| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/18/2015 02:12:48 AM · #1 |
Hello All
Recently I have been thinking of downsizing and selling off all my gear and was looking at smaller cameras like the Fujifilm X-T1, Fujifilm X100T, Olympus OM-D E-M5, Olympus OM-D E-M1 just to name a few.
The only thing I am worried about is not having the range of options I currently have such as a plethora of lens' for each situation.
At the moment I enjoy macro, landscapes, abstract, star trail and lego photography and wondered if any of these 'street photography' or CSC type cameras would do the job or am I still better off keeping my D7000.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2015 02:20:46 AM · #2 |
| Sony's a7 range may suit you perfectly. They are compact, mirrorless, FULL-FRAME Sensor cameras, solidly built and able to use, with an adapter, virtually every lens ever built. Penny and I both switched over in December and are loving it. High-ISO performance is outrageously good. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 02:36:54 AM · #3 |
Thank you for the advice, will certainly look at the a7 as well.
I would also have to look at how much I could get for all my current gear and make sure I could move straight over to a more compact camera without spending any more money as I am on a very tight budget at the moment. :) |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 06:01:20 AM · #4 |
I love the easy ability of changing settings on my FJi XT1, and the lenses are wonderful. But their macro lens options are not good, and a rumored 90mm macro seems to have been pushed back (indefinitely?). I believe there art adapters out there to make use of other lenses, so maybe that is a good option for you. I also am mot a huge fan of the Fuji focus point system, I find the Nikon system much easier to work with.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2015 06:26:59 AM · #5 |
I think that the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II would meet your needs. I just bought it along with the Olympus 12-40 f2.8 Pro, the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko and the Olympus EC-14 1.4x Teleconverter.
Speaking of star trails, the OM-D E-M5 MK II has a feature by which you can watch the build up of the image during a long exposure so that you can see the image and close the shutter when it looks how you want it to. No more guessing if it came out as you hoped.
The 5-axis image stabilization is amazing for still and video. This camera also has a mode in which it takes 8 shots while shifting the sensor slightly resulting in a 40mp jpeg or a 60mp raw image that rivals the Nikon D810 for overall image quality and arguably beats it in color rendition. That feature, however, doesn't work well if there is motion in the scene such as moving water or wind blown tree branches.
The only drawback (for now, and it is slight) is the lack of a super wide zoom that is at least f/2.8. The only lens wider than the ones that I listed above is M.Zuiko ED 9-18mm f4.0-5.6. I heard something about Olympus working on a Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO Lens which would pretty much complete the lineup for fast quality glass.
All that being said, I am actually seriously considering selling my new Olympus set that I just purchased with less than 30 shutter clicks. While the lenses are certainly smaller than my Nikon versions, the camera itself is TINY in my big hands. I have never been one to be concerned with large and heavy camera gear. I have always said that I would carry gear twice the size if that gear meant better image quality. So, this tiny camera is not quite my style and I am wondering if I wouldn't have been better off putting those funds towards upgrading my Nikon gear. Maybe the D810 or D750...a tilt shift lens that I have been considering...a fisheye lens for the fun of it...or a longer range telephoto...or....or....or....
Anyway, I think that the Olympus setup that I bought might meet your needs and think that you ought to consider it. If I decide to sell mine and stick solely with Nikon then I will probably post it for sale here first.
Message edited by author 2015-04-18 10:29:29. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 06:27:31 AM · #6 |
The OM-D series will definitely do what you want. Micro 4/3 has a full range of lenses and accessories. The Olympus 60mm macro lens is one of the best I've used, and is small and light. The main weakness with micro 4/3 is at the long end (>300mm equivalent).
One thing I realized when shopping was that you have to pay attention to the size and weight of the lenses. Mirrorless bodies are generally smaller than their DSLR counterparts, but on the APS-C and full frame systems, many of the lenses are as big and heavy as DSLR lenses. Or heavier. So if size and weight is a primary concern, pay attention to that.
As far as what you can get for your old gear, check recent sales on eBay. That will give you an idea what to expect. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 06:41:31 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by yakatme:
.
All that being said, I am actually seriously considering selling my new Olympus set that I just purchased with less than 30 shutter clicks. While the lenses are certainly smaller than my Nikon versions, the camera itself is TINY in my big hands. . |
LOL. That's the thing I find most appealing about the thing. I can hold it securely and shoot with one hand.
But yeah, you should go to a camera store and try out anything you're considering before you make any major decisions. Shooting with a small camera is definitely a different experience.
Message edited by author 2015-04-18 10:41:52. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 06:42:40 AM · #8 |
| Let me know if your getting rid of your Sigma150-500...I'd be interested in talking to you about that one...not sure how much the shipping would be...might not work??? |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 06:51:14 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Sony's a7 range may suit you perfectly. They are compact, mirrorless, FULL-FRAME Sensor cameras, solidly built and able to use, with an adapter, virtually every lens ever built. Penny and I both switched over in December and are loving it. High-ISO performance is outrageously good. |
a7 ... image stabilization in-camera? |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 06:58:16 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by Ann:
Originally posted by yakatme:
.
All that being said, I am actually seriously considering selling my new Olympus set that I just purchased with less than 30 shutter clicks. While the lenses are certainly smaller than my Nikon versions, the camera itself is TINY in my big hands. . |
LOL. That's the thing I find most appealing about the thing. I can hold it securely and shoot with one hand.
But yeah, you should go to a camera store and try out anything you're considering before you make any major decisions. Shooting with a small camera is definitely a different experience. |
Haha, that is very funny considering that I am the manager of what is probably the largest camera store in South Florida. Yeah, I held it and shot with it in the store when the Olympus rep visited and brought a demo. It was super small but I thought that I would get used to it. I was enthralled with the idea of once again carrying a camera with everywhere I went. I started to do so when I first got it about two weeks ago but I found that I still don't take it out of the belt mounted camera bag that I carry it in. I plan to get some shots with it this weekend and see if I do get used to it. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 07:05:22 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by Ann:
Originally posted by yakatme:
.
All that being said, I am actually seriously considering selling my new Olympus set that I just purchased with less than 30 shutter clicks. While the lenses are certainly smaller than my Nikon versions, the camera itself is TINY in my big hands. . |
LOL. That's the thing I find most appealing about the thing. I can hold it securely and shoot with one hand.
But yeah, you should go to a camera store and try out anything you're considering before you make any major decisions. Shooting with a small camera is definitely a different experience. |
I did that (checked out in store) prior to picking up the a6000. Some other models (mirrorless) didn't fit as well. However, I agree about the size difference. My gosh, my a77 seems like a tank now compared to the a6000. That said, I do find the a6000 doesn't cover all needs and the a77 is still hanging around. I do have some interest in the a7II ... maybe later. :-) |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 07:40:02 AM · #12 |
| While the new Olympus OMD EM5 mk2 is a pretty decent camera I would still look at the EM1. I love my EM1 and would not trade it for the world. I arrived at this camera after shooting Canon for over 20 years and a brief stop with the Fuji XE1. The reason I suggest the EM1 over the EM5 is the EM1 also has PDAF, which allows the use of the 4/3 lenses. I primarily use 4/3 lenses on my EM1 and by going that route you have access to some of the things lacking in m4/3 line up. There is the wonderful 7-14mm to cover the wide end a number of choices for the long end. Now the Olympus m4/3 60mm macro lens is the best macro lens I have ever used, I am comparing it to the two that I have used - the Canon 100mm L and the Lester Dine 105mm. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 01:19:36 PM · #13 |
Thank you everyone for the advice, much appreciated.
I must admit the size of the CSC cameras is a little concern, my D7000 felt small in my hands so I had to go and buy a battery grip for it and I haven't used a compact camera in many many years but I guess it took time adjusting to my first DSLR coming from a compact so it would just take time.
Originally posted by Ja-9:
Let me know if your getting rid of your Sigma150-500...I'd be interested in talking to you about that one...not sure how much the shipping would be...might not work??? |
Will certain let you know, are you in Aus or elsewhere in the world? |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 01:45:35 PM · #14 |
I'm in Florida...so it might not be cost effective.
How long have you owned the lens? Any problems/issues? |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 02:35:10 PM · #15 |
I am working out whether I like a new Fuji XT-1 with a pair of nice lenses.
I wrote a lengthy first impressions review in this thread
Coming from a long line of Nikons, a Sony A6000, which I returned, a Micro 4/3 Panasonic G5, and lastly a Panny FZ1000 (which I have and like).
Message edited by author 2015-04-18 18:36:27. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 03:02:42 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Neil:
I am working out whether I like a new Fuji XT-1 with a pair of nice lenses.
I wrote a lengthy first impressions review in this thread
Coming from a long line of Nikons, a Sony A6000, which I returned, a Micro 4/3 Panasonic G5, and lastly a Panny FZ1000 (which I have and like). |
Tempted by the XT-1 as well but also like the Olympus OM-D models.
I can get an Olympus OM-D E-M10 with 14-42mm EZ Lens for AU$799 or twin lens kit with M.Zuiko 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 lens M.Zuiko 40-150mm f4-5.6 lens for AU$958
If I went for the above one I could possibly sell my Sigma lens and maybe one other lens I don't use much and still keep my D7000...decisions decisions.
Originally posted by Ja-9:
I'm in Florida...so it might not be cost effective.
How long have you owned the lens? Any problems/issues? |
I have probably owned the lens for about a year, one of the reasons I was thinking of selling it was I hardly ever use it, it's probably been out of my camera bag a handful of times. ITs been a great lens though, allowed me to zoom right in on kangaroos/birds etc to get some nice pictures without spooking them.
Message edited by author 2015-04-20 18:40:23. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 06:31:57 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by AussieChris:
Originally posted by Neil:
I am working out whether I like a new Fuji XT-1 with a pair of nice lenses.
I wrote a lengthy first impressions review in this thread
Coming from a long line of Nikons, a Sony A6000, which I returned, a Micro 4/3 Panasonic G5, and lastly a Panny FZ1000 (which I have and like). |
Tempted by the XT-1 as well but also like the Olympus OM-D models.
I can get an Olympus OM-D E-M10 with 14-42mm EZ Lens for AU$799 or twin lens kit with M.Zuiko 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 lens M.Zuiko 40-150mm f4-5.6 lens for AU$958
If I went for the above one I could possibly sell my Sigma lens and maybe one other lens I don't use much and still keep my D7000...decisions decisions.
Originally posted by Ja-9:
I'm in Florida...so it might not be cost effective.
How long have you owned the lens? Any problems/issues? |
I have probably owned the lens for about a year, one of the reasons I was thinking of selling it was I hardly ever use it, it's probably been out of my camera bag a handful of times. ITs been a great lens though, allowed me to stay away from kangaroos/birds etc to get some nice pictures. |
BTW - I looked to see what kind of stuff you shoot. Nothing in your portfolio, but your collection of lenses suggest birds and macro. Perhaps 400mm is not long enough, but it's worth looking at the FZ1000! Hard to beat a 25 - 400m F2.8-F4.0 lens, even if it's attached to only a 1" sensor. You make up to some extent for sensor size by being at F4.0 at 400mm. Focus is snappy and the controls and viewfinder is great. You can also get great bokeh when wide open at 200mm to 400mm.
All just screen captures from LR. You still have to click View full-sized image on DPC because I captured them from my 30" monitor. All shot through my office window, which isn't the best, but the tree is right outside so when a bird's there I grab my camera and shoot without leaving my desk. :)
Reduced to fit, ISO 800 Full Zoom of the lens, F4
shown at 100%
Reduced to fit on my screen
Another shot, but at 100%
The FZ1000 is around $800, sometimes a bit less now. (I paid $899 in August!)
Message edited by author 2015-04-18 22:33:28. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 06:52:37 PM · #18 |
I did look at the Panasonic as well and have only seen pictures of the camera online but the size seems comparable to a smaller DSLR.
The reason for wanting to downsize was so that I had less to carry around with me as I have a huge camera bag full of gear I thought maybe the CSC cameras might of been a better choice but knowing me I would end up with just as many lens as I have now anyway.
My membership expired here recently but will be renewing it once I have proper internet again but you are right, mainly macro photography but would love to get into more abstract photography which again is why I thought a smaller CSC type camera might be better than a bulky DSLR. |
|
|
|
04/18/2015 07:10:20 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by AussieChris:
I did look at the Panasonic as well and have only seen pictures of the camera online but the size seems comparable to a smaller DSLR.
The reason for wanting to downsize was so that I had less to carry around with me as I have a huge camera bag full of gear I thought maybe the CSC cameras might of been a better choice but knowing me I would end up with just as many lens as I have now anyway.
My membership expired here recently but will be renewing it once I have proper internet again but you are right, mainly macro photography but would love to get into more abstract photography which again is why I thought a smaller CSC type camera might be better than a bulky DSLR. |
True, the FZ1000 is as big as a APS-C SLR, but the size is actually perfect. Remember: there are no lenses to carry. The large size makes it easy to hold, press the buttons and more importantly: it still weighs less than half what a SLR + lens weigh at about 2lbs. Probably less because remember it's a 25mm to 400mm F2.8-F4.0 lens built in (Leica designed)!
And while such superzoom ranges are common with all-in-ones, not many have such a nice wide open aperture, and most have tiny sensors. The FZ1000 1" sensors are very good, it's the same sensor as the much heralded RX100 (and I had one of those too and loved it while it lasted).
I also have the FZ200, which has a 24-600mm zoom, if I remember correctly, and is a CONSTANT F2.8. But really, the tiny sensor in that is no comparison to the FZ1000's and I don't think the IQ is comparable. |
|
|
|
04/19/2015 02:06:56 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by Neil:
True, the FZ1000 is as big as a APS-C SLR, but the size is actually perfect. Remember: there are no lenses to carry. The large size makes it easy to hold, press the buttons and more importantly: it still weighs less than half what a SLR + lens weigh at about 2lbs. Probably less because remember it's a 25mm to 400mm F2.8-F4.0 lens built in (Leica designed)!
And while such superzoom ranges are common with all-in-ones, not many have such a nice wide open aperture, and most have tiny sensors. The FZ1000 1" sensors are very good, it's the same sensor as the much heralded RX100 (and I had one of those too and loved it while it lasted).
I also have the FZ200, which has a 24-600mm zoom, if I remember correctly, and is a CONSTANT F2.8. But really, the tiny sensor in that is no comparison to the FZ1000's and I don't think the IQ is comparable. |
Well you do have some very good points.
I will certainly give the FZ a better look now, I have also worked out that if I sold all my gear I would have about AU$2800 to spend and just having moved to a new unit (apartment as Americans say) I am liking the idea more and more of downsizing with the possibility of having a little left over to save for a rainy day.
Thank you for taking the time to reply as well, will post back here with what I decide in the end. :) |
|
|
|
04/22/2015 04:50:03 PM · #21 |
Well I have narrowed it down a little.
Looking at either the Olympus OM-D E-M1 or the Fuji XT-1 depending on how much I can sell all my Nikon gear for, I am leaning more towards the Fuji for it APS-C sensor but I do LOVE the look of the Olympus body and it's extra controls.
My brother mentioned that I should also look at the X-Pro1 as I could save some money and buy better glass but I am just not sure with the X-Pro1 being over 3 years old. In a way he is right though, photography for me is a hobby not a profession which is why I can't justify having all my Nikon gear and decided on getting a CSC but Looking at the X-Pro1 I could get that for around $1600 with the 35mm, for a few hundred more I could have the newer models.
I can get a Fuji XT-1 for around $1900 with the 35mm lens or the Olympus E-M1 for about $1800 with the 12-40mm but that doesn't leave much money left over for more glass as lenses from both are not cheap.
Maybe I am just better off selling my Nikon gear and seeing how much I make from that first.
|
|
|
|
04/22/2015 06:26:12 PM · #22 |
Best of luck to you. Such a difficult journey this can be.
I don't think you will be disappointed in either way you go. |
|
|
|
04/22/2015 06:30:25 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by AussieChris:
Well I have narrowed it down a little.
Looking at either the Olympus OM-D E-M1 or the Fuji XT-1 depending on how much I can sell all my Nikon gear for, I am leaning more towards the Fuji for it APS-C sensor but I do LOVE the look of the Olympus body and it's extra controls.
My brother mentioned that I should also look at the X-Pro1 as I could save some money and buy better glass but I am just not sure with the X-Pro1 being over 3 years old. In a way he is right though, photography for me is a hobby not a profession which is why I can't justify having all my Nikon gear and decided on getting a CSC but Looking at the X-Pro1 I could get that for around $1600 with the 35mm, for a few hundred more I could have the newer models.
I can get a Fuji XT-1 for around $1900 with the 35mm lens or the Olympus E-M1 for about $1800 with the 12-40mm but that doesn't leave much money left over for more glass as lenses from both are not cheap.
Maybe I am just better off selling my Nikon gear and seeing how much I make from that first. |
I think I can help with the choice of the XT-1 versus the OM-D. I have been pouring over my XT-1 files to see if it, besides being lighter, is giving me the image quality I want. I think the answer to that is yes. The 10-24mm lens is really nice, and that's mainly what I would shoot with. I love the Fuji color profiles too, the Velvia profile in Lightroom (which mimics what you can also get in camera if you shoot JPEG) rocks without being "too" over the top. Astia too.
This was taken on my test outing, and it's ISO 2000, with no noise reduction. Mainly applied the Velvia camera profile in LR and I just loved the colors so added even more saturation. It's also +.85 exposure, so it's more like 3200. Very little noise in the photo visible at 100%:
That was the 10-24mm. Both it and the 18-135 seem to have good microcontrast, perhaps not a "Zeiss" 3D look, but very good. So I'm happy there. Both have incredibly good stabilization too.
Where I'm not happy is this: while they have a nice lineup of lenses Fuji users are drooling over...for example the 56mm 1.2, there are no lenses in their lineup I am really interested in, because none of the nice primes have stabilization, and there isn't any in-body stablization. So if you want incredibly shallow DOF and shoot wide open, great, you probably aren't going to be caring about stabilization then. But when you try to use the lenses for other purposes and stop down to get more DOF, you are going to be at a much higher ISO than someone who has stabilization. Hence you lose the advantage of Fuji being cleaner at a given ISO. You will be at a higher ISO.
For example, the new rave of a lens is a 40-150mm F2.8. So that's supposed to be a wonderful lens like my Nikon 70-200 F2.8. But my Nikon has VR. The Fuji does not have any stabilization. To me, I'd rather use the 18-135 F3.5-5.6 then...since it's stabilized. Of course, it's not perfect either, being F5.6 at full zoom.
The E-M1 has the advantage of in-body stabilization which is going to make up for some of the difference. Their pro line isn't cheap, but it's F2.8, and you get stabilization at all focal lengths. And you get stabilization with any lens you can mount, including your old Nikon lenses. Plus, the lenses are smaller in general being for M43.
Now, do I regret my XT-1 purchase? I actually have a few more days before I'd need to return it. But I think I will keep it. My main purpose is wide angle, and the 10-24 is a great little lens. The 18-135 is pretty nice as well, and that gets me to 210mm in 35mm terms. If I can keep within those bounds, I may be content for a while. I've only really taken it out for a single test spin, but I liked the results. I feel it's a good compromise for portability. I will probably carry my FZ1000 on trips with it, basically as my big zoom. It's not a low light, ultra wide angle camera, but I like the controls and even the EVF better than the XT-1.
The complaint I've heard about the Oly's is that there is always a "grain" (noise). I was bothered by the grain in my D7100--too many pixels per square inch on the sensor...probably on par with the 16MP Oly, which is tops for its class. That's why I decided to accept the compromises of the XT-1. My only other choice would be to go with one of the full frame Sony's, but then I know I'd be talking about bigger lenses. And while the RX100 remains one of my favorite cameras of all time, I really thought the A6000 had very poor dynamic range and hence image quality. I'm sure the A7 line is much better, but it took a away a bit of the Sony glow they had earned with me for the RX100.
Anyway, think about the above regarding your own usage and purchase patterns...it may help you decide.
Message edited by author 2015-04-22 22:51:46. |
|
|
|
04/22/2015 10:09:53 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Neil:
I think I can help with the choice of the XT-1 versus the OM-D. I have been pouring over my XT-1 files to see if it, besides being lighter, is giving me the image quality I want. I think the answer to that is yes. The 10-24mm lens is really nice, and that's mainly what I would shoot with. I love the Fuji color profiles too, the Velvia profile in Lightroom (which mimics what you can also get in camera if you shoot JPEG) rocks without being "too" over the top. Astia too.
This was taken on my test outing, and it's ISO 2000, with no noise reduction. Mainly applied the Velvia camera profile in LR and I just loved the colors so added even more saturation. It's also +.85 exposure, so it's more like 3200. Very little noise in the photo visible at 100%:
That was the 10-24mm. Both it and the 18-135 seem to have good microcontrast, perhaps not a "Zeiss" 3D look, but very good. So I'm happy there. Both have incredibly good stabilization too.
Where I'm not happy is this: while they have a nice lineup of lenses Fuji users are drooling over...for example the 56mm 1.2, there are no lenses in their lineup I am really interested in, because none of the nice primes have stabilization, and there isn't any in-body stablization. So if you want incredibly shallow DOF and shoot wide open, great, you probably aren't going to be caring about stabilization then. But when you try to use the lenses for other purposes and stop down to get more DOF, you are going to be at a much higher ISO than someone who has stabilization. Hence you lose the advantage of Fuji being cleaner at a given ISO. You will be at a higher ISO.
For example, the new rave of a lens is a 40-150mm F2.8. So that's supposed to be a wonderful lens like my Nikon 70-200 F2.8. But my Nikon has VR. The Fuji does not have any stabilization. To me, I'd rather use the 18-135 F3.5-5.6 then...since it's stabilized. Of course, it's not perfect either, being F5.6 at full zoom.
The E-M1 has the advantage of in-body stabilization which is going to make up for some of the difference. Their pro line isn't cheap, but it's F2.8, and you get stabilization at all focal lengths. And you get stabilization with any lens you can mount, including your old Nikon lenses. Plus, the lenses are smaller in general being for M43.
Now, do I regret my XT-1 purchase? I actually have a few more days before I'd need to return it. But I think I will keep it. My main purpose is wide angle, and the 10-24 is a great little lens. The 18-135 is pretty nice as well, and that gets me to 210mm in 35mm terms. If I can keep within those bounds, I may be content for a while. I've only really taken it out for a single test spin, but I liked the results. I feel it's a good compromise for portability. I will probably carry my FZ1000 on trips with it, basically as my big zoom. It's not a low light, ultra wide angle camera, but I like the controls and even the EVF better than the XT-1.
The complaint I've heard about the Oly's is that there is always a "grain" (noise). I was bothered by the grain in my D7100--too many pixels per square inch on the sensor...probably on par with the 16MP Oly, which is tops for its class. That's why I decided to accept the compromises of the XT-1. My only other choice would be to go with one of the full frame Sony's, but then I know I'd be talking about bigger lenses. And while the RX100 remains one of my favorite cameras of all time, I really thought the A6000 had very poor dynamic range and hence image quality. I'm sure the A7 line is much better, but it took a away a bit of the Sony glow they had earned with me for the RX100.
Anyway, think about the above regarding your own usage and purchase patterns...it may help you decide. |
Thank you Neil for taking the time to reply with such detail and I love your image, if I got images as sharp as that I would be very happy.
Definitely gives me some more to think about and Jules you are right, such a difficult journey especially after having DSLR's for so long. :)
Will keep you all posted.
|
|
|
|
04/24/2015 02:37:53 AM · #25 |
Another vote for the EM1. Love it. And as you can also use Panasonic lenses on the Olympus you have quite a good range of lenses to choose from and then you can add a speed booster and use any old manual glass (focus is manual also but the EM1 has focus peaking). A speed booster also shortens the length of the lens and drops the f-stop by one (sort of like a 1.4x converter but in reverse). So many options with M43 you just have to decide what you would like to play with.
In regard to Fuji ... I understand they use a noise reduction algorithm even in RAW so that is why it appears less noisy than other cameras. I understand prints don't show the noise anyway so shouldn't be a problem.
I have a black and white family portrait which is cropped to about 3/4 of the original image. It is printed on a 750x1000 canvas and looks amazing. How many people ever print this large. How large do you print.
My son was married a couple of weeks ago. And ... I was the photographer (a friend also helped)
Here is my flickr site. I have been shooting m43 for a couple of years now so most of what you will see is from an Olympus cameras. EXIF date for most all shots is shown.
flickr site
I love the WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) electronic viewfinder. You can gain it up for studio work so no problem there.
I would suggest the EM1 as you don't need to purchase a grip for it and controls are nicely set out.
One thing I love about the lenses is that I can shoot them all wide open and they are sharp.
I love the touch screen and the Fuji doesn't have this. You may think you won't use it but it's fabulous being able to touch the screen to shoot or to move the focus point.
I think either are great cameras and it all comes down to which suits you better. Good luck
(Thought I would just edit to say that if you look at my profile and see all my gear (yes I have a lot) please be aware that I am moving into shooting video and sometimes run three cameras at the same time, therefore need a double up of some focal lengths etc)
Message edited by author 2015-04-24 06:52:23. |
|
