mu4/3 + p&s or DSLR + p&s?

pikaaarrr

New to Mu-43
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
3
Hi all,

Ever since I came back to looking at mu4/3 (last time I had been looking at this maybe a yearish ago, the GF1+20mm combo was $900 at cheapest!!), I've been pondering whether it'd be a good decision to move over. Right now, I'm using a used A100 and an LX3. My reason for picking Alpha over Canikon, etc, a while ago was that the Minolta lenses go for very cheap yet deliver great performance, even though they don't have the absolute newest technology. But, I've been a little disappointed with the size and performance of the system; the LX3 isn't really pant-pocketable, and of course the DSLR isn't either, and I wasn't super impressed by the A100's high ISO performance, although that isn't a big issue.

...I'm rambling. So, I was considering moving to S90/95 (seems a LOT smaller) and possibly an mu4/3, which would either be the G1 or the GF1/EPL1/EP1/EP2 depending on what sort of deals I will find. I most definitely plan on getting the 20/1.7, and some legacy lenses, hopefully some decent pancakes.

My quibbles with the G1: is it really worth switching from Alpha, since I already have the Alpha gear, size-wise and performance wise? It's also harder to get quality AF lenses than on the Alpha format.

My quibbles with more compact mu4/3: how do they perform with legacy lenses? How much size am I saving, really, since they're not pant-pocketable anyways? Is it worth the compromise? I probably won't be purchasing the EVF's for these cameras, at least not now, since they aren't super cheap and only the VF2 seems to be worth buying.

Any potential problems with the S95 either?

Thanks a ton!
 

usayit

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
2,964
Location
Some call it the arm pit of NYC.
My gut feeling from your post would be to get better glass on you A100. Ninety percent of the time, switching systems nets a rather big loss in value. As such, there should be some very compelling reasons to make that switch.

just some initial thoughts in reaction to your post.

-G1 isn't going to be much better than your a100 for high iso
-m43 lens selection, native, is not going to be as wide as your current system. It's growing quickly but it's still a unknown factor.
-Glass has improved over the years... Many of us, shoot with legacy glass because we enjoy it and like the results. Shooting legacy Minolta glass on your A100 was disappointing you, what would make you think that shooting legacy glass on M43 be any more satisfying?

Glass Makes a huge difference. I have a very difficult time explaining this to the typical consumer that walks through the door. HUGE.
 

pikaaarrr

New to Mu-43
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
3
Thanks for your fast response!

In case it might be important, I like street shooting a lot, but it seems that the S95 would cover a lot of those needs.
 

photoSmart42

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
628
Location
San Diego, CA
The S95 is a great take-everywhere camera. It has limitations, but for what it offers there's none like it. I have one, along with all my other photographic tools (m4/3, SLR, DSLR, MF, etc.).
 

joele

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
165
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Glass Makes a huge difference. I have a very difficult time explaining this to the typical consumer that walks through the door. HUGE.
Agreed I have always been more concerned about investing in good glass than in expensive camera bodies (I tend to buy a generation behind)... Glass also tends to last MUCH longer and retain more value..
 

pictor

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2010
Messages
637
Agreed I have always been more concerned about investing in good glass than in expensive camera bodies (I tend to buy a generation behind)... Glass also tends to last MUCH longer and retain more value..
Investing in fine lenses is a good advice, but one has to be careful in choosing the right camera body, too. A sports photographer, for example, who needs a quick and reliable AF won't be happy with an entry level camera body. The camera body has to be at least good enough for ones needs, otherwise one will buy a second body soon, which in some cases is more expensive than buying even the best body at first. A less than good enough body may hinder or in the worst case even prevent one from taking the pictures one wants to shoot.
 

pictor

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2010
Messages
637
btw... the trade from LX3 to the s95 does make sense. I have an lx3 and I am happy with it but I too would not consider it pocketable
Do you think, that the differences are big enough to justify the switch?
 

usayit

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
2,964
Location
Some call it the arm pit of NYC.
With every decision you have to take into consideration of the consumer's needs and situation. This is true for someone who says "I want sharper images with nicer bokeh" or "I need more frames per second".

In the case of the OP, I think the A100's capabilities haven't been totally explored if unsatisfied results came with a vintage old lens with older optical designs. There are of course cases outside the norm... some being the older lenses out perform a similar lens of today.

In the case of S95 versus the LX3 decision, the OP said "the LX3 isn't really pant-pocketable". This leads me to believe that pocketable compact camera is very important. The LX3 is rather large for a compact... its lens sticks out.. From that standpoint, the S90 or S95 might be a good upgrade simply because its smaller.
 
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
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom