- Posts
- 4,733
- Likes
- 11,958
Recommendations needed for entry level mirrorless camera
- Posts
- 244
- Likes
- 231
sgrenald
·I started using micro4/3 about 11 years ago. I've had several bodies, but all Panasonic, and I have a bunch of lenses. But I've mostly switched to Nikon's Z system. But I can tell you that quality glass makes all the difference. I had a Panasonic G7 with a 14-45 lens (which is actually a pretty good lens) but got a "too good to pass up"deal on their 12-35 f/2.8 and the difference in quality was VERY noticeable.
You can use Olympus or Panasonic lenses on either camera, but IN GENERAL, you get better results when you use the camera brand's lenses.
You can use Olympus or Panasonic lenses on either camera, but IN GENERAL, you get better results when you use the camera brand's lenses.
- Posts
- 428
- Likes
- 1,354
Tako Yaki
·https://www.dpreview.com/news/04123...es-deal-with-jip-to-sell-its-imaging-business
It is sad, but... at least a Japanese company is taking over, not a Chinese one!!!
I am a long time Olympus fan.
As the smallest of the Japanese camera maker, they had alway an very interesting camera & lens portfolio IMO.
It is sad, but... at least a Japanese company is taking over, not a Chinese one!!!
I am a long time Olympus fan.
As the smallest of the Japanese camera maker, they had alway an very interesting camera & lens portfolio IMO.
Edited:
- Posts
- 4,733
- Likes
- 11,958
wagudc
·You can use Olympus or Panasonic lenses on either camera, but IN GENERAL, you get better results when you use the camera brand's lenses.
I agree lenses make a big difference. I bought a f1.8 17mm prime lens that is great. I like the Olympus lens but I also have enjoyed dabbling in vintage. I picked up a vintage Minolta 50mm f1.8 manual focus that is fun and cost less than $25 including the adapter. Virtually any manual lens can be adapted.
Edited:
- Posts
- 244
- Likes
- 231
- Posts
- 4,733
- Likes
- 11,958
wagudc
·Yep, all you need is an adapter. I was specifically talking about m43 lenses. But it's also probably true that old lenses (e.g., 20th Century) are probably not as good, optically, as the stuff that's come out in the last five years.
No doubt vintage lenses were not computer designed and optimized, and are not as good as today's top lenses (and perhaps even mid-level lens). However, for virtually nothing you can get a very descent lens to play with. Some of the imperfections of vintage lenses produce artful effects.
- Posts
- 244
- Likes
- 231
sgrenald
·No doubt vintage lenses were not computer designed and optimized, and are not as good as today's top lenses (and perhaps even mid-level lens). However, for virtually nothing you can get a very descent lens to play with. Some of the imperfections of vintage lenses produce artful effects.
I have a Nikon 70-210 f/4. It's one of the first autofocus lenses they made, about 35 years ago. Until Nikon (or someone) makes an F-mount to Z-mount adapter that has a screw drive on it, it's strictly manual focus on my Z7, but I've gotten some good results with it.
- Posts
- 1,370
- Likes
- 11,321
khanmu
·https://www.dpreview.com/news/04123...es-deal-with-jip-to-sell-its-imaging-business
It is sad, but... at least a Japanese company is taking over, not a Chinese one!!!
I am a long time Olympus fan.
As the smallest of the Japanese camera maker, they had alway an very interesting camera & lens portfolio IMO.
My parents bought me an Olympus OM10 for my 16th birthday, and I loved that camera. Yes it is sad news, it has happened to many of the brands and products I grew up with and loved, especially Japanese ones - I’d also include my long vanished Nakamichi tape deck..
- Posts
- 428
- Likes
- 1,354
Tako Yaki
·My parents bought me an Olympus OM10 for my 16th birthday, and I loved that camera. Yes it is sad news, it has happened to many of the brands and products I grew up with and loved, especially Japanese ones - I’d also include my long vanished Nakamichi tape deck..
A Nakamichi Dragon...?!
Cool!
yep, they were bought out by a Chinese company, if I remember right...
Very sad!!!
- Posts
- 533
- Likes
- 5,917
ikanbilisclub
·I switched over from Nikon to a Fuji XT2 with a 35mm f1.4 a few years back and was quite blown away by Fuji's capabilities. However, it's still on the heavy side and I found myself less enthused about carrying it out even on outings with the kiddos.
Recently got a pre-owned X100f with low shutter count for 600USD and I'm loving the portability and performance! It's so much easier to bring around the place.
Recently got a pre-owned X100f with low shutter count for 600USD and I'm loving the portability and performance! It's so much easier to bring around the place.
- Posts
- 17
- Likes
- 52
neokind
·No doubt vintage lenses were not computer designed and optimized, and are not as good as today's top lenses (and perhaps even mid-level lens). However, for virtually nothing you can get a very descent lens to play with. Some of the imperfections of vintage lenses produce artful effects.
that’s all true. Building on this idea is that vintage lenses were designed for film and not the digital sensor stacks in today’s cameras. This can lead to various issues. None are deal breakers for the average shooter, but modern lenses and their coatings are optimized for the cameras of today. I am a big fan and have a small collection of Zeiss lenses for the C/Y mount that I use on my Sony Bodies. They’re fun to use, render beautifully, but there’s no comparison to modern glass and coatings, especially when shooting into a light source.
- Posts
- 4,733
- Likes
- 11,958
wagudc
·that’s all true. Building on this idea is that vintage lenses were designed for film and not the digital sensor stacks in today’s cameras. This can lead to various issues. None are deal breakers for the average shooter, but modern lenses and their coatings are optimized for the cameras of today. I am a big fan and have a small collection of Zeiss lenses for the C/Y mount that I use on my Sony Bodies. They’re fun to use, render beautifully, but there’s no comparison to modern glass and coatings, especially when shooting into a light source.
I am indeed an average shooter (if not below average). I bought an 80s Minolta macro lens with the extension tube for under $60 (featured here: https://lens.ws/minolta-md-50mm-f3-5-macro/ ) I am still learning to use it, but it is fun way to try out macro photography. I also learned that 50mm on MFT is a bit too tight for good wrist shots. I did manage to get a nice picture of an iris in our garden though.
- Posts
- 244
- Likes
- 231
sgrenald
·I am indeed an average shooter (if not below average). I bought an 80s Minolta macro lens with the extension tube for under $60 (featured here: https://lens.ws/minolta-md-50mm-f3-5-macro/ ) I am still learning to use it, but it is fun way to try out macro photography. I also learned that 50mm on MFT is a bit too tight for good wrist shots. I did manage to get a nice picture of an iris in our garden though.
50mm on m43 is more like 100mm on full frame. Which is good for macro or portrait, but not so great for close shots. You can get the Panasonic 25mm for $150 pretty much every other month, if it's not actually on sale right now. Wider gets more expensive
- Posts
- 17
- Likes
- 52
neokind
·50mm on m43 is more like 100mm on full frame. Which is good for macro or portrait, but not so great for close shots. You can get the Panasonic 25mm for $150 pretty much every other month, if it's not actually on sale right now. Wider gets more expensive
That’s the primary drawback, in my mind, for the mft format. Wide lenses can be really pricey. Of course the trade off is for full or aps formats, the former having a much higher price of entry, and the latter having more or less the same crop factor issue as mft. There are lots of gems out there to find, though, especially in the old Minolta lineup.
- Posts
- 4,733
- Likes
- 11,958
wagudc
·50mm on m43 is more like 100mm on full frame. Which is good for macro or portrait, but not so great for close shots. You can get the Panasonic 25mm for $150 pretty much every other month, if it's not actually on sale right now. Wider gets more expensive
That’s the primary drawback, in my mind, for the mft format. Wide lenses can be really pricey. Of course the trade off is for full or aps formats, the former having a much higher price of entry, and the latter having more or less the same crop factor issue as mft. There are lots of gems out there to find, though, especially in the old Minolta lineup.
I have an Olympus 17mm f1.8 that was $200 used from KEH. It is great for landscapes and snapshots of the kids birthday parties, etc. However it is too wide for that classic wrist shot. The 50mm is good for portraits, flowers, bugs, and a watch off the wrist. I plan to pick up something between the two, maybe just the 14-42 kit lens (which I don't have). At some point I may get the Olympus 30mm macro.
The 17mm (cropped down a bit).
50mm
- Posts
- 184
- Likes
- 83
Out of TIME!
·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?
Micro 4/3's good bang for the buck, IMO
I have an Olympus Pen E lp-1 & consider the Lumix over Olympus
The lenses apperar better made. The low end Olympus lenses have a plastic mount.
Knocked over tripod with camrea on it lens is kaput!
Picked up lens adaptors from Fotodiox and lenses at thrift to replace it.
Anyway get one with a finder so you can frame outside.
- Posts
- 184
- Likes
- 83
- Posts
- 4,733
- Likes
- 11,958
wagudc
·Check out BMP used cameras, Pansonic Lumix DMC LX100
Micro 4/3's good bang for the buck, IMO
I have an Olympus Pen E lp-1 & consider the Lumix over Olympus
The lenses apperar better made. The low end Olympus lenses have a plastic mount.
Knocked over tripod with camrea on it lens is kaput!
Picked up lens adaptors from Fotodiox and lenses at thrift to replace it.
Anyway get one with a finder so you can frame outside.
I went with the Olympus with f1.8 17mm prime lens which is all metal. I recently got the 75-300mm zoom, which is plastic with a metal mount. One could certainly get higher quality kit, but for me the price, size / weight, and quality are about right.
- Posts
- 16,783
- Likes
- 47,526
STANDY
··schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collectorI went with the Olympus with f1.8 17mm prime lens which is all metal. I recently got the 75-300mm zoom, which is plastic with a metal mount. One could certainly get higher quality kit, but for me the price, size / weight, and quality are about right.
How are you enjoying the f1.8 17mm
Makes a easy grab point and shoot with a bit more bang.
The WiFi is so easy to get the pictures to a iPad or phone. This alone is the feature that makes the camera a stand out for me.
Don’t know if you have seen this
https://robinwong.blogspot.com/2016/04/5-reasons-why-olympus-om-d-e-m10-mark.html
And some tips here
https://robinwong.blogspot.com/2015/08/olympus-om-d-e-m10-mark-ii-review.html
- Posts
- 13,169
- Likes
- 52,339
Larry S
··Color Commentator for the Hyperbole.EM1 M2 owner here … 3 Lenses … I love the camera. I am however, fairly angry about how Olympus abruptly exited the business…. Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm….stay with a firm who’s in it long haul.
Similar threads
- Posts
- 203
- Views
- 29K
- Posts
- 1
- Views
- 4K
- Posts
- 23
- Views
- 2K
