jon_kobeck1 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Just curious if any pros or serious photographers have ditched their full frame gear for the Micro Four Thirds format. Tell us if your happy and is it working for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigd Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 <p>I don't know of any pros who have "ditched" full-frame for Micro Four Thirds, but I know of some who, in addition to full-frame gear, also use Micro Four Thirds for some purposes. Kirk Tuck has written very enthusiastically about Olympus' "digital Pen" cameras on his blog, though it's been a few weeks since he's said much about them. Here is his blog:</p> <p><a href="http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/">http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/</a></p> <p>And here are some of Kirk's specific comments on the E-PL2:</p> <p><a href="http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/01/olympus-epl2-first-installment.html">http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/01/olympus-epl2-first-installment.html</a><br> <a href="http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/01/bikers-meet-olympus-epl2.html">http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/01/bikers-meet-olympus-epl2.html</a><br> <a href="http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/01/olympus-epl2-final-installment-kirks.html">http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/01/olympus-epl2-final-installment-kirks.html</a><br> <a href="http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/01/olympus-epl2-is-video-good-do-we-care.html">http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/01/olympus-epl2-is-video-good-do-we-care.html</a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Taylor Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 <p>I shoot full time and recently bought a GF1. I use it for personal stuff, it's easy to drag around, the lenses are great. The 20/1.7 makes it, for me, incredibly useful. But, I can't see it replacing my 5D MK2s and 8 x 'L' lenses. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wouter Willemse Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 <p>Thom Hogan added m4/3 to his toolkit: <a href="http://www.bythom.com">www.bythom.com</a>. Quite some articles on the various available cameras on this site.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukhov Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 <p>-If they don't ditched mid format for -.... some thing right about orientation in equipment </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porter Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 <p>I never understand Yury... LOL</p> <p>I wouldn't consider myself a professional photographer since it isn't how I make my income, but I have sold a shot or two in the past and contribute to charity auctions with relative frequency. Used to have a D700 with all of the 2.8 glass and changed to m4/3. At first my E-P2 was just going to tide me over till I found something I really wanted, but I think I'm quite happy with what I have... I don't have the SHG 4/3 lenses, but I am using the standard ones: 12-60, 50-200. Also have the m4/3 20mm f/1.7 and 4/3 Panaleica 25mm f/1.4. All provide wonderful results.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnfarrar Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 <p>Like Patrick, I'm a 'serious amateur' who sells a few prints and has a few in mags. I run a D700 system alongside a Pen system. The D700 is so superior for low light and being able to pull detail out of shadow areas without noise taking over. It's better for tripod-based pictures and using filters (ND, ND grads, polar). But even with older lightweight lenses it's a heavy system for my ageing frame to carry. The Pen with kit lens, Lumix 20/1.7 (great!), and old Pentax K lenses for tele, gives me a very light system for long hill days (a camera plus 200mm ffe lens weighing about 650 g - would be over twice that with Nikon), and one with great dof for landscapes. It's much much better than the Canon G I used to use, but for sheer quality I'd still use the Nikon.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 <p>I use full frame as replacement for medium format film (sold off my Pentax 6x7 system, still keeping the 6x6 Hasselblad), and 4/3 and m4/3 as replacement for small format film. Different systems for different needs. Would not consider ditching full frame, just as I did not ditch medium format film when small format SLRs got better.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted_raper1 Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 <p>I'm not really a pro, but I do exhibit and sell in galleries. My main equipment is a Nikon D200 and a 17-55DX, Tokina 12-24, 50 and 35 primes, and an 80-200 2.8. I used to carry around small sensor cameras as backup (Canon G11, mostly) but got tired of small sensors. So I ditched the stuff and now I use a Pen with the Panasonic 20 1.7 lens; I think the micro 4/3 format is, for me, the ideal system to use when I don't want to lug 6 or 8 pounds around with me, and in the right circumstances, the IQ fro the Pen/20 setup is almost as good as the Nikon. So I'll never ditch the Nikon but I'll use the Pen quite a lot of the time these days.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne_murphy8 Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 <p>I have a Panasonic micro 4/3 camera and it is pretty good, but the biggest failing in my opinion is that there are virtually no professional zoom lenses available for micro 4/3. Using large other-brand pro lenses with adaptors defeats the purpose, I think. The 4/3 Leica lenses don't get good reviews for reliability and neither Panasonic nor Olympus makes micro 4/3 professional quality zoom lenses (apart from the Pan 7-14). I don't really understand why the micro 4/3 systems is being promoted as semi professional when no attempt is being made to deliver pro/semi-pro zoom lenses, preferably with constant apertures. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Taylor Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 <p>No one is going to "ditch", but rather 'augment'.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rroberto Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 <p>I was recently sent on assignment to SXSW to capture the event for the magazine. After 3 hours of lugging my E3 with battery pack & bag of lenses, I shot the rest of the assignment with an E-P1 and E-PL1, Lumix 50-200, and Zuiko 12-60 with adapter. The editor was extremely happy with the results, and my shoulder and back appreciated the holiday</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_owen3 Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 <p>I don't know if I really count as a serious photographer as I make virtually no money out of it so far but yes, I sold my Nikon D700 and zoom lenses (17-35 f2.8 and 70-300) after trying out the G1 for a few weeks. I decided to fill out the Lumix system which included the excellent 7-14 so the D700 had to go. I kept the excellent legacy lenses. Although the D700 clearly had a better sensor for difficult light situations, now that I upgraded to the GH2 -- always planned anyway as part of the overall purchase -- I find that I'm losing very little in IQ and a lot in weight! The GH2 can give very sharp and detailed images and is a noticeable step up from the first generation sensor which is used by all the Olympus and Lumix models except the GH1. But you must shoot RAW for best results as the Panny JPEGs are still rather mediocre.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exabetal Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 @Wayne; The Pana 14-140 is a pretty good lens, perhaps not EF-L quality but not bad at all, and definitely not if you consider it's a 10x zoom. The Pana 7-14 IS top notch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaunt_gharibian Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>I actually just sold my 5DII and all my SLR (digital and film) gear and switched to a smaller rangefinder system.<br> Now I'm using the Leica M8, a Voigtlander R2A and a Lumix GH2 with Leica M lenses. The GH2 is mostly for telephoto work and low-light photography compensating for the 5DII's high iso sensitivity that i was used to. I use the Leica and Voigtlander mostly for portraits and general daytime/travel shooting. </p> <p>It's tough to simply switch from a can-do-anything full frame DSLR system to a mirrorless system. Nothing matches the versatility of the 5DII. The way it worked for me is switching to an objective-oriented multiple camera system.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astral Posted April 16, 2011 Share Posted April 16, 2011 <p>Our photography department (at work) has just relegated FF to minor jobs and is now moved to Leica S2 for studio, environmental and landscape photography. I can imagiine some pros benefitting from the portability of M4/3 gear, but quality-wise and for sheer lens choice M4/3 is hardly a serious option.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now