Would you wait for the new A7mkIII or pull the trigger on A7mk2/Fuji X-T2?

Discussion in 'Other Systems' started by mesmerized, Mar 6, 2017.

  1. mesmerized

    mesmerized Mu-43 Veteran

    Jun 18, 2012
    Hi all,

    I'm thinking of getting something to replace my OMD E-M5mk2 and I'd like to seek your advice... I'm considering one of these:

    - Sony A7mk3 (if it's worth the wait)
    - Sony A7mk2 (the prices might go down when mk3 comes out)
    - Fuji X-T2 (those SOOC JPEGS are tempting)

    I mainly go after landscapes and random portraits of people in everyday situations.

    Any insights?

  2. ean10775

    ean10775 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 31, 2011
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Honestly, based on your brief description of what you like to shoot, I'd stay with the EM5 Mark II. Landscapes and candid portraits are two areas where I don't think m43 gives up much to larger sensor systems. If you had said shallow DOF portraits at wider focal lengths or low light people photos I would certainly understand the desire to move to a FF system. What do you find lacking that a FF camera or X-T2 would remedy in your shooting?
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. mesmerized

    mesmerized Mu-43 Veteran

    Jun 18, 2012
    That's exactly what I'm after... I had the 45mm Oly twice in between the years and had to sell them... The 75mm gives me a pretty nice shallow DOF but it's a pretty inconvenient focal length. Besides, I really find the 16Mpix sensor to be simply not enough for heavy cropping... and the price tag on the EM1mk2 is not something I'd splash out on given the size of the sensor...
  4. TheMenWhoDrawSheeps

    TheMenWhoDrawSheeps Mu-43 Veteran

    Jun 15, 2016
    Try mitakon 25mm f0.95 - you'll get your shallow dof.

    Pana 25mm f1.4 or 42.5mm f1.4 dropped in price.
    Oly f1.2 will definetely hold it's value for some time - if you want to try.

    16mp vs 24mp - there are plenty discussions about picture size. In mine difference between those two are rather negligible. Pixel aren't straight line, it's not 30% more size, more Detail - Yeah, bit more cropping, but just a bit.

    For your purposes 5II is just as good
  5. Speedliner

    Speedliner Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Mar 2, 2015
    Southern NJ, USA
    A7r3, but it will be an expensive conversion, or stay with m43.

    Why change
    - shallow DOF
    - excellent face/eye focus for portraits
    - high resolution and DR for landscapes w/o the motion challenge of m43 hi-res
    - if you're going to change, maximize the benefit.

    Or stay
    - m43 lens quality can close a lot of gap with APS-C in particular.
  6. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Legend

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Wait until the A7M3 comes out, and then get an A7M2, and pick up some Canon FD glass (85mm f/1.8 & 135mm f/2.8 for portraits, 20-35 f/3.5 L for landscapes, etc.).

    The Canon FD glass is great on the 24MP Sony sensor, and is pretty cheap. You don't need AF for either of the type of shooting you mention.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Legend

    With the current lens selection, I'd go with Fuji over Sony FF. Sure Sony has a bigger sensor, but the lenses are still just not that attractive. They are either mediocre, huge, overpriced or some combination of the 3.

    I'd much rather have a set of Fuji f1.4/1.2 primes, which give f1.8/2 on FF kind of DOF control.

    Of course if you want video, then Sony wins hands down.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  8. TheMenWhoDrawSheeps

    TheMenWhoDrawSheeps Mu-43 Veteran

    Jun 15, 2016
    why the extra step in getting extra body? put 50mm f1.4 on speed booster, and you get your 75mm f2. put 85mm f1.8, and you´re shooting with 130mm f2.8.
    and of course as i mentioned before many cheap and not so cheap fast manual lenses in f0.95-1.2 from 10mm to 50mm range.
  9. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Legend

    Megapixels are a function of area, but resolution is generally measured linearly. Jumping from 16 to 24MP is an increase of 1.5x, but that means that it increases only 1.22x in each dimension (square root of 1.5).

    That means printing about 20% larger at same DPI, or having 20% less DPI at same print size. How many people can tell the difference between 200 and 240 DPI without a magnifier?
  10. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Legend

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Because the OP said that he found the 16MP of the E-M5 II limiting?

    The 24MP sensor in the A7M2 is a great sensor. Better color depth and dynamic range than the E-M5 II, along with high ISO. Buying a speedbooster isn't going to fix that.

    The OP appears to have his mind set on the A7M2, A7M3, or X-T2. The A7M2 is the best option from a cost:performance standpoint for what he's trying to shoot.
  11. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Legend

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    One also has to consider the different aspect ratios. The OP is in an interesting situation here, as portraiture tends to lend itself well to the 4:3 or 1:1 ratio (better for a native 4:3 sensor), while landscapes are typically done at 3:2 or 16:9 (better for a native 3:2 sensor).

    Of course, this is all pretty useless if the medium is web content. The only area this really matters is when you start getting in to larger prints. We have no clue what the OP is doing with these images, since he didn't mention it in the OP. He also didn't mention why he's dissatisfied with his E-M5 II, except for the fact that he can't get shallow DoF with his E-M5 II (I'd challenge him on that assumption all day long, but it's not worth my time. Also, shallow DoF + landscape = dafuq?), and that he can't crop enough with 16MP (I'd say he's not using the correct lenses at that point, but again, it's not worth my time).

    A post in a m43 forum asking the opinion of 3 cameras, none of which are m43 cameras, without stating where he feels his m43 camera is insufficient is simply an exercise in futility really, but I suppose we should oblige him anyways.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Legend

    If the OP is upgrading for increased resolution, then adapting old lenses is not going to get him there. We shoot 2x crop sensors that use the central 1/4 of the lens circle. So we don't get the ugly edges on a lot of those lenses. Especially old ultrawides. You aren't getting 24+MP of resolution on an old 20-35mm, unless you stop down to f11 every time. Some people say edges don't matter as much for the portrait primes, but I will disagree. If you like to use pleasing compositions, or shoot a vertical full length portrait, the subjects face will be closer to the edges and then softness makes you shy about shooting wide open. There goes your FF advantage when you stop down to f2.8.

    While true, the difference is linear resolution when cropping between 4:3 and 3:2 with the same diagonal is about 3%, so not really changing the equation much.
  13. TheMenWhoDrawSheeps

    TheMenWhoDrawSheeps Mu-43 Veteran

    Jun 15, 2016
    lets agree to disagree. by using speed booster or f0.95 lenses, i´m actualy shooting 2 stops faster than ff - meaning i can use 2 stops lower ISO remaining same shutter speed.

    so in terms of ISO, DR, Color range - in bad light this setup has clear advantage over 7ii.
    for landscapes 5ii has High res which is better than anythinga7ii has to offer.

    seems like the only advantage is resolution for portraits.
  14. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    You know the E-M5 II has the high res mode that's useable for a lot of landscape/urbanscape work. Sony sucks for street shooting because of the ridiculously loud shutter that can wake the dead. I have the A7 II and use it only as an adapted lens rig just so I can have a portable FF solution. Fuji might be a good option, but honestly I just don't find a big difference between 16mp M43 and 24mp APSC. Get a 20mp Pen-F with the 50mp high res mode and call it a day.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Legend

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    I own the 17.5, 25, and 42.5 Noktons, so I'm well aware of shooting those lenses in low-light on an E-M5 II.

    At f/0.95, I have no clue how sharpness would compare against a lens like the Canon FD 50/1.4 on an A7 II body. What I do know is that the Canon FD 50/1.4 I had was sharper wide open at f/1.4 than my Nokton 42.5 was at f/0.95, so for arguments sake, let's say that you can shoot the E-M5 II at 1-stop lower ISO than a comparative FoV set-up on an A7M2 (due to having to stop down from f/0.95 to 1.4). But, the A7M2 has some advantage when it comes to high ISO, roughly 2/3 a stop based on the graph you posted. So in total, the E-M5 II ends up having roughly a 1/3 stop advantage on the A7M2.

    The "problem" you run in to is that for any serious portraiture work that is going to be lit properly, you're going to be shooting at the base ISO, where the A7M2 still has an advantage for color depth, low ISO cleanliness, and dynamic range (though if lit properly, this shouldn't be an issue). The same applies for landscapes, where you're shooting from a tripod at base ISO, so the better DR is an advantage.

    I'm not here to argue about how good or not good an E-M5 II is, and point out that you can get native f/0.95 lenses for it. I own an E-M5 II, I own 3 Nokton f/0.95 lenses, and they're perfectly acceptable to me. The OP came here to ask an opinion of which camera he should move to, because his E-M5 II just isn't doing it for him (mind you, he never told us what areas the E-M5 II has let him down in). So I simply offered my opinion and told him to go with an A7M2 & Canon FD glass. It's an economical way to get a great FF camera for a reasonable price. No sense in trying to convince him to spend extra money on speedboosters and f/0.95 lenses for his m43 gear when he's made up his mind that it's inferior for his needs.
    • Like Like x 2
  16. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    New gear is great in many ways - but I doubt an A7ii will make any significant difference to the resulting images. My advice would be to find a used A7ii and a single lens (35/2.8) and use that as a starting point. If you like what you're seeing then sell the Olympus ands add some more FE lenses; but otherwise just sell on for little financial loss.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. genesimmons

    genesimmons Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 12, 2017
    i am a full frame shooter, as well as the m4/3. i have the original sony a7, i use it like u for landscapes and portraits, i recently picked up a em1.2 and as good as that cam is i won't be selling my a7 any time soon, the dynamic range on the sony is to good, i have lots of great minolta glass and i am very happy with the images from them all, my em1.2 has its place and for 90% of my shooting it does it all,
    i would wait for the a73, i was going to wait as well but the em 1.2 tempted me to much, the a73 should have improved ibis, and other improvements, i would wait for the a73 release
  18. Clint

    Clint Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Apr 22, 2013
    San Diego area, CA
    There's got to me more here. If you want really shallow DoF then you are going to be as close as possible to filling the frame with your subject, and as far away as you can be from the background - but then you not need to do any heavy cropping.

    Get the Sony A7mk2 and Sony FE 85mm f/1.4 GM Lens for about 3K.
    Or the Fuji X-T2 with a Fujifilm XF 56mm f/1.2 R Lens for about 2.5K.
  19. Replytoken

    Replytoken Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 7, 2012
    Puget Sound
    Inconvenient in that it is too short?

    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Legend

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    If I had to guess, I'd say too long. He talks about owning the O45 twice previously, but that it didn't give enough DoF.

    An A7M2 + Canon FD 85mm f/1.8 should cost around $1,250-1,300. It's a very sharp lens, nice and small, and gives the DoF of an f/0.9 lens on m43. Stop it down a stop to f/2.5 and it'll be razor sharp, while giving a nice shallow DoF (equivalent to f/1.2 on m43).

    Sure, he could just go buy a PanaLeica 42.5 f/1.2 for ~$1000, but he seems pretty set on moving away from m43.
  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.