Hello everyone,
This is my first post here, although I have been reading threads occasionally the past few years.
My first few cameras were superzooms because of the range and affordability. I mostly take pictures of (nature) landscapes and wildlife (mostly birds, but basically whatever I encounter
) and occasionally macro (mostly flowers and insects). Due to limited spare time outside of holidays (and lack of proper nature in my immediate surroundings ), I currently only shoot on vacations. But I hope to move to an area with more nature in about 5 years and also have more spare time by then. And this is why buying an ILC (particularly a MILC) appeals to me: I would be able to invest in a few lenses and upgrade to a new body in about 4 years rather cheaply and keep the lenses. Apart from that a MILC would of course also offer higher IQ than an advanced compact because of the larger sensor and dedicated lenses for each purpose (instead of a big compromise, like in compact cameras).
I currently own an Olympus XZ-1 which I bought almost 2 years ago, to replace my Olympus SZ-10 superzoom camera which performed poorly in low light. I had decided back then that I would settle for a camera with less focal range, so I could have better low light performance and better general IQ (there was no TZ100/FZ1000/RX10-esque camera available back then in my price range of about 200 euro). The rationale behind this was, that no matter how much focal range my camera would have, there would always be that next object that would be just too far away. I would simply have to accept that I can't capture everything. So I purchased my current XZ-1 with a maximum focal range of 112 mm (compared to the about 500 mm of the SZ-10). Besides the SZ-10's image quality (lots of smearing of fine detail, this was especially evident when taking pictures of landscapes including pine trees ) was horrible on a cloudy winter day already, so I was already giving up a lot for the extreme tele range.
A great demonstration of smearing of fine detail with the SZ-10
I am generally very pleased with my XZ-1. The lens is excellent IMO and because it so fast, I can almost always keep the ISO at the base value of 100 outdoors at day (this mostly compensates for the dated image sensor). I have taken some great photos with it and I although I still miss a bit more focal range at the tele end, I no longer crave for extreme tele like 400-600 mm. But in the evening and indoors the very dated sensor in the XZ-1 starts to show its age as I have to increase the ISO. Therefore I am looking at a replacement. Ideally that replacement would have a bit more focal range at the tele end (I guestimate 200 mm would be about right), and even better low light performance courtesy of a more modern (and preferably also a bit larger) sensor. I am satisfied with the controls/interface and size of the XZ-1, but that doesn't mean I'm not open to change regarding that!
I have recently written a program that scans my images and generates statistics regarding the frequencies of my use of focal lengths. It uses the Plotly graphing service to generate plots of the data. I have let it scan all of my typical images taken with the XZ-1. The result can be found here:
Focal length frequency plot
I did this to avoid overestimating the use of certain focal lengths and have an objective way to look at how I use my camera's focal range.
As you can see there is a very large peak at 112 mm, my XZ-1's maximum focal length. This suggests that I often would like a bit more focal range at the tele end and therefore my guestimate of about 200 mm.
I am currently torn between finally switching to a (M)ILC, that would amount to buying a Panasonic GM1/5 or GF7 and buying a 45-150 mm tele lens later on. Or staying with the advanced P&S/compact category. The Panasonic TZ100 particularly appeals to me (before the SZ-10 I owned a FZ-8) because of its 1" sensor and 250 mm range which seems perfect to me. But at the current price I would have to save up quite a bit more and when it needs replacing in 4 or 5 years, I would be left with no lenses and have to buy a complete new camera. I also just discovered the Canon G16, but its 140 mm maximum focal length is only a small upgrade and the sensor although more modern is the same size as my XZ-1's. The Sony RX100 series just don't have enough range at the tele end. And neither do most of its competitors like the Panasonic LX series. The Sony RX10 is out of budget and probably too large anyway.
My objections against MILCs are having to switch lenses and the vulnerability of the sensor when doing so. I'm afraid switching lenses will take too much time and hastily switching them might result in me dropping one of them (as I am a bit clumsy ). The possibility of getting dust or moist on the sensor also doesn't appeal to me... I haven't been able to find a proper video of how much effort and time switching lenses takes with M4/3 cameras.
Does anyone with similar concerns/(who has been) in a similar position any advice?
This is my first post here, although I have been reading threads occasionally the past few years.
My first few cameras were superzooms because of the range and affordability. I mostly take pictures of (nature) landscapes and wildlife (mostly birds, but basically whatever I encounter
) and occasionally macro (mostly flowers and insects). Due to limited spare time outside of holidays (and lack of proper nature in my immediate surroundings ), I currently only shoot on vacations. But I hope to move to an area with more nature in about 5 years and also have more spare time by then. And this is why buying an ILC (particularly a MILC) appeals to me: I would be able to invest in a few lenses and upgrade to a new body in about 4 years rather cheaply and keep the lenses. Apart from that a MILC would of course also offer higher IQ than an advanced compact because of the larger sensor and dedicated lenses for each purpose (instead of a big compromise, like in compact cameras).I currently own an Olympus XZ-1 which I bought almost 2 years ago, to replace my Olympus SZ-10 superzoom camera which performed poorly in low light. I had decided back then that I would settle for a camera with less focal range, so I could have better low light performance and better general IQ (there was no TZ100/FZ1000/RX10-esque camera available back then in my price range of about 200 euro). The rationale behind this was, that no matter how much focal range my camera would have, there would always be that next object that would be just too far away. I would simply have to accept that I can't capture everything. So I purchased my current XZ-1 with a maximum focal range of 112 mm (compared to the about 500 mm of the SZ-10). Besides the SZ-10's image quality (lots of smearing of fine detail, this was especially evident when taking pictures of landscapes including pine trees
) was horrible on a cloudy winter day already, so I was already giving up a lot for the extreme tele range.A great demonstration of smearing of fine detail with the SZ-10
I am generally very pleased with my XZ-1. The lens is excellent IMO and because it so fast, I can almost always keep the ISO at the base value of 100 outdoors at day (this mostly compensates for the dated image sensor). I have taken some great photos with it and I although I still miss a bit more focal range at the tele end, I no longer crave for extreme tele like 400-600 mm. But in the evening and indoors the very dated sensor in the XZ-1 starts to show its age as I have to increase the ISO. Therefore I am looking at a replacement. Ideally that replacement would have a bit more focal range at the tele end (I guestimate 200 mm would be about right), and even better low light performance courtesy of a more modern (and preferably also a bit larger) sensor. I am satisfied with the controls/interface and size of the XZ-1, but that doesn't mean I'm not open to change regarding that!
I have recently written a program that scans my images and generates statistics regarding the frequencies of my use of focal lengths. It uses the Plotly graphing service to generate plots of the data. I have let it scan all of my typical images taken with the XZ-1. The result can be found here:
Focal length frequency plot
I did this to avoid overestimating the use of certain focal lengths and have an objective way to look at how I use my camera's focal range.
As you can see there is a very large peak at 112 mm, my XZ-1's maximum focal length. This suggests that I often would like a bit more focal range at the tele end and therefore my guestimate of about 200 mm.
I am currently torn between finally switching to a (M)ILC, that would amount to buying a Panasonic GM1/5 or GF7 and buying a 45-150 mm tele lens later on. Or staying with the advanced P&S/compact category. The Panasonic TZ100 particularly appeals to me (before the SZ-10 I owned a FZ-8) because of its 1" sensor and 250 mm range which seems perfect to me. But at the current price I would have to save up quite a bit more and when it needs replacing in 4 or 5 years, I would be left with no lenses and have to buy a complete new camera. I also just discovered the Canon G16, but its 140 mm maximum focal length is only a small upgrade and the sensor although more modern is the same size as my XZ-1's. The Sony RX100 series just don't have enough range at the tele end. And neither do most of its competitors like the Panasonic LX series. The Sony RX10 is out of budget and probably too large anyway.
My objections against MILCs are having to switch lenses and the vulnerability of the sensor when doing so. I'm afraid switching lenses will take too much time and hastily switching them might result in me dropping one of them (as I am a bit clumsy
). The possibility of getting dust or moist on the sensor also doesn't appeal to me... I haven't been able to find a proper video of how much effort and time switching lenses takes with M4/3 cameras.Does anyone with similar concerns/(who has been) in a similar position any advice?
Last edited:
So thanks a lot for the effort of digging these up! I am aware of the IQ difference between 'normal' 1/2.3 inch compacts and larger sensor cameras and that is one of the reasons I am looking for an upgrade to my XZ-1. I have read the RX100's 1" sensor has very similar performance to the G1X MkII due its more modern sensor. I'm not sure if the difference increases as you increase the ISO value.
Yesterday it took almost all day before my post was visible...