|
|
Post by birderbert on Nov 2, 2014 20:18:27 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Gord on Nov 2, 2014 22:21:10 GMT -8
Bert, I really enjoyed that read especially as one who's fairly entrenched in the full-frame/DSLR end of the spectrum. I wonder how well these cameras will perform for bird photography. That said, I think Dave Peppar uses something similar? And no denying his results are wonderful.
|
|
|
|
Post by birderbert on Nov 3, 2014 8:32:13 GMT -8
As an Olympus Micro Four-Thirds user I know full well the benefits of the micro Four Thirds system especially now as I have entered retirement. The weight advantage over all other Full Frame or APS-C systems is a great bonus to me! HOWEVER! Since having taken up bird photography, I can see the advantage of larger sensors and more megapixels since almost all of my images have to be cropped and I assume that would apply to most other photographer's pics. That aside [and curse Olympus for changing their AUTOFOCUS system from PHASE to CONTRAST DETECTION when moving from 4/3 to micro4/3] I still love their beautifully engineered little cameras. The autofocus when using my older 4/3 glass on m4/3 bodies is TOO SLOW to capture the fast moving little birds and I am back using my E-3 Four Thirds body for photographing Kinglets, Warblers etc! So much for shedding Bulk and weight! lol Can't wait for some Faster, Long Teles for m4/3
|
|
|
|
Post by dpeppar on Nov 5, 2014 8:50:18 GMT -8
Bert, a very interesting topic. I use a Pentax K3 which is a 24mp APS-C sensor. The APS-C is used on most non-full frame DSLR. Thanks for your comment Gord.
Bert I think DSLR (full or C) do give some advantage re autofocus and image size but the rate of change in camera technology is changing so fast who knows what will come.
Re weight: I thing a camera of 3-4 pounds is easier to handhold than a light 1 lb camera. Its a matter of physics. I've added a shoulder harness to carry it though!
DaveP
|
|
|
|
Post by birderbert on Nov 5, 2014 9:51:12 GMT -8
Hi Dave
You're right about the change in technology. Olympus [among others] claimed to have the fastest autofocus system. I don't know if this is true but using native micro4/3 Olympus lenses it is extremely fast. My problem is in using older Phase Detection 4/3 lenses with newer Contrast Detection m4/3 bodies hence my comment "Can't wait for some Faster, Long Teles for m4/3"
I do however disagree with your comment "I think a camera of 3-4 pounds is easier to handhold than a light 1 lb camera". The heavier camera is perhaps more stable being less prone to shock and is perhaps why Olympus came up with their 5-axis IS system. I find the heavy cameras to be a huge burden when being carried around for any length of time! I typically have 2 bodies & lenses around my neck when out in the field and find the lightweight mirrorless system to be a huge boon for an old guy like me! I have used both DSLR and Mirrorless systems so I speak from personal experience. I find that I can handhold the lighter m4/3 system for MUCH longer than my DSLR without fatigue!
The whole topic is, and will of course continue to be, the subject of endless debate! lol
|
|
|
|
Post by kevinhhood on Nov 8, 2014 11:35:38 GMT -8
Hey all! I, of course, am commenting from the cheap seats with my Panasonic Lumix FZ200 with its 22 square mm of sensor, but of course I am a BIRDER/photographer and use my camera to assist with identification (though I sometimes get a lucky shot that comes out well as long as you don't look too closely). I noted recently that Panasonic has released a FZ1000 with a 116 square mm sensor. Here's a good link for comparing the two: www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz1000. Would I consider it as better for my style of photography? Perhaps, perhaps not. The 4x sensor area would be nice but it's equivalent zoom is 25x400 compared to the 25x600 for the FZ200. I have to admit I live mostly at the max-zoom end of the range and would probably be frustrated by the loss of the top 1/3 of my zoom range. For someone from the photographer/birder (or PHOTOGRAPHER/BIRDER) camp, it might prove to have some value. Of course I live far from the big-sensor world so don't take my word for it. Kevin |
|
|
|
Post by dpeppar on Nov 8, 2014 13:03:49 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by birderbert on Nov 8, 2014 14:44:42 GMT -8
Kevin "I, of course, am commenting from the cheap seats with my Panasonic Lumix FZ200 " I think a lot of us are in the "cheap seats" when compared to Nikon D3X or D4 or Canon EOS 1DX and the ilk. Any camera with a Leica lens has to be pretty good? My philosophy is simple - use a tripod with any lens over 200mm. I took my entry level Olympus m4/3 bodies and "kit" lenses on my European Vacation last year plus used a carbon fibre Gitzo Travel Tripod for most shots. The resulting images from the entry level systems were superb, I think!  AS-L1-Neuschwanstein-SHARP B by BirderBert, on Flickr |
|
|
|
Post by birderbert on Nov 8, 2014 14:48:11 GMT -8
Interesting video Dave. Kinda puts things in perspective but what's with the switch stick? |
|
|
|
Post by kevinhhood on Nov 8, 2014 19:31:07 GMT -8
Dave:
Great video! It's really nice to know that the 'moron behind the camera' can make a difference. (I have always known that the 'nut behind the wheel' was the most failure prone part of vehicle.)
Bert: Wow! Looks like it was generated by high res ray-tracing stuff (not sure of the correct lingo) like that which Disney and others used for their high-detail animation. On the Hawaiian vacation we decided to go carry on only so I had to choose 1 piece of birding equipment. I chose the camera and left my image stabilization binoculars and my tripod (sorry Bert and Ken) at home. Thank goodness the Panasonic's IS is good enough to get some reasonable hand-held shots. I will definitely try to take my tripod next time! I promise!
Kevin
|
|
|
|
Post by birderbert on Nov 8, 2014 21:13:41 GMT -8
Talk about Disney! I think Schloss Neuschwanstein in Bavaria was the inspiration for the Disney World castles. Very little post processing on that image - just a little extra vibrancy and some slight sharpening. Just shows what even a small m4/3 camera is capable of---tripod mounted of course [hint hint]
ps My little Gitzo tripod is only about 20" long collapsed and will fit inside most medium/large suitcases [probably not your carry-on though]. It weights around 2 lbs and costs a small fortune! |
|
