D7000 to EPL2, anyone else make this jump?

Started May 13, 2011 | Discussions thread
Anders W Forum Pro • Posts: 21,466
Re: Does not see any advantage.....

jim stirling wrote:

Anders W wrote:

jim stirling wrote:

tedolf wrote:

ability to use hundereds of high quality 35mm format lenses made over the last 50 years, many at incredibly cheap prices. It is possible to pick up an E-pl1, 28-84mm equivalent zoom, 100mm equivalent f1.7 portriat lens; 270mm equivalent f 2.8 telephoto and sitll be shy of $600.00;

If you do not mind using typically heavier, larger {narrow focal length selection of rangefinder lenses excluded}

Like, for example, Konica AR Hexanon 40/1.8 (27 mm, 140 g) or Minolta MD 50/1.7 (36 mm, 165 g), and so on, and so on (there are lots of similar SLR lenses, all available at prices less than 50 USD).

The Canon 50mm F1.8II weighs in at 130g and I was comparing to mFT lenses and the smaller lenses are typically the fast 50s . The shorter focal lengths are pretty redundant due to the 2x crop factor and the longer telephoto lenses are generally far heavier than any mFT option.

So what? Are these 50 mm lenses heavier than anything somehow comparable, including m43 lenses, which is what you claimed? If so, please specify. Let me take another example: My Minolta MD 85/2 weighs 280 g and is 54 mm long. Again, is this bigger or heavier than anything you'd like to compare it with? If so what?

manual focus, manual aperture lenses you can happily mount lenses from Nikon going back 40yrs in focal lengths from 8mm to 1700mm much the same with Pentax and Canon already has a wide selection of adapters available.

And how well and fast can you focus these old lenses on a Nikon, Canon, or Pentax SLR, in the VF nota bene? And what about VF brightness when stopped down a bit?

I can focus them perfectly well , though on the low end bodies the viewfinders are indeed poorer and an EVF with the manual zoom aid is a bonus. Though most models now allow you to zoom in using liveview for manual focus if needed or did you not wish to mention that.

If you look at what I wrote, I already "mentioned" it by pointing out that the difference was in the VF funtionality. So no need for such snide remarks. As you point out, it is indeed difficult to focus manually on most DSLRs, particularly on the cheaper ones, which are APS-C rather than FF and have pentamirror rather than pentaprism. In addition, traditional manual focusing aids like micro prism and split-image are no longer available (unless you buy a new screen specifically for that). I find MF doable but difficult in good light with my Pentax K100D but close to impossible in poor light. Further LCD live view is not what I'd like to use unless the camera is on a tripod or I am shooting from an odd angle where it is impossible to use the VF. You can't see things as well on the LCD for several reasons and it makes it more difficult to hold the camera steady for correct framing, focus, and blur-avoidance.

And as to 100mm “equivalent” alas in the single most important criteria for portraits namely DOF control it is sadly lacking.

Care to show some of the many successful head-and-shoulders portraits with just the right DOF that you have shot with your FF cameras at f/1.4 or f/2 with an FL of about 100 mm?

I have taken thousands of portraits at around F2 typically with the Nikon 85mm F1.4, I am a wedding photographer so shallow DOF portraits are rather a standard tool of the trade both for subject isolation and to remove a distracting background . And just how many F0.7 or F1.0 lenses are there for mFT other than the heavy manual focus Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 which weighs 410g and costs 2 or 3 times more than the FF 50mm lenses.

OK. Normal distance for a head-and-shoulders portrait with an 85 mm on FF would be about two meters. That gives you a DOF of 4 cm at f/1.4 and 6 cm at f/2. So please show us some examples of successful portraits of yours taken with your 85 mm at that distance and at those apertures.

ability to use off camera, wireless TTL flash for about $175.00 more-capable of controling up to three off camera flashes;

Nikon has the best implementation of flash control bar none.

At that price point?

I actually never noticed the price , but the statement is correct Nikon CLS is easily the best flash system around and I presume the price is for the bottom end Olympus flash which costs more than the bottom end Nikon model.

The problem is that if you want to use this feature with any Nikon body that can compete in terms of price with any m43 camera, you need to buy two flashes, one of which being able to act as the commander. The built-in flash cannot control the remote on Nikon bodies from the D5100 down.

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +28 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow