On 31 October 2012 14:09, Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > But to be short, probably every camera is good at low light now. I still
> > prefer the Olympus colors however.
>
> I agree, entirely. The OM-D is good enough for anything I would want
> to do in this regard.
>From what I've seen so far, I agree with Ken & Moose - OM-D deserves some
serious consideration. You can even use your 4/3 lenses with an adapter.
Were I in your place I would almost certainly go that route, as it is, I'm
waiting to see what, if anything, Olympus come up with in full-size 4/3 to
replace my 5-year old E-3. The E-3 does better in low light than your E-1,
but its performance there is still weak compared to the APS-C and 35mm
sized competition. For which reason, I've just agreed to buy a used Canon
5D mk 1 to use with my old OM lenses and they'll probably get used in dingy
dives where jazz bands play ;)
Have a browse through some of the galleries at
https://picasaweb.google.com/ian.a.nichols
if you want to see what an E-3 can do, which you might consider as an
alternative... but the OM-D does it significantly better as far as I can
see.
--
Stand firm for what you believe in, until and unless logic and experience
prove you wrong. Remember: when the emperor looks naked, the emperor *is*
naked, the truth and a lie are not "sort-of the same thing" and there is
no aspect, no facet, no moment of life that can't be improved with pizza.
-Daria Morgendorffer
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|