Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/02/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]OK lets see I've gone out and spent seven grand usd on a Leica M40 to enable my tens of thousands of dollars of Leica glass but wait! Its a bit heavy!! I'll just have to LEAVE IT AT HOME and carry a camera two formats smaller instead! Nobody can tell the difference right! NOT going to happen. And if nobody can tell the difference why am I so heavily invested in full frame? By the way there is a format between 2x and 1x corp. and Its 1.5 crop and remains the most popular selling of DSLR cameras and certainly gives more bang for the buck than any other format and lits looking like mirrorless soon too. Many of these cameras exist in systems where you can use your full frame glass on them. They are nicely just a bit lighter and smaller. They don't seem like something which came out of a box of Cracker Jacks. And in a studio strobe or otherwise non low light situation especially where you can use the lowest iso' s they really may not tell the difference so much. Like on the beach. At high noon. But to split that in half and go further smaller with the inane 4/3's format calling it comparable to the work of top full frame cameras is really too much. A really great use for a camera half half frame (2x crop) is to put in your jeans pocket like a Minox which it would hopefully be the same size as. Or the same size more realistically of a Rollei 35. Which come to think of it is a full frame camera. In other words a near sub compact format sensor belongs in a near sub compact camera body.. On 2/25/14 9:58 PM, "Jim Laurel (gmail)" <jplaurel at gmail.com> wrote: > My photography interests are pretty varied so I'm maintaining a complete > Leica > M9/M240 digital system, a Canon 5Dmk3 system, and a Micro 4/3 system with > the > Olympus OMD EM-1. We do a lot of diving and my wife insists on a full-frame > system so she uses the 5Dmk3s, but I think she is slowly succumbing to the > siren call of Micro 4/3 because it is getting increasingly difficult to > tell > the difference between our results underwater, not to mention that the many > usability advantages of the EM-1 often make it easier to get the shot at > all. > It's no wonder they are currently outselling DLSRs by 6 to 1 for this > application. I can choose to either use my EM-1 or our 2nd 5DMK3 body > underwater, yet I choose the M4/3 simply because of usability, which is a > huge > asset in that environment. Quality is already good enough with the EM-5 and > even better with the EM-1. Frankly, people are incredulous about the > results > we are getting with M4/3 underwater these days and many are rethinking > whether > the better IQ of full frame is really worth the incredible hassle and > expense > of getting it to some of the more remote diving destinations. > > I'm trying to do more landscapes these days, especially infrared > landscapes. > So when I have the luxury of working out of a car, and weight doesn't > matter, > I have started to use the 5dMK3 system again. In fact, I just added the > 17mm > and 24mm TS-E lenses to our kit for just this purpose. Also, we are > preparing > to do some landscape astrophotography and the Canon is simply the best tool > for the job. > > With the advent of the Leica M240, the M system finally becomes truly > viable > for landscape work. The EVF means I can frame accurately and position > things > like grads properly. The R to M adapter makes it possible to use > telephotos > and focus them accurately. Unfortunately, it doesn't looks like it will > ever > be a suitable tool for landscape astro because none of the M wide angles > (24 > and wider) are well-corrected enough for coma to work well. > > The point of all this is horses for courses. If I'm on a dive trip, I'm > shooting M4/3 both above and below the water. If it's nighttime > landscapes, or > landscapes where I can accommodate the weight and bulk, it's the Canon. If > I > were going on a long trip during which I was doing a lot of walking during > the > day and wanted the finest IQ, I'd go for the M240. If it is a long > through-hike like 800km on the Camino de Santiago, which is a mix of > candids, > landscapes in all sorts of light in in all sorts of weather conditions, I'm > taking an EM-5 or EM-1. And for everything else, general shooting around > home, > I'm usually grabbing the EM-1 just because of all the cameras I have at my > disposal, none are as flexible, easy to use or as fun to use as the OMD > EM-1. > > This argument that people have about full-frame vs APS-C vs M4/3 is > ridiculous > because each of those systems has its place. Of the three, APS-C probably > makes the least sense IMO, because it occupies this nether world in which > the > smaller sensor doesn't bring any corresponding reductions in weight or > bulk - > the worst of both worlds. > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/