Is the E-PL6 the best camera deal at the moment?

Same here.  There are different versions?  Just cosmetic?

gary0319 wrote:

junk1 wrote:

Never saw it that low new...maybe from Hong Kong or China, maybe.

Most I've seen recently have been in the $150-$175 range used US. The older versions are going for about $250 new.

junk1 wrote:

Some used m43 lenses are cheap - the Panasonic 14mm F2.5 lens weighs just 2oz and sells for $150-170 used.

The 55-250 telephoto is good (my only SLR is an old Rebel), if that's what you got...the ancient 75-300 is horrid though and I can't believe I still see it being sold in 2 lens kits. 70-300 lens is good but I highly doubt that's what you have.

Canon's 18MP sensor is actually pretty good at high ISOs. At lower ISO's, it's dynamic range is lower than some others.

I also have an older sigma 30mm F1.4 lens that's not very sharp by today's standards, but it's plenty good enough in the center (where the person/subject is) and at F1.4 the objects in the corners are out of focus anyhow.

Canon's 10-22 lens is excellent and not too heavy...the new STM version (10-18mm?) seems almost as good and cheaper.

Thanks for all the lens info, I'll keep those in mind but for now I think I'm set. I got the 55-250mm IS I because it seems to be the exact same as version II. It was incredibly cheap. I also grabbed the newish 24mm pancake, though I wish it was f1.8 instead of 2.8 but no big deal.

Ulfric M Douglas wrote:

You really have to know which lenses are good and how to buy them for reasonable money.

The Lumix 20mm is great and because it was sold as a kit with millions of GF1 bodies it is always available second-hand for £120

The Olympus 45mm is also great and best to buy new at £200-ish.

The Sigma 30mm has always been £99 so definitely worth getting : a good lens.

Avoid the attempted theft which comes with many m4/3rds lenses.

Then there's the Olympus 40-150 : fabulous and cheap.

Knowledge is power .. err .. savings.

When I had a Panasonic G5, I actually had the Panny 20mm plus the 45-150mm for telephoto. The 20 took great shots with incredible sharpness but I found it unusuable as a walkaround, everyday lens. The sluggish AF was just terrible in many lighting conditions. The 45-150 was decent and pretty snappy.

I did like how M4/3 lenses received firmware updates to improve their performance and quality. DSLR lenses don't have firmware, do they?

Sigma does, and they even have that new dock for updating them.  Canon/Nikon probably do as well (what doesn't have firmware/software inside nowadays?), but only the manufacturer can update them.

I hope you got the STM version of the 55-250.

Nomadical wrote:

I did like how M4/3 lenses received firmware updates to improve their performance and quality. DSLR lenses don't have firmware, do they?

junk1 wrote:

Sigma does, and they even have that new dock for updating them. Canon/Nikon probably do as well (what doesn't have firmware/software inside nowadays?), but only the manufacturer can update them.

I hope you got the STM version of the 55-250.

I haven't seen any firmware updates then for the lenses I got or nothing that I could see online.

No I didn't get the STM version, just the older ES-F IS model. STM version is $80 or so more and I had no plans on using a telephoto for shooting video. So having the slower, noiser focus with a much cheaper price tag seemed more logical.

Well now that I've had a couple days with my first DSLR, just wanted to say a few things which I'm sure most here already know.

Low light AF, at least on this SL1 and likely other Rebels and entry level Nikons, is pretty poor compared to all the m4/3 cams I've owned. Quite slower and sometimes just gives up hunting. At least unless you use the pop-up flash to assist. I remember my GX7 being able to focus in a barely lit room even with the assist lamp disabled. I assume this is something to do with the different camera tech between the systems. Bummer.

OVF AF in decent to good light is incredibly quick though, which caught me off guard. Faster than RX100, G5 and GX7 when out and about. It's just so strange trying to get used to relying on a viewfinder though after always composing with an LCD. Liveview LCD AF is as everyone knows with DSLRs, pretty mediocre. It's usable though when set to Quick Focus but that has the annoying side effect of a brief blank screen as the mirror lifts.

Canon's 24mm pancake is amazing and honestly just as sharp than the Panny 20mm 1.7. Really nice little lens that could double for macro work, lets you get very close. Only cost me $130 versus $270 that I had paid for a used Pan 20mm with its turtle slow AF. Just wish it was f/1.8 instead of f/2.8 but no big deal.

The SL1 could really use focus peaking, no idea why Canon didn't bother adding it. Even my sold RX100 had it so I actually assumed every DSLR would. Manual focus can be quite a guessing game but thankfully it's rarely needed.

The SL1 body itself really reminds me of the Panasonic G5, feels very similar to hold and maybe even lighter in weight. The Canon has a superior grip though with better material.

I always only select/use my Rebel's center focus point and "recompose" the framing if I want the subject off-center.  Otherwise it will pick something screwy to focus on (almost always something closer than your intended subject).