Fibinaci wrote:
Were I you, I would find one of each to borrow and see how it fits how you shoot. that's the most important thing, the only thing really.
I'd love to but I don't know anyone who uses them here. Sadly most of the people I know use fuji. Haven't been able to find anyone nearby using oly although in the groups I am a part of (especially the mirrorless) oly and panasonic seem to be favorites of active members. Those in either sony or fuji upgrade pretty often, it seems.
Unless you are printing to large poster size or billboards you won't notice the difference between apsc or m43. Most companies filter down their sensors so many cameras have the same sensors as former high level models. Almost every review includes the phrase "same sensor as the xxx"
although (correct me if i'm mistaken) don't bigger sensors generally provide better flexibility? or is that a matter of my finding a way to compensate via iso? I liked that my friend's fuji did quite well under lower light (but not entirely willing to spend the price invested in it) It's good to hear this though, very reassuring since I'm still thinking of staying with m43. That said though, any suggestions for meeting low-light needs (m43 vs apsc) or did i misunderstand technicalities there? (I'm still pretty new and inexperienced so I may oversimplify)
The difference in lenses is real though, MFT has so many systems beat(including sony apsc e-mount) in that regard. Which means not only in the new market but the second hand market are flush with nice lenses to pickup.
I had the 6000's predecessor and came to hate it and its horrible menus and Sony's charging for features that everyone gives away for free. Olympus' super control panel makes having one command dial not seem a handicap.
Yes I heard about this recently. If given the choice, a lot of hands-on reviewers would prefer the oly user interface to sony's. (which I am also worried about re: investing in the a6000).