M43 for hiking?

[45matai]

Currently I carry a Panasonic FZ100 when I go hiking, it's my only camera. I'm not happy with the amount of noise I get from it. I recently took a trip to DC and anytime it wasn't very sunny out, the pics got noisy real fast.

I've heard an opinion that M43 have a better depth of field for hiking pictures versus DSLR cameras. Is there any truth to that?

I'm trying to decide between the new GF3, GH2, or a T3i.

Most of my picture taking is hiking, the kids or sight-seeing.

Any thoughts or advice?

Thanks!

 

[Fulvio Senore]

Hiking is done outdoors, so there is a lot of light. The back screen is not easy to see in bright light, so a camera with a viewfinder is easier to use.

I use a G1 when hiking in mountains an the viewfinder is very good. You can also use it to review images in bright light. In high mountains, with the sun, the back screen is impossible to view.

--
Fulvio Senore

 

[JonB1975]

Go for the GH2 - if you can find it!

Why not the other 2? - The GF3 has no facility for a viewfinder which will be a pain in bright sunshine, you can't attach an external flash either. The T3i, while a great camera, is bigger and heavier, especially once you start buying decent lenses for it.

Why the GH2? Excellent image quality from the new sensor (competitive noise in normal iso range) and class leading video which is easier to operate than "traditional" dslrs. When it comes to depth of field it has more for each equivalent focal length than the T3i when using dedicated lenses.

If you want shallow depth of field you can also buy old lenses and use adapters (I have a Leica R 50mm f2 that works well on my GF1)

 

[Jogger]

The only reason to go GF3 over GF1 is the movie mode. Otherwise, the GF1 is the better camera with more manual controls, hot shoe, EVF capable, etc.. it even uses the same sensor.

That and the pancake 14 and 20 would make a great, light, compact hiking kit... add a legacy 50/1.8 for a portrait lens. Dont expect to shoot sports with this set up though.

Currently I carry a Panasonic FZ100 when I go hiking, it's my only camera. I'm not happy with the amount of noise I get from it. I recently took a trip to DC and anytime it wasn't very sunny out, the pics got noisy real fast.

I've heard an opinion that M43 have a better depth of field for hiking pictures versus DSLR cameras. Is there any truth to that?

I'm trying to decide between the new GF3, GH2, or a T3i.

Most of my picture taking is hiking, the kids or sight-seeing.

Any thoughts or advice?

Thanks!

 

[DjarumBlack]

I love my E-P1 for hiking. Its light and has pretty good picture quality.

 

[sean000]

Currently I carry a Panasonic FZ100 when I go hiking, it's my only camera. I'm not happy with the amount of noise I get from it. I recently took a trip to DC and anytime it wasn't very sunny out, the pics got noisy real fast.

I've heard an opinion that M43 have a better depth of field for hiking pictures versus DSLR cameras. Is there any truth to that?

There is some truth to this, but it's not a major advantage. The problem with tiny compact camera sensors is that the focal lengths are so short it can be difficult to get shallow depth of field when you want to isolate your subject (unless you use a telephoto and shoot from a close distance). DSLR cameras (especially full frame) use focal lengths to achieve the same angles of view that make it easy to get shallow depth of field, but you have to stop down to a smaller aperture to get more depth of field. So for a landscape, where you want everything in focus, you need to stop a DSLR down a bit more and/or be more careful about how far out you focus so that you are maximizing your depth of field from near to infinity (hyperfocal distance). A m4/3 sensor splits the difference. It's easier to get shallow depth of field than with a compact sensor (but not as easy as with a DSLR), and it is also easier to get maximum depth of field than it is with a DSLR. In practical terms you can get away with using f/8 on a m4/3 camera for a landscape that might require f/11 or f/14 on a DSLR. Depending on the light that might mean it is easier to shoot the landscape handheld with the m4/3 camera while you might need a tripod for the DSLR shot... given the same ISO.

I'm trying to decide between the new GF3, GH2, or a T3i.

Most of my picture taking is hiking, the kids or sight-seeing.

Any thoughts or advice?

I would forget the GF3 for the same reason Fulvio mentioned: There is no viewfinder option for the GF3 and the LCD will be difficult to see in bright sunlight while you are hiking (for overcast hiking days it won't be as much of an issue). For m4/3 I would look at the options that either include a built-in viewfinder (like the GH2 or G3), or an accessory viewfinder (the GF2 and the Olympus Pens).

If you want to take photos of your kids playing sports you might be happier with a DSLR. For everything else I think the m4/3 cameras excel as family cameras. The smaller and lighter kits for m4/3 mean less camera luggage to haul around.

I shoot with both a DSLR (Nikon D200) and a GF1. We have a 10-month-old baby as well as some older nieces who live down the street. The GF1 has become my preferred travel, hiking, and family camera. Unless you want wider or longer, a kit that includes the 14-42mm, 20mm f/1.7, and 45-200mm will be very light for hiking and travel and will cover quite a range. A comparable DSLR kit that includes an 18-55mm, 35mm prime, and 70-300mm zoom will weigh a lot more. Another option is the 14-140mm zoom, but I like the having the dual zooms so I can leave the telephoto at home and travel really light with just the 20mm and 14-45 when I want. It's pretty easy to fit the m4/3 gear into other non-camera bags as well, so if you have a favorite day-hike backpack you can stow the m4/3 camera in one of the accessory pockets quite easily.

I love how the GF1 easily handles both stills and video, and it is a camera my wife doesn't mind using (she hates using my DSLR), so I get to be in more of the photos.

 

[45matai]

This is some great info.

Does anybody do a combo of like a GF1 and a GH2? I kinda dig the idea of a compact body for sticking in a pocket and a more serious camera for more serious pictures.

I read rumors of a "Pro" M43 line coming from Pansonic. Would it make any sens to get the GF3 now, some lenses then get a the GH3 Pro or whatever it is when it comes out?

 

[sean000]

This is some great info.

Does anybody do a combo of like a GF1 and a GH2? I kinda dig the idea of a compact body for sticking in a pocket and a more serious camera for more serious pictures.

A lot of people here have both a GF1/GF2 and a GH2 (or other model with built in viewfinder). There isn't really a difference in the still image quality (although the GH2 will offer a bit cleaner high ISO). There is more of a difference in video quality and the form factor. You might find that the GH2 is small enough without adding a GF1/GF2 or Pen. Just depends on how you like to carry it. I like the GF1 because with the 20mm it fits easily into some accessory pockets on different bags I have (like the handlebar bag on my bicycle), but I have thought about selling it for one of the larger Panasonic cameras since I usually carry the GF1 in bags that could easily accommodate a GH2 or G3.

I read rumors of a "Pro" M43 line coming from Pansonic. Would it make any sens to get the GF3 now, some lenses then get a the GH3 Pro or whatever it is when it comes out?

It's all just speculation and rumors at this point. The GH is kind of the Panny pro series, so I would expect a GH3 to be a modest upgrade to the GH2. Will there be a more serious version of the GF3 that takes an accessory viewfinder or has one built-in? We will just have to wait and see. Personally I would skip the GF3 completely if you want to use the camera outdoors in bright light. I made it through last Summer without the LVF1 viewfinder for my GF1, but it was really hard to see what I was shooting. I quickly asked my wife for the LVF1 for my birthday. From what I can tell there is very little reason to buy a GF3 over a GF2 or GF1.

 

[453C]

I found a m43 system offered the right balance of image quality and packaging for me. FWIW, my typical backpacking kit is an Olympus E-PL1 (with VF-2 viewfinder), Oly 9-18, Panny 20, and Panny 45-200, all in a ThinkTank holster bag. That seems to cover everything I need, in a relatively light package. From your list, a T3i with equivalent lenses would be bulkier and heavier, and I'm quite happy with the IQ I'm getting with my m43 system.

Here's all the currently available m43 bodies and lenses. GF3 should be listed soon:
http://four-thirds.org/en/microft/body.html

I think you need to make a few decisions:

• Do you want dedicated manual controls, and how many?

There's a lot of variety of control interfaces between all of the m43 bodies. I think the DPR full reviews do as good a job as any site in discussing the differences, but you really need to handle the bodies to see what works for you.

• Do you want a viewfinder?

If so, skip all the models that don't offer the possibility. Also, consider the price of the VF-2 electronic viewfinder when looking at PENs. The VF-2 is great, but it's not cheap.

• Do you want to stabilize any non-system lenses?

Panasonic stabilizes their lenses (but not all of them), not bodies, so if you want to stabilize an adapted, non-m43 lens, you'll have to use an Olympus body. Also, a stabilized Panasonic lens will probably work better for video than relying on Olympus' "digital video stabilization".

• How important is video?

Panasonic bodies definitely have an edge here. I find my E-PL1's video is fine for my uses, but the file sizes are huge, and there's little of the control offered by something like a GH2.

I'm sure there are others, but those came to mind from the start. If at all possible, get to a shop and try some bodies out. You may decide that a certain spec sheet is perfect, but realize that body just doesn't feel good in your hands. I wouldn't worry about getting a second body until you decide on a primary one.
--
http://453c.smugmug.com/

 

[Just Having Fun]

The m43 cameras will be smaller, lighter and have a little more reach.

An EVF will let you use your camera as a spotting scope. You can zoom 7-10x (plus the len focal lenght) and use the lens based IS at the same time. It is a lot of fun when hiking.

 

[ennemkay]

regarding lcd limitations in bright light, i seem to recall many people on here claiming to have good results using this: http://www.clearviewer.com/Products.html

can be used with any of the m43 cameras.

 

[45matai]

I used my FZ100 LCD in very bright conditions in Virginia recently with no problems.

 

[ennemkay]

i've been using my compact digicams in bright light for several years. one thing i might have trouble with in bright light with an lcd, though, is manual focus. but the e-pl1 magnifies a small cropped area of the field of view in manual focus mode and displays it full-screen unlike the PIP in some cameras. that seems to work pretty well.

 

[jpds]

You may be interested in having a look at Craig Mod's field test of the GF1. I must admit it influenced my own choice...

http://craigmod.com/journal/gf1-fieldtest/

J-P

 

[minden]

I have used an EP1 for hiking climbing and camping. I find the reduced pack size to be a major advantage. My DSLR in a camera bag is impossible to fit in a small day sack while the EP1 in a cheap ebay hard case will fit in all but the smallest bumbag. If you like to travel fast and light but still capture near DSLR quality the I would consider MFT.

I have not hiked with my DSLR since I got the EP1.

You can see some of my pictures at

http://mourneviews.co.uk/

 

[45matai]

Those are some great pics. I don't know where I'd get a GF1 though. Is there any picture quality difference between the GF1, GF2 and GF3? Or is it just features and manual controls?

Also, I haven't held any of the GF cameras, do they fit in a pocket with a pancake lens?

 

[MP Burke]

I use a Panasonic G2 and the Olympus 9-18mm mft lens a lot when I go walking in Snowdonia. A nice lightweight combination. In good light it is quite possible to use the lower ISO settings, which give the best IQ overall. I would recommend anybody to try one of the cameras with an EVF, they are a bit bigger than the screen-only cameras, but the forthcoming G3 is still pretty small and light.

 

[453C]

Those are some great pics. I don't know where I'd get a GF1 though. Is there any picture quality difference between the GF1, GF2 and GF3? Or is it just features and manual controls?

No GF3 shots yet, but you can compare quite a few cameras here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCGF2/page18.asp

Also, I haven't held any of the GF cameras, do they fit in a pocket with a pancake lens?

No, no, no, no, no, not again!

I don't consider even the diminutive GF3 or NEX-C3 to clearly be "pocketable", unless you're discussing jacket pockets. Even then, there's a wide range of opinions on what "pocketable" means. None of these interchangeable lens cameras (ILCs) will be as "pocketable" as a compact with a retractable lens. Again, go to a shop and see for yourself, but you might let them know why you're sticking a camera in your pocket. That link I posted has the measurements, too.
--
http://453c.smugmug.com/

 

[pocketpygmy]

Does anybody do a combo of like a GF1 and a GH2? I kinda dig the idea of a compact body for sticking in a pocket and a more serious camera for more serious pictures.

if you've got that kind of cash to spare, i think it would actually make more sense to have just one m4/3 body accompanied by a high-end compact (olympus xz-1, panasonic lx-5, canon s95) that is actually more compact and easier to retrieve/deploy/tote. the money saved by paring down ambitions for multiple m4/3 bodies could instead go to an all-in-one superzoom lens (Oly 14-150 or Panny 14-140) that would match the focal length range of the FZ100 but far exceed the IQ. my mom has that camera and i know what you mean about the noise. it's actually more like mud to me.

i'd go for the G3 when it comes out soon -- built-in EVF, not as expensive as the GH2 but with a similar new-generation sensor. the detachable viewfinder for the olympus PENs might be too risky to have around when you're out roughing it or whatever, plus that 12MP sensor is supposedly 'aging'.

 

[453C]

Does anybody do a combo of like a GF1 and a GH2? I kinda dig the idea of a compact body for sticking in a pocket and a more serious camera for more serious pictures.

if you've got that kind of cash to spare, i think it would actually make more sense to have just one m4/3 body accompanied by a high-end compact (olympus xz-1, panasonic lx-5, canon s95) that is actually more compact and easier to retrieve/deploy/tote. the money saved by paring down ambitions for multiple m4/3 bodies could instead go to an all-in-one superzoom lens (Oly 14-150 or Panny 14-140) that would match the focal length range of the FZ100 but far exceed the IQ. my mom has that camera and i know what you mean about the noise. it's actually more like mud to me.

i'd go for the G3 when it comes out soon -- built-in EVF, not as expensive as the GH2 but with a similar new-generation sensor. the detachable viewfinder for the olympus PENs might be too risky to have around when you're out roughing it or whatever, plus that 12MP sensor is supposedly 'aging'.

m43 + compact seems like a good idea. I may be doing something similar soon for a family member with aspirations beyond her iPod touch and near-disposable Kodak.

When truly scrambling around, I find a case is necessary, so no concerns about knocking off the VF-2 for me. Olympus is in a bit of a dead spot at the moment WRT new bodies and sensors, but I hope that changes soon. Still, the old E-PL1 (or any of the PENs) doesn't do a bad job.
--
http://453c.smugmug.com/