Thinking about going fully with m43 and seling off my Nikon Gear

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by RJNear, Mar 21, 2014.

  1. RJNear

    RJNear Mu-43 Regular Subscribing Member

    Jun 5, 2011
    Upstate NY
    R.J. Near
    OK I have been playing with EP-2 for sometime and a few lenses and like it but felt it would not replace my Nikon D700 and Nikon glass. But I recently purchased OM-D E-m5 with the 12-40m Pro, and now feel if I have something that will compete with the D700 so I am thinking of selling off my Nikon system and then pick up E-m1 and some fast Olympus primes. I am curious to see if anyone has been down this road and do you regret it? I have always loved the Olympus lime of cameras back in the film days owning OM-1, OM-2 and a OM-3 with Olympus glass and I now feel Olympus has hit home run with OM-D and the fact they are now producing Pro glass.

    Should I make the jump?

    Current Nikon system is D700, 24-70mm, 70-300mm, 50mm 1.4, SB-600, SB-900.....

    thinking in Olympus system the E-m5 with 12-40mm 2.8 (already have) E-m1, 17mm 1.8, 25mm 1.8, 45mm 1.8 (have the 45mm) and 75mm 1.8.....

  2. rbelyell

    rbelyell Mu-43 Veteran

    Sep 15, 2013
    Mountains of NY
    i enjoy m4/3, so please dont take this question the wrong way, but have you considered the nikon Df? from what ive seen the IQ is second to none, its lowlight ability is a new standard, and its FF. its very compact for FF and you get to keep your nikon glass. if you sell the d700 and m4/3 gear youre just about there...

    reason being, and please, this is all just my opinion, if the choice is between apsc and m4/3, i take m4/3 in as the IQ is just as good and its much more compact a system. but, as between either of those platforms and FF, again its hands down FF in IQ terms. problem has always been bulk. however, once you consider the biggest m4/3 cams paired with the biggest pro level zooms, youre pretty darn close to the Df + lens bulkwise, but not, imo IQwise. and just to be clear, i am absolutely not knocking m4/3 IQ, just citing the comparative reality ive seen in my FF rx1vs epl5.

    anyway i apologize for slight OT, but i thought it might be worth mentioning since youre already invested in nikon gear.
    • Like Like x 5
  3. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 20, 2011
    Sell the depreciating items ASAP that you won't use like the body, flashes, and lower end lenses. Keep the high end lenses that will not lose much value like the 24-70, should you need to return to Nikon should unforeseen things happen to m4/3 in the next 5 years. That is if you see yourself staying with photography for the next 10+ years. If it's an older 24-70 model I'd move that out too though, or if a newer model gets released as it's value could drop. The m4/3 equipment doesn't really hold value over long periods compared to Canon and Nikon, at best m4/3 values are unproven, at worst the bottom could fall out, currently the system depreciates rapidly if purchasing new, especially bodies and peripherals. The bodies on m4/3 are more than halved in value once you buy them and use them for 6 months based on msrp new prices, and the used market follows.

    If you're not concerned with losing that value accumulated in Nikon and can easily replace that lost value, ditch all the Nikon stuff.

    Personally, I'd ditch it anyway, and save and spend as needed to slow the bleed of depreciation.
  4. stripedrex

    stripedrex Do or do not. There is no try.

    Jun 8, 2012
    Long Island, NY
    I'm currently very committed to m43 and finding myself needing just a bit more iso performance and even with my primes wanting to isolate my portraits. I had a brief stint with an Sony A7R and I have a suspicion I'll be going back once we have a few more lenses. I came from a Nikon APS-C D5000 and in comparison to that sensor m43 is now very close. However there is that ISO advantage that's tangible indoors coming from APS-C. I'll be honest I'm beginning to lose focus on why I loved m43 so much. My lenses and bodies just keep getting bigger and I find myself with more primes than I really need and constantly having to change lenses so I can keep my shallow DOF in various focal lengths. I lose all that convenience benefit m43 is for once I start doing all that. A full frame 24-70 f2.8 would cover 75% of most of my prime usage on m43 and from a bulk perspective I have a feeling Sony will be the first to make it happen. Albeit such a lens might be a bit large but not much more than having to carry 3-4 primes. If I do switch over I'll likely keep m43 with 3 lenses. 20mm, 45mm and maybe a superzoom as my travel camera and have the rest of my budget go to the full frame. And focus on m43's main advantages of size and good performance.

    I apologize as well as my response doesn't directly answer your question =).
    • Like Like x 1
  5. broody

    broody Mu-43 Veteran

    Sep 8, 2013
    This is a very personal issue.

    Ask yourself, how much do you find yourself using the Nikon gear vs. the M43 kit? And, are you liking the results well enough?

    My Nikon kit wasn't terribly impressive, but still it always stayed at home because I couldn't be bothered with the bulk, so I sold it off. With M43, everything changed... Now I can take my camera and a couple lenses literally everywhere with close to no encumbrance. So that worked out great for me. But if you feel you get a ton out of your Nikon kit and feel you're squeezing out all its capabilities, well, why try to fix what's not broken?

    Pick whichever system better fits your needs and use case. Keep in mind that nowadays, M43 can be considered a very serious system for a sophisticated user, but it can't do everything.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. PatrickNSF

    PatrickNSF Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 30, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    I didn't come back to m43 with the intent of getting rid of my dSLR – it was more to supplement it – but I ended up selling my Sony A77 this week. I had already pared that system down to the 16-50/2.8 and the Sigma 50-150/2.8. I found that what I was getting with the Oly 12-40/2.8 and the primes was comparable, if not better, than what I was used to with the Sony. The only thing I'm missing for now is something to replace the 50-150/2.8 (which I haven't sold yet).

    That being said, the A77 is APS-C and not FF, so YMMV.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. HappyFish

    HappyFish Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 8, 2012
    still have both FF but the FF gear only comes out on paid gigs ? and also because certain lens like the 85 on FF now that the 42.5 is out might be able to ditch FF

    for me its not as much about the lens selection as it is AF in low light that the M4/3 is not as good at yet ? a FF camera with a flash mounted and IR assist is fast accurate
    work arounds of course

    now personal use only thing I use is M4/3 these days :)

    still curious where the sony A7 type series will go and think it could be nice setup if they get top notch glass for some things

    do you bring your camera with you all the time or do you sometimes say ahhhhh maybe just this lens or maybe not because it is big and heavy ? if you ever say that dump it ?
    if its OK and you don't need the money keep it around a bit and expand a few lens selections and get a E-M1 the handling is quite a step above the EM5
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Photorebel

    Photorebel Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 14, 2013
    Jeff Mims
    It depends….
    I planned to sell off part of my Canon DSLR gear, which included several L lenses, and just keep a body, with a couple of lenses, flash to use in addition to my M4/3 gear. In the end, I got rid of all the Canon. Can M4/3…compare with FF Canon? Again, it depends. The FF definitely had advantage at higher ISOs (6400 and up..especially…for lower noise, cleaner images) and certainly..larger pixels..on a larger sensor..allows for larger cropping.
    However, suits my needs. It's brought the fun..back into photography, I take it more with me, than the Canon gear. No camera is better than any other, if you don't have it with you .
    Of these two photos…can you tell with was made with Canon FF or OM M4/3? There just wasn't enough difference for me, and I just like the smaller format..which is less cumbersome to carry, and easier to shoot with. Everyone is different. I would suggest shooting similar subjects with both formats, and see what you think.

    1. p494142761-4.jpg
    2. p54169496-4.jpg
  9. SRHEdD

    SRHEdD Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 24, 2011
    Viera, Florida USA
    I sold of my Nikon kit twice. Couldn't live with the E-P3 and E-M5 combo and went to FF Nikon (D600). When the E-P5 hit, I started to re-think, then the E-M1 was introduced and I sold the Nikon gear off. Never looked back. Sometimes the lenses feel small, but many of the parents on my two sons' sports teams have remarked they like the pics better since I switched. They don't KNOW that I switched, but the comments started immediately after. Plus, no more giant files to reduce to email friends and family. RAW when I need it is superb, and the jpgs are already viewer friendly (size, color, and crop). I now have a long list of Olys, each has its own place in my shooting. E-P5 for fun, E-M1 for work, E-P2 for my Gigapan and Nodal Ninja heads, E-P3 just because I have a soft spot for that model and found it cheap. I'd say I enjoy shooting the Olys much more, I'm getting comments on the pics being better (to my viewing public), and only once or twice have I missed that big, full-frame file. One last thing... I REALLY enjoy being able to afford a 600mm (35mm equiv.) lens. The Oly 75-300II has opened up really fun shots I couldn't make before.

    Do it, you only live once.
    • Like Like x 2
  10. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Been there, done that, have the shirt. :wink:

    All my a Canon equipment is on consignment sale. When mine is sold, we will do likewise for the wife's set. Can't wait for the rest of the Pro series of lenses.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. mjgraaf

    mjgraaf Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 9, 2014
    Had a d300/d700. Sold the d300 with all dx glass and a few ff lenses used as (bulky) walk-around zooms. And deep dived into the m4/3 system. Love the compact size. Can take all lenses on any shoot. No more choosing and limiting myself.

    But i could not part with the d700. Too much old glass lying around, too long been my dream camera. Have it still there and sometimes use it in low light situations. Though not that often... But i just can't part with that beauty ......

    Sent from my C6503 using Tapatalk
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Photorebel

    Photorebel Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 14, 2013
    Jeff Mims
    Well said. I sold my most of my Canon stuff, then bought more…and then returned it, and sold the rest. For many of the same reasons you listed..
    I enjoy shooting to OLY more….don't need super large files…I like having the equivalent of very long lenses. (I have a Panny 100-300). I'm not saying everyone should dump FF, but for me, it was definitely the way to go.
  13. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Don't get me wrong - LOVE my µ4/3 kit..:biggrin:


    There's noooo way that I'm going to part with this...:smile:

    Nikon Dƒ With 24mm ƒ2.8 Non-AI by RedTail_Panther, on Flickr

    Nikon Dƒ With Micro Nikkor 55mm ƒ2.8 AI-s by RedTail_Panther, on Flickr

    Nikon Dƒ With Nikkor 105mm ƒ2.5 AI-s by RedTail_Panther, on Flickr

    Nikon Dƒ With Nikkor 85mm ƒ2.0 AI by RedTail_Panther, on Flickr
    • Like Like x 4
  14. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    jump! jump! jump! jump!

  15. RJNear

    RJNear Mu-43 Regular Subscribing Member

    Jun 5, 2011
    Upstate NY
    R.J. Near
    Thanks everyone all good points, since the Nikon gear has only been used a few times over the past year I think I will be letting it go.
  16. DynaSport

    DynaSport Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 5, 2013
    That is how I decided to sell my Canon gear. I looked back over the photos I had taken for the past year and found very few taken with the Canon. But my Canon wasn't FF, it was APS-C. There is still a part of me that would love a FF camera, but I am pretty spoiled now to gear that weighs way less than my old Canon gear did. I could see myself with the Canon 6D and the 24-100 and the 50 1.4, but it probably won't happen. I didn't win the billion dollar tournament challenge, so my camera budget is still a bit small.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. m43happy

    m43happy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 18, 2012
    I had a D700/24-70/50 1.4/85 1.8. When the E-M5 came out and I saw the results the sensor put out I sold it all off and picked up an E-M5/14/25/75. Do I miss having a little bit more shallow DoF? Sometimes, but I've also got a better appreciation for the greater DoF provided on the telephoto end of m4/3. It's a compromise and you have to accept the fact that m4/3 does things not as well as full frame and vice versa. One thing is certain though, I probably carry around my camera with me 30-40% more now since it's in a much smaller package (mainly for candid shooting and stuff). I have since upgraded to the E-M1, and after seeing the results that Olympus and Panasonic are putting out now with their cameras, I don't see myself ever looking back.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  18. wildwildwes

    wildwildwes Mu-43 Veteran

    Jun 9, 2012
    Brooklyn, NY
    FYI - in my humble opinion, there is NOTHING compact about the DF (in fact, I find it rather bulbous to hold and handle), nor is its image quality in general superior to the E-M1 (or for that matter, the E-M5) the exception being "low light" captures... Furthermore, if you really want to keep your Nikon glass, you can purchase an adaptor and keep on using the Nikon lenses with your Oly bodies. Finally, the DF lacks video (which one may or may not care about) but for my needs, being able to capture video from time to time is a precious valuable option. Oh, and did mention that the build quality of the DF feels REALLY cheap (given its price point) -- while both the E-M1 and E-M5 are built like tanks.

    BTW, I've been shooting professionally with Nikon's "pro" bodies since the venerable F2 series (and have owned every "pro" film body up to the F5 at which point I was forced to shoot with digital - starting with the D1...). Currently keep a couple FX digital bodies around as a reminder of how big and heavy they are! For most of my photography needs, both my E-M1 and E-M5 provide me with superior results to my big FF systems... Just my 2 sense!

    Good luck with whatever direction you end up in!:thumbup:
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Joelmusicman

    Joelmusicman Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 1, 2013
    One thing people forget about when talking about the ISO "advantage" of APS-C or even FF is that the OLY E-M5 & E-M1 IBIS is simply phenomenal. Especially against the Sony A7 series (no IS at all) and somewhat advantageous to the CaNikon gear (ILIS). While it's true that FF Sony/Canon/Nikon ISO 6400 is clearly superior to Olympus ISO 6400, with the Olympus you might be able to be in ISO 3200 or less at a silly low shutter speed.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.