pegelli
Well-known member
Maybe, but I would put "Some" in front of your sentence and I don't think switching a battery every ~2000 shots is such a big deal for every sports shooter.
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!
New Olympus High End m43 Camera
- Thread starter ptomsu
- Start date
biglouis
Well-known member
The issue with the A9 is not the size of the camera body.
It is the size of the frickin' lenses attached to the camera body.
I sold my Sony kit largely because the lenses (at the time) were pretty mediocre and because the lenses were totally out of proportion with respect to the bodies. What is the point of a tiny body and a lens which looks like it will tear off the lens mount?
This will always be an issue with FF mirrorless bodies unless lenses are specifically hobbled, like the Z mount 24-70 f4. Everyone is raving about how small it is. Yeah... stupid... it's been made f4 because the existing f2.8 is ginormously out of proportion on the Nikon mirrorless bodies and at f4 the whole lens can be a lot smaller.
The only manufacturers with small lenses in proportion to the body sizes are Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji and.... Leica (of course).
Sorry to be off topic - I actually quite like the specs of both the Nikon mirrorless and the A9. As I said elsewhere a Z500 would pair very nicely with the PF300 or PF500 Nikkor lenses.
LouisB
It is the size of the frickin' lenses attached to the camera body.
I sold my Sony kit largely because the lenses (at the time) were pretty mediocre and because the lenses were totally out of proportion with respect to the bodies. What is the point of a tiny body and a lens which looks like it will tear off the lens mount?
This will always be an issue with FF mirrorless bodies unless lenses are specifically hobbled, like the Z mount 24-70 f4. Everyone is raving about how small it is. Yeah... stupid... it's been made f4 because the existing f2.8 is ginormously out of proportion on the Nikon mirrorless bodies and at f4 the whole lens can be a lot smaller.
The only manufacturers with small lenses in proportion to the body sizes are Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji and.... Leica (of course).
Sorry to be off topic - I actually quite like the specs of both the Nikon mirrorless and the A9. As I said elsewhere a Z500 would pair very nicely with the PF300 or PF500 Nikkor lenses.
LouisB
pegelli
Well-known member
I don't disagree Louis, especially the GM zooms are humongous which seems to be caused by being bright as well as optically very well corrected. But they are too big (and too expensive) for me as well. But you can still get a quite small and performant set if you go with the smaller/simpler primes like the 28/2, 55/1.8 and 85/1.8.
But going longer (for sports/wildlife) with M43 the lenses will always be smaller for the equivalent FOV and even though some people find the new Olympus body too big it will still have that advantage over a FF system.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Well IMHO these two posts entirely miss the point why I am using my Sony A9. It’s currently the only mirrorless camera with fast enough sensor readout time (1/160 s) that I can use the silent electronic shutter without having to worry about rolling shutter distortions.
With a battery grip on the A9 and the 100-400/4.5-5.6 lens, including the 1.4x and 2x TC, it’s easily handholdable for me and optically brilliant. It has displaced my Olympus E-M1 Mark II with 300/4 Pro and 1.4x TC for Hummingbird in Flight and other bird and action shots. Furthermore its EVF is blackout free.
This Sony system will be the standard I will measure the anticipated Olympus E-M1 X system against.
pegelli
Well-known member
K-H, with all respect these posts don't "entirely miss the point", they are just not about "this point" that is of high importance to you (readout time) because this thread is about the new mirrorless olympus and we don't know the readout time of that camera yet.
Last edited:
Knorp
Well-known member
Yet another rumour ... (FT5) New leaked product images of the E-M1X. Will be priced at 365,000 YEN (around $3000)
ptomsu
Workshop Member
The more I see of this beast the more I come to the conclusion that this is NOT the camera for me - completely obsoletes all of the advantages that m43 stands for!
Thanks god there are other mirrorless camera system options :ROTFL:
:clap:
Last edited:
V
Vivek
Guest
OT reply:
Sony could have made the sensor stack quite thin to afford the use of M lenses. It also allows for making ther own system lenses smaller and in proportion to their original A7 series body size.
Instead, now they are making their bodies Ginormous to make them fit their Gigantic lenses.
:ROTFL:
Sony could have made the sensor stack quite thin to afford the use of M lenses. It also allows for making ther own system lenses smaller and in proportion to their original A7 series body size.
Instead, now they are making their bodies Ginormous to make them fit their Gigantic lenses.
:ROTFL:
pegelli
Well-known member
Sorry for another off-topic diversion
Agree some of the Sony lenses are pretty large but I wonder if that is really caused by the thick sensor stack. For instance there isn't much size/weight difference between the same M-mount and E-mount voigtlanders which seem to be optimised for the sensors they are supposed to be mounted on.
V
Vivek
Guest
Well, that is based on a false premise.
If you check out the M and FE lens’ filter threads (where applicable), you would not have made that assertion.
If you check out the M and FE lens’ filter threads (where applicable), you would not have made that assertion.
pegelli
Well-known member
You're right, the E versions are indeed a bit bigger than the M-versions, but some more than others.Well, that is based on a false premise.
If you check out the M and FE lens’ filter threads (where applicable), you would not have made that assertion.
On the Nokton 40/1.2 the E-version is a bit thicker (58 mm filter) than the M-version (52 mm filter) and it's 25% heavier (without the M-E adapter)
However on the 12/5.6 the difference is much smaller with only 3 mm more max diameter of the E vs. M version (since it doesn't have a filter thread) and on the 15 mm filter size is equal (58 mm) and max diameter is nearly identical (1.4 mm difference)
biglouis
Well-known member
I've been reading some reviews of the Z7 as a birding camera. The force from the dark side is strong, young Jedi...The more I see of this beast the more I come to the conclusion that this is NOT the camera for me - completely obsoletes all of the advantages that m43 stands for!
Thanks god there are other mirrorless camera system options :ROTFL:
LouisB
faberryman
Member
What makes the Z7 any better at birding than a Sony?
ptomsu
Workshop Member
Maybe nothing else than that it is NOT A SONY :ROTFL:
V
Vivek
Guest
It still helps Sony selling their fabulous sensors!
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
The PF lenses, and for a Panasonic user, ergonomics that are very similar to those of Panasonic camera. The Z6/7 bodies are surprisingly close to the GX8 in every aspect.
pegelli
Well-known member
I would say it differently: "BECAUSE IT'S A NIKON" :loco:
But what I do find amazing is that Olympus brings out one "ugly" body (where beauty is in the eye of the beholder) that is somewhat bigger than their previous body + grip and suddenly some people who talked about the size advantage of M43 for longer tele-shots like birding are suddenly considering to change that for a slightly smaller body but with lenses about twice the size for the same field of view :facesmack:
biglouis
Well-known member
Sony 100-400
vs
Nikkor 200-500
Nikkor 300/4 PF
Nikkor 500/5.6 PF
Nikkor 80-400
Nikkor....
Need I go on?
LouisB
faberryman
Member
Can you not use a Nikon lens on a Sony camera with an adapter?
biglouis
Well-known member
The YouTube videos I've seen have shown that the FTZ adapter has no impact on AF speed and performance (which is a big surprise to me). I'm not willing to take the chance on that but I am willing to keep on tracking the development of the Z7 and I'll be very interested once the 500 PF 5.6 becomes more available.
At present most Nikon birders still recommend the D850 over both the Z7 and Z6 and also the D500, which is also interesting.
LouisB