Equipment & Techniques > Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear
Camera system to complement Micro Four Thirds and large format film
feppe:
I'm looking for a camera system to complement my travel and studio gear: Micro Four Thirds and large format film. The main shortcomings of MFT is lack of very shallow DOF for portraits, some limitations when printing big, and it's a bit too dainty and fiddly in the studio, and when shooting in portrait orientation (vertical grip would help though). LF film is very expensive to shoot, process and drum scan, requires more light than many studios have on rent, and doesn't travel well.
Therefore I'm looking for a system to fill these gaps. I sold my Canon gear years ago in favor of MFT, so I'm not invested in any system.
Main requirements:
* Mirrorless a must for compactness, lightness, and ability to use legacy lenses from various manufacturers
* Works well in studio with whatever lighting gear they have available. I never use tethering, and control flashes manually.
* Subject matter mostly glamour, nudes, portraits, some landscapes, cityscapes, low light long exposure photography (night cityscapes), and general travel. Some color, some B&W. I would also shoot artwork (oil and watercolor paintings). I don't do sports, birds, weddings, products, macro, video, or do massive cropping.
* I would mostly shoot with a sharp normal prime lens, and a fast 100-135mm prime lens which has beautiful bokeh.
* The system should preferably have a solid ~24mm prime as well
* Manual focus is ok, and legacy lenses are ok, as long as the system has an accurate way to focus.
* In-body stabilization a plus for more versatility outside the studio, but not a requirement (have that with MFT).
* I'm a serious amateur: I care about robustness and reliability, but don't care about same day service. I don't care about megapixels or bit depth; everything on my short list below has good enough IQ at base ISO (DPReview comparison for the curious). I sometimes print big, but I don't let my nose touch the print (i.e. no pixelpeeping).
* Budget 2000-4000 EUR/USD
The current shortlist:
* Sony E-Mount (A7, A7R, A7II). There is a good selection of ~50mm primes, but only an 85mm prime for portraits, which is too wide for my tastes.
* Fujifilm X-Mount (X-Pro1 or 2, or Fujifilm X-T1 or 2). Fujifilm has very affordable normal lenses, but the same gaping portrait lens gap as Sony: the Fujinon XF 56mm f/1.2 R is also too wide for facials, and only around f/1.8 in 35mm equivalent DOF, which may not be shallow enough for some cases.
Anything I missed? Haven't looked at Leica as they're way out of my budget.
So it boils down to lenses, usability and features. Neither system seems to have a fast 100-135mm portrait lens, so will need to look at adapters - any suggestions? The Fujifilm cameras have an edge on skin tones, but Sony should be fixable with color target and calibration. Sony knows sensors for sure, but has an even more immature lens selection.
Any tips much appreciated!
Alan Smallbone:
Fuji has a 90mm f2, that gives you the fov of a 135mm on full frame. Rent both if you can and see what menu systems and IQ meet your needs.
Alan
TonyVentourisPhotography:
What bodies have you shot with? The E-M1 and GH4 are both pretty substantial with L-Brackets or grips. I shoot studio work all the time tethered and I love using the E-M1. Its great to have a full screen live view without needing anything special. Very convenient, and excellent look with studio lights. Shallow depth of field is easy if you are willing to spend for it. A metabones speed booster will turn any canon or nikon lens into an autofocus lens. Using an 85 1.4 for example should give you a 120mm .95 or so lens after adapter. Sharper too. Any good 1.4 or F/2 lens should give you some great results. Otherwise the the Leica 42.5 or the Oly 75 are fantastic, and do give shallow depth of field depending how extreme you want it.
Otherwise, between sony and Fuji, I would go Fuji. I like their results for portrait way more than I do for landscapes and other subjects. I cant dig the watercolor effect lightroom produces on landscape scenes with the X-trans. Fuji has the primes nailed pretty well. I don't know how well they tether though. Never used them connected like that. I've used just about all the Fuji bodies up to now save the X-Pro2, and most of the lenses. I potentially would have ended up a Fuji user if they never went Xtrans. For what I do, It just pops up way too often for me. Some people dig it though.
feppe:
--- Quote from: TonyVentourisPhotography on August 22, 2016, 03:47:27 pm ---What bodies have you shot with? The E-M1 and GH4 are both pretty substantial with L-Brackets or grips. I shoot studio work all the time tethered and I love using the E-M1. Its great to have a full screen live view without needing anything special. Very convenient, and excellent look with studio lights. Shallow depth of field is easy if you are willing to spend for it. A metabones speed booster will turn any canon or nikon lens into an autofocus lens. Using an 85 1.4 for example should give you a 120mm .95 or so lens after adapter. Sharper too. Any good 1.4 or F/2 lens should give you some great results. Otherwise the the Leica 42.5 or the Oly 75 are fantastic, and do give shallow depth of field depending how extreme you want it.
--- End quote ---
I have Olympus EM-5, fastest lens I have is Hexanon 57mm f/1.4 which I love for portraits. I haven't looked at the Speed Booster, it sounded like an April Fool's joke when I heard about it - it actually works? Although it costs as much as a decent prime lens, that and a vertical grip would be much cheaper than another camera system.
One thing I forgot to mention is lack of dual memory card slots in EM-5, and I believe no MFT body has that. I've had a card fail on me, taking with it hundreds of pictures, and I'm sure several portfolio shots. X-T2 has dual slots.
scyth:
--- Quote from: feppe on August 22, 2016, 04:49:56 pm ---I haven't looked at the Speed Booster, it sounded like an April Fool's joke when I heard about it - it actually works?
--- End quote ---
do you believe that teleconverters work ? so why you don't believe in wideconverters then... it is a simple optics
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version