Does Mirrorless Overpriced ?

<p>Technically, can I use ring adapter to put a Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 on the Panasonic GH3 for better picture quality ? </p>

<blockquote>

<p>can I use ring adapter to put a Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 on the Panasonic GH3 for better picture quality ?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Better than what?<br>

<br>

Leaving the "better" part aside, yes, you can adapt Nikon lenses to any mirrorless camera.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I have always assumed that lack of production run makes for high prices and developing something new</p>

</blockquote>

<p>actually, in the case of the GH3/GH4, they have high prices because of their high-end feature sets. the GH4, for instance, can do 4k video.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>you can adapt Nikon lenses to any mirrorless camera.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>technically this is true, but... AFAIK, there is no third-party adapter which will allow for AF w/ Nikon F-mount lenses. also, the GH3 does not currently have focus peaking, which helps when manually-focusing. So that may not be the best solution for you. Panasonic does make a 12-35/2.8 which on MFT is a 24-70 equivalent, but it costs around $1000. in other words, there is no free lunch. Many videographers nowadays are using DSLRs and high-end mirrorless because of the smaller form factor, but if you want pro-level performance, you are probably going to have to lay out a fair amount of cash.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.ebay.com/itm/OLYMPUS-E-PM2-White-Micro-Four-Thirds-Interchangeable-Lens-System-Camera-with-Si/301164437154">E-PM2 for $199</a>.</p>

 

<p>It all depends on what you need, how badly you need it, how much you earn, and other factors. "Overpriced" is a subjective term in a world in which a D800 costs close to $3,000 and a perfectly fine Nikon FM can go for 80 bucks. How badly do you need a "backup?" What will it do for you that you can't already do with your existing gear? Cameras are tools that are more or less suited to some situations and more or less not suited to others. I happen to like the NEX6 with a 20mm lens for EVERYTHING and that "kit" cost me about a grand. I don't make much money but I am a one camera, one lens guy, so I don't think it's overpriced. Maybe instead of a backup camera that involves buying into a different system you should think about lenses for your existing system. </p>

<p>@J. Sevigny,<br>

You are right, I 100% agree with you. If I can afford $1800 or more for Panasonic GH3 kit or Sony A7, likely I go for a decent lens for my Nikon DSLR family to share with. It was my mistake to misunderstand mirrorless camera. <br>

I have Nikon P7000 in my backpack everyday while I'm going to work, to hike, to shop or having coffee in SB. I like this $400 point-and-shoot with full manual control and good picture quality. The only downside is no DOF or 1080 video external mic jack. I "expected" a full loaded mirroless to replace this everyday P7000 which is around $500. Obviously, I was wrong. </p>

<p>You really need to do your homework. As was stated above, almost every camera is good for some things and bad for others. The GH3 and GH4 are designed in such a way as to almost make still photographs an additional extra feature. Reading videographers' technical jargon is very mysterious to me. "I can't use Codex jingl-weeb at 50 fps without hijacking my endorun until post. I'm using Biscuit Freak to edit"<br>

OK.<br>

I still have to remind myself NOT to take the video in Portrait orientation!</p>