Lenses making me consider switching back to 4/3 system

[Aholt]

[...]

Well, I guess since I am asking questions, I will ask just one more. Are there any good kindle books on the EM1 Mark 3?

Gary

Yes, this one. I have it both for the Mark II, and bought it for the Mark III: https://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Ol...ympus+om-d+em-1+mark+iii+books,aps,196&sr=8-1

Anders

 

[gary stepic]

I totally understand your point, I have given the factors you mentioned a lot of thought. Approaching 74 what I want to shoot has changed from what I have photographed in the past. What I care most about now is having fun shooting.

Two of the most liberating trips I have been on were a trip to New Orleans where I used the 1" sensor Sony RX10 and a Canadian Rockies tour where I used a G9 and 12-100 lens. I remember carrying 40 pounds of gear on vacations and trips because I wanted to be prepared to shoot anything and have the best quality. Sometimes too much time was spent on worrying about my photography and not enough time just enjoying the moment.

The only prints I want are for my small home, and the prints usually hang on the wall for a long time so I am not constantly replacing them. The vast majority of what I shoot is meant to share over the internet. The photos I take for sharing are usually in good light and outdoors. I think today's software can do a lot to help offset some of the weaknesses of MFT sensors. I might have to spend a little more time fixing some photos with the tradeoff being much quicker to work on smaller files.

Lastly, and this reason may be unfounded, I feel a lot more comfortable not having to carry very expensive gear. Obviously, size and weight of MFT is a factor, but for some reason I worry a little less taking a kit that cost half as much, or less.

Gary

 

[Skeeterbytes]

Lastly, and this reason may be unfounded, I feel a lot more comfortable not having to carry very expensive gear. Obviously, size and weight of MFT is a factor, but for some reason I worry a little less taking a kit that cost half as much, or less.

You're not wrong. I priced a camera for camera, lens for lens 2-camera sports kit, if I were to transition from Oly to Sony. (After seeing some exceptional shots from another sideline dad taken with an A9 and 400/2.8.) I was quickly at $25k before extras. Next lifestyle, perhaps.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[Phranc]

Greta thread!

 

[kolyy]

I totally understand your point, I have given the factors you mentioned a lot of thought. Approaching 74 what I want to shoot has changed from what I have photographed in the past. What I care most about now is having fun shooting.

Thank you for your reply. What I don't understand is where the fun part in your thinking comes from. I don't see how could the lenses you name make shooting somehow more fun compared to what you have.

Two of the most liberating trips I have been on were a trip to New Orleans where I used the 1" sensor Sony RX10 and a Canadian Rockies tour where I used a G9 and 12-100 lens. I remember carrying 40 pounds of gear on vacations and trips because I wanted to be prepared to shoot anything and have the best quality. Sometimes too much time was spent on worrying about my photography and not enough time just enjoying the moment.

I can fully understand this, my thinking is very similar. However, you can take your current camera with a single similar lens on a trip just as easily. How is the G9+12-100 any more fun than the A7RIV with the 24-105 or the Tamron 28-200mm? If anything, I would much rather have an F4 FF lens than F4 on MFT. Been there, done that. F4 on MFT is not fun, it's frustration in dealing with more difficult lighting conditions. Is it doable? Sometimes yes, but I always carried a prime or two for such occasions. On FF I don't need to do that, a single zoom lens can do it. That's the part which allows me to enjoy the moment and not worry about my photography. And of course, this is also true for the much higher headroom for DR.

The only prints I want are for my small home, and the prints usually hang on the wall for a long time so I am not constantly replacing them. The vast majority of what I shoot is meant to share over the internet. The photos I take for sharing are usually in good light and outdoors. I think today's software can do a lot to help offset some of the weaknesses of MFT sensors. I might have to spend a little more time fixing some photos with the tradeoff being much quicker to work on smaller files.

Ok, that might be good arguments for someone buying new gear on a budget. In such a case a cheaper MFT or APS-C setup might suffice. But you already own the better gear, why switch to the less capable one, which essentially duplicates what you have? And not even that cheaply.

Lastly, and this reason may be unfounded, I feel a lot more comfortable not having to carry very expensive gear. Obviously, size and weight of MFT is a factor, but for some reason I worry a little less taking a kit that cost half as much, or less.

Gary

I could understand that, but you seem to have choosen quite expensive high-end MFT gear. Won't you surely loose money with the switch? The only more expensive part in the FF system is your camera, comparable FF lenses cost the same or are even cheaper. In comparison, something like an A6400 with the 18-135mm kit lens has essentially the same capability as the G9+12-100, but costs around $1000.

 

[Phranc]

Oops. Great thread lol.

 

[gary stepic]

The G9/12-60 kit costs $1,700 new while the Sony a7r4/24-105 costs $4,900, in my view that is a substantial difference. The 7-14 is less than half the price as the 12-24 and half the size. There is even a substantial difference between the Pany 100-300 compared to the 75-350 Sony, which is an APS-C lens.

Fun factor is hard to describe. I think for me it means being able to operate the camera without having to read instructions. If someone uses a camera day in and day out then using a bunch of custom buttons is no problem. If it is many months between camera uses then it can make using the camera more difficult. I hated the Olympus EM5 for that reason.

Please don't misinterpret thinking I do not like my Sony gear. I think the a7r4 has been one of the very best cameras I have ever owned, and I have owned a ton of cameras. Carrying expensive equipment on a long trip does concern me quite a bit. As I said it probably is an unfounded fear, especially when traveling in Europe. Slovenia and Croatia, from what I have read, are very safe countries. I mentioned I like to use two bodies, if I used the a7r4 I was thinking of picking up an used a7r3 or maybe a73 for a second body. This old guy would be walking around with over $8,000 of gear hanging on my shoulder. Maybe it is silly to make a mental difference between carrying a MFT system worth a little over $3,000 ($4,500 if I bought the EM1.3 as another body) compared to over $8,000, but none the less it is a factor for me.

And I will state again that for me the advantages of full frame will not be very noticeable, if at all, for what I will be shooting. The weight and more peace of mind will be.

Gary

 

[evetsf]

I am curious if the EM1 iii allows for HDR shooting. I am talking about where you can set the camera up to take three continuous shots using the self timer at a stop or more apart. I remember having one camera, cannot remember if it was G9 or EM 5 that could not do this. Also curious if there is a panorama mode.

Don't know about the Oly, but the G9 certainly can. Set up your exposure bracketing parameters, turn the drive mode tab to self-timer & press the shutter.

Some older Panasonic bodies could not, as they had exposure bracketing as one of the options on the drive mode dial. To bracket with a "self timer" required a wired remote.

 

[Henry Richardson]

Carrying expensive equipment on a long trip does concern me quite a bit. As I said it probably is an unfounded fear, especially when traveling in Europe. Slovenia and Croatia, from what I have read, are very safe countries.

Gary, this article about travel and photography may be interesting:

Ramblings about Travel and Photography

Ramblings about Travel and Photography

Ramblings about Travel and Photography

www.bakubo.com

 

[kolyy]

The G9/12-60 kit costs $1,700 new while the Sony a7r4/24-105 costs $4,900, in my view that is a substantial difference. The 7-14 is less than half the price as the 12-24 and half the size. There is even a substantial difference between the Pany 100-300 compared to the 75-350 Sony, which is an APS-C lens.

I thought you were interested in the Olympus 8-25mm/4 and 12-100mm/4 lenses? As for the very old Panasonic 7-14mm/4, I don't think it is appropriate to compare it with the Sony 12-24mm/4 at all. I'd say that the closest counterpart to it on E-mount with regard to size and quality is the Sony 10-18mm/4, which is actually a bit smaller. But even that has been made largely irrelevant by the new Tamron 11-20mm/2.8, a fantastic little APS-C lens. If you want a FF lens, then the Tamron 17-28mm/2.8 is not much larger, neither more expensive than the 7-14mm/4, while being vastly more capable. Honestly, the outdated Panasonic 7-14mm/4 is a good example of the poor value of many wide angle MFT lenses.

Fun factor is hard to describe. I think for me it means being able to operate the camera without having to read instructions. If someone uses a camera day in and day out then using a bunch of custom buttons is no problem. If it is many months between camera uses then it can make using the camera more difficult. I hated the Olympus EM5 for that reason.

I can fully understand if you choose a camera based on how well it suits you ergonomically or operationally. But your original post was about lenses drawing you back to MFT, that was what I was reacting to.

Please don't misinterpret thinking I do not like my Sony gear. I think the a7r4 has been one of the very best cameras I have ever owned, and I have owned a ton of cameras. Carrying expensive equipment on a long trip does concern me quite a bit. As I said it probably is an unfounded fear, especially when traveling in Europe. Slovenia and Croatia, from what I have read, are very safe countries. I mentioned I like to use two bodies, if I used the a7r4 I was thinking of picking up an used a7r3 or maybe a73 for a second body. This old guy would be walking around with over $8,000 of gear hanging on my shoulder. Maybe it is silly to make a mental difference between carrying a MFT system worth a little over $3,000 ($4,500 if I bought the EM1.3 as another body) compared to over $8,000, but none the less it is a factor for me.

Ok.

And I will state again that for me the advantages of full frame will not be very noticeable, if at all, for what I will be shooting. The weight and more peace of mind will be.

Gary

My argument is that by this switch you would not save any weight over what you have, or over what you could have if you adjusted your lens collection (depending on exactly which lenses we are talking about), while ending up with a significantly less capable system. For me personally, the result would be more frustrating to use, not more fun (for comparison, the core of my current setup is Sony A7C with Sony 16-35mm/4 and Tamron 28-200mm/2.8-5.6).

If you are interested where I am coming from, here is my old thread from 2018, where I described my upgrade from MFT to FF:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4305360

It went pretty viral and filled the 150 post limit in just two days :-D I made a number of follow-up posts which clarified some of my experiences. In particular, here I demonstrated some of the limitations I encountered with my MFT system, using some mundane real-world pictures, and how FF solved those for me (DR and low-light):

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61451187

 

[gary stepic]

interesting thread and I do understand why you upgraded, makes sense. Yes, I was and still am interested in the 8-25 and 12-100. It is the range of those lenses along with the quality that appealed to me. Trust me, the lenses I want seem to change by the hour.

I had thought about going the Sony APS-C route. I have given all the lenses you mentioned a lot of thought and have owned them at one time or another. I just keep going back to my experience with the G9 and how much I enjoyed it. I probably will have another sleepless night rethinking my lenses. I know it has worked out kind of strange that I did not get any of the gear I mentioned in my first post.

I have always enjoyed shooting with a long tele zoom. Anything similar to the Pany 100-300 or Oly 75-300 are much larger and far more expensive in full frame. Even compared to the Sony 75-350 the MFT lenses are smaller and cheaper, that has always been a draw for me. The range of the 8-25 is rare and either I will eventually get it or I still may get it instead of the 7-14. I did love the 12-100. I chose the Pany 12-60 because the kit price was attractive with the G9. If I did not get the 100-300 then I probably would have gotten the 12-100.

The reason I went from MFT back to full frame is because of wanting that one large print in my living room. I admit I was drawn to the fact that APS-C lenses work well in crop mode. What started to happen is I started to get very uncomfortable thinking about taking so much expensive gear just for the very rare moment of getting a shot for my very large print. All the other reasons for keeping a7r4 don't mean much.

I will make a large print before I leave on my big Europe trip in June. If am happy with the quality, then I sell my a7r4. If I am not, I may get the Olympus EM1 3 and play with the HHHR mode. I will hang on to my a7r4 for a little while to use for sports (I use the 17-70 and 70-180 Tamrons in crop mode) and use my MFT for the majority of times when I just want to share photos on my website.

Gary

 

[gary stepic]

Henry,

I enjoyed the article, thanks. I have always loved traveling, seeing new places. I had a good marriage for 38 years with the best times being our vacations, hate to say this, but best vacations were the empty nest ones where my wife and I could enjoy each other. When my wife passed nearly five years ago my love of travel grew even more. At first it was to get recharged and forget about the pain, then it just became really fun traveling by myself. What made it fun was the people I met, which your stories reminded me of. This is a reason I want to travel lighter and focus more on the experiences and less on taking thousands of photos. I want to use my travel blog to share my experiences.

And I think you are on to something when saying the people photos can be more interesting than the landscape shots. I went on a little get a way to Hermosa beach. I shared a Facebook photo of me with four young ladies (I am 73) that saw me sitting by myself at a bar while listening to live music and they invited me to dance with them. I got far more likes and comments on that photo than any beach or scenic photos i posted.

I am really looking forward toward my 6 week trip to Europe starting June. My sister was going to travel with me but had to bail out. I am actually a little glad because i have found when I am by myself it is much easier to meet people, even at my age. I spent four years in Germany while serving in the Air Force during the early 70 years. I still cherish the memories I have of the friends I made from countries all over Europe and other parts of the world. Again thanks for sharing your blog, as I mentioned brought back some great memories.

Gary

 

[kolyy]

interesting thread and I do understand why you upgraded, makes sense. Yes, I was and still am interested in the 8-25 and 12-100. It is the range of those lenses along with the quality that appealed to me. Trust me, the lenses I want seem to change by the hour.

I had thought about going the Sony APS-C route. I have given all the lenses you mentioned a lot of thought and have owned them at one time or another. I just keep going back to my experience with the G9 and how much I enjoyed it. I probably will have another sleepless night rethinking my lenses. I know it has worked out kind of strange that I did not get any of the gear I mentioned in my first post.

I have just seen your post about placing the order. I hope it will work out for you. If you are comfortable with the G9 and enjoy using it, it might be the most important point after all. I have tested the G9 four years ago, but it was too bulky and conspicuous for me. I didn't even like the ergonomics too much (e.g. the Canon-esque front dial behind the shutter button and the placement of the joystick right next to the EVF). But a lot people seem to love the G9, so it might work for you as well. On the other hand, If I needed to chose from the current MFT lineups, I'd probably go with the Olympus E-M5 III, which you didn't like It suits me much more with its compact nature and classic design. I'd probably chose the 8-25mm/4 and either the 12-100mm/4 or 12-200mm lenses with it. But then I'd also need something brighter, which would bring me back to the same conundrum I escaped from ;-)

As for Sony APS-C, I'd simply go for A6600+18-135mm+Tamron 11-20mm/2.8. I could add the new Sigma 18-50mm/2.8 as well. That would downsize my current setup quite nicely, with not that much of a sacrifice. F2.8 on APS-C is just about good enough for me.

I have always enjoyed shooting with a long tele zoom. Anything similar to the Pany 100-300 or Oly 75-300 are much larger and far more expensive in full frame. Even compared to the Sony 75-350 the MFT lenses are smaller and cheaper, that has always been a draw for me. The range of the 8-25 is rare and either I will eventually get it or I still may get it instead of the 7-14. I did love the 12-100. I chose the Pany 12-60 because the kit price was attractive with the G9. If I did not get the 100-300 then I probably would have gotten the 12-100.

I don't really understand why you even consider the 7-14mm/4. It's a cheaply built lens from 2009 with no weather sealing and restricted range, which is not even that compact due to the bulbous front element. In comparison, the Olympus 8-25mm/4 is a brand new lens with very high build quality and weather sealing, much longer reach, similar size and not that much higher price. I'd go for the 8-25mm/4 100 times out of 100 attempts, with the Panasonic 8-18mm/2.8-4 being a second possible contender.

Yes, the price of the 12-60mm in the kit (Leica version, I guess), is much more reasonable than the stand-alone cost of the 12-100mm. So it's a great choice, if you can sacrifice the reach, its also significantly more compact. But I don't think it's correct to say it will still give you more reach than the Sony 24-105/4, as it is more appropriate to compare it in APS-C crop mode, which gives you 160mm equivalent.

The reason I went from MFT back to full frame is because of wanting that one large print in my living room. I admit I was drawn to the fact that APS-C lenses work well in crop mode. What started to happen is I started to get very uncomfortable thinking about taking so much expensive gear just for the very rare moment of getting a shot for my very large print. All the other reasons for keeping a7r4 don't mean much.

I can acknowledge that this factor did not even occur to me at the beginning. As for me, I am more uncomfortable traveling with a large and conspicuous camera, like the G9, than a more discrete setup, even if more expensive. But I can now appreciate your point of view as well.

I will make a large print before I leave on my big Europe trip in June. If am happy with the quality, then I sell my a7r4. If I am not, I may get the Olympus EM1 3 and play with the HHHR mode. I will hang on to my a7r4 for a little while to use for sports (I use the 17-70 and 70-180 Tamrons in crop mode) and use my MFT for the majority of times when I just want to share photos on my website.

Gary

 

[kolyy]

Henry,

I enjoyed the article, thanks. I have always loved traveling, seeing new places. I had a good marriage for 38 years with the best times being our vacations, hate to say this, but best vacations were the empty nest ones where my wife and I could enjoy each other. When my wife passed nearly five years ago my love of travel grew even more. At first it was to get recharged and forget about the pain, then it just became really fun traveling by myself. What made it fun was the people I met, which your stories reminded me of. This is a reason I want to travel lighter and focus more on the experiences and less on taking thousands of photos. I want to use my travel blog to share my experiences.

And I think you are on to something when saying the people photos can be more interesting than the landscape shots. I went on a little get a way to Hermosa beach. I shared a Facebook photo of me with four young ladies (I am 73) that saw me sitting by myself at a bar while listening to live music and they invited me to dance with them. I got far more likes and comments on that photo than any beach or scenic photos i posted.

I am really looking forward toward my 6 week trip to Europe starting June. My sister was going to travel with me but had to bail out. I am actually a little glad because i have found when I am by myself it is much easier to meet people, even at my age. I spent four years in Germany while serving in the Air Force during the early 70 years. I still cherish the memories I have of the friends I made from countries all over Europe and other parts of the world. Again thanks for sharing your blog, as I mentioned brought back some great memories.

Gary

That's quite moving, thank you very much for sharing your backstory.

 

[gary stepic]

I only ordered the G9 with 12-60 kit. I am rethinking the ultra wide choice leaning toward the 8-25 as I originally planned. What is making the choice tough is debating about using one camera or two. In the past I have always liked using two. If I used one camera the 8-25 is a lens I could keep on the camera. If I used two I would have the extra 2mm on the wide end with the 7-14 and the small lens would offset a little of the weight of the second camera.

I am now thinking of the 8-25 because I would really like to try using the one camera with three lenses - 8-25, 12-60, and 100-300. I probably will not miss losing the 2mm on the wide end. If I am unhappy with my experimental large print and add a second body, then I will probably try and find a used 7-14.

Gary

 

[Skeeterbytes]

[Stage whisper] it's only 1mm difference. Don't know the AoV difference offhand, but in practice 7 to 8mm is minor in most settings.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[EZGritz]

One of my friends switched from Nikon FF to the SONY 61MP. We shoot together. His Nikon DSLR kit was great. He shoots a lot of 70-200 with the SONY. His Nikon kit produced better images. I told him the SONY lens was old and does not have a good reputation. When we compared images with my EM1.2 and the 40-150PRO f/2.8 not only did the SONY kit produce less detail, he couldn't produce a sharp image. Now he has to buy the new SONY 70-200 and sell the old one. We do a lot of panning. IBIS is essential. He crops I don't have to. The SONY images look OK until you crop. If you don't need to crop you don't need 61MP, aren't using it. You are just processing gigantic files for no benefit unless you are printing barn doors. He bought the SONY kit to print barn doors - 5X8 feet on vinyl. He does not have an image he can print that size out of the SONY. The reason he bought it is because someone printed one for him from a Canon R5 that looks great. MAX MP doesn't help you unless you have IBIS and lenses that are equal to it.

We are both selling event photos. He expected images 3X better than I'm getting because he has 3X the pixels. So far I'm getting better photos than he is. From what I see, if I wanted more resolution I'd go for a Canon kit.

I haven't experienced HHHR, only HRM. However they do it, whatever goes on inside the camera doesn't matter to me. I only have to push the button. The images speak for themselves. They are great. Lots of detail, clean skies, great color fidelity. They are superior images. Not 3X. It doesn't work that way for whatever reason. Maybe the limit of my eyes, my monitor, my printer. You can't point at one link in a chain and think the entire chain is as strong as that link. It's as strong as the weakest. If you go to one of the sites where the photographer posts HHHR images you find they are stunning and missing nothing compared with FF. The detail is great, the color is great, the DR is great.

There are times when 20MP is too much and I reduce the resolution so I don't have to handle files that are so big. I don't want a 61MP camera. I'd rather dial in HiresMode when I need it. I prefer this solution. $6,000 for one body and one lens so I can have 61MP all the time is not appealing to me. I can/did buy a body and an assortment for that.

My friend is not happy. He has to lose money on the lens he bought. He's going to be into this system for more than $7,000 for one lens and one body. Meanwhile, I keep taking photos and nobody ever said to me - that must be a 20MP camera. Not enough resolution. In my travel's I use HRM to take landscapes of areas where the friends I visit live. I give the image to them to print and display on big, high res monitor. They love them. Nobody says - you should have a higher resolution sensor. They think the images are great.

I like filling the frame with the image. It's the best way to know if I have the subject framed the way I want it. I appreciate the extra range of the 40-150 PRO. 80-300 is useful. I can see what I'm photographing and I do a lot less cropping, none at all 85% of the time. I have 50% more range in a lens that weighs more than 1/2 lb less than the SONY 70-200. That's appreciated at the end of a long day.

You can do lots of lab tests and lots of calculating but it's the result that matters. I haven't seen my friend with the SONY in a while. I don't know if he has the new 70-200, probably he does if it's available. What did he have to spend for all that? $6,000 for one body and one lens + what he lost upgrading the lens. $7,000? And he carries around a lot more weight. Nothing about this makes me want a SONY kit.

 

[EZGritz]

For low light indoor sports, you get something for the money. For everything else not so much.

 

[gary stepic]

I was thinking in full frame language ;-).

 

[EZGritz]

For what it's worth, I find f/4 is a sweet spot in MFT. Most of the time I have plenty of light. I have the 17 f/1.2, 25 f/1.8, 45/1.8, 75 f/18 when I need something brighter. The f/1.2 PRO primes are not so small and light but the full set of f/1.8 primes, except for the 75, are tiny and light and you can buy all three for $1,000. There are Pany and OLY and Sigma make f/1.4 MFT primes too. OLY just announced their first one. I take the f/1.8 primes but almost never need them. Most of the time I shoot the 12-45 f/4 and 40-150 F/2.8. I take the TCs. That's like having two more lenses. Even with the 2XTC on it, I think the 40-150PRO is a better lens than the 100-300 is. Yes, it's bigger and heavier. A personal decision if the extra bulk and weight is worth it.

I still take the 14-150 because it's tiny for the range and it has the best range for driving around in a car when you don't know if you need the long or short end. 50% of the time without the range of this lens I have the wrong lens on the camera and no time to change lenses before the opportunity is lost.

I'm going to buy the 40-150 F/4 PRO when it's available. I expect it to be significantly smaller and lighter than the f/2.8 40-150. Most of the time I don't need f2.8. I stop the lens down anyway. The 12-45 f/4 PRO and 40-150 f/4 PRO and a few primes will be my travel kit.

I find that if I position myself correctly I can make excellent subject isolation at f/5.6. I use the 14-150 to photograph hood ornaments at car shows using the long end at f/5.6 with the lens close to the ornament. Works great. Sometimes the background is too out of focus. I like to be able to see what the background is. Ultrathin DOF is most of the time a domaine for artists. For travel, I find it's rarely needed. I like the deep DOF of the MFT system and still, I find myself stopping down to put everything I want in focus.