Great... but would you sell your dSLR or digital RF for it?

I love the idea of the micro 4/3 stuff. I think the real question is weather you would trade in your dSLR stuff for it, or for that matter your

digital RF, or is it still the awesome idea that's not ready for or all that well suited to replace those technologies?

 

I know there are advantages to dSLRs or RFs that micro 4/3 isn't meant to overcome, but is it a new niche or could it replace the dSLR or

RF in your collection?

<p><em>I think the real question is weather you would trade in your dSLR stuff for it</em></p>

<p>Why is that the <strong>real</strong> question? Sort of like saying, "I love motorcycles, but the real question is whether I would trade in my car for one."</p>

<p>Keith</p>

<p>for me the answer was yes. I sold my 20D and Tokina 12-24 to buy a G1 and Olympus 9-18mm. I now get excellent reliable metering with legacy lenses (I use OM lenses) that I only got with my film EOS bodies before. Its much less tiresome to carry in the field to places like this:</p>

<p><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3172/2580226978_77e906d645.jpg" alt="" width="333" height="500" /></p>

<p>I never commited the money to full frame and often grumbled that my 20D was too much of a chunk to carry.</p>

<p>I would only be tempted back to Canon if I was to go with Full Frame and desire wide angles or ultra high ISO. Telephoto on the G1 is even more advantaged than wide, with 300mm lenses being cheap (I bought a near mint OM 300mm for under US$200, in the US examine KEH for instance) and really helping with telephoto work.</p>

<p>I get better macro results with a 100mm f2.8 lens and some extension tubes (tubes cost me US$6) than I ever got with my DSLRs and without the metering problems.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Is the question "Would I trade my Full Frame camera?"<br>

Maybe, maybe not but I bought a Olympus E3 DSLR and it is just fantastic. </p>

<p>I've used various Nikon film bodies, a couple of Leica M's, a Fuji GW680 and a Hasselblad. My first DSLR was Nikon D2H. Around the time I "replaced" my D2H with "D40", I quitted shooting films. I started to carry around my D40 much more often than when I'd had D2H because it was lighter and smaller.</p>

<p>About ten month ago, I replaced my D40/kit zoom combo with Panasonic G1/kit zoom combo. Since then, I carry my G1 even more often. And several days ago, I bought the newest 20/1.7 pancake for my G1. I still have the kit zoom, but 20/1.7 is my (literally) standard lens. I'm sure I will carry my camera even even more often. Yeah, you can call me lazy, but I would say that the light and small equipment which you feel like carriyng around is far more functional than the most efficient but heavy and bulky DSLR which you feel reluctant to take out.</p>

<p>I wrote about that in my blog. I (sort of) traded in my 5DII and collection of L primes for a sigma DP2 and an Olympus E-P1. (I still have a lot of change from that transaction) I may add an M9 as well after people have had a chance to fully break it in. Now I have a half dozen compacts and a Mamiya RB67.</p>

<p>I didn't do it because the compacts perform better, because they obviously don't. I did it because compacts suit my purposes better than a big, intimidating fright machine when walking down the street or sitting on the subway.</p>

<p>It's up to you if you want to get rid of the DSLRs. What do you need a camera for?</p>

Mike, it's the "real" question for me because that's what I'm considering doing.

 

I shoot with a 1.6 crop sensor dSLR and have 2 film cameras. One is a 4.5x6 RF, the other a 4x5 LF. I use the RF for

street. I use the 4x5 for landscapes. My dSLR is the catchall for most everything else, shooting my 18 month old son (no

shutter lag is a good thing), some landscapes, some macro, some street.

 

Seems to me the micro 4/3 will replace my dSLR just fine if I don't do lowlight stuff. It's also more comact and portable.

 

Is the FP shutter quieter than a dSLR shutter? If so it would be better for street.

 

It would also be easier to bring a 4/3 on vacation with a full assortment of lenses without requiring a lot of extra luggage.

 

I don't see much of a downside.

<p>The downside is investing in a format with lower detail resolution capability.<br>

If you're a zoom-person you don't have much choice other than DSLR or m4/3, but if you're after both small size and superior quality of files you may want to check the two new Leicas, both with sensors significantly larger than m4/3 or 4/3.</p>

<p>You bet. Since I got my Panasonic LX3 a year ago, I have used my DSLR half a dozen times. However I did miss the SLR experience, so I sold my DSLR, and picked up a G1 about two weeks ago. So far I do not miss my DSLR, and I am about to sell my 31 and 77 limited lenses. While I love those lenses, I just did not use them enough to keep them around. Next stop, 20mm pancake (and 14mm when it comes out), and then maybe I will sell my LX3 too. :)<br>

FWIW, I do not find the G1 lacking compared to my K100D. The viewfinder gets a little dicey in low light due to slow refresh rates, but with adequate lighting (good indoor lighting at night), it is fine for me. I wear glasses, and the G1 is a big improvement when using the viewfinder with my glasses. When the refresh rates are low, I often use my LX3 technique of pre-focusing and getting a rough sense of framing with the viewfinder (or screen), and then taking the picture without using the finder at all. This also helps to put my subjects (usually my kids) at ease.<br>

Scott</p>

<p>I acquired the Panasonic G1 in December. I shoot every day. Since then, the G1 has made more than 3x the exposures that all five of my DSLRs have, the results look great, and there's no reduction in quality. It's proven to me that I can sell off all the DSLR gear and stick with the G1, GH1, and GF1 bodies. </p>

<p>The only niche the DSLRs have is an advantage for shooting continuous sequences, which I do so rarely that I really shouldn't worry about it at all. Maybe I'll keep one body around specifically for that purpose. </p>

<p>Keith</p>

<p>>Is the FP shutter quieter than a dSLR shutter? If so it would be better for street.</p>

<p>yes ... I used it at a conference where things are quiet and noisy flapping mirror cameras get "looks" from the people you're beside. I got no such attention.<br>

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2429/3896745011_d118c96b72.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>even used in the middle of the crowd it was fine.</p>

<p><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3513/3897529312_8a7aa55334.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>and the flash doesn't go off unexpectedly either!</p>

 

<p> No. I am now lusting after a Panasonic M43 but selling or trading one of my Nikons is not an option for one simple reason - used digital stuff has NO VALUE. Or at lease very little for trade-in purposes. So, I am starting to accumulate digital cameras. What could I really expect to get for a well worn D50 or D80. They are still excellent picture takers and make great back-ups to my main camera, a D300, which I need to keep. I will just have to wait a year for the Panasonic replacement so I can get the current one at a discount. </p>

<p>Sanford</p>

<p>I will tell you a secret</p>

<p>buy off the wave. eBay is a great place to sell your stuff with minimal losses. Place good photographs and you won't loose much.</p>

<p>Sanford, if you are going to use your older Nikon stuff less and less after you move to m4/3 system, I would suggest you to part with them ASAP while they can make SOME money. Your old digitals will lose even more value if you just keep it. There will be no "classic old digital cameras" in the future. It would be mentally healthy to consider that the large part of the price of digital camera is the price of films, development and enlargement. ;)</p>

<p>I will always keep the Nikon system. The 12-24mm zoom and the 18-200mm zoom are the perfect combination for all occasions and nothing does ISO 1600 like the D300. The Panasonic would be a fun/walk-around camera, like a high quality point and shoot.</p>

<p>If you often use slow zooms and ISO 1600, m4/3 system may just seem to be a high quality P&S, but if you would use it in a more appropriate way, you would see that G1 system offers enough reason to make a switch. So did I.</p>

<p>m4/3 cameras are nealy usesless in continuous shooting mode, but I've never used that mode in my life, so that problem is non-existent for me.</p>

<p>Sanford,<br>

What is a Panasonic M43?<br>

Dave</p>

<p>Sanford,<br>

What is a Panasonic M43?<br>

Dave</p>

<p>Micro four thirds - I can't think of the Panasonic name for their new rangefinder style camera.</p>

<p>The G1 has not only replaced the DSLR or RF in my collection, I no longer have a collection. I bought a G1 and I sold the compacts I had and my DSLRs (pan L1, oly E410) and the zoom lenses I was using on them. I kept my E1 and a few OM primes, thinking it might be nice for bad weather, dust etc, but now I'm selling the E1(I hope) to fund the new Panasonic 20 mm f/1.7.<br>

The G1 (and likely the other m4/3 models) seems to be the digital I've been waiting for. It meets all my needs for handling and image quality. The OIS lenses (14-45, 40-200) coupled with the camera's operating system produce excellent results. I've got an adapter for 39mm LTM lenses because I like the russian lenses I used to have for my FED, and I've gotten an Industar 69 LTM from a half-frame Chaika. It's very small and is 28mm f/2.8, has some quirky attributes, but a lot of "character". <br>

For me the answer was "yes", I'm comfortable with the G1 as my only camera. Actually it's more like I'm relieved, because I was getting tired of chasing gear looking for something like this. My mind is back on the photos.</p>

 

<p><em>..."For me the answer was "yes", I'm comfortable with the G1 as my only camera. Actually it's more like I'm relieved, because I was getting tired of chasing gear looking for something like this. <strong>My mind is back on the photos.</strong>"</em> <br /><br /> That's the best endorsement possible.</p>

<p>Can you clarify why the continuous shooting mode is useless? I don't use that a ton on my dSLR but when I want it, I want it.</p>

<p>On an SLR, when you turn on continuous shooting mode you get a glimpse of each frame immediately <strong>before</strong> it is captured as the mirror flickers up and down. The optical reflex viewfinder operates at the speed of light, which nothing can surpass, so even if it's just a few milliseconds of illumination, you can see what's going on easily. </p>

<p>An Electronic View Finder system can <strong>*never*</strong> show you an image prior to the time that the sensor captures it, and it takes orders of magnitude more time for the EVF to actually display the image that was just recorded compared to an SLR viewfinder. What this means is that on continuous capture mode you are treated to a slow, stop action succession of still frame captures <strong>after </strong>each individual frame is captured, which makes it quite a bit harder to track a moving subject through a sequence. </p>

<p>It's not totally unusable for simple sequence capture, but this is one area of endeavor where an SLR viewfinder will remain supreme for quite a long time to come.</p>

<p>The only occasion I could think of when continuous shooting mode of m4/3 can be used without frustration would be auto bracketiing of still subject with the camera on a tripod.</p>

<p>That said, when continuous shooting mode is replaced with the movie mode that will create the file from which you can extract still images (as it has already been made possible by RED system), this shortcomings of m4/3 will automatically disappear.</p>

<p>Trade in my DSLR for m4/3? Absolutely! Mostly, it's travel photography that pays the bills for me. For 2 years I shot with a Canon 5D with a battery grip and all the giant lenses that came with it (70-200, 17-40, 50, 100 macro). When the GH1 came out, I decided to give it a try, also because wanted to add video to my reperatoire for work purposes.<br>

It took one trip, and I was sold sold sold. The IQ way exceeded my expectations, it was so much easier to carry my kit around, the swivel screen opened up more compositional opportunities, and I was able to cover so much more ground and get many more shots (which equalled a lot more "keepers" and thus more money)! Now I just shoot, and don't waste time and energy fiddling with a pack full of gear.<br>

Seattle Skyline:<br>

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2439/3838974122_b4cfce89fe.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="281" /><br>

Los Angeles Fires:<br>

<img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3515/3864421118_6fc2098a90.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="375" /><br>

So my 5D and all the gear that I hauled with it is gone. Now I don't have to sweat what I think I might need, what I have to carry, what I can fit in my carry-on, etc, etc, etc... I'm so thrilled to finally find a camera that makes photography fun again! I just pick up my GH1 with 14-140 kit lens and go... It's nice to enjoy your job :)</p>