Going from MFT to used DSLR ?

F

Fuju

Suspended / Banned
Messages
118
Edit My Images
Yes
I've got an old Oly E-M10 and it's been good but I'm just feeling a bit held back by its performance now. It seems that even some older DSLR rigs at a cheaper price will offer as good or better IQ than say a newer OM1 MK3 which is 800 quid used, albeit that model has more features though, but I'm still thinking an older DSLR maybe a better option.

I've got a max budget for a body of £300 and I've seen a Sony SLT-A77, which is older than my camera, but on paper it would outperform the Oly in almost every area. It's got about 15000 shutter count, which didn't seem too bad. I've also been looking at the Nikon 7100 too.

What do you think? I'd also need to adapt my lenses but think I could cope with the slight difference in focal length.
 
Can you adapt the lenses?
 
I shoot whatever, no preference really.

I have seen adapters but maybe I'll check further, it's not a real problem as I can sell the ones I've got.
 
What element of performance do you feel is holding you back?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
I'd be careful looking at older DSLR's as a more recent MFT might actually offer better image quality and I'm not sure you'll be able to adapt MFT lenses to APS-C cameras as some may not cover the image circle even if you could adapt them plus there's the questions of how are you going to focus and adjust the aperture?

My last DSLR was the Canon 5D and I'm pretty sure recent MFT cameras are better but that 5D is very old tech now.

Anyway, this is my advice, don't get carried away with the thought that a DSLR is going to be better, check first. Check compatibility of lenses you may want to adapt and check IQ.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't £300 be better used to probably upgrading your lenses? If you change your camera to a budget-friendly old DSLR then I don't think your photography going to change much.
 
I quite like my lenses and didn't need to upgrade them tbh. I wanted a little more MP for cropping, higher FPS, articulating screen, environmental sealing, higher shutter speed, better quality EVF etc. Despite the Sony being older, it's got what I want. I don't shoot digital much so this will fit my needs unless I spend more time on digital.
 
If your after the Sony then you will have to get Sony own lens.

Just looking around and it is not possbile to adapt MFT lens to fit onto a DSLR, simply because it will be too far away from the snesor to get an image in focus also you would need to have it electronically mounted else you would be shooting wide open all the time.

If you want to keep the lens you have then you may have to look at Panasonic or Olympus.
 
Fuju said:
I quite like my lenses and didn't need to upgrade them tbh. I wanted a little more MP for cropping, higher FPS, articulating screen, environmental sealing, higher shutter speed, better quality EVF etc. Despite the Sony being older, it's got what I want. I don't shoot digital much so this will fit my needs unless I spend more time on digital.
Click to expand...

Have a look here...

cameradecision.com

Olympus E-M1 III vs Sony A77 II Detailed Comparison

Read our detailed comparison of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III vs Sony SLT-A77 II to find out their strengths and weaknesses, and decide which one to choose.
cameradecision.com
 
The D7100 is a vastly better option the A77. That range of Sony cameras has been completely abandoned, bar a small handful of lenses, and never hugely popular anyway so not something I would choose to buy into. At least with Nikon there's a huge number of suitable lenses out there.

As already mentioned, you can forget any idea of converting your existing lenses. Apart from the flange distance problem, the MFT sensor is half the size of APS-C so they would vignette horribly on a DSLR.

Basically, you need a more realistic budget.
 
Snapsh0t said:
The D7100 is a vastly better option the A77. That range of Sony cameras has been completely abandoned, bar a small handful of lenses, and never hugely popular anyway so not something I would choose to buy into.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of low-cost Sony A mount lenses available, all the cheaper thanks to it being abandonned. Can't say I'd recommend an A77, but if low cost photography is what's needed then it will be cheaper than Nikon - talking as someone who moved from Sony to Nikon. A lot of the old Minolta glass is much better than the old enthusiast Nikon stuff (but the 28-80 and 28-100 zooms are pure garbage) and the best matches Nikon pro-quality.
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
There are a lot of low-cost Sony A mount lenses available, all the cheaper thanks to it being abandonned. Can't say I'd recommend an A77, but if low cost photography is what's needed then it will be cheaper than Nikon - talking as someone who moved from Sony to Nikon. A lot of the old Minolta glass is much better than the old enthusiast Nikon stuff (but the 28-80 and 28-100 zooms are pure garbage) and the best matches Nikon pro-quality.
Click to expand...
A camera without a real viewfinder and a really crap fake one. No wonder nobody wanted them.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
A camera without a real viewfinder and a really crap fake one. No wonder nobody wanted them.
Click to expand...
Have you ever used a Sony A-series camera?

As someone who uses a pair of A65s regularly, alongside Nikon and Panasonic systems, I find them well designed, reliable and capable of providing the results I want...

Bicycle with big tyres and trailer in Exeter A65 DSC02564.JPG
Halifax bomber at Yorkshire Air Museum A65 DSC02648.JPGPedestrian steps from Western Way to Bridge Street Exeter A65 DSC03686.JPG
 
LongLensPhotography said:
A camera without a real viewfinder and a really crap fake one. No wonder nobody wanted them.
Click to expand...

The viewfinders are less bad than the E-M10 series, and they are especially functional in low light or with smaller aperture zooms - TBH I'd much prefer one of these electronic viewfinders than an OVF on a crop body with a kit zoom.
 
keep your lenses and go for a used omd1-mkii lots on the s/h market at the moment
 
the black fox said:
keep your lenses and go for a used omd1-mkii lots on the s/h market at the moment
Click to expand...
Not for £300 Jeff, I've been looking, that's why I ended up with a MKIII
 
Tysonator said:
£300 budget IMO is not realistic t buy in to newer models DSLR or mirrorless, especially if new glass is required !
Click to expand...
Agreed.
If the Sony is going to be 300 and another 300 for lenses, why not take that 600 and buy a G9, then you can use your current lenses, and keep the old camera as a back up.

But then for 600 there are many possibilities :)
 
LongLensPhotography said:
A camera without a real viewfinder and a really crap fake one. No wonder nobody wanted them.
Click to expand...
That is a bit unfair and hardly unique to Sony as every mirrorless can now has an evf. I too prefer an ovf but am more than happy to use an evf.

I used to own an a65 and an a77 and IQ was excellent, indeed images sold using them more than paid for my D850!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top