Jump to content

Any "pros" ditch their full frame DSLR for M4/3 format ? Are you happy?


jon_kobeck1

Recommended Posts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<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

<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

<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

<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

<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

<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

<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

<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

  • 2 weeks later...
<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

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...