Contituation of the Versatility thread

Started Apr 5, 2013 | Discussions
FoolyCooly Veteran Member • Posts: 3,484
Re: Versatile != only 'small'

moving_comfort wrote:

My E-PL5 is the perfect balance of size, cost and power. Small enough to go anywhere like my iphone 4. Cheap enough to leave on the beach as I swim. Powerful enough not to miss my DSLRs when I am using it.

.

Sure -  for you.  The whole point of my post was that I love the small size, the reduced cost, etc, etc as well, but I get let down when I review the images later.  This reduces the effectiveness of the small-versatility I enjoyed while taking the shots and puts a damper on the experience.

I'm not sure what your expectations are but I don't feel let down when reviewing any of my photos from any camera with exception to my iPhone. The iPhone does't cut it in many situations.

As it stands, my two main cameras are the D800 and the iphone4.  Absolutely no mirrorless/m43 camera can match the iphone's ubiquitous nature, and no mirrorless/m43 camera can match the D800's IQ and performance power.  Trying to have a little of both with something like an OM-D has been an exercise in disappointment for me.

Not many DSLRs can match the D800's IQ. The D7100 maybe better for burds but as far as IQ and Pixel count goes the D800 is among the best period. BUT it is clearly not the most versatile. You couldn't strap one to your helmet and jump out of a plane, leave it on the beach without it walking off or fit it in your pocket.

That said, there's no accounting for simple gear lust.  I may end up with a kit anyway and think of the use cases later.

-- hide signature --

Here are a few of my favorite things...
---> http://www.flickr.com/photos/95095968@N00/sets/72157626171532197/

MOD Biggs23 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,117
Re: Versatile != only 'small'
1

FoolyCooly wrote:

Not many DSLRs can match the D800's IQ. The D7100 maybe better for burds but as far as IQ and Pixel count goes the D800 is among the best period. BUT it is clearly not the most versatile. You couldn't strap one to your helmet and jump out of a plane, leave it on the beach without it walking off or fit it in your pocket.

Those are not the only criteria that go into consideration for 'most versatile'. There are literally hundreds of others, many of which the D800 excels at.

If you want to say 'easiest to carry around' than that's a different story entirely.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon D750 Nikon D5 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
moving_comfort
moving_comfort Veteran Member • Posts: 8,230
Re: Versatile != only 'small'
2

FoolyCooly wrote:

Not many DSLRs can match the D800's IQ. The D7100 maybe better for burds but as far as IQ and Pixel count goes the D800 is among the best period. BUT it is clearly not the most versatile. You couldn't strap one to your helmet and jump out of a plane, leave it on the beach without it walking off or fit it in your pocket.

Again, you're choosing a definition for versatile that only means small.  There's other versatility to consider, like the versatility in shooting situations that require incredible low-light capability, incredible resolution/cropping capability, eye-opening dynamic range, the versatility that a large VF brings to MF.  Versatile != small... 'small' is only one attribute of versatile.

.

-- hide signature --

Here are a few of my favorite things...
---> http://www.flickr.com/photos/95095968@N00/sets/72157626171532197/

 moving_comfort's gear list:moving_comfort's gear list
Pentax K20D Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D +10 more
panamforeman
panamforeman Senior Member • Posts: 1,210
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread
1

I think both of you have made valid points. In fact all the posts on this thread are valid.

However, if I may offer MHO: There are “only” two consequences that ultimately matter when taking a photograph, regardless of the “gear” used and the “activity” taking place that is photographed.

And that is IQ and Content. If the IQ is poor then the content of the shot is diminished. It may still be useful but is limited by the IQ. (Fortunately today we have Photoshop, etc. that corrects poor technique & ability)

It is the Subject or the Content of the shot that determines everything about it. I offer but two dramatic examples. Both from WWII. An era of slow B&W film, and by today’s standards primitive but still very capable cameras:

The photo? The raising of the American flag on Mount Suribachi at Iwo Jima, February 1945 by Joe Rosenthal. Taken with a Speed Graphic. It has become the most circulated photo in the world and probably the most famous. The photo was almost missed because some people were in the way and Joe was piling rocks for a better vantage point. A shout, “it’s going up” and Joe turned and snapped the shot.

It was a perfect photo as to IQ and content! Accidently so? Even Rosenthal thought so. But still………!

The other is the photo of the Sailor kissing the Nurse in Times Square on VJ day August 1945 by Alfred Eisenstaedt. He turned, saw the sailor and the girl, snapped the photo. Photo made life magazine’s cover. And reprinted everywhere in the free world, even today for both photos. (Coincidently, another photographer, Victor Jorgensen, made the same shot but from a different vantage point. It wasn’t considered as good because it showed less of Times Square)

Both are examples of IQ and Content coming together. (You can google them) But, of course, it IS the content that makes the photo. It just really helps and enhances the photo when the IQ is good. (perfect)

$25,000 worth of gear or a $400 P&S camera. It all comes down to the skill and imagination of the photographer in working with what he has. Some seem to have it, most don’t!!

Sometimes a completely random shot with a Brownie is a treasure, and a carefully composed and set-up shot with a half million $s of gear is junk!

Versatility is usually the boast of the overconfident, but unskilled. They trust in their gear rather than their abilities. (That would be most of us)

Personally? All I carry these days is the Canon G15 and the S110. Any other is just as good!

But the absolute bottom line for me is IQ. It is first priority in everything. It overrides everything else. And I’m able to, believe it or not, achieve it with a simple Canon G15.

 panamforeman's gear list:panamforeman's gear list
Canon PowerShot S120 Panasonic ZS100
FoolyCooly Veteran Member • Posts: 3,484
Re: Versatile != only 'small'

How can a camera be the most versitle if it was left at the condo bc it was too big or expensive. An ok picture is better than no picture at all... This is why the iPhone is now the most popular camera on the Internet.

Actually I am sitting in TGI Fridays with my fam, typing this post out on my iphone while they are talking to me about the tiny epl5 in front of me. I would never bring a dslr to dinner with my in-laws.

moving_comfort
moving_comfort Veteran Member • Posts: 8,230
Re: Versatile != only 'small'
2

FoolyCooly wrote:

Actually I am sitting in TGI Fridays with my fam, typing this post out on my iphone while they are talking to me about the tiny epl5 in front of me. I would never bring a dslr to dinner with my in-laws.

I probably wouldn't either!  (Below snapped with my iphone last year at a restaurant table)

When it's literally always with you, it wins that small/everywhere category hands-down.

I just don't see how a phone/D800 combo can be beat for versatility!

.

-- hide signature --

Here are a few of my favorite things...
---> http://www.flickr.com/photos/95095968@N00/sets/72157626171532197/

 moving_comfort's gear list:moving_comfort's gear list
Pentax K20D Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D +10 more
MOD Biggs23 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,117
Re: Versatile != only 'small'
1

FoolyCooly wrote:

How can a camera be the most versitle if it was left at the condo bc it was too big or expensive. An ok picture is better than no picture at all.

Agreed.

Actually I am sitting in TGI Fridays with my fam, typing this post out on my iphone while they are talking to me about the tiny epl5 in front of me. I would never bring a dslr to dinner with my in-laws.

But why not? If I bring a camera I bring the one I feel most capable for the circumstance I'm bringing it for. More times than not that means a dSLR.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon D750 Nikon D5 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
FoolyCooly Veteran Member • Posts: 3,484
E-PL5 Test Images *IMAGE HEAVY*
1

ISO 12800- Nothing really worth writing home about but I'd call that usable for small print. Probably better than my D90 and D300 performed.

A few from a run sequence- This is every 3rd frame. This is with the 14-42mm kit lens. It's not really suitable for sports but it's the only AF lens I have at the moment. I believe it is still a relevant test.

The rest of the sequence is in my album.

8fps!

Sports- Catch the action even with MF!

From Dinner-

These are just some snapshots/test images. As you can see not much care was taken in the making or processing of these images. I'm pretty sure any soccer mom could reproduce every shot here.

Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,222
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread

Pfft.

Fun fact 1 - I have a variety of photos taken with mirrorless that a D800 couldn't take. There's actually quite some good advantages to having a live view with no focus speed issues, and a movable screen. The D800 is a good camera, but it's only the most versatile if you have a very narrow view of what's important and useful.

Fun fact 2 - Pretty well everyone has a weight budget. If you own a decent variety of camera gear, then generally you won't take all of it with you each time you take photos.

So, if your weight budget is for a FF with a 24-70 and a 70-200, then someone else with a mirrorless and the same weight budget could probably take lenses covering the same array of focal lengths, as well as a superlong tele, and perhaps a dedicated macro.

Which suggests that while it depends on the situation, for a decent chunk of the time, mirrorless is more versatile, for the simple fact that you can carry more options.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +7 more
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 9,509
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread

Mjankor wrote:

Which suggests that while it depends on the situation, for a decent chunk of the time, mirrorless is more versatile, for the simple fact that you can carry more options.

MIRRORLESS is more versatile, NOT (insert sensor size here).

When a mirrorless interchangeable FF arrives, to me, IT (if done right) will be more versatile than apsc DSLR that can not adapt other lenses....should be smaller than many apsc dslrs as well.

All things being equal, I still think that smaller sensor mirrorless will be more versatile in many cases than larger sensor mirrorless as far as cameras are concerned.

As far as lenses go, it is the other way around.

Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,222
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread

neil holmes wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

Which suggests that while it depends on the situation, for a decent chunk of the time, mirrorless is more versatile, for the simple fact that you can carry more options.

MIRRORLESS is more versatile, NOT (insert sensor size here).

When a mirrorless interchangeable FF arrives, to me, IT (if done right) will be more versatile than apsc DSLR that can not adapt other lenses....should be smaller than many apsc dslrs as well.

All things being equal, I still think that smaller sensor mirrorless will be more versatile in many cases than larger sensor mirrorless as far as cameras are concerned.

As far as lenses go, it is the other way around.

Good point. I was torn as to use m4/3s or mirrorless as APSC mirrorless doesn't gain the same size/weight advantage as m4/3s, FF will have almost no advantage and the little Q has a huge advantage. I'll just have to tolerate being confusing.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +7 more
Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,222
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread

vzlnc wrote:

vzlnc wrote:

FoolyCooly wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

Sorry, DX and MFT.

Good enough for what, exactly? All I'm saying is FF provides more DoF options and is therefore more versatile, which is the point of this and the other threads. Nothing more.

Good enough for everything.

How about birds in flight, fast moving kids, indoor or outdoor sports, which REQUIRE PDAF. Now its entirely a different story that you MIGHT just get a decent picture doing CDAF or manual focusing using zone system, but isnt that a hell lot more cumbersome, not to mention you will NEVER get the exact shot you want bcoz of the nature of CDAF. Regardless of the sensor size or the lens, CDAF is NOT SUITABLE for these situations. Hell, even in regular snapshots CDAF misses the exact moment many times.

How about hand-holding long telephoto lens, not only its awkward, its so shaky that none of the IS or VR systems are going to compensate enough. Its just goes against nature when you are holding a small gripless compact with a long telephoto at an arms length and trying to turn the zoom ring. There is a reason why rifle-scopes are attached like that and why archers hold their arrow close to their eye. Not to mention the paid you will end up with.

Also you have end with no AF tracking that is a MUST for such situations.

Also need to add things like you can change almost all settings of the camera WITHOUT taking your eye OFF the viewfinder. All your buttons are on the finger tips. You can focus and recompose with the press of a button without changing any settings and still have the subject in your view all the time. Just not possible with any other system. That means FF is more adaptable to any scene or condition you throw at it.

Sorry. I forgot I'm not supposed to do this.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +7 more
Ulric Veteran Member • Posts: 4,534
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread

Biggs23 wrote:

EVF cameras are crippled in quite a few ways. If you're a regular user of them you're certainly aware of that. They do have some advantages though.

Live blinkies. <3

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus PEN-F Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +13 more
Ulric Veteran Member • Posts: 4,534
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

COMPLETE darkness means that NO light is available. Literally, none. That's what the word means. If there is NO light than NOTHING can focus, not even your eyes. So no, it cannot focus in COMPLETE darkness.

Infra Red. Darkness to my eyes, not to the camera. Now you know? The camera is capable of "seeing" in IR light and acquire focus, even if our eyes can't.

The old Polaroid AF system used ultrasonic radar and was actually able to focus in complete darkness.

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus PEN-F Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +13 more
Ulric Veteran Member • Posts: 4,534
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread

vzlnc wrote:

Also need to add things like you can change almost all settings of the camera WITHOUT taking your eye OFF the viewfinder. All your buttons are on the finger tips. You can focus and recompose with the press of a button without changing any settings and still have the subject in your view all the time. Just not possible with any other system. That means FF is more adaptable to any scene or condition you throw at it.

I can change all the settings on my E-M5 without taking my eye off the viewfinder. What does that say about the sensor size?

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus PEN-F Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +13 more
Jorginho Forum Pro • Posts: 14,294
Well, on second thoughts it is probablythe GH3

If it is pure stills, we do not look at weight etc it is probabl a FF.

But if we look at all that is possible with cams of a photoamera size I think it is he GH3. It an do reasonable AF tracking in stills, but the strong point is that it can do the same in video. The deo is also of TV quality. The only one that can do that.

There is little this cam cannot do to the satisfacion of say 95% of all shooters I think. It is weathersealed, has a swiveling displaym has an EVF with no blackout. It weighs so much less with those excellent lenses hat in practice you can do all that a lot longer than with any FF.

Also. CDAF is lightning fast and accurate. No front or back focussing issues. Etc.

In the end, this match makes little sens to me. It all depends on wha you are shooting, how muh you are willing to pay and to crry along with you etc.

 Jorginho's gear list:Jorginho's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +8 more
Jorginho Forum Pro • Posts: 14,294
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread

OMD is weatherseald and has IBIS, the others over here do not have it. OMD has a tiltable touchscreen, no touchscreen on the Sony. The IBIS of the Oly also works in video and demonstrably much better than any in lens stabilisation. I do not own one, but that is the truth. So the Oly is more expensive indeed but it does offer some advantages that make any cam more expensive, not just some gadgets.

 Jorginho's gear list:Jorginho's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +8 more
Jorginho Forum Pro • Posts: 14,294
I have the EPl5 and have the EVF. Sets you back 120 dollar BTW
1

I disagree that an EVF is not usefull. It is but not because of weight, because in bright light you can't see enough on the screen.

 Jorginho's gear list:Jorginho's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +8 more
Jorginho Forum Pro • Posts: 14,294
You are generalising a lot.

Listen, I agree that trying to compare good PDAF for focus tracking ot the current PDAF on some mirrorless cams or some CDAF on some other is abit useless. The good DSLRs are better.

However you can read in reviews that at least GH3 and I think OM-D too, let alone Nikon1, are comparable for action shooting like midrange DSLRs. Not my words, just the reviews. I have shot AF tracking with my EPL5. I am not going to compare this to a good DSLR, but it does reasonably well. It is not as black and white as you make it out to be and in my experience also not as good as others try to claim.

For kids etc: with NEx6, Nikon1, EPL5, OM-D and Gh3 (and even my GH2 to some extend) can do that. BIF: it is not impossible, it is just not as good. I have shot BIF with my Gh2. With some practice it is reasonable.

Now, for any other focussing just tap the screen and it focusses on the subject and shoots instantly. The hitrate is very high, probably the highest out there. My sis has the D7000 and had lots of focussing issues.

Also I have the GH2. It is fine with the 100-300 mm lens on it. That lens only weighs 500 grams.

For the sake of arguing people tend to put things in homogenous groups where the things tey talk about are rather heterogenous. And EPL5 is  quite different from a GH3 or GH2.

 Jorginho's gear list:Jorginho's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +8 more
Richard Veteran Member • Posts: 4,858
Preaching to chior, Mirrorless people will never accept this.
2

vzlnc wrote:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/versatile

versatile: turning with ease from one thing to another.

Everyone knows that FF is more versatile, but the mirrorless people will not agree, they feel the need to justify their purchase. A phone camera may be good enough, a mirrorless may  be good enough for your application but you give up versatility for size and portability but no mirrorless person would ever admit that.

No pro in his right mind would choose mirrorless unless there was an overwhelming need to have a smaller camera because he knows the FF will get better image, have better noise control, better featuers and lenses. But mirrorless people cannot accept this. So why bring it up to them and remind them they have an inferior camera, their only response will be to dispute you with some dumb argument and then go back to it is smaller. Not worth the time.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads