So should I move to L-mount for landscapes?

Pierre77 wrote:

pdk42 wrote:

I'm a pretty hard core m43 user and have been since about 2013 when I switched from Canon DSLRs (5dii and 40d). In general I've been pretty happy with m43 (currently using an EM1.3) and in the main I get decent results from it. In the main I shoot landscapes, but venture into other stuff too. I've dabbled in mirrorless FF a couple of times over the last 5 years or so - Sony A7rii and then a Nikon Z7. I really didn't gel with either. I appreciated their IQ of course, but didn't really like the handling and overall I didn't enjoy using them as much as my Oly gear. And I also reasoned that for the output I produce (on-line and A3+ prints), the extra IQ really wasn't making a practical difference.

But I recently picked up an S5 to give L-mount a whirl and I must admit that I'm liking it! So, I'm now wondering if I should gravitate more to that, esp for the landscape work. I still think that I'd stick with Oly for the longer lens stuff (not that I do much of it, but the EM1.3 plus the 40-150/2.8 is quite a combo). If I did that, I'd add a 16-35 (or Sigma 16-28) and swap the 20-60 for a 24-105. Then the wide/normal range would be the S5 with the longer stuff staying with m43.

What are your thoughts? Take a look at my Flickr feed to get a feel for what I shoot.

Thanks!

That´s exactly my plan. I´ll keep the EM1III with 12-100/4, 40-150/2.8, 100-400 and the 60 macro and sell the 12-40/2.8, and use the S5 for landscapes together with my Nisi 15/4.

Do you like Nisi 15, btw?