Have you swapped your DSLR for a MFT?

Started Jan 6, 2013 | Discussions thread
MatsP Senior Member • Posts: 2,112
Yes, from 40D to E-M5

I had a 40D with 10-20/4-5,6, 17-70/2,8-4, 50/1,8 and 70-210/2,8 with 1,4x extender plus a couple of other lenses I seldom used. It was a nice camera with good IQ. I was thinking a lot of upgrading the body but ended up in deciding that as long as Canon didn't come with something remarkably better in the APS-C range I wouldn't. 7D wasn't that much better I thought. A 5DII was tempting, but as I had lenses mostly for APS-C it would have led to a big investment. When NEX7 arrived i had a look at it and it turned out to be a nice Leica look-a-like body, but a flickering evf and limited lens range made me sceptical  Then OM-D E-M5 showed up and I was very attracted by its look which reminded me of my old slrs (I once had an Oly Pen FT and I still own an OM-G, a Chinon CM4 and a Pentax ME) but was  MFT really a serious format? Reviews seemed to show that it in fact was.

What finally made me decide to buy a new camera was an accident. I happened to drop into the water when trying to jump from my boat to a slippery rock in a mooring in the archipelago. I had my camera around my neck and it was drowned, as was the 17-70. The body started to work again after a weeks drying, the lens as well. But as soon it was a little damp the camera started to take pictures without me doing anything. I decided to sell all my Canon gear in one package and the buyer got the body for free and went right away to Scandinavian Photo in Stockholm and bought myself an OM-D E-M5 with kit lens 12-50.

Why the E-M5? As I already had came to that NEX was no alternative, a 7D wouldn't give me much more than my 40D and a 5DII would force me to invest in expesive FF lenses the decision was quite easy, especially as I found that the E-M5 IQ was better than 7D according to several reviews and I couldn't see much difference to 5DII either when comparing. Only D800 showed a significant difference in IQ, but I didn't know anything about Nikon while I was familiar with the Oly brand since analog times.

I don't miss my 40D much. Only sometimes when I find the E-M5 buttons to small and I can sometimes miss the excellent grip and ergonomics of the 40D. But what I really don't miss is the weight. 40D plus 70-210 weighed over 2 kg, while E-M5 with 40-150 weighs 600 g. And the latter gives sharper pictures!

Now I have the body and Oly 9-18, kit lens 12-50, Sigma 19/2,8 and Oly 40-150 plus my old f.zuiko 38/1,8 from Pen FT and a Tokina 80-200/4 bought at a flea shop for 200 SEK (30$). I have found the 9-18 performing as, or maybe a little bit better than the Sigma 10-20 on the 40D, the 12-50 is way better than its reputation and a good substitute to my 17-70 on 40D, the 40-150 is excellent and the Sigma 19/2,8 is a very sharp lens though it could have been faster. The old 38/1,8 is sharp and fast but lacking AF of course, and the Tokina 80-200 is razor sharp at the long end but heavy and has no AF either.

This is what I have got now, and it works fine for me so far. In all situations, maybe except for fast moving targets IQ is better than my former system. If I need even better IQ, which I may in a future, I have to go FF, with Nikon D800 or D600 as the best option I guess.

 MatsP's gear list:MatsP's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow