Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
MIRRORLESS CAMERAS
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Apr 21, 2012 17:04:34   #
photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga
 
I have used several version of the pen by Olympus and it was basically my point and shoot when I just didn't want to carry around my d700.

I recently got the new EM5 from Olympus and it is jaw dropping, it is more than just sensor size as suggested by MT shooter.

THe bodies are smaller and the lens lighter in weight, but many are quite good and the results are very nice. Unless one wants to make prints 20x30 most will find the results better than expected.

For Rivernan, if you mean the OMD-EM5 it is has been released and more and more people have them in hand , snapping away having lots of fun.

Reply
Apr 21, 2012 17:50:25   #
sbesaw Loc: Boston
 
rivernan wrote:
I have been waiting for this camera that was supposed to be available april 1 2012.
Its release has been postponed.
I just want to hold it and feel it and try a few snaps with it....
WHERE IS IT?



sbesaw wrote:
GordonB. wrote:
I was looking at the photography mags after I had finished grocery shopping yesterday and one of the main mags
had a large article on mirrorless cameras; it was a review
of the new Olympus.
Would some of the pros here who are never without an
intelligent answer please explain the pros and cons of
this subject. I would have bought the mag if I didn't have to get back into those darn understaffed check-out lines.
Still, I think I can get better info from some of the guys here than in that article.

Many thanks,
Gordon
I was looking at the photography mags after I had ... (show quote)


If you are really interested read this article for some perspective. There are many who believe that the DSLR may be going the way of BetaMax and HDDVD. I had posted this link here in General Photography but the admin moved it to "Links and resources" so I am still learning where things go but since you asked about it here, this article by Trey Ratcliff is pretty compelling:

http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2012/01/04/dslrs-are-a-dying-breed-3rd-gen-cameras-are-the-future/?awt_l=FucPY&awt_m=K46rXbko6oHlCW

I found the above article by Trey Ratcliff pretty thought provoking. I have my own thoughts shooting both Nikon FX Bodies with Nikon Glass as well as the Olympus OM-D E-M5 micro 4:3 mirrorless camera. The quality of the Olympus even at 100% crop at higher ISO is pretty remarkable and this is still new technology. Thoughts????
This is going to ruffle a lot of DSLR feathers while some will give it the serious look it deserves.
quote=GordonB. I was looking at the photography m... (show quote)
I have been waiting for this camera that was suppo... (show quote)


I ordered mine from Hunt's Photo in Melrose, Ma. It came in April 10th with 12-50mm lens and Battery Grip. Still waiting on 45mm 1.8 which I had a chance to try and did a Head shot. Cropped it so that just the left I filled the frame and I could count every eyelash. Frustratingly still waiting on spare Battery. They are on order as well. I am at the Red Sox game with a few lenses including the Panasonic 100-300mm (200-60m 35 mm equivalent)

Shooting home plate in the shade at 1600 ISO 500 sec at 5.6. Tack sharp, no noise.

Reply
Apr 21, 2012 18:49:01   #
photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga
 
Here is an interesting link for viewing

http://gakuranman.com/olympus-om-d-e-m5-field-test/#more-9506

Reply
 
 
Apr 21, 2012 21:17:29   #
LBullock Loc: WA
 
They're light, fast (no mirror to open/close), continuous AF and for right now, you can pick one up for under $1000.

Reply
Apr 21, 2012 23:21:46   #
MT Shooter Loc: Montana
 
One of the reasons they are so light is the small sensor, they haqve a 2x crop factor to attain a 35mm equivalent. That means the lens only has to have half the diameter in the glass to give the same evident view. That makes the lens a LOT cheaper to manufacture because of the optical glass savings.
Shoot the same scene with a 4/3's and with a full frame of the same MP rating and blow them both up to 20x30 and compared the print resolution and you will see the difference in the sensor quality. How do I know? I did it, simple. (10MP Olympus 4/3's at 20x24 and 12MP D700 at 20x30, the D700 image was leaps and bounds better without even looking close)

Reply
Apr 21, 2012 23:52:39   #
LBullock Loc: WA
 
I'd say in a year or two, these "mirrorless" will really be worth a look. Which one did you try? Take a look at Sony's A77. It's really nice. Now, I haven't tried one myself, yet. I'm looking at Nikon's D800. Read a lot of good things about it. But in a few years from now, if these mirrorless cameras hold their own, who knows? Might be what digital did to film. Anyway, there are still those who prefer film, even now. Matter of taste, I s'pose.

Reply
Apr 21, 2012 23:59:59   #
MT Shooter Loc: Montana
 
I wouldn't even pretend that "mirrorless" is going to go away, far from it. The technology is destined to adavnce and will most likely replace prisms entirely at some point. For me, I much prefer to see EXACTLY what my lens sees, and not a digital interpretation of it. At my age, I will most likely die using prisms, and die happy!

Reply
 
 
Apr 22, 2012 00:24:29   #
modest genius Loc: joshua tree park CA
 
What about on the new Fuji X1 Mirrorless. (not 10 or 100)around $1,700 body only. said to be giving Leica run for its money.
Roger Hicks wrote:
Wanda Krack wrote:
I have read and heard that the mirror-less cameras will be the next wave of the future as far as cameras go. They make sense to me.


When they get the finders right, quite possibly. But even the best electronic finders at the moment are blurry and jerky compared with optical finders. They're getting better but they ain't quite there yet.

Cheers,

R.

Reply
Apr 22, 2012 01:07:28   #
LBullock Loc: WA
 
That looks nice!

Reply
Apr 22, 2012 07:19:17   #
Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine
 
modest genius wrote:
What about on the new Fuji X1 Mirrorless. (not 10 or 100)around $1,700 body only. said to be giving Leica run for its money.


Sort of... But Leica has found that demand for the M9 is about 3x what they predicted. A more realistic analysis, in my book, is that a LOT of people want 'real' cameras where they wrest back control from automation, and where they don't have to hold a camera at arm's length to guess at what's going to be in the picture.

Certes, another couple of generations of camera design, and I may contemplate an X1. But the EVF is still significantly inferior to a real finder.

Cheers,

R.

Reply
Apr 22, 2012 09:53:49   #
GH2man Loc: Portland Oregon
 
It may be time to redo your test with a 16 mp Panasonic.
MT Shooter wrote:
One of the reasons they are so light is the small sensor, they haqve a 2x crop factor to attain a 35mm equivalent. That means the lens only has to have half the diameter in the glass to give the same evident view. That makes the lens a LOT cheaper to manufacture because of the optical glass savings.
Shoot the same scene with a 4/3's and with a full frame of the same MP rating and blow them both up to 20x30 and compared the print resolution and you will see the difference in the sensor quality. How do I know? I did it, simple. (10MP Olympus 4/3's at 20x24 and 12MP D700 at 20x30, the D700 image was leaps and bounds better without even looking close)
One of the reasons they are so light is the small ... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
Apr 22, 2012 12:16:36   #
modest genius Loc: joshua tree park CA
 
The new Fuji X1 has a viewfinder as well so no need for arms length. Also interchangeble lenses.
Roger Hicks wrote:
modest genius wrote:
What about on the new Fuji X1 Mirrorless. (not 10 or 100)around $1,700 body only. said to be giving Leica run for its money.


Sort of... But Leica has found that demand for the M9 is about 3x what they predicted. A more realistic analysis, in my book, is that a LOT of people want 'real' cameras where they wrest back control from automation, and where they don't have to hold a camera at arm's length to guess at what's going to be in the picture.

Certes, another couple of generations of camera design, and I may contemplate an X1. But the EVF is still significantly inferior to a real finder.

Cheers,

R.
quote=modest genius What about on the new Fuji X1... (show quote)

Reply
Apr 22, 2012 12:27:37   #
photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga
 
There are other cameras with built in viewfinders, and/or ones that can be added and no need to hold a camera at arm's length.

Reply
Apr 22, 2012 12:51:32   #
sbesaw Loc: Boston
 
GH2man wrote:
It may be time to redo your test with a 16 mp Panasonic.
MT Shooter wrote:
One of the reasons they are so light is the small sensor, they haqve a 2x crop factor to attain a 35mm equivalent. That means the lens only has to have half the diameter in the glass to give the same evident view. That makes the lens a LOT cheaper to manufacture because of the optical glass savings.
Shoot the same scene with a 4/3's and with a full frame of the same MP rating and blow them both up to 20x30 and compared the print resolution and you will see the difference in the sensor quality. How do I know? I did it, simple. (10MP Olympus 4/3's at 20x24 and 12MP D700 at 20x30, the D700 image was leaps and bounds better without even looking close)
One of the reasons they are so light is the small ... (show quote)
It may be time to redo your test with a 16 mp Pana... (show quote)


Or the 16MP Oly E-M5.

Reply
Apr 22, 2012 13:21:59   #
Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine
 
modest genius wrote:
The new Fuji X1 has a viewfinder as well so no need for arms length. Also interchangeble lenses.


That was what I meant: that people want viewfinders they can use at their eyes, the X1 (and indeed its forebears) being excellent examples. Sorry I wasn't clearer.

Cheers,

R.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.