Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:12 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,157
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The reason the OP posted his question here is because he wants to continue to use his Leica lenses on a stabilized body. Most of his lenses are already very good, and will be excellent on the smaller image sensor.

And while some of the Olympus m4/3 lenses are very good, most aren't any better than equivalent lenses from any other manufacturer. But that's beside the point. He already has excellent lenses in thos ranges. What he needs is a lens or lenses that will fill the gap created by the narrower angle of view of the m4/3 body.
I understand very clearly why the Op posed his question. And I also understand that his lenses are fine. On that , we agree.

The reason I suggested the possibility of trying an AF lens i.e. the 45mm f1.8 is to double check and see if manually focusing his existing lenses might not be part of his issue.

A reasonable suggestion to make in my view.
Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:33 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

A reasonably good kit lens, which he'll probably need anyway, will tell him the same thing.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:43 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,157
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
A reasonably good kit lens, which he'll probably need anyway, will tell him the same thing.
I agree. But, given the fact that all his lenses are primes. I didn't bother to go with an inexpensive 14-42mm 'kit lens' The 45mm f1/8 is a good prime that might be able to give the same field of view as his 90mm. His, 90mm meanwhile gets turned into a 180mm lens. There is a sale going on (I think ) that offers a 150.00 rebate on the 45mm prime should he decide to get a lens along with the body. That brings the cost down to $250.00

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2013, 9:16 AM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14
Default

After having studied the very useful info regarding using "Leica glass on a non Leica body", I am of the opinion that, although possible, it might not be such a good idea after all?
I am now thinking about just keeping my Leica and in addition purchasing a MFT camera.
Apart from the impressive Oly Em5, the Fuji X Pro1 could also be a good candidate as a second camera, if combined with the new zoom 18-55mm f2.8 which has OIS. It is expected that Fuji will also launch a 10-24mm and a 55-200mm both with OIS.
The choice is not easy and I would appreciate reading your reactions.
Thank you!
Harry
Muizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2013, 10:34 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Any option that doesn't involve mounting your Leica lenses on a non-Leica body means you'll get AF and AE, and that's good.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2013, 4:14 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muizen View Post
After having studied the very useful info regarding using "Leica glass on a non Leica body", I am of the opinion that, although possible, it might not be such a good idea after all?
I am now thinking about just keeping my Leica and in addition purchasing a MFT camera.
Apart from the impressive Oly Em5, the Fuji X Pro1 could also be a good candidate as a second camera, if combined with the new zoom 18-55mm f2.8 which has OIS. It is expected that Fuji will also launch a 10-24mm and a 55-200mm both with OIS.
The choice is not easy and I would appreciate reading your reactions.
Thank you!
Harry
I think you might be on the right track. As others have mentioned putting your Leica lenses on a MFT camera would effectively half the field of view.

Now that you are moving away from that idea there are many more options for stabilization, namely OIS. The Fuji X Pro1 is a good candidate for sure, it has very good high dynamic range just like the OM-D EM5. The new 18-55mm f2.8-4 sure looks like a winner lens. Overall the Fuji line is shaping up to be pretty good.

That said my preference is micro four thirds, I find the Fuji $1399 price for the body only to be too much for what you get. Add in a lens and you're over $2000 easy. For the same money I would opt for the Olympus E-PL5 ($549) and the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 ($1,100) which has a constant f2.8 and OIS. There's also a number of good primes, the Zuiko 12mm f2.0, Lumix 20mm f1.7, Panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4, Zuiko 45mm f1.8, Zuiko 75mm f1.8 are probably the best of the bunch.


Coming from a Leica I suspect you might not have the same price/value perspective as I do and in that case I can see why you might lean towards the Fuji
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 3, 2013, 1:18 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14
Default

Ramcewan:
Thank you for your response!

It is interesting to notice how one can deviate away from an original idea (Leica lenses on a non Leica)!
When I would purchase a second camera I would most likely sell a Leica lens, which would give me ample funds for compensating the investment.

When looking at the X Pro1 and the Em5 I notice some differences that can be important:
* Sensor X Pro1 16,7 MP versus 16,1 Em5 - Most likely not really important?
* Sensor type X Pro1 APS-C versus Four Thirds Em5 - Important difference??
Multiplier 1.5 for W Pro1 versus 2 for Em5 - This could be an advantage of the X Pro1?
Em5 has fantastic shake reduction, the X pro1 doesn't have anti shake, but the zoom lenses do. -strong plus for Em5
LCD of the X Pro1 has 1.230.000 dots versus 610.000 dots for the Em5. - I feel that this is an advantage of the X Pro1
OVF on the X Pro1 only - which I consider a plus point for the X Pro1.
Em5 somewhat smaller in size and lighter, but the range finder model of the X Pro1 I like better.
I would appreciate reading your opinions on above observations.
Thanks!
Harry
Muizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 3, 2013, 3:13 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

The Fuji has a larger sensor and a shorter flange focal distance than m4/3. In order to avoid distortion, vignetting, field curvature, and chromatic aberration, Fuji's lenses must be more complex in order to be as good, and therefore will probably be more expensive, or, in order to be equally inexpensive, probably won't be as good.

Case in point: The Olympus 45/1.8 (at $399) runs rings around the Fuji 60/2.4 (at $649.)

And since Fuji relies on image stabilization in the lens, the lens(es) would be even more complex and thus more expensive.

My recommendation has always been to find the lenses you need to be able to shoot what you want, and pick a body you can hang them on.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 3, 2013, 3:57 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muizen View Post
Ramcewan:
Thank you for your response!

It is interesting to notice how one can deviate away from an original idea (Leica lenses on a non Leica)!
When I would purchase a second camera I would most likely sell a Leica lens, which would give me ample funds for compensating the investment.

When looking at the X Pro1 and the Em5 I notice some differences that can be important:
* Sensor X Pro1 16,7 MP versus 16,1 Em5 - Most likely not really important?
* Sensor type X Pro1 APS-C versus Four Thirds Em5 - Important difference??
Multiplier 1.5 for W Pro1 versus 2 for Em5 - This could be an advantage of the X Pro1?
Em5 has fantastic shake reduction, the X pro1 doesn't have anti shake, but the zoom lenses do. -strong plus for Em5
LCD of the X Pro1 has 1.230.000 dots versus 610.000 dots for the Em5. - I feel that this is an advantage of the X Pro1
OVF on the X Pro1 only - which I consider a plus point for the X Pro1.
Em5 somewhat smaller in size and lighter, but the range finder model of the X Pro1 I like better.
I would appreciate reading your opinions on above observations.
Thanks!
Harry
The sensor size difference in my opinion is immaterial as is the MP difference.

you mention the LCD screen resolution, what I would suggest makes the OM-D much better is that the screen tilts and is also a touch screen allowing touch 2 focus and shoot, as near as I can tell the Fuji is just a display.

Overall I think you have the right information to make a choice. I second what Tcav says about the lenses of the MFT line vs. the Fuji line especially the Olympus lenses. I think you'd find the 12mm f2.0 and the new 17mm f1.8 to be very nice lenses with the high build quality you are used to, throw in the 45mm f1.8 and the 25mm f1.4 you'd have a nice 24/35/50/90 fov setup very similar to the Leica setup you have.
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 4, 2013, 11:21 AM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramcewan View Post
The sensor size difference in my opinion is immaterial as is the MP difference.

you mention the LCD screen resolution, what I would suggest makes the OM-D much better is that the screen tilts and is also a touch screen allowing touch 2 focus and shoot, as near as I can tell the Fuji is just a display.

Overall I think you have the right information to make a choice. I second what Tcav says about the lenses of the MFT line vs. the Fuji line especially the Olympus lenses. I think you'd find the 12mm f2.0 and the new 17mm f1.8 to be very nice lenses with the high build quality you are used to, throw in the 45mm f1.8 and the 25mm f1.4 you'd have a nice 24/35/50/90 fov setup very similar to the Leica setup you have.
Hello Ramcewan,
Thank you again for your very useful observations and advise!
Could you recommend some fast zoom lenses for the Em5 too?
I like to use zooms to avoid the need for carrying around too many lenses.
Thanks
Harry
Muizen is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:02 PM.