I'll interject my ideas and opinions point by point and you can regard or disregard them as you like:
biglouis wrote:I'm going though mental convolutions at present about whether or not to stick with m4rds or change to a APS-C system.
Ironically, it is because of the Lumix 100-300 I am having these internal discussions.
The 100-300 has introduced me to the pleasure of photographing birds. I would not have been able to take a chance on a lens of this size with another system without spending double or even treble the purchase price.
Not really. The 100-300 is over $500 currently. You can match it's ultimate IQ with a $250 lens on an APS-C camera. By ultimate IQ I mean that the combo of the (actually better) $250 lens and the APS-C (if a newer hi-res model) will actually look better after you've cropped to what the µ4/3 + the Lumix 100-300 would have delivered.
Additionally if you like bird shooting you can hunt around and get a used 200-400mm or a 400 or 500mm prime with ED or LD glass for about the same as you paid for the Lumix and such primes will just wipe the floor with that Lumix. I know some of you have "feelings" for the Lumix but it really is one of the worst lenses in that range. It has very poor IQ compared to others which are faster, brighter, built better, and costs less.
Now that I've discovered how much I want to take forward this type of photography I have also discovered the limitations of the m43rds system. AF is slow, there is a single point of focus, metering is limited and sad-to-say anything shot at higher than iso800 has poor resolution. I'd say the high-iso issue is the most serious limitation. Here in the UK a lot of the time we are dealing with gloomy skies. The need for really clean iso1600 or 3200 shots is paramount. With bird photography cropping is essential and when you crop at above iso800 then I am afraid to say that on my GH-2 things turn to mush.
Unless, that is, I'm doing something wrong?
If I do it right I can use 2000 ISO on my GH1 and crop to about 1/2 of the frame size and most folks won't know it's not 200 ISO when that's NR'ed and scaled to 1200 pixels across
if also using a good lens. But this is a little time consuming in PS and ACR plus it takes a bit study to be able to use those apps to that degree. It's not impossible, it's not even "very difficult", it's just time consuming - like about 15 to 20 min a shot after you know what you're doing. (And lots of reading + trial and error to get to where you know what you're doing). This is true to an even greater extent when printing. Noise shows up very much more on your LCD monitor than it does in the output from a printer!
Still, Every APS-C released in the past 5 years or so will have less noise than any of the µ4/3 cameras - and this certainly will include the GH3 and the OM-D. On top of that all modern APS-C cameras will produce better looking images than all µ4/3 cameras just due the subtleties introduced by the difference in dynamic range. µ4/3 cameras will produce images which look flat and somewhat lifeless when compared with the APS-C shot taken in the identical situation.
To say it a different way: No
good or knowledgable wildlife shooters (especially birders) will be wanting to use a smaller sensor just so that they can take advantage of the crop-factor. All of them want a FF sensor or at
least APS-C
and with the best noise handling possible! Mostly this is because they don't want to spend so much time at the computer! But some stuff just can
not be corrected or remedied in software in a reasonable amount of time - even if you're a total app-wizzard!
So, I am at a bit of crossroads. Do I stick with m43rds and limit my success with photographing birds, or do I change systems? The need to abandon m43rds is partly financial: I have a lot of money tied up in m43rds kit even at second hand prices and I do not want to proliferate my camera ownership into a 4th system. I don't think the wife will stand for it either!
IMHO you should practice manual focusing good glass on a tripod with gimbal head first before you dump your µ4/3. The difference between a good lens and what you're using now is just night and day! It's intense! You'll kick yourself for not doing it sooner when you see the difference - I promise! You should be able to find something like the nFD 300/2.8L for around $600 and a
good cheap gimbal head for around $75 or so. (I'm using this gimbal head myself. I've compared it directly with the $600 Wimberley and there's not enough difference to mention.) Also the bottom line is that when needing good sharp micro-contrast and micro-detail you can
never shoot 300mm hand held. Maybe with perfect lighting and 1/4000s shutter speed you might get 10% that don't have their details destroyed to some degree - if you're lucky. It's just a fact that 300mm
needs stable tripod legs and a nice sturdy head - or some similar support. And this becomes more evident the more you crop and the less you scale too.
Try that first and as you learn to MF-Track (which is also a WHOLE BUNCH OF FUN IN THE DOING!) you'll discover what your camera is actually capable of. From there you may decide that's good enough. If you don't or can't come to terms with MF (but it's so easy! and so fun! anyone can - everyone used to!) just resell the nFD lens (maybe even make $50 in the process) and bump up to an APS-C or better yet the APS-H.
APS-H is the sensor in the Canon EOS 1D Mark II. And that camera has the best AF short of the 1D X or the D4 (which I don't know enough about yet to say) The 1DmkII and IIn also have a really nice continuous drive mode! Between that AF and that drive mode (plus a nice sized buffer to actually make use of it) you'll be in birders heaven!!! And either camera can be had for around $550 if you spend just a little time looking and are quick on the draw. But again, I think this should be a second step.
It seems sad to ask for insights into personal decision making in a forum but a lot of people in this forum have more experience than I and have become virtual friends, so I would welcome your comments - no matter how critical!
Nah, it's not sad. The options out there are nothing short of mind boggling! Mix those with a decent price : performance ratio and you're wise to ask us for our experiences and knowledge - not sad.
So in short - things I would do first if I were you:
- Test how to use higher ISO to a good result.
- Get a decent lens (this will mean learning to MF / Track).
- Use the proper (proven) birding equipment (gimbal head + sturdy legs).
- Invest some time in improving your editing skills a bit.
And if all that still isn't enough (or you can't hang)... then move up to the APS-H camera and an AF (L quality type) lens.
And whatever you do, have fun doing it! Don't get emotionally attached to a format or some equipment just cuz of your brain input, what you've read others say, seduction factors, or etc. Keep it open minded. Like, hay, maybe if you look into it you'll find that something like the Pentax K-5 is actually the best bang for the buck, etc. etc.
.