Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
  1. #1
    No longer a newbie, moving up!
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    61
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    2 times

    Micro 4/3's vs. DSLR

    I can get an olympus e-pl1 and nikon D3000 for the same price. What are the pros and cons of each? Besides the size difference, is there any real difference in the quality of the images they put out or anything like that?



  2. #2
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    North New Jersey, United States of America
    Posts
    9,487
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    338 times
    Quote Originally Posted by C_Dubs View Post
    Besides the size difference, is there any real difference in the quality of the images they put out or anything like that?
    Since you said... "besides the size difference" and followed up with "real difference in the quality", I'd recommend DSLR.

    Do a search.. you'll find a review of the E-PL1 and G1 I wrote up. You'll also find some in depth discussion between the two. The real value of the micro 4/3 IS the size; both camera and lens.
    <exits stage left>

  3. #3
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati OH
    Posts
    1,329
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    235 times
    If you plan on using legacy lenses the crop factor is 2 to 1. So if you have a 50mm it really looks like 100mm. However, the depth of field is the same. Therefore, its harder to get shallow depth of field and good bokeh.

    I've been shooting with a borrowed Panasonic GH1 (while I save some money for dslr) and I've gotten (at least what I think to be) great shots but I want a full frame dslr when I do buy a camera.

  4. #4
    I spend too much of my life on TPF!
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Saint Louis MO
    Posts
    767
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    87 times
    Quote Originally Posted by JAC526 View Post
    So if you have a 50mm it really looks like 100mm. However, the depth of field is the same.
    The DOF would be different between these two cameras -- even using the same lens.

    Joe

  5. #5
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    North New Jersey, United States of America
    Posts
    9,487
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    338 times
    Quote Originally Posted by JAC526 View Post
    Therefore, its harder to get shallow depth of field and good bokeh.

    From

    Image sensor format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



    There's not THAT much of a difference between APS-C 1.5-6x crop and Micro 43. You make it sound like they are equipped with P&S pinky thumbnail sized sensors.




    There's a difference because CoC is also different...
    <exits stage left>

  6. #6
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    13,388
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    1835 times
    Quote Originally Posted by JAC526 View Post
    .... Therefore, its harder to get shallow depth of field and good bokeh......
    Really? Are you sure about that?

    Shot with an Oly EP3 and 40-150mm lens.







    The Liver is Evil and Must Be Punished.
    Shooter of FX, DX and MFT

    We boogied in the kitchen
    We
    boogied in the hall
    I got something on my finger
    So I wiped it on the wall

    Chuck Berry - Reelin' and Rockin' - Lancaster Arts Festival 1972

  7. #7
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    1,923
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    330 times
    Quote Originally Posted by kundalini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by JAC526 View Post
    .... Therefore, its harder to get shallow depth of field and good bokeh......
    Really? Are you sure about that?
    This is a matter of physics.. the smaller the sensor, the deeper the focus field at a given focal length and aperture. You can certainly get shallow depth of field and good bokeh, but it is undoubtedly harder with a smaller sensor. You're quite close to your subjects in both of those photos, which is the ideal condition for rendering depth of field effects. A larger sensor will always make this effect easier under a wider variety of conditions.
    60d, Tokina 11-16 2.8, Canon 24 1.4L II, Zeiss 35 1.4 Distagon, Zeiss 50 2.0 Makro-Planar, Canon 85 1.8, Yashica DX 135 2.8, flashy stuff, filtery stuff

  8. #8
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    13,388
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    1835 times
    Very true analog., but the myth that you have to shoot wide open at f/1.4 on a full frame to acheive nice bokeh is just that, a myth. It also requires knowing how to use your gear and the physics involved. I do agree with you.
    The Liver is Evil and Must Be Punished.
    Shooter of FX, DX and MFT

    We boogied in the kitchen
    We
    boogied in the hall
    I got something on my finger
    So I wiped it on the wall

    Chuck Berry - Reelin' and Rockin' - Lancaster Arts Festival 1972

  9. #9
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    In the country just north of Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    4,904
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    1025 times
    Shot with a Panasonic G1 m4/3 camera - both foreground & background out of focus.


    Ron

    Olympus OM-D E-M5, E-PM1, Oly 14-42 II (2), 40-150, 75-300 II, 17/2.8, 25/1.8, 45/1.8, Sigma 19/2.8, 30/2.8 & 60/2.8, Bower 7.5/3.5 fish-eye.
    Panasonic G1 & GF1, 14-45, 45-200 & 14/2.5 and numerous legacy lenses.
    Canon S5 IS

  10. #10
    No longer a newbie, moving up!
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    61
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    2 times
    is the olympus epl-1 a good 4/3's camera to choose?

  11. #11
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    In the country just north of Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    4,904
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    1025 times
    Quote Originally Posted by C_Dubs View Post
    is the olympus epl-1 a good 4/3's camera to choose?
    I went with Panasonic's G1 & GF1. I use the G1 with legacy lenses & the wife uses the GF1 with native 14-45 lens.
    Ron

    Olympus OM-D E-M5, E-PM1, Oly 14-42 II (2), 40-150, 75-300 II, 17/2.8, 25/1.8, 45/1.8, Sigma 19/2.8, 30/2.8 & 60/2.8, Bower 7.5/3.5 fish-eye.
    Panasonic G1 & GF1, 14-45, 45-200 & 14/2.5 and numerous legacy lenses.
    Canon S5 IS

  12. #12
    ann
    ann is offline
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    4,253
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are NOT OK to Edit
    Liked
    185 times
    I love my pen-1, usayit has an indepth thread here about that camera.

  13. #13
    has a hat around here somewhere Site Moderator
    TPF Supporter

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    UK - England
    Posts
    20,470
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    2874 times
    *moving to equipment subsection*
    How to get critique on your photography!


    The Mentor Scheme mentoring on TPF all are welcome to read and apply

    Best photos on the net!
    well at least I like to think so - sometimes

  14. #14
    No longer a newbie, moving up!
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    61
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    2 times
    so i can the the epl-1 for $300 and the sony nex-3 for $360. is the nex-3 worth $60?

  15. #15
    TPF Junkie!
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    North New Jersey, United States of America
    Posts
    9,487
    My Gallery
    (0)
    My Photos Are OK to Edit
    Liked
    338 times
    Quote Originally Posted by C_Dubs View Post
    so i can the the epl-1 for $300 and the sony nex-3 for $360. is the nex-3 worth $60?
    So much focus on the camera body... Have you looked at each system's selection of lenses? Have you found the review on E-PL1?

    IMO, the NEX's weakness is the lack of interesting lenses.. along with the UI.. along with handling. NEX does have a nicer sensor (bigger) but I surmise this contributes to the complexities and size of the optics which probably is part of the reason. The biggest weakness of the E-PL1 is the autofocus performance.. again my opinion.


    btw.. is that $300 new or used?
    <exits stage left>

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-29-2010, 08:31 PM
  2. Nikkor 105mm micro VR vs. nikkor 60mm micro no VR
    By iknowdatalfabat in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 07-21-2008, 08:31 AM
  3. Nikkor 105mm micro VR vs. nikkor 60mm micro no VR
    By iknowdatalfabat in forum Photography Equipment & Products
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-17-2008, 01:15 AM
  4. Ant Micro
    By ThcGunSmoke in forum General Gallery
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-25-2006, 03:52 AM
  5. more micro
    By plove53 in forum General Gallery
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-16-2003, 01:31 AM

Search tags for this page

4/3 vs dslr
,
dslr vs micro 4/3
,
dslr vs micro four thirds
,
m4/3 vs dslr
,
micro 4 3 vs dslr
,

micro 4/3 vs dslr

,
micro 4/3 vs slr
,
micro four thirds vs dslr
Click on a term to search for related topics.