The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Sell my Nikon gear and full steam ahead on 4/3

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Whats a M9. LOL

Seriously If I could afford it than yes there would be but a M9 and it's little friends that go with it is a cool 12k. No thanks. My money is in the big gun. Lock and load
 

toddbee

Member
Pretty wild. I actually dont miss my a900 24-70 combo or my d700 with a few zeiss primes. still am amazed at how happy i am with the gf1. deciding on my next lense. the 20 1.7 is unbelievable. wishing for more primes
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Whats a M9. LOL

Seriously If I could afford it than yes there would be but a M9 and it's little friends that go with it is a cool 12k. No thanks. My money is in the big gun. Lock and load
Fully agree - for the price of an M9 plus 2 decent lenses you can almost step into digital MF.

I still have kept all my M glass so I might end up with an M9 occasionally if it is available and prices are getting somehow decent, but otherwise I am a happy camper in M43 territory and actually enjoy the benefits of this much more modern and state of the art design.

EVFs will be the future I am convinced now, if we like it or not. The one of the EP2 is SO NICE, of course it can and will be improved, but it already reached the threshold so I can fully accept it.

Think about EVFs with twice the resolution and maybe some more improved DR and auto adoption to existing light and some less noise in low light and then we are there :thumbs:

Hopefully Leica will jump on that train with their future M models.
 
K

Kevin_b1

Guest
When I first started this thread I thought I was going to get lots of negative comments about the change, but what is apparent is that a lot of other people are doing the same thing.

It would appear that Panasonic and Olympus have come across a goldmine where new and photographers with years of experience are buying into a new system.

My reason is it's light and portable, the lenses are small but optically good and do not cost an arm and a leg. Even the most expensive 7-14 can be got for £850 against the Nikon 14-24 costing £1,400, before anyone says but the Nikon is far better that is not my argument.

How long now before the big boys like Canon and Nikon jump on the band wagon, if they do I hope they do not introduce their own lens mount and the micro 4/3 mount stays open to use with all makes of camera.

Regards

Kevin
 

Jonathon Delacour

Subscriber Member
How long now before the big boys like Canon and Nikon jump on the band wagon, if they do I hope they do not introduce their own lens mount and the micro 4/3 mount stays open to use with all makes of camera.
Unfortunately, just as Samsung have developed their own lens mount for the NX-10, Canon/Nikon/Pentax/Sony will develop their own proprietary lens mounts for any mirrorless systems they produce. The likelihood that any of them would adopt the m4/3 mount is about the same as the likelihood that the United States adopts the metric system or switches to driving on the left side of the road.

All I'm hoping is that, like Micro Four-Thirds, their mirrorless cameras allow the use of adapters so that I can continue to use the Olympus Pen F, Minolta Rokkor, and Konica Hexanon lenses I've come to treasure (and which have replaced most of my Nikon/CV/Zeiss lenses). Though, should Nikon release a D700-style body with the D3x's 24 megapixel sensor, I'll probably buy one to use with an 85mm T/S lens I'm holding on to. Or, if I win the lottery, I might step onto the slippery slope of medium format. God forbid!

But, for me, the real appeal of m4/3 is the the ability to use legacy lenses. The dedicated m4/3 lenses are indeed small and optically good but, to my taste (with perhaps the exception of the Panasonic 20/1.7) somewhat cold and clinical. In other words -- dare I say it -- lacking in character. (Not everything in this mysterious world of ours needs to be hard, clean, and sharp.)
 

pellicle

New member
Hi

It would appear that Panasonic and Olympus have come across a goldmine where new and photographers with years of experience are buying into a new system.
not sure if that's where the gold is, or just we're the most vocal

I don't reckon adaptor sales are any where near the sales of the cameras


My reason is it's light and portable, the lenses are small but optically good and do not cost an arm and a leg. Even the most expensive 7-14 can be got for £850 against the Nikon 14-24 costing £1,400, before anyone says but the Nikon is far better that is not my argument.
perhaps ... but how much of that is micro4/3 and how much is just expectable?

I mean the 20mm f1.7 isn't really significantly different to the Olympus 25mm f2.8 but it is twice the price (and yes, both have aspherical elements so the Panasonic is hardly ahead there), even when you look at the kit 14-45 beside the 4/3 14-45 there isn't a lot in that either




holding a camera like the 4/3 E-420 in my hands does not make the G1 feel diminutive, nor its optics. I even use a 9~14mm Oly zoom, which strangely feels bigger on the G1 because of the adaptor.

I've actually started using the Pentax 110 50mm lens over my OM 50mm lens just because its so compact



and looks quite in place on the camera



and does fit in a pocket nicely (and is really light)

Sure, I love the EVF and swivel screen ... but as to micro ... I'm not really seeing much advantage there.

I'm actually (after farting about a lot with lenses this last year) tending back towards a 20D and/or 5D for more serious photographic needs and keeping the G1 as a Coolpix upgrade (though its not as solidly made) with more options while eyeing the GF or EP for a better compact camera.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Good points, Pellicle. :)

The only reason that the G1 became my most used camera with its EVF and Swivel TFT screen was because it allows me to use small manual focus primes on it with ease.

Though the Oly-D17/2.8 and the Pana 20/1.7 are tiny (by most camera standards), the lack of real manual operations without battery power and poor CDAF performance put severe limitations on them for my use.

I have no desire to buy/use the 45mm lens.

The slow zooms with built in software corrections are not that enchanting compared to real lenses.:sleep006:

I look forward to how the Samsung NX develops.

Oh, would I give up my Nikon gear for m4/3rds? No.
 

pellicle

New member
Hi

Good points, Pellicle. :)
thanks ...
The only reason that the G1 became my most used camera with its EVF and Swivel TFT screen was because it allows me to use small manual focus primes on it with ease.
I see we are on the same page with this one and ...

Though the Oly-D17/2.8 and the Pana 20/1.7 are tiny (by most camera standards), the lack of real manual operations without battery power and poor CDAF performance put severe limitations on them for my use.
not to mention they loose the focus when power cycled ... this ****s me no end with the zoom. When I'm taking photos of things in tabletop work and I'm re-arranging something I have to check my focus every bloody time! So I don't use the zoom and put an FD on instead (that way all I have to check if the flash hasn't powered down (I figure that one out pretty quick however).

I have no desire to buy/use the 45mm lens.
reading the review on that:

The petite size of the Leica macro is all the more extraordinary when you consider that it doesn't change length on focusing, in contrast to the Olympus which extends dramatically (picture here) yet only reaches 1:2 magnification as opposed to 1:1.
... and they have to put it on the adaptor to make the Oly look bigger?


did you notice this little pearl on dpreview:
Close range test

To see how effective OIS is at dealing with shake during macro shooting, we repeated our test at a much closer distance, with an image magnification of approximately 2:1. In this case we looked at just IS Mode 1. The results from this test are pretty stark - at such close focus distances, IS is giving next to no advantage at all (which again reflected our experience in the field). It's not quite time to put away your tripod yet.
I'm unwilling to put away my OM50f1.8 and extension tubes just yet ... ohh, and they only cost $30 all up too

its a good thing they put the 45 on the GF, as sat beside the 620 you may not know which one was smaller



of course dpreviews anti G1 bias comes out again:

The 45mm macro is perhaps best matched to the 'faux DSLR' styled G1
ho hum ... faux dslr ... owh ... how pwositively plaaastic


ok ... back to the job at hand ... :)
 

djonesii

Workshop Member
I have a D300, G1 (panasonic), G9, RD-1 and a FH20 (casio) in my digital stable.

For a long time, I have been thinking of ditching the D300 + attendant lenses. My shooting mix is while, mine. I spend a lot of time in the studio shooting models who are nude, so I have a need for pretty high image quality, but my main output is a vanity book, I have no clients.

I shoot the kids swim meets, and a sport called cowboy mounted shooting, so I like the D300 8FPS.

and a fair bit of street, and there is just something about a rangefinder.


The MF-DB calls out to me often, but the Nikon would have to go. I need the high frame rate, but as most of these are only 8X10 and smaller, even web I'm going to see what the FH-20 does.

When the 100-300 comes out, that could kill the need for my 120-300 2.8 on the nikon, I get to 600 and that should be good for the occasional wild life shoot.

But I still don't see a way around a studio setup, high frame rate set up, and a general setup with a long lens. The range finder needs to stay. My shooting is just to varied to live within the M4/3rds constraints after using a full suite of lenses on a D300.

The D300 is good enough to do the studio, sports, and a bit of wild life.

as a parting shot, I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure ....

Dave
 

pellicle

New member
Dave

I have a D300, G1 (panasonic), G9, RD-1 and a FH20 (casio) in my digital stable.
....
I spend a lot of time in the studio shooting models who are nude,
do you need an assistant :)

sorry ... couldn't resist ...
as a parting shot, I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure ....

well, a psychiatrist told me that I tend to blame others for my problems, of course I am sure that this must be a genetic trait that I have inherited from my parents.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
of course dpreviews anti G1 bias comes out again:
I do not buy/use my gear based on that outfit (or for that matter any outfit).

They have a market and, apparently, an audience they cater to.

Thankfully, I am oblivious to both.:)
 
Last edited:
This thread interests me as it deals with people who have lived with DSLR and now feel that 4/3 is adequate. A bit like when we moved from roll film to 35mm.

I can't see the back of a camera as I need reading glasses. So I have no option other than to go for the hot shoe EVF.

How are people dealing with flash guns? Yes, the little internal, and I'm not even sure if it pops up when an EVF is fitted, will do for the small jobs. But what does the 4/3 user do when he wants to use the equivalent of a Canon 550 gun?

Tony
London UK
 

m3photo

New member
Re: Tending back ...

I'm actually (after farting about a lot with lenses this last year) tending back towards a 20D and/or 5D for more serious photographic needs and keeping the G1 as a Coolpix upgrade (though its not as solidly made) with more options ...
I'm with you on this one (except the farting :D). I'll hold on to my D700 and manual lenses too, as I see them as a different tool for other work. The G1 is fun but won't replace all else I have.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I've built up my equipment kit with the notion that one format and compatible lens mount specifications would allow me to invest in bodies and lenses that all worked together.

My SLR kit is comprised of two bodies (Olympus E-1 and Panasonic L1), currently I have the G1 in Micro-FourThirds. My lens kit is fully interchangeable from the SLRs to the G1 (mostly pro-quality lenses from both Olympus and Panasonic/Leica); I have just one mFT lens at present (Lumix G 20mm f/1.7) and will add likely two more (45/2.8 Macro, 14/2.8 ... my goal in the mFT space is to keep things small). I have a couple of adapted lenses only usable on the mFT bodies, due to the mount register limitations of the SLRs, and which have imaging characteristics I want to use.

All of these lenses are high quality performers, comparable to or surpassing the best of what I used prior to going to FourThirds format. I have available body choices from top of the line pro-class SLR (E-3) to extremely compact (GF1 or Pen E-Px), all with the same lenses. It maintains FoV and DoF consistency across the board. Image quality across the whole system is excellent. While the lenses are not particularly inexpensive, they are all excellent performers and have been well worth what they cost.

This lets me concentrate more on the photography while choosing the gear most suitable, for reason of features and form factor, to a given task. I intend to stick with this system approach for as long as it remains advantageous to my work.

For other folks, I cannot say. This works for me, better than any other combination of cameras, formats, what all in the past.
 

sinwen

Member
MF primary and secondary is GF1 and GF1 IR

Don't want anything in the middle
Fully agree - for the price of an M9 plus 2 decent lenses you can almost step into digital MF.

I still have kept all my M glass so I might end up with an M9 occasionally if it is available and prices are getting somehow decent..........

Hopefully Leica will jump on that train with their future M models.
I also agree and I also have all my M glass.... but I know I will never end up with a second hand M9, first I don't dream of it and second the price would be still an outrage.

I see that Canon & Nikon aren't jumping on this gold mine that M4/3 is, for once Canon seems to be somewhat paralyzed. They may try something like Maps-c, we'll see.
I am just sad Pentax didn't join.
 

Tullio

New member
...
I can't see the back of a camera as I need reading glasses. So I have no option other than to go for the hot shoe EVF...
Assuming you want either the GF1 or the EPn/EPLn body because if you go with the G1/GH1 you have a nice EVF to work with. No need for an extra piece of accessory.
 

greypilgrim

New member
I guess I am rapidly approaching Guy's take on the world. For my purposes, the M4/3 fits the same niche as my Nikon DX system which is soon to be sold. I am keeping my good FX Nikkors and heading towards FF once I can dredge up enough money for a D700. Not in the same class as Guy's MF, but the same basic idea.

There just isn't enough difference between my D200 (and D70) and my G1 to differentiate the two IQ wise. Yes, the D200 is better at ISO 1600 and a bit better at ISO 800, but the G1 is far superior on manual focusing for me, and there is the weight factor. if I am going to carry around more weight, it needs to be a significant leap in dynamic range and IQ (hence my pipe dream of getting a D700).

Of course, I just spent on the 7-14, so I'm going to have to wait that much longer.

Doug
 
Top