I'd prefer M43 also. Fuji offers no sensor stabilisation, which seriously
cripples its otherwise nice primes. If IS would be something your wife
comes to appriciate, Fuji is actually a dead end with non IS primes and
even a non stabilised 2.8 standaard zoom.
The bla bla about the superior RGB patterned sensor has also quiet down
since their new flagship MF camera is NOT equiped with it ;-).
Actually my wife has an e-m5 with 14-150mm and is happy with it. Less
weight and easier to get along then a two lens setup. You'll find them
quite cheap second hand, if you prefer. Actually I think the E-M10 mk II
has the E-M5 mk I stabilisation unit. Still good.
To the people who prefer 3:2 ratio pictures to 4:3, I'd say look at the
classic artists, who had no prejudice for a technically dictated format.
Rembrandt
<https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en/rijksstudio/artists/rembrandt-harmensz-van-rijn>,
for instance. For every 3:2 ratio painting they produced, they made at
least 10 more square ones....
The Rembrandt link points to a site of the well-known Dutch 'Rijksmuseum'
in Amsterdam, that has digitized all their art objects in high resolution.
You can download and use the files as you please, since they only show
objects where the copyright is no longer applicable or permission is
granted. Nice!
2017-07-01 22:26 GMT+02:00 Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On 7/1/2017 9:49 AM, Jez Cunningham wrote:
>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> My wife has been re-inspired to resume photography after she accompanied
>> me
>> on a 1-week workshop in south-west France. She's been using a Nikon D70
>> (from 2004) and says she wants a more modern DSLR - in particular with a
>> decent sized LCD to review her pictures. She's got 3 Nikon lenses but none
>> with VR.
>>
>> She was assuming she'd stay with Nikon (3400 or 5600 - I use a 7000) but
>> I'm leaning towards advising her to look at the OMD 10 - if she can get on
>> with the EVF.
>>
>
> I prefer an EVF. Focus peaking and EVF magnification for focusing are
> magic for better focus than with any OVF. Especially for folks with less
> than perfect vision, I suppose, but I had 20/10 vision in my shootin' eye,
> and still like them.
>
> You'll probably point to a Fuji but they are getting seriously more
>> expensive.
>>
>
> I don't personally understand the attraction of Fuji. I couldn't find any
> meaningful IQ difference between their 16 MP sensors (the ones Chris has
> suggested used) and the Olys, and I pixel peeped carefully. There is the
> difference in shape between 3:2 and 4:3, which could be a factor for some
> folks, one way or the other.
>
> Personally, I find Fuji kinda boring or limited. This is just me, and may
> not apply to your wife, but Oly's innovation with HR Mode, Focus
> Bracketing, etc. simply widen my photographic horizons. I also prefer the
> excellent Oly IBIS to IS in some lenses and not others. (The IBIS in the
> E-M10 II is not rated quite as good as the E-M5 II. I don't know what the
> difference may be, but the E-M5 II IBIS is wonderful.)
>
> Amazon uk has a package of the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II body with 14-42
>> and 40-150 mm lenses. I'm sure these are not top-notch lenses (apologies
>> I
>> haven't followed the intricate discussions of all their pros and cons over
>> recent months/years!) Do you think they're 'adequate'?
>>
>
> They are more than adequate. Reviewers are regularly 'surprised' at how
> good the Oly and Panny kit lenses are. Lens materials and design have
> reached the point where inexpensive, modest speed, modest range zooms are
> quite good.
>
> Most of the things we knew about lens quality from film days are outdated.
> From another brand; the Canon 50/1.8 is all plastic, feels light and cheap,
> like it would disintegrate if dropped - but - SHARP, even wide open. Usta
> be, stop down to f8 or so for best results. Most contemporary lenses are
> already very sharp wide open and peak one, occasionally two stops down. The
> Tammy 90/2.8 Macro I had was sharpest for 1:1 Macro wide open.
>
> OTOH, for pure enjoyment, or perhaps I should say transparency, in 'doing'
> photography, I highly recommend the 14-150 (or Panny 14-140). Excellent
> zoom range, without changing lenses all the time, and rather good IQ. I
> don't think there's any practical IQ difference between the two. I switched
> from Oly to Panny to get OIS for use with my GM5. All of the images in this
> gallery were taken with the Panny 14-140. <https://goo.gl/photos/JE6dSSv
> qHtBRRWXb6>
>
> Some used an ancient Oly iS/L Lens B-Macro H.Q. Converter f=40cm C-U lens
> on the front*. Work well for less intimate subjects, too, but I don't
> happen to have a gallery of a bunch of those shots all in one place.
>
> LR says I took over 4,300 shots with the 14-150 and am up to almost 1,200
> with its replacement 14-140.
>
> Are they as good as Oly's Pro line, or Panny's Leicas? No. If I'm being
> serious, I'm carrying a PLeica 12-60 or Oly Pro 12-100 and PLeica 100-400,
> three exceptional, and rather expensive, lenses. But the 14-140/150 are
> darn good lenses, and I've been quite happy with the images from them. (One
> exception I know of is closest focus at 140 mm with the Panny - soft.)
> .
> My casual kit is GM5 with 14-150. I think the E-M10 II with 14-150 would
> be an excellent combo. Prices for that body are down, as the next body
> release will be an E-M10 III. Personally, I'd go with an E-M5 II, for the
> better IBIS and slightly larger apparent size of the EVF image, if nothing
> else. Then the option of the other special things it does would be there.
>
> Moose D'Opinion
>
> * Based on tests of several achromatic C-U lenses on it. Another old
> 'truth' that now often isn't is that extension tubes are better than C-U
> lenses. I've had achromats outperform tubes, and not all achromats are
> equal with all lenses. Messy, for those of us who like to get close. The
> old Oly C-U lens gave me better results on the long end of the 14-140 than
> tubes, for example, but tubes bested the other C-U achromats I tested.
> --
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|