Toronto Photography Meetup Group

A few months ago, I thought hard about dumping my DX system for a micro 4/3 system. My main reason was that I've found that I am much more likely to take something smaller to trips and travel than a big DSLR. I have started thinking about this again this week.

Besides the fact that I will be losing a lot sensor size and in theory some IQ (everything else being equal), I am also losing a lot of used lens and variety of lenses available by going micro 4/3 or a Sony NEX system.

It also makes me think that I am less serious about the hobby if I was to switch.

I know that a lot of people can create amazing images with these smaller cameras. But am I just crazy for even thinking about switching? Any comments?

I dunno, this is just a very uneducated and maybe ignorant comment to some degree, but from my observation, people who shoot 4/3's still end up buying a few lenses and add-ons.

They still end up carrying a small camera bag. A bag that will probably fit a D90+18-200. If you can truly find one camera+lens combo that will suffice, go for it. But I know myself, and I'm sure a lot of people on the forum are the same; I'd end up carrying a bag anyways.

Maybe try to pair down your current setup. Limit yourself and you'll find yourself exploring different ways of shooting. This goes for 4/3's or DX. Go out and just shoot with a 50mm or an ultra wide and you'll get some interesting photos, because you'll be forced to think outside the box in order to capture a given scene. It can obviously have it's draw backs, but it'll help you grow as a photographer.

Actually, I could be in the same situation as you. I feel that when travelling I lost a handfiul of good shots because I didnt have my camera. If thats the type of situation you are refering to when traveling?

At the moment, I have an E-PL1 (m 4/3 system) as my primary camera. Then I have an Olympus Tough 3005 when I know I'm going to get wet.

Although, as I take photography more seriously and I pick up more money. I'm thinking of doing a Canon G12 and Canon DSLR combination. Since my E-PL1 is actually too big to bring for some situations. The Canon G12 might be more "fitting" to commonly bring along. It also feels more like a DSLR like than my E-PL1. As for my Canon DSLR (probably a 40D) I would use it for shooting at home or events in the local area.

I dont know much about photohgrapy since I'm just starting out. Although, I'm just sharing my thoughts since you might have ecountered a similar concern.

The Sony E-Mount 18-200 for the NEX is frankly a massive lens compared to the NEX bodies. Even when the camera gets smaller, it doesn't prevent a downsizing of the lens according to the laws of physics.

Frankly, the way to go with a NEX or M43 system is with small primes, be them native ones like the Panny 20, or the Sony 16, or opting for leica M-mount primes while each system's small prime lineup gets filled out.

My current "small camera" lineup is a NEX-5, Sony 16/2.8, Cosina Voigtlander 25/4, and CV 35/2.5, with the appropriate adapter.

i purchased an E-P1 early this year because my wife didn't want a bulky (her standard) DSLR when we travel with the kids. so i sold my back up 20D to fund this purchase. she loves how lighter it is but at the same time i was able to be more creative with it since i purchased a $20 adapter from eBay and a Canon FD 50mm 1.4 for $35 from Kijiji. when we went to High Park for Cherry Blossoms this Spring i was able to take decent photos with that set-up. i still like the solid feel of a DSLR though and i like looking at the viewfinder 99.9% of the time.

i'd say don't sell your set-up and just purcahse a used micro 4/3. the reason i went with Oly is coz of the price and the in-body IS w/c i think the GH and GF series Panasonic are missing, correct me if i'm wrong.

Thanks for the comments!

Yeah, part of the plan is that I have to sell some of the gear to fund the purchase. I thought about keeping my D80 , 85mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8, 12-24mm Tokina f/4, and sell my Sigma 24-70mm and 70-300mm to fund part of the purchase.

This way, I still have the lenses to do semi-serious portraits and landscapes. Then leave the street and general stuff to the mirrorless.

You will be losing AF lenses but not if you learn to manual focus. There are a lot of used lenses that can be used with m4/3 or NEX bodies with adopters - more than with Nikon bodies, Canon bodies are not as bad as but there is a LOT more choices with these newer small bodes for MF lenses.

Why switch, just keep both - the EP-L1 is being discounted again for $399 with kit lens.

I saw the NEX-3 being sold for $399 during Christmas time.

Sell it back used for half price and consider it a cheap rental if you don't like it.

Don't forget either that when you move to m4/3, that you end up with a crop factor of 2x, which is great if you want more telephoto reach, but sucks if you are trying to do landscapes and wide angles.
Suddenly that 50mm acts like a 100mm and your "wide" 18mm, is really 36mm.

I did this a couple years ago, going from a D300/D40 combo to a Panasonic G1.

This can work pretty well with a few caveats.

1. You need native lenses for your wides. m4/3 has a 2x crop factor so even ultra-wide lenses aren't all that ultra-wide if adapted. Look at the Oly 9-18 or the Panasonic 14/2.5 prime for wides.

2. Forget about high ISO shooting. even the best m43 camera struggles above ISO 800. It's like shooting a D200 or D80 in terms of high ISO.

3. Shooting action is difficult. Doable, but difficult. Viewfinder blackout is the biggest problem, generally you lose the LV feed to the LCD or EVF for about 1/3 of a second when shooting in continuous. I added a E-30 and some regular 4/3rds lenses for that use. Note that there is a fully coupled adapter for 4/3rds lenses which can be really useful to round out the lens line, I actually used that a lot with the cheap & good Oly 40-150 f4-5.6,although there's now an m43 version.

The benefits are small size, the advantages of Live View (especially when manual focusing) and some really, really good lenses (Oly HG series 4/3rds lenses in particular are superb).

I eventually ended up replacing the G1 with a Sony SLT-A33, which wasn't all that much larger but has far better high ISO performance, a better selection of wides and handles action a lot better. I'll probably add a NEX for pocketability at some point. I do miss the G1/E-30 pair in some regards, especially the 4/3rds lenses and the ability to use my RF lenses on digital.

I bypassed the large DSLR's primarily for the same reason you are thinking of ditching the larger DSLR's. Though technically I was using my wifes Pentax K110D before hand which wasn't that large nor heavy.
In any case I got the GF1.
What others says is correct. The Panny G1,2, GH1, GF1, GF2 all struggle after ISO 800 though for my purposes ISO 1250 is pretty good and ISO 1600 is doable with noise reduction. Oly does a little better in this regards with all their pens. On the other hand, all indication suggests that the new Panny GH2 and G3 can do even better than the rest.
AF seems to be catching up to DSLR's (well, lower end DSLR's anyhow) specially with the G3, GH2 and maybe even the new GF3 which was just announced.
As others have mentioned, wide angle wise, yup, go native lenses. Otherwise the skies the limit assuming you don't mind putting up with MF with adapted lenses. The just announced 25mm (50mm in FF) f1.4 Panasonic/Leica lens is a very much appreciated announcement as well. There are still some holes but there is everything from 7mm (14mm in FF) to 300mm (600mm in FF) covered natively and a bizzillion other brands you can use with adapters. The biggest hole right now seems to be either a native portrait prime and a fast standard zoom (i.e. something like a 12-60mm f2..
I can't say about the Oly (though people have said it's not quite as elegant), but with the Panny m43's, manual focusing is pretty easy and at least from my experience, I can manual focus faster and with way way more hit rate than I could ever dream with the Pentax k110d, albeit the Pentax does have a smallish viewfinder.
With my Thinktank Retrospective 5 (http://www.thinktankphoto.com/products/ ... stone.aspx), I can carry a GF1, 20mm, 14-45m, 45-200mm, Super Takumar 55mm, Jupiter 37A 135mm with other accessories comfortably and if I'm really crazy there is just enough space to put in a Pentax SMC-M 50mm F1.7 and a 28mm... So for me, this small bag can carry my whole system if I wanted (though I usually limit myself to much less). If I was to carry the equivalent DSLR with it's lenses...I think I'll need to work out more...
Either way the size, weight and IQ has been truly amazing, I just wish their marketing (both Oly and Panny) was up to snuff, at least in Canada/USA.

With the issue of the m4/3 ISO over 800, I think maybe because my D80's high ISO capabilities are not that great, I really don't see an issue with the PENs or GFs not being able to handle ISO 800 and over. Maybe if I had a D7000 it would be a different story.

Thanks guys for the comments. I will still have to take my time to think about this. I am leaning towards selling a couple of my lenses and my LX5 and then get a E-PL2 or an NEX.

Umm, I don't consider myself remotely close to being a good photographer and everyone's view of what is good or not is different. That said, as far as I can tell, most would consider any m43 to be able to handle up to and including ISO 800 without problem. After that would depend on the camera on hand with varying levels of acceptability. Though I do agree with your assessment between D7000 and D80. M43 is definitely catching up though I doubt they would ever catch up to mid to high end DSLR's just because of sensor size.

My advice, as a u4/3 owner, is don't consider it if you plan on routinely shooting things that move faster than a 4 year old kid. The CDAF speed just doesn't seem to be there yet.

this is true. i used to have a 135mm F/2 which is like a 270mm F/2