Canon shooter switching to m3/4

[senser]

me canon shooter too recently supplemented with M43(GX1 paired with 20mm)---for the days i got nothing particular in mind to shoot, just bring out camera for random street shots...

Real world usage today at Albert St..my feel...
1.very useful fast AF and many times shoot from hip or chest blindly..yet >80% keepers!
2.can tell not many people bothered when PnS size camera point at them(unlike DSLR)
3. fixed focal length forces mind to frame shot first and move around more...more interesting angles captured...
4.touch screen AF and shutter very much useful!
some shots...http://www.flickr.com/photos/23318005@N08/with/6658016313/
thanks!

 

[rhema83]

i'll echo some of the users here that m43 cams are not replacement of DSLR but a smaller cam that compliments it when you want to travel light.

A few things that you will miss especially when you first switch to m43
1) Dynamic range - DSLR has wider dynamic range which was quite noticeable in the beginning but if you shoot RAW, you should be able to get 1-2 stops more
2) Change in shooting style - I was used to shooting with VF but sudden change to PnS style kinda strange, it gets more comfortable if you have an EVF on the m43 . Personally, i am only comfortable shooting in two positions that can give me the stability i want. One is using VF and tucking in my arms which is basic DSLR style, the other is shooting from the waist which is only possible if you get a swivel screen cam, with the swivel screen, it is even possible to shoot at angles that its impossible without the swivel screen
3) longer range fast lens - 70-200/2.8 anyone? Well, i think equivalent option is coming so cross our fingers this happens in 2012

Is the dynamic range of the latest 4/3 sensors really inferior to the APS-C sensors? From the reviews, it seems that Panasonic's 16MP G3/GX1 sensor is a winner. I would love to see a side-by-side comparison of their ISO100 (for DR) and ISO6400 (for noise) shots.

 

[Jet Lim]

Remember there is no perfect camera in this world. Every camera and system has it's pros and cons. You need to ask yourself if you could accept it. Canon has much better noise control than Olympus. But Olympus color is better with more details. Dynamic range wise, my feel Canon is slightly better but Olympus has arts filter and you could use software to correct it. AF wise, Canon is a better system overall but the recent release of E-P3 really impressed me. :what:

I was a Canon user for more than 5 years. Guess what...about a year ago I sold away all my 11 L lenses, 1DM4 and 5DM2 and switch to Olympus E-5 and Sony system. If you ask me any regrets? The only regret is I should have switched to Olympus earlier.
You can see some my pictures here
Jet Lim Photography | Birds
Jet Lim Photography | Wildlife

Although Canon is not bad too but I like Olympus especially the color, IQ and lighter equipment to carry overall but that's just me. Canon is a good system too, if you use it properly. My landscapes and BW shots were taken with Canon --> Jet Lim Photography

Having said that, I like Olympus better. I end up getting a E-P3 too

 

[jonathann]

Moved from the Olympus EP-1 to the Canon 5D2 and never looked back since. Occasionally still bring the EP-1 abroad when i want to travel light.
However the Fuji X10 has replaced my EP-1 now.

If i need to make a choice like you, my personal opinion would be i would not fully swap my Canon gears to move into the m4/3 territory. Getting a m4/3 just to supplement could be ideal.

Nevertheless the X10 is able to replace my m4/3 gear at the moment due to the faster zoom lens.

 

[Oly5050]

Nevertheless the X10 is able to replace my m4/3 gear at the moment due to the faster zoom lens.

M4/3 IQ is way better than X10. Even more so when used with the primes. Also colours and WB are better on m4/3. There are other minor annoyances with the X10 in terms of handling and usability eg. Limitations on shutter speed in certain modes n flash on not linked to camera on. The X10 is a premium pns but will not replace m4/3, thats wat i hv found out. If it does that means i am willing to compromise on the IQ.

 

[SkyCheong]

Switched from Canon APS-C to m4/3... I'm still keeping my DSLR in case my friends need me to shoot a last minute event or for more serious work.

Using both GF1 and GX1. My choice of m43 over DSLR is simple: I can operate it with 1 hand. Most of the time it rains when I'm traveling (unfortunately), and it is not fun holding the umbrella and trying to take a picture/protecting the DSLR from the rain. My 20mm is always on and have 14-45mm as a backup if I need the extra 6mm. IQ-wise, I don't see it as a big drop from APS-C, since Olympus DSLR are using 4/3 sensors as well.

 

[jonathann]

M4/3 IQ is way better than X10. Even more so when used with the primes. Also colours and WB are better on m4/3. There are other minor annoyances with the X10 in terms of handling and usability eg. Limitations on shutter speed in certain modes n flash on not linked to camera on. The X10 is a premium pns but will not replace m4/3, thats wat i hv found out. If it does that means i am willing to compromise on the IQ.

yup definitely the newer m4/3 sensor IQ will be better then the X10 given the size. I find my IQ for X10 is on par with my Ep-1 and it has better high iso noise handling. I put it that the EP-1 has a older technology. If i need good IQ i would use my 5D2. However the X10 is excellent for low light shooting in term of a zoom lens. Not considering in term of prime lens.

Nevertheless the above are just based on my personal opinion.

 

[titus1984]

I have both systems currently, the Ep1 and 550D. Like what many have mentioned, I like both systems for their strengths. One being light weight and another for IQ. I do wildlife shoot and I think in this aspect m4/3 handling and variety of lenses is not as good as canon. M4/3 is however light and compact. If you are not a hard core pixel peeper, I would say m4/3 is good enought.

 

[Oly5050]

I have both systems currently, the Ep1 and 550D. Like what many have mentioned, I like both systems for their strengths. One being light weight and another for IQ. I do wildlife shoot and I think in this aspect m4/3 handling and variety of lenses is not as good as canon. M4/3 is however light and compact. If you are not a hard core pixel peeper, I would say m4/3 is good enought.

I thought if you are a pixel peeper, you will go for m4/3 or 4/3?

I have been pixel peeping, and one thing I have found is that if you are pixel peeping for sharpness, you better go for m4/3 or 4/3. ie. You want to see every eye lash or capillary in the eyes. Hahaha! Of course, if you want to pixel peep and look for noise at high ISO, I guess, I cannot argue that the 135 FF systems may be better. But, having said that, IQ to me, is bad at high ISO for all systems anyway. If IQ is so important, that no one will shoot in low light or poor light.

 

[icy2fire]

I bought a GX1 as I find my 5dii too bulky for everyday use. However I will keep my EOS system. I think m43 complements dslr very well. Which is why I refused to even consider 43 system. If I wanted something which requires dslr, I use it. If not, m43 for the other situations.

Having said that, m43 is not perfect. The picture quality is not as good. Loses out also on high ISO. In addition, good fast lenses are very ex too. But the gx1 it is a very fun camera, with very good picture quality as long as I don't compare lol. In summary, a good compromise.

 

[tsammyc]

Although I'm a convert to the NEX/Carl Zeiss ZM combo, I think you should consider the Canon PowerShot G1X. Before you scoff at the fact that it is a P&S, note that it has an advanced APS-C sensor. As I suggested on this forum several months ago, most brands will introduce a P&S compact with large APS-C sized sensor. Canon are also claiming that their 28-112mm equivalent lens is "pin sharp" and has good bokeh and shallow DOF. It should have excellent low light capability as well going to ISO 12,800. Finally, P&S compacts will achieve DSLR quality. Compared to M4/3, it should have equivalent PQ and should do what no interchangeable lens camera can do - have the lens retract completely into the body. Although on further inspection, the base of the lens does stick out a bit, but not as much as the Panny X-lenses. However, I hope this should allow you to slip it into pants pockets. This camera looks like a winner and soon everyone and their mother will have P&S with APS-C sensors.

There is also the new Fuji X-Pro1, but that is more for the crowd that wants an easy to use Leica, but can't afford one. It's large and heavy.

 

[Agrivar]

Although I'm a convert to the NEX/Carl Zeiss ZM combo, I think you should consider the Canon PowerShot G1X. Before you scoff at the fact that it is a P&S, note that it has an advanced APS-C sensor. As I suggested on this forum several months ago, most brands will introduce a P&S compact with large APS-C sized sensor. Canon are also claiming that their 28-112mm equivalent lens is "pin sharp" and has good bokeh and shallow DOF. It should have excellent low light capability as well going to ISO 12,800. Finally, P&S compacts will achieve DSLR quality. Compared to M4/3, it should have equivalent PQ and should do what no interchangeable lens camera can do - have the lens retract completely into the body. Although on further inspection, the base of the lens does stick out a bit, but not as much as the Panny X-lenses. However, I hope this should allow you to slip it into pants pockets. This camera looks like a winner and soon everyone and their mother will have P&S with APS-C sensors.

There is also the new Fuji X-Pro1, but that is more for the crowd that wants an easy to use Leica, but can't afford one. It's large and heavy.

You are incorrect again. I don't mind you posting in this forum if you get your facts right.

The new canon sensor is slightly larger than four thirds and smaller than APS-C. It is NOT APS-C. Check out dpreview.

"
The sensor in the G1 X is 18.7 x 14mm, which means it's 20% smaller than the sensors Canon uses in most of its DSLRs. However it's slightly larger than the Four Thirds size used by Olympus and Panasonic, and more than 4x the area of the Fujifilm X10's sensor. Noticeably, its pixel count is also around 20% lower than Canon's 18MP DSLR chip - supporting its assertion that its design is closely related, with the same underlying pixel design. This can only bode well, given the high quality results that cameras such as the EOS 7D can produce."

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canong1x/

 

[rasdeep]

Looks like an interesting year ahead if PnS sensors' heading towards APS-C size, the G1X looks good but the lens is a little slow, if it is a F2.8 constant, it will be a winner but i think size wise will have to compromise again..

Although I'm a convert to the NEX/Carl Zeiss ZM combo, I think you should consider the Canon PowerShot G1X. Before you scoff at the fact that it is a P&S, note that it has an advanced APS-C sensor. As I suggested on this forum several months ago, most brands will introduce a P&S compact with large APS-C sized sensor. Canon are also claiming that their 28-112mm equivalent lens is "pin sharp" and has good bokeh and shallow DOF. It should have excellent low light capability as well going to ISO 12,800. Finally, P&S compacts will achieve DSLR quality. Compared to M4/3, it should have equivalent PQ and should do what no interchangeable lens camera can do - have the lens retract completely into the body. Although on further inspection, the base of the lens does stick out a bit, but not as much as the Panny X-lenses. However, I hope this should allow you to slip it into pants pockets. This camera looks like a winner and soon everyone and their mother will have P&S with APS-C sensors.

There is also the new Fuji X-Pro1, but that is more for the crowd that wants an easy to use Leica, but can't afford one. It's large and heavy.

 

[pinholecam]

Although I'm a convert to the NEX/Carl Zeiss ZM combo, I think you should consider the Canon PowerShot G1X. Before you scoff at the fact that it is a P&S, note that it has an advanced APS-C sensor. As I suggested on this forum several months ago, most brands will introduce a P&S compact with large APS-C sized sensor. Canon are also claiming that their 28-112mm equivalent lens is "pin sharp" and has good bokeh and shallow DOF. It should have excellent low light capability as well going to ISO 12,800. Finally, P&S compacts will achieve DSLR quality. Compared to M4/3, it should have equivalent PQ and should do what no interchangeable lens camera can do - have the lens retract completely into the body. Although on further inspection, the base of the lens does stick out a bit, but not as much as the Panny X-lenses. However, I hope this should allow you to slip it into pants pockets. This camera looks like a winner and soon everyone and their mother will have P&S with APS-C sensors.

There is also the new Fuji X-Pro1, but that is more for the crowd that wants an easy to use Leica, but can't afford one. It's large and heavy.

Another attempt at redefining the pns category.
Good thing for the person looking for a pns with larger sensor (which can be a bad thing for the layman; because of "why not everything sharp?" syndrome due to reduced DOF)
Slowish lens.
The advantage of an ILC is that a few years down the road, the nice lenses can still be retained.
Its hard to beat the small fast primes offered by m4/3 atm for small mirrorless cameras, though the Fuji may well be the one to watch.

 

[pinholecam]

Looks like an interesting year ahead if PnS sensors' heading towards APS-C size, the G1X looks good but the lens is a little slow, if it is a F2.8 constant, it will be a winner but i think size wise will have to compromise again..

I could live with f2.8-f4 if that was possible by dropping the FL a bit on the long end (eg. 28-85 equivalent)

 

[rasdeep]

I could live with f2.8-f4 if that was possible by dropping the FL a bit on the long end (eg. 28-85 equivalent)

+1 to this thought, for PnS shorter FL and f2.8-4 should work wonders already with IS in body

 

[tsammyc]

Another attempt at redefining the pns category.
Good thing for the person looking for a pns with larger sensor (which can be a bad thing for the layman; because of "why not everything sharp?" syndrome due to reduced DOF)
Slowish lens.
The advantage of an ILC is that a few years down the road, the nice lenses can still be retained.
Its hard to beat the small fast primes offered by m4/3 atm for small mirrorless cameras, though the Fuji may well be the one to watch.

They could program the Auto/Program mode to step it down to an everything sharp F-stop. It's a 1.8 crop factor and from my experience with my Pentax 40mm Ltd 2.8 lens, you should be able to have blurry backgrounds and subject popping DOF with half body shots, but probably not with full body shots. That is pretty good already. I only wish the Canon S100 successor could have this sensor...

With a 450g body, the new Fuji X-Pro1 is just too heavy for me. It's getting close to the size and weight of a M9 (593g) but with better PQ and autofocus. With a Leica or Zeiss M lens, the NEX 5N already gets me the PQ and for just 287g.

 

[pinholecam]

They could program the Auto/Program mode to step it down to an everything sharp F-stop. It's a 1.8 crop factor and from my experience with my Pentax 40mm Ltd 2.8 lens, you should be able to have blurry backgrounds and subject popping DOF with half body shots, but probably not with full body shots. That is pretty good already. I only wish the Canon S100 successor could have this sensor...

With a 450g body, the new Fuji X-Pro1 is just too heavy for me. It's getting close to the size and weight of a M9 (593g) but with better PQ and autofocus. With a Leica or Zeiss M lens, the NEX 5N already gets me the PQ and for just 287g.

Not the same.
Stopping down, ISO and/or shutter speed must correspondingly respond to this.



Different strokes for different folks, since weight is so subjective.
I do quite a bit of cycling (or rather I used to), and many folks I know are rather anal about weight of their gear.
Carbon everything bike (including water bottle cages, titanium screws, etc) at great expense just to shave off another 250g or less from their sub 10kg bikes.
I just look at it in another POV, I go pee before I get out the door for a ride, its easily 250ml or 250g

 

[keiser]

Although I'm a convert to the NEX/Carl Zeiss ZM combo, I think you should consider the Canon PowerShot G1X. Before you scoff at the fact that it is a P&S, note that it has an advanced APS-C sensor. As I suggested on this forum several months ago, most brands will introduce a P&S compact with large APS-C sized sensor. Canon are also claiming that their 28-112mm equivalent lens is "pin sharp" and has good bokeh and shallow DOF. It should have excellent low light capability as well going to ISO 12,800. Finally, P&S compacts will achieve DSLR quality. Compared to M4/3, it should have equivalent PQ and should do what no interchangeable lens camera can do - have the lens retract completely into the body. Although on further inspection, the base of the lens does stick out a bit, but not as much as the Panny X-lenses. However, I hope this should allow you to slip it into pants pockets. This camera looks like a winner and soon everyone and their mother will have P&S with APS-C sensors.

There is also the new Fuji X-Pro1, but that is more for the crowd that wants an easy to use Leica, but can't afford one. It's large and heavy.

The G1X (btw is 4/3 rather than 3/2 and also smaller) made me wonder why did Canon did not manufacture smaller lenses for their APS-C DSLR (given that they do make excellent lenses)? Perhaps there are physical and other limitations? It also prompts me to wonder if Fuji could produce smaller and better lenses for their new APS-C sized cam as compare to Canon. Any thoughts?

 

[rhema83]

The G1X (btw is 4/3 rather than 3/2 and also smaller) made me wonder why did Canon did not manufacture smaller lenses for their APS-C DSLR (given that they do make excellent lenses)? Perhaps there are physical and other limitations? It also prompts me to wonder if Fuji could produce smaller and better lenses for their new APS-C sized cam as compare to Canon. Any thoughts?

One big reason is because the G1X does not have a mirror box. Thus the flange focal distance is much shorter than the EOS DSLRs, allowing a smaller lens to be built. But a side effect of shorter FFD is light fall-off at the edges due to the angle which the light is hitting the sensor. That can be corrected by (expensive) micro-lenses on the sensor, which Leica is using on its huge full frame (Kodak made) sensor. That said, I don't understand why Canon wants such a long zoom lens on its "pro" G series camera. A 24-70mm f/2.8 equivalent would be ideal.

2012 is definitely an exciting year for photography. There are so many new models in the pipeline, I will have a really tough time deciding what to go for next. At this moment, the Fujifilm X-Pro1 looks mighty interesting. If it is able to overcome the slow AF and other reliability issues of the X100, and produce good image quality with the new experimental sensor, it's going to be a real hit. It's not cheap, but compared to a Leica M8 (APSC sensor) and the midrange M lenses, the Fujifilm system is almost a steal.