From EOS to mirror less ( 4/3 etc ) - anyone else seriously considering this move

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by tdigi, May 17, 2010.

  1. From what I have seen I am pretty impressed with the four thirds cameras and other smaller inter-changable lens cameras out and coming out in the near future ( sony NEX, panasonic, olympus etc)

    I don't see completely moving away from my full frame 5D2 since I do work with it on occasion and its such a great camera when I really want/need the highest quality but I do plan to get something that is easier to handle for casual shooting. I would think users of APS-C cameras and those who shoot completely for fun would be even more intrigued.
     
  2. They're cute little cameras but a bit small to shoot with, especially with larger lenses. I can't imagine a 300 2.8 or 400 F4 on the little bugger. I played with a Oly Pen at Shirokiya--what eye candy--but it felt so awkward at arm's length. I think if you fit the eye level VF and only used wide to normal lenses a lot of guys would dig 'em. I'd have to fit a oversized grip with rounded contours as it felt like holding a metal bar of soap. Of course then it would be as large as a Rebel but what the hay.
     
  3. I'm getting a Panasonic G2 when it comes out in a few weeks. I'm getting fed up with carrying a large DSLR around with me. When I get one it will be interesting to see how much I use the DSLR. The G2 will also replace my camcorder which is hardly ever used because of its size.

    Cheers

    Alan
     
  4. They are rather dinky little bodies and I personally would be going for the NEX when I have spare funds available. You need to appreciate that this is not going to have the same IQ as your full frame beast. You would also have to take into account that this is perhaps not the professional camera in the old Leica mould from 50s and 60s. However, they are fun cameras with much potential in the right hand. Like any other system, you need to let the system grow in your palms and develop your shooting habits. Once this part is achieved, they would be a joy to play with.
     
  5. The smaller the camera the smaller the attention it garners, waiting for the perfect small digital street camera. Well as close as perfect, mostly time lag and low noise at least up to 800 ISO, presently use (small) the G11 and and an old T70 (that people only look at like it is some type of dinosaur).
     
  6. I purchased the dinky bodied too small to shoot with Pen E-PL1 a few weeks ago. I have not used my full sized DSLR since (for non-work related photography) and likely will not for most general personal photography. The IQ is as promised. So is the convenience.
     
  7. I'm deeply interested in the 'mirror-less' camera approach, but I find them problematic to use because of the viewfinder (or lack thereof). My close-distance eyesight (two feet or less, say) is very poor and I simply cannot use a compact camera - I can't see what's on the screen sufficiently well to compose. I can't even judge whether a horizon is horizontal or not, for example, not to mention the awkwardness of the 'arms-length' position. So I use EOS DSLRs and, when I feel like it, a Leica M6 with a few of their lower-cost lenses. (And the VF on that is wonderful...)
    I know that there are the EVFs for the m4/3 cameras, but it seems to me that these are optically different. My vague recollections of optics in school physics lessons told me that a reflected image is as far away from the viewer as the real image, so when I'm looking at a landscape or travel scene on the DSLR I'm looking into the distance via the VF mirrors. (With the Leica I'm not even looking at a reflection, I'm looking directly at the view.) But with an EVF, surely I'm looking at a projection an inch (or less) from my eye; and although it's projection of a distant view, it's not quite the same as a traditional SLR reflected image. Is it?
     
  8. Tom,
    SLRs project the viewing image onto a small ground glass screen located after the mirror. Our eyes adjust to that as if it were far away due to optics in the eyepiece area after the pentaprism. But optical finders look more lifelike because through the whole viewing system, light stays as light. With EVFs, the recorded light is converted to electronic information which is send to a detailed electronic display that we view, but EVFs just don't have the clarity of all optical systems, and give a pixeled view.
    I'm with you on having trouble composing with a rear display. I owned the G1 when it first came out, but never entirely warmed up to the EVF. I am considering getting the G2, but not to replace my 5D. The idea of shooting video from eye level really appeals to me. And there are enough m4/3 dedicated lenses out now to give a decent selection.
     
  9. Nope, I like my 40D and the range of lenses available. I'd like to get a FF in addition to it some day and have no intention of going 4/3.
     
  10. I agree the viewfinder or lack of is annoying but everything in photography is a tradeoff so I would live with it for casual use. I also do not see using this camera with long lenses. I just like something small that is better then a p/s. I also like that its pretty easy to shoot high quality video. I see no reason to ever own a camcorder.
     
  11. Canon's "superzoom" cameras are already quite similar to the new mini SLRs - I have an SX10 IS, with the LCD viewfinder and swivel LCD on the back. With its equivalent zoom lens of 28-570mm, it is quite capable. I use mine most of the time for casual shooting instead of my XSi DSLR and seven lenses.
    Having the swivel LCD is a real bonus, being able to take low down shots without needing to physically lay on the ground. The camera has most of the same controls as a DSLR, manual, etc., and accepts my Canon 430EX flash. About the only thing that bothers me is the shutter delay, but I can live with that in a single lightweight camera versus the DSLR and the whole lot of baggage that goes with it. Still like and use the DSLR, but the smaller one is with me most of the time.
     
  12. I work in landscapes that are reproduced at a large size. Even FF DSLRs are marginal and usually I wind up stitching or shooting MF or LF film. When Canon releases a FF mirrorless rangefinder at about 1/3 the price of the Leica M9, then I'll be interested! The new mirrorless cameras, with a couple of lenses, etc., don't really offer any advantage over a Rebel. As others have noted, the LCD display issues in bright light, and lack of real viewfinders are major negatives for serious work.
     
  13. I'm very interested in the development in this field. Personally I don't see myself moving over to 4/3, but adding one is very tempting; I currently also use a point&shoot. I do a lot of hiking and would certainly appreciate a lightweight setup while retaining good IQ. I don't mind the lack of an optical viewfinder, but a swivel screen is a must in my opinion. It'll also depend on what lenses will become available.
    I agree with Manuel Barrera in that a smaller camera has distinct advantages. Magnum photographer Alex Majoli has created stunning images using nothing but compact cameras, and I agree with his conclusions regarding their unique advantages and shooting style, see Alex Majoli points and shoots
     
  14. I guess that is what I should have said, I do not plan to move to 4/3 just to ad one or some form of advanced smaller camera.
     
  15. Micro 4/3 cameras are like iPad... they produce a need that some people didn't have! It might be a good solution for a pro who do not want to haul around big DSLRs while on vacation. But for amateurs, like myself, it's not the case. When I'm on vacation, I want to shoot, so I take my DSLR and a bunch of lenses with me (no need to say, no micro 4/3 can match the quality of 5D and prime lenses, whatsoever). When I'm around with friends, I take a P&S to do some snapshots. So I don't see how it would fit in my shooting style. Anyway, I would try them out, if I have the chance!
     
  16. I recently added a Olympus e-pl1 to my D700 and D5000. I have found it to be quite an amazing little image maker. Is it perfect? By NO means. NO camera is. It has like others its strengths and weaknesses. In the strength department it produces perhaps the sweetest Jpegs in the industry. Color accurate and rich and sharp, ready to print. In the RAW department it adds a tad of dynamic range and overall ability to adjust in the post, but otherwise this is a camera you can just go out and shoot and enjoy with. The built in stabilization is a plus, especially when using lenses such as the superb Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and Olympus 17mm f2.8 as well as others offered by many manufacturers with adapters, which for many people is the highlight of the Olympus Mft line, that ability to use manufactures of many kinds with this camera body.
    Overall IQ is very high indeed. I've compared directly next to my D5000 and in fact out of camera it has MORE pleasing colors, which from the D5000 would require more adjustment to get it there. Sure, dynamic range is still superior on a competent DSLR, but this isn't always a deal breaker. You won't find a camera to produce BETTER photography of flowers and overall landscapes that will easily print a knock out 13x19. The build quality is very tight and solid. I added their VF-2 viewfinder which provides a stunning 100% view and 60fps refresh rate. It makes for a wonderful travel camera that can deliver the goods. Battery life ain't half bad either. on average around 300 shots a charge. The video, while perhaps not quite up to the Canon 5DmkII standards will MORE than suffice for the great many folks out there. It is simply so easy to use and get great results. Enough adjustments for the seasoned serious shooter and yet you can hand it to your wife or kid and expect results as well. Sure it's not a sports shooter, but in good light it can pull that off as well.
    Those that have seen or investigated this cam know already it has the tiny built in flash. Useful for fill in or add a Oly outboard flash and it can remotely trigger it as well. I'm pretty pleased and surprised it has been such a high level performer. I think that 4/3rds has finally arrived. And glad they shrunk it as well :)
    00WUWr-245141784.jpg
     
  17. Great shot. The olympus does not have an onboard flash correct?
     
  18. They're nice and all but they are limited. My new EPL-1 focuses ok in most situations with the little plastic 14-42 (thank God that lens has nice image quality in spite it's pitiful build quality)
    The Panasonic 45-200 OS has a much more impressive build but the camera cannot push it's focus around like it can the 14-42. My first outing with it today was a little disappointing. Sometimes the focus would not lock. I'm still working on my technique and haven't given up hope yet.
    As one who most always has their camera set on A priority I'm thinking the 'simple "Auto" setting might be the way to go for many common situations. After all it's a P&S and you need to work it in a different fashion the a DSLR. One example. I set the camera for manual focus and then use "Auto" mode which overrides my command and puts the camera back in autofocus. Sounds counter productive but that's good because I can now quickly turn the dial one notch up to "P" and manual focus is back in play. No quicker way that I know of to jump back and forth between the two. Also on a bright sunny day I quickly found myself maxing out the 1/2000 shutter speed at my selected apertures. (camera won't fire dammit now what!). Normally this a quick fix on a DSLR but on a P&S just letting the camera take care of things in Auto mode again is the fastest, easiest way to avoid such problems.
     
  19. Alireza says "no need to say, no micro 4/3 can match the quality of 5D and prime lenses, whatsoever"
    Well they can't match the speed or the high ISO on the 5D but when it comes to IQ on a non-moving target don't be so quick to put them down. Take a peek at the new review at DPReview and check out how much impressive detail the EPL-1 can pull in. You'd need to be printing big to see a real difference between the 5 D and the little Oly at lower ISO's though the speed of my 5D will certainly land more keepers than the fiddly EPL-1.
     
  20. I've been annoyed more than once having seen m4/3 shooters bringing their cameras to places and events when I've decided to leave my heavy EOS 50D at home. Sure, technically speaking my pics would probably (potentially) have been slightly better than theirs, but that's kind of irrelevant when there are no pics made at all. For the time being I can't live without an optical viewfinder. I also need the instant response of a DSLR. So, if anything, Olympus and Panasonic -- and to some degree the Leica X1 -- have made me consider becoming a T2i/550D shooter. Better than all m4/3 cameras and, after all, not exactly huge, at least not when paired with primes.
     
  21. NEX is a taste of things to come: astounding image quality in a surprisingly small package. The reason is that once you do away with the mirror you can use symmetrical lens designs that are smaller, lighter and better for wide angle. It's only a matter of time for a full sensor, 645 and 6x7 sensor model to come, but it may be a long wait since sensor cost would go up by at least the square of the dimension and wouldn't benefit from economies of scale like the popular small models. It would be wonderful to have a 6x7 back with controls and view screen that you could attach to Mamiya 7 lenses.
     

Share This Page