Can't seem to find the right m4/3 camera

Foto4x4 wrote:

Gosh, I hope you can weed through all the off topic crap that’s flooded your thread... I’ve almost forgotten what you asked!!!

I have to print out this whole thread and construct a Beautiful Mind wall in my garage.

See some thoughts within your last reply.

Max5150 wrote:

Foto4x4 wrote:

Max5150 wrote:

Thank you everyone for all the info. Very useful.

At this point in the life cycle of 4/3, what your feeling on the 20mp sensors vs 16mp? If focus should be on the 20mp, that basically means GX8/9, G9 which is getting a bit large for a compact kit, or OM 1 iii, which honestly is more than I want to spend on 4/3.

I’d be interested in what you’re used to shooting with to avoid going off tangent.

I am mainly a M4/3 shooter these days. EM1.2 for primary body and a GX9 as backup or casual shooting of non critical work, though to be frank, it’s images are very very close to the EM1.2. Not much at all between them until you take handling, EVF, customisation and so on, into account. The EM1.2 is my most enjoyable setup ever when matched with Olympus’s Pro lenses and the PL100-400. But then you’re getting into large lenses.

What don’t you like about the A6500 lens choices? As a long term Sony user who got frustrated with their APS-C lens line up, I must say the A6300 is nice with their 18-135 (maximum flexibility) or a couple Sigma primes (19, 30, 60) which I have only recently bought for the heck of it. Those three lenses with the A6500 IBIS would make a decent setup. But for outstanding IBIS, the EM1.2 is a marvel and in a compact body, the GX9 is close too.

More info please so responses can be targeted better.

My current line up:

1) I shoot a fair bit of ice hockey and soccer with a Nikon D7500 and 70-200 f2.8. I may sell the D7500 and go with a mirrorless FF to pick up a bit more light and cropability. This is not a kit I'm interested in lugging around anywhere else for now. Just using it for sports, family/special events.

So, from this I assume you’re retaining the D7500 and will use it as this last sentence primarily.

2) Sony A6500, Sony FE 10-135, 10-200,

Do you mean E 18-135 and 18-200? If so, the first is too short at 135mm max FL and the latter has poor AF speed and accuracy from my experience. I think you should have tried the FE 70-200/f4 (the f2.8 would be better but very expensive).

I sent the Sony 18-200 back to Sony for a firmware upgrade and it now focuses like a laser beam - even in relatively low light. It's as least as good as the 18-135.

Sigma 30 f1.4 Had this before I got the D7500 outfit. Unfortunately, I'm just not impressed. I don't think the focusing is that great. It's useless for hockey and other fast sports unless in very good light. I don't like the Sony colors, ergonomics not great, the Sony lenses are over priced and FE lenses not fantastic performance. The FE lens selection isn't great, so if I want good performance I'm pretty much buying full frame lenses for it.

No argument there. Lens costs was a primary reason for my moving away from Sony.

As such, I might as well enjoy the benefit of a FF sensor, so I'm going to sell it. I know there are all sorts of adapters that allow all sorts of additional lenses, but I'm looking more for a system. I have old Nikkor glass that yielded spectacular shots on this body, but it's a bit of work.

3) I travel a fair bit and over the years have whittled what I lug around down further and further. I currently travel with a Sony RX100 which I use a lot and plan to upgrade to a more current model. I also have Nikon J5 with 6.5-13mm, 10-100mm, and 18mm 1.8. The J5 is a very good street shooter, takes nicely balanced photos, with good color, focuses like a laser beam, and generally makes a nice small kit. On the downside, it does not have a viewfinder, and isn't great in low light. I generally don't miss the viewfinder but there are occasions in which I do.

Hmmm... RX100VI? Compact, 24-200mm, great travel camera. Though I have decided to avoid all-in-ones from now on. Too costly if they get dirty sensors or dust inside. Durability issues with some too. Much easier to clean a sensor on an ILC and the lenses can be used with any compatible body.

So the m4/3 could fit into a couple niches outside of the sports role; namely, travel and general photography. I do wish the m4/3 had a phase detection focus component,

Olympus EM1.2 has PDAF and it works very well especially with FW v2.0. And Panasonic’s DFD is fast and accurate though speed does fall off a bit in very low light. And I’m talking dark here.

Thanks!

but since I've never shot with one, so I'll reserve judgement. I'm not a pixel peeper. I just want a well balanced photograph and an ergonomic platform that's easy to use and get what I need it to do easily. I don't foresee making prints larger than 16x20, much less even12x18.

Lastly, on the advice of some commenters, I'm going to play with a couple of Olympus models and get to know them better.

Great idea. The EM1.2 is terrific, but size might be a negative given your comments. So also try the GX9. Pay attention to the EVF. Some have an issue with it. I do not. I had a GX8 for a time and I much prefer the GX9 overall. Especially size, the removal of AA filter, better IBIS, and in-camera focus stacking etc.

Hope this helps

M4/3’s main advantage IMO is the range of quality lenses that don’t break the bank. Even inexpensive ones are generally better than all but the most expensive FE lenses. Extend that to the Pro and Leica lenses and you get super images that will easily meet your printing sizes.

PS. Disregard all the BS about shutter shock. It’s simply not an issue on recent bodies and can be avoided with correct settings on earlier ones. Despite the reputation, I never saw it on my GX8. The FW update fixed it.

Hope that helps...

Thanks.