"OK" but much cheaper camera body and invest in a good lens or good body with kit?

Hi all,

I'm a starting enthusiast hoping to invest in a camera but on a budget. I'm interested in taking "memories" mostly. Candid photos of friends in house parties, or street photography of places I will travel to. Hopefully a little more than "better than my camera phone" photos but I don't think I will be investing in professional gear.

The budget part is the issue.

I currently have a borrowed Lumix GF-2 with the 14-42 and 14mm kit. After shooting with it, I found it to be quite enjoyable, except for some color issues (in terms of recording the colors I want) I've yet to work out (i shoot in raw... I'm not sure if it's a post processing issue, a skills issue or the camera) and its lowlight capability. Anything near 800iso drops quality, which is hard because i think most of my social gatherings (and reasons to photograph) are likely to be in-doors and low light.

So the plan was for me to get a camera that makes shooting candid easier (tilting screen), allows reasonable use of lowlight/iso
I prepared myself to invest in a prime lens probably good enough for low light (likely the 25 1.7 or the 20) and a good kit. (maybe few vintage lenses for portraits or zoom).

If you don't have time to read into the details here's a quick summary of my considerations:

sony a6000

Pros
-great flexibility, good overall value. Known to fit candid photos and street photography. Decent and portable kit lens. Samples on flickr tell me people interested in what I want to shoot seem to have decided on this camera as well.
-features and reviews suggest flexibility for more developed photography knowledge in the future

Cons
- i don't feel I can afford to invest much more after buying the kit.

Olympus OMD-EM10
- good investment, great AF as well. the M43 system allows me to use what I can already borrow/buy from the GF2 i am using now.
- slightly cheaper than the a6000 but more space to invest in a lowlight lens (either 25mm or 20mm)
- stabilization is likely to come in handy for work (video)
-features and reviews suggest flexibility for more developed photography knowledge in the future
cons:
-still kind of pricey.. some hesitation because olympus has NO official support here in the Philippines.

Olympus Pen EP-5
-much much cheaper than a6000 and OMD (easily 200$ cheaper)
- space to buy lenses, as well as use the ones I already have
- meets basic needs: portable, articulating screen, good shots under high ISO
cons:
-less "future" flexibility?
- lack of official repair support.

Background for preferences (if interested in what I used to consider):

Up until recently, I was attracted to the sony a6000 here in the philippines (especially now that sony released a new camera, everyone seems to be unloading). Its price point (The whole brand new set for the a6000 is around 560$ or php28,000) and reviews for fast AF, good sensor detail and flexibility for the price really got to me. However at that price point, I'm not entirely sure I'll be able to get another lens for low-light (or any other reason, for that matter).

-Then I considered the OMD-EM10 (being sold for roughly $500 just the body and around $600 for the kit). Second hand can drop up to around $400 with 65-100$ for a kit lens. Leaving me with 60 to maybe $100 which I can invest in a 20 or 25mm for when things go on sale in the states.

But there are people currently selling the Olympus Pen EP-5 at $320. It has stabilization which i heard helps (admittedly not with subjects moving around but it does allow me to photograph with lower shutter speed, given i ask my subjects to stay still (in theory acc to blogs and reviews). It's got the articulating screen, and samples online for high iso seems pleasing enough (or have I been deceived?) The price point also makes me feel at ease both in terms of space to invest, but also in terms of personal financing. I'm at my first paying job here in the Philippines which is enough to "get to buy things for my own" but not a lot of big non-profiting investments.

Few things to add for consideration:

- Sony has available support/repair here in the philippines. Sadly, Olympus does not (although there are active oly photographers in the camera groups i am a part of and they insist ... in their international connections for licensed repair)

- I was hoping to use my camera maybe to help with work since I am in charge of documentation and publication (marketing) for a social housing foundation felt like the stabilization would help with videos

- on the long end of things, I feel i may be able to borrow DSLRs from friends (who no longer use theirs) for the things my "personal camera" may not be able to handle. So i'm a little torn between getting one that allows me to hit my minimum (comfortably), get one that meets minimum AND a little more but likely less than SLR capability or would require more investment than I am comfortable with.

Generally speaking, it's better to invest your money in better glass whenever you can. A good lens will last forever, and you'll be able to use it on many different camera bodies over the years, even decades, of photography. You'll replace your camera bodies a lot more often, but every time you do you'll get more out of the lenses you already own.

I'm not going to give specific recommendations for gear, because ultimately only you can make those sorts of decisions that make the most sense for you and what you want to accomplish. The results you deem good enough are going to be very subjective to you.

It's also worth considering that some of the older, fairly-fast lenses are often quite cheap to get these days, either new or used, and unless you really need features like dual stabilization or weather sealing they still provide great value. Used cameras don't hold their value as well, but will still provide great photographs with a good lens. Newer cameras of course have better low light capability, but getting more light to the sensor to begin with by using a fast prime is often your best bet.

The fact is, any fairly recent camera in any format is going to be miles ahead in image quality compared to what the greatest professional photographers were using last century, just on the technical merits. Yet, we still admire those photographs today. The quality of your photographs depends a lot more on other factors, like how much thinking you're doing behind the camera, your timing, and even a bit of luck. With any camera or lens combination, you can capture a masterpiece.

Were I you, I would find one of each to borrow and see how it fits how you shoot. that's the most important thing, the only thing really.

Unless you are printing to large poster size or billboards you won't notice the difference between apsc or m43. Most companies filter down their sensors so many cameras have the same sensors as former high level models. Almost every review includes the phrase "same sensor as the xxx"

The difference in lenses is real though, MFT has so many systems beat(including sony apsc e-mount) in that regard. Which means not only in the new market but the second hand market are flush with nice lenses to pickup.

I had the 6000's predecessor and came to hate it and its horrible menus and Sony's charging for features that everyone gives away for free. Olympus' super control panel makes having one command dial not seem a handicap.

Fibinaci wrote:

Were I you, I would find one of each to borrow and see how it fits how you shoot. that's the most important thing, the only thing really.

I'd love to but I don't know anyone who uses them here. Sadly most of the people I know use fuji. Haven't been able to find anyone nearby using oly although in the groups I am a part of (especially the mirrorless) oly and panasonic seem to be favorites of active members. Those in either sony or fuji upgrade pretty often, it seems.

Unless you are printing to large poster size or billboards you won't notice the difference between apsc or m43. Most companies filter down their sensors so many cameras have the same sensors as former high level models. Almost every review includes the phrase "same sensor as the xxx"

although (correct me if i'm mistaken) don't bigger sensors generally provide better flexibility? or is that a matter of my finding a way to compensate via iso? I liked that my friend's fuji did quite well under lower light (but not entirely willing to spend the price invested in it) It's good to hear this though, very reassuring since I'm still thinking of staying with m43. That said though, any suggestions for meeting low-light needs (m43 vs apsc) or did i misunderstand technicalities there? (I'm still pretty new and inexperienced so I may  oversimplify)

The difference in lenses is real though, MFT has so many systems beat(including sony apsc e-mount) in that regard. Which means not only in the new market but the second hand market are flush with nice lenses to pickup.

I had the 6000's predecessor and came to hate it and its horrible menus and Sony's charging for features that everyone gives away for free. Olympus' super control panel makes having one command dial not seem a handicap.

Yes I heard about this recently. If given the choice, a lot of hands-on reviewers would prefer the oly user interface to sony's. (which I am also worried about re: investing in the a6000).

Mike:

I agree with the "good lenses first" approach. You can obtain excellent image quality out of the older bodies. The EP5 is an excellent camera, I still have mine. For indoors and low light, a 20mm f/1.7 Pany or 17mm f/1.8 Oly are very good, and the 25mm Pany and Oly lenses are good as well. While the A6000 will have better sensor performance, lens costs might be a problem given your desire to keep the budget down. The 6000 does have a built in EVF, but that won't be as important for lower light work than if most of your shots were in bright sun light.

I'm a fan of Sonys as well as m4/3rds; I use an A6300 for sports and m4/3rds for most everything else. I think the 6000 is at a bargain price right now, but the kit lens isn't great. If you go with the 6000, you could opt for the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 for a small, low light budget alternative to compliment the kit lens and it would be pretty close to the output you'd get from the EP5 with one of the f/1.7 or f/1.8 primes. Keep in mind that the Sony doesn't have IBIS like the EP5, but if your subjects are people who are moving around, you don't really need to be able to shoot at super slow shutter speeds anyway.

Both are excellent cameras, but I think the right choice is to figure out the lenses you'd need and look at overall costs comparing the two systems.

As to the OMD EM10, I'm not knowledgeable enough on it to comment.

As to your GF2, have you adjusted the white balance setting to alter the colors a bit? I recall some found that worked well on the GF2, and that is what I did to get better results when I had a GF1. Not perfect, by any means, but I got the GF1 adjusted to where I was happy with skin tones.

Good luck.

Mike Loanzon wrote:

-Then I considered the OMD-EM10 (being sold for roughly $500 just the body and around $600 for the kit). Second hand can drop up to around $400 with 65-100$ for a kit lens. Leaving me with 60 to maybe $100 which I can invest in a 20 or 25mm for when things go on sale in the states.

I would just do this, if you mean the original E-M10 (Mark I), or even the E-M5 (Mark 1). Both are a big upgrade over the little GF-2. It seems like maybe prices are a bit higher where you live, but typically these are under $300 around here used. You get a viewfinder, flip-screen, 16mp and image stabilization with either, how can you beat that?

Greg

Hi

I would go for the EM10 because of the VF and allow the stabilization to make up for the slow kit lens as much as possible.

If you want a fast prime for low light, I strongly suggest not getting a 25mm lens. A 20 or 17 will be more flexible indoors. If mostly individual portraits then the Pana 20mm is king, and will also do small groups. If you lean more towards larger group photos then the Oly 17mm is great as is the Pana 15mm.

The most flexible general lens for me is the Oly 17mm f1.8, although if I am going to a restaurant then I pretty much only ever take the 20mm.

People say the best investments are lenses, but I think that holds true once you have a decent body to fit them on. The EM10 is capable of great results with the kit lens. You just have to be more careful and know what you are doing a bit more. By that I mean understanding the basics about subject distance and backgrounds. A kit lens is less forgiving than a fast prime used wide open in many circumstances.

mrxak wrote:

Generally speaking, it's better to invest your money in better glass whenever you can. A good lens will last forever, and you'll be able to use it on many different camera bodies over the years, even decades, of photography. You'll replace your camera bodies a lot more often, but every time you do you'll get more out of the lenses you already own.

Thanks for this, it makes sense. Although I posted earlier about a similar topic (i think it was the a6000 vs. lumix gx85) and someone mentioned that a6000 series lenses can be adapted to more bodies in the future (bigger sensors, even) while the m43 will be limited to... m43? is this true?

The fact is, any fairly recent camera in any format is going to be miles ahead in image quality compared to what the greatest professional photographers were using last century, just on the technical merits. Yet, we still admire those photographs today. The quality of your photographs depends a lot more on other factors, like how much thinking you're doing behind the camera, your timing, and even a bit of luck. With any camera or lens combination, you can capture a masterpiece.

Quick question about that, since it's been bothering me. If considering just the functions of the camera, OMD EM-10 and the EP-5 aren't all that different. sensor size, stabilization (5-axis) same lens systems and all. (although focus points may be a consideration... 85 vs 35 or so). What other "reasonable" considerations are there to upgrade?

Also the latter statement is exactly why I reconsidered getting the cheaper ep-5 haha along with this blog post http://erickimphotography.com/blog/2017/05/01/6-lessons-ive-learned-after-shooting-all-the-expensive-cameras/ basically explaining that when it comes right down to it what matters is you have opportunities to shoot and that you generally like your photos (instead of getting caught up n thinking about gear and functions). The EP-5 meets my minimum requirements although (as mentioned by the other respondent) maybe it's a matter of seeing whether it works well enough to capture the photos i want (expression mostly) which may be the OMD and a6000's advantage... and yet I don't know if i'll "need" to take "all possible photos at all times i want them" because it'd be nice to miss some and get some too.

Cameras aren't investments, lenses are.

If you enjoy the GF2, stick with Panasonic and take a look at the GX80/85 with the 12-32mm kit lens.

inlawbiker wrote:

Mike Loanzon wrote:

-Then I considered the OMD-EM10 (being sold for roughly $500 just the body and around $600 for the kit). Second hand can drop up to around $400 with 65-100$ for a kit lens. Leaving me with 60 to maybe $100 which I can invest in a 20 or 25mm for when things go on sale in the states.

I would just do this, if you mean the original E-M10 (Mark I), or even the E-M5 (Mark 1). Both are a big upgrade over the little GF-2. It seems like maybe prices are a bit higher where you live, but typically these are under $300 around here used. You get a viewfinder, flip-screen, 16mp and image stabilization with either, how can you beat that?

Greg

A brand new omd-em10 MKII is around 500$. most of the ones below that, (much older or used ) I tend to doubt or avoid mainly because of the fear that it could break down without any solution. I do love it though. Next to the GX85 it's the best selling/most loved M43 in all of the groups i'm in. my only hesitation with investing that much more money in the system is that I'm worried I can't have it repaired if I end up with some issues along the way (Especially early along the way. Olympus does not have any authorized repair centers in the philippines, sadly. which led me to hope for the gx85 since panasonic has presence... but it's much more expensive).

Will see if my budget allows it in a few months but definitely considering it.

G Rash wrote:

Mike:

I agree with the "good lenses first" approach. You can obtain excellent image quality out of the older bodies. The EP5 is an excellent camera, I still have mine. For indoors and low light, a 20mm f/1.7 Pany or 17mm f/1.8 Oly are very good, and the 25mm Pany and Oly lenses are good as well. While the A6000 will have better sensor performance, lens costs might be a problem given your desire to keep the budget down. The 6000 does have a built in EVF, but that won't be as important for lower light work than if most of your shots were in bright sun light.

I'm a fan of Sonys as well as m4/3rds; I use an A6300 for sports and m4/3rds for most everything else. I think the 6000 is at a bargain price right now, but the kit lens isn't great. If you go with the 6000, you could opt for the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 for a small, low light budget alternative to compliment the kit lens and it would be pretty close to the output you'd get from the EP5 with one of the f/1.7 or f/1.8 primes. Keep in mind that the Sony doesn't have IBIS like the EP5, but if your subjects are people who are moving around, you don't really need to be able to shoot at super slow shutter speeds anyway.

Both are excellent cameras, but I think the right choice is to figure out the lenses you'd need and look at overall costs comparing the two systems.

As to the OMD EM10, I'm not knowledgeable enough on it to comment.

As to your GF2, have you adjusted the white balance setting to alter the colors a bit? I recall some found that worked well on the GF2, and that is what I did to get better results when I had a GF1. Not perfect, by any means, but I got the GF1 adjusted to where I was happy with skin tones.

Good luck.

Thanks for this! Great to hear both sides. And yes, ibis is something to  consider loosely since people have mentioned it doesn't do much if the subjects are moving.

For your comment on the GF1, does pre-setting or adjusting balance before taking the photos differ from post-processing the white balance? (obviously just getting started haha but thank you for the help)

rashid7 wrote:

Short answer: new bodies are more fun, but lenses are the best investment.

Keep in mind that the best attribute of EP5 is IBIS, which doesn't do much good with people pix, where u need to keep the shutter speed higher. Indoors, an EVF is optional.

If u were in the US, I would suggest u take advantage of the special on GX85; $695 plus free 45-150 lens, and $100 voucher which u should use to buy the $150 25f1.7

good luck

PS: A6000 is excellent, but other than being compact, the kit lens is weak

Thanks for your reply!

Unfortunately, I'm nowhere near the states (nor will i be near it any time soon). My first choice was the GX85 actually, I'd set it as my goal when I started working. However I realized later on how much more I'd be spending (with the lenses ++), and realized further that I should probably be investing in financial tools as early as I can as well (financial security here is pretty tough). Although I did hear that the OLY OMD autofocus is particularly remarkable.

WIth any luck I might just stick with my back-up plan of holding out with the GF-2 until I can afford the GX85 but i'll take quite a while.

... or the EM10 mkII if you can find a deal on it. I have the EM10 and I think it's a great camera.... it's my second m43 camera after a GH2 that I had (which was also excellent). The Sony has a bigger sensor, which is going to provide a little bit better image quality ultimately, but in real use probably not enough that you'd notice the difference. I like the design of Oly and Panasonic cameras much better and the lens section is much better as well. The EM10 has something known as in body stabilization which means that you can shoot with lower shutter speeds without shaking the camera and is very useful. The OM10 and the mkII version are some of the best values in cameras, I think... in that they have the best controls/most features of just about anything in that price range. I wound't bother with a camera that doesn't have a viewfinder and if you're willing to go used you can get the aforementioned cameras cheap enough to where it might not seem so worth it to go even cheaper and get on of the Pen model cameras that lacks the VF...

If you go used, you might even have some budget left to get another lens...

Aaron801 wrote:

... or the EM10 mkII if you can find a deal on it. I have the EM10 and I think it's a great camera.... it's my second m43 camera after a GH2 that I had (which was also excellent). The Sony has a bigger sensor, which is going to provide a little bit better image quality ultimately, but in real use probably not enough that you'd notice the difference. I like the design of Oly and Panasonic cameras much better and the lens section is much better as well. The EM10 has something known as in body stabilization which means that you can shoot with lower shutter speeds without shaking the camera and is very useful. The OM10 and the mkII version are some of the best values in cameras, I think... in that they have the best controls/most features of just about anything in that price range. I wound't bother with a camera that doesn't have a viewfinder and if you're willing to go used you can get the aforementioned cameras cheap enough to where it might not seem so worth it to go even cheaper and get on of the Pen model cameras that lacks the VF...

If you go used, you might even have some budget left to get another lens...

Agree - maybe I would add into consideration GX80/5.

Thanks for this! My apologies, i forgot to mention that the Pen-EP5 being sold at $300+ comes with a viewfinder, making it a very compelling argument/consideration.

The OMD really has one of the best reviews I've found. Most photography vlogs i've seen, as far as "secondary... more portable cameras" are concerned (in place of their SLRs or bigger-bodied set-ups) OMDs are their Go-to.

still my hesitation investing that much knowing there isn't much support here, as well as some reports of "ok but not very sturdy" camera parts? like the viewfinder foam falls off or the buttons are not exactly the best. worried small things like that (although easily remedied in repair shops) might be problematic here.

Thanks for this!

Online, the GX85 is easily 100-$150 more expensive than the a6000. I've yet to see what they're like in the physical stores (They usually give discounts over the counter if they know you're paying cash. At least the stores in the philippines are known for it haha)

Also, the Pen-ep5 kit being sold (for 300+) comes with a viewfinder in the kit! thus my dilemma. haha thanks for your advice, good to know.

larsbc wrote:

My favourite candid/street camera is my Panasonic GX7. Besides its single axis flip-out screen, its flip-up viewfinder is also great for unobtrusive shooting. This camera should be available on the used market for a rather reasonable price.

I considered this! I can't seem to find people selling the GX7 though. Has it been discontinued or something? Maybe i could explore more. Or maybe it's simply because the people who bought it are happy with the system (such as yourself)

That uses the older 12mp sensor. It wasn't until I got my GX7 that I felt that I finally had a micro four thirds camera that performed better at high ISOs than my Nikon D300 (a camera which was the first to satisfy the majority of my shooting scenario requirements). I shoot my GX7 in raw mode up to ISO3200 which, when combined with a fast lens, can cover a lot of poor light and indoor shooting situations.

That is a relief. i'm curious though, my friends who use fuji create some pretty impressive detail in their photos which I Find a little soft on the m43 samples i've seen. Even the lower-end fujis seem to provide this, like the X-a2 which ... seems to be marketed as "better than your smart phone selfie camera" type. How would you describe m43's ability for image detail in that regard? From what i've seen some m43s can* be a little softer than the aps-c sensors- again, this may just be a lack of understanding on my part which is why I would like the opinion of someone who seems well versed in the m43 system.

Is it as good as a full frame sensor? No, of course not. But it will cover a lot of situations. The 20/1.7 is a good starting point because you can find them used, they're reasonably priced, and the focal range is ok for indoor shooting. If you can afford a bit more, I'd look at the Olympus 17/1.8, for its wider field of view. While I have a 25/1.4 that I like, I find it too narrow for indoor shooting.

Another great thing about the m43 system here in the philippines is that there are a lot of people moving their gear around. Bodys and lenses alike. Although It worries me that I'm missing something. Maybe there's a reason why people aren't exactly "happy" with their m43 system (secretly, they don't always explain what system they're "upgrading" to.) Although most sony a6000 sellers have either moved up to the a6300 or fuji.. hmm.

As for the rest of your comments, thank you! great insight esp for street photography. Would love to see your samples (or shots) if you're up for sharing! I think I learn a lot from observing haha thanks again!