Giving up too much swapping m43 kit for Z50 kit?

[randolin]

With the G81(85) these lenses: Oly 12-40/2.8 and 75/1.8, Lumix G 7-14/4.0, 35-100/2.8 (and internally focussing which I do like). I will keep for the time being the tiny GM5+20/1.7 (always along camera) and the Oly macro 60/2.8 (no Nikon Z equivalent at this time).

I want to keep things light (and simple?) consolidating on Nikon side as I have D7500+ Sigma 10-20 and 100-400 which get used for birding and the wide angle in archaeological and historical building context. Started out in photography 60 years ago, largely documentary experience plus travel, never made it my profession, not artistic aspiration, more record keeping.

Why do I want to drop the fairly good m43 set and get from an optical point of view possibly inferior glass? ...because I prefer one kind of menu logic AND I'm getting older still after I passed the 3/4 of a century mark.

Holding me back just as much appreciated as pushing me in Need some thoughts other than my own circles. TNX

 

[softmarmotte]

With the G81(85) these lenses: Oly 12-40/2.8 and 75/1.8, Lumix G 7-14/4.0, 35-100/2.8 (and internally focussing which I do like). I will keep for the time being the tiny GM5+20/1.7 (always along camera) and the Oly macro 60/2.8 (no Nikon Z equivalent at this time).

I want to keep things light (and simple?) consolidating on Nikon side as I have D7500+ Sigma 10-20 and 100-400 which get used for birding and the wide angle in archaeological and historical building context. Started out in photography 60 years ago, largely documentary experience plus travel, never made it my profession, not artistic aspiration, more record keeping.

Why do I want to drop the fairly good m43 set and get from an optical point of view possibly inferior glass? ...because I prefer one kind of menu logic AND I'm getting older still after I passed the 3/4 of a century mark.

Holding me back just as much appreciated as pushing me in Need some thoughts other than my own circles. TNX

Personally I would do the reverse and keep the m43. Lightness is something not to be sniffed at for the older gentleman, particularly when you are using 400mm (equivalent) lenses...

Once you have set up the menus as you want them, I am not sure you dive into menus that much IMHO

 

[bmoag]

I too would keep the m43. There is very little, particularly with good raw processing, that is better in an APS sensor.

If you want the bump in noise reduction from a larger sensor it would make more sense to go full frame. For my distinctly amateur purposes on major trips I take a full frame (now a Z) and m43. Although I later enjoy the quality of the FF images when one is out in remote foreign boonies the heftitude advantage of m43 can make one wonder why the FF is really “needed.”

 

[randolin]

and TNX

With the G81(85) these lenses: Oly 12-40/2.8 and 75/1.8, Lumix G 7-14/4.0, 35-100/2.8 (and internally focussing which I do like). I will keep for the time being the tiny GM5+20/1.7 (always along camera) and the Oly macro 60/2.8 (no Nikon Z equivalent at this time).

I want to keep things light […]

Personally I would do the reverse and keep the m43. Lightness is something not to be sniffed at for the older gentleman, particularly when you are using 400mm (equivalent) lenses...

Once you have set up the menus as you want them, I am not sure you dive into menus that much IMHO

Yeah, the weight question, but the Z50 gear is light (crop factor 1.5). Also, the PL100-400 on E-M1 or G81 weighed about 200g less than D7500 with Sigma 100-400, they both clock in at or under 1.5kg (unlike a Nikkor 200-500). Reason I went Nikon was improved low light behavior. The PL100-400 would get things nicely close and adequately sharp but when I needed 1/2500 (freeze wing movement) I ended up at ISO6400 (in low winter light) and I couldn't get the feather detail I wanted (using DxO PL2, PRIME NR).

But I will miss the Oly 75/1.8 amd I think the Lumix 7-14 is easily as good as the Sigma 10-20). Hence the mulling it over.

 

[randolin]

I too would keep the m43. There is very little, particularly with good raw processing, that is better in an APS sensor.

As detailed to poster in previous reply, the E-M1 or G85 + PL100-400 in low winter light had noise issues the D7500+Sigma 100-400 did not have and as to weight, I carried 200g more.

If you want the bump in noise reduction from a larger sensor it would make more sense to go full frame. For my distinctly amateur purposes on major trips I take a full frame (now a Z) and m43. Although I later enjoy the quality of the FF images when one is out in remote foreign boonies the heftitude advantage of m43 can make one wonder why the FF is really “needed.”

Given that some thought and said to myself, old man, do keep it as light as possible and the crop sensor harvest ain't have bad. It's just the winter low light (Kootenay/BC, Canada) that got a shift going but not all the way to FF. Compromises.

Now the question is optical quality (Z50 kit is light, compares easily to my m43 combos), just how good are the Z DXs 16-50, 50-250? One thing against them ...quite slow.

 

[randolin]

So, I'm gonna keep m43 gear a while longer. The tiny GM5 I wouldn't trade anyway.

Here are some numbers wrt weights:

Cameras

Nikon D7500 - 720 g (1.59 lb / 25.40 oz)

Nikon Z50 - 450 g (0.99 lb / 15.87 oz)

Panasonic G85 - 505 g (1.11 lb / 17.81 oz)

Olympus E-M5 III - 414 g (0.91 lb / 14.60 oz)

Panasonic GX-9 - 407 g (0.90 lb / 14.36 oz)

Panasonic GM5 - 211 g (0.47 lb / 7.44 oz)

Long range zooms
(and FF approx. equiv.)

Panasonic-Leica - 100-400 985 g (2.17 lb)

Nikon 200-500 - 2300 g (5.07 lb)

Sigma 100-400 - 1160 g (2.56 lb)

Nikon kit lens Z 50-250 - 405 g (0.89 lb)

The APS-C combo Z50+Z50-250 weighs 855g, approx. equiv. 375.

The capable D7500+Sigma 100-400 weighs 1880 g, approx. equiv. 600.

G85 + PL100-400 weighs 1400 g, approx. equiv. 800.

I wasn't happy with the PL 100-400 zoom motion (stiff, jerky; also it turned out a dust pump.) The Nikon gear is fine for birding and the 1800g vs 1400g (G85+PL) is bearable. The Panasonics admittedly perform well enough in what I'm interested in, also for occasional video. However, once the Nikon DX mirrorless line has been tried, tested, and grown larger, I might still go for gear consolidation wrt brand, and that'd be Nikon because of low light and focussing issues with the items in my m43 bag.

 

[Astrotripper]

So, I'm gonna keep m43 gear a while longer. The tiny GM5 I wouldn't trade anyway.

Here are some numbers wrt weights:

Cameras

Nikon D7500 - 720 g (1.59 lb / 25.40 oz)

Nikon Z50 - 450 g (0.99 lb / 15.87 oz)

Panasonic G85 - 505 g (1.11 lb / 17.81 oz)

All of the above have one in common. Ergonomics suitable for use with heavier and longer lenses.

Olympus E-M5 III - 414 g (0.91 lb / 14.60 oz)

Note that it lacks the deep grip of the options above. And while it is a marked improvement over previous E-M5 models, that would not be my choice to use with a lens like 100-400. (I used 100-400 on my E-M1 II and I got to handle E-M5 III with various lenses).

Panasonic GX-9 - 407 g (0.90 lb / 14.36 oz)

Even worse than the above.

Panasonic GM5 - 211 g (0.47 lb / 7.44 oz)

Long range zooms
(and FF approx. equiv.)

Panasonic-Leica - 100-400 985 g (2.17 lb)

Nikon 200-500 - 2300 g (5.07 lb)

Sigma 100-400 - 1160 g (2.56 lb)

Nikon kit lens Z 50-250 - 405 g (0.89 lb)

The APS-C combo Z50+Z50-250 weighs 855g, approx. equiv. 375.

If that option is in the running and you are willing to sacrifice the long end, then there's always PanaLeica 50-200/2.8-4. It's reportedly a very good performer and there's always an option of x1.4 and x2 teleconverter in case you need to go longer. That lens is just 655 grams.

And there's also Panasonic 100-300/4-5.6 II at 520 grams. But it is a noticeable downgrade in image quality vs 100-400.

The capable D7500+Sigma 100-400 weighs 1880 g, approx. equiv. 600.

G85 + PL100-400 weighs 1400 g, approx. equiv. 800.

I wasn't happy with the PL 100-400 zoom motion (stiff, jerky; also it turned out a dust pump.)

Stiff zoom is a common complaint about this lens. My rental also suffered from this affliction. Very annoying.

The Nikon gear is fine for birding and the 1800g vs 1400g (G85+PL) is bearable. The Panasonics admittedly perform well enough in what I'm interested in, also for occasional video. However, once the Nikon DX mirrorless line has been tried, tested, and grown larger...

Not going to happen. It's going to be the same as with Nikon's DSLRs. You'll get a bunch of consumer grade convenience zooms and that's it. You will have to use FX lenses if you want more than that. For now, it remains to be seen how good those zooms will be.

, I might still go for gear consolidation wrt brand, and that'd be Nikon because of low light and focussing issues with the items in my m43 bag.

Unfortunately, going into high ISO territory and trying to stay compact is a loosing battle. No matter how you slice and dice it, you will have to carry a heavier kit (assuming keeping the same reach). Maybe one day Nikon will be able to make PF zooms, that might be a game changer. Until then... it's about choosing a compromise.

 

[randolin]

Thanks a lot for your input! really helps me sort thru Options (things I have and want to complete as well as things to 'recycle').

So, I'm gonna keep m43 gear a while longer. The tiny GM5 I wouldn't trade anyway.

Here are some numbers wrt weights:

Cameras

Nikon D7500 - 720 g (1.59 lb / 25.40 oz)

Nikon Z50 - 450 g (0.99 lb / 15.87 oz)

Panasonic G85 - 505 g (1.11 lb / 17.81 oz)

All of the above have one in common. Ergonomics suitable for use with heavier and longer lenses.

Olympus E-M5 III - 414 g (0.91 lb / 14.60 oz)

Note that it lacks the deep grip of the options above. And while it is a marked improvement over previous E-M5 models, that would not be my choice to use with a lens like 100-400. (I used 100-400 on my E-M1 II and I got to handle E-M5 III with various lenses).

Noted!

Panasonic GX-9 - 407 g (0.90 lb / 14.36 oz)

Even worse than the above.

Panasonic GM5 - 211 g (0.47 lb / 7.44 oz)

Long range zooms
(and FF approx. equiv.)

Panasonic-Leica - 100-400 985 g (2.17 lb)

Nikon 200-500 - 2300 g (5.07 lb)

Sigma 100-400 - 1160 g (2.56 lb)

Nikon kit lens Z 50-250 - 405 g (0.89 lb)

The APS-C combo Z50+Z50-250 weighs 855g, approx. equiv. 375.

If that option is in the running and you are willing to sacrifice the long end, then there's always PanaLeica 50-200/2.8-4. It's reportedly a very good performer and there's always an option of x1.4 and x2 teleconverter in case you need to go longer. That lens is just 655 grams.

Interesting!

And there's also Panasonic 100-300/4-5.6 II at 520 grams. But it is a noticeable downgrade in image quality vs 100-400.

The capable D7500+Sigma 100-400 weighs 1880 g, approx. equiv. 600.

G85 + PL100-400 weighs 1400 g, approx. equiv. 800.

I wasn't happy with the PL 100-400 zoom motion (stiff, jerky; also it turned out a dust pump.)

Stiff zoom is a common complaint about this lens. My rental also suffered from this affliction. Very annoying.

Yeah, and more over, when I traded it for D7500, dealer noted: very dusty. So, weather sealing is one thing but it won't keep out very, very fine suspended particular matter.

The Nikon gear is fine for birding and the 1800g vs 1400g (G85+PL) is bearable. The Panasonics admittedly perform well enough in what I'm interested in, also for occasional video. However, once the Nikon DX mirrorless line has been tried, tested, and grown larger...

Not going to happen.

Oh!?

It's going to be the same as with Nikon's DSLRs.

You'll get a bunch of consumer grade convenience zooms and that's it.

That is the DX situation. Lamented for long, e.g. Thom Hogan, but, I guess, FF shows better on Nikon's income column.

You will have to use FX lenses if you want more than that.

Thought about it time and again, esp. when FX D750 was/is to be had for a modest price. But, as I mentioned initially, getting older here (I'm a pre-boomer and the heavy lifting of birders with FF and $$$-lenses (PF 300 is about the only one I'd dare to think of), then I know ...next life.

For now, it remains to be seen how good those zooms will be.

, I might still go for gear consolidation wrt brand, and that'd be Nikon because of low light and focussing issues with the items in my m43 bag.

Unfortunately, going into high ISO territory and trying to stay compact is a loosing battle.

Lesser losses with APS-C than m43, ruefully added.

No matter how you slice and dice it, you will have to carry a heavier kit (assuming keeping the same reach). Maybe one day Nikon will be able to make PF zooms, that might be a game changer. Until then... it's about choosing a compromise.

Yes, the PF line.

I'll go over my options tree yet once more. And TNX again.