First mirrorless camera

[waday]

I just ordered the Olympus omd em5 m ii and 12-40 Pro (both camera store occasions) for €1130,- and my parents will pay €250 for my birthday. This brings the price I have to pay to €880, leaving me with more than enough for a tripod and maybe a second lens if I eventually know what I shoot the most (40-150 Pro or 12-100 Pro). They will both be here today so I'm super excited!

You're going to like it.

@BrentC , did you get the 50-250 in the mail?

 

[BrentC]

I just ordered the Olympus omd em5 m ii and 12-40 Pro (both camera store occasions) for €1130,- and my parents will pay €250 for my birthday. This brings the price I have to pay to €880, leaving me with more than enough for a tripod and maybe a second lens if I eventually know what I shoot the most (40-150 Pro or 12-100 Pro). They will both be here today so I'm super excited!

You're going to like it.

@BrentC , did you get the 50-250 in the mail?

My mistake in my sig its a 50-200. No still waiting. Probably won't get it till sometime next week.

 

[beagle100]

I do like it. I mostly use it as a remote, off-camera flash in a one-light portrait setup. I trigger it by the small flash that my EM5ii came with. It produces some really nice results when I have the time to tinker with settings. I purchased a secondary Yongnuo 560-iv to supplement. While the Yongnuo could have done the exact same thing for a fraction of the cost, it is nice having the Olympus for on-camera usage(Sync).

*- I don't really care for flash photography, so I only use it when I need to. A lens is a much more fun way to spend the money.

Thanks! That's kinda what I was thinking and likely the reason why I never pulled the trigger on the flash.

Yeah, I'd rather spend the money on a lens

I have one as well. It's a nice flash but I got it because I needed a flash to use off the hot shoe. If you don't use flash much or need one off the camera the one that comes with the camera is actually good and all you probably need. So save the money for lenses.

Remember in another thread I said I have no money to buy lenses? I just picked up the 12-100 and a used 50-200 and EC14. I couldn't stop myself.

Oh. My. God.

What?! I'm so excited for you!

How do you like them? Need details!

Have only been doing some test shots with the 12-100 but so far I am really impressed. I think its going to be a fantastic lens. Very sharp and great IQ. Everything I was hoping it would be. can't wait to take it travelling. The 50-200 and TC I am still waiting for it in the mail and hope it will compliment my 300 for wildlife. I will post some pics from both of them when I get a chance.

Nice! That's awesome. Do you feel limited at all with the f/4 as opposed to something faster?
ETA: something faster being the 40-150 2.8, haha

No, I think the f/4 will do me fine for what I need.

yes, f/4 is nice, f/2.8 is nicer
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[BrentC]

Thanks! That's kinda what I was thinking and likely the reason why I never pulled the trigger on the flash.

Yeah, I'd rather spend the money on a lens

I have one as well. It's a nice flash but I got it because I needed a flash to use off the hot shoe. If you don't use flash much or need one off the camera the one that comes with the camera is actually good and all you probably need. So save the money for lenses.

Remember in another thread I said I have no money to buy lenses? I just picked up the 12-100 and a used 50-200 and EC14. I couldn't stop myself.

Oh. My. God.

What?! I'm so excited for you!

How do you like them? Need details!

Have only been doing some test shots with the 12-100 but so far I am really impressed. I think its going to be a fantastic lens. Very sharp and great IQ. Everything I was hoping it would be. can't wait to take it travelling. The 50-200 and TC I am still waiting for it in the mail and hope it will compliment my 300 for wildlife. I will post some pics from both of them when I get a chance.

Nice! That's awesome. Do you feel limited at all with the f/4 as opposed to something faster?
ETA: something faster being the 40-150 2.8, haha

No, I think the f/4 will do me fine for what I need.

yes, f/4 is nice, f/2.8 is nicer
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

Ah..but this f/4 is a phenomenally wicked super zoom that retains sharpness and IQ throughout the whole fl range. And with the Dual IS I can easily do 5 second exposure handheld fully wide when needed. If I were to get the 2.8 I would need both Pro lenses, 12-40 and 40-150. 2.8 would be really nice but for my needs, being mostly a wildlife shooter, the 12-100 f/4 is the perfect lens for me to travel with.

Here is a great comparison between the two lenses:

Olympus 12-100mm f/4 PRO vs. 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO – The complete comparison

 

[unpopular]

My first mirrorless was a Wista D with a 135mm Nikkor. Fit neatly into a breifcase for those spontaneous moments.

o_o

 

[Emanuel M]

My first mirrorless was the Olympus E-M5 MK 1...
Still love it, but nowadays I'm using the Olympus PEN-F with a 9-18mm, a 17mm 1.8, a 45mm 1.8 and a fantastic 75mm 1.8 (I really really love this lens).

From time to time I use my, also beloved, Nikon D610

Cheers