rethinking Micro Four Thirds in 2016

I see most people are trying to talk you out of making any real changes; I won't though I do think you should stick partly with m43.

Here's what i think you should do: first off keep the E-PM2 and some of your compact m43 lenses for your portable kit. At some point you might think about upgrading the E-PM2 to a new Olympus body or to the Panasonic GM series, but you can safely put that off for the time being.

If you have m43 logic suggests your second system should be full frame. I mean the sensor's performance isn't that much better at APS-C than at quarter-frame (m43). So you need to settle on a full frame camera: either buy the SONY A7 with a couple of lenses of your choice (which is what you seem to want to do) or keep the Nikon D600, which seems to be a highly rated full frame DSLR- that can't be bad. (Not sure why you are shooting with an E-M1 if you have this camera already).

OR

If you wanted to do something really radical, dump the whole lot and go for a single system: the Fuji X-T2 + lenses. Short of this solution I don't see why you should dump your m43 investment.

I'm looking at a system at the moment coming from film & digital P&S's. Mostly for travel and family events.

I'm leaning towards the m4/3 because of the small bodies with small primes.

Not interested in zooms and feel the m4/3 will give me everything I need in performance & image quality in a nice little package.

M43 does most of what you want fairly well, and perhaps you have a good deal invested in it already.

You could look at some of the Panasonic offerings (GM series for really compact body, GX8 for higher MP sensor) Look into adapting lenses when native offerings fall short (Metabones and other adapters allow AF and/or focal reducer for brighter aperture)

Some faster primes coming from Olympus, and the E-M1/II may boost sensor performance.

You'd be hard pressed to find a pocketable camera sharing a battery w the top of the line model... generally the pro model will have a beefier battery, the compact will sacrifice capacity for the sake of compactness... Olympus does a pretty good job keeping it to two battery sizes.

But if budget isn't really a factor, why not buy into a second brand for specific needs that m43 does not cover, rather than trying to find another format that covers all your needs.

If size wasn't a factor, you could go w Canikon for the full line of lenses and bodies... but neither will give you as portable a system, or as pocketable a camera as an E-PM or GM plus pancake prime.

golfhov wrote:

Camera Newton wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Camera Newton wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

You have your analyses, you have your requirements. What should we think about? To me it is all about the system, so lenses too and that combo's size and weight. Not much has changed at all.

Since 2012 mFTs has had its own development too. Much better AF especially C-AF with Panasonics, but also EM1. Video and still IQ has gone up (but for stills compared to the Em5, which is also 2012, not much). Lens choice is still to my mind by far the best and unqiue in the mirrorless segment but most importantly I cannot find equivalents in my case in any other systemcam.

But to each their own. We can make a fuss about the details, but Sony and Fuji will get you where you want too (Fuji not for video, okey..). So does it matter? If you are nitpicking like me it does, but a more realistic view tells me that "not so much" is the better answer.

Sony has BIG covered. The A6000 is too big for most pockets and almost all their lenses rated above dismal are too big or too heavy to be pocket-able.

yes most all larger format lenses are bigger.This is just basic physics. The op seems well aware. Calling the MFT pocket able is a bit of a stretch. You need to be very selective with your bodies and lenses and/or have some seriously large pockets

None can compete with the 20mm F/1.7 or 45mm F/1.8 on a GM5.

a5000 and 20 1.8. Very similar

There is no such lens. No need to make stuff up.

Sony has a pretty average 20mm F/2.8, which equals 30mm F/4.3 while the better Panasonic is 30mm and F/3.5.

The A5000 is also a larger crippled camera lacking any option for a VF.

Interesting where you get the panasonic is better. Any evidence to back that up would be nice. You did the math yourself and see they are quite similar in size, cost, focal length, and aperture.

I wish you would quit making stuff up. You've already been caught once.

F/3.5 and F/4.3 are not equal and not "quite similar".

The camera you mention is larger, heavier and lacks a VF. It is also crippled and no option to add a VF (or a good flash either).

I hope anyone willing to be honest will also look at all Sony lenses released in the past 2 1/2 years and see their HUGE size and $1200 average price tag. That is all anyone needs to know about their cameras being 'small' and 'affordable'.

Interesting where you get the panasonic is better. Any evidence to back that up would be nice. You did the math yourself and see they are quite similar in size, cost, focal length, and aperture.

I wish you would quit making stuff up. You've already been caught once.

I made an honest mistake. I know both pancake primes on the e mount are 2.8s.

F/3.5 and F/4.3 are not equal and not "quite similar".

here is the definition of similar.

sim·i·larˈsim(ə)lər/adjective

1. 1.resembling without being identical. I would think 3.8 vs 4.3 are well within the definition

The camera you mention is larger, heavier and lacks a VF. It is also crippled and no option to add a VF (or a good flash either).

It is larger and heavier. I even sent a link to the measurements just so you could see exactly how different they are. In fact here you go a5000 is +11.1 mm +3.3mm -.4mm and +58 grams. If that is not within the realms of similar I do not know what is

I hope anyone willing to be honest will also look at all Sony lenses released in the past 2 1/2 years and see their HUGE size and $1200 average price tag.

Who is making things up.You already used the term only. Now you just slightly adjusted it. anyway you are making an argument I never did. MFT is the smallest system overall hands down(nikon ?) Just don't pretend there are not other options out there

That is all anyone needs to know about their cameras being 'small' and 'affordable'.

Small is a relative term. The a7 is small for what it is. There are MFT cameras that are large for what they are. Affordable is relative too. Overall MFT is the most affordable but if you want say an em1, a constant 2.8, and a couple of the really nice primes the competition starts to look a little more interesting.

Anyway you are going to say something harsh against me and I really don't care. I know I will get no audience here but I want these words out there for anyone that may be brainwashed by your gospel. There are actually a lot of different systems out there that can meet various demands better than others.

Cheers

traveler_101 wrote:

...  or keep the Nikon D600, which seems to be a highly rated full frame DSLR- that can't be bad. (Not sure why you are shooting with an E-M1 if you have this camera already).

This D600 you see in my gear list is partly to blame for my inquiry

I picked up a bargain-priced D600 which I performed some minor cosmetic repairs and sent off to Nikon for shutter replacement. It came with two manual focus lenses, 35/1.4 and 85/1.4. It's only been a few days and I'm still waiting for it to come back from Nikon.

I need to make a quick decision on whether to sell this bundle for a small profit, or adopt it for real use, in which case I'll need to throw more money at it, including an external flash and some AF lenses. If I'm going to sell it, I'd rather do it while the date on the Nikon repair receipt is still fresh.

golfhov wrote:

Calling the MFT pocketable is a bit of a stretch. You need to be very selective with your bodies and lenses and/or have some seriously large pockets

Where I live we need a coat or jacket from September through June. I can fit the E-PM2 + P20/1.7 pancake into one pocket, and depending on need either a 12-32 pancake or 60/2.8 macro or 7/3.5 fisheye into the other. On some occasions I've brought the E-M1 with bodycap in one pocket and the largish Noctictron 42.5/1.2 in the other, then put the two together upon arrival at the destination. Removing the neck strap helps.

Alex Notpro wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Calling the MFT pocketable is a bit of a stretch. You need to be very selective with your bodies and lenses and/or have some seriously large pockets

Where I live we need a coat or jacket from September through June. I can fit the E-PM2 + P20/1.7 pancake into one pocket, and depending on need either a 12-32 pancake or 60/2.8 macro or 7/3.5 fisheye into the other. On some occasions I've brought the E-M1 with bodycap in one pocket and the largish Noctictron 42.5/1.2 in the other, then put the two together upon arrival at the destination. Removing the neck strap helps.

Thanks. I can see that.

Going back to my original point. There are other small options. The a5000 is similar in size to the epm and there is a 20 2.8 pancake. There is also a 16-50 pancake if you want that. There are definitely more small options in MFT. I am not insinuating that larger formats will win a size contest only that there are other small cameras.

The EOS m also has small lenses available

Just for fun the a7 is a little smaller and lighter than the em1. You could do an a7ii or rii for similar size but a good bit heavier. Not the lenses. As I have already stated that is just physics. It is impossible to have a full frame lens smaller than a MFT

MFT has the title in size and always will. The other mirrorless systems do have some compact optiosn s

Alex Notpro wrote:

traveler_101 wrote:

... or keep the Nikon D600, which seems to be a highly rated full frame DSLR- that can't be bad. (Not sure why you are shooting with an E-M1 if you have this camera already).

This D600 you see in my gear list is partly to blame for my inquiry

I picked up a bargain-priced D600 which I performed some minor cosmetic repairs and sent off to Nikon for shutter replacement. It came with two manual focus lenses, 35/1.4 and 85/1.4. It's only been a few days and I'm still waiting for it to come back from Nikon.

I need to make a quick decision on whether to sell this bundle for a small profit, or adopt it for real use, in which case I'll need to throw more money at it, including an external flash and some AF lenses. If I'm going to sell it, I'd rather do it while the date on the Nikon repair receipt is still fresh.

I see. Well I suppose then you have to decide between the D600 and the SONY A7R/A7R-II. Nikon would be a cheaper way to go and since you will soon have the camera in your hands, I suppose you should see if you like the Nikon. If it doesn't work out you can always sell and try a SONY.

Whichever full frame you decide for I still don't see any reason why you should dump your portable Olympus kit. Keep the E-PM2 + 20/1.7 and 12-32 lenses as your portable kit. Pick up a Panasonic GM or a E-PL7 eventually to replace the E-PM2, if you wish.

I might be mistaken but reading your reasoning it sounds like you have lots of spending money for this hobby. What now is called "Full Frame" (35 mm) was not that long ago a piddly small film size that would never make it over the 6x6 camera's (Bronica etc) that were used by wedding photographers etc.

Please sell of all your MFT gear at fire-sale prices, then start pondering about what to buy next and in the meantime we can pick up some hardly used good stuff.

Then after you've aquired your Canon 1D (whatever version) with L lenses you try to travel on a plane outsdide the US where the limit of carry on luggage is 5 or 7 Kg. You'll find that you'll have to put your laptop, camera and lenses into the checked luggage (but not your batteries) and after arrival some stuff is missing and your tripod is all bent. Afterwards when wanting to photograph something you can go only to places with decent transport because it is too heavy to take with you on a walk to a location that is not crowded with tourists all taking the same picture.

Oops, now you'll miss that little MFT system so you better have a fire sale of thet Canon gear.

You would not think of switching to larger gear than the FF, yet it was not that long ago that 35mm was looked down upon. 35mm took off with the masses because they could carry a camera with them - there was not so much luxury as having umpteen different primes and zooms in one's bag. The camera hang by a strap around their neck, together with a flash somewhere for inside use, and that was it.

News sensors are just over the horizon with more resolution etc etc. By then FF will be a dinasour.

The depreciation on a Canon L lens is more than the purchase price of a MFT lens and that is if you sell it before it is replaced by the next model.

But go ahead and be happy with your new gear and kick yourself when you are dead tired at the end of the day hauling all that gear around while I'm enjoying the views, walking around town or in the hills or where ever and get the spontaneous award winning shots that the big gear carrying crowd misses.

All satire aside but asking a stranger on a website about what photographic equipment YOU need is like asking a stranger what for a person you should have as a wife.

For twelve and half years I was a professional photographer and worked with whatever gear was at hand. If we could make pictures then with a Minox that were good enough to finish up in National Geographic then what's wrong with the gear you've got now?

Really: A second camera should not require a second set of "energy supply paraphernalia" (spares, chargers, cables). Sony and Nikon have figured this out. Olympus hasn't. I don't know about the others.

Najinsky wrote:

Or more specifically, they are too specific.

For example, wanting to use the same battery. Why?

Most people would answer they only want to carry a single charger. And in these days of airline restriction on weight and even limits on lithium batteries, there is some sense in that.

But what if they had a battery life of 4 weeks or say, 4,000 shots, and what if that 4,000 shot camera had a built in battery that couldn't be changed.

Is your requirement actually about carrying batteries, because this is something you enjoy doing, or more about your camera having power.

I decided to dump the D600, primarily on usability concerns (OVF with eyeglasses is very annoying, lack of a properly implemented LCD shooting mode hampers composition, AF is not precise enough for fast lenses and lacks face & eye-detect, and last but not least, heavier, bulkier and more anti-social than I ever remember from previous DSLR experience).

I'm now taking a more serious look at the A7, and one camera I didn't notice initially, the A5100 which is about the same size as the E-PM2. In equivalence terms, the A7 with 24-240mm zoom looks like it could replace both of my current pro-grade zooms, 12-40 f/2.8 and 35-100 f/2.8, at about the same combined weight plus an extra 40mm at the long end. The rest of the SONY lens line-up is sadly very limited, so I'm also looking into using Canon lenses on the A7.