Subjective camera preferences.....

Setter Dog wrote:

Interesting post as yours always are,.....

We're leaving tomorrow for a trip through Teton and Yellowstone. I had planned to take a Sony a77, a Canon SL1, both with 18-250mm Sigmas, and my two Pany G models. All these cameras will fit in a large gear bag and I always work from the car, so space is not a problem. However, I have learned on past trips that using more than two cameras is not much fun for me.

So, the "traveling team" will be a Pany G5 w/100-300mm and a Pany G6 w/14-140mm. I know that I enjoy using stabilized lenses when shooting at long focal lengths. The two cameras left behind are excellent cameras but, like you, I just enjoy using the Panys more. I'm also pleased that output from my G5 and G6 are as identical as they can possibly be,...at least to my eye.

I'm sort of hoping this trip will firmly entrench me in the m43 system and I can move the other two cameras out,......but I'm not betting the house on that!

Jack

Do the Ben Franklin thing, Early to bed and early to rise.  It is surprising how quiet Yellowstone is early in the morning.  It is mayhem after 9 am and long into the night.

Have a great time and good light to you!!

Is there really that much difference between them, or is it just handling differences that you notice because you have so many bodies that you can use?

For the most part, body upgrades never got me that much. The lone exception was the EM5 - it really was head and shoulders above its contemporaries in terms of sensor and IS performance. Otherwise, body upgrades are a bit better here, a bit better there, but they don't really didn't improve the photograph much over an existing body.

Lens additions, on the other hand, are where I've seen the greatest improvements in capability. A 7-14 will capture images that no other lens can get, regardless of which body it is used on. Same for the ZD 50-200 - no other lens quite matches its combination of sharpness, aperture, focal length range, and size. My old 4/3 PL25, used in the optimal conditions, produces lovely bokeh that no other 4/3 or M43 lens can quite match. Maybe the PL42.5, if you can handle the price.

There is one other advantage to putting your major money into glass: it doesn't really depreciate much, while bodies depreciate like crazy.

I wish I had the money to add a GH4, a GX7, and a GM1. But, at least in my opinion, I'd be better off sticking with the EM1 or EM5, and adding a PL42.5 1.2, or maybe a Panny 35-100, maybe the MZD 40-150 F2.8 when it comes out. I really think I'll get better capability.

TrapperJohn wrote:

Is there really that much difference between them, or is it just handling differences that you notice because you have so many bodies that you can use?

Up until this current generation, there were very noticeable IQ differences between the various cameras (or rather, between cameras with the different generations of sensors).  Within sensor generation (for instance, the 12MP one used on both the earlier Panasonics and Olys), the differences came down to the native color rendition and which side of the detail/NR compendium that the manufacturers emphasized (which, as I have said, is different in Panasonic and Oly bodies; less so in RAW but still there).

In this current generation, the differences are much more subtle.  They are there, but with small amounts of tweaking in PP, I can get the files from the EM1, GX7, and GM1 to be remarkably similar to each other.  There are some things that the Olys still do, however, with very fine detail, that make me kind of nuts, and they are not invisible in the subjects that I shoot a lot of (flowers, for instance, and high detail landscapes).  These are mostly pixel peeping level complaints, mind you, but when you are doing detailed macro work, that's the level you DO work on, so even small differences matter.

I think the handling differences are a big part of the equation.  As I said in the first post, the GX7, in the short time I have had it, becomes invisible in my hands when I use it.  It gets out of the way of the shot, and that is something that I think adds to the quality of the final images.  The EM1 still feels like I have to think about it as I am shooting, so it interrupts the creative flow, as it were.  I suspect it's probably just the UI differences that are responsible for this, but who knows....

For the most part, body upgrades never got me that much. The lone exception was the EM5 - it really was head and shoulders above its contemporaries in terms of sensor and IS performance. Otherwise, body upgrades are a bit better here, a bit better there, but they don't really didn't improve the photograph much over an existing body.

As I said, with the current generation of sensors, the differences are far more subtle.  Prior to this, however, each new generation of sensor technology brought really quite visible improvements to the output.

Lens additions, on the other hand, are where I've seen the greatest improvements in capability. A 7-14 will capture images that no other lens can get, regardless of which body it is used on. Same for the ZD 50-200 - no other lens quite matches its combination of sharpness, aperture, focal length range, and size. My old 4/3 PL25, used in the optimal conditions, produces lovely bokeh that no other 4/3 or M43 lens can quite match. Maybe the PL42.5, if you can handle the price.

I agree with you.  It does, however, depend a lot on what you shoot....The PL42.5 is a lens I am most curious about, as it really renders some gorgeous images from what I have seen posted from it.  However, it's definitely not in the budget, and I don't do portraiture, so I can't justify getting it to photograph my pets... .  I did buy the PL 45mm f2.8 this year, and I am absolutely loving it....at that focal length, I automatically try and get in really close to my subjects, so it being a macro makes it FAR more useful to me than the Oly 45mm f1.8 (which I had, and never used, so ended up selling it).  I just wish they would come out with a higher quality long lens (300mm) or updated 100-300mm which is very sharp at 300mm....That would be a definite investment I would use quite frequently, no matter what the body.

There is one other advantage to putting your major money into glass: it doesn't really depreciate much, while bodies depreciate like crazy.

I wish I had the money to add a GH4, a GX7, and a GM1. But, at least in my opinion, I'd be better off sticking with the EM1 or EM5, and adding a PL42.5 1.2, or maybe a Panny 35-100, maybe the MZD 40-150 F2.8 when it comes out. I really think I'll get better capability.

I'm not disagreeing with you.  The differences between all of these cameras are quite small in terms of final output.  The thing is, the one that hits the sweet spot in terms of size, handling, UI, and output is the one that you will use the most...and I was simply shocked that I ended up enjoying using the GX7 more than the EM1 after working with them both.  I honestly thought the EM1 would be the one I preferred, with the GX7 making a brief stay at my house before I moved on from it.  But, I'm just enjoying using the GX7 more, so it will stay, and the EM1 will go. (I don't keep all of those bodies around, BTW....I do sell them when I decide it's time to move on.  THAT much disposable income I do not have...  ).

-J

Hen3ry wrote:

it's like me with the G6. Put the 12-35 lens on it and i feel obvious and intrusive with an obtrusive camera. Put the 12-32 lens on it and lens, camera, and Geoffrey fade into the crowd…

heh, heh, it's what's in your head that counts!

My brief acquaintance with the GX7 in the store told me this was a great camera for fading with. Only the lack of the fully articulated screen put me off, really.

Cheers, geoff

Actually, the flip up EVF, which I thought was kind of a gimmick, makes up for the lack of screen articulation just a bit

-J

Kim Letkeman wrote:

Hen3ry wrote:

it's like me with the G6. Put the 12-35 lens on it and i feel obvious and intrusive with an obtrusive camera. Put the 12-32 lens on it and lens, camera, and Geoffrey fade into the crowd…

heh, heh, it's what's in your head that counts!

My brief acquaintance with the GX7 in the store told me this was a great camera for fading with. Only the lack of the fully articulated screen put me off, really.

And that obscenely thick grip ...

The first time I tried a GX7 in the store, the grip felt kind of blobby to me.  However, now I just hook my fingertips around it and it dangles off of them, much like I used to hold the GH2.  It's much more comfortable than I thought it would be, after using it for a little while.

-J

FrankS009 wrote:

There are emotional, intellectual, and financial perspectives on this question. Starting with the intellectual ones first, the m4/3rds system uniquely offers different sized bodies that share the same lenses. So originally I bought a G1 and a GF1. Now there are really three sized bodies: for example the GM1, the GX7, and the GH4/EM1 and some "tweeners" such as the EM5 with grip. Some lenses balance better on different sized bodies, but some are more appropriate for different social situations. While maybe a wedding photographers could do the whole shoot with a GM1, the customer's expectations might be of a bigger camera. On the other hand, hauling a GH4 or EM1 around on a travel light holiday is not much fun. and so from that perspective I am a multi-camera user, at least in theory.

Emotionally, I do not change cameras much, and react to them personally. My G1 and GF1 became part of me, and I took my old GF1 on a recent trip rather than my GX7 because I was familiar with it and a bit afraid I would damage the newer camera. I could have used the EVF as it turned out, but the GF1 felt pretty indestructible and unobtrusive. I never felt comfortable with an EM5 and had no attachment to it. The EM1 doesn't do it for me either although I am sure it is a good camera.

So, GM1 for the best camera you have with you also being as good as any other and if your mood is for something cute, the GF1/GX7 in the middle, and the GH4 for big lenses and to carry the big camera image when social circumstances "demand" it. Now all I have to do is afford all three!

F.

In all of this back and forth, I was catching myself wondering if I should wait for the GH4.  However, I realized that one of the things that I am enjoying about the GX7 is the weight.  For me, it seems as if the sweet spot for camera body weight is about 400g.  Above 450g and I start noticing the body weight....the GH2 was right on the borderline, and the GH3 was just way too heavy.  The EM1 is also over  450g which I think might be why I notice it in hand, too.  So, to even think of trying the GH4 would be simply folly, and I find myself not tempted at all after realizing that.  

I make no apologies for being an unabashed gearhead

-J