Reading mode: Light Dark

Thinking of switching systems again - maybe 4/3 sytem, some questions

Go to last post
Many of the Pansonic lenses have Optical Image Stabilization built into the lens. And OIS does work when shooting video.

Panasonic's 12-35mm f2.8 does have OIS, but the 7-14mm does not.

So if you feel you absolutely do need IS, then buy Panasonic lenses with OIS.

In my opinion, I feel the GH4 is a far better camera than the GX7, 4K video notwithstanding. And I own both.
 
Thanks for the link to your site. We actually overlap quite a bit subject matter, although I'd say you are a more accomplished photographer than I am. Here are some rough matches to some of what I saw.

Waves:



More here: Oahu

Haleakala!: (but not with m 4/3, just a few months before I jumped from Canon/FujiFilm to Oly)



Mountains (I grew up in Colorado, but shockingly haven't photographed there):



More here: New Zealand

But my real love, and what brought me back to more serious photography is safari:





More here: Zambia & Botswana

For these subjects, the only real limitations I've found with E-M5 are my own. (Well, I think focus tracking bugged me with some very fast-moving animals (wild dogs), BIFs, and surfers.) I can pretty much guarantee you that you won't have trouble with brides and grooms. As I said, we print a lot in fairly large sized, and 16 mpx has not been an issue.

--
The BoxerMan
 

Attachments

  • 3101155.jpg
    3101155.jpg
    4.6 MB · Views: 0
At my age I should know better by now. I keep chasing the perfect solution but I agree, what I have is pretty good now. I think I am not giving the RX10 enough credit, it really is a very adequate camera and agreed, the a6000 will do nicely when I want larger prints or am facing more challenging lighting situations. I think it is a little on the small side for me (the RX10 feels perfect) and the viewfinder could be brighter but every option I am considering as something I can find fault with or doesn't suit my needs perfectly.

I really appreciate every ones input. One thing I have discovered on this forum is there seems to be a lot more helpful people. I hardly get any responses for anything on the Sony forum. But I guess buying a 4/3 camera just to be able to post on this forum is not a wise idea.

Gary
 
gary stepic said:
Yes, I saw that post. It seems like every time I think I have found what I am looking for I discover something or something is pointed out that tells me I need to keep looking. Image stabilization is kind of a big deal for filming, I know professionally a tripod would be used but very often it will not be practical.

So none of the Pany or Oly lenses are stabilized?
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Panny zooms have OIS, which works for both stills & video. The GX7 is Panny's only camera with IBIS, but this IBIS works only for stills. If you put an OIS lens on the GX7, the OIS will provide stabilization for both stills & video. Oly lenses - zooms and primes - do not have any built-in stabilization. They rely on IBIS for both stills & video.
gary stepic said:
That would explain why the Oly 40-150 2.8 is same price as the Sony 70-200 4.0. What are the Pany and Oly designations for stabilized lenses?
Click to expand...
Oly makes NO stabilized lenses. So, if you put an Oly lens on a Panny body (other than a GX7) you get no stabilization. If you put an Oly lens on a GX7, the camera's IBIS will work (for stills).
gary stepic said:
I really need to wait another year and live with a two camera solution for now. We are planning a trip to Disneyland in May and San Antonio in September and for those trips the Sony RX10 would be perfect. Last may we went to New Orleans, Destin, and Panama City Beach and the RX10 again was the perfect camera for that type of trip. I live near Albuquerque NM and my daughter lives in Montrose so I plan on a lot of hiking type trips to Colorado and western Utah. For those trips I will take the a6000 and 16-70 lens. The a6000 works well enough for events and portraits.

It will make it fun watching DPreview waiting for reviews and previews of new releases, which I am sure there will be plenty in the next year or so. I think the upgrade cycle for mirrorless cameras is far shorter than DSLRs.

Another factor that will be important to me is the viewfinder. My eyes are not that great anymore and it seems like in bright daylight I still have a hard time viewing through the screen with the a6000.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about the a6000's rear screen or the EVF? I thought the a6000's EVF was supposed to be pretty good.
 
I probably will hold off another year I and if I do make any switch it probably will be the GH4 because of the video. I have read some reviews of the GX7 and GH4 and I am wrong in assuming image quality is the same.

I really do want to do more video, for now the RX10 will do. Who knows what Sony will do in the future with an a6000 upgrade. In the mean time I will save my pennies and keep checking out this forum. I have not mentioned this but I think I would like the size of the GH4. The a6000 feels a little too small for me and the 70-200 4.0 looks mismatched although it performs well. I am thinking the viewfinder may be brighter as well, that is a real issue for me.

Again, I really appreciate your responses, I am very impressed how helpful posters are on this forum.

Gary
 
EVF and my eyes may be getting to the point I will always struggle a little. Southwest skies are great but very bright.

Gary
 
jalywol said:
gary stepic said:
Yes, I saw that post. It seems like every time I think I have found what I am looking for I discover something or something is pointed out that tells me I need to keep looking. Image stabilization is kind of a big deal for filming, I know professionally a tripod would be used but very often it will not be practical.

So none of the Pany or Oly lenses are stabilized? That would explain why the Oly 40-150 2.8 is same price as the Sony 70-200 4.0. What are the Pany and Oly designations for stabilized lenses?
Click to expand...
No, this is incorrect. MOST of the Panasonic lenses are stabilized. The only ones that are not are the wider primes. (14mm, 15mm, 25mm). Anything longer than that in primes is stabilized.
Click to expand...
Good point. I'd forgotten that the new 42.5mm f1.7 has OIS. Also, the 42.5mm f1.2 Nocticron and the 30mm & 45mm f2.8 macros.
jalywol said:
The ONLY zoom they make that is unstabilized is the 7-14mm f4. ALL of their other primes and zooms are stabilized.

NONE of the Oly lenses are stabilized. On the other hand, a wide prime like the 12mm really doesn't need it (for stills, anyway). The two Panasonic Pro lenses that I mentioned earlier are stabilized, and are smaller than their Oly counterparts. (12-35mm f2.8 and 35-100mm f2.8). The 14-140mm (both versions) is also stabilized, and might make a great all purpose video lens for a not huge investment (although it is slower).

Panasonic designations are OIS, or Mega OIS, or Power OIS (you get the idea). Oly has no stabilized lenses, so they have no designations.
Click to expand...
All of the above matches my understanding.
 
Thanks, I think blogs are a nice way to share photos. What is the point of taking a great shot if you can't share it with anyone. My hope is even if someone does not agree with my subject matter, and given the topics I am sure there will be many, I can keep someone interested with blogs on travel with lots of photos. I really have a hard time finding decent photos of places I want to visit so I think there could be a need for more photo intestive travel blogs.

I may not make a nickel doing what I plan on doing but it should be very fulfilling and enjoyable, and at my age that is worth way more than money.

Gary
 
I think it is more my eyes, when I walk in the house after being outside I can hardly see anything for a few moments until my eyes adjust. I did not seem to have any problems with the Nikon D800 viewfinder but who knows, I may have the same problem with the D800 now. It will be a factor in choosing cameras though, the brighter the better.

What I may need to do is find some sort of hood I can wear, something that can shade my eyes a little.

Gary
 
gary stepic said:
At my age I should know better by now. I keep chasing the perfect solution but I agree, what I have is pretty good now. I think I am not giving the RX10 enough credit, it really is a very adequate camera and agreed, the a6000 will do nicely when I want larger prints or am facing more challenging lighting situations. I think it is a little on the small side for me (the RX10 feels perfect) and the viewfinder could be brighter but every option I am considering as something I can find fault with or doesn't suit my needs perfectly.

I really appreciate every ones input. One thing I have discovered on this forum is there seems to be a lot more helpful people. I hardly get any responses for anything on the Sony forum. But I guess buying a 4/3 camera just to be able to post on this forum is not a wise idea.

Gary
Click to expand...
 
gary stepic said:
... I think blogs are a nice way to share photos.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I may be missing that. All I've done are travelogs on DPReview.
gary stepic said:
... My hope is even if someone does not agree with my subject matter, and given the topics I am sure there will be many, I can keep someone interested with blogs on travel with lots of photos.
Click to expand...
Perfectly describes me. I looked through (and read a few sentence), but I was there for the pictures.
gary stepic said:
I really have a hard time finding decent photos of places I want to visit so I think there could be a need for more photo intestive travel blogs.
Click to expand...
Well, being there is a LOT more than having the pictures. And, YOUR pictures are always more meaningful than others. For one, they call up your personal experience.
gary stepic said:
I may not make a nickel doing what I plan on doing but it should be very fulfilling and enjoyable, and at my age that is worth way more than money.
Click to expand...
My best wishes to you.
 
I will wait another year but if I wanted to get into movies the 14-140 OIS lens would be a fun combo with the GH4. It seems like it is a decent quality lens and as much as I would like it to be 24mm on the wide end, the 28-280 range would be similar to what my RX10 has. I would add the 7-14 (I am aware there may be more alternatives in the near future) to cover the wide range. One camera and two lenses would be all I would need. I would probably add a couple of primes down the road, one for portraits and a good landscape lens.

My biggest disappointment with Sony is their lenses. Primes are kind of outrageous and their pro FE 24-70 is not that impressive. There are just not as many choices as there are with Pany. But the A7ii could be promising with the 16-35 and 24-240 lenses.

Like I mentioned, I will save my pennies, try to get the most out of what I have, and look forward to checking out this website for future upgrades as well as forum comments on what is out there already.

Gary
 
Hi - it's a shame lenses haven't kept up with bodies in Sony-land - the A6000 sounds like a great camera. Micro Four Thirds definitely offers some great high quality lenses, with more on the way by the sound of the rumour sites, so I think should be able to meet your requirements unless you really want to head up the higher reaches of the ISO scale, or love to play with minimal depth of field, in which case a larger sensor has its advantages. The other system that may be worth a look is Fuji X - a very nice photographer's system that has grown quickly, from a company that responds well to the feedback from its customers, and with a nice range of high quality lenses. If I was starting from scratch now, I'd seriously consider Fuji, but I'm bought into m43 enough that it really isn't cost effective or necessary to make the jump.

Cheers,

Jon
 
Jon,

My new strategy is to go out and buy a bunch of lottery tickets (odd not that great but safer than robbing a bank) and when I win I will just buy cameras and lenses from all the systems. Seriously, I am going to wait at least a year and then evaluate what is available and what I really need. What I have is fine for now. And I am looking at Fuji as well as other alternatives.

Gary
 
The new 14-120 lens does look interesting, reviews seem to be pretty good for that lens. I would not miss the range of the RX10 so much. I would be giving up that coveted 24mm on the wide end but I would pair that lens with the 7-14 or something similar. For traveling I would only have to take one extra lens. I am going to wait a bit though as what I have will be fine for my planned trips this year.

There has to be a real benefit for me to change because I know it will cost me. If I do get into filming more, then the GH4 with a 14-120 will give me a good range, better movie capability than my RX10, similar still performance to my a6000/16-70. I had been planning on getting something wider than 24mm, a Rokinon 12mm, but the Pany 7-14 would cover what the 14-120 doesn't.

Gary
 
This camera seems to be a great camera but movies appear to be a weakness, I can bet that will be addressed in the upgrade. Out of the many cameras I and we have discussed it seems like this is the closest one due for an upgrade as it was introduced on Oct 2013. I know DSLR upgrades seem to be every three years, seems a little longer now, and I am curious if the 4/3 cameras upgrade more quickly. This one may be worth waiting for. And now I know why the Oly lenses don't have IS, the cameras do. The 12-60 lens that I liked but would not work so well on other Oly cameras may work ok, from what I have read and from I think another poster stated, on the M1.

Gary
 
[No message]
 
gary stepic said:
If the 12-40 2.8 lens is close to prime quality then I could have a good do it all camera
Click to expand...
It is an amazing lens Gary! from 12-35, it's absolutely stunning! 35-40 a liiiitle less sharp, but really no big deal.

I think the 12-40 2.8 has pretty much the same image quality / sharpness than the excellent primes (17mm/25mm/45mm).

Thouse are 1.8, so I use them sometimes for indoors or more blurred background, but most of the time, I use the 12-40 2.8It is the perfect high quality all-round lens. Last summer I used it for my trip to Scotland: https://www.flickr.com/photos/oli_4d/sets/72157646148232217/

With the E-M5, E-M5 II or the E-M1, it's a very nice combo.

For more tele, the 40-150 2.8 is very good as well I guess, but I don't have it, it's not in my budget right now ^^
 
I like the lenses in the Oly system. The OM1 upgrade can be what I am looking for assuming there will be improvements in the movie area. I need a bright viewfinder and it appears the OM1 has one of the best EVF viewfinders for mirrorless. I love the range of the 12-60 and from what I have read it is pretty sharp, but that would be a tough choice from what I have been reading about the 12-40. The 40-140 2.8 would be a great sports and event lens if I decided to shoot more sports and events. From what I have read the OM1 is made so the older 4/3 lenses can perform well on the camera (from what posters have said focusing would not be good with the M5ii). I don't think I will have to wait all that long for the upgrade and it would be really nice if there was a little megapixel bump as well.

Gary
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top