E-M1 vs. A7II Thoughts

zxaar wrote:

MatsP wrote:

My conclusion from your comparison is that the EM-1 is superior from most aspects except for resolution and high ISO performance.

And dynamic range too.

You are right what he is saying that sony is significantly better that making photos the thing for which one buys camera.

I take it that for you the photo aspect of camera is not so important but for op it seems tk be a big factor.

Of course the photo aspect is important, that's why we all own cameras I guess. But everything in cameras are compromises. If the best possible IQ was my only concern, regardless of cost, portability, size and so on,  I would buy me a half format camera. I love Hasseblad cameras. To me, at the moment, I'm satisfied with what my mft camera gives me. It's much better than what I was used to with my film dslrs. You can always strive for the ultimate IQ. But the is a point when the gaining is so marginal that other things weigh over. It's up to each photographer to decide where this point is, but don't say photo quality doesn't matter to them.

That's an amazingly good result, remembering that you compare a 16 MP and a 42 MP camera. The only advantages of the A7II are directly related to the sensor resolution and size and not much else. The negative things you list seems to me being mostly related to only a short experience of the EM-1 which of course is very understandable. It takes some time to learn how to set and use an Olympus camera. What many refer to as a complicated menu reflects that the possibilities to individual settings are enormous and it's easy to get wrong if you don't take your time diving into it. Have fun!

-- hide signature --

::> I make spelling mistakes. May Dog forgive me for this.