szrimaging

<p>Think I had to figure that out on my E-M5 also. Having made the switch fully from Nikon to Olympus, all I can say is that Olympus may have the WORST menus in all of digital cameras. That said, the quick menu on the E-M5 is pretty darn nice (just needs AE bracketing added).</p>

<p>And DSLRs have that exact same range of fast and slow auto focus. It's not an issue of mirrorless vs DSLR and an issue of camera A vs Camera B.</p>

<p>You are also comparing a $1700 pro-sumer camera to a $600 (or less, or at least should be less) camera. Totally unfair.</p>

<p>I agree, the top speed AF from Nikon and Canon probably best the top speed AF from Olympus or Sony, but I would hardly say that DSLRs outside of top tier professional cameras have an advantage.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>On the issue of shutter lag, it's not likely to be an issue with a DSLR where it might well be an issue with over half the mirrorless bodies. It usually is constrained by the AF system. If low latency is an important requirement to you, then you need to select your mirrorless camera with that in mind.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>D3200 shutter lag is 274ms vs E-PM2 at 204ms. Single focus acquisition on the Olympus bodies is fast, freaky fast. They can't track things coming at them or away very well, but they focus quick. Yes, some of the earlier bodies had lag issues, but I would say that is a non-issue at this time. Just as you can choose a DSLR with a not-so-fast AF, you can choose a mirrorless with a lightening quick one. This has nothing to do with form factor and everything to do with individual camera design.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>- <strong>Optical through-the-lens viewfinder</strong>, which is in practice and principle is superior to the rangefinder OV and electronic VF because you're seeing the actual photons from the scene you're photographing</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Umm...purely preference, neither is truly superior. It all boils down to how you want to work and see things.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>- <strong>Negligible shutter lag</strong>, which greatly improves keeper rates for even static or very slow moving subjects</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Wait..what? DSLRs vs Mirrorless has zero bearing on this one, it's all individual camera design.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>- <strong>Body form and control layout</strong>, with minimal need to go into menus while shooting</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Individual preference. Has nothing to do with mirrorless vs DSLR. There are cameras (i.e. GH3) which are extremely similar. Personally, I find the controls on my OM-D E-M5 as good or better than the controls on the D7000. It is all preference.</p>

<p>Rob, given your type of shooting, my question would be how much and how much money do you have to spend on a system. Some of that (architecture for instance) would benefit greatly from some very specialized lenses called Tilt-Shift (or Perspective Control) lenses. That said, these lenses are somewhat complicated and require knowledge of camera movements. They are also quite expensive. If you wanted to learn those, then DSLR is the way to go, as currently, no equivalents are offered in a mirrorless system, to my knowledge. There are adapters that psuedo work that way, but I don't know how well they work.</p>

<p>It's not the sensor format that is going to change your photography. It's either the camera's form factor or the photographer's use of the camera that is going to change your photography.</p>

<p>The form factor (i.e. View Camera, SLR, TLR, WLF box such as the Hassie 500) for some can play a great change in how you work. For instance, the backwards/flipped of view cameras have, at least for me, enforced the role of composition and created shapes a bit more than a SLR viewfinder. SLR's, at least for me, tend to lead more to a subject specific composition. TLR's kind of land in the middle for me.</p>

<p>Yeah, if you want video, I would cross off the Fuji X-System cameras. Yes, they can shoot it, but it's far behind everyone else.</p>

<p>I would say, for video, Sony, Canon, Panasonic and Nikon are all pretty competent. Implementation and capability will vary model to model.</p>

<p>I use Ranger Quadras, and they are good to compliment mid-day light, but not defeat it. So, I guess the question would be how much you need.</p>

<p>That said, what about Rangers? They go up to 1600WS if I remember right. Not as compact but much more powerful.</p>

<p>Personally, after using Norman, Elinchrom and Profoto, I am equally in love with the Elinchrom as I am the Profoto. Elinchrom in the field, Profoto (at least when I had access to them) in the studio.</p>

<p>I would also ask, why have you narrowed it down to those three? Micro 4/3 (i.e. Olympus and Panasonic), Fuji X-Series, NEX, and Pentax are all very good. The key is ergonomics and what makes sense to you. Try them out at a camera shop.</p>

<p>I feel like Nikon and Canon are the US auto industry in the '80s and '90s. They were so successful prior that they are just relying on their tried and true while not really innovating. Eventually the manufacturers with more innovation and better systems will topple them.</p>

<p>Personally, I'm dumping my Nikon right now and switching to Fuji or Olympus.</p>

<p>Hello there. There are tons of spots around Marquette. In Marquette there is a park (Presque Isle Park, if I remember correctly) that has gorgeous black rock cliffs. Easy to hike onto, and you park basically at the beginning. There are also plenty of rocky shores. If you take Big Bay Road north there are a few different little parks and hikes along the way. Both inland and on the coast of the lake.</p>

<p>I shoot film for much the same reason as JDM. I love using my TLR, and, well, there is no real digital TLR out there (I do wish there was though).</p>

<p>Dan, with the way the exposure building in the O-MD E-M5 works, I would say we aren't very far off. It has actually puzzled me for a while why we don't have a single 32-bit HDR capture mode on cameras. I would love it.</p>

<p>Not sure anyone said it, but a TLR will have parralax issues due to taking and viewing lenses not being on the same plane. For the most part, at least for me, it's a non issue. I either am far enough back it doesn't matter, or learn to compensate for it mentally.</p>

<p>That said, I personally find the way you hold a TLR much better than an SLR, but that's just me (no rangefinder experience).</p>

<p>I should have added that the venue had a decent amount of light. So, as long as you don't need a lowlight lens (which f1.4 primes would be better for anyways), it's not a bad event lens. I did have problems at a wedding not so long ago though.... really low light at the reception....</p>

<p>Funny, I just shot an event last night with the 17-70mm and SB800. No issues whatsoever except one back focus (probably my fault). VR/OS goes a long way, IMHO.</p>

<p>Although I haven't used it on a D7100, the Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 OS does perfectly well on a D7000, and I would hazard a guess it should be fine on the D7100. But it's just a guess. Should be a few hundred less than the f2.8 constant siblings.</p>

<p>Yep. Kind of weird the way that works. Think it has to be a .tif, but not positive.</p>

<p>Where did you get $240? Maybe if you are upgrading from CS6, otherwise it's $50 a month, or $600 a year (for the full suite).</p>

<p>For the full Suite, the price isn't bad, but for those of us who only bought one program (i.e. Photoshop), it's a rip-off. I'm still out on this one, and it will be interesting to see if I can convince my boss to do a monthly fee...</p>

<p>Hyperdrive makes (or did) a drive that can both download from your cards and hook into your iPad. Look it up. Otherwise, you can always get one of a multitude of card/reader harddrive combos that are made exactly for this. Some are even powered by AA.</p>

<p>I love Central. Bought a TLR in there last time I was in the city. Excellent people, patient, friendly.</p>

<p>Look at mice made for gaming. They generally have some pretty accurate lasers and interesting features. I use an older one with a weight tray in it that allows me to customize the weight of the mouse. It makes a huge difference.</p>

<p>Let's be honest here. Cameras are a very personal choice. Some will love smaller form factors, others will love larger ones. Some will love 1,000,001 adjustments, others will want 3. It's all personal. At this point, the only way to know is go to a camera shop and try them out. Everything else is just flapping your jaw...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Wow, that's pricey E-6!</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

That is all my costs, so film, processing, shipping, shipping it to them via USPS and a padded envelope. It adds up. If I send in more than one roll at a time the cost does drop per roll.</p>

<p>*looks at TLR* So? And I have never really pressed my eye into any SLR. 99% of my bracing comes from the arms. And this includes tack sharp almost 1 minute exposures on ISO 100 Velvia handheld at night in Chicago using a 50mm f1.8 (not sure aperture used) and Minolta X-GM (I think that's the right designation).</p>

<p>Size is, of course, the usually first one stated. However, in my humble opinion, there are a multitude, but it boils down to you as a photographer and an individual system/camera, not a whole genre of cameras vs another genre.</p>

<p>So, size, price, weight are self explanatory.</p>

<p>But then there are other reasons. You may find that you like the way a particular body feels. Such as a more "rangefinderesque" Fuji X-Pro1 or the compact but still well designed (at least to me) Olympus Pen Minis. Or you may find that the features of a particular camera, say the 5-axis IBS of the Olympus O-MD E-M5.</p>

<p>However, I am currently at the state of using my DSLR (Nikon) and a really nice compact (Fuji X-10) and have found this better than buying into a second system. Mind you, I am a bit different in that I am going to medium format film and a TLR for a lot of my shooting. Older manual cameras seem to work better for me...</p>