I am looking to step up to a decent quality camera (think Seiko, not Timex or Rolex). I have always had point and shoot, or cellphone cameras. I want something that is reasonably compact, has changeable lenses, and can perform decently in low light. I also prefer to have a view finder. Price wise I am thinking in the $600-$800 range for body and basic lens. If I can a zoom lens too for that price, great otherwise I can get it later. Image stabilization is important, because I don't want to haul around a tripod.

So far, I am leaning towards the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III which I can get for $700 usd including a zoom lens. What do you all think? Anyone have experience with this camera or other reccomendations?

 

I have no experience with the MkIII, but I bought an OMD-10 MkI when it first came out. Although I've loved my OM1 (several bodies and a big bag of lenses) and OM4 cameras since the 1970s this one has been trouble. If not used for a few weeks it was always advisable to take apart body and lenses and clean the contacts with alcohol -- a bit of jiggling the lens against the contacts was sometimes needed in the field too. Now the 14-42 lens seems to have completely died, so I just use the body with the 60mm macro lens. It's a shame, but after 40 years of happy Olympus use I will not be buying any more. To keep my investment in the 60mm Macro I'm looking for another Micro-4/3 body, perhaps a Panasonic of which my one compact has been reliable.

I hate to diss Olympus, but they're not the same outfit they used to be

 

You’re right!
https://www.dpreview.com/news/04123...es-deal-with-jip-to-sell-its-imaging-business

 

@MRC I'll mark that as a vote against in the Olympus. It is good feedback. Since you mention Panasonic to the DMC G7 seems good. This kit looks like a good deal. There are so many options and numbers in the camera world, it makes a newbie overwhelmed. I also know from binoculars quality makes a much bigger difference than the numbers. The Sony a6000 is also a popular option in this price range, but it is getting long in the tooth.

 

Not a good sign I think.

 

Lumix FZ, whatever the latest version is.

stupidly powerful and capable Lieca lens as long as you don’t want to take many flash pictures indoors.

i’ve had one for years and am still happy with it. Relative small, relatively simple, quite powerful without the need for extra lenses. I have a friend who has about ten grand tied up in her gear and I constantly piss her off with this $400 thing.

 

Intriguing idea, a step up from standard point and shoot, but not quite interchangeable lens level. We spend a lot of time in densely forested areas and no camera I have had will take descent photos. Even with a flash, they struggle, maybe because there are no walls to reflect the flash. Plus our all black dog is impossible to photograph.

 

This might help
https://www.dpreview.com/buying-guides
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/buying-guide-best-cameras-under-500
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/buying-guide-best-cameras-under-1000

 

The OM-D E-M10 ll is actually a better camera better stability

Have it and love it. Have been able to get a few good lens for it but nowadays I mostly go the 17 pancake and use it like a 35mm camera.

Few shots a while back all at the same place.

 

Thanks, I had seen sone of these, but the buying guide got me to the lens reccomendations which are quite helpful.

 

I like the idea of non-zoom lens, better low light performance. Zoom = walk closer to subject.

 

I have a Sony 7r series. Look for sales.

Can't recommend a particular brand unfortunately. My suggestion is related to lens. You can get killer prime lenses used (from Japan mainly). Get yourself an adapter and you can get inexpensive vintage stuff. I have Canon FD as they are good and lots. You shoot manual but with the camera's settings you can set the view to turn (red in my case) on the spot that's focused. You can also set a zoom in on the viewfinder to get sharp. It's easier than it sounds. You can still get some auto lens but if you have time to shoot your subject you can save money.

That's my quick down and dirty suggestion. Welcome to a new rabbit hole.

 

I find it does poorly with flash photography because by the time it works out the shot the subject has moved. Its great for static shots but dogs don’t sit still do they

photography in the forest is where its great, while my friend is pissing around changing lenses this stupid thing has gone from wide angle to high zoom at the push of a button. Plus i’m not toting a ton of lenses around in a bag or exposing the camera’s guts to the elements every time i change one.

and when the day comes that it gets busted on a rock my camera is worth less than one of her lenses.

 

My plan was a point and shoot with a good Auto everything but able to pick myself when needed.
The wifi connection from Olympus is great for easy download to phone or iPad
As said the ll is better than the lll so may be cheaper if they are still around.

 

I've been shooting with Fuji cameras since 2013 now.
Currently using X-T4. And would recommend used X-T2 + 18-55 lens (maybe 700USD total?).
But, even X-T1 is awesome, although rather old now.
I love JPG files that come from the camera. Fuji is known for creating good color science. They do make actual films.
I mostly shoot outdoors and family JPGs. Rarely need RAW conversion, unless the light is difficult.

Few things to consider when choosing a camera.

1. Sensor size
The smaller sensor has more noise. So, you need more light.
The smaller sensor has more depth of field. So, you might want to buy "brighter" lenses.
The smaller sensor makes better macro photography.

2. Do your hands shake?
A bigger sensor requires more precise focusing and I advise cameras with in-body stabilization.
That costs more.
Smaller sensor cameras have also IBIS.

3. Do you need a fast autofocusing system?
Some pro photographers shoot modern cameras only in manual mode, including manually focusing. Moving subjects are shot with planning and prefocusing.
I can't comment on the Olympus/Panasonic cameras you chose, but I guess they are alright.

3. Do you want to shoot macro photos of your watches (or whatever)?
Many lenses don't focus on close distance. And have too small magnification.
If you get Fuji 18-55 with a macro extension tube (Fuji's) you still have autofocus and can have good magnification.
I use an 80mm macro lens, that has 1:1 magnification, but it's expensive. Laowa makes 2:1 lenses for 2x less money. Manual focus only.

4. User experience of menus.
Try different cameras in the shop. I didn't like Sony's menu navigation. This could be important at the end of the day.

Whatever you choose, just go out and shoot
In my experience, a good photo comes from the light or lack of it.

 

Thanks everyone. I took a look at all the options everyone suggested, but ended up buying the same camera and lens @STANDY second hand from KEH camera, and an entry level Olympus zoom lens.

 

I have the first version of the Olympus OMD - bought it when it came out and with a bunch of lenses. I’ve not had any quality issues, and it’s certainly been very reliable and robust for me. I’m in no way a competent photographer but even I managed to take some vaguely half decent photos (pre-lockdown on holiday in Africa, it seems so long ago)...I can pm you the lenses I use, if you are interested.

 

Hi all,

I have not got a chance to use the new camera much but I took a couple shots around the house and back yard. I bought the Olympus EM10 Mark II. A few shots with the Zuiko 17mm F1.8 prime lens, and a $10 thirft store 50mm F1.8 Minolta manual focus lens. Lots of fun.

 

How are you enjoying the ease of use and lightness of the package.