Micro Four Thirds camera
- Started
- Last post
- 201 Responses
- Atkinson0
CANON S90 IS THE BEST I'VE USED. oops sorry. Ebay mode!
- Hombre_Lobo0
georgesIII
jus replied to your LX3 thread, i was only going to buy an LX3 but decided i wanted more image quality so got the GF1.
i have since having the GF1 for a few months played with a G11 and its just lovely, the ergonomics are perfect, its the best feeling camera ive ever held. Great versatile lens too.
If you want better image quality and lens options, the E-PL1 OR E-P1 (if not interested in the electronic view finder) are your best cost friendly choices.
The electronic view finder is something special though and the E-PL1 takes very slightly sharper pictures.
E-PL1 is the best choice IF you dont mind slightly slow autofocus. with the 14-42mm len, then later get the panasonic 20mm, then the EVF.
Look at previous pages in this thread, loads of info, ill just be repeating myself and run the risk of missing something important out!
- Atkinson0
Right, got the camera. Ace. The 20mm Panasonic is fantastic and the Olympus 14-42 isn't half bad. The camera extended menu is very good. Looking forward to using it more! Thanks again Hombre_Lobo for the help - email me your address I'll send you something.
- Hombre_Lobo0
Yeeeh boy!!
Youre welcome dude, when i was choosing its was nightmare trying to work it out, which is why i dont mind writing loads about it, if it helps!
Look forward to you posting in the recent pics thread :D
- Andrew_D0
Has anybody used the Sony Alpha NEX-5? Is it worth a damn?
I want a camera that does quality video and stills. I'm contemplating a Canon 7D, but if there's something cheaper that does the job, I'm all ears.
Founds these links for video on the Sony Alpha NEX-5:
Should I just splurge and get the 7D? I saw Vistek had the body on sale for $1650: http://www.vistek.ca/store/Digit…
Cheers in advance.
- go for the 7D and a nice L lens.ok_not_ok
- Yeah, think that might be the best route. L series? Aren't they super expensive?Andrew_D
- Get the 24-70 L. It's a little pricey but that's all you'll need for a long time.ok_not_ok
- huuuge lens, but nice... I'd rather have a 28 f.18, 50 f1.8 and 85 f.18... f1.8 changes everythingvaxorcist
- Atkinson0
The Sony seems to be a fairly basic upgrade from point and shoot.
- 23kon0
my camera plans have been put on hold for the moment as getting some bits for the car has drained some funds lol.
def keeping my eye on the olympus e-pl1
the LX-4 may be out when im thinking of buying though
- Atkinson0
so might the epl2!, or the ep3...just to make decisions easier!
- Atkinson0
Here's a shot fro the EPL1s first outing, with the Panasonic 20mm
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dra…
A small amount of luminance noise reduction in LR
- Atkinson0
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/drawsomething/4812869782/" title="In The Night Garden Liverpool (28 of 35).jpg by Craig Atkinson ♦ Café Royal Books, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4812869782_5a3245a95f_b.jpg" width="763" height="1024" alt="In The Night Garden Liverpool (28 of 35).jpg" /></a>
- mnmlst0
For these price of these micro 4/3 you can by a low end SLR and get better results and a much better lens selection. Unless the size really matters, these don't make sense.
- micro 4/3rds cameras are like old rangefinders... smaller, less imposing, less PHOTOGRPAHER...etc..vaxorcist
- not true, when compared to entry level DSLR, the GF1, and E-PL1 are on par if not better, with DR and high ISO.Hombre_Lobo
- Atkinson0
mnmlst can you get better results with a low end slr? Also, size is vital for me - I wouldn't take an SLR with me everywhere.
- mnmlst0
better results than what? The pic above? Definitely. But it sounds like the size matters, in which case 4/3 cams are great. But just realize what you're dealing with, the 4/3 cams are indeed smaller but when you factor the lenses and stuff you're not exactly going to slip it into your pocket on the way out the door. At that size they are still bigger than your pocket unless you are MC Hammer. And for me anyway, not having a glass viewfinder sucks bigtime.
- Hombre_Lobo0
@mnmlst
"For these price of these micro 4/3 you can by a low end SLR and get better results and a much better lens selection"not true, when compared to low-end DSLR, the GF1, and E-PL1 are better, with DR sharpness and high ISO.
see here, compared to the nikon d3000 (which scored highly in tests for low-end DSLR's)
sharpness -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/…high iso -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/…The E-PL1 is a clear winner comparatively. And the d3000 is the highest scoring low-end DSLR as far as i can see on dpreview.
- Hombre_Lobo0
Atkinson that pic is ace!
loving it. great lighting, cute kid!
The 20mm is something special isnt it! and of course with those great oly jpeg colours it comes out very nice. *shakes fist, whilst holding GF1 in other hand* :P
- Atkinson0
@mnmlst, that pic is the third I took with the cam, if a DSLR couldnt do better I'd be v surprised! However, a better photographer I'm certain could take as good or better with a m4/3 camera. As noted above, it's also less imposing, and the electronic VF is really great.
- Again, i think these are great little cameras. But a very different beast from SLRs as of now.mnmlst
- mnmlst0
The D3000 is cheaper than the GF1 for that matter. Buy a d5000 and add a 50mm 1.8 for 120$ and you've got a much better setup. You've got more options, better everything for within 100$ of the price of the GF1. Again, unless size is your issue (which it understandably can be), these cameras are a small limited system - right now anyway. They show promise, but they aren't there yet.
- Hombre_Lobo0
letter head that is ace!
i too love my GF1, i much prefer its ergonomics to the pen cameras, just preference.What ND filters were you using? im in the market for some birthday filters! want a grad ND, and standard ND.
- singh-ray vari, They are pricy, but you can change the ND.mnmlst
- no filters, just the 20mm lens. I'm a beginner, so really just learning as I go ..letterhead
- oopsletterhead