bro where u buy the used E-M1ii and how much? looking around to buy a 2nd hand E-M1ii also
I bought from another CSNAP bro. It was on sale for USD899 last week. Not sure if you took advantage of it.
bro where u buy the used E-M1ii and how much? looking around to buy a 2nd hand E-M1ii also
I have a 7-14mm F2.8 and a 40-150 F2.8 if you are interestedWait for their product launch or sale. Try to be their club member to be in their email list. They have some very good ideas. eg. About 200 of us bought the EM5 mk3 for only about $1300 and at one time they are giving away their 45mm F1.8 in their xmas 14 day sale or something like that.
Other that, I got most of my gear second hand. Anyone one to let go some Pro Lenses at an attractive price eg. 40-150 F2.8 can PM me
His photos are good. But if he had used other brand equipment, they would be just as good or better.
Quote [ How can my view be impartial, when I use Olympus and, to top it all off, I am the brand ambassador/ visionary? ] UnQuote
Olympus E-M1 mark III review 2 | Petr Bambousek | Wildlife Photography
Olympus E-M1III, Olympus E-M1 mark III, first impressions, review and real world field test by wildlife photographer Petr Bambousek, extender, converter, teleconverter, costa ricawww.sulasula.com
To his credit, he did confess his vested interest.
He was probably paid directly or indirectly to sing praises.
Hey, all the other brands' "ambassadors/visionaries" do that too. No crime was committed here.
"ambassadors/visionaries" got to make a living.
Whether to sell or keep equipment is a personal choice.
If you don't need the money, who cares?
Whether MFT dies a quick death (Panasonic also announces it will quit MFT soon); or a slow death (Panasonic continues MFT for few years).
Canon rumor is that M (APS-C) line will be continued with new 32MP model. It is a cash cow for Canon.
For whatever reasons, the camera buying public likes it very much.
This thing sells a lot and for Canon why kill the goose that laid the golden egg?
The success of small, light, cheap, powerful, very saleable APS-C mirrorless models from rival brands Canon, Nikon, Fuji - will impact Panasonic decision whether to abandon MFT.
No matter what, you cannot stop technology advance.
It does not make sense.
Just as computer users cannot insist that the rest of the world continues to use 5¼ inch floppy disk in 2020.
At some point, MFT dies. It was good in its era (2008).
You also forgot worse. Yes, worse.His photos are good. But if he had used other brand equipment, they would be just as good or better.
You also forgot worse. Yes, worse.
Of course he’d be able to handle probably any gear given to him.I would not doubt his professional skill as a photographer, to be able to handle other equipment besides MFT.
The known equipment for bird shooting are:
Sony A9 Mk2 full frame
Canon 1DX Mk3 full frame
Nikon D500 APS-C
maybe D850 full frame
(Maybe in future Canon R5 & R6)
Maybe some MFT but definitely not the most popular among bird shooters.
Don't believe me. Go and see for yourself in Singapore bird shooting circles.
For Birding, the ideal focal length is 600mm to 1200mm.
Max. Aperture of F4 is required for 600mm lenses is preferred because
when you add a 2x TC to get 1200mm for smaller birds, it becomes F8.
Camera Autofocus speed usually start drop once Aperature is smaller than F8.
Look at the comparison chart from B&H Photo. Prices are in USD.
Even professionals who are paid for their birding shots will find it hard to justify
the cost of Full Frame 600mm F4 lenses.
The Olympus 300mm F4 (equivalent to FF 600mm F4 in terms of Focal Length) is much more
affordable, at less than half the weight. And it does produce very respectable award winning photos
that even photographers like Petr Bambousek do not find his Micro Four Thirds system limiting.
View attachment 79622
You want to talk about the pro capture feature on the Olympus cameras too?
Yes.You mean this?
Hi Pitachu,
You can say it's equivalent to a 600mm lens in FOV but you can't say it's equivalent to a 600 f/4 because it's not. No amount of f/4 is f/4 is f/4 changes this.
And it is so much smaller than a 600mm f/4 lens precisely because it isn't a 600mm f/4. Its a 300mm f/4 which produces images on m43 equivalent to a 600mm f/8 lens on a FF.
This is only talking about the amount of light it lets in at the effective FOV.
You can argue the optical qualities of the 300mm f/4 are comparable to those exotic $10k+ supertele's. I haven't seen specifics but it's very likely it sits somewhere between the long end of the quality 600mm zooms (eg. Sony 200-600) and the exotic 600mm primes.
And what happens when you don't need the extra light a 600mm f/4 lens lets in and a 300mm f/4 produces perfectly fine results (as Petr Bambousek demonstrates), you just end up carrying extra dead weight. Could that extra weight and handling difficulties hinder a wildlife photographer, especially when he/she has to travel through harsh terrain to get to a location? Of course it could.
And what happens when you don't need the extra shallow DOF or where deeper DOF is actually desired, you just end up carrying extra dead weight. Same potential hindrance.
Look, the 300mm f/4 takes the TC's very well too:
Pretty lightweight way to get to 1200mm equiv whilst maintaining a certain bar of image quality.Olympus extender MC-20 (TC 2x) | Petr Bambousek | Wildlife Photography
Olympus E-M1X first impressions, review and real world field test by wildlife photographer Petr Bambousek, extender, converter, teleconverter, 2xwww.sulasula.com
If you need the extra light, then you need the equipment to let you do it. And m43 does run into practical limits.
If you don't need the extra light or shallower DOF, then FF runs into practical limits of how small they actually make lenses to (particularly at longer focal lengths).
Ironically someone like Petr Bambousek is probably the type of talent that can exploit any advantages you give him and is likely to push photography beyond the practical limits of the m43 system. Yet he doesn't feel hindered by it.
But how many of us can say we actually push our gear to the limits. Modern society has conditioned us to always want more, often for the sake of more and also ease of quicker gratification. Nothing wrong with that though - your money so you choose how to use it. But more/bigger is not always better.