Might be moving away from m4/3 to Fuji (for everyday photos) after a great couple of years

Promit

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
1,820
Location
Baltimore, MD
Real Name
Promit Roy
I respectfully disagree with you from a practical real world perspective :) The a77 has more dynamic range, better tonal range, higher resolution and more AF points across the frame than the 6d. The 6d will scale to higher ISO's with better noise handling and will hold onto color detail better past ISO6400. However I would wager that more people would benefit from better IQ at the lower isos' than the super extreme corner cases where you absolutely MUST shoot at ISO10000 without any light modifiers, flash, strobes etc... Most people want to keep their ISO's low to maximize their equipments IQ potential, and in the lower ISO's where you want to be shooting for most subjects, Sony sensor technology has Canon beat currently, even when comparing APS-C with small format.
I don't know if your comparison is on the mark or not, but I will say that at ISO 3200 on the A77 II, I'm getting blotchy color shifts in the shadows that are visible at web size and can't be easily dealt with by naive NR (but can be dealt with through other means). That's the low light pain point for me. Same seems to apply to the EM5 and GH4.
 

WT21

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
7,260
Location
Boston
BTW - I'm a canon shooter with a 5d mk iii ;)

Have you shot with the 6D? In my tests, the 6D sensor outperformed the 5Diii sensor. You really should not lump them together.

Most people want to keep their ISO's low to maximize their equipments IQ potential

Do you have proof of this beyond simple conjecture? If this were so boldly true, why do so many people chase high ISO? It can't be because everyone is dumb in understanding their own needs.

A quick check of my bank of 6D shots. Out of 1000 keepers during my time with the camera, 300 were shot at ISO 100 and 200. 450 at ISO 800 and below. The rest above ISO 800. 116 of them at ISO 6400.

For the ISO6400 shots nearly all of them were from 3 events: 2 indoor basketball games (where shutter speed was critical) and 1 kids musical, where the lighting was pretty low. I wish I could post them, but they were all of kids events, so I'm not wiling to do that.

I don't know if the a77 could do the same. I merely post the above stats to show that high ISO is relevant.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,397
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Real Name
Nic
Do you have proof of this beyond simple conjecture? If this were so boldly true, why do so many people chase high ISO? It can't be because everyone is dumb in understanding their own needs.

A quick check of my bank of 6D shots. Out of 1000 keepers during my time with the camera, 300 were shot at ISO 100 and 200. 450 at ISO 800 and below. The rest above ISO 800. 116 of them at ISO 6400.

I think that everyone's circumstances and usage patterns are going to be different. For example, this is a plot of stats from my current collection of processed images from 2013 with the top right chart being my ISO usage. The ISO 100 spike is from my Samsung and Canon cameras and the ISO 200 spike from Micro 4/3. The weird ISO values are from a Ricoh GXR that I briefly used last year. Most of my low light images would have been taken with my E-M5 where I would rarely haven been shooting moving objects and would have been taken relying on the IBIS and (hopefully) a steady hand to keep the ISO speeds as low as possible.

Stats2013_zps3089af3f.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

val

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
548
Location
Australia
Real Name
William
I enjoy using both M43 and Fujifilm equally. It really comes down to what you're shooting.
Now I absolutely love their primes, I think that's where we differ from the start.
14mm F2.8. 23mm f1.4 and 35mm f1.4. Done!
So like dinners or travelling...slow subject stuff. That is what Fujifilm are good at.
anything that needs quick AF or reaction then it's M43.

It's a shame that the upcoming Sony 35mm F1.4 FE is so big..IMHO F1.8 would of been the sweet spot.
 

tomO2013

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2013
Messages
864
Hi

I bought the 5d mk iii because it came out first and it looked to be a nice replacement for an older 1ds mk ii with a sticking shutter that I had gotten off eBay. If i had had the choice between the 5d and 6d now, for the money savings primarily, I'd probably have gone for the 6d (I don't dispute that there is an IQ improvement over the 5d mk iii, it's not huge but it is there, the only reason that I can see to go for the 5d over the 6d is debatably better build quality and Canon's amazing AF system in the 5d).

Looking at my own Lightroom catalogue numbers, for my shooting habits, shows a distinct preference for ISO's well below ISO3200 on my EM1 (this includes quite a few event photography shoots in low candlelight without flash; and no I am not a paid photographer :) ). I'm also assuming that even those with low light monsters such as the Nikon DF or D4s would prefer to keep their ISO's as low as possible to maximize IQ. Your mileage may vary with the 6d of course - perhaps you like to, or more importantly, perhaps you need to stop down in very low light to keep your subjects in focus?? In which case, of course you would need to boost your ISO's to 6400 and beyond....

Since we are debating sensor technology - and whether Sony are producing superior sensor chips to Canon here. Consider this post from photographic life comparing the D800 (small format) vs the 6d.... http://photographylife.com/nikon-vs-canon-dynamic-range. Granted this is a more apples to apples comparison, but still it shows Canon's sensors are lagging the competition from Sony.

Can you point to any articles, reports, or better yet provide sample images that demonstrate that Canon produces a superior sensor in the 6d to the best from Sony, or even in the APS-C lineup, better than the A77ii beyond just the single corner case of crazy high iso metrics?? I'm interested in seeing something such as a landscape or portrait that shows the Canon at ISO200 - 1600 having superior dynamic range / tonal range, detail etc... Something that refutes DXO's numbers that show the A77ii to having better dynamic range, tonal range, color bit depth, and having higher resolution both from it's higher megapixel count and also from it's lack of AA filter. I would also wager that practically speaking the in body sensor shift on the Sony would close the low light shooting envelope somewhat.....

My point is, of course if your shooting habits are primarily at night, with no flash, no light modifiers, slow lenses, then the 6d would be a superior tool than an A77 in terms of noise - but thats a very specific shooting envelope that doesn't consider studio portrait, landscape, action, daytime shooting, shooting with a flash, nor does it consider when we get down to brass tax, what you subjectively find acceptable or not in print at higher ISO's. Pixel peeping does not translate to print well. I've shot many ISO6400 images with my EM1 and have printed them without problem.

I should also say here that my tolerances to 'noise' are perhaps different to most. I started with film and love grainy films such as Tri X. My EM1 can produce vastly cleaner results at ISO6400 than I would have gotten at ASA400 on Tri X and I typically add grain in post to many of my prints to remove the sterile digital look. Everybody has different tastes :) In my eyes it is grain if it adds texture to an image and it is noise if it detracts from an image. The characteristics of noise are just as important as the SnR and at what point noise (from a DXO perspective) becomes perceptive. For example, lots of random fine grained luminance speckles are infinitely preferable to banding in the shadows etc...

Irrespective on whether we agree or not here, your image of the formula one car is spectacular and I do envy that you are lucky enough to own two great cameras in the 6d and the A77ii !!

--Tom

Have you shot with the 6D? In my tests, the 6D sensor outperformed the 5Diii sensor. You really should not lump them together.



Do you have proof of this beyond simple conjecture? If this were so boldly true, why do so many people chase high ISO? It can't be because everyone is dumb in understanding their own needs.

A quick check of my bank of 6D shots. Out of 1000 keepers during my time with the camera, 300 were shot at ISO 100 and 200. 450 at ISO 800 and below. The rest above ISO 800. 116 of them at ISO 6400.

For the ISO6400 shots nearly all of them were from 3 events: 2 indoor basketball games (where shutter speed was critical) and 1 kids musical, where the lighting was pretty low. I wish I could post them, but they were all of kids events, so I'm not wiling to do that.

I don't know if the a77 could do the same. I merely post the above stats to show that high ISO is relevant.
 

WT21

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
7,260
Location
Boston
Hi

I bought the 5d mk iii because it came out first and it looked to be a nice replacement for an older 1ds mk ii with a sticking shutter that I had gotten off eBay. If i had had the choice between the 5d and 6d now, for the money savings primarily, I'd probably have gone for the 6d (I don't dispute that there is an IQ improvement over the 5d mk iii, it's not huge but it is there, the only reason that I can see to go for the 5d over the 6d is debatably better build quality and Canon's amazing AF system in the 5d).

Looking at my own Lightroom catalogue numbers, for my shooting habits, shows a distinct preference for ISO's well below ISO3200 on my EM1 (this includes quite a few event photography shoots in low candlelight without flash; and no I am not a paid photographer :) ). I'm also assuming that even those with low light monsters such as the Nikon DF or D4s would prefer to keep their ISO's as low as possible to maximize IQ. Your mileage may vary with the 6d of course - perhaps you like to, or more importantly, perhaps you need to stop down in very low light to keep your subjects in focus?? In which case, of course you would need to boost your ISO's to 6400 and beyond....

Since we are debating sensor technology - and whether Sony are producing superior sensor chips to Canon here. Consider this post from photographic life comparing the D800 (small format) vs the 6d.... http://photographylife.com/nikon-vs-canon-dynamic-range. Granted this is a more apples to apples comparison, but still it shows Canon's sensors are lagging the competition from Sony.

Can you point to any articles, reports, or better yet provide sample images that demonstrate that Canon produces a superior sensor in the 6d to the best from Sony, or even in the APS-C lineup, better than the A77ii beyond just the single corner case of crazy high iso metrics?? I'm interested in seeing something such as a landscape or portrait that shows the Canon at ISO200 - 1600 having superior dynamic range / tonal range, detail etc... Something that refutes DXO's numbers that show the A77ii to having better dynamic range, tonal range, color bit depth, and having higher resolution both from it's higher megapixel count and also from it's lack of AA filter. I would also wager that practically speaking the in body sensor shift on the Sony would close the low light shooting envelope somewhat.....

My point is, of course if your shooting habits are primarily at night, with no flash, no light modifiers, slow lenses, then the 6d would be a superior tool than an A77 in terms of noise - but thats a very specific shooting envelope that doesn't consider studio portrait, landscape, action, daytime shooting, shooting with a flash, nor does it consider when we get down to brass tax, what you subjectively find acceptable or not in print at higher ISO's. Pixel peeping does not translate to print well. I've shot many ISO6400 images with my EM1 and have printed them without problem.

I should also say here that my tolerances to 'noise' are perhaps different to most. I started with film and love grainy films such as Tri X. My EM1 can produce vastly cleaner results at ISO6400 than I would have gotten at ASA400 on Tri X and I typically add grain in post to many of my prints to remove the sterile digital look. Everybody has different tastes :) In my eyes it is grain if it adds texture to an image and it is noise if it detracts from an image. The characteristics of noise are just as important as the SnR and at what point noise (from a DXO perspective) becomes perceptive. For example, lots of random fine grained luminance speckles are infinitely preferable to banding in the shadows etc...

Irrespective on whether we agree or not here, your image of the formula one car is spectacular and I do envy that you are lucky enough to own two great cameras in the 6d and the A77ii !!

--Tom

Please. I never conjectured any of this: "Since we are debating sensor technology - and whether Sony are producing superior sensor chips to Canon here."

What I said was the 6D has a better sensor than the a77ii. My secondary point is the 6D sensor (alone in the Canon line up) holds it's own with many of the other cameras on the market. I don't know if it's a fluke or what, and it is pretty surprising, IMO. My third point was lots of people need good high ISO, and you can't use just your shooting habits to make universal declarations.

My points were no bigger than that. You are welcome to write long debates about other things, but they were not my points at all. Also, I don't know what you are referencing re: the formula one car. That is not my picture. I think perhaps you are mixing up multiple posters.
 

tomO2013

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2013
Messages
864
No probs - I was replying to both your goodself and Provit (the original poster and photographer of that gorgeous race car shot) after only 4-5 hours sleep.
So before this goes any further I hope that no offence is being taken, because certainly from my side, I enjoy a friendly chit chat about photographic gear so understand that is where I come from.

I did actually understand the points that you were making and appreciate you taking the time to give your opinion - I just don't agree with you is all and I have already shared my (albeit long-winded) train of thought as to 'why' , beyond short one liner statements!
I'm still open to photographic evidence that shows that the 6d sensor is superior to the A77ii in other areas beyond super high ISO where the A77ii cannot leverage it's sensor shift image stabilization e.g. ISO200 -1600 landscape, portrait, still life, architecture, macro etc... :)

To that end let's just agree to disagree - one man, one vote. In another 3 - 4 years the new Samsung NX1 with it's BSI APS-C sensor will be history and we will be having a debate on the interwibbly about who is producing the technically better sensor ... the latest curved organic BSI sensor from Fuji VS the Canon BSI organic foveon ;)

All the best,

--Tom.


Please. I never conjectured any of this: "Since we are debating sensor technology - and whether Sony are producing superior sensor chips to Canon here."

What I said was the 6D has a better sensor than the a77ii. My secondary point is the 6D sensor (alone in the Canon line up) holds it's own with many of the other cameras on the market. I don't know if it's a fluke or what, and it is pretty surprising, IMO. My third point was lots of people need good high ISO, and you can't use just your shooting habits to make universal declarations.

My points were no bigger than that. You are welcome to write long debates about other things, but they were not my points at all. Also, I don't know what you are referencing re: the formula one car. That is not my picture. I think perhaps you are mixing up multiple posters.
 

teddoman

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 22, 2013
Messages
193
Location
nyc
Anyway, I've had the Fuji for a week and as I'm starting to step out of the honeymoon period, I'm wondering if my excitement was premature. I do like the imaging, but the camera is just so... I don't know a better word for it than primitive. I don't mind the speed (it was replacing an EM5 with 14-54 II, remember, so it's actually quite a bit faster). But the lack of zone AF is annoying. The controls aren't that helpful, especially because the aperture ring is way too easy to bump, and doesn't have very positive clicks. As a result I'm reluctant to shoot the camera in aperture priority. Its inability to select shutter speed based on focal length is another hassle, and completely needless at that. I have a photo at 55mm in broad daylight that has visible motion blur even at screen size (just barely), which at 1/60 has me wondering why the OSS didn't manage to compensate. And I would describe the grip/physical feel as "tolerable".

I'm seriously re-evaluating, and returning the camera in favor of an A7 -- or the P12-35 -- is not off the table.
For feel, there's an iShoot grip that I use with my X-E1, I like cameras to have a bit of a grippable hump.

The X-T1 is a bit more snazzed up with AF-C tracking, but the X-E2 and X-E1 definitely seem to be best used for pure stills photography in manual mode. I've read a lot of Fuji owners talk about how slowing down has made them rediscover things about photography that they used to love. So maybe something gets lost shooting 11 fps, and Fuji has helped rekindle something for those owners. Shooting with primes also has the effect of slowing you down and making you think in a certain focal length. Before Fuji, I mostly shot with center point AF-S in manual mode using unstabilized primes, so Fuji was an effortless transition for me. But I also have other systems, so it only fills a "niche" for me. If you're finding yourself missing a lot of those other more automated features, Fuji might not be for you.
 

shutterduster

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Feb 8, 2013
Messages
144
Location
Keremeos, BC. Canada
Real Name
Dave T
Anyway, I've had the Fuji for a week and as I'm starting to step out of the honeymoon period, I'm wondering if my excitement was premature. I do like the imaging, but the camera is just so... I don't know a better word for it than primitive. I don't mind the speed (it was replacing an EM5 with 14-54 II, remember, so it's actually quite a bit faster). But the lack of zone AF is annoying. The controls aren't that helpful, especially because the aperture ring is way too easy to bump, and doesn't have very positive clicks. As a result I'm reluctant to shoot the camera in aperture priority. Its inability to select shutter speed based on focal length is another hassle, and completely needless at that. I have a photo at 55mm in broad daylight that has visible motion blur even at screen size (just barely), which at 1/60 has me wondering why the OSS didn't manage to compensate. And I would describe the grip/physical feel as "tolerable".

I'm seriously re-evaluating, and returning the camera in favor of an A7 -- or the P12-35 -- is not off the table.

It's been a while since this post. Have you made any progress in your decisions.
I still can't believe the number of systems and cameras you have been through in such a short time.
Maybe it is time to build a system that ticks the most boxes in your wish list and master it.

Just my humble opinion.
Dave T
 

Promit

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
1,820
Location
Baltimore, MD
Real Name
Promit Roy
It's been a while since this post. Have you made any progress in your decisions.
Well I finally got a hold of a Panasonic 12-35, and compared shooting with the GH4 and that lens to the Fuji. The GH4/12-35 is a combo I needed for work, not an optional toy. The question was, does the Fuji bring anything to the table that I really am not able to get with the GH4? The answer is no, it does not. So the Fuji is on its way back to B&H today in fact. The more time I spent with the Fuji, the less I liked it. Of course a GH4 + 12-35 is a rather expensive combination compared to the Fuji, but it wasn't really an optional acquisition.
I still can't believe the number of systems and cameras you have been through in such a short time.
Maybe it is time to build a system that ticks the most boxes in your wish list and master it.
That's quite rude. To some extent, the huge list of m4/3 bodies I've run through represents simple curiosity, and to some extent it represents the mistake I made in not buying an SLT much earlier than I did. My photography work is mostly of moving objects, and I tried far too many m4/3 bodies thinking they'd be able to handle it. I was foolish enough to believe the marketing claims more than once, I admit. Even the GH4 isn't particularly good at it, despite the DFD advertising. The Fuji didn't impress me either on the motion front, despite the on-chip phase detection. I also do plenty of video - if the GH4 didn't exist, I would probably have divested from m4/3 completely in favor of SLT, but its 4k abilities have turned out to be quite useful.
 

imahawki

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
216
I find that advice that strikes a nerve is often some of the best advice. Just me personally.
 

Promit

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
1,820
Location
Baltimore, MD
Real Name
Promit Roy
Believe me, I would love to be single system. But I work with such diverse requirements that it's just not in the cards, especially after my hobby photography was subsumed into my professional work about two years ago. None of the mirrorless cameras are capable of what I need photographically, as much as I wish they were and have spent money trying to make them. At the same time none of the DSLRs are capable of what the GH4 is doing on video, even though some of them are starting to close in on what the GH3 was capable of. So I sit with two blocks of incompatible lenses.

Sorry, make that three blocks of lenses. I can't even speed boost my Alpha lenses onto my GH4, so now I'm buying Nikon glass. Argh!
 

teddoman

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 22, 2013
Messages
193
Location
nyc
To some extent, the huge list of m4/3 bodies I've run through represents simple curiosity, and to some extent it represents the mistake I made in not buying an SLT much earlier than I did.
We learn from experience. Getting a feel for the different systems means he has a more concrete feel for many of the other systems. Why put a negative spin on what represents an experiential learning process.

And we're probably all a little guilty of too much gear, but that's what great about this hobby. The hobby has resale value.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom