43 body with a prime lens, but I felt it was a good idea to offer an alternative view as well.

Peter.

--
gallery at http://picasaweb.google.com/peterleyssens

Peter,

What got me started on the FE2 thing, is that the past few weeks I've been scanning my slides from trips to Guatemala 2001 to 2006. While I have most every Nikon prime from 24 to 200 mm, reviewing my slides I find 95% were done with 28 and 50 mm on the FE2. Using hyperfocal markings I was able to get fairly sharp street candid images, without calling attention to myself. It's time to go back to that simplicity.

And, yes, the D700 is one of the cameras I'm considering. What's wrong with my current D80? Metering for one, I find myself constantly over-riding the camera, and, of course, it doesn't meter with my primes. The E420 is nice and small, sometimes the images are clear and sharp, sometimes there's a lot of smearing of the detail.

So I guess we come down to the following two very different options: (1.) a GF1 with the 20 mm lens to supplement my current set up, or (2.) go to a D700 and try and use it like my old FE2, selling the D80 and E420 (won't get much) to help with the purchase price.

Thanks for comments and insight.

--
Gene in Deep South Texas
http://www.pbase.com/lahuasteca/

Gene,

Gene J. Paull said:

reviewing my slides I find 95% were done with 28 and 50 mm on the FE2. (snip) It's time to go back to that simplicity.

Click to expand...

Yep, been there, done that. You know that I dragged a 28mm, a 50mm and a 1.7x teleconvertor all around Japan and even bought a 200mm there only to find I was using my 90mm most of the time ? I was addicted to that lens back then. I moved to the 50mm when I discovered that it gave me 2/3 stop more light at f2.0 than the 90mm because of its simpler design. I needed all the light I could get for a candid shoot at an informal wedding party and since then, I got addicted to the 50/f1.4: I hardly use anything but a 50mm now.

Gene J. Paull said:

And, yes, the D700 is one of the cameras I'm considering. What's wrong with my current D80?

Click to expand...

I proposed the D700 because it's a direct match for your FE2 primes, whereas the D80 has a smaller sensor.

Gene J. Paull said:

So I guess we come down to the following two very different options: (1.) a GF1 with the 20 mm lens to supplement my current set up, or (2.) go to a D700 and try and use it like my old FE2, selling the D80 and E420 (won't get much) to help with the purchase price.

Click to expand...

You should really try out the D700 before buying it. I've become very sceptical about using a DSLR like an analog SLR, particularly when it's a brick like the D700. Don't forget that it's quite probable you'll be changing diaphragm or shutter speed (or both) using some thumb wheels instead of using the controls you're used to on the FE2. I find the lack of feedback of thumb wheels (they don't stop at max/min aperture or speed) quite disconcerting.

Peter.

--
gallery at http://picasaweb.google.com/peterleyssens

Gene J. Paull said:

I find 95% were done with 28 and 50 mm on the FE2. Using hyperfocal markings I was able to get fairly sharp street candid images, without calling attention to myself. It's time to go back to that simplicity.

Click to expand...

Then you should also consider the fact that m43 lenses will probably never have focus markings on the lens, and the cameras probably won't show it as well. This is due to cheaper design of contrast detection focus lenses. The camera actually never knows how far the focus is, hence the lack of such information in EXIF information.

So, if you rely on hypefocus and the lens markings, you should stick with manual focus lenses. Of course you can mount them on m43 bodies, but then you would need adapters and lose some of the compactness of m43 (unless you get leica M-mount, but that's $$$$!). Also I'd guess the depth of field markings wouldn't be correct anymore given the crop factor.

So... you can't quite rely on hyperfocal shooting much on m43.

for the Olympus ep cameras you can use cheap batteries from third party manufacturers. Panasonic are very expensive and you can use original batteries only (Panasonic bars third party products through software)
external electronic VFs use a lot of power. For backpacking, I'd go without

Ep1 bodies are now very cheap to have, as are nice four thirds lenses like the Oly 2/50 Macro Which means you can get a nice outfit with lots of spare batteries for less than 1000 USD

Hi Gene,

I switched from Nikon film cameras (yeah, the FE and FM were fantastic cameras )to a G1, and I've been very happy about 99.9% of the time.

My short list was the D90 and the G1. After a lot of research (esp the specs posted in the detailed camera reviews on this site), I came to the conclusion that I could get equally good image quality for 16*20, or even 20*24, from the G1 -- as long as I stuck to the lower ISOs (up to 400) and shot RAW. I normally shoot outdoors during the day, and frequently use a tripod/monopod, so I felt that the ISO penalty would not be significant. This has proved to be the case. Indeed, as I tended to shoot ISO 64-200 with film, even for low light situations, I've hardly noticed the issue.

On the flip side, the weight/size bonus has been amazing. I find myself much more likely to carry my full set of lenses (7-14, 14-45, 45-200, legacy 50mm macro w/adapter) when visiting more strenuous locations. The bag (LowePro Nova 180) I'm using is also literally half the size I needed for my full 35mm kit (similar array of lenses, but of course there was always space needed for film, filters, etc.). One big bonus has been for air travel. Some airports, such as Heathrow and Gatwick, are really tight about carry-on limits. On my last trip I had no problem getting my camera bag through the 5kg weight limit at Gatwick (it does vary with airline).

One further comment -- for several years my wife had a P+S with no viewfinder. She had an ongoing problem outdoors. She found it hard to compose an image if there was any direct sun. She found it especially hard to see if there were distracting elements or 'mergers'. On several occasions I tried to help her, and found that the screen was almost completely washed out.

I've also tried to compose using the screen on the G1 (when the camera was at odd heights or angles), and found it a bit better, but still hard to use in high-light situations. I've actually taken to carrying an old 'focusing cloth' from a view camera! I also find it harder to hand-hold a camera as steadily when I have to compose using the screen. I'm too used to that old brace position! Anyway, the GF1 is a wonderful camera, but as an experienced SLR user you may find the existence of an electronic viewfinder helpful -- perhaps a GH1, a G2, or a G10.

Ciao,
Ron

How about a D5000 and three prime kit.

I've done alot of hiking with the D5000, 18-200 and 35 1.8. Good combo.
...that said - the micro 43 system is tempting.

John

Gene J. Paull said:

OK, here we go. My current system is Nikon D80, lots of lenses, and Olympus E420 and 14-54. A very heavy system indeed for hiking Appalachian stream valleys looking for the ultimate waterfall shot, or backpacking over Guatemala, shooting traditional fiestas and dances in the Mayan highlands. My ultimate goal is fine art 8 x 12 to 16 x 20 prints to be exhibited in local shows here in South Texas. In the old days it was so much easier - a lightweight Nikon FE2 and three prime lenses - depending on metering and film used, the results were no different from the most expensive Nikon pro bodies at the time.

So, where to go next? Panasonic GF1? Olympus Pen? I know, I'd need new lenses, and the LCD for framing would take some getting used to. But that screen would be perfect for shooting from the hip for candid street scenes.

I had posted something similar over at Nikon, and I'm still very seriously considering the D300s, but I'd like to hear from m4/3 users. Would I be giving up anything in terms of base ISO image quality with the GF1? What are the caveats. It intrigues me as sort of a modern rendition of the FE2.

Comments? Thanks.
--
Gene in Deep South Texas
http://www.pbase.com/lahuasteca/

Click to expand...

--
http://www.OneFrameStudios.com
http://www.pbase.com/happypoppeye

I did some figures on the weight issues. Firstly the E cameras are a bit lighter than APC cameras and when one add zoom lenses, they get a lot lighter the faster the zooms become.

However for an economy trip, if one compares (from another thread) the weight of an Olympus E-P2 camera with its EVF-2 (which has the better much less blurring Epson EVF compared to what Panasonic use), you save from 500 grams to a kilo for a kit lens type of quality.

The post below includes the coming 70-300mm lens, which I estimated the weight (from the thread about the 70-300mm micro FT lens).

I presume the reduction in weight and length to be 65%, hence the new weight might be 275 grams and the new length 83mm or 3.25 inches long.

Add that weight to a E-P2 camera, and you get:

EVF-2 32gram; EP-2 without card and battery 335g; card & battery 38g; 70-300 lens 275g. Total: 680 grams.

Add another battery & Card: 38g; a 14-42 lens: 150g; a 20mm fast lens: 100g: Total 288g (but no cases or bags are weighed)

Total E-P2 EVF kit without cases and bags etc: 968g.

An E-620 which has better focus than the 420 I think and also IBIS:

Body: 475g; 70-300mm lens 620g; 14-42: 190g; Battery (50g???); Another battery: 50g; Faster pancake lens ... F2.8 25mm pancake, 95g (the fast one is the costly Pana 25mm F1.4 lens that weighs 520g);

Total E-620 kit weight: 1,480g

Swap:25mm pancake for the Leica Pany F1.4 lens: Total 1,905*

Subsitute E-30 for E-620 (faster focus etc etc): 2,160 gram

If you took the 14-54 instead of the micro 14-42, it would be more bulky and unless you have the MkII version it will be difficult to focus, the weight cost would be another (440-150)=290g.

You would also need the adapter ... B&H sell the adapter along with the ED 40-150mm f/4.0-5.6 Lens (which weighs 220 grams) for $200.

Incidentally, the basic outside kit from Olympus was:
E-3 800g
14-54 (12-60 has much better width which is more useful) 440 (575g)
50-200 II 990g
Total E3 combo ex batteries etc 2230g

The latter is of course weatherproof and works much better in low light conditions. Some would add the EC 1.4 which makes the tele lens a 70-280 f/4.0-4.9, which still autofocuses most of the time, and very easily in good light. It weighs 170 grams.

It's a shame that Oly or Pana haven't brought out some higher quality tele lenses, since they have some beauties in FT. I guess they'll come eventually, as they appear to have achieved critical mass, with a strong market share.

Gene J. Paull said:

So I guess we come down to the following two very different options: (1.) a GF1 with the 20 mm lens to supplement my current set up, or (2.) go to a D700 and try and use it like my old FE2, selling the D80 and E420 (won't get much) to help with the purchase price.

Thanks for comments and insight.

Click to expand...

After reading this second post of yours, it becomes clear that if you wish to keep shooting "more or less" as you are used to; using your manual focus Nikkors (I used to have a 28 f/2 that was a true gem...), then the D700 is indeed the choice you have.

Actually, in my mind, the GF1 and 20mm lens, I see it as a complement, not a matter of "either one or the other", ref. your options 1 and 2 above. I have this combination for street and documentary/travel shooting, and it is really good at that. You can just prefocus and shoot from the hip.