Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras
Thread started 23 Feb 2012 (Thursday) 19:59
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

DSLR to Micro 4/3. Anybody made the switch and been happy?

 
Yohan ­ Pamudji
Goldmember
Yohan Pamudji's Avatar
2,994 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Mississippi
May 23, 2012 14:24 |  #466

arentol wrote in post #14474285external link
You need to have another look at the 20/1.7 as it is just about the most perfect lens possible on M/43rds....

Slow AF is its only downside for me.

Focal length = 10/10, It is 1mm short of being a true Normal lens, and once you crop a teeny bit to correct not being properly leveled or such your shots usually end up being actual "normal" shots. Normal lenses are something not typically made for DSLRs so most people use the next widest lens available, 35mm, instead. Fortunately the 35mm lenses we get are fantastic and a fairly small amount of cropping will get you ~Normal results, but a true normal is still way more "natural" if you ever get a chance to use one. (Voightlander 40mm on FF or a 28mm on Crop is as close as you can get right now for primes). Trust me, if you try out this lens you will quickly be in love with the angle of view you get and will be entirely unconcerned with it being a bit narrower than a 17-18mm lens.

Gotta disagree. If a 17-18mm f/1.7 with the same size and quality were available I would own it instead. I prefer the 35mm angle of view, so cropping the 20mm (40mm equivalent) gets me further from ideal instead of closer. The 20mm is a fantastic lens, but for those who prefer a wider angle of view it's a stopgap measure until hopefully Olympus get around to updating the 17mm f/2.8 or making a larger aperture version with better image quality as well.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
arentol
Goldmember
1,305 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Seattle WA
May 23, 2012 15:32 |  #467

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #14474541external link
Slow AF is its only downside for me.

Gotta disagree. If a 17-18mm f/1.7 with the same size and quality were available I would own it instead. I prefer the 35mm angle of view, so cropping the 20mm (40mm equivalent) gets me further from ideal instead of closer. The 20mm is a fantastic lens, but for those who prefer a wider angle of view it's a stopgap measure until hopefully Olympus get around to updating the 17mm f/2.8 or making a larger aperture version with better image quality as well.

Let me put my point another way, as I think I came off a little strong before....

Basis (arguably all factual):

1.) There is a reason why the term "Normal lens" exists, and it is a psychological reason. For many people a photo shot at or around "normal" for the given format and then viewed at typical viewing distance just feels more "natural". It is a subtle effect, much like the rule of thirds or the golden mean often is, and like those rules it is also meant to be broken. But also like those rules it does work, and works well, to make photos just seem to be "right".

2.) 50mm lenses are called "normal" on 35mm, but they are not. Normal is defined as the focal length equivalent to the diagonal size of the sensor, or about 43mm in the case of 35mm. Shooting slightly wider than this works better than shooting slightly narrower, as you can crop, but not anti-crop, so 40mm on 35mm or 20mm on MFT is a good choice for getting "normal" results from a camera.

3.) Long ago, despite all other formats making and using "normal" lenses that were actually very very close to true normal, 35mm format lens manufacturers decided to go ahead and call 50mm "normal" and make tons of 50mm lenses and almost no 40-45mm lenses. The reason for this was likely that a 50mm is 1x magnification and (relatively) simple to make, as well as it being vaguely close to "normal". Once this became the standard there was little point to making a true normal lens because it was too close to the 50mm lenses everyone already had. So the next logical step down in prime lenses was 35mm. So 35mm lenses became very popular as the closest lens to Normal while 40mm-43mm lenses virtually don't exist.

Hypothesis (kinda):

So with all that as my basis, my belief is that it has now become a psychological effect for many photographers to see 35mm shots and have them just feel "right".... But in reality if we all had been using 40mm lenses all along those would feel "right" now instead. I can't prove this, and it is never going to change to where people as a whole do prefer 40mm on DSLRs, so it is kind of irrelevant, but I still think it is the case.

Conclusion:

I think that if you give the 20 f/1.7 a chance, that for the above reasons, it will grow on you very quickly and you won't miss those other 2.5mm at all. Especially if you don't also use a 35mm lens on your DSLR at the same time..... But I did word that part a bit to strongly on my last post. I can't be certain you will, I just think you will for the above reasons.


5D3 | Rokinon 14 f/2.8 | 16-35L II | TS-E 24L | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | Voigtlander 40 f/2.0 | Σ 50 f/1.4 | MP-E 65 | 70-200 2.8L IS II | Σ 85 f/1.4 | Zeiss 100 f/2 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Fuji X10 | OM-D E-M5 | http://www.mikehjphoto​.com/external link
*****Lenses For Saleexternal link*****

LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
krb's Avatar
8,818 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
May 23, 2012 16:05 |  #468

arentol wrote in post #14474817external link
Conclusion:

I think that if you give the 20 f/1.7 a chance, that for the above reasons, it will grow on you very quickly and you won't miss those other 2.5 at all. Especially if you don't also use a 35mm lens on your DSLR at the same time..... But I did word that part a bit to strongly on my last post. I can't be certain you will, I just think you will for the above reasons.

Something that is a little odd but perhaps relates to the above is that I've never cared for a normal 50mm lens when shooting a 35mm but I really like the 20mm on my GF2.


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickrexternal link
Gear list

LOG IN TO REPLY
jacobsen1
Cream of the Crop
jacobsen1's Avatar
9,629 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Mt View, RI
May 23, 2012 18:54 |  #469

hell, I'm a 24mm guy but I've learned to love the 20mm...


My Gear List

my sites:
benjacobsenphoto.comexternal link | newschoolofphotography​.comexternal link
GND buyers FAQ

FOR SALE: 5Dii RRS L-bracket, 430II, 12mm macro tube PM ME!

LOG IN TO REPLY
Yohan ­ Pamudji
Goldmember
Yohan Pamudji's Avatar
2,994 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Mississippi
May 23, 2012 20:27 |  #470

arentol wrote in post #14474817external link
Let me put my point another way, as I think I came off a little strong before....

Nah, I wasn't put off by how strongly you stated it. I was just disagreeing with your point, period :)

Interesting theory but with no proof that I know of. If you had just stuck with "those used to using 35mm will prefer it over 40mm" then I can buy that. But to argue for a natural, physiological inclination toward preferring 42mm if coming from a photographic blank slate... I think that's a bit of a stretch to put it mildly. Something about not multiplying entities without just and sufficient cause comes to mind ;)

Having said that I do enjoy using the 20mm, just not as much as I do a true 35mm equivalent. I've used 35mm on FF so much that I can more or less "see" in 35mm without a camera pressed to my eye, and in terms of balancing perspective distortion with how much you can get in the picture from any given position I've come to really appreciate it (24mm makes you get in closer where you have to really watch the perspective distortion, while 50mm doesn't get enough of the environment in the shot). The angle of view of the 20mm is therefore just slightly off for me, especially with the narrower 4:3 aspect ratio of m4/3 compared to 3:2 of DSLRs.




LOG IN TO REPLY
arentol
Goldmember
1,305 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Seattle WA
May 24, 2012 01:00 |  #471

Yohan Pamudji wrote in post #14476018external link
Nah, I wasn't put off by how strongly you stated it. I was just disagreeing with your point, period :)

Interesting theory but with no proof that I know of. If you had just stuck with "those used to using 35mm will prefer it over 40mm" then I can buy that. But to argue for a natural, physiological inclination toward preferring 42mm if coming from a photographic blank slate... I think that's a bit of a stretch to put it mildly. Something about not multiplying entities without just and sufficient cause comes to mind ;)

Having said that I do enjoy using the 20mm, just not as much as I do a true 35mm equivalent. I've used 35mm on FF so much that I can more or less "see" in 35mm without a camera pressed to my eye, and in terms of balancing perspective distortion with how much you can get in the picture from any given position I've come to really appreciate it (24mm makes you get in closer where you have to really watch the perspective distortion, while 50mm doesn't get enough of the environment in the shot). The angle of view of the 20mm is therefore just slightly off for me, especially with the narrower 4:3 aspect ratio of m4/3 compared to 3:2 of DSLRs.

Yeah, the basis for the "normal" thing is not super strong (neither is the golden mean), but it is apparently true enough that it has been used for a very long time in photography and cinematography. Also 35mm format is the only format that considers a lens more than 5% from true normal to be its "normal", and then 35mm goes way over the top and uses one that is 16% narrower than true normal, which is enough that it really should not be called normal at all. Not even close.

Also, this is kind of interesting, just found it after my last post:

http://www.canonrumors​.com ...-f2-8-pancake-coming-cr3/external link

Not sure what the impetus for this decision was, but it looks like Canon may be seeing room in the market for a 40mm lens on 35mm right now. This is especially interesting considering there are only 2 pancake lenses for the EF mount right now and one of them is also 40mm. Wonder if that had anything to do with Canon making this lens.


5D3 | Rokinon 14 f/2.8 | 16-35L II | TS-E 24L | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | Voigtlander 40 f/2.0 | Σ 50 f/1.4 | MP-E 65 | 70-200 2.8L IS II | Σ 85 f/1.4 | Zeiss 100 f/2 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Fuji X10 | OM-D E-M5 | http://www.mikehjphoto​.com/external link
*****Lenses For Saleexternal link*****

LOG IN TO REPLY
Mookalafalas
Goldmember
Mookalafalas's Avatar
Joined Jul 2010
Southern Taiwan
May 27, 2012 03:03 |  #472

Older M4/3s bodies are so cheap they're almost free these days. Stuff that was released less than a year ago can be had for bargain bin prices. I just ordered an E-PM1 for $227, and you can now get a Panasonic 14mm F2.5 for $160. This will be the 3rd time I've entered the M4/3 field. I'm going to take a vacation with only this camera and a couple of primes. I'll have to see if when I come back I want to sell off all my Canon gear :D


Call me Al Gear Flickrexternal link
You don’t have to have a great lens to take great pictures—but it sure helps. –Ben Long

LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
Vancouver, BC
May 28, 2012 19:47 |  #473

I dislike my Olympus OMD E-M5. This dreadful photo was taken in a dark room using ISO 12800 :P

IMAGE: http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo230/alan_u1971/Alaska_May_2012/P5240119.jpg

This photo lacks sooo much detail :P

IMAGE: http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo230/alan_u1971/Alaska_May_2012/P5240088.jpg

Nice "pop" from a PL 25 f/1.4

IMAGE: http://i378.photobucket.com/albums/oo230/alan_u1971/Alaska_May_2012/P5220199.jpg

5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 80D | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | 100L | EF-S 10-22 | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 10-24 f/4.0 | 55-200 | EF-X500

LOG IN TO REPLY
bedojo
Goldmember
1,301 posts
Joined Jun 2010
portland oregon
May 29, 2012 00:02 |  #474

I miss the m4/3 :S
But I am happily shooting the xpro1.
I kind of want to pick up another old gf2 and get one or two of the cheap primes! :S
loved how small it is, xp1 is still small, but nothing is m4/3 small xP

One if my photos, shot on the gf2 + 45mm, was selected for a alien software blog feature, and they contacted me about using it on their Facebook, which is cool. that a 550$ setup was selected compared to photos shot on a $4,000 setup! (my old canon gear )


Al, you are tempting me to get a backup camera for my China/Thailand/where ever I end up in SE Asia trip!


follow me 500pxexternal link || Facebook Pageexternal link || Flickrexternal link || Website & Blogexternal link ||Feedback: 1 2
Gear: Fujifilm X-Pro 1 || 18mm f2.0 || 35mm f1.4 || 60mm f2.4 || AB800 || YN560 || Gordy Wrist Strap || Billingham Hadley Pro ||

LOG IN TO REPLY
bongEstrella
Senior Member
602 posts
Joined Apr 2009
Mechanicsburg, PA
May 29, 2012 12:50 |  #475

I used my em-5 for about a month on a vacation, and I have to say I'm sold. The one thing I'm a little disappointed about is the built-in EVF. It's almost unuseable with my polarized sunglasses on, something I probably should've anticipated. Thankfully, the OLED display is perfectly visible even on a bright daylight.

I like it so much I'm actually going to sell all my Canon gear over the next few weeks. For those interested, I have a 55-250 and 430 EX II for sale in the market section of this forum.


My Galleryexternal link
For Sale: 60d, 15-85
Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
Vancouver, BC
May 29, 2012 12:58 |  #476

Bedojo,

Your xpro1 will give you incredible IQ. I did consider the xpro1 and tested it for a period of time. I wanted it but the cost pushed me away.

I will have to say the little E-M5 is extremely responsive in AF to the fuji. No disrespect because I would have purchased the xpro1 if my budget allowed me. I resorted in buying a $1000 E-m5 body and quickly supplemented the body with a 14mm and PL25 f/1.4 just before my trip.

I will say the oly E-M5 is NOT PERFECT. Currently alot of people are having "freezing" cameras. My camera doesn't wake up sometimes when it sleeps. I must pull the battery out to kick start the camera back on. Toggling the power switch does NOT wake it up. This has happened moreso with my PL25 f/1.4. People speculate its a firmware fix but I'm not to concerned.

I really must say the IQ is still not as good as the xpro1 but interms of print and websize photos its very comparable. I'm still blown away in the amazing IQ from the olympus e-m5. For slow moving/static photography on the go prefer the M43 over buying a canon crop body like 7d or 60d. I may ruffle feathers saying this but the IQ from the little m43 sensor IMO produces better IQ than some of the current canon crops aswell as better high ISO performance. For more serious work with movement I'll take less IQ and use a canon crop dslr or use my full frames for incredible IQ.

I never ever imagined a day i would rave about a M43 sensor. IQ wise the E-M5 seems substantially better than my 1dmk3 and 50D I owned. ISO department the E-M5 puts the 1dmk3 and 50D as very noisy cameras compared to the new M43 sensor used in the E-M5.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 80D | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | 100L | EF-S 10-22 | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 10-24 f/4.0 | 55-200 | EF-X500

LOG IN TO REPLY
Yohan ­ Pamudji
Goldmember
Yohan Pamudji's Avatar
2,994 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Mississippi
May 29, 2012 13:26 |  #477

AlanU wrote in post #14500893external link
I will have to say the little E-M5 is extremely responsive in AF to the fuji. No disrespect because I would have purchased the xpro1 if my budget allowed me.

I gave the X-Pro1 a serious look too but am not looking to deal with slow AF.

I will say the oly E-M5 is NOT PERFECT. Currently alot of people are having "freezing" cameras. My camera doesn't wake up sometimes when it sleeps. I must pull the battery out to kick start the camera back on. Toggling the power switch does NOT wake it up. This has happened moreso with my PL25 f/1.4. People speculate its a firmware fix but I'm not to concerned.

I've heard it's a problem with Panasonic lenses. Are you experiencing the camera not waking up from sleep with Olympus lenses attached?

I may ruffle feathers saying this but the IQ from the little m43 sensor IMO produces better IQ than some of the current canon crops aswell as better high ISO performance.

Well if that ruffles anybody's feathers then they're too attached to a brand. All it takes is a quick look at the samples out there to see that IQ from the E-M5 is very good, especially considering the slightly smaller sensor. In terms of ability to lift shadows it's actually better than Canon's latest cameras including the 5DIII, but I guess that's not a very high bar to clear (don't hurt me :)). It's still slightly behind the best Sony 16MP APS-C sensor in various ways, but not by very much and almost certainly not noticeable in prints.




LOG IN TO REPLY
bedojo
Goldmember
1,301 posts
Joined Jun 2010
portland oregon
May 29, 2012 13:29 |  #478

the IQ and images out of the fuji blew me away.
went from a 5d2 + L's to a m4/3 w/ 12mm 45mm 25mm f1.4 -> fuji.
the m4/3 are every bit as good as current crop cameras, and TINY!
would love it if fuji stole Olympus AF magic :P


follow me 500pxexternal link || Facebook Pageexternal link || Flickrexternal link || Website & Blogexternal link ||Feedback: 1 2
Gear: Fujifilm X-Pro 1 || 18mm f2.0 || 35mm f1.4 || 60mm f2.4 || AB800 || YN560 || Gordy Wrist Strap || Billingham Hadley Pro ||

LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
Joined Feb 2008
Vancouver, BC
May 29, 2012 14:50 |  #479

Yohan,

I guess it maybe a panny lens issue. I only own two lenses at the moment and they are both panasonic.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 80D | 24LmkII | 35mm f/2 IS | 85 mkII L | 100L | EF-S 10-22 | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji X-T2 w/battery booster | 16mm f/1.4 | 56 f/1.2 | 10-24 f/4.0 | 55-200 | EF-X500

LOG IN TO REPLY
mattia
Senior Member
528 posts
Joined Feb 2009
May 30, 2012 03:15 |  #480

It does seem to be isolated, though - 90% of the shooting I've done on the E-M5 (admittedly still not all that much) has been with either the panny 14 or 20. No lock-ups, both work great. Although I'm really wanting a wider angle lens...must wait for the panny normal zoom, or possibly just start saving up for one of the ultra wide zooms....


5DII | 300D | 30D IR | 17-40L | 24-105L IS | 70-200/2.8L IS | 100-400L IS | 15 FE | 35L | 50/1.8 mk I | 135L | Sigmalux 50/1.4 | Sigma 105/F2.8 Macro | C/Y Planar 50/1.4 | C/Y Distagon 35/2.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

72,976 views & 2 likes for this thread
DSLR to Micro 4/3. Anybody made the switch and been happy?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.0067 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.04s
Latest registered member is radislavi4
1006 guests, 511 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017