wiley_rittenhouse2

<p>Here's my 2 cents: One thing that I didn't see among your list of concerns is the quality and available selection of lenses. Oly makes some great lenses, but it doesn't make a lot of different types of them. Same for Panasonic. In M4/3, you can cross them over pretty seamlessly (I use a Pany 20mm f/1.7 on my E-P3 body). You can adapt all sorts of lenses to the M4/3 bodies, but with varying degrees of limitation. Features may "make or break" a body, but lenses can make or break a system for a certain application. The available list of lenses that work pretty seamlessly on a D7000 is much longer and more diverse than M4/3 offerings, especially if you include Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron alongside the Nikkors (now, that may not matter to you, depending on what you actually plan to shoot).</p>

<p>Also, if you ever, ever plan on renting a lens for a particular shoot, you will find it trivial for obtain what you need for Nikon or Canon, but very hard (if not impossible) for most any other system. I rented a Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 to shoot an indoor ice hockey game for a friend under available light. It cost me $50 for the day and I got great shots using my D300. I'm pretty sure that I would have had far fewer keepers even with the OM-D (I don't think M4/3s has a lens in that equivalent focal range at that speed).</p>

<p>You obviously have some criteria you're working from (weight and compactness). Don't know if these others are of concern, but I thought I'd offer them.</p>

<p>My two cents: the only thing that really matters when a person chooses is 'interface'. Both systems (as well as others bearing other names besides Canon or Nikon) are equally capable of producing outstanding results in the possession of a user who knows how to extract the maximum potential from each (and neither is universally harder than the other). I have used both Canon and Nikon systems over the years. They *feel* different to use - so each person should find the one that fits best. It's possible that the OP is one of those people, due to previous background or other factor(s), who prefers one 'interface feel' in a wedding environment, and the other in a studio environment, since they are very different activities with different rhythms and requirements. It's easy to read the old "Nikon vs Canon" trope into the statement that the salesperson was quoting, but if it was quoted accurately, that does not imply that one system is *universally* preferred over the other for a given application.</p>

<p>Emilio,<br>

I used both the 85mm f/1.4 AF-D and 50mm f/1.4G AF-S on my D300 during a recent location shoot in a couple's home. I used the 85mm for a tighter shot of just the two of them (shoulders up), then switched to the 50mm when we included their golden retriever in the shot. The room was a pretty typical small living room. I did not shoot wide open in either case, but just wide enough to ensure that the background was still fairly soft while keeping them in focus. I used a DOF program on my iPod touch to select the f-stop before starting the shoot. I was very pleased with the results, as were they.</p>

<p>A little more on how sensor size affects DOF: because of the crop factor of DX sensors, you must back off from your subject to get the same image size (i.e. a person's face occupying the same portion of the frame) that you would see in FX, which results in a change in DOF. The equations can be seen at http://www.dofmaster.com/equations.html if you want to really dig in and see the contributing factors. In fact, you can use these equations to create a quick table in Excel and then plot the curves for the near and far distances (Dn and Df) for acceptable sharpness relative to subject distance (s), given values for the other independent variables.</p>

<p>I recommend that you read Thom Hogan's article "D3 or D300?" Much of what is said there would equally apply to the comparison "D90 or D700". See http://bythom.com/d3ord300.htm</p>

 

<p>I would recommend that you visit David Hobby's website/blog - http://strobist.blogspot.com/ - and read "Lighting 101" before making the decision to upgrade/change platforms. I think you may find it useful for what you seem to want to achieve.</p>

I have done business with both Adorama and B&H over the last several years. I have been in the retail locations for both stores. I have purchased thousands of dollars of new and used equipment at both stores. I have found both of them to be reliable and courteous in all my transactions. Buy with confidence.

I'll leave aside the discussion about whether Mac or PC is better for photo work and just focus on the OS itself. I have worked with Mac OS X since v10.0, Windows since v3.1, and more recently Linux (Ubuntu and Gentoo). My favorite for the computer I *use* is the Mac, and the reason is stability. I remain frustrated by Microsoft's unwillingness or inability to do what is necessary to create a truly stable OS. Apple took the risk when they started over with the Unix kernel and built a great GUI on top of it. It has paid off. My first OS X system was a PowerBook G3 Firewire (Pismo), which I used for almost six years. In that time, it never crashed once.