Nikon to Sony A7, Olympus m43 user feedback

F

fstorm

Messages
258
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been using Nikon gear for years and have accumulated plenty of quality glass. I've sold my D700 35mm and 85mm so far.

I've been contemplating going over to m43 initially, for weight reasons and quality glass from Olympus and Panaleica camp. I borrowed an E-M1 and M5 for the weekend and was impressed with the handling and quietness. PQ was good enough. However I've handled an A7 and that isn't much bigger body wise. I know the lenses won't be much smaller than my Nikon kit, esp telephoto end of things, but the wide and mid angles will be fine.

I see a steady flow of people selling their A7 kit for Nikon/Canon.

What's wrong with the Sony ? The menus ? AF ?

We know Sony sells the same sensor to Nikon and other manufacturers, so it isn't the intrinsic PQ.

I was very close to pulling the trigger on the m43 kit, but there is still the nagging sensation that I may regret it.
 
I went from Nikon FF to m43 and haven't regretted it one tiny little bit. But was supposedly only for travel but I ended up selling all my Nikon kit as I hadn't used it once in a year.
 
Also worth looking at fujifilm x-t1 or x-t10
 
chrism_scotland said:
The IQ of the Sony lineup isn't up for debate, its excellent, maybe not quite as good as Nikon gets out of the same tech but close.

Personally for me I got rid as the lens lineup isn't there yet and in my opinion the ergonomics were for me personally quite poor.
Click to expand...

What are you using now? Back at Nikon?
 
Thanks for the responses so far.

I've got an XE1 with the 18-55mm 2.8-4, X100, Sigma DP2M, Sony RX100, Panasonic LX7, LX3 and Nikon 35mm, medium format film cameras.

I found that I didn't enjoy dragging all that Nikon gear about in a ruck sack that weighed about 5Kg (12llbs), though I loved the results from it. I normally carry the RX100 or X100 around with me. The Mrs uses the LX7 mainly and the D700 + 70-200mm f2.8 on sports days etc.

I'm considering the Sony A7 ii and E-M1/5 for the IBIS, I know I've been fine for +35years without IBIS, but I know I'll get better results from IS than without, especially if I'm not totting a tripod. The Fuji IS isn't as good and their primes don't have it. I'm likely to hang on to the X100, simply because I like the way it works and the rendering is lovely. The Sigma is a strange one, I really have to be in the mood to use it, need to treat it like a field camera or at least a medium format camera, but in anything but good light, a tripod is needed. The RX100 may make way for the Mk3 or the Fujifilm X70.

My thoughts are something like :

A7ii - as I like messing with manual focus lenses and it's light enough to carry.
Panasonic FZ1000 - Good enough PQ and a decent 25-400mm lens directing light into a Sony 1" BSI sensor. Like my RX100 on speed.

May substitute the A7ii for Olympus E-M1 or EM-2 when they decide to release it. The XE1 is likely to be sold.
 
fstorm said:
I see a steady flow of people selling their A7 kit for Nikon/Canon.

What's wrong with the Sony ? The menus ? AF ?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't pay too much attention to that. It's a fluctuating and not an accurate statistic.

I bought the Olympus EM5ii so I'd not have an excuse to leave it at home. And it definitely works. I comes everywhere with me. As I don't carry it like a DSLR in a bag. I have it on a shoulder sling and cover, with a small belt pack for 2 lenses and accessories. Or, in winter in a coat pocket. As the lenses are really compact.
 
Last edited:
I see a lot of people flitting back and forward between systems and whilst that's all well and good if you can afford it that's not generally what I do and I can't see myself going back to DSLR's anytime soon. For me the A7 makes the most sense when used with more compact primes. I have the Sony 35mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.8 and I think the package is the best cameras I've ever owned. I also use old manual lenses and IMO if manual lenses are a big draw for you you can't do better in digital than an A7.

Maybe the Sony system makes less sense if you want to shoot action and/or use larger lenses? People also seem to whinge a lot about the cost of the Sony kit.

I also have MFT, I was an early adopter and have a G1 and GX7. I think that for general use it's an excellent system and I only have a few niggles such as the lack of auto ISO with the ability to dial in exposure compensation in manual mode... that does bug me. Apart from that I think that my GX7 has a poor EVF but others seem to be quite happy so that may be just how I perceive it. IQ wise I think that my GX7 (and therefore the later cameras too) will give good results even up to and including ISO 25,600 for whole image use and when viewed normally at least.

If you want the best IQ you can get from a compact camera I'd recommend that you take a long hard look at the Sony A7 series but if you can resist the urge to pixel peep and don't print the size of a barn you may be perfectly happy with MFT.

MFT lens wise I have the Panny 14mm f2.5 and 20mm f1.7 and Oly 17mm, 25mm and 45mm f1.8's and all give good results. I'm particularly taken with the 17mm f1.8 and its build and snap manual focus feature, well worth a look IMO.
 
Last edited:
Theres no denting that compared to other mirrorless systems Sony lenses are quite expensive, lens and value wise you can't go wrong with either M4/3 or Fuji, they've both got sizeable mature lens lineups and a plentiful used market which can be important too if your looking to keep the price down.
I really liked M4/3 back in the days before we had cheaper full frame options in DSLR's and before Fuji and Sony really became decent mirrorless options in their own right.
 
The other issue is that the Sony FE Zoom lenses seem to viewed as adequate and the primes ok, rather than exceptional compared with many of the PanaleicaOly and Fujifilm lenses.
 
Last edited:
fstorm said:
The other issue is that the Sony FE Zoom lenses seem to viewed as adequate and the primes ok, rather than exceptional compared with many of the PanaleicaOly and Fujifilm lenses.
Click to expand...

There are some cracking lenses in the lineup but on the zoom front only the 16-35 f4 seems to be heralded as "very good".
 
M4/3 is an excellent option if you want to go lighter and less bulk. I'm lucky enough to own both Nikon and Olympus M4/3 and in some situations I really struggle to tell the difference in IQ. Yes in low light the FF is obviously better, and yes overall the FF has more 'depth' to the image, but at times I struggle to see a difference. For example last year I got invited to both an Olympus Photoshoot/class and Nikon Photoshoot/class and in situation we used the same lighting rig and photographed a model. I still can't decide which images are better, my D750 with 70-200mm f2.8 or EM5-II with 45mm f1.8. The fact I'm struggling to tell a difference speaks volumes to me.

Apart from low light the other areas where you'll find the M4/3 is lacking compared to FF is subject isolation/shallow DOF and AF performance, especially in low light and with tracking.

As for the Sony, people swap back and forth. The biggest complaints I hear about the Sony are the colours/white balance isn't as pleasing as either Nikon or Canon, and form my own experience with Sony I've had to do a lot more tweaking in PP to get the colours as nice/accurate as I'd like, greens/grass can be quite garish. The other issue is AF, although I believe the A7R-II has improved on this. Still can't compete with DSLR too.

I think the A7 as a system is OK if you're sticking to primes as it makes it a nice small lightweight package, however start sticking zooms on them and I'd question why you'd choose the A7's over a DSLR. You have pretty much all the bulk but with the disadvantage or poor AF (low light and tracking), and poorer (for most) ergonomics. Of course, there are some that prefer the EVF and as Sony are neglecting their a-mount FF I can't think of another FF system that uses EVF (unless the new Pentax K1 or Leica use EVF???).

http://camerasize.com/compact/#567.327,624.515,567.107,624.514,ha,t


.
 
fstorm said:
The other issue is that the Sony FE Zoom lenses seem to viewed as adequate and the primes ok, rather than exceptional compared with many of the PanaleicaOly and Fujifilm lenses.
Click to expand...
Oooh dunno about that... some of the Sony and Zeiss primes seem to be amongst the best on sale to the likes of you and me :D The 35 and 55 I have are both very good lenses indeed. If you need that finite quality or not is another matter.

Just to add balance to snerkler above A7 series focus tracking may not be to the very best DSLR standard and finite speed may be only adequate but... on the positive side the focus is accurate and there's no front / back focus or MA faff on to worry about.

Not sure about MFT tracking, not something I use, but single focus with my GX7 and faster primes is quick indeed and from what I've read and seen on line the newer Panasonic csmeras are even faster when fitted with fast focusing lenses.

So, with these cameras tracking could be an issue depending upon your expectations but single shot focus can be very fast indeed.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Oooh dunno about that... some of the Sony and Zeiss primes seem to be amongst the best on sale to the likes of you and me :D The 35 and 55 I have are both very good lenses indeed. If you need that finite quality or not is another matter.
Click to expand...
Agreed, some primes are exceptional imo too.

Just to add balance to snerkler above A7 series focus tracking may not be to the very best DSLR standard and finite speed may be only adequate but... on the positive side the focus is accurate and there's no front / back focus or MA faff on to worry about.
Click to expand...
Very true, one of the advantages of contrast detect.

Not sure about MFT tracking, not something I use, but single focus with my GX7 and faster primes is quick indeed and from what I've read and seen on line the newer Panasonic csmeras are even faster when fitted with fast focusing lenses.

So, with these cameras tracking could be an issue depending upon your expectations but single shot focus can be very fast indeed.
Click to expand...
It can and in good light single AF on my Em5-II is only fractionally slower than my D750. However, I specifically mentioned AF in low light as it is then when the difference becomes much more marked (y)
 
fstorm said:
Panasonic FZ1000 - Good enough PQ and a decent 25-400mm lens directing light into a Sony 1" BSI
Click to expand...

I have moved between systems and did love my EM1 but after owning an LX100 I bought an FZ1000 to try and in good light it really surprised me with the quality of images it produced and I find it to be a very versatile camera. I have now sold all my MFT gear and trying to decide what to use next as my main camera for low light and family shots. Like others I have looked at the A7 and even a D750 and D7200. So many decisions....
 
Hmm, interesting replies. I've toyed with the idea of the D750 for a while, but that wouldn't satisfy the need to go light. The A7 (base,s,r) ii is just to satisfy my need to fiddle and GAS. Arguably I could probably make do with what I have + FZ1000 for the telephoto stuff. In all likelihood I'm likely to get the Sony and a couple of primes, 24mm and 85mm. May even be legacy MF lenses. I fancy having a go at astrophotography.
 
fstorm said:
Hmm, interesting replies. I've toyed with the idea of the D750 for a while, but that wouldn't satisfy the need to go light. The A7 (base,s,r) ii is just to satisfy my need to fiddle and GAS. Arguably I could probably make do with what I have + FZ1000 for the telephoto stuff. In all likelihood I'm likely to get the Sony and a couple of primes, 24mm and 85mm. May even be legacy MF lenses. I fancy having a go at astrophotography.
Click to expand...

The 24mm would need to be legacy MF, there isn't a native one, the 85mm is also likely to need to be adapted unless you want to spend £900 on the Batis 85 or £1500 for the upcoming Sony...
 
I didn't even check the Sony product list - I just mentioned my favourite focal lengths ;-)
For what I want it for MF isn't a problem, I'm unlikely go for the Bastis and Sony G lenses, I'd rather spend that sort of money on a Leica M lens, as it's likely to hold value, although probably go for MF Olympus/Nikon 24mm and 85mm.

I'm in two minds about going for the non-IBIS models and save myself enough for one may be both lenses.
 
fstorm said:
I didn't even check the Sony product list - I just mentioned my favourite focal lengths ;-)
For what I want it for MF isn't a problem, I'm unlikely go for the Bastis and Sony G lenses, I'd rather spend that sort of money on a Leica M lens, as it's likely to hold value, although probably go for MF Olympus/Nikon 24mm and 85mm.

I'm in two minds about going for the non-IBIS models and save myself enough for one may be both lenses.
Click to expand...

I have to say I think the A7ii is the best of the lineup just now, for me it was night and day improved over the older A7, nicer handling and just generally a more complete product than the original, IBIS is handy too!
 
I am very happy with my A7R2 and lenses, most of the time.

I am selling the A6000 and some lenses though as it has caught me out with the slight delay after I press the shutter n some occasions, and it is not (for me) a camera I would like to trust for anything moving or sporty. I know some of you geniuses will come back and say it's me, but I know different, and have been using the system for a considerable time alongside a D800 that I regrettably sold. The sale of the A6000 and lenses will fund/part fund an used D600 and Sigma 35 art, and I still have a Nikon 85mm 1.8D, which will do until a Sigma comes along at the right price.

I will run the two systems alongside each other, Heavy Nikon for portrait sessions and sports, and lightweight Sony for carrying around the hills for landscape work, where both will deliver the goods!
 
I've come from Canon, gone to Fuji, tried the EM1 and sold it, looked longingly at the A7r and now settled on a mix of Fuji and Olympus to take care of my needs.

With Fuji you've got the lens quality as well as the camera quality and the lens range as well now and its damn hard to beat but the AF still isn't up to par with a decent DSLR as far as speed goes, its getting there but still not there yet.

The EM1 just didn't have the legs when it came to iQ at higher ISO's, the Fuji X-Pro1 blew it out of the water in that respect and at lower ISO's as well but at the time none of the Fuji's could touch it for AF speed and with the battery grip it felt so damn good in the hand, better than the XT-1 does, but as well as those points it was also the lenses quality, the primes are great, sharp, lovely contrast, but the zooms outside of the pro range all need stopping down a bit to get the best from them and they aren't as sharp as the Fuji's by a fair margin, even the Oly Pro range benefits from being stopped down to F4 - 5.6, the slower range F8 - F11.

Sony still don't have the lens range and I'm sorry but the zooms at least are soft wide open and all need stopping down, even the Zeiss F4 models, they simply don't produce the goods I expect from lenses costing as much as they do.
This really surprised me as I use Zeiss M mount lenses and they're as sharp as a lens can get with the best micro contrast I've ever come across, you need to spend a good £3.5k to get a lens that can better the 50/2 planar T ZM.

I really really wanted to go FF and sony was the only option that was light enough for me to manage and though they have other plus points such as AF adaptors that allow Canon EF/EF-s lenses to be used with them and still utilise AF and IS of the Canon lens, it was the native lenses that was the deal breaker for me, as said, to expensive, to heavy for CSC lenses and not up to par IMHO.

Weight has for a good many years been a major issue for me due to my disabilities and just seems to become more of an issue each year so whilst I'm keeping my X-Pro1 and will still use it, its use will become more and more limited to using it on a mount, either my custom bodged bed mount or a tripod, especially with the heavier lenses, so for hand holding I'm going to try the slightly smaller Olympus Pen F.
The body itself isn't that much lighter, but with the 2x crop factor smaller light lenses such as the Zeiss 50/2 become a portrait lens and the native primes are feather weight, in fact working weights out if shooting the 120-135mm range I get a weight saving of 178 grams which is quite significant for me and will mean (along with the IBIS to combat my tremor) I can continue to shoot hand held for longer.

My advice would be to try the different formats out, borrow or rent your different choices and see how they perform and whether or not they truly do meet your needs, but don't sell the Nikon gear just yet, you may want to keep it for wildlife if nothing else.
 
Last edited:
magicaxeman said:
Sony still don't have the lens range and I'm sorry but the zooms at least are soft wide open and all need stopping down, even the Zeiss F4 models, they simply don't produce the goods I expect from lenses costing as much as they do.
Click to expand...
Will be interesting to see what the new G zoom lenses are like, I expect these will be pretty damn good.
 
magicaxeman said:
.....

My advice would be to try the different formats out, borrow or rent your different choices and see how they perform and whether or not they truly do meet your needs, but don't sell the Nikon gear just yet, you may want to keep it for wildlife if nothing else.
Click to expand...

Ahh, I've sold the D300, D700, 85mm, 35mm and the 70-200mm VR AFS is about to go too.
Got the 20mm,50mm and a couple of zooms left.
 
fstorm said:
The G lenses are going to be big, heavy & expensive.



and very good I expect.
Click to expand...
Yep, and as I stated earlier begs the question why you'd choose the Sony system if you're going to use these lenses as you're not saving on bulk.
 
What I'd like to see is Fujifilm, Olympus or Pentax making lenses in Sony FE mount, primes and zooms without silly and expensive convertors. Would be great, can't really see it happening though.
 
fstorm said:
A little update : I bought Rizwan's A7rii. I'm planning to pair it up with up with some MF primes, ordered a bunch of adaptors in anticipation.
Click to expand...
You mean Sony A7II ;) you won't regret moving to Sony if you've done your research and if it fits your requirements.
I moved from Nikon to the original A7 and have no regrets to date.

Kind regards,

Rizvan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top