Me again...sorry.

lugworm

lugworm

Messages
574
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
For my son this time. He is set on getting a csc, and is looking at the Sony a6000 (which would be my choice), and the Panasonic gX7, both with kit lens to start with. Like me, he takes a lot of "action" shots of my grandson, and low light shots, but he is involved in local league football and would like to start taking match shots.
Is there much to choose between the two for his needs ?

By the way, I have decided on the Fujifilm x30.
 
The A6000 has better AF for sport and a slightly better sensor. BUT, the GX7 has a much larger lens selection.
 
As Twist says the A6000 is better for sports and moving subjects but lens selection isn't as good. As much as I like my Olympus, taking sports etc is always a real frustration as continuous auto focus isn't reactive or consistent enough. Maybe if I didn't have a high end DSLR to compare it with I wouldn't find it as frustrating, but I'm sure I'd still find it frustrating ;) The GX7 is pretty similar to the Olympus in terms of continuous auto focus.
 
twist said:
Could also look at the Olympus OMD EM10 for similar money.
Click to expand...

He did, but says he doesn't think it's as good as the other two for low light work, according to some of the reviews. It was one of my original choices too.
 
lugworm said:
He did, but says he doesn't think it's as good as the other two for low light work, according to some of the reviews. It was one of my original choices too.
Click to expand...

Im sure it is. The Sony will be the best as the sensors the biggest.
 
The difference between the the GX7 and EM10 for low light isn't going to be noticeable. Both are a bit smudgy past ISO3200 unless you're in good light and needed a fast shutter speed! You only really notice an improvement once the sensor size increases with like for like technology.
I'd agree with the other posters about the lens selections for the M43, especially on the long end!
 
lugworm said:
He did, but says he doesn't think it's as good as the other two for low light work, according to some of the reviews. It was one of my original choices too.
Click to expand...
Then they're wrong imo, they're all very similar. You'd think that the Sony would be better with it having a larger Sensor but it's not really. As for the Olly vs Panny, not much in it at all. The Panny probably has more noise, but it's finer and the Olly has more chroma noise.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ima...=1&x=0.1312927631284066&y=-0.9790009973890715
 
I have the A6000 and use it for all types of photography. The focus speed is fantastic and I have got pictures that I do not believe I would have got with my canon 5d mkiii
 
Thanks for that link snerkler, I'm sure he'll find it useful. I've just had a short play around with it. What a handy tool.
And the difference beyween raw and jpeg seems to be huge, raw giving much more natural looking colours (in my eyes anyway).
Is it just me, or are the Olympus shots slightly to warm ?
 
lugworm said:
He did, but says he doesn't think it's as good as the other two for low light work, according to some of the reviews. It was one of my original choices too.
Click to expand...
The E-M10 is much better than the other two for low-light work, due to its awesome stabilisation. Only the Sony has a bit cleaner (but smudgier) high ISO than the Olympus but that's more than offset by the stabilisation.
The olympus also has a bit nicer flesh and sky colours (sometimes) than the other two.
The GX7 is an excellent body though, with good tilting EVF.
Both the Olympus and Panasonic take a whole range of good autofocus long zooms, there's almost too much to choose from...
 
Ulfric M Douglas said:
The E-M10 is much better than the other two for low-light work, due to its awesome stabilisation. Only the Sony has a bit cleaner (but smudgier) high ISO than the Olympus but that's more than offset by the stabilisation.
The olympus also has a bit nicer flesh and sky colours (sometimes) than the other two.
The GX7 is an excellent body though, with good tilting EVF.
Both the Olympus and Panasonic take a whole range of good autofocus long zooms, there's almost too much to choose from...
Click to expand...

Really? Not sure how it's better. The Sony lens has oss and the gx7 has ibis. Besides, how is stabilization going to help with a moving subject? They will all add smudging at hi iso with jpeg.
 
Last edited:
Ulfric M Douglas said:
The E-M10 is much better than the other two for low-light work, due to its awesome stabilisation. Only the Sony has a bit cleaner (but smudgier) high ISO than the Olympus but that's more than offset by the stabilisation.
The olympus also has a bit nicer flesh and sky colours (sometimes) than the other two.
The GX7 is an excellent body though, with good tilting EVF.
Both the Olympus and Panasonic take a whole range of good autofocus long zooms, there's almost too much to choose from...
Click to expand...
The Sony and GX7 both have stabilisation so again there's no difference really. The only camera I've tried where stabilisation is hugely better is the EM5-II, it's seriously impressive and several stops better than my EM10. I agree the Olympus colours are nicer than the other two, especially Sony. But then I prefer the colours of my D750 to my Olly, but of course this is preference.

As for long zooms, this is where the m4/3 system shines over the other CSC's as there's two 600mm eq zooms to choose from. That being said I've owned both and got rid of them both as AF isn't good enough for anything other than static subjects imo. Well that's a bit harsh, I've taken pics of ducks swimming across the water but even then hit rate wasn't great, but I am comparing this to DSLR. The very cheap 40-150mm is surprisingly good optically, even though it feels like a kids toy. Again, I wouldn't like to be shooting sports with it. The 40-150mm f2.8 is pretty impressive too, but does cost a bit. I've not had chance to try this on moving subjects though.
 
lugworm said:
Thanks for that link snerkler, I'm sure he'll find it useful. I've just had a short play around with it. What a handy tool.
And the difference beyween raw and jpeg seems to be huge, raw giving much more natural looking colours (in my eyes anyway).
Is it just me, or are the Olympus shots slightly to warm ?
Click to expand...
They do look it in jpeg on that test, but I've never noticed as I always shoot RAW. I generally find Olly has too much magenta, particularly on skin tones, but on the whole very nice.
 
paulefox said:
I have the A6000 and use it for all types of photography. The focus speed is fantastic and I have got pictures that I do not believe I would have got with my canon 5d mkiii
Click to expand...
Wow, that's very surprising.
 
snerkler said:
The Sony and GX7 both have stabilisation so again there's no difference really. The only camera I've tried where stabilisation is hugely better is the EM5-II, .
Click to expand...
Sure, that's your experience.
I just find the stabilisation on ALL the "floating sensor" models (which have ebbn called 5-axis and 3-axis, but that's not the point) to be much better than the others, however I don't have the E-M5MkII so canot comment on that.
My e-pL7 "floating sensor" stabilisation if often (not always) much much better than my older Olympii and my Panasonic stabilised lenses.
In low light I will always use my e-pL7, every other body I own is not as good.
The E-M10 has the same stabilisation as my e-pL7 hence my recommendation.
 
Thanks for your advice. I think the £100 cashback is steering him towards the Sony. I'll let you know what happens !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top