1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Em1 and Olys 2,8 lenses or D750 and Tamron 2,8 lenses ;;;

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by PantelisMor, Dec 23, 2014.

  1. PantelisMor

    PantelisMor Mu-43 Veteran

    282
    Jan 14, 2013
    Hello, one friend wants to buy a camera.

    He thinks one of the above sets.

    D750 with tamron 24-70 2,8 and tamron 70-200 2,8
    or
    Em1 with oly 12-40 2,8 and oly 40-150 2,8

    he wants for travel. Landscape , street ,and portrait photography. It will be his camera for all his photo. Ha has a little interest for video. He is not professional just enthusiastic...

    what will advice him ;;;
     
  2. MarkoPolo

    MarkoPolo Mu-43 Regular

    141
    Jan 25, 2014
    Greeley, CO
    Mark Brown
    Well, this is a micro 4/3rds forum, so the answers will be prejudiced. I went from Canon APC (7D and L lenses) to Olympus and am quite happy to have done. I would have gone all in sooner if the Pro line of lenses was fully available. So now, I just need the 300mm f/4 and I will be all set. The quality is actually better than my 7D and I love the smaller size and weight. I'm sure you would get the opposite view on a Nikon forum:smile:
     
  3. sprocket87

    sprocket87 Mu-43 Veteran

    306
    Jun 29, 2011
    It comes down to weight.

    D750 + either of those lenses is a monster. I used to shoot D700 with the Tamron 24-70 2.8. Loved the combo, but my wrist killed me after every shoot. Switched to EM5 and 12-40. So much more comfortable and portable, but of course it isn't full frame.

    Travel convenience: EM1
    Street: EM1 no question
    Portrait: D750 for DOF and resolution
    Landscape: Toss up. Leaning toward D750 due to less diffraction concerns for small apertures and more crop capability.

    Have him rank those 4 criteria in order of greatest to least importance and that should help him decide. Just my 2 cents.
     
  4. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    Whenever I get asked this question I always ask the following question, which is really the biggest difference between any mirrorless system right now and a DSLR:

    Will they ever want to shoot sports or fast moving subjects that require good C-AF?

    If the answer is no - I'd lean more toward a mirrorless option
    If the answer is yes - then I lean more toward a DSLR option
    If the answer is only sometimes and very rarely - go m43.

    Here is why:
    I discount a lot of the hi ISO/low light arguments due to the fact that, yes - we can agree that a larger sensor is going to have the potential to shoot a cleaner file than a smaller sensor. However - if we look at the cost benefit of the optics - you can get m43 primes(oly or panasonic) that can be shot wide open with excellent sharpness at f/1.2 - f/1.8. You can get m43 zooms that can be shot wide open at f/2.8. You can then factor in the difference in exposure compared. Sometimes this is 2 stop difference, which can be the difference between shooting 1/60, f/4, ISO 3200 on a DSLR to get the sharpness and DOF you need, or shooting 1/60, f/1.8, ISO 800 on m43. ISO 800 on m43 is a great ISO to be shooting.

    Same can be said for the DSLR cameras. However, the catch is coming....
    There are probably a number of primes/zooms on DSLR mount that can be shot wide open and have the same level of sharpness as the m43 equivalents. You are looking at then shooting the primes as f/2.8 or f/4 and the zooms at f/4 or f/5.6. On top of that, you can get the m43 primes for $300-$700. DSLR primes that can provide the same quality? $1000-$1600. Zooms? m43 $800-$1500, DSLR $1500-$2500.

    If you've ever shot an Olympus m43 camera body from say the EP3 through EP5 or any of the OMDs, S-AF is fast, fast, fast when paired with the quality optics. Not all DSLR lenses can say the same.

    Hope this helped some.
     
  5. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    In my humble opinion, full-frame f2.8 zoom lenses are a bit over-the-top for anyone who isn't making money from their photography. Obviously people put different value on different things, but if you're just a hobbyist and you're waving around an 8" long, 2.5 lb lens, you're really going to change the atmosphere. A good choice for people who take things very seriously, but maybe not a great choice for outings with family and friends, or while travelling.

    The Tamron telephoto is also not stabilized, so you're going to be pushing the ISO up significantly more than on the Olympus in order to compensate with shutter speed, which claws back a lot of the image quality advantage.

    That 3 lens D750 kit also weighs 2.73 kg / 6 lbs, compared to 1.75 kg / 3.9 lbs for the Olympus, which also provides 50% more length on the telephoto end.

    I think that FF is great for a lot of things, but I think that what it does best is wide fast primes, or fast portrait lenses like an 85mm/1.8 - focal lengths and apertures that are simply not achievable on smaller formats. For zooms, I would never go faster than f4 on FF...it would just disincentive taking the camera with me so much having such a humongous kit with me.

    There are definitely images that you'll be able to take with the FF kit that are not possible with M4/3. But is it worth this?

    ugMftaK.
     
  6. DoofClenas

    DoofClenas Who needs a Mirror!

    941
    Nov 9, 2012
    Traverse City, MI
    Clint
    Either way...if he's doing landscape work, he's gonna want a tripod...The tripod and ballhead to support the D750 will need to be rather robust (and expensive). I don't use mine as much as I used to with my E-5, but when I go out with the specific intent to do landscapes, I bring my tripod along.

    If weight and size isn't an issue, the D750 is the way to go...it's an awesome machine with quite a bit more dynamic range.

    http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/10/17/soi-bought-a-nikon-d750/
     
  7. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    True, though it also depends on lot on the lighting conditions and how much processing you plan on putting into your landscape shots. If the conditions are not super contrasty, you should be able to get enough dynamic range in a single exposure, and with M4/3 you aren't ever going to be stopping down past f/5.6 or f/8, so in many cases you'll still be able to have a fast shutter speed at base ISO. It also depends on if you want to do the surreal long-exposure shots that a lot of people like or whether you just want a more documentary approach to landscape.

    Obviously if you're doing multi-shot stitches and exposure bracketing you'll need a tripod. But it's really, really nice to be able to leave that at home.

    And to be clear, I agree that the D750 is still a better choice for landscape, and in general will probably be able to get you nominally better image quality in all circumstances. I have no doubt that it's an exceptional camera. But I would definitely pick an A7(r) with f4 lenses before I picked a D750 with f2.8s, because I can't imagine carrying that much bulk and weight especially when travelling. But obviously not everyone feels that way, so if it's a non-issue, it's a non-issue.
     
  8. DoofClenas

    DoofClenas Who needs a Mirror!

    941
    Nov 9, 2012
    Traverse City, MI
    Clint
    Yup...an A7r would be right there with the D750...in fact, I'd probably probably wouldn't consider the D750...The D810 on the other hand...
     
  9. diableri

    diableri Mu-43 Regular

    34
    Feb 21, 2014
    Central CA
    If he's asking advice then I think the EM1 is the better choice. I've always thought you should actually know you need a piece of gear like this and if he doesn't already know why he needs a big rig like that 750 and the 2.8s then it'll be heavier/larger than necessary.

    There would have to be very specific reasons I'd decide to carry the big stuff because the smaller kit is just more enjoyable for me.
     
  10. edmsnap

    edmsnap Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Dec 20, 2011
    Edmonton, Alberta
    If the friend doesn't at this point know enough about photography to even have an idea about what kind of system he wants (ยต4/3, APS-C, full-frame...), then for sure my opening suggestion to him wouldn't be professional-level systems where the low price is $3500. Make some $300-400 suggestions to him and let him figure out where he wants to go from there.
     
  11. MarkoPolo

    MarkoPolo Mu-43 Regular

    141
    Jan 25, 2014
    Greeley, CO
    Mark Brown
    And to rethink this a little, one of the EP series with the less expensive lenses would certainly get him started using a camera with the ability to set aperture and shutter speed and get very good results with a very small light package. However, if he is set on the E-M1, that certainly would not be a bad choice.
     
  12. JYPfoto

    JYPfoto Mu-43 Veteran

    268
    Aug 27, 2013
    Sorry if this sounds harsh, but if he's not sure if he needs FF, then he probably doesn't. If he's not making money from his shooting (which sounds like he isn't) and he's not a hardcore dedicated enthusiast (which sounds like he isn't since he doesn't know if he needs FF), he's probably better off with the E-M1. The two cameras that he's considering are very different beasts. Not just on sensor size but in terms of weight, overall size, tracking, etc.
     
  13. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Are these even comparable?

    $1600 USD difference between the two sets
    Opposite ends of the scales in term of weight and size.
    One is FF and the other is MFT

    This is a simple solution.... Choose a priority; budget, size/weight, sensor/format. That's should pretty much make it a clear choice between the two because they are SO different.

    budget - EM1
    size/weight - EM1
    sensor/format (FF) - D750

    At the very least, discussion about priorities may open up other opportunities to make suggestions...... and not just MFT either... Fuji, Samsung etc.

    Or.. one can spend large! That way it will be hard to blame the camera.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. PantelisMor

    PantelisMor Mu-43 Veteran

    282
    Jan 14, 2013
    Hello, merry christmas to you and your family.....

    Thx a lot for your help. My friend is not a professional just for hobby..


    To mention that he likes a lot to edit his raw files... Also he likes, he wants to try long-exposures with the camera. In this aspect there are big differences from two systems ;;;

    Finally to mention that sometimes, he likes to shoot moving subjects, mostly his kids or football games.....
     
  15. trandg

    trandg Mu-43 Regular

    61
    Sep 24, 2012
    Toronto
    David
    I used to travel a lot with 1-2 nikon bodies, a wide angle, a 17-55 f2.8, 80-200mm f2.8 and maybe 1 or 2 primes. Had a crazy sized bag to carry it around and a sore sweaty back when I would be touring around.

    Fast forward to rhe past few years with my E-M5 and E-M1 and I have the exact same setup in a shoulder bag. If they travel and adventure, the Olympus setup is less cumbersome and will capture better photos because not only will you have it with you, but because it doesnt attract as much attention or garner the same reactions from those being photographed by a giant body and lens combination.

    I have minimized my Nikon kit to a body, 17-55mm and flash as a backup for the odd studio job, but for everything else I am 100% Olympus and not looking back.
     
  16. mjgraaf

    mjgraaf Mu-43 Regular

    53
    Feb 9, 2014
    Netherlands
    Menno
    Ah! Now there is a good reason, he wants to show of in the ratrace between the parents shooting their kids ;-)
    No doubt, go for the D750, just calculate for him the price difference and size difference when he starts to go into the real long lenses. And suggest to him the option to laugh in their face, when they come to the sports field with their idiotic oversized equipment.

    My guess, 99% chance that he'll be having much more fun with a oly set....
     
  17. Stanley W

    Stanley W Mu-43 Regular

    32
    Oct 28, 2013
    Hi,
    i've been a lurker for the longest time hahha.. but i can finally reply something that's appropriate here.
    I was lured by the dark side by D750, it's smaller (but not too small), its FF (yeah...the poison), the super low light performance, and accurate CAF! So i took the plunge, bought it with the 50mm f1.8. SO i was thinking, i'll keep both the m43 and Nikon; where i'll bring the M43 for travelling and using the fast zooms, and the Nikon for really dark places....

    So long story short:
    D750 with 50mm f1.8, 18-35mm f3.5-4.5, 85mm f1.4
    personal experience:
    i) D750 lighter than most DSLR @ FF , of cos no fight for the EM-1
    ii) Good CAF, almost none to fault.; but thus far my need for CAF is non-existant (yet to have a kiddo) last i did an indoor soccer game with the EM-1 with only S-AF, still managable. have yet to do CAF with EM1 ahhaah i should try it one day.
    iii) good iso performance, there is no comparison in this. the D750 is very clean up to iso 3200(in my opinion). EM-1 6400 is almost 12800(i put it towards 25600). i've always wanted a low light monsters. i get pretty embarrased when i do group shots in dim lit restaurants...but
    iv) DOF aka BOKEH. unbeatable even at f1.8. in cases where u need good DOF (e.g. to get everybody's face in focus) you have to stop down abit! and that pushes up the ISO, might end up counter productive. Since EM-1 has DOF advantage, there's usually no need to stop down by too many stops. So you really need to weigh whether u need the bokeh or the DOF.
    v) Inbody IS of EM-1 is very very good feature!
    vi) D750 wifi is still in stone-age era.....(my opinion)

    I love the D750 CAF/Iso Performance and clean files. But i still sold it away after 2-3 weeks because
    i) I prefer the mobility of the EM-1, and m43 lenses; especially the zoom lenses (tried the 24-70f2.8 Nikkor and the 70-200 f2.8 Nikkor for my own wedding. OH MY)
    jj) DOF, i prefer to have more DOF for now, if i need less DOF, i'll probably rent /save-buy f0.95/f1.2
    iii) ISO, sadly, EM-1 loses alot of grounds here. i'm trying to mess around with postprocessing progs to see if i can get better iso 6400 performances.(other than using on board JPG, which i find pretty ok after +1 sharp, +2 contrast, noise reduction normal / high). I am still hoping they have a new sensor on EM5MKII, but my hopes were dashed lol
    iv) Inbody IS, there is no substitution for this!
    v) Not a very rich guy, so i figured i cannot have 2 different kind of bodies for now....

    Not sure whether it helps, but just sharing my opinion!
    and pardon me for my atrocious english! ahhahaah

    Rgds
    Stan
     
    • Like Like x 1