I have two system I am feeding, Canon and Olympus m4/3. Where I am debating is do I want to upgrade my T2i to 7D or my E-P2 to E-P3... I find it difficult to make my mind on this one...
I have owned 5dMk2 and 7D.. but it took me awhile to admit the Oly EP3 with good lenses is just as good.. You paid more for the 5D mk2 and 7D so you have to adjust your pride level. LOL.. :smile:Renaud,
I also have a 7D and a 5D Mark II. I have been very pleasantly surprised by just how good the E-P3 is compared to the 5D. Clearly the Canon is better, but not by nearly as much as I expected. The 7D is better than the E-P3, its controls are much easier to use, it has weather sealing, shoots at 8 frames/second and so on but the image quality is pretty darn close.
The E-P3 is my first M4/3 camera so I don't know if it's much better than the E-P2 but I shouldn't think so. As M4/3 said, getting a better lens is probably your best option. If you really want a better body, the 5DII would be the one to get currently, or wait until the 5DIII comes out. But don't forget the size and weight penalty with the dSLRs like the 5D or 7D, not to mention the cost.
I have owned 5dMk2 and 7D.. but it took me awhile to admit the Oly EP3 with good lenses is just as good.. You paid more for the 5D mk2 and 7D so you have to adjust your pride level. LOL.. :smile:
I would say there is not a great difference between the E-P2 and E-P3 in terms of image quality--you can check DPreview. I don't know the Canon line very well, but a better "upgrade" path would be going from an APS-C to a 35mm size sensor. Going from one camera to another with the same size sensor is not a big jump.
t2i = T3i = 60D = 7D in landscape image quality
E-P2 = E-P3 in landscape image quality (though the E-P3 may have a slight edge)
So with either Canon or Olympus, rather than using money to upgrade the body, you might consider upgrading the lens's to get sharper, more detailed images.
I personally don't like the colors my T3i delivers when I shoot landscapes so I use strictly Olympus m4/3 gear to shoot landscapes. I think Marto's E-P3 photo above shows how Olympus can deliver rich yet natural looking colors like the film cameras of the past could deliver. I havn't been able to get my T3i to do that reliably and consistently.
Mr. Doug... I understand that you are equally happy with the results you are getting from m4/3 as from the full frame sensor in the 5DMkII. But I could not disagree more strongly with the statement that m4/3 is "just as good". I wish it were true, but I shoot a LOT with both and there are significant differences. I'm not saying m4/3 isn't a great format and camera system, because it is and I love it. But it is simply not comparable to the full frame sensor on the 5DMkII in terms of dynamic range, lattitude, and detail at larger sizes. I have applications and situations where I simply cannot attain "equal" results with m4/3, though I wish I could. Maybe some day. I will continue shooting m4/3 for a very long time, I hope... perhaps long enough to see that.
I love my 5DMkII and I love my m4/3 gear, but they each have separate niches and applications as far as my needs go. For your needs, they may be equal.
Thanks every one for your contribution to this thread,
Here some background.
I have been shooting with DSLR for a long time, my first was a Canon 300D Rebel. I soon upgraded to a 40D with a stack of big lens.
My wife and I travel once or twice a year and doing photography is a big part of my enthusiasm to travel.
One year though I got fed up of carrying the big gear and swore it was the last time...
So I sold every thing and went M4/3 with the E-P1 and then upgraded to E-P2, went to Netherlands with a much smaller rig and was really happy about it. When I look at my pictures I find the they are missing some spunk. (E-P2, M4/3 14-150 and M4/3 9-18)
So I went back to Canon with the rebel line a T2i with Sigma 17-70mm OS lens as a walk around setup and not that much more impress with the result. I thought that the smaller body of the rebel line would be a good middle ground.
So when the E-P3 was announce I thought it would be the answer to my dilemma, better image quality and faster focus, which annoy me a bith on the E-P2.
So upgrading the the body became the solution in my mind and for a reason the it is eluding me, upgrading the optics was not first in line...
Need to ad that I a bit of a pixel peeper...
I agree with the idea of upgrading my lens would be a good first step and using a tripod was not considered also due to image stabilization, but I do see the added value....
I also agree that the full frame body must provide better images with good lens. But the usage that I do of my pictures make justifying the cost a bit difficult for me and my minister of finance...
Hope this help understanding where I am cumming from.
Thanks again every one...
I have been shooting with DSLR for a long time, my first was a Canon 300D Rebel. I soon upgraded to a 40D with a stack of big lens.... So I sold every thing and went M4/3 with the E-P1 and then upgraded to E-P2.... (E-P2, M4/3 14-150 and M4/3 9-18).... So I went back to Canon with the rebel line a T2i with Sigma 17-70mm OS lens.... So when the E-P3 was announce I thought it would be the answer to my dilemma
Instead of buying more gear, use your current gear to its maximum potential.
My wife and I travel once or twice a year and doing photography is a big part of my enthusiasm to travel.