Proffessional interest in Mirrorless/M43 overstated...

Started Jan 14, 2014 | Discussions thread
amalric
amalric Forum Pro • Posts: 10,839
Re: Proffessional interest in Mirrorless/M43 overstated...

sebiruns wrote:

ryan2007 wrote:

Next time you should approach the photographer and ask. I bet they say to the affect a workhorse, solid can take constant wear.

With that are these photographers using Nikon D7100 or a D4, about a $3,000 body cost alone. If you are getting paid $300/hour for an event you only have one chance to get the shot. Nikon and Canon are extremely well established in what they do so far as cameras and lenses go.

It is like a surgeon using a rusty and bent blade to operate, sure it works but not as well as one that does not.

If Nikon or Canon saw any real potential in mirror-less for them and their Pro's they would have come to market with something substantial. I am sure Nikon has to have a Full Frame Pro solution and maybe Mirror-less is not yet there enough for them. Whatever it is it has to be both a winner of a camera and a profit maker.

It makes me smile that the OP is illiterate. Perhaps people using pro cameras in some country are mostly illiterate, and conventional too?

Because at 43rumors we see quite a bunch of fashion photogs, using m4/3 and certainly the use is extending to Asia too. S. Huff is also showing quite a few photog. doing geographical documentation with the OM-D.

So what are we claiming exactly? That some illiterate photogs, are using some traditional cameras to shoot some traditional sports in a photographically backward country?

Am.

Thanks for the low blow. I am not illiterate. I typed on an iphone while riding a train - standing. I wish there was a way to edit the op. But the mobile version of this site does not seem to allow this. Any mistakes I may have made that I am unaware of may be a due to the fact that I am not a native speaker. It is great that some americans ridicule foreigners for their english while they often don't speak a second language (or even third) to begin with.

I am not complaining about the English, but about the general sloppiness in comparisons. By now we have a fair notion of the differences between FF35, even mirrorless, and m4/3.

S. Huff just published this:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/01/20/rendering-comparison-olympus-e-p5-vs-sony-a7-by-michael-van-en-bergh/

As seen there are not many reasons for a pro to avoid m4/3. Even, a pro portraitist wrote a long blog page about that, showing that there were many reasons to prefer it in marriages, again making the comparisons with FF.

http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/micro-four-thirds-vs-full-frame/

Does one have one to repeat the same prejudices'? One perhaps should learn better what is available first.

Am.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow