Those who ditched DSLR's to go full m43, do you miss your previous setups? Why? - Page 11

taran · #**101** July 12th, 2012, 10:08 AM

I tried, but I don't recommend it for an event shooter, which often means shooting in dim light.

The AF of many scenes I shoot was accurate less than 1% of the time with m43. The same scenes shot with a top of the line nikon DSLR featured a 100% AF success rate.

I have no doubt CDAF will advance greatly in the next few years, but my own metrics indicate we are about 5 years away from the accuracy of the phase detection system I am currently using.

Declan97 · #**102** July 12th, 2012, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m43dex

Went from D200 with 17-55mm 2.8 kit to epl2 with kit lens and missed the Nikon performance a lot but not the weight. Upgraded to OMD and now I hardly miss anything (Nikon had better single point focus, better range of zooms and contiunous shooting was better). I rarely shoot action so one point is a non issue. I gained a lighter kit, dreamy jpegs and I really like the custom dials. M43 companies are finally starting to address the zoom issue so I am in a very good place right now.

I wonder what was the entry level ff from nikon?

Ned · #**103** July 12th, 2012, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Declan97

I wonder what was the entry level ff from nikon?

Was, or is? If talking "was", the D700 was the first Full Frame Nikon I saw that was more consumer-grade than pro-grade (if there were others before it, they slipped under my radar). Currently, I believe the entry-level Full Frame would be the D600.

tgmosher · #**104** July 12th, 2012, 09:13 PM

I ditched my Nikon bodies and lenses and went whole hog with an EPL-1 and EPL-2.

The only thing I miss is the viewfinder on the Nikon. I don't miss the weight of the camera or it's lenses.

Declan97 · #**105** July 12th, 2012, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ned

Was, or is? If talking "was", the D700 was the first Full Frame Nikon I saw that was more consumer-grade than pro-grade (if there were others before it, they slipped under my radar). Currently, I believe the entry-level Full Frame would be the D600.

I mean from the previous series ned, the Nikon ff.. Not the new and latest version, in order to fair price valuation:)

Ned · #**106** July 12th, 2012, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Declan97

I mean from the previous series ned, the Nikon ff.. Not the new and latest version, in order to fair price valuation:)

Ah, I think I get you... during the time of the D200, right?

There were no entry level FX cameras that I know of then. The D200 was the "prosumer" camera at the time, bridging the gap between the pro-grade FX and the lower-end DX cameras...

That's what was cool about both the Nikon D700 and the Canon 5D... cameras like that brought Full Frame into the pro-sumer arena, where previously FF was only used in Pro-Grade bodies.

Declan97 · #**107** July 13th, 2012, 12:17 PM

Yes, I as always ned:) Send I thought the d200 was on the same class with our E3?

dhazeghi · #**108** July 16th, 2012, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Declan97

Yes, I as always ned:) Send I thought the d200 was on the same class with our E3?

Different generation. The E-3 came out alongside the D300. Which helps explain why it received the welcome it did.

Now they finally have high-end performance in a compact body (with matching lenses) and, surprise-surprise, it's a big hit. Just as a lot of us were saying 3 and 4 years ago...

DH

m43shooter · #**109** July 17th, 2012, 12:47 AM

I first used nikon dslr and after I went working for a press agency I converted to Canon dslr (all co-workers were using Canon at that time, so backup was better).

I've been using Canon for the last 8 years. Some time ago I stop shooting professionally. I changed careers and hardly touched any gear for months. Kind of a burnout I guess. Two months ago I started preparing for some traveling up to Canada and other stuff in Europe.

I convinced myself never to carry that much weight to take some nice pictures abroad. So I started reading and got interested in m43. When the OM-D hit the market, I went for it. Sold all my dslr gear, put some money in the bank and used some to allow myself a budget in m43.

Since then, I started to take more pictures, got interested again. Now I feel confident that I can take a camera and some lenses on a trip in a small bag. No heavy weight, no big backpacks. I love the idea.

The only thing I did in the past, was shooting a lot of action. I think m43 is not on the same level as pro or semi-pro dslr for decent action and big tele lenses. Apart from that, my m43 gear is as capable as can be for the things I shoot. So from my point of view I can do almost 95% of all my work with m43 and I love it so far.

Declan97 · #**110** July 17th, 2012, 12:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dhazeghi

Different generation. The E-3 came out alongside the D300. Which helps explain why it received the welcome it did.

Now they finally have high-end performance in a compact body (with matching lenses) and, surprise-surprise, it's a big hit. Just as a lot of us were saying 3 and 4 years ago...

DH

Thanks dh, what a pleasant explanation