Site Sponsors
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 101 to 138 of 138

Thread: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

  1. #101
    Senior Member JMaher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sarasota
    Posts
    942
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    [QUOTE=jonoslack;415164]
    I . . . for me however I really like the larger depth of field of the OMD for nature and close up work, where there will still be plenty of bokeh . . . If I want to shoot people with a short depth of field I'll use full frame.
    /QUOTE]

    I agree as well. However it would seem the 45 1.8 and the upcoming 75 could be pressed into service for portraits when necessary.

    JIm

  2. #102
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    [QUOTE=JMaher;415173]
    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    I . . . for me however I really like the larger depth of field of the OMD for nature and close up work, where there will still be plenty of bokeh . . . If I want to shoot people with a short depth of field I'll use full frame.
    /QUOTE]

    I agree as well. However it would seem the 45 1.8 and the upcoming 75 could be pressed into service for portraits when necessary.

    JIm
    Hi Jim - quite agree, and will do a perfectly decent job as well.
    (the 45 is fine, and I rather lust after that 75)
    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  3. #103
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    I like having f1.8 on the 45. I just don't like the minimum focus distance of that lens. Begs for either buying back the 45 macro and having 2 45's or waiting for the 60 macro to arrive on the scene.

  4. #104
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,344
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    There's also the Sigma 50/1.4 in 4/3 mount which is an ideal portrait lens for m4/3 and will AF on the OM-D. I have one waiting

  5. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by Terry View Post
    I like having f1.8 on the 45. I just don't like the minimum focus distance of that lens. Begs for either buying back the 45 macro and having 2 45's or waiting for the 60 macro to arrive on the scene.
    Hey Terry,
    I just carry around a Canon 500D (high quality diopter), and it does really well. I imagine you could use the 250D from Canon as well or the Nikon 4T...

    Doug
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #106
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    There is also an expensive, upcoming Kenko tube option.

  7. #107
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    f I want to shoot people with a short depth of field I'll use full frame
    Agreed. For me, digital APS-C is full-frame. I have no plans to buy a full-frame digital. If I want *really* shallow DOF for portraits, I'll use my Contax 645. Portraits look much better on film anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    With adapted lenses that aren't corrected for the thick stack of glass on a m4/3rds sensor, the DOF charts go astray.

    So, it is just not a matter real estate that determines the DOF.
    I don't know about any of this, but I would venture that real estate is still the overriding factor.

  8. #108
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    Agreed. For me, digital APS-C is full-frame.



    I don't know about any of this, but I would venture that real estate is still the overriding factor.
    Whatever that works, Robert.

  9. #109
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,116
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Well I quite agree Vivek - if you're confused about

    Which leads back to my original issue . . . how much does one lose in terms of IQ by shooting the smaller Olympus sensor?.

    . . . . .
    Do you really want the answer to that question? :-) I shot the K-5 vs the OMD on a back lit subject at ISO 3200 both. The K-5 had notably more shadow data, details, etc. while the EM5 sent them to crushed shadow mush. I may post the shots later. Oh and the K-5 did the same shot when there was a little less ambient light.

    But to be frank, I think the IQ of the EM5 is quite good for a wide variety of situations and I think focusing on photography more than these differences is the way to go. If the EM5 didn't have the fast primes it would be a different story but it has them.

    - Raist

  10. #110
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by greypilgrim View Post
    Hey Terry,
    I just carry around a Canon 500D (high quality diopter), and it does really well. I imagine you could use the 250D from Canon as well or the Nikon 4T...

    Doug
    I have a bunch 250D, 500D, 3T, 4T. They are pretty heavy for the teeny 45f1.8 would have to see how it would do on the 12-50 or the Panny 25mm.

  11. #111
    Contributing Editor ustein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    > and I think focusing on photography more than these differences is the way to go.

    This maybe even be at the core of this topic I think.
    Uwe Steinmueller
    -------------------

    Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
    http://www.outbackphoto.com

  12. #112
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,116
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by ustein View Post
    > and I think focusing on photography more than these differences is the way to go.

    This maybe even be at the core of this topic I think.
    Sure and to be clear, I think most people should just stop pretending the EM5 does "as well as any APS-C" (or best APS-C) and accept it for what it is. Pros and cons. I see a lot of "oh the EM5 matches APS-C/FF, etc." which is just not true. But it doesn't need to, to be good.

    - Raist
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #113
    Senior Member nostatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    I know it won't create images like my now-gone 5D2. But I find the OMD more fun to shoot. So I can have fun getting "lesser" images (though for most of my uses only pixel peeping could confirm that) or I can have a large FF camera sitting in the drawer not getting used.

  14. #114
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by Terry View Post
    I have a bunch 250D, 500D, 3T, 4T. They are pretty heavy for the teeny 45f1.8 would have to see how it would do on the 12-50 or the Panny 25mm.
    I use the lensbaby hood/step up ring to 52mm, and I use a 52mm 500D (or my other 52mm filters). That balances really nicely for me. I standardized on 52mm for all my primes (12, 20, 45, and various nikkors) plus they work on the 14-45 and 45-200.

    Step Up/Shade | 37mm to 52mm filter adapter

    It also gives me a nice little lens hood that stays on the lens all the time and adds little bulk at all.

    Doug

  15. #115
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by greypilgrim View Post
    I use the lensbaby hood/step up ring to 52mm, and I use a 52mm 500D (or my other 52mm filters). That balances really nicely for me. I standardized on 52mm for all my primes (12, 20, 45, and various nikkors) plus they work on the 14-45 and 45-200.

    Step Up/Shade | 37mm to 52mm filter adapter

    It also gives me a nice little lens hood that stays on the lens all the time and adds little bulk at all.

    Doug
    I love this forum. Ordered.

  16. #116
    Contributing Editor ustein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    >I love this forum

    But it is also expensive :-)
    Uwe Steinmueller
    -------------------

    Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
    http://www.outbackphoto.com

  17. #117
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by ustein View Post
    >I love this forum

    But it is also expensive :-)
    Yah, the only reason I don't have an OM-D is because they aren't available, and I blame it completely on this forum (both wanting the camera and it not being available).

    Doug

  18. #118
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,872
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by raist3d View Post
    Do you really want the answer to that question? :-) I shot the K-5 vs the OMD on a back lit subject at ISO 3200 both. The K-5 had notably more shadow data, details, etc. while the EM5 sent them to crushed shadow mush. I may post the shots later. Oh and the K-5 did the same shot when there was a little less ambient light.

    But to be frank, I think the IQ of the EM5 is quite good for a wide variety of situations and I think focusing on photography more than these differences is the way to go. If the EM5 didn't have the fast primes it would be a different story but it has them.

    - Raist
    +1

    I do see that there are better solutions out there than the OMD - but the issue is that the OMD is overall such a great solution that it can hardly be topped.

    Olympus did a really good job this time! So let's not tighten this success anymore ....

    OMD - GREAT CAMERA!!!!

  19. #119
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina western foothills
    Posts
    1,860
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    I've been debating that exact thing since I have the 45/2.8 macro. I did get out my FD50/1.8 and Hexanon 40/1.8 with adapters to satisfy me until I make some decision of where to go--next LOL.

    I still do have my old 5D which still gives me lovely shallow DOF images but, doggone, I sure have gotten lazy LOL. It doesn't go with me very often these days.

    Quote Originally Posted by Terry View Post
    I like having f1.8 on the 45. I just don't like the minimum focus distance of that lens. Begs for either buying back the 45 macro and having 2 45's or waiting for the 60 macro to arrive on the scene.

  20. #120
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina western foothills
    Posts
    1,860
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Ricardo, I'll remember this when I want to quiet that camera lust that is difficult to quell sometimes LOL. I'm still shooting with G3 and haven't decided if/when I'll make a decision to change. I do know I'm shooting a great deal more with m4/3 than DSLR and making adjustments for that.


    Quote Originally Posted by raist3d View Post

    But to be frank, I think the IQ of the EM5 is quite good for a wide variety of situations and I think focusing on photography more than these differences is the way to go. If the EM5 didn't have the fast primes it would be a different story but it has them.

    - Raist

  21. #121
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by raist3d View Post
    Do you really want the answer to that question? :-) I shot the K-5 vs the OMD on a back lit subject at ISO 3200 both. The K-5 had notably more shadow data, details, etc. while the EM5 sent them to crushed shadow mush. I may post the shots later. Oh and the K-5 did the same shot when there was a little less ambient light.

    But to be frank, I think the IQ of the EM5 is quite good for a wide variety of situations and I think focusing on photography more than these differences is the way to go. If the EM5 didn't have the fast primes it would be a different story but it has them.

    - Raist
    Hi Ricardo
    funny you should say that - there are great deals on the K5 at the moment, and my son has just put his A77 and lenses on ebay, so that he can go back to 16mp with the K5 - I think he's right . . . Me? I think the IS on the OMD probably makes up for the difference, and I'm much too slow to photograph anything which moves anyway

    The k5 is a fine camera, one of the few I really miss. (I don't miss QA with Pentax lenses however).

    Just this guy you know

  22. #122
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by ustein View Post
    > and I think focusing on photography more than these differences is the way to go.

    This maybe even be at the core of this topic I think.
    Hi Uwe - it absolutely is for me . . . It's a case of IQ vs IC (Image Quality vs Image Content). the best camera is the one that allows you to get the best IC with a respectable IQ.

    The reason I started this thread is that I wanted to discover how much sacrifice in IQ was involved in getting IC with the OMD - which it really is good at!

    One of the things which hasn't really been discussed . . . . but which really is relevant when we talk of high ISO . . . is the IS on the OMD - it really is splendid - much better than I've experienced before . . . . 600mm equivalent at 1/15th - that's madness, but I have pictures to prove it!

    the reason I don't have an S2 - or a D800, and I've never gone to MF, is because all of these moves seem to me to be a decision in favour of IQ, at the cost of IC . . . (and don't imagine I'm not tempted!!! - my hand was quivering over the buy button for a D800e and lenses last night . . . )

    Just this guy you know

  23. #123
    Senior Member JMaher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sarasota
    Posts
    942
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Not that I have the same acquisition problem that many do on this forum but I canceled my D800 preorder a few days ago when I ordered the OM-D. I like the idea of a camera that may make it easier for me to take more pictures with better content.

    Jim

  24. #124
    Member smartwombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    27
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    11

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    For me the requirement is pretty much the same, can I get the content I want (motorsport) at the quality I need?

    The E-P1 was a non-starter, because of the lack of EVF.
    GH-1 came close in ergonomics and features, but AF and burst speed are too slow.

    Of course my trusty Canon 1D series and white lenses will do the job, but since my car accident I can't even lift a pro body let alone with a 70-200 or 300 prime.

    So as an interim measure (it's going to be a year I think before I'm rehabilitated enough) I was looking for a camera I can use while the skin graft beds in and the scarring reduces.
    So far the OM-D EM-5 fits that fine.

    Coupled with my bagful of OIS Panasonic micro 4/3 lenses I think that the OM-D may be capable enough.


    PAul
    Oh yes, Jono - I am that Wombat ...

  25. #125
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Uwe - it absolutely is for me . . . It's a case of IQ vs IC (Image Quality vs Image Content). the best camera is the one that allows you to get the best IC with a respectable IQ.

    The reason I started this thread is that I wanted to discover how much sacrifice in IQ was involved in getting IC with the OMD - which it really is good at!

    One of the things which hasn't really been discussed . . . . but which really is relevant when we talk of high ISO . . . is the IS on the OMD - it really is splendid - much better than I've experienced before . . . . 600mm equivalent at 1/15th - that's madness, but I have pictures to prove it!

    the reason I don't have an S2 - or a D800, and I've never gone to MF, is because all of these moves seem to me to be a decision in favour of IQ, at the cost of IC . . . (and don't imagine I'm not tempted!!! - my hand was quivering over the buy button for a D800e and lenses last night . . . )
    Here I say it: for me the size of a camera is often not so much the factor which makes me bringing it or leaving it at home.
    More important is for me: do I enjoy to use the camera? and do I get the results I expect from it.

    The worst chance to be taken with me has a camera which disappointed me. I mean when I have used it, believe to have caught some nice moments, and then - seeing them on my display having mushy images.

    For me- for example- a nice big viewfinder makes it much easier to take images.

    I am not talking against small cameras, and I prefer them for example on bike tours, or when going out in the evening, or on business trips. But for most use I dont see a bigger size of a camera as a real reason not to bring it.
    In case of the S2 (and the same would be true for a D800 or 5d) I got a small backpack which takes the camera+ lens + 1 additional lens (if needed).
    Plus room for a bottle of water, and some treats for the kids. This is just a small daypack- no monster photo backpack.

    I totally agree that the best camera is the one which is used a lot, no matter which camera this would be.

  26. #126
    Contributing Editor ustein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    >for me the size of a camera is often not so much the factor

    I am in the same boat but we cary two sets. I think more and more DOF makes a difference pro and also con FF.

    Right now we use the set of gear for the task at hand. Often the D800 and 5D2 and other times the NEX-7 (have no OMD right now).
    Uwe Steinmueller
    -------------------

    Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
    http://www.outbackphoto.com

  27. #127
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Northern Ca/Tx/Mexico
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    my son has just put his A77 and lenses on ebay, so that he can go back to 16mp with the K5.
    Jono,

    Just curious - what were his reasons for this?

    thanks,
    Roberto M.

  28. #128
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    As these pixel pitches get smaller and smaller, lens selection, stability, stabilization on/off, etc. all make quite a bit of difference in looking at these cameras. Really, it's about how big you print. Assuming identical conditions and lens quality, the NEX-7 should print a few inches larger on each side than the OM-D, but that often gets skewed by other factors. The Sony 24mp sensor is still the best non-35mm sensor around, but the difference is often slight in use.


  29. #129
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Hi Douglas
    I think the truth is that unless you're going to print really big, all the modern cameras will do fine.
    We are in Cornwall right now, and the house is decorated with pictures taken in 2004 some with the the Kodak 14n, but most with the Olympus E1. 19" prints on the whole, and they look just fine.
    The thread was not really meant to be a pixel peeping exercise so much as to get a handle on what was lost. For me the answer is:"not enough to make up for being able to use a Leica 60mm macro with Image Stabilisation".

    A month in, I'm having a ball with the OMD

    Just this guy you know

  30. #130
    Senior Member nostatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    While this may be a silly reason, the silver/black one I ordered way back when showed up. It is even more fun to shoot than the black one, especially with the silver 45/1.8 on the front of it. That combined with Aperture now supporting raw make life good.

    The silly things that go into like/dislike of a tool.
    new album | nostatic | music
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  31. #131
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Douglas
    I think the truth is that unless you're going to print really big, all the modern cameras will do fine.
    We are in Cornwall right now, and the house is decorated with pictures taken in 2004 some with the the Kodak 14n, but most with the Olympus E1. 19" prints on the whole, and they look just fine.
    The thread was not really meant to be a pixel peeping exercise so much as to get a handle on what was lost. For me the answer is:"not enough to make up for being able to use a Leica 60mm macro with Image Stabilisation".

    A month in, I'm having a ball with the OMD
    Hi, Jono. That's really all I meant by my above post. Prints will look better at a given size with the NEX-7 in a vacuum, but, usually, there are enough outside circumstances to nullify the advantage, especially when handholding. I occasionally see the difference between my 5n and NEX-7 at 13x19, but not usually. The same goes for the NEX-7 when compared to larger sensor cameras like the M9 or A900.

    The interesting thing is how many factors up the different sensor sizes compare. If the OM-D compares favorably to the NEX-7, and the NEX-7 compares favorably to the A900 (or M9,) does the OM-D compare favorably to the A900, or is that too far of a stretch?

  32. #132
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Image stabilization on the OM-D is frankly amazing. I put a 105DC Nikkor on a silver one - which clearly has better image quality than the black - and when the IS was active it was like shooting in slow motion...got sharp shots down to about 1/10th second. This completely transforms use of adapted teles.

    The NEX 7 on the other hand has a micro 4/3 sensor built-in for no extra charge. Just crop as needed.

  33. #133
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    I just tested the 9-18mm for CA correction in LR 4.1 and here are the results using lower right corner of image at 100%




    Last edited by barjohn; 30th May 2012 at 22:30.
    V/r John

  34. #134
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    John, instead of linking to the url of the gallery page scroll down and use the top of the two URL's listed at the bottom of the page. That will properly put the images in the thread at full size.

  35. #135
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    As these pixel pitches get smaller and smaller, lens selection, stability, stabilization on/off, etc. all make quite a bit of difference in looking at these cameras. Really, it's about how big you print. Assuming identical conditions and lens quality, the NEX-7 should print a few inches larger on each side than the OM-D, but that often gets skewed by other factors. The Sony 24mp sensor is still the best non-35mm sensor around, but the difference is often slight in use.

    In theory yes but the monkey wrench is the aspect ratio difference and then of course getting the perfect paper size

    NEX7 6000x4000
    OMD 4608 x 3456

  36. #136
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galveston, TX
    Posts
    947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Finally got it right. It has been a while since I posted and I had forgotten how.
    V/r John

  37. #137
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    I was almost going to press the like button . . . . and then I thought of myself and realised that your post sounds like:

    Famous Last Words
    Oh no, i'm not going that route. Missed this comment a week or two back.

    I'm continuing on the path to simplification. Now that I have the M9 and GXR, and a bit too many lenses, I'll reduce further on the unused gear flopping about here. Just sold another FourThirds lens tonight. Eventually, all the SLR gear will be gone (other than my Nikon F... ;-), all the extraneous bits too.

    I am tempted by the Leica X2. As close to an original Barnack as a digital camera can be, I suspect. Simple controls, just the one lens, clip on viewfinder, compact but not too small to hold properly. To see if that's the way to go, I've fitted the Skopar 35/2.5 to the M9 and will be shooting with that (almost) exclusively for 1000 photos or three months, whichever is longer. If that works out, and I buy the X2, I'll reduce the excess kit even further.

    It's tough to want less in the modern age. I only want more photos that I am happy with. :-)

  38. #138
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: OMD vs NEX7 - resolution - discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    I am tempted by the Leica X2. As close to an original Barnack as a digital camera can be, I suspect. Simple controls, just the one lens, clip on viewfinder, compact but not too small to hold properly. To see if that's the way to go, I've fitted the Skopar 35/2.5 to the M9 and will be shooting with that (almost) exclusively for 1000 photos or three months, whichever is longer. If that works out, and I buy the X2, I'll reduce the excess kit even further.

    It's tough to want less in the modern age. I only want more photos that I am happy with. :-)
    I really like the X2 - I wish it focused a bit closer, and I wish it were 50mm equivalent, but otherwise it's a fine camera - very responsive, it gets out of the way. Nice!

    Just this guy you know

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •