Help me to recognize my buddy camera?

[nico_bouchi]

<p >Help me to recognize my buddy, he's got :</p>

<ol>

<li>- a 100% bright viewfinder.</li>

<li>- 2 or 3 Bright lenses around f/2 : a very bright 35mm, then a 80mm or maybe a zoom something like 50mm/100mm, if there's some good quality zoom?</li>

<li>- the dynamic range might be awesome.</li>

<li>- he's got quite a big color depth</li>

<li>- the sensor might be CMOS at least micro 4/3</li>

<li>- might be filming at 1080p</li>

<li>- might be shooting in RAW</li>

</ol>

<p > </p>

<p >better if he's got :</p>

<ol>

<li>- HDR seem's to be a cool feature.</li>

<li>- autofocus might be quick</li>

<li>- autofocus might be phase detection</li>

<li>- image stabilization</li>

<li>- built in flash</li>

<li>- better if it's quite tinny not as big as a reflex 5D (but I'm still open for bigger camera)</li>

</ol>

<p > </p>

<p >I don't really care about:</p>

<ol>

<li>- high ISO</li>

<li>- start up delay</li>

<li>- continuous shooting</li>

<li>- Waterproof,Weather sealed</li>

<li>- Awesome Screen</li>

<li>...</li>

</ol>

[john_tran14]

<p>There are not too many cameras that might fit your requirements and there are not too many cameras recently released. So you would be able to get your answer by browsing the net (dpreview for example) or your local stores. Others really can't answer your question though because many properties listed are quite subjective like: good quality, awesome, big, quick...</p>

<p>A quick look at your lists,the answer must be a top-the-line DSLR from Nikon or Canon. In 6 (second list) you would prefer if it's quite tiny but this is the one condition that is against most other conditions of yours, so you must drop this tiny requirement</p>

<p>You didn't have even a "subjective" condition on the quality of the prime lenses. The maximum aperture can not tell the quality of the lenses. I have had many lenses with max aperture 1.4, 1.8, 2 and terrible quality</p>

[nico_bouchi]

<p>canon L quality prime lens too for sure... always the best... The only actually responding to this will be the next OM-D EM-5, what do you think?</p>

[andylynn]

<p>I don't understand, are you trying to decide what kind of camera to buy? What do you shoot and what do you want to pay? Is size important (so you need a mirrorless camera) or are SLRs okay too?</p>

[ariel_s1]

<p>No mirrorless camera can have a 100% bright viewfinder. You need a TTL camera for that, and in that case, the only choices that fit the bill, sadly, are "as big as a reflex 5d." In fact, they are either the 5D, or its competitor the D800. I'd say that the only camera that comes even close to fitting all of your needs is the Sony NEX system with the LE-EA2 adapter. The NEX-7, or NEX-5n with add-on viewfinder gives you an electronic viewfinder at least. The adapter gives you phase detect autofocus. Then, with the adapter, you can buy lenses like the 24mm f/2.0, which with the crop factor fulfills your need of "a very bright 35mm." It also gives you a good 50mm lens, a good 80mm-ish lens, and some good zoom options. If you want "awesome" dynamic range, then these are definitely your choices for a mirrorless camera.</p>

<p>BTW, pretty much all sensors that aren't medium format are CMOS. Overall, you have a weird list of demands, and you may want to do some searching, because right now it sounds like you don't even know what you think that you want.</p>

[nico_bouchi]

<p>I can pay around $2000 I can wait for having more lenses... <br>

I'm looking for a mirrorless but maybe a small SLR could be a better option?<br>

I shoot mostly urban paysage and landscape... some street pictures too...<br>

I'm not very kind of making people pictures but it could be something to work...<br>

thanks</p>

[r.t. dowling]

<p>From the description, it sounds like a Pentax K-5 with DA Limited primes and DA* zooms.</p>

[john_tran14]

<p>I knew you already made your choice and I don't think anyone can change that. I don't have and have never touched an EM5 but looking at the review, I see, the only special thing about it is the resemblance to the OM film SLRs which may appeal to the old OM film shooters (maybe the same ideaas the Pentax K)</p>

[r.t. dowling]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"...the only special thing about it is the resemblance to the OM film SLRs which may appeal to the old OM film shooters..."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I respectfully disagree. I've never owned an Olympus OM camera and have never shot with one, nor do I have any particular affection or nostalgia for Olympus cameras, and yet I find the EM-5 extremely appealing. As a Pentax shooter, I find the EM-5 to be everything I hoped Pentax's mirrorless camera would be (aside from the smaller sensor, which isn't a dealbreaker).</p>

[ariel_s1]

<p>Nico, if you're willing to get an SLR, then get the SLT version of the NEX-5 or NEX-7. That would be the Sony a-55/a-57 or a-65. They are both cheaper because they come with a built-in viewfinder unlike the NEX-5, and you don't have to buy the adapter like the NEX-7. This gives you an $800-$1,000 camera, leaving you the money towards the 24mm, since you seem to want a 35mm lens more than everything else.</p>

[bill_tuthill]

> the only special thing about [the E-M5] is resemblance to the OM film SLRs.

 

Now that 5Dm3 samples have appeared on DPreview, we can arrange cameras in order of image quality. I would say it goes like this: Pentax 645D, Nikon D800, Canon 5Dm3, Sony NEX 7 (maybe tied with) Olympus E-M5. That's great for a 4/3 sensor, especially one with a wide range of lens options. Nikon APS-C follows, then Pentax, with Canon well behind. Any disagreements?

[r.t. dowling]

<p>The problem with the NEX 7 is that it's brutally unforgiving with lenses. A lens that looks decent on NEX 5 may look like crap on NEX 7. That may be true with the D800 as well; I haven't looked at those tests yet.</p>

<p>I'd say the K-5 is ahead of the D7000 by a hair (and K-01 may be ahead of K-5 by a hair), but otherwise your ranking seems pretty reasonable to me.</p>

<p>The sensor in the E-M5 is certainly as good as the last generation of APS-C sensors, which I think is a great accomplishment. </p>

[ariel_s1]

<p>Bill, until we see truly objective measurements of the E-M5's sensor, I just don't believe that it's bringing anything new to the table. There's no way that it's tied with the NEX-7, because that would mean that Olympus, without any sensor production capacity of their own, were somehow able to secretly source a sensor that is light years ahead of current m4/3 technology, including the GH2 and GX1 which both have decently competitive performance for their size. If the E-M5 has any different significant, real-world performance increase over the Panasonic GX1, color me surprised. The GX1's sensor is about a stop better in high ISO performance than the E-P3, but with near-identical colors and <strong>slightly</strong> improved dynamic range. The resolution, dynamic range, and colors of the Sony NEX-7 is in another league, not to mention the extra 2-2.5 stops of high ISO performance over even the GX1. Considering that Sony has the capability to amortize their research costs over the various APS cameras, I just don't see it. Look at how many cameras the Sony 16.2MP sensor has found its way into; the 24MP sensor of the NEX-7 will find its way into just as many, if not more. No way will Nikon and Pentax not try to use that sensor for their newer cameras, plus it's already found its way into the a77, a65, etc.</p>

[nico_bouchi]

<p>Okay I've been owning by the past a beautiful OM2 spot... I like the OM-D EM-5 but It's quite expensive for a camera with such a tiny censor. Anyway I'm waiting for a real test to see it. The prime lenses from Olympus seem's very good... <br>

On the other hand I would like to compare with the smallest reflex on the market.<br>

I was looking as you were commenting :<br>

Sigma SD1m, (waiting to see how it will be)<br>

Sony a-65 (the lighter and smaller after OM-D) or a-77, <br>

Pentax K5, <br>

Canon 5D MK2 (the biggest and older)<br>

And I think the Pentax K5 is the winner?<br>

-------------------<br>

Nikon D800 and Canon 5DMKIII too expensive.<br>

Sony NEX7 no good lenses.</p>

[r.t. dowling]

<p>Just to clarify my previous post: I tend to agree with Ariel that the E-M5 sensor is not tied with the NEX 7 sensor in terms of pure resolution... but that's not necessarily a bad thing, for me anyway. I don't need 24 megapixels right now and probably won't need that many in the future, either, since I rarely print bigger than 8"x10". </p>

 

[bill_tuthill]

We know that Olympus has a better JPEG engine than Panasonic, but what's surprising is that the RAW files are also sharper and less noisy than GX1. NX200 looks good at low ISO. We don't talk about Samsung much, but they have a better lens selection than Sony NEX. I don't like the crude USM-style sharpening from NEX-5N.

 

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympusem5/7

[andylynn]

<p>Well, now you've eliminated all the mirrorless cameras, so to comment on the DSLRs:</p>

<p>I'd stay away from the Sigma DSLR. It certainly gets the hype with its interesting sensor, but it's a 24x16mm (let's call that DX) sensor camera that only takes Sigma lenses, for the price you'd pay for a 36x24mm (FX) sensor Nikon or Canon that takes a huge selection of lenses.</p>

<p>The Pentax K-5 is a great camera. It is very, very similar to the Nikon D7000 and Sony A580, so you can compare those. They all have the same 16mp DX sensor that gives great results, and they all have good ergonomics. Look at which lenses you'd choose from each company's selection, and that will influence your decision. For example, Nikon doesn't have any really good yet affordable fast primes that are close to 35mm equivalent on a DX camera. (To translate the field of view a lens gives you on DX to what you'd expect, given a lens for a 35mm film camera, multiply by 1.5. So the Nikon 35mm DX lens on a D7000 has the same field of view as a (35mm*1.5=52.5mm) lens would on your Olympus OM2. Basically, same as a 50mm lens. To work like a 35mm lens on your OM2, use a 24mm lens on a DX digital camera.)</p>

<p>The Canon 5Dii is excellent but you'd be very, very hard pressed to fit it in your budget. So I'd say, choose between the K-5, D7000 and one of the Sony options.</p>

[ariel_s1]

<p>Yes Bill, and apparently the E-M5 is also sharper output than the D3 and 1D Mk IV, which are almost as good as some random Panasonic point and shoot:<br>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studio-compare#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=oly_em5&masterSample=p1010003&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=oly_em5&slot0Sample=p1010003&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=nikon_d3x&slot1Sample=dsc_7406&slot2Camera=canon_eos1dmkiv&slot2Sample=canon1d4_iso200&slot3Camera=panasonic_dmcfz100&slot3Sample=panafz100_iso200&x=-0.8447497811005588&y=1.340201520881659<br>

I will continue to argue that the DPReview comparison tool is relatively worthless. You can MAYBE compare noise, but "sharper" is due to such a large host of issues that DPReview doesn't care about, that it isn't even funny. Samsung NX is a decent choice, but their sensor performance isn't amazing, from the first-gen that I've seen.</p>

<p>Nico, you're all over the place. I think you need to go meditate for a few days and think about what you really want. You come to the mirrorless forum, and then you settle on all SLRs. You specifically say that you don't want a 5D, then despite no one else mentioning it, you suddenly add a 5D to the list. You say you have a budget of $2,000, then you mention two systems whose body alone costs well over that (Canon and Sigma). You say you want a 100% viewfinder, then you say that the K-5 is the best choice. Come on man, people are genuinely coming here to help you, don't make it so difficult.<br>

Funny enough, the Pentax doesn't have a 35mm equivalent f/2 lens, which you claimed you needed. The NEX-7 does. So, again, why don't you take a nap, and then come back when you're sure of what you really want?</p>

[nico_bouchi]

<p>Hi Ariel S,<br>

Sorry that's true I must apologies if I'm posting a lot, the problem is first that my mother tongue is not english, that's why I'm having problems to be as clear as I would like... On the other side It's quite hard to have a real information about products that don't even exist actually on the market. I said I don't really like 5Dmk2 cause it's seem's to be a bit old and it's the heaviest actually on the market. As well right know a Pentax K5 seems to make better images? You might check your information cause the price for the new Sigma SD1m is around $2000, when I speak about 5D mk2 I speak about second hand market around $1500 for a good one I think. I think the K-5 got a nice viewfinder, at 100%, am I wrong ? I didn't know about lenses for K5 that's why I came here... I've been dicovering right here that there's some nice prime lenses as those Pentax-DA : http://www.pentaximaging.com/camera-lenses/ maybe there's no 35mm I didn't know but I will try to look for... I don't like NEX7 cause there's no convenient lenses but that's all... maybe better keeping shooting with my GF1 and waiting for the real gem as could be the next OM-D EM-5? I think I don't realy no what I want cause it doesn't exist actually on the market...<br>

Thanks</p>

[andylynn]

<p>A 5DII for $1500 would be a very good buy indeed. Do they actually sell for that? I would think it would be more. But if you want smaller, look at DX cameras. Or just stick with Micro 4/3. You can get the 20mm Panasonic lens, which gives you a 40mm field of view equivalent - isn't that close enough to 35mm? Think of the money you'd be saving.</p>

<p>Don't buy a Sigma DSLR (which is $2300). Just don't do it. Don't buy into the Foveon sensor hype - it's not special enough to be worth limiting yourself to only Sigma lenses.</p>

[nico_bouchi]

<p>I won't buy a Sigma,<br>

I'm actually looking at the alternatives for a micro 4/3 in the reflex world? I already own a nice GF1+20mm but I miss a real viewfinder... <br>

actually a 5D mark II (810g) with a 24-105 L usm is around $2000,<br>

but a Pentax K5 (670g) seems to be lighter and smaller, with some few better performing as it is more recent. The only big difference seem's to be the full frame? <br>

Maybe a 7D (820g) could be a good challenger too...<br>

For DX cameras there's D300S (890g), but I've never loved Nikon... <br>

Thanks</p>

[andylynn]

<p>If you didn't mind the weight, and knowing you don't like Nikon, I'd say the 5DII with the zoom lens looks like a good idea. It has a larger viewfinder than the others you mentioned. The 7D and D300S are heavy, and have worse viewfinders than the 5DII. But this is all coming down to personal preference, and since you like the Pentax too, go try that and the 5DII and see what you think.</p>

[jcuknz]

<p><em>No mirrorless camera can have a 100% bright viewfinder. You need a TTL camera for that</em><br>

<em></em> <br>

To me that is a delightful bit of nonsense since most live view cameras have 100% coverage and 'bright' in all lighting conditions is normal. I must have had those features for getting on the past decade with my 'mirrorless cameras' which are TTL. Strikes me as highly amusing blinkered thinking or playing with words LOL. :-)</p>

[jcuknz]

<p><em>I like the OM-D EM-5 but It's quite expensive for a camera with such a tiny censor</em><br />You pay for miniaturism and short production runs. <br />Do you spurn your wrist watch for a alarm clock on a neck strap? <br />I paid getting on twice the price of the EM-5 for the tool I wanted in M4/3 [ before I read about the EM-5 ] ... the sensor size was irrelevant ... quite apart from my distaste of all DSLRs. Is the sensor size big enough to do the sort of photography you wish to do and are you skilled enough to work at that sensor size.</p>

<p><em>I already own a nice GF1+20mm but I miss a real viewfinder...</em><br>

Well get a M4/3 with a viewfinder ...I just added an EPL1 when I found i could use an add on viewfinder working off the sensor which shows me whatever lens I'm using .... as an old timer I had been hung up on the older add-on viewfinders which worked optically and were unsatisfactory in this age of 100% Electronic viewfinders.<br>

I already have a G3 but with subsequent knowledge think the IBIS system better for my legacy lenses.</p>