Pro primes vs XT3 and F2 Prime kit?

Nick779

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
154
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Im just curious if anyone has run into this thought before.

I was eyeballing the pro primes for lower light shooting and got to thinking about other systems because of the cost with a DoF that is similar.

Have any of you considered adding a Fuji as a second body with their reasonably prices F2 primes? It just seems like a versatile option besides the loss of stabilization.
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
6,735
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
For that purpose why not stabilised FF mirrorless with f/1.8 primes?
Yep - the Z6 plus 35/1.8 or 50/1.8 would make an excellent kit. Small, stabilised, excellent sensor (apart from a bit of banding when pushed hard). Add in the 14-30 and 24-70 kit zooms and you've got a very nice three lens combo. If I didn't already have an extensive m43 package, that's the way I'd go since I don't use long lenses much at all. It would be different if I was into sports, wildlife etc.
 

Nick779

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
154
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Yep - the Z6 plus 35/1.8 or 50/1.8 would make an excellent kit. Small, stabilised, excellent sensor (apart from a bit of banding when pushed hard). Add in the 14-30 and 24-70 kit zooms and you've got a very nice three lens combo.
Heh, thats actually the kit on my wishlist. Z6 + 24-70F4, 35F1.8, and either a 50 or a 85F1.8
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
6,735
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
Heh, thats actually the kit on my wishlist. Z6 + 24-70F4, 35F1.8, and either a 50 or a 85F1.8
Go for it then :). The Z6 has a very nice feel to it. Definitely nicer than the Sony A7 series. Only downsides from my evaluation are:

- No over/under exposure indicators in live view (blinkies). You get them on image review, but not before exposure.
- Uses fancy and expensive memory cards.
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
5,935
Location
Knoxville, TN
I see about $1100 reasons to consider the Fuji:

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

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

Nick779

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
154
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Go for it then :). The Z6 has a very nice feel to it. Definitely nicer than the Sony A7 series. Only downsides from my evaluation are:

- No over/under exposure indicators in live view (blinkies). You get them on image review, but not before exposure.
- Uses fancy and expensive memory cards.
Good to know. Ill probably rent it for a few days just to make sure its what im looking for, but from the reviews ive watched and the lens lineups ive seen it seems like a good option.

I do shoot sports and wildlife, but I cant really afford the FF glass I would want/need to be as effective as I am with my EM1.2 + 40-150 Pro + TCs. Im just looking for a more complementary kit that would give an edge to dynamic range, shadow/highlight recovery, and low light/landscape shooting.

I see about $1100 reasons to consider the Fuji:
I cant argue with the cost, however $1100 buys you stabilization, more DoF if you need it, easier RAWs to process, and a much more extensive lens lineup.
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
5,935
Location
Knoxville, TN
I understand the feeling when comparing the Olympus Pro primes, as well:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2016
Messages
1,214
I wouldn't dismiss the fuji. The low light ability of the xtrans sensor rivals FF in achieving clean high iso shots. As far as raw processing, the xtrans files are just as simple to process now as any other.
 

Nick779

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
154
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
I wouldn't dismiss the fuji. The low light ability of the xtrans sensor rivals FF in achieving clean high iso shots. As far as raw processing, the xtrans files are just as simple to process now as any other.
Maybe im out of the loop, but I thought there wasnt wide support for their RAWs? I agree with the low light stuff though, I was playing around with it on DPR and its very clean for APS-C.

I have Zero experience with non stabilized cameras/lenses though so that might be more frustration than its worth.
 
D

Deleted member 20897

Guest
Maybe im out of the loop, but I thought there wasnt wide support for their RAWs? I agree with the low light stuff though, I was playing around with it on DPR and its very clean for APS-C.

I have Zero experience with non stabilized cameras/lenses though so that might be more frustration than its worth.
Xtrans RAW is widely supported, just some tools are better than others at how well they handle the demosaicing. Lightroom does well with everything except micro contrast and sharpening. Capture One seems to have the sharpening and micro contrast adjustments under control.
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
6,735
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
I do shoot sports and wildlife, but I cant really afford the FF glass I would want/need to be as effective as I am with my EM1.2 + 40-150 Pro + TCs. Im just looking for a more complementary kit that would give an edge to dynamic range, shadow/highlight recovery, and low light/landscape shooting.
Keeping the E-M1ii plus 40-150+TC would make sense as your sports & wildlife camera then, but using the FF camera for low light and landscape etc. Having said that, I think the E-M1ii can do a reasonable job of landscape. Remember too that building a complete FF system will get expensive, big and heavy once you get away from a few primes and standard f4 zooms. You might find this post I did a while ago helpful too:

My latest foray into FF mirrorless - and why I'm sticking with m43
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
5,935
Location
Knoxville, TN
Actually, I think this thread needs to take a step back.

OP, what lenses in mft do you currently own? Might it be possible to upgrade your current kit to help in lower light without reaching all the way to the Pro Primes? (I'm thinking the Sigma 1.4 trio, or even some 1.8 primes.)

Now, if you are just wanting to buy into another system, that's fine. But if you are trying to solve an issue, there may be more options available to you in mft.
 

Nick779

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
154
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Keeping the E-M1ii plus 40-150+TC would make sense as your sports & wildlife camera then, but using the FF camera for low light and landscape etc. Having said that, I think the E-M1ii can do a reasonable job of landscape. Remember too that building a complete FF system will get expensive, big and heavy once you get away from a few primes and standard f4 zooms. You might find this post I did a while ago helpful too:

My latest foray into FF mirrorless - and why I'm sticking with m43
Ill definitely give that thread a read.

Actually, I think this thread needs to take a step back.

OP, what lenses in mft do you currently own? Might it be possible to upgrade your current kit to help in lower light without reaching all the way to the Pro Primes? (I'm thinking the Sigma 1.4 trio, or even some 1.8 primes.)

Now, if you are just wanting to buy into another system, that's fine. But if you are trying to solve an issue, there may be more options available to you in mft.
I currently have the 12-40/40-150 Pro + TC. Ive been looking at the cheaper mFT primes like the Sigma 1.4s and the Oly 1.8s, mainly 16/17mm and perhaps 45 or 75mm.

I initially was going to start building up my primes in mFT but my continued paranoia of the system/mount's future made me hesitant to invest in more mFT glass and pushed me towards something I think wont ever go away. I also partly just want to try FF, which a rental might be a better option.
My current plan was to complement my EM1 with FF mirrorless and stick strictly to an F4 normal zoom and a prime or two. I thought about long lenses, but the Nikkor 200-500F5.6 I was looking at and can afford is some ~5.6Lb.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
5,935
Location
Knoxville, TN
If you want to try out FF, then go for it. Learning and playing with new things can be exciting and inspiring.

That said, if you just want to solve lower light, I would suggest trying out an Oly 17 1.8 or Panny 15 1.7. You might be surprised. You will also save bundles of money and weight.

Even if mft isn't manufactured anymore (FSM forbid), our current cameras and lenses don't stop taking pictures.
 

Nick779

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
154
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
If you want to try out FF, then go for it. Learning and playing with new things can be exciting and inspiring.

That said, if you just want to solve lower light, I would suggest trying out an Oly 17 1.8 or Panny 15 1.7. You might be surprised. You will also save bundles of money and weight.

Even if mft isn't manufactured anymore (FSM forbid), our current cameras and lenses don't stop taking pictures.
True, theres also the used market as well. Come to think of it after looking at the lens roadmap, I doubt anything is getting killed off with all of those plans.
I still might go for the Olympus primes as a cheap solution. It just really sucks that the 17mm Olympus lenses click when in C-AF, I really wanted to use them for video. Perhaps the Sigma is worth a shot in that case, its just bigger.
 

Pluttis

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
802
Location
Sweden
Real Name
Peter
Oly f1.2 pro primes might be more expensive(and bigger) but they have much nice bokeh than the Fuji f2.0 primes.
The Sigma primes are also really good.
 
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