Shoot with both M4/3 and Full Frame, or even APS-C

[Lepewhi]

That's my thinking.

 

[HicHic]

Yes, I can of course see the depth of field difference. But, that's not the only thing that I see about photography. With street and travel photography, it's not as important as portrait photography, which I don't do. If I were into portrait photography, it'd be a no brainer.

 

[HicHic]

Since you already have M4/3 bodies, maybe look at fast lenses like the PL 10-25 f1.7 and PL 25-50 f1.7 for low light photography. Might be cheaper than investing in a whole new system. Maybe you can rent them first to see if they solve your low-light scenarios.

Those lenses are optically very good, but they're not built well. The barrel at the rear comes apart easily, it's only held on by a bit of glue.

 

[James Stirling]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby. . I used the 85mm F/1.8 F in dozens of weddings

Optical limits tests of Nikon Z 85mm F/.8 , Nikon F 85mm F/1.8 and their highest rated m43 lens the 45mm pro for comparison



50mm Z



The 35mm F/1.8 Z is considered the weakest and the extreme corners wide open do lag behind it improves quickly by stopping down even by F/2.2

I do like Panasonic's way of doing things and if I was not a long time Nikon user Panasonic L mount would be my next choice. I just found out in a recent post here that the S1r ii has an in camera focus stacking option

The good news these days is that it is very difficult to find a bad camera and a lot of what we choose is down to personal taste rather than achievable results .

--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

 

[Lepewhi]

I agree

 

[ahaslett]

Since you already have M4/3 bodies, maybe look at fast lenses like the PL 10-25 f1.7 and PL 25-50 f1.7 for low light photography. Might be cheaper than investing in a whole new system. Maybe you can rent them first to see if they solve your low-light scenarios.

Those lenses are optically very good, but they're not built well. The barrel at the rear comes apart easily, it's only held on by a bit of glue.

Bought used with dealer 6 month warranty, they would cost £2,500-3,000. You can buy a new S5D with kit lens currently for £899 and add a new Sigma 24-70/2.8 for £998 (discounted at LCE). All depends what FL range and light gathering etc OP needs.

If you need parfocal zooms for video then the PL lenses are designed for video.

A

 

[Mizar11]

I'm interested to know how many of you shoot with both M4/3 and FF or APSC. Those that do, why? I realize that FF is better at low light and lower noise. But, in the real world, can you see a real difference unless viewed very close. And is the dynamic range really wildly different? Talk me out of getting a FF, please.

My shooting style is street, travel and general outings with local photo clubs that I'm involved. I know that for birding and wildlife, I'm better off with the M4/3 for the 2X crop. But, Belgium is a dark country in the winter, so ? .

Thanks for your thoughts,

I use m43, APSC, and FF. But I'm not a wildlife or big telephoto user, my use case is a standard zoom, F4 or variable being fine so long as the IQ is excellent, plus faster compact primes in the "normal" 40mm to 60mm range, and maybe a prime in the 70-85mm range. That's it. No interest or use for entire "systems," or Holy Trinity f2.8 zooms, or "Big Whites," or any of that. So I've given myself the fun of trying and having cameras and lenses in all three formats and like them all.

Yes, FF is better in low light, better dynamic range, and delivers more malleable files I call more "clean and sparkly." Yes, same is true of APSC versus m43 though by a much smaller margin. But FF is bulkier and heavier, though not horribly depending on your use case. When I use FF (Nikon Z) I am carrying only one or two primes and sometimes a standard Z 24-70 S zoom, more often no zoom. Because lugging a bunch of heavy stuff around saps the fun out of it.

The Nikon f1.8 S primes are Zeiss Otus quality at very reasonable prices for what they deliver. I do have the 50mm f1.8 S from that line and it's a knockout. As for the "soul," and the "art," and the "creativity," well, those qualities reside in you. Either they are there in your eye, your mind, and your heart . . . or they are not.

It is true that the Z "S" line primes are bit bulky and heavy. However, Nikon Z also features light, compact, faster FF primes often dubbed the "muffins," that deliver excellent IQ and are loved in some quarters for their character rendering. A 40mm f2, two at 26mm and 28mm f2.8, and a 50mm f2.8 that is also an MC. I've noticed that many gear snobs, particularly at DPR, overlook or look down their noses at these lenses and their plastic construction. But they outperform their F mount "G" predecessors, which have produced many a classic photo. If one wanted to try FF, one of the smaller Z5/6/7/ZF bodies with one or two of those primes and maybe the 24-70 F4 S zoom (an "S" zoom acquirable used at very reasonable prices) is a relatively portable outfit.

Having said all that, though I will always use Z FF if for work or a once-only event or occasion for others, if for my own use, at least as often as FF I'll instead be rolling with one of the small bodies and a small fast prime or two, with or without a small standard zoom, in Olympus m43 or Nikon or Fuji APSC. The fun factor and the charm factor are irresistible with mini-size bodies and lenses that also deliver delightful images.

Another way to come at this might be: How much do you print? How large do you print? Because with recent sensors and everything being optimal with your shooting technique and exposure, up to, say, 11X14" or 11X16", honestly, format difference isn't going to matter substantially. And if you print very little, format difference basically doesn't matter at all.

This should be mandatory reading at the top of every format-angst discussion.

 

[David Kieltyka]

…from Micro 4/3rds up through 44x33mm medium format. (My lone APS-C camera is 20 years old and very cranky so it rarely gets powered up.) In my experience you have to push the cameras to extremes to notice any quantitative differences. Differences that exist and differences that matter to me…the latter are a small subset of the former.

It's only in edge cases where I'll choose one format over the others due to an inherent advantage the chosen format has. Mostly it comes down to what I feel like using on a given day, and as I'm not a pro I never have to use any particular camera or lens.

Gear that doesn't feel and handle well doesn't make the cut, no matter its technical qualities.

-Dave-

 

[Ysarex]

Thanks, that's what I want to hear

This was taken on one of my walks using my Pen Lite E-PL5. What more do I need?

The E-PL5 is limited in a number of ways the most critical for me is not having an EVF .

I'm very happy with the E-PL5. I bought it this year to replace a 1" sensor compact (Canon G7) like the Sony. I was mostly happy with the G7 except just a little too often I missed being able to change lenses -- RX100 has the same problem as do phones. EVF would be nice and there is one available for the E-PL5 but I'm likely to be happy with it as is. It weighs only 3 ounces more than the G7 and that was critical in my decision to switch.

The E-PL5 has everything I need. It saves unmolested raw files, gives me complete control over exposure and has a very effective live-view highlight alert system that I require to be able to set an exposure. I'm happy.

I feel if you need/want a very small light option that the 1" cameras come into their own. My wife has the RX100 V .It has an EVF , built-in flash and a lens equiv to a m43 12-35mm F/2.4-3.7. It packs in a huge feature set but for my hands it is a pain in the backside regarding handling



Assuming your walks are in daylight there are a number of smart phones with good camera options and powerful processing that make them viable options.

I check periodically and there are very few that I would be willing to consider. I must have a raw file and it has to be a real raw file with no molestation from the camera software. The powerful processing must have an off switch or I consider it unusable. It has to give me complete exposure control along with a live-view highlight alert.

It's going to have to have a 1" sensor otherwise it won't meet my DR requirement, and there's still the issue of changing lenses. The few phone cameras that come close for me are very pricey and if I'm going to spend that much money I'd just as soon buy a couple more lenses for my E-PL5.

Though for me a "real" camera is very much my preference . As most folk these days carry phones anyway it adds zero weight to your walk

 

[softmarmotte]

I recently bought a Pana L Mount S5D. The price was just too good to resist. 999 eur with a 18-40 lens. Actually I traded my GX9 and paid 499 eur

It's great and I get better shots in more challenging light. Low light it has dual gain ISO so beginning at 640 with similar/better results than MFT. But more to the point whne highlights are high and shadows are low, I get more range, depth, colour + the ability to 'improve' in PP

Combined weight about 875g, so Ok for short walks or when I carry a rucksack. The problem comes when adding the 70-300 for more range. That doubles my load...

On the other end of the scale a Pana GM1 with Oly 14-150 and a Lowa 9mm give me more or less the same length at a tiny fraction of the weight

I am very happy I have the S5D. Do i need it ? No but I am enjoying using it

You can see on my Flickr shots with both Panas, the OM1 and my old GX9. Do you see the differences ?

 

[HicHic]

Since you already have M4/3 bodies, maybe look at fast lenses like the PL 10-25 f1.7 and PL 25-50 f1.7 for low light photography. Might be cheaper than investing in a whole new system. Maybe you can rent them first to see if they solve your low-light scenarios.

Those lenses are optically very good, but they're not built well. The barrel at the rear comes apart easily, it's only held on by a bit of glue.

Bought used with dealer 6 month warranty, they would cost £2,500-3,000. You can buy a new S5D with kit lens currently for £899 and add a new Sigma 24-70/2.8 for £998 (discounted at LCE). All depends what FL range and light gathering etc OP needs.

If you need parfocal zooms for video then the PL lenses are designed for video.

A

Yes, extremely expensive too.

 

[HicHic]

I recently bought a Pana L Mount S5D. The price was just too good to resist. 999 eur with a 18-40 lens. Actually I traded my GX9 and paid 499 eur

It's great and I get better shots in more challenging light. Low light it has dual gain ISO so beginning at 640 with similar/better results than MFT. But more to the point whne highlights are high and shadows are low, I get more range, depth, colour + the ability to 'improve' in PP

Combined weight about 875g, so Ok for short walks or when I carry a rucksack. The problem comes when adding the 70-300 for more range. That doubles my load...

On the other end of the scale a Pana GM1 with Oly 14-150 and a Lowa 9mm give me more or less the same length at a tiny fraction of the weight

I am very happy I have the S5D. Do i need it ? No but I am enjoying using it

You can see on my Flickr shots with both Panas, the OM1 and my old GX9. Do you see the differences ?

Lumix is all about bang for buck.

 

[Ysarex]

I have an E-PL5 that I'd like to use fir the same purpose as you use yours but the dial & arrows around the OK button misbehave terribly. For example, when changing the focus point, it moves in the wrong direction, or navigating the menu, it will often go up when I press down. I have the 1.6 firmware that supposedly addressed this problem.

Is there any technique or remedy for this?

There's a used one available at MPB now: https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/olympus-pen-e-pl5

 

[James Stirling]

Thanks, that's what I want to hear

This was taken on one of my walks using my Pen Lite E-PL5. What more do I need?

The E-PL5 is limited in a number of ways the most critical for me is not having an EVF .

I'm very happy with the E-PL5. I bought it this year to replace a 1" sensor compact (Canon G7) like the Sony. I was mostly happy with the G7 except just a little too often I missed being able to change lenses -- RX100 has the same problem as do phones. EVF would be nice and there is one available for the E-PL5 but I'm likely to be happy with it as is. It weighs only 3 ounces more than the G7 and that was critical in my decision to switch.

The E-PL5 has everything I need. It saves unmolested raw files, gives me complete control over exposure and has a very effective live-view highlight alert system that I require to be able to set an exposure. I'm happy.

I feel if you need/want a very small light option that the 1" cameras come into their own. My wife has the RX100 V .It has an EVF , built-in flash and a lens equiv to a m43 12-35mm F/2.4-3.7. It packs in a huge feature set but for my hands it is a pain in the backside regarding handling



Assuming your walks are in daylight there are a number of smart phones with good camera options and powerful processing that make them viable options.

I check periodically and there are very few that I would be willing to consider. I must have a raw file and it has to be a real raw file with no molestation from the camera software.

That makes Olympus an unfortunate choice

The powerful processing must have an off switch or I consider it unusable. It has to give me complete exposure control along with a live-view highlight alert.

They do provide raw file options though I am not sure how raw raw means with phones

It's going to have to have a 1" sensor otherwise it won't meet my DR requirement, and there's still the issue of changing lenses

Yep the 1" phone cameras tend to be at the higher end looking a PTP the 1" sensor at their respective base ISO's are very close to each other ( E-PL5/7 ).

The few phone cameras that come close for me are very pricey and if I'm going to spend that much money I'd just as soon buy a couple more lenses for my E-PL5.

I get my smartphone a generation behind when my grown up kids feel the need to move up I would never pay the price for a high end phone

Though for me a "real" camera is very much my preference . As most folk these days carry phones anyway it adds zero weight to your walk

--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

 

[Sam Bennett]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

 

[James Stirling]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

 

[ahaslett]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

In every field of human endeavour. Just remember how recently the scientific method became mainstream and how fragile it is in reality.

 

[Sam Bennett]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

Your “controlled tests” are concerning the optics, which I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on.

 

[Ysarex]

I'm interested to know how many of you shoot with both M4/3 and FF or APSC.

I have and use all three. Used least = FF. My FF cameras are too big and heavy -- the lenses are bigger and heavier and when I use a camera I'm most often walking and carrying it.

Could you point to one FF lens that is larger than a m43 lens doing the same job ( diagonal AOV, DOF /subject isolation and total light gathering ).

First lens I bought for my E-PL5 after the pancake kit zoom was the 12mm f/2 -- 130 grams and 43mm length. Nikon makes a 24mm f/2.8 -- 270 grams and 46mm length and a 24mm f/1.7 135 grams and 40mm length and a 24mm f/1.8 450 grams and 97mm length.

Then there's the pancake zoom. 14-42mm f/3.5 - 5.6 -- 91 grams and 23mm length. Closest I can find is an old Nikon 28-80mm f/3.5 -5.6 -- 195 grams. FF lenses tend to be bigger and heavier.

 

[Ysarex]

Thanks, that's what I want to hear

This was taken on one of my walks using my Pen Lite E-PL5. What more do I need?

The E-PL5 is limited in a number of ways the most critical for me is not having an EVF .

I'm very happy with the E-PL5. I bought it this year to replace a 1" sensor compact (Canon G7) like the Sony. I was mostly happy with the G7 except just a little too often I missed being able to change lenses -- RX100 has the same problem as do phones. EVF would be nice and there is one available for the E-PL5 but I'm likely to be happy with it as is. It weighs only 3 ounces more than the G7 and that was critical in my decision to switch.

The E-PL5 has everything I need. It saves unmolested raw files, gives me complete control over exposure and has a very effective live-view highlight alert system that I require to be able to set an exposure. I'm happy.

I feel if you need/want a very small light option that the 1" cameras come into their own. My wife has the RX100 V .It has an EVF , built-in flash and a lens equiv to a m43 12-35mm F/2.4-3.7. It packs in a huge feature set but for my hands it is a pain in the backside regarding handling



Assuming your walks are in daylight there are a number of smart phones with good camera options and powerful processing that make them viable options.

I check periodically and there are very few that I would be willing to consider. I must have a raw file and it has to be a real raw file with no molestation from the camera software.

That makes Olympus an unfortunate choice

How so? My E-PL5 raw files seem normal and unmolested.

The powerful processing must have an off switch or I consider it unusable. It has to give me complete exposure control along with a live-view highlight alert.

They do provide raw file options though I am not sure how raw raw means with phones

Apples Pro-Raw files aren't raw at all neither are Samsung's Expert Raw files.

It's going to have to have a 1" sensor otherwise it won't meet my DR requirement, and there's still the issue of changing lenses

Yep the 1" phone cameras tend to be at the higher end looking a PTP the 1" sensor at their respective base ISO's are very close to each other ( E-PL5/7 ).

The few phone cameras that come close for me are very pricey and if I'm going to spend that much money I'd just as soon buy a couple more lenses for my E-PL5.

I get my smartphone a generation behind when my grown up kids feel the need to move up I would never pay the price for a high end phone

Though for me a "real" camera is very much my preference . As most folk these days carry phones anyway it adds zero weight to your walk