Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Which is best for landscapes?  (Read 10292 times)

DanLehman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 53
Re: Which is best for landscapes?
« Reply #20 on: August 25, 2015, 10:10:53 am »

All righty then.   I'm going to research more about the differences between
 the E-M1, E-M1 II (rumored),
[E-M5] ,  E-M5 II,
[GH3]) ,   GH4,
 and
[GX7],  GX8.
...
[ G6, G7 ?
  E-M10
  GM5 ]

  It's all a bit confusing.  [esp. w/Canon offering "G7X" !  ;D ]

I hear so much praise for the E-M1
I'm anxious to see what the E-M1 II
(or E-M10 II, whichever it's going to be named) has in store.

Well, sir, there is indeed a lot to consider, balanced by that old
maxim (usually kept aside in the heat of GAS) "it's not the camera,
but the photographer!".  And indeed there are a lot of good things
to say about the E-M1; but so, too, for all of the others, really.

And my point re the 40mpx E-M5 mkII must be tempered by assertions
[www.soundimageplus.com] that
Quote
To a certain extent the other Olympus 'extra' the high-res mode which creates 40MP jpgs.
or 64 raw files is also dependent on subject matter not moving about,
in fact it has to be completely still or else all sorts of artefacts appear in the images.
but that, too --from a seemingly level-headed reviewer--
comes in for some contrary indication (one of Ming's commenters) --to wit:
Quote
I use mostly to shoot architecture or landscape in hi-res mode and find it very useful and effective, minor quirks aside.
(I’ve got the two pro zooms and find image quality very, very good, when not phenomenal).
// [also this]
I’m using the High Res mode with some nice results with only a light (but high quality) travel tripod.
Maybe those many artifacts are more a pixel-peeping presence
than printed?!

I show in the set of m4/3 bodies some of the predecessors.
Might you resolve to give the system a shake, w/some thought
that lenses will hold value fairly well in buy/sell, and older
bodies also --given low price to start ?  --one option.

Good hunting!


--dl*
====
Logged

BradSmith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 773
Re: Which is best for landscapes?
« Reply #21 on: August 25, 2015, 03:34:30 pm »

I'd suggest that you rent one of the MFT cameras and the Oly 12-40 f2.8 PRO lens.  See what the real world results are for YOU.  It is a relatively small investment to make to verify your decision about such a major financial change for you.

For whatever it is worth, I'm a landscape guy with years of 4X5 B&W shooting and darkroom experience, so I've got a pretty good idea what a "good" print looks like.  Last year I traded my Canon APS-C camera and lens kit for:
Oly E-M1
Pana 7-14 f4
Oly 12-40 f2.8 PRO
Oly 40-150 f4-5.6 R 

I'm very happy, even with the amazingly cheap 40-150.  Only downside so far is that there are so many customization options with the E-M1 that it is daunting getting it set up the way I want.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up