Help me decide, please, between FF and a second m43 body

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by Fabercula, Jun 18, 2017.

  1. Fabercula

    Fabercula Mu-43 Regular

    29
    Aug 8, 2016
    Fabrizio
    Hi, I'm not sure what to do; for the last two I've been using a Nikon D750, great camera, but last summer I bought my first m43 camera, an Oly EM 10 ii and ever since then I am using way more the latter than the former. Three months ago I sold the EM 10 ii and get a brand new EM 1 ii and, when I go out I prefer walking along lighter and pack in my bag all the lenses I want to carry with me.
    So the insane idea has been haunting me to get rid of my FF gear and, with the money I should realize, paying our family trip vacantion and getting a second m43 body a Panasonic Gh5 to use with the PanaLeica 100-400.
    I am aware I wouldn't have anymore the quality of the FF but portability is a great factor to take into account as well.
    I think I have already made up my mind but I'd like to listen to someone else's opinion.
    Thank you,
    Fabrizio
     
  2. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    If you don't actually utilise the unique advantages of FF (shallower DoF, better low-light performance, better C-AF/TR) then it makes sense. If you do video it makes even more sense. But I wonder about the need for a GH5 - unless you need the video specs, the G85 does a lot of the same at a cheaper price.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Aperture Don

    Aperture Don Mu-43 Regular

    89
    Jan 7, 2017
    Illinois
    It's a good thing that you have probably made up your own mind since it's really difficult to give anyone that type of advice. I, too, have good and current Nikon gear including a Df, three pro zooms and a couple of pro primes, totaling about $5,500 for the purchase price and could probably sell everything for about $3,500. I don't use my Nikon equipment very often these days since I have the Olympus E-M 1.2 and a lot of good lenses including three pro zooms. The way I see it is that since I don't need the money right now, I can't justify selling all of this good FF equipment since one never knows when the moment may require the use of different equipment. I don't shoot. weddings or big events anymore, but if a friend or relative insisted, I would, and I would also use the Nikon. Like your D750, my Df sees in the dark, and I can shoot at ISOs in excess of 12,800 with minimal noise - I can't do that with my Olympus. On the other hand, if you're sure that you're done with FF, and you have better places to put the money, and you're willing to take a big loss, then you're making the right decision.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Drdave944

    Drdave944 Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    968
    Feb 2, 2012
    The EM-1 mk ii is just so freekin good that the only other camera I am using on my current trip is a Canon D5 SR for super hi resolution wide angle shots. If you don't already have a lot of FF lenses,you probably don't want to spend that kind of money. You can mate the Em-1 with all your lenses with Metabones. So I was using a Canon 70 to 200 F-4,l series on my EM-1 Other than some balky autofocus on hard scenes,it works great.
     
  5. robcee

    robcee Mu-43 Veteran

    313
    Jan 10, 2016
    Toronto
    Rob Campbell
    I'd say hang onto the D750 for night-time, low-light or astrophotography. It's a great camera and those lenses (not sure which ones you've got) you won't ever get back if you sell them.

    I still keep a D800 around for astro and high-res shooting, but I haven't upgraded to the EM1mk2 yet.
     
  6. PakkyT

    PakkyT Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2015
    New England
    Ya I always laugh at people on Flickr discussions who will go on and on about how this camera or that camera is the one to get because of some "xyz" type of shooting. Then you go look at their photo stream and it is page after page after page of NOT "xyz" shooting or the feature they tout as the must have is not something you would ever use for any of their shots. I think a lot of those people like to read web sites and parrot info they saw, not that they actually have any experience in what they are parroting on about. :)
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. wimg

    wimg Mu-43 Regular

    191
    Dec 10, 2016
    Netherlands
    If you don't use or see the need of ISO higher than 6400, have enough with 20 MP (or 80 MP with static subjects :)), and can live with the shallow DoF that lenses like the Oly 25 Pro, Panny Nocticron and 12 F/1.4 provide, why not? Shallow DoF is heavily overrated, especially as one generally needs to stop down on FF to F/2.8 or F/4 to get even close to a semblance of an in-focus image or part of the image. Since most MFT lenses are extremely usable from wide open or close to wide open, and FF lenses often have to be stopped down 2 or 3 stops, you wouldn't therefore need large aperture FF lenses. If you do want to use shallow DoF, more than available with any MFT lenses, you could always consider using a MetaBones speedbooster with a fast FF lens - that's what I do.

    MFT is so much more capable than FF in so many regards that effectively, I no longer use my 5D II any longer, also owning a Pen F and an EM1 II, but I guess if I had a 5DsR, I would possibly use that for not-so-static subjects for which I need high resolution images, so I may still get one of those. However, not for the foreseeable future either, as I currently do not shoot enough to warrant buying another expensive camera :).

    Having said all that, I always carry the Pen F with me, and when out on business, the EM1 II as well, and never the FF stuff anymore.

    In short, go for it, sounds like the right thing to do, and if you ever need FF type DoF, just get a FF lens and a Metabones speedbooster.

    Kind regards, Wim
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2017 at 10:05 AM
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. chonbhoy

    chonbhoy Mu-43 Veteran

    486
    Apr 23, 2013
    Scottish Highlands
    I would be cautious and hold onto it for now, its only been a year and your photography needs might change or sell some of the FX lenses, keep the good ones that you know will produce the better photograph when you have something specific in mind. I don't think i could justify selling a camera with that good a sensor in it even though i understand that i wouldn't be using it a lot.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Clint

    Clint Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Apr 22, 2013
    San Diego area, CA
    Clint
    So the sane idea is keep thousands of dollars worth of 35mm digital gear sitting and collecting dust!

    Family vacation memories always seem to outweigh any camera or gear I've ever had. I have several photos from family vacations on my walls. Know how many photos of any of my expensive photo gear from over the years adorns my walls - zero, zip, nada, zilch.:coffee-30:
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Fabercula

    Fabercula Mu-43 Regular

    29
    Aug 8, 2016
    Fabrizio
    Thank you guys for your replies.
    The fact is I've to the decision that two systems are too many for the use I do.
    I prefer to have only one systems and two bodies on which I can attach the lenses I have.
    And between the two systems i would have chosen the lighter and more confortable to carry with me.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Petrochemist

    Petrochemist Mu-43 Top Veteran

    730
    Mar 21, 2013
    N Essex, UK
    Mike
    If you're finding the EM1 is adequate for your uses, then it's best to sell the FF kit quickly. Digital cameras tend to depreciate rapidly, so you'll get the best return if you don't hang on to it. Hanging on to it in case you get into low light photography in the distant future doesn't make any sense, by then better cameras will be available for less than you get for the kit now.

    If you occasionally benefit from the advantages of the FF kit and can afford to keep both, then that's a viable option. I still have several DSLRs with a good range of lenses, even though most of my shooting is via MFT. Resale value of my older DSLR is now fairly minimal, so I find it worthwhile keeping it at work in case an unexpected photo opportunity turns up when I don't have the up to date kit here.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. andyw

    andyw Mu-43 Veteran

    432
    Jan 27, 2010
    Surrey. UK
    I have a Pana GM1 which I fine pretty awesome for Street, A Oly E-M5 II for general stuff and a Nikon D750 with the 35mm f1.8 FX lens.

    The M4/3 stuff is great, really really great. The D750 is pretty awesome. The images are more detailed and have a smoother, sharper look to them but only slightly. The DOF is great and something I love but I do no pro work and really do not need the D750 so I'm deciding whether to sell it or keep it.

    I'm trying to minimise 'stuff' that I have so It will probably go as I have no real need for it at all. It's just a nice toy.
     
  13. mjgraaf

    mjgraaf Mu-43 Regular

    61
    Feb 9, 2014
    Netherlands
    Menno
    I sold my D700 & other FF stuff long time ago, when I saw that I did not use it anymore after purchasing a Oly OMD EM5. So my opinion might not be truly unbiassed. But I think it makes much less sense to let good equipment dust away, even if you have the money, when someone else may be having good use for it. And yes, there have been moments when I wished I still had the D700, but reality is that I would not have taken it with me, and even when I would, chances are not with the right lens. Remember, the best camera is the one you actually take with you. And the challenge for me is to learn how to use the disadvantages and advantages of a specific system to my advantage, instead of complaining about what I do not have. Anyway, I found it liberating that I could just bring all my lenses with me, and still carry significantly less weight than a D700 with a small lens selection. And no need for backpacks anymore! One more article I picked up from these fora: From Medium Format Digital to Micro 4/3 – Superinfocus, FWIW.
     
  14. Phlash46

    Phlash46 Nikon Refugee

    126
    Jul 1, 2014
    Montrose, NY
    Bruce Gordon
    If the distinct advantages of FF (not including size, weight and cost!) aren't important to your shooting, I'd suggest an OMD EM-15 II instead. The layout is very similar to the em-1 II and you'll have an easier time switching bodies! By the way, the 100-400 works just fine on the em-1 II if you use only the lens stabilization.
     
  15. kawhona

    kawhona Mu-43 Veteran Subscribing Member

    269
    Jun 22, 2013
    Phoenix
    Don Thompson
    I have both and for the amount of time I use my Nikon gear (mostly astro) it is clearly a waste of money but, for some weird emotional attachment I am reluctant to get rid of it and the rest of the kit. Though logically I probably should.
     
  16. Powaysteve

    Powaysteve New to Mu-43

    I just switched from Canon to Olympus M43. The Canon stuff was just getting too heavy to haul around on backpack trips overseas. Also with airline carry-on issues and restrictions increasing, it was getting hard to carry a loaded backpack and another bag of gear on board. I had about $18K of Canon gear, both full frame and crop bodies with several lenses. Why I will miss my big white telephoto lens (if I ever find someone to buy it), the Olympus 300mm f4 PRO with the 1.4x converter out reached it handheld and I can hold it all day long at. So I will be buying a second EM1 MK2 soon.
     
  17. What lenses are you using on the M4/3 cameras? Reason I ask is because a british pro compared the D810 with the em1 (original) and the em1 was just slightly more detailed when it was down sampled. The holy trinity lenses were used. He was going to fully switch to M4/3 but then the A7r came out and decided to go with Sony because he prints very big.
     
  18. Fabercula

    Fabercula Mu-43 Regular

    29
    Aug 8, 2016
    Fabrizio
    Eventually I sold my Nikon D750 and got a second m43 body.
    Maybe I was crazy but I did want to try out the new brand Panasonic GH5 and so I went for.
    My back pack now is way lighter and I can fill it in with whatever lens I like.
    Perhaps I'm wrong, time will tell.
    In any case, I think that Nikon will still be on the market in a year or two, just in case I am going to buy a FF gear again, but in this case I will choose my lenses very carefully: macro and landscape.
    For the time being, I will try to enjoy my m43 stuff.
     
  19. andyw

    andyw Mu-43 Veteran

    432
    Jan 27, 2010
    Surrey. UK
    I use the Panaleica 15mm f1.7 on the GM1. I use the Oly 17mm f1.8 most of the time on the E-M5 MkII but I also have the Oly 60mm f2.8 macro.

    I also have the 12-40mm f2.8 pro zoom which was part of the E-M5 MkII kit. I have only started using it but have found it to be very soft so is going back to Olympus when I am back to work next week. I'm not keen on zooms especially the pro ones as they are too heavy for the size of bodies. It would be fine on the GH5 or E-M1 but then you are getting into DSLR territory so no point. I expect I will sell it but will wait and see.

    For what I do the 35 equivelent focal length is all I really use and need. A super wide will be bought at some point for some landscape pics. :) Not sure what to get for that though. The Panasonic 8-18mm looks superb!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Taurahe

    Taurahe Mu-43 Regular

    80
    Nov 24, 2015
    Brandon
    I sold all of my Nikon gear and went all in on m 4/3 A year ago. My Nikon gear sat for a year without being touched. The only thing I miss is the shallower dof....but only occasionally . If I were to add a Nikon back in , I would go crop sensor with a fast lens. Ff would not be worth the expense.

    The right choice is a personal one. I say, shoot the things you usually use the full frame for with the olympus and see how it makes you feel. If it is ok for you, then you have a valid answer