Advice and Experience from the u4/3 community

<p>Hello all<br>

I have been thinking seriously about my upgrade path of late, leaning towards a Fuji, flirting with the idea of a Type 701, the samples from which on Mr Huff's site seem very nice and I am now wondering whether I should stick with u4/3 and put the money towards lenses. As some of you will remember I have a baaad hankering for the Leica 42.5/1.2. It would also be nice to have the 45mm Macro. These two together cost a lot! I would be grateful if those with experience could comment on their findings please.<br>

1. How big a leap in IQ is there from a GX1 to a GX7? Is it any quicker/more accurate in the AF/WB Dept? Does anyone have any idea when the GX8 might be coming out? It seems that Oly/Panny are leapfrogging each other but as far as I can remember, the GX7 is only about a year old, which would mean a wait of possibly another year.<br>

2. Are there any people out there who have used both the OMD-EM1 and the GX7?<br>

3. What about the build quality and IQ of the GH4? Given that I'm useless at movies, would the pro spec and possibly better processing engine mean I would have the advantages of the EM1's admittedly impressive layout but with the bonus of class-leading movie output?<br>

Thanks for your replies. I know it is a lot to consider, given I am only weighing up three different cameras, but I am getting a bit tired of having to start again with lenses/formats/software and like my workflow at the moment.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'm using the GX7 and am liking it very much. Its my first 4/3. I haven't used any other. I use a Leica 35 sum micron, rarely a 50 sum micron and main lens is the Panasonic 12-35 and the 20mm. The Panny lenses are quite good. The video is also very good though not what the G4 is, and doesn't have the options of the G3 but the video quality is lovely.</p>

<p>After starting the <em>ISO still the weakess of MFT Format</em> thread one would assume that you are in fact the leading authority on µ4/3.</p>

" I am getting a bit tired of having to start again with lenses/formats/software and like my

 

workflow at the moment."

 

Every new thing will be displaced by some newer and hotter thing. And will always be thus.... Some people buy and sell, sell and buy to the advantage of those who buy used gear, to the profit of KEH and eBay, so I can understand and even sympathize, gear lust is lust, ---an itch hard to keep scratching. If you have lots of discretionary money and a big tax refund and you are hot for something, just go for it. Which one? All of the above have merits....and users... Just appreciate that in a year there will be a newer version. There will even be an EM2 in 3 years, and a GH5 etc.... I am SO durn satisfied with my EM-1 JPEGS that I am not looking except casually at newer offerings from Fuji (very nice is Fuji, I respect them) even as I could -theoretically- convince myself with little effort that I can spring for a Fuji system alongside my micro four thirds. I have heard of such ambidextrous lot out there..:-)

Buy good lenses, well of course. A tripod and head, get a good one....these are interesting, more than sensor baloney.... I am happy with my kit for what I shoot, better than anything I ever owned. And more than I will ever honestly need. I can rave about the Lumix 12-35 F 2.8 but I think I did that already on this forum... a lens is a good addition vis a vis another body methinks.. cameras and sensors are already exceeding expectations for us.

If you absolutely want higher ISO for instance in incredibly dark bistros, you can add a full frame Sony for the bistro work. Otherwise, no advice SORRY, try dpreview for features lists, practice transcendental meditation and tamp down Spring Fever. Just a bit. Aloha nui.

<p>Thanks for the <em>constructive</em> comments; Bruce, stop being an arse.<br>

I had a good look at a couple of GH4 reviews and it looks bloody brilliant. Like possibly many of us, I had set it aside in the "not really relevant" box but it manages to just edge a nose ahead the EM1 and has a button layout that I want to try out. The full coverage of AF points and accurate, lightning-fast AF also appeals very much. I was also looking at the 12-35/2.8, which of course is 24-70 in FF terms, a classic medium zoom option. I feel it is very likely I will end up buying <em>both</em> the 42/1.2 and the 12-35/2.8. There goes another two grand! I'll need to get out there and have a good old play with both the EM1 and the GH4 and make a decision. It'll really come down to personal preference in the end. One thing that is keeping me interested in u4/3 is the lens lines-up. Rather than trawling through a million Nikon lens reviews and choosing between 10 different zooms, thirty years worth of primes etc, it is relatively straightforward to go through the choices for this format. There are many peaches and very few lemons. <br>

http://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/lenses<br>

http://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/lenses</p>

 

<i>It'll really come down to personal preference in the end.</i>

<br>

<br>

So why the long winded posts?

<p>You're not really getting what a forum<em> is</em>, are you?<br /> OK, by special request:<br /> I just got my new camera It's BRILLIANT! Everything about is GREAT! I'm so happy I can now take pictures of my back yard. Micro Four Thirds RULE! Anyne who buys a Nikon or Canon is a moron!<br /> Happy now, Norman?</p>

<p>What the world needs is the Ralph Oshiro/ Stepehen Conkie <em>Welcome to my Photo Gear Toy Box Forum.</em></p>

I have enjoyed my now aging but still perky Lumix GH2. I am only casually interested in movies, not serious enough to fill big fat SD cards-, but Panasonic has delivered a pleasant camera in its GH series, and they seem to be not so small to get a firm grip on, yet I am not getting a GH4 nor GH3....Too many camera bodies now I have a flagship Oly micro model. I wanted to still be able to use the ED lenses such as the 50mm which I plan to keep. Olympus has delivered a high end product in the E-M1., which also has a good grip and feel and solid build. Olympus has put thought in its design I mean. And delivered on the promise of compatibility so many disputed for years......Now I am trying to get a mental "grip" on its functions and settings.....

What still I like about the Panasonic GHx series- is a FULLY articulated viewfinder that swings to the side as well as up and down dimension. )I have no doubt the GH4 with its build quality is worth the entry fee, but no sale for me...No need for it right now).

As to upgrades, I am not immune. And a used or refurb would not be out of the question, more bang for the buck... I would like to own the Lumix f 2.8 35-100 ( zooms are my style lately, they are so doggone good) Meaning it would be tempting....but I know my needs and feel no urgency. My problem is lack of places to try them out and handle them locally.

Options if I want more reach I still can use the 50-200mm with adapter, but it is a big fit in the bag, though not out of the question. Or in fact , all my Canon FD lenses - with adapters and focus peaking feature of E-M1. Even the ED 50mm with my EC-14...gives me good tele for my needs No Birdies in my viewfinder is main thing..

Bottom line:Lots of workarounds before shelling out 1300 bucks. My take is my take, naturally, each to her own:-)

Having two camera designs for me at least gets tricky unless one is really serious about camerawork..or semi pro... Mastering the menus on one is enough of a task.

The E-M-1 is almost too versatile. What I am glad to see is a convergence in the two micro 4/3 companies, illustrated by the Lumix GX7 addition of in body IS. About time.

 

We all need to take an" easy strain" in discussing pros and cons if this forum is to remain hospitable to the " community." A good neighbor policy doesn't cost anything. GS

<p>As Gerry said, I would like to have the 35-100 2.8, but its expensive. I did need and bought the 12-35 2.8 and I think its a very good lens. I think it is very clear, and I like the color I get from the combination of that lens and the GX7. Plus the OIS seems to work pretty well. Compared to "big camera" 24-70's its nice and small and light. It is expensive though.</p>