Can a micro4/3 camera be a DLSR replacement?

[andreios]

Personally I´d not consider these options to be mutually exclusive. I´d have both. I take my DSLR along when I know action shots (that includes kids outdoors) are the order of the day. I use my R-D1 for more sedate situations.

Is there much of a shutter lag while shooting the G1 or similar m4/3 camera in manual focus mode?
And how about RF and SLR users coping with the lack of VF? (if speaking about E-P1 e.g.)

 

[Santtu Määttänen]

Is there much of a shutter lag while shooting the G1 or similar m4/3 camera in manual focus mode?

At least on E-P2 with new firmware there's very very little shutter lag. With firmware 1.0 there was about 1sec shutter lag but with newer firmware it feels much quicker, not sure how quick thou.

 

[dws21uk]

That shot's damn gorgeous -- I'd be more than happy with that coming out of ANY camera!

/blush Vince, thanks for your kind words, I'm glad you like it.

 

[user237428934]

And how about RF and SLR users coping with the lack of VF? (if speaking about E-P1 e.g.)

If you get used to it and don't think about it that it might look different (or stupid), using live view is not a bad thing. It has a real disadvantage to hold the camera steady. If you press the camera to your forehead longer times are possible then holding the camera at arms length.
With the G1 I only used the back monitor when mounted on a tripod. For the rest I used the viewfinder.

 

[nathanp]

Is there much of an issue with dynamic range compared to a DSLR? I've only looked on my work laptop so far but some of the pics in this thread look like they have blown highlights.

I took my Hexar and 300D out for a quick walk on the weekend and again much preferred the handling of the Hexar.

 

[andreios]

I`ve been handling my dslr today again and came to decision that for time being I want something small. It`s not probable I`ll be doing some photo-job in upocming years so according to the motto that the best camera is that you have with you I`ll prefer size over other aspects and go for a m4/3 (or perhaps even for a ricoh GRD).

 

[gavinlg]

Is there much of an issue with dynamic range compared to a DSLR? I've only looked on my work laptop so far but some of the pics in this thread look like they have blown highlights.

Yeah the highlights are easier to blow on m4/3 sensors. They're not bad but not quite as good as the best apsc from nikon and canon. Interestingly out of camera jpegs from the olympus pen series actually have a higher dynamic range than out of camera jpegs from nearly all the dslrs out there - even some of the full frame ones. They squeeze a lot out of their jpegs in comparison to other manufacturers. But blow some highlights, even in raw, and it's difficult to get them back, where as my 5d will pull back good info out of even severely blown highlights.

 

[jsrockit]

But blow some highlights, even in raw, and it's difficult to get them back, where as my 5d will pull back good info out of even severely blown highlights.

Completely true... it's why I sold the Olympus E-P1.

 

[dws21uk]

I had problems at the start with blown highlights, mainly because I don't like using auto ISO and had set it to 100 ISO which wasn't a good idea as I later read that the sensor is best at 200 ISO. It's been a lot better since then.

 

[campbellcj]

I just got my E-P2 last week, but already I have a strong feeling that my "workhorse" D200 will get a lot less use from here on out. I have several film and digital bodies, andy they will all continue to be used, but the E-P2 form factor and quality seem really compelling as a "goes everywhere" camera for daily use and travel.

 

[andreios]

Thank you for all your answers..I still don't know which way to go, but at least I've sorted out my priorities and decided to wait w/ dlsr purchase until I'll be able to get a fullframe.
I have to admit, that I begin to be more and more interested in Sigma DPs and Ricohs (although their sensor isn't that big), but we shall see.. Perhaps I really should wait for the new Sony things... However, I'd much rather invest my money in a Hasselblad system than in weird adapters and lenses which functionality isn't always guaranteed as I understand from reading some threads here and elsewhere. If I buy an micro4/3 body the only lens I can see myself using it w/ is one or the other pancake. So perhaps thinking about a fixed lens compact as the Sigma or Ricoh GRD isn't completely pointless. I know that this is now far from my original post, but thanks to your help lads I've now clearer mind in these matters.

 

[andreios]

Just to add a finish line to this thread - I`ve handled the E-P1 and G1 and some P`n`S cameras (the best feeling in my hand was w/ the G11) and finally ended up with...
...EOS 20D and an elderly Zeiss Distagon 28mm/2.8 for basic digital setup. (I realized that nothing else apart from a digital RF would make me happy to work with.)
More shooting w/ this combo will take place next week after my final exams at the university, so I`ll share some thoughts then in a proper section of the forum.
Anyway, I`d like to thank all you for your comments and suggestions once more.

 

[Vince Lupo]

I'd like to shoot a job with my new E-P2 -- my day-to-day camera is a D700, but I think the E-P2 would be just fine for magazine assignments. We'll see!

Well I'm actually shooting a job with my E-P2 (magazine assignment), and so far, so good. We'll see what the editors say!

 

[shadowfox]

To those who have problems with blown highlights with E-P1/2, maybe y'all need to learn how not to get so much blown highlights.

I live in Texas, can't get more harsh light than here, trust me. Histogram and ND filters are my friends when I do digital.

 

[januaryman]

To those who have problems with blown highlights with E-P1/2, maybe y'all need to learn how not to get so much blown highlights.

I have learned - to not get highlights blown to hell, I just pull out my rangefinder. Never a problem.

Trading highlights for shadow details seems a cheap solution and not one I'm liking much. That said, my digital cameras let me pull many good photos out of thin air. I like them for what they can do, and curse them for what they can't. :dance:

 

[campbellcj]

What I found on my recent Hawaii trip was pretty much as expected. I definitely would have been fine bringing less gear than I did. I went relatively "light" (LOL) but still brought my D200 w/ 3 lenses and E-P2 with 4 lenses, some misc. filters, chargers and whatnot, and a tripod.

I did some landscape shots with both cameras and really the only plus of the conventional DSLR for that -- other than the high-end Nikon glass that I did not bring this time -- is that I have a 77mm filter holder that supports conventional ND and ND grad filters. I suppose I could get one for smaller filter ring sizes if desired though.

The main shortcoming of the E-P2 in my opinion was (a) the AF speed for kid/action shots and (b) I have not yet gotten adept at AF focus point selection but have my doubts that would ever be as straightforward as on a full DSLR. I have had some trouble getting the AF to focus on the item I actually want, as opposed to other random stuff in the scene.

All-in-all the E-P2 (or my R3A) will be coming with me on all trips from now on and the big Nikons only when it is a serious photographic trip for wildlife, auto racing or so forth. OR, if I need extreme low-light sensitivity or elaborate flash capabilities when only the big guns will do, but that is a small subset of circumstances in my range of shooting.

 

[ampguy]

Can Geico save you a lot of money on insurance??

 

[sfaust]

I don't get this fascination with this race to make the smallest interchangeable camera. Reminds me of the megapixel race. If it's small enough not to be a nuisance to carry so that you actually use it, as the smaller DSLRs are and the EVILs are, why would you want to sacrifice IQ - at all? - this is especially true of low light capabilities. All of these cameras are too large to put in a pocket.

IMO, it's all about compromise. Why would anyone want to use a P&S when a crop DSLR is so much better. Why would anyone want to shoot a crop camera when they can go full frame. Why would anyone want to shoot FF 35mm when medium format offers so much more IQ. Why would anyone want to shoot MF when ……

Its not so much a race to build the smallest interchangeable camera as it is to provide the highest image quality is a small form factor for everyday use. Ideally, I'd love to have the image quality I get from my 1DsMkIII and L glass put in my iPhone camera, but that's unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future

Instead I need to pick the best compromise between image quality and form factor that suits my use. It was the G series from Canon that I used for daily carry and those photography opportunities that were unplanned yet warranted better image quality than my iPhone camera could provide.

With the m4/3, that bar has been raised with regard to high ISO performance, DOF control, overall image quality, as well as the option to use interchangeable lenses, legacy glass, optical or electronic viewfinders, etc. The m4/3 is head and shoulders above almost all P&S cameras, and still small enough to carry in a briefcase, small waist pack, jacket pocket (with pancake lens), or just carry on a wrist strap. Perfect for when photography is on the sideline to everyday life, but the photographer wants something of substance available for the opportunities that undoubtedly arise.

I can fit the E-P1, and 35mm equivalents of 40mm 1.7, 150mm 2.5, 28-84mm 3.5/5.6, three batteries, a 40mm viewfinder, and three memory cards in a waist pouch that can't even hold my 1DsMkIII body, let alone even the smaller DSLRs (see packed waist pack below!). Thats a lot of firepower in such a small package. I've foregone image making in the past when the only option was to carry a DSLR and lens on my shoulder all day, but I'd easily go all day long with the m4/3 full kit described above in a small bag on my waist. I feel so en'LIGHTENED' (bad pun I know )

While I'd rather not give up IQ at all, I'm also not going to carry around my DSLR outfit just in case those photo opportunities arise. So I either accept a hit on quality with a P&S, carry around my huge shoulder bag, or forgo the images altogether. The m4/3 is just a small bump up in size over a P&S, but a huge leap in image quality over the everyday P&S.

A compromise long overdue! And I'll gladly keep moving up as the IQ increases and the form factor reduces. If they can fit it on a chip and drop it in my iPhone, so much the better!

Count me in!!!

 

[gavinlg]

I have learned - to not get highlights blown to hell, I just pull out my rangefinder. Never a problem.

Trading highlights for shadow details seems a cheap solution and not one I'm liking much. That said, my digital cameras let me pull many good photos out of thin air. I like them for what they can do, and curse them for what they can't. :dance:

-0.7 exposure compensation is your friend. Just set it there and leave it there, unless the light isn't contrasty, in which case you bring it back to -0.3.

Expose for the highlights, not for the shadows. They'll take care of themselves.

 

[gavinlg]

I have not yet gotten adept at AF focus point selection but have my doubts that would ever be as straightforward as on a full DSLR. I have had some trouble getting the AF to focus on the item I actually want, as opposed to other random stuff in the scene.

Set and leave the camera set to single AF point in the middle, and focus/recompose. This is pretty much what I do with all cameras including DSLRs.