Balancing Competing Interests in Camera/Lense Selection

[Siddhartha]

I am a holdout from shooting 35mm pro slide film and 6x4.5 cm medium format pro slide film until now.  I recently sold my Mamiya 645e (with 55mm f/2.8, 80mm f/2.8 and 150mm f/3.5 lenses) and heavy 35mm gear that included a 70-200mm f/2.8L, as well as an aluminum tripod with pan/tilt head and LowePro DryZone 200, and have begun my journey to selecting my next camera system.  Like others, I seek the highest image quality in the smallest, lightest package with the lowest price. Of course, who wouldn't like a 4/3 camera with the image quality of a 4x5 view camera, but this isn't realistic at this stage of digital sensor development.  Although I love looking at medium format transparencies, 6x7 gear is way too heavy and I'm not sure about DOF when using a MF rangefinder like the Mamiya, so I finally decided to switch to digital because (1) I will be much more inclined to shoot more (though still carefully), and do a lot of experimenting to perfect each image and (2) the current digital sensor technology seems sufficiently mature and (3) digital doesn't produce wasted film in the search for perfection.  Initially I though that I would start with Canon's 70-200mm f/4L little brother to the f/2.8 that I sold, because it is said to be every bit as sharp, and add a 17-40mm f/4L lens and a 40D or 50D body.  If Nikon had an equivalent to the 70-200mm f/4L L I would even consider switching to Nikon because I like the controls on their DSLRs better than Canon (although Canon appears to have the edge in sensors).  My goal is to make 8x10 to 16 x 20 prints of my best images, and occassionally even larger.  The one thing I don't like about the ancient 35mm format is this aspect ratio wastes a lot of captured data when cropped to "ideal format" when printing. This is why I'm not overly enamored with paying a lot more for "full-frame" 35mm DSLRs like the 5D Mk II (you still throw away a lot of data when making ideal sized prints).  Hence I haven't thrown the micro 4/3 offerings out with the bath water just yet, but they don't seem as mature a technology.  However, I'm not sure if they (or even APS sized 35mm sensors) are capable of making prints of 16x20 or larger prints that would be of acceptable quality to sell or publish in a calendar or magazine.  The "Camera Metrics" article and spreadsheet was quite interesting, but it hasn't helped me make a decision.  Whatever I end up, I want it to be a "system" that I will stick with through the years as technology advances, which means I'll keep the lenses and upgrade the body occassionally if there is a compelling reason to do so.
Here are a few of my ideal features:
1)  Ideal format sensor size
2)  Image-stabilizer in the body, not the lenses
3)  Light weight (compared to full-frame 35mm DSLRs and 35mm f/2.8 pro lenses)
4)  Focal lengths from 20mm to 300mm (35mm equivalent)
5)  Price in the $1500 range
6)  Sensor dust shaker, etc. are presumed
My overarching goal is that I don't want to be limited to making 8 x 10 or 11 x 14 prints, so that I can express the creative, artistic vision that excites me when I see a composition waiting to be photographed.
Anyone else out there grappling with putting together such a kit for a similar purpose?  Thanks!

[JBerardi]

Well, if you don't like the 35mm aspect ratio, you're basically down to the 4/3s system (or m3/4s, but that system is still in it's infancy. You'd have to get an adapter for regular 4/3s lenses to get all the focal lengths you want). The new e-620 looks nice, and it's only about half your budget. It's relatively lightweight, has in-body stabilization, and the dust shaker.

[dalethorn]

If the Canon G10 is as good as MR says it is, at least at ISO 100-200, then a Micro 4/3 sensor certainly has the potential to meet your needs. Shop carefully, though. Nobody knows whether Pana and Oly will keep pushing the quality up, whether other mfr's will jump in and what they'll do, or whether the relatively low prices for 4/3 will discourage quality (long term) in favor of bells and whistles. Since Pana and Oly aren't big guns in the Big Iron DSLR market, they have every incentive to make the system as professional as the bigger DSLR's, but that would have to make the other mfr's very nervous. Which I think is a really exciting development, to shake things up.

[phila]

Since Pana and Oly aren't big guns in the Big Iron DSLR market, they have every incentive to make the system as professional as the bigger DSLR's,

Not going by this they aren't!

"Olympus' view is focused chiefly on mainstream photographers. Studio and commercial photographers taking pictures for magazines certainly have a need for more megapixels, Watanabe said.
"We don't think 20 megapixels is necessary for everybody. If a customer wants more than 12 megapixels, he should go to the full-frame models," Watanabe said."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10189546...ag=2547-1_3-0-5

[Chris_Brown]

2)  Image-stabilizer in the body, not the lenses

Sony.

[Bama_Panda]

1)  Ideal format sensor size
2)  Image-stabilizer in the body, not the lenses
3)  Light weight (compared to full-frame 35mm DSLRs and 35mm f/2.8 pro lenses)
4)  Focal lengths from 20mm to 300mm (35mm equivalent)
5)  Price in the $1500 range
6)  Sensor dust shaker, etc. are presumed
My overarching goal is that I don't want to be limited to making 8 x 10 or 11 x 14 prints, so that I can express the creative, artistic vision that excites me when I see a composition waiting to be photographed.
Anyone else out there grappling with putting together such a kit for a similar purpose?  Thanks!

From your list I would say Oly is the best bet.
Listen ..there is going to be a tradeoff in either APSC or 4/3. You just have to make the decision what fits your requirements better. As for NOT being able to make wonderful BIG prints with 4/3 - that is hogwash. I have seen some of the most gorgeous BIG prints made with an E1, and that was 5 mp.

As for Oly's statement about 12 mp being big enough ...well, it is - at this stage of sensor development and for the 4/3 sensor. Truth is - the latest sensors will do pretty much anything you want them to do - even in a smaller, lighter system. If you want to forego the light weight; and some of the items mentioned above 'DONE RIGHT' then go for a full frame or an APSC that boasts a high mp count.

OK..one more thing and I will shut up.
Here is my post on another thread about noise. Like I said ..'Just my 'O'.

There is so much talk about noise, but from what I see from mfgs. of both APSC & 4/3 sensors is there is a decision made by each mfg. to determine what is the most important part of the whole in regard to sensor performance.

Some want a cleaner high ISO image, but it seems there is less effort or emphasis placed on the viability of a JPEG that does not need PP. Others, like OLY - shoot for a great JPEG that any novice would be happy with, but the higher ISO images may need a bit of tweaking in something like Neat Image.

Bottom line, for either APSC or 4/3 and the photographer that is looking for that perfect image, there usually has to be some tweaking on one end or the other. Much of this, I bet - have to do with $$ spent to develop the camera.

I see images all the time from 'OLD' cameras like my E300 that are fantastic, at a variety of ISOs and F stops. Can I do the same with mine? I could, but it would take me learning my camera better, taking more time studying PP - maybe investing in new lenses or software. Have I yet done any of this? Some, but not near enough - sad to say. But I could if I found the time, passion, or energy - and I would see better results.

Many want a camera that does it all with perfection, but that camera does not exist. Just my 'O'.

[DarkPenguin]

1)  Ideal format sensor size

Um, there isn't one.

2)  Image-stabilizer in the body, not the lenses
3)  Light weight (compared to full-frame 35mm DSLRs and 35mm f/2.8 pro lenses)

Sony, Pentax, Samsung or Oly.

4)  Focal lengths from 20mm to 300mm (35mm equivalent)

Getting down to 20 is going to cost you at least $500.

5)  Price in the $1500 range

Body alone or with lenses?

My overarching goal is that I don't want to be limited to making 8 x 10 or 11 x 14 prints, so that I can express the creative, artistic vision that excites me when I see a composition waiting to be photographed.

What do you mean by "I don't want to be limited to making 8 x 10 or 11 x 14 prints"?  How big do you want to print?

At this point I think you're looking at the 14+mp Sony or Pentax/Samsung.

Edit: Or the new 12mp Oly just announced.  Provided it is available when you need it.