Gah that time again, help me choose

[aureliaaurita]

It happens every time:I come back here to borrow your brains after reading a million differing reviews and confusing myself beyond all imagining, then disappear again. For that I apologise but I'm going to do it anyway.

I want something I can chuck in a bag and use every day. I rarely have my camera with me and then 'binge' when I do. This must be annoying for anyone I am with, just as it is for me when I look at the 400 snaps I've taken in one afternoon. It's as if I'm yo-yo dieting.

I also do not want to / cannot spend a fortune.

I currently own an OMD E-M5, the first one. It's a great camera but...

- I received three bundled lenses at the time of purchasing, so I didn't really choose them. I went in for an LX100, mind completely set, and was somehow flummoxed into it : Oly 40-150mm, oly 45mm fixed and an oly 14-42mm kit....I only ever use the 45mm. We do not want a repeat of this flummoxing.

- After being asked a gazillion times and flatly refusing to 'do the photos' I've finally stopped being a coward and agreed, in the company of a proper photographer, to assist at a friend's wedding. So I sort of have to hang on to the OMD for the next few months. Largely because I think people won't accept that anything smaller is a 'real camera' (I know, I know.)

- I believe I get on better with a fixed lens of any variety, once I get used to it. This much I feel I have established but not much else.

- I looked at the X100T but I think it's a touch too pricey for me.

- I've considered buying the 20mm panasonic 1.7 ii pancake lens for the OMD but am not completely convinced that this will make the OMD portable enough and am worried about speed?

- I once owned a GRD, the first. It was the thing that turned me on to photography. I foolishly purchased the IV rather than hold out for the GR, sold it. Will the GR give me that feeling back I wonder? How is it in low light...honestly?

- I don't really understand the improvements that have been made to the GR ii - is it just wifi? really? And where have all the GRs gone?

So, in summary, choices are

- Stick a pancake lens on the OMD, namely the panny 20mm ii. Will it be small enough / fast enough?

- Buy the new GR or GR ii, and find a cheaper solution to the viewfinder....does such a thing exist?

- X100S or x100 even, new territory but more affordable.

- Has to be a relatively cheap solution and I'd rather buy from a shop, refurbished, rather than an individual second hand.

:bang:

I'm just a snapper, but haven't tried anything with a zoom lens that I've really liked. It's as if it gives me too many options and I usually pick the wrong one.

I enjoy the omd with the 45mm, it's an odd one but I've grown to get on rather well with it. I would like to get back to something closer to 35mm though as 90mm or whatever it works out as can be, well, tricky, particularly when it's the only lens I really use.

Apologies for the rambling post but all thoughts appreciated.

 

[Merlijn53]

Sorry, you can't be helped. Too chaotic.
🙂
Wish you all the best.
Frank

 

[AlexBG]

I have a sony rx100 mk1 that i adore and I hate zooms. Plus for £150 it is a bargain and the only feature that I have wanted in it was time lapse when it was my one and only camera. If you can manage without a viewfinder then they are great.

If you can afford it I would jump on the x100. Yes it is a few years old and there are better cameras but then there is always a better camera.

 

[aureliaaurita]

r

r

Sorry, you can't be helped. Too chaotic.
🙂
Wish you all the best.
Frank

harsh, but fair 😉

 

[aureliaaurita]

I have a sony rx100 mk1 that i adore and I hate zooms. Plus for £150 it is a bargain and the only feature that I have wanted in it was time lapse when it was my one and only camera. If you can manage without a viewfinder then they are great.

If you can afford it I would jump on the x100. Yes it is a few years old and there are better cameras but then there is always a better camera.

I'm watching one that's still at £200....

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

You want a cheapo solution?

Here's one; stick the 14-42mm lens on the Olympus and read the manual. Then try it out and you might just learn to love it and appreciate it...

The Olympus 45mm is the equivalent to a 90mm lens, if I remember and fast at a little under f/2 and so is the Panasonic but at 20mm is much wider than the 45mm.

But the point ought to be made that the 14-42 is a very usable lens. It seems to me you'd be daft as a brush to abandon it.

Regards, David

PS If you do decide to throw away everything and go for another camera then please let me know when you bin it...

 

[jsrockit]

Use what you have until you can get a X100T. That is the best decision for you.

 

[aureliaaurita]

Hi,

You want a cheapo solution?

Here's one; stick the 14-42mm lens on the Olympus and read the manual. Then try it out and you might just learn to love it and appreciate it...

The Olympus 45mm is the equivalent to a 90mm lens, if I remember and fast at a little under f/2 and so is the Panasonic but at 20mm is much wider than the 45mm.

But the point ought to be made that the 14-42 is a very usable lens. It seems to me you'd be daft as a brush to abandon it.

Regards, David

PS If you do decide to throw away everything and go for another camera then please let me know when you bin it...

Shall do 😉 but it makes the camera just that touch larger than I'm accustomed to.

I'll give it a go. The only lens of the three I don't get on with at all is the 40-150mm. I've again probably not given it enough thought. I just can't get used to changing as I go, hence sticking with the 45mm (90) which, once you're accustomed to it, works very well for me. Hence the other has seen so little use.

I've used GRs up to now, with the old sensor, so used to wide angle, interspersed with a pen that I gave to a friend before buying the OMD.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Let us know how you get on. the 14 to 42 is a very usable range for a zoom, roughly 28 to 85mm in 35mm film terms and so good to perfect for faces and places (that was Ilford's old sales pitch, btw).

The 40 to 150 is probably a bit too long for use except on a tripod, holding it still without a tripod is difficult but possible at air shows. It's not my first choice unless trying to get a decent shot of the deer in the woods etc.

Regards, David

 

[grouchos_tash]

My wife had a Oly Pen that never got used so I decided to have a play. I bought a 20mm, used it for an hour, realised that I could focus faster manually and sold them both.

The X100 is just as frustrating; sold it.

I'm happy with the X-T10, the focus is finally fast/accurate enough to be worthwhile 🙂

 

[Archiver]

I want something I can chuck in a bag and use every day. I rarely have my camera with me and then 'binge' when I do.

- After being asked a gazillion times and flatly refusing to 'do the photos' I've finally stopped being a coward and agreed, in the company of a proper photographer, to assist at a friend's wedding. So I sort of have to hang on to the OMD for the next few months. Largely because I think people won't accept that anything smaller is a 'real camera' (I know, I know.)

- I've considered buying the 20mm panasonic 1.7 ii pancake lens for the OMD but am not completely convinced that this will make the OMD portable enough and am worried about speed?

- I once owned a GRD, the first. It was the thing that turned me on to photography. I foolishly purchased the IV rather than hold out for the GR, sold it. Will the GR give me that feeling back I wonder? How is it in low light...honestly?

- I don't really understand the improvements that have been made to the GR ii - is it just wifi? really? And where have all the GRs gone?

I have the E-M5, the X100 classic, the GRD III and GR. No LX100, so I can't comment about that, haha.

The E-M5 plus the 20/1.7 will be small, but not pocket-small. Only the GR is pocket-small, and I have the GR in my pocket most of the time. It is the ideal 'stash and forget' camera if you want something that produces very high quality images with a small footprint.

The main difference between the GR and GR II is that the GR II has wifi. That's about it. There is little difference in processing, speed, or anything else. The lenses and processors are the same. As for low light, I am confident with shooting the GR in city conditions at night, with streetlights, shop fronts and traffic for illumination. Depends on what you mean by 'low light'.

The 20/1.7 will, however, make your E-M5 very good in low light. I use the 45/1.8 and I love it, too. By the way, the E-M5 with the 45/1.8 is a great wedding camera, particularly for portrait style shooting. For events, I prefer to use a 50mm or 75-90mm, as this suits my desire to be able to pick out people in images.

The X100 is larger than the E-M5, so if you want something you can just throw in a bag, be aware of that. It's lighter, and not weatherresistant, either. The 35mm focal length is a matter of preference; for me, it's not wide enough to capture a room, and not long enough to pick out a person's face the way I prefer. Having said that, check out Brian Kraft's Hawaii holiday and wedding images, taken with the X100 and X100s:

http://blog.briankraft.com/personal/fuji-x100-destination-maui-hawaii/

http://blog.briankraft.com/fuji-x100s-wedding-photography-colorado/

Note that these kinds of images are possible when you have a good sense of how a focal length performs, and are willing to work the dickens out of the limitations of a single focal length.

When you look at his wedding images, think about how close you would need to be to the subjects to create them with medium wide lens. When you see the images taken with very close foreground objects and midrange subjects, think how close the subjects must be. 35mm is hugely different from 90mm (45/1.8) and it will demand a very different approach to shooting. But you would already know that from your Ricoh GRD, so it's a matter of recalibrating yourself if you go for a wider angle camera.

Hope this gives you some ideas.

 

[Larry H-L]

On your EM-5, an Oly 17mm f1.8 might focus a bit faster than the Panny 20mm, but the 17 is a little larger. A 17mm & 45mm would make a nice wedding combo set IMHO.

 

[aureliaaurita]

Incredibly helpful Larry thank you, so helpful in fact I think I've come to a decision, and those wedding photos are beautiful food for thought.

I've sold the zoom that I never use(the 40-150mm) and got a decent £50 for it.

Have a refurbed GR on order, and will purchase the Olympus 17 or the Panasonic 20/1.7 a month or so before the wedding so that we can make friends - I think with that, the 45mm (90) lens I already have and the Ricoh in my back pocket I'll feel pretty set for the day.

Thank you everyone, especially Larry who helped seal the deal. Great help as ever.

 

[Archiver]

I've sold the zoom that I never use(the 40-150mm) and got a decent £50 for it.

Have a refurbed GR on order, and will purchase the Olympus 17 or the Panasonic 20/1.7 a month or so before the wedding so that we can make friends - I think with that, the 45mm (90) lens I already have and the Ricoh in my back pocket I'll feel pretty set for the day.

I think that's a perfect solution for you. The GR in the back pocket will handle wide angle shots, and the 17/1.8 and 45/1.8 can easily handle everything else. You've got the classic three lens setup of 28, 35 and 90 with that combination.

 

[aureliaaurita]

I think that's a perfect solution for you. The GR in the back pocket will handle wide angle shots, and the 17/1.8 and 45/1.8 can easily handle everything else. You've got the classic three lens setup of 28, 35 and 90 with that combination.

that's a classic combo? I didn't know but feel awfully clever.