- Joined
- Jun 7, 2012
- Messages
- 15,469
- Reaction score
- 7,848
- Location
- Central Florida
- Website
- www.flickr.com
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
I recently got sucked into the mirrorless maddness....
even though i was originally set on getting an APS-C mirrorless, i wound up getting an Olympus E-PL5.
obviously not the latest and the greatest of the m4/3 line, but what i personally wanted was a camera that i could take to places like the park, the zoo, or just when we are out and about without having to drag around the DSLR. I almost never took our cameras anywhere except on rare occasions, the dog park. It was just a hassle and a half between the camera itself and a lens or two.
The Olympus? so much smaller and more manageable. you can get some fast primes for m4/3 too. 17, 30, 50, 60, 75... and some fast zooms too in a 12-40 f/2.8, and a 40-150 f/2.8. (rumored for this year?) not to mention the panasonic lenses I can use on the Oly. Pricey? yuppers. especially the Pro zooms. I imagine i will be just fine with the slower zooms and a fast prime or two. I could just buy an adapter and use my Nikon lenses....but then it would turn into a camera i didn't want to drag around with me. and I already have two of those.
I dont think a lot of people are buying mirrorless systems to try to compete them against their DSLR's. I would imagine that a large percentage of MILC buyers are the same as me. Just someone who wants the versatility of an interchangeable lens system, but small enough to actually take with you without having to bring a suitcase along.
There are always sacrifices to be made, no matter what system you go with. I like having the DSLR's for when we need them, and a m4/3 for when i want a camera my wife can carry in her purse. personally, i would not want to start putting big lenses on my Olympus. it would totally defeat the purpose for which i bought it in the first place.
is it great that i can? absolutely. I am just not likely to do it myself.
even though i was originally set on getting an APS-C mirrorless, i wound up getting an Olympus E-PL5.
obviously not the latest and the greatest of the m4/3 line, but what i personally wanted was a camera that i could take to places like the park, the zoo, or just when we are out and about without having to drag around the DSLR. I almost never took our cameras anywhere except on rare occasions, the dog park. It was just a hassle and a half between the camera itself and a lens or two.
The Olympus? so much smaller and more manageable. you can get some fast primes for m4/3 too. 17, 30, 50, 60, 75... and some fast zooms too in a 12-40 f/2.8, and a 40-150 f/2.8. (rumored for this year?) not to mention the panasonic lenses I can use on the Oly. Pricey? yuppers. especially the Pro zooms. I imagine i will be just fine with the slower zooms and a fast prime or two. I could just buy an adapter and use my Nikon lenses....but then it would turn into a camera i didn't want to drag around with me. and I already have two of those.
I dont think a lot of people are buying mirrorless systems to try to compete them against their DSLR's. I would imagine that a large percentage of MILC buyers are the same as me. Just someone who wants the versatility of an interchangeable lens system, but small enough to actually take with you without having to bring a suitcase along.
There are always sacrifices to be made, no matter what system you go with. I like having the DSLR's for when we need them, and a m4/3 for when i want a camera my wife can carry in her purse. personally, i would not want to start putting big lenses on my Olympus. it would totally defeat the purpose for which i bought it in the first place.
is it great that i can? absolutely. I am just not likely to do it myself.