4/3 rds. Am I insane, mad, or on seeing the light?

me15

me15

Suspended / Banned
Messages
608
Name
Alex
Edit My Images
Yes
Currently my set up consists of a Canon 40D, 17-85 IS, 10-20 Sigma, 120-400 Sigma and a nifty 50, plus a few filters, remote triggers, etc. I like, and enjoy, the kit I have, but I despise the weight. I have a couple of camera backpack/bags, which cost an awful lot of money, but I have got to the point of dreading almost 10kg of kit around with me.

So I decided to look at the micro 4/3rds. I love the look of the Panasonic GF1 (It's how a modern rangefinder should look) but love the features of the G2. So I keep thinking should I sell my kit and go for the micro 4/3rds or stick with what I've got?
 
If you replace everything you've got with 4/3rds, you will spend a huge amount of money and save relatively little weight. It's the lenses that weigh tons, and that won't be changing much like for like.
 
Is this a similar post to Smooth's?
 
I had a similar thought as the DSLR I find is a bit intrusive, especially on family days out. It's OK if I'm out and about on my own but I think the wife is a bit sick of the sight of it tbh.

Have you thought of a G1? They're fairly cheap now the GF1 and G2 are available. I've bought one of those to go alongside the DSLR. It's a fair compromise when I need/want to leave the 7D at home.
 
"(It's how a modern rangefinder should look)"

I think that this is the best way to look at MFT. I love my GF1 and 20mm f1.7 and I don't think that I'll buy any more lenses as just as it is it fits the bill as a quality replacement for a rangefinder or other smallish quality film camera.

I've kept my 20D and all it's lenses.

I'm going to disagree with the view that you won't save weight with a MFT setup as I don't see how you can fail to.
 
By all means look at it as an addition but my own experience says don't sell up and move over, I lost a lot of money selling up my MFT gear and going back to a DSLR.

but I have got to the point of dreading almost 10kg of kit around with me.
Click to expand...

Sound's like you've fallen into the "take everything, cover every eventuality"

Next time you go out I challenge you to take just the camera with 1 lens fitted, a spare battery and one other lens in your pocket.
Limiting yourself like this can be very liberating and produce surprising results.
Don't worry about the "what if this situation crops up/presents itself" just roll with it and make do with what you have on you.
 
I've had a GF1 since March, and taken many hundreds of photos. I've used it alongside my full frame 5D, duplicating shots many times. As good as the GF1 is, it's no match for the 5D and as such I'd never give up my dslr.

Having said that, I've taken a lot more photos with the GF1 this year than the 5D, in situations that I wouldn't want to drag the 5D round or attract the attention. They compliment each other and I shall always hang on to both of them.
 
I made this move when I had got fed up of lugging all my kit around, it was good for a while but although the IQ is decent it really never will match my 5D, I also need to get some more studio stuff under my belt and tbh I won't be taking the G1 into the studio.
My decision was also partly influenced by the fact I have very little time to shoot nowadays bt when I do get time to shoot again I will be going back to a dslr.
 
I moved to a GF1, because of weight, cumbersome issues.
But I kept most important canon lenses, sold a 50d body but bought a 40d back as a safety net, I have a wedding to do next year and however well the GF1 takes photos, I doubt the sheer look of it will impress anyone at a wedding!!

I adore my GF1 though, gets taken out with me every day, and after all isnt that what we want our cameras for?
 
The issue . . . weight/size . . . the solution used to be a compact, IQ was never compared, just accept for what it was.

We seem to have moved on, the same issue . . . but expecting IQ to be up there . . . :thinking:

The cost of these 4/3 cameras is at the lower end of the market, entry level in DSLR terms, the image quality is certainly there or there abouts.

We never questioned lens availability on a quality compact . . . it did not exist, one used what was available.

So why get precious over the dedicated lenses available in 4/3. Be honest with yourself, if you want a forest of lenses, you have to stick with dragging the 10kg kit bag about whichever system you opt for!

M4/3 is about freedom, minimalist :thumbs: . . . They 'are' lighter, they 'are' smaller! they 'do' produce remarkable images at their price point, a pro camera they 'are not' . . . thats if you are a pixel peeper!:naughty: The rest of us view at normal range and enjoy;)

Run with the hair, hunt with the hounds . . . or . . . Pay your money and take your choice . . . Either way, enjoy photography . . . :shrug:

CJS
 
Last edited:
Janice said:
I moved to a GF1, because of weight, cumbersome issues.
But I kept most important canon lenses, sold a 50d body but bought a 40d back as a safety net, I have a wedding to do next year and however well the GF1 takes photos, I doubt the sheer look of it will impress anyone at a wedding!!

I adore my GF1 though, gets taken out with me every day, and after all isnt that what we want our cameras for?
Click to expand...

Which lens/lenses do you use on your GF1 Janice?

CJS
 
CJS said:
Which lens/lenses do you use on your GF1 Janice?

CJS
Click to expand...

I have all three Pannys (20mmm f1.7, 14-45mm & 45-200)

The 20 f1.7 is superb, small, light, sharp, and so easy to carry you can put the camera into a outdoor coat pocket no probs. I actually carry another lens or two in a coat pocket if the GF1 is round my neck.

I also have a used Canon FD 50mm f1.4 with an adapter. better focal length I think than the 20, but only manual focus and aperture is turned on the aperture lens which is no hardship. Not bad for £50 :thumbs:
 
Looking at what you have, I'd suggest getting some light weight lenses to pair with what you have. Then you can mix and match depending on where you're going.

...and keep the camera out of your bag as much as possible to spread the weight.
 
I've gone from an Olympus E-P1 with 14-42 and 20mm to a 50D with Siggy 10-20 and 30 1.4.

I can't say the weight has been an issue for me to be honest. I also far prefer the comfort of having a nice grip and being able to brace against my eye.

The E-P1 was fantastic - amazing OOC jpegs, it looked the nadgers, IBIS was a life and the quick menu thing was handy. I sold it for one reason; the m4/3 system is nice but incredibly expensive compared to DSLR land. I really wanted a UWA... options were a 9-18 at £550 and a 7-14 at nearly £900. I wasn't prepared to spend close to a grand and the oly looked like daylight robbery given it's build. I also wanted a portrait lens (that AF'd). Only option was the 45mm 2.8 macro ..... which was nice, but 2.8 isn't exactly bright and it costs a huge whack too.

If I had the money, I would've kept the E-P1 and the 20mm... the pairing make an awesome low light combo. Fairly clean ISO1600 + f1.7 + 4 stops IS = who needs a flash!

I'm glad I made the switch as the m4/3 prices don't seem to have gone down.
 
Last edited:
I hate to think how much my camera bag actually weighs with all my kit in it; certainly too much to be comfortable for any length of time.

When heading out, I have a serious think about what sort of pictures I think I will be taking and try to customise what kit I actually take, leaving as much as possible behind. Makes things a lot easier.
 
I purchased a GF1 for much the same reasons as a few others. The thought of lugging even a small kit bag around was bloody unappealing when I do any sort of walking.

I use my DSLR mainly for wildlife & motorsport - no way any of the m4/3 systems can do that. But I have got rid of everything other than my long lenses and my UWA because the GF1 now fills that gap.
 
Scarecrow said:
I hate to think how much my camera bag actually weighs with all my kit in it; certainly too much to be comfortable for any length of time.
Click to expand...

I've seen your bag and there's no way I'd try to lift it ;)

I think Ian's right. As Derek said, I start trying to think which lenses I might need before you go out and usually end up taking them all :(

I think I have two options, buy myself a G1 and see if it complements my setup or take the challenge and only go out with my prime lens.
 
me15 said:
...or take the challenge and only go out with my prime lens.
Click to expand...

It's a good thing to try but, if this is too restricting and you know your main lens will be say the 10-20, taking one or even two kit lenses (or a prime) just in case will add very little weight.
 
Kidding our selves . . . :thinking:

Weight and bulk seems to be the main issue when someone considers an m4/3 camera/lens. Those that seem to make a success of it, appeared to embrace the available bespoke standard lenses, 14-45mm, 20mm and the 45-200mm these are the Panasonic 'kit offerings', I think the other manufacturers fall roughly in line?

Want, macro, or a longer lens than 200mm, practicality says stay with DSLR, I think keeping a DSLR in reserve is a good idea, fills in the few gags. The need for a vintage lens collection . . . that does not even come into the reasoning for wanting a m4/3 camera IMHO:cuckoo:

Back to weight, I have just weighed my G1 with battery, card, strap, 14-45 lens, lens filter and cap, I weighed all up 645grs. The D90 bear body weighs in at 620grs . . . say 700grs with the battery, a close equivalent Nikon lens 18-70mm weighs approximately 480grs. A Nikon D300s body weighs 918grs with battery, similar to a Canon 5D. Nikons 18-70mm lens is a modest piece of glass compared with some of the more exotic longer/wider offerings?

The Panasonic, 20mm f1.7, weighs 100grs, combined with the GF1 body, battery and card, the total is 448grs!!! I can see why the move to a m4/3 camera is in the ascendancy.

M4/3 is the quality 'compact' the DSLR hobbyist has been waiting for, now the fight will run, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, which one is best??? Just like Canon, Nikon have been doing for years . . . :bat: Oh no . . . :lol:

By the way, anyone seen the spec., for the new D7000:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond7000/page2.asp

CJS :banana:
 
yadontunderstand said:
why so much gear?

just a body and a prime- thats all you need :)
Click to expand...

We gotta ween the man off gently ;)


Weight wise I found that the 500D and 50mm F1.8 though slightly heavier, wasn't noticeable over the weight of my G1 and 14-45mm.

I had the 14-45, 45-200 and leica 45mm macro.

Cost wise though the initial camera came in at low end DSLR cost, the lenses where similar prices and the fast lenses can cost as much or more than L glass.

For me the IQ wasn't up to my standards, low light use was abysmal, my G11 outshone it in low light situations!! (I shoot a lot in low light) and the feel of the G1 was "cheap".

I changed back to DSLR and haven't regretted it, apart from the money I lost on my panny kit (all bought new, sold secondhand)

Another downside was the panny raw files which need the later version of ACR, so unless you have CS4 or CS5 you have to convert them to DNG or use a stand alone app, oh and the supplied software hates win 7 64bit.

Forget the MP count on the sensors, I just think you will find theres a huge difference between the D90 and the panny, including the range of lenses or lack thereof on the panny.

Having done it once I wouldn't do it again, as an addition yes, replacement? it don't come close to being an adequate replacement.
 
"For me the IQ wasn't up to my standards, low light use was abysmal, my G11 outshone it in low light situations!!"

This doesn't sound right as the G1 has a much bigger sensor than the tiny one in the G11. I don't know how the G1 compares to the GF1 but I wouldn't have thought they'd be that far apart and if they're not the G1 should easily beat the G11 for higher ISO performance just as the GF1 does according line reviews.
 
My thoughts and reasoning for ditching a dslr mirror others in this post, weight, portability and the fact that out of the 2 cameras I had the Little Geoff was being used far more - and even if it wasn't being used, I still had it with me, slipped in the wides handbag or in a small rucksack.

My long term review explains in more detail.

It has been about a month since selling all my canon kit and so far am not regretting it one bit, in fact it feels very liberating !
 
I don't think that Micro Four Thirds is a replacement for DSLR kit as such, but rather kit for someone who wants a better camera than a compact or bridge, but without the weight and size of the bigger DSLRs. Many amateurs probably realise they don't like the bulk of their DSLR kit and so "downgrade" to the Micro Four Thirds. But, if it were as good as DSLR kit then people in the business would too :shrug:

It's interesting now that Micro Four Thirds is becoming more popular with people dumping their DSLR kit - but I think the reason for that is because there is quite a big gap between compacts and DSLR in terms of cost new and quality - people want a camera better than a compact but don't always need everything a DSLR offers, so the Micro Four Thirds came along and filled the gap. A nice quality camera that doesn't cost the earth and doesn't weigh as much as the moon.

I personally wouldn't trade my DSLR in for anything - it's big and heavy, but so nice to hold, the mirror slap is reassuring (I never liked the fact that compacts were silent, apart from that cheesy fake shutter sound that you hear three minutes after you've tripped the shutter) and the lack of appreciable shutter lag is great.
 
Last edited:
"the mirror slap is reassuring"

Golly, I hate it. When I take a shot I want it to have as little effect on the subject as possible and I certainly don't want to draw attention to myself so I'd like a completely silent mechanism and certainly I'd want a mechanism that caused no camera movement. Mirror lock up shouldn't be necessary.

To me the movement and noise of my 20D is simply awful and I believe is at least in part due to additional mirror movement made necessary by EF-S.
 
woof woof said:
"the mirror slap is reassuring"

Golly, I hate it. When I take a shot I want it to have as little effect on the subject as possible and I certainly don't want to draw attention to myself so I'd like a completely silent mechanism and certainly I'd want a mechanism that caused no camera movement. Mirror lock up shouldn't be necessary.

To me the movement and noise of my 20D is simply awful and I believe is at least in part due to additional mirror movement made necessary by EF-S.
Click to expand...

I agree the mirror smashing around is the worst thing about DSLRs. And it's the reason why wide angles are difficult to make and have to have several extra retrofocus/inverted-telphoto elements stuck on the back to clear the mirror. It's a big optical advantage for mirrorless cameras.

But to be fair to EF-S, the mirror doesn't have to move anywhere except upwards to clear the rear of the lens, because the mirror is much smaller than full frame anyway. Canon have rather cleverly taken advantage of that extra bit of space, shifting the rear of EF-S lenses back a few mms. As a result, EF-S lenses don't need such strong retrofocus elements, which aids optical performance. Witness the excellent quality of the Canon 10-22 even at 10mm (better than anything else out there) and the superb quality of the 17-55 2.8, which is also better than even Nikon can manage (and cheaper).

There is much less slap on a crop format DSLR. If you want to see how the mirror moves, get a tooth pick of something and lift it up - it's only held down against spring pressure.

Edit: Canon DSLR shutter/mirror firing in slow motion video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CHgBuKmfog&feature=related
 
Last edited:
"But to be fair to EF-S, the mirror doesn't have to move anywhere except upwards to clear the rear of the lens,"

That's interesting as I've previously read that EF-S means that the mirror movement is more complex and noisier. I haven't time to Google it now but just out of interest sake I'll see if I can Google my way to anything later. Certainly I was under the impression that the additional movement made necessary by EF-S intrusion was responsible for the extra noise over EF only.

"Witness the excellent quality of the Canon 10-22" Having owned one of those I'd argue with the "excellent" tag as my current Siggy 12-24mm has much less distortion and no vignetting which I can see, the Canon lens had lots of both. I also think that colour rendition is more accurate with the Siggy but these days that means little and I suppose that the Canon does have the advantage of being 10mm on APS-C.
 
Last edited:
me15 said:
Currently my set up consists of a Canon 40D, 17-85 IS, 10-20 Sigma, 120-400 Sigma and a nifty 50, plus a few filters, remote triggers, etc. I like, and enjoy, the kit I have, but I despise the weight. I have a couple of camera backpack/bags, which cost an awful lot of money, but I have got to the point of dreading almost 10kg of kit around with me.

So I decided to look at the micro 4/3rds. I love the look of the Panasonic GF1 (It's how a modern rangefinder should look) but love the features of the G2. So I keep thinking should I sell my kit and go for the micro 4/3rds or stick with what I've got?
Click to expand...

Just because you have all that gear doesn't mean you have to always cart it around. Decide what sort of shooting you're going to be doing on a a partucular day and take just one suitable lens and stick with it.
 
CT said:
Just because you have all that gear doesn't mean you have to always cart it around. Decide what sort of shooting you're going to be doing on a a partucular day and take just one suitable lens and stick with it.
Click to expand...

I agree Cedric. The OP's 40D and 17-85 isn't exactly massive or heavy and a very potent walkabout package. A new 500D/550D/60D with 18-55 kit lens would be positively light weight, and fully compatible with the rest of the system.

These new mirrorles jobbies are cool and seductive little toys though ;)
 
Well, that might swing it... only if it was crispy though :nuts:
 
CaptainPenguin said:
Why not get something like a 450D and 18-200 as a walkabout kit when you dont need all the big kit
Click to expand...

It goes back *** the issue mentioned before, making the decision as to what kit to actually take. You decide on a lens, then decide to take one other, just in case, and if you're not careful take the whole lot :)

It's more about disciplining myself and restricting myself to only one or two lenses at a time. Hopefully this may encourage me to think more about the shots I take and bring out a little more creativity in me. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top