DSLR vs Micro Four Thirds - Nikon D5000 v Panny GF1G

[-doomed-]

I'll be honest. In all your critical thinking and railing against consumerism, you seem to exude this weird sense of elitism on how intelligent you are.
You say you sleep well at night, do you? I feel like you sit around dreaming up threads to post here about film vs. digital, this vs. that, and NickTrop vs. RFF. I mean it's great that you love your D5000, perhaps you should ask Nikon if you can replace Ashton Kutcher in the ad campaigns. Surely an everyman spokesperson damning consumerism and driving a car from 1997 with 117k on it will sell the world on buying this one camera over the other options.
Like it or not, you too are a part of the machinery that keeps consumerism growing. You'd fall into the category of an opinion leader.
How much did Nikon cut you in to troll photo forums hawking their product.

 

[Al Patterson]

Al - it's early. Climate change hasn't kicked in yet. 😛

I'm old, so I expect to be long dead when it does, and having no children, explain to me why I should care? 😀

I still want a Micro 4/3 system for my Leica lenses though... 😉

 

[Al Patterson]

I'll be honest. In all your critical thinking and railing against consumerism, you seem to exude this weird sense of elitism on how intelligent you are.
You say you sleep well at night, do you? I feel like you sit around dreaming up threads to post here about film vs. digital, this vs. that, and NickTrop vs. RFF. I mean it's great that you love your D5000, perhaps you should ask Nikon if you can replace Ashton Kutcher in the ad campaigns. Surely an everyman spokesperson damning consumerism and driving a car from 1997 with 117k on it will sell the world on buying this one camera over the other options.
Like it or not, you too are a part of the machinery that keeps consumerism growing. You'd fall into the category of an opinion leader.
How much did Nikon cut you in to troll photo forums hawking their product.

If we relied upon Nick to keep consumerism going, we'd be up the proverbial estuary with no means of locomotion...

 

[-doomed-]

I hope Nikon is paying him at least.

 

[BillBingham2]

The crisis isn't "the coming crisis", we're smack dab in it. Early, middle, late, one can argue. It is current and ongoing, not "coming". Maybe "the continuing crisis" would be a more accurate description........

I think it's a cross between the Crisis De Jour and the dreaded 24hr News Cycle (perhaps deadlier than any natural disaster). CDJ is sadly it's a natural part of capitalism and consumerism. 24hrNC is a bad new mix of instant gratification.

Back On Topic........

The D40/60 is smaller than the D5000. I was shocked to see the Pen was heavier than the D5000, the lack of a pentaprism really does lighten a camera up. The M4/3s format has me interested from playing around some old Cine glass but for main use the design seems like too much of a compromise. Not small enough to fit in a shirt pocket, my old 24/2.8 nikkor becomes a normal lens. While my 180/2.8 kicks some butt as it reaches out like a 360 and really fast on at that, a fast 270 is still pretty good.

For now I'm sticking with my GRD III, though the X100 has me interested.

The review felt a bit light and a bit to editorial with little meat behind the writing. Interesting quick read and great pot to throw a few veggies into as it simmers.

B2 (;->

 

[MikeAUS]

Micro 4/3 future?

Micro 4/3 future?

Micro Four Thirds? Keep'em. No advantage at all over compact DSLRs...
Don't fall for the hype of these cameras..

Speaking purely as a consumer and non-expert, surely the Micro 4/3 system was great at a point in time, but ultimately it will go the way of APS Film. It has less capability than standard size sensor, but allows smaller camera body. Sound familiar? Now that NEX, Samsung, et al are entering the market with smaller bodies but significantly better sensor and low light capabilties + adapter to use Leica etc, + better crop factor, + cheaper why would anyone buy a Micro 4/3 now. Obviously the Micro system has been around longer so has maturity on it's side and you can interchange b/w Oly/Pana as it is standard, but I reckon other systems will challenge it and defeat it? Why pay more for a system that does less? Will Micro 4/3 be here in another 5 years? Caveat being of course there is a major technology jump and somehow the smaller sensor can suddenly do better or equal image quality than it's bigger brothers!

 

[rdeleskie]

You carry a bag? I just carry the D5000 on a wrist-strap. I keep a plastic baggy in my back pocket in case of rain.

I sometimes have to use my hands for things other than taking pictures. Anyway, the D5000 is significantly larger than the EPL1 with the kit zoom or one of the pancakes. Enough so that I rejected it when it came time to select a digital camera. If it works for you, great.

 

[DNG]

Speaking purely as a consumer and non-expert, surely the Micro 4/3 system was great at a point in time, but ultimately it will go the way of APS Film. It has less capability than standard size sensor, but allows smaller camera body. Sound familiar? Now that NEX, Samsung, et al are entering the market with smaller bodies but significantly better sensor and low light capabilties + adapter to use Leica etc, + better crop factor, + cheaper why would anyone buy a Micro 4/3 now. Obviously the Micro system has been around longer so has maturity on it's side and you can interchange b/w Oly/Pana as it is standard, but I reckon other systems will challenge it and defeat it? Why pay more for a system that does less? Will Micro 4/3 be here in another 5 years? Caveat being of course there is a major technology jump and somehow the smaller sensor can suddenly do better or equal image quality than it's bigger brothers!

Edit >>> in Pink
Well, the new Panasonic GH2 with a 18mp sensor, blows away most, if not all entry level APS-C DSLRs already. And NOT just at ISO 800 or under!....
My next m4/3....😉
I see you shoot film too... Me too...I have more film cameras than digital

 

[Spyro]

mirrorless/evil cameras are the way of the furure, but no way the present, not yet. IMHO of course 🙂

They are ok for some types of shooting like landscape, stills and video but not ok for many others because:
1) they have no viewfinder. Instead they have an expensive little TV at the end of a tunnel that you buy separately and it completely destroys the only advantage of this camera: size and form factor. And you cant use flash with it.
2) with the dedicated lenses they have no distance scale anywhere. Distance scales serve a purpose, they are not decorative. Read up on hyperfocal and zone focusing.
3) With the legacy or RF lenses they completely overshoot THE most popular lens combination: 35mm f2. Not to mention 35mm f1.4.
4) Even though most of them are 1/4 the size of a FF sensor, their shutters are noisy. Sorry guys, quality shutters cost money.

Other than that they are a great concept and have awesome potential. I believe one day they will fully replace DSLRs completely but they have to overcome at least 2 of these 4 issues.

 

[rdeleskie]

Now that NEX, Samsung, et al are entering the market with smaller bodies but significantly better sensor and low light capabilties + adapter to use Leica etc, + better crop factor, + cheaper why would anyone buy a Micro 4/3 now.

Thom Hogan came to a different conclusion and sees the Sony approach as a dead end. Anyway, there are plenty of reasons to choose a M4/3 over a NEX or Samsung right now, native lens selection being the main one. Sony and Samsung still have to deliver more complete ranges of small-sized, high quality lenses to make their platforms attractive, IMO. The EPL1 is also cheaper than anyone else's offering, at least in Canada.

Ultimately, none of this matters. Buy the camera that suits your shooting style and budget. All that matters are the pictures.

 

[gavinlg]

Speaking purely as a consumer and non-expert, surely the Micro 4/3 system was great at a point in time, but ultimately it will go the way of APS Film. It has less capability than standard size sensor, but allows smaller camera body. Sound familiar? Now that NEX, Samsung, et al are entering the market with smaller bodies but significantly better sensor and low light capabilties + adapter to use Leica etc, + better crop factor, + cheaper why would anyone buy a Micro 4/3 now. Obviously the Micro system has been around longer so has maturity on it's side and you can interchange b/w Oly/Pana as it is standard, but I reckon other systems will challenge it and defeat it? Why pay more for a system that does less? Will Micro 4/3 be here in another 5 years? Caveat being of course there is a major technology jump and somehow the smaller sensor can suddenly do better or equal image quality than it's bigger brothers!

Current m4/3 sensors are about the same in IQ as most aps-c sensors. The new sony one in the k5/d7000 is a step ahead again, but very very new. The GH2 18mp m4/3 sensor is better than all other aps-c but that one.

Don't compare m4/3 with APS, compare it with half frame cameras like the original PEN - one of the most famous and beloved cameras the company has ever made.

 

[pvdhaar]

My beef with this GF1 versus D5000 review is that it only compares against the strong points of the D5000. The round-up finally only scores features, IQ, and value for money.

The problem with investigating small differences in image quality is that it overlooks the most important aspects of photography; good subject matter, good lighting and good composition, and of course the adage 'f8 and be there'.

No points are given for fitting inside a coat pocket. No points are awarded for being un-intimidating. No points are given for cuteness..

For those who think these are too 'fluffy' concepts, then on the technical side, also no points are awarded for system consistency.. The noted depth of the system is deceptive. The D5000 only has full functionality with AFS lenses, any other type (AI/AIS/AF/AFD/G) means dropping features like AF and/or metering.

I think m4/3 is here to stay and evolve..

 

[Ronald M]

My D40 does a great job for a small camera. With Nik Define 2 noise reduction, even ISO 800 look really good. The 18/135 lens that I was forced to buy with it does ok for what I use it for. The package was <$500 new. Newer cameras at small size like D3100 are way better. Generally I prefer my Nikon D3 or D700 or I will put film in a Leica. Ya, they still work. Not sold on digi Leicas yet, M or otherwise.

I don`t want a add on viewfinder or to hold a camera at arms length. STUPID CONCEPT to say the least. Putting a Leica lens on it which doubles the effective focal does not make up for the downside.

Rollei 35 if you want to go light and small.

 

[Range Loser]

Nice thread Nick, an interesting bit of midnight reading last night. It's good to see something else occasionally which sparks a bit of debate, when you're tired of 'show us your Leica' postings.

Merry Christmas all...

 

[NickTrop]

I'll be honest. In all your critical thinking and railing against consumerism, you seem to exude this weird sense of elitism on how intelligent you are.
You say you sleep well at night, do you? I feel like you sit around dreaming up threads to post here about film vs. digital, this vs. that, and NickTrop vs. RFF. I mean it's great that you love your D5000, perhaps you should ask Nikon if you can replace Ashton Kutcher in the ad campaigns. Surely an everyman spokesperson damning consumerism and driving a car from 1997 with 117k on it will sell the world on buying this one camera over the other options.
Like it or not, you too are a part of the machinery that keeps consumerism growing. You'd fall into the category of an opinion leader.
How much did Nikon cut you in to troll photo forums hawking their product.

I do exude a weird sense of elitism on how intelligent I am! - by design! Why, if I had a nickle for everytime I've been told exactly that, I'd buy me an M9. Oh - wait, wait, I can't - that whole anti-consumerism thing 🙁. (snap) lost myself for a second there.

As for the rest of your comments, I qoute the immortal Joel Hodgson. "It's only a RFF thread, maybe you should just relax..."

 

[Gid]

A most enjoyable thread. As usual Nick eventually gets someone to rise to the bait. I'm in the who cares what you use camp and have stopped worrying too much about gear - I can take poor photographs with both film and digital.

As to consumerism, the bulk of the world's economies are predicated on its continuance. It keeps people in jobs who are in turn able to consume more. If we all stop consuming, beyond life's necessities, then a lot of people are going to find themselves out of a job which in turn will put further pressure on consumption - more job losses will follow and so on in the downward spiral. There could be winners - those with the skills to repair, refurbish - a whole new industry might spring up making spare parts. We'd then be consuming spares and maintenance services instead - not everyone has the skill or ability to fix stuff. I don't particularly like rabid consumerism, but I don't know how we get from where we are now to somewhere better. I think the Luddites had the right idea.

Merry Xmas to you all.

 

[igi]

Nice thread Nick, an interesting bit of midnight reading last night. It's good to see something else occasionally which sparks a bit of debate, when you're tired of 'show us your Leica' postings.

Merry Christmas all...

His posts are comparable to Madonna's antics 😱

 

[Keith]

Personally I wouldn't touch micro four thirds with a very long pole ... I see it as a pointless exercise ... ability to use legacy lenses included. I'd buy a second hand RD-1 first.

Nick ... you are a legend! 😀

 

[Stuart John]

I drive a 1993 car with 247,000 km on the clock. It just pass the MOT a couple of months ago and if it passes next year I will drive it for another year. As I drive about 10,000km per year I hope to get at least another 50,000km out of it. I have an old D1h, still works great along with my F801.

I doubt I would but a micro 4/3s now. I just don't want to buy a viewfinder seeing as all my other camera came fitted with one as standard.

 

[MRohlfing]

I doubt I would but a micro 4/3s now. I just don't want to buy a viewfinder seeing as all my other camera came fitted with one as standard.

Then why not buy a Lumix G1? Viewfinder is included.

Anyway, I'd rather compare the G1 to the D5000, as they are both more or less 'SLR-like', both discontinued (and because I use both, D5000 at work, G1 at home).

I don't have to support my growing family with this, so I don't do any tests. Both cameras really can rock well. To me the quality of the pics looks very similar, at least in low ISO. High ISO is a little bit different, I like the G1 up to 1600 and the D5000 up to 3200.

D5000: A bit larger, better grip, I can hold it more securely
G1: Smaller, I might accidently press a button

D5000: Viewfinder is small and dark, difficult to focus manual lenses
G1: Much larger and brighter viewfinder, focusing of manual lenses is easy, magnification can be switched on if necessary. Brightness is self-adjusting when I change the aperture for stop-down metering. Preview of the picture when using the +/- or WB-control. The viewfinder becomes difficult to use in very bad light, as the frame rate becomes low

D5000: When the picture is taken it takes 2 or 3 seconds to appear on the screen. I have to take the camera from the eye to see the screen
G1: The picture appears immediately in the viewfinder (can be switched off to have continuous viewing), until I touch the shutter release or for the set number of seconds. No need to take the eye away from the finder

The focusing speed with the kit lenses seems to be about equal and is quite OK. Both cameras I would not use for fast sports.
D5000: AF becomes dead slow when using live view
G1: As the viewfinder uses video, it is always live view, AF is fast anyway

D5000: No metering at all with manual lenses. It takes my old Nikkor AI glass
G1: Metering in A and M mode with manual lenses, takes my old AI and Leica glass

And now the poll!
Which camera should I go to bed with (please check only one):
( ) D5000
( ) G1