Size matters - my dilemma...

Messages
4,473
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
Right, I need some help.
I currently have a Nikon D850 and various decent lenses.
I also have an Olympus EM1 mk2 and a couple of decent lenses.

I also have a sore back, bad eyes and am (unusually) getting older.
The Nikon is perfect in almost every way, but a trip out the other day with a Sigma 150-600, 70-200 f2.8 and an 24-120 was exhausting.
The only 'complaint' that I have about the D850 body is that to adjust the exposure compensation I need to press a button and twiddle a knob. Not a biggie really.

The Olympus was bought as a holiday camera with a 14-150 travel lens, but I've added a 12-40 pro and a 40-150 pro with T/C to the list. I need something longer if I'm going to keep it, and so far the Panasonic 100-400 seems to be the only option.
Size wise it is amazing, but I struggle with the complexity and hate having to pull out my glasses to read the menu every time I want to change things.
However, I love that exposure compensation is so easy via a twiddly knob, but am just not getting on with it as much as I'd hoped.

I popped into a camera shop yesterday and had a quick look at a Fuji XT2 and XH1, which both have proper knobs to twiddle, and along with the Fuji lenses they seem to be some sort of ideal compromise between the Nikon and Olympus physically.
The Sony A7iii doesn't look like it'll weigh in at much less than the Nikon once a few lenses are added, and I do like the idea of a bit more reach that an APS-C sensor (that the Fuji's have) could offer, as I do find even my 150-600 is a little short at times.
The XT2 has knobs for everything so looks ideal in many ways, but the XH1 has built in stabilization - not sure if that matters too much as most of the lenses I might buy have it built in, but it felt better in my hand than the XT2 as it is slightly bigger.
Battery life might mean a grip will be needed on either..
As far as lenses are concerned, I use zooms almost without exception.

I guess my question is what other makes should I be looking at that are fairly simple to use, as in loads of knobs rather than loads of menus and weigh in at noticeably less than the Nikon ?
Also, if anyone has gone from either a D850 or a EM1mk2 to something in between I'd love to hear what and why...
Many thanks in advance !
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,600
Edit My Images
No
#3
Nikons new mirrorless will have an EXP comp dial but you won't save on weight.

The XH1 and 100-400 weigh as much as the A7riii and 100-400gm, you can add a 1.4xtc to either, you may think you have more reach with the Fuji APSC over the FF setup but you'll be able to crop more out the A7riii and still get better IQ/AF/battery life than the APSC Fuji... the Sony has a built in APSC crop mode that will make the EVF adjust the mag to APSC so no frame lines/shaded boxes or anything.

If you're feeling rich the A7riii setup will be a good choice, so would waiting for the new Nikon as you already have the lenses... or you'll need to go to a smaller format to save size and weight... which you already have.

I dont think any camera menus are great, so many options, once the cameras setup you shouldn't have to go into menus at all, you should have a my menu, FN menu and programmable modes via mode dial like U1 and U2. Sony also has recall.

Here it is on the A9.... time to setup but very useful if you change things often.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3qpOfaCEzI


Screen Shot 2018-08-12 at 10.30.47.png
 
Last edited:
Messages
18,912
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#4
Size wise is it amazing, but I struggle with the complexity and hate having to pull out my glasses to read the menu every time I want to change things.
However, I love that exposure compensation is so easy via a twiddly knob, but am just not getting on with it as much as I'd hoped.
I dont think any camera menus are great, so many options, once the cameras setup you shouldn't have to go into menus at all, you should have a my menu, FN menu and programmable modes via mode dial like U1 and U2. Sony also has recall.
Yup to the idea that you shouldn't need to be diving into menus too often. I think I only go into mine to format the card and change the clock, at the mo I can't think of anything else...

If bulk and weight are the driving factors I think MFT is the starting point and if that doesn't satisfy you'll need to look at the larger APS-C systems. MFT does have the by many reports excellent longer lenses such as the Panasonic 100-400mm which is tempting me, this giving a 200-800mm FF equivalent FoV.

After having mini SLR style MFT cameras I now only have the RF style GX80 and GX9. These are relatively small cameras and make a small package when used with a prime or one of the more compact zooms. I wouldn't have a problem using a larger lens such as the 100-400mm as I'm not one of those who thinks that larger lenses make smaller bodies unbalanced as in use my left hand is holding the lens. I've used MFT RF style cameras with an adapter and largish film era 70-210mm without balancing problems :D

In your position I'd take another long hard look at MFT, either SLR or RF style (Olypus do a nice RF style camera) and see if I could get over those complexity and menu issues. It is IMO just a matter of sitting down, going through the options and configuring the buttons and quick menus and after that you shouldn't be diving into the complex menu system too often at all.
 
Messages
6,670
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
#5
I dumped all my heavy canon gear this year in favour of a panasonic g80 and a pl100-400 , I have also now got a olympus omd10-mkii to couple up with my growing collection of manual focus legacy lenses . the learning curve was (and still is intense ) but I have stuck with it and am now getting the results I like 90% of the time , I think if I had kept my canon gear I would be going to and fro as you are and comparing , these days I just pick up a camera and go out and actually enjoy it without lugging bags ,tripods ,etc etc with me and going home with a aching back . its certainly put the enjoyment back into things , the other side effect of the 100-400 is its close focus ability and distant birds to close up butterflies etc is a mere click of the distance button .

my advice would be to go for the pl 100-400 put it on the omd body and LEARN to use it properly ,I would love one of those bodies but cant stretch that far .

its a hobby and unless your earning mega bucks with your equipment then its far better to be comfortable ,PLUS I dont get the silly comments these days like oooh was that lens /camera expensive
 
Last edited:
Messages
13,750
Name
Nightmare
Edit My Images
No
#6
How about one or two smaller primes or a more moderate f/4 70-200mm zoom for your Nikon?

I have no idea what you shoot so it is hard to comment really. If it is wildlife there is never anything small and light with good output.
 
Messages
18,912
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#7
How about one or two smaller primes or a more moderate f/4 70-200mm zoom for your Nikon?

I have no idea what you shoot so it is hard to comment really. If it is wildlife there is never anything small and light with good output.
The only issue with that is it's 200mm v an equivalent 800mm with MFT. 200mm is pretty poor to very possibly useless for stuff like birds IMO.
 
Messages
5,871
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
#8
I swapped from 5D3 to X-T2 (via 80D) for precisely the same weight/size reason.
The X-T2 is so much smaller and lighter (with the 35mm f/2 and 18-55 kit) than the 5D3 and 24-70L / 50mm f/1.8.
I don't see much of a trade off is quality. Maybe a bit in really low light...

I do still have the Canon kit, but it mainly gets used for occasions where I know I'm going to want a long lens (occasional airshows etc.) I don't find myself debating which kit to use though generally, I pretty much always just reach for the Fuji.

If you're seriously thinking about the Fuji X series, rumours are that the X-T3 is soon to be announced, that it'll have IBIS, and a ticket price less than the X-T2.
Of course... Rumours...
 
OP
OP
S
Messages
4,473
Edit My Images
Yes
#9
Thanks for the replies.
I have recently being doing some motor sport, and wildlife, so long zoom lenses are a must. 600mm FF is often not quite long enough so crop or MFT seems like the way to go.
Bulk and weight are the main things, and yes, I really need to get my head around the EM1's menu and setting it all up - not something I'm good at at all, so being able to configure dials to do different things just confuses me, which is why set dials (such as the Fuji's have) appeal.
 
Messages
14,600
Edit My Images
No
#10
Thanks for the replies.
I have recently being doing some motor sport, and wildlife, so long zoom lenses are a must. 600mm FF is often not quite long enough so crop or MFT seems like the way to go.
Bulk and weight are the main things, and yes, I really need to get my head around the EM1's menu and setting it all up - not something I'm good at at all, so being able to configure dials to do different things just confuses me, which is why set dials (such as the Fuji's have) appeal.
The fuji xh1 doesn't make much more sense though, you have a SS and AP dial on top, well your OMD has a front and rear command dial and exp comp which you use a lot. Theres no real diving into menus even if you haven't programmed any buttons (for exposure) and programming the OMD will be as much a chore as the XH1.

It sounds like you should just buy the 100-400 instead of making big switches.
 
Last edited:
Messages
18,912
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#11
But the Fuji's will save you less weight than MFT and MFT is what you have at the moment so switching to a 3rd system will mean more money, time and for you there's also the bafflement factor to take into consideration. I'm not having a pop here :D as I'm getting the same these days and one reason why I've stuck with Panasonic for years rather than trying an Olympus is that I just can't be bothered with yet another new way of doing things.

I'd honestly recommend trying to get your head around what you already have before deciding to try something else, manual dials or not.
 
Messages
14,600
Edit My Images
No
#12
There is another option, you could replace all your kit with perhaps the A7riii for FF with high MP, A6500 or A6300 APSC, 70-200, 100-400, 1.4tc.

That way you share the lenses and gain the crop advantage, A65/300 + 1.4x tc = 24MP almost 800mm.... but the A7riii will do the same FL in APSC crop at 18MP and mean 1 body only.
 
Last edited:
Messages
22,761
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#13
Thanks for the replies.
I have recently being doing some motor sport, and wildlife, so long zoom lenses are a must. 600mm FF is often not quite long enough so crop or MFT seems like the way to go.
Bulk and weight are the main things, and yes, I really need to get my head around the EM1's menu and setting it all up - not something I'm good at at all, so being able to configure dials to do different things just confuses me, which is why set dials (such as the Fuji's have) appeal.
If you want full-frame, plus fast apertures and long focal lengths, then weight and bulk are inevitable. You could look at some 'carrying solutions' like a dual harness, modular waist/body packs, backpack etc to make life easier, but otherwise you've simply got to compromise and either be more selective about how much gear to take or change it all for something smaller/lighter - basically reduce format to APS-C or M4/3 - and accept a new set of compromises, no free lunch.

Bear in mind that your D850 is effectively also a 20mp APS-C camera. Nikon 80-400 could potentially replace both 70-200 and 150-600 on APS-C? Maybe hire one?
 
Messages
2,086
Name
Craig
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
I can’t answer your question particularly but have you tried easy exposure comp on the D850?
This. You can set it up so one command dial changes your aperture or shutter, depending which priority mode you are in, and the other, without requiring a press and hold at the same time, simply rotates to adjust exposure compensation.

Carry less lenses around with you, but don't give up the d850.
 
Messages
539
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
Yes
#15
Cant you fiddle with the menu in the viewfinder so you don't need to put your glasses on?
 
Messages
6,670
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
#18
Steve have a look at my pics in th3 Panasonic owners thread . All hand held from b.i.f to insects and butterflies ,,the only difference between mft and 100-400 and canon 1d and sigma 150-600 sport is just over 6 kg in weight
 
Messages
22,184
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#28
How were all those wonderful pictures created before the era of the big fat bloated DSLR and lens combo? It truly baffles me.
My Canon EOS 5 is bigger and heavier than my 6d. And takes exactly the same lenses.
And I owned much bigger film cameras ;)

Don’t let your prejudice push you to false statements. ;)

It’s small but very capable cameras that are the ‘new’ thing, not ‘bloated dslrs
 
Last edited:
Messages
865
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
Yes
#29
If you want less weight stick with the Oly, I just went back to Fuji from the EM-1 Mk2 and the difference when you also factor in lens weight is a lot. If it was me I would go for the 300 Oly lens or the Pana 100-400. My only issue with the Oly was low light performance otherwise I would have kept it, fantastic camera and the lenses are right up there in terms of IQ and build quality if you stick with the Pro range.
 
Messages
3,621
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
#30
I just don't get why someone would contemplate giving up a proper camera like a D850 for one of these silly little cameras mentioned earlier...

It's called choice I think and thank God we have it.

Imagine a world where all photographers insist on having a reflection in their photos. Life would soon become boring.

Ever used a M43 body properly? Thought not.
 
Messages
9,669
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
#31
My Canon EOS 5 is bigger and heavier than my 6d. And takes exactly the same lenses.
And I owned much bigger film cameras ;)

Don’t let your prejudice push you to false statements. ;)

It’s small but very capable cameras that are the ‘new’ thing.

That's a 90's camera and pretty large one at that. I would bet Alan meant long before that era. We always had cameras in the house growing up, they were capable enough for family photo shoots and general 'snapping' - none of them were bigger than than any of the smaller M43 bodies today. One of my uncles was a professional photographer, he did weddings, sporting events etc and worked for a newspaper. I remember him using cameras, couldn't tell you the make or models, but they too were pretty discreet until he pulled out the mad popping flash.

More likely to look like this
 
Last edited:
Messages
18,912
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#32
My Canon EOS 5 is bigger and heavier than my 6d. And takes exactly the same lenses.
And I owned much bigger film cameras ;)

Don’t let your prejudice push you to false statements. ;)

It’s small but very capable cameras that are the ‘new’ thing.
Deep sigh... Good for you Phil :D

My size experience...

My Canon SLR's were weeny compared to my 20D and 5D as was my Nikon SLR. Back then many if not all SLR's were smallish and maybe about the size of a MFT, Sony A7 or Fuji mini SLR style camera but they weighed almost nothing because they were a largely empty box. The lenses were sometimes smaller and lighter too. None of my SLR's were anywhere near the weight of any of my DSLR's. That was my experience.

These days I just find DSLR's and their lenses too bulky and too heavy. My bad. My RF's were larger than my MFT RF style gear but they weighed next to nothing. My film compacts were just a little bigger than my Panasonic TZ100 which lives in my 35mm compact camera case but they too weighed very little. Overall I do think that digital has lead to heavier cameras as of course they're not just empty boxes these days, there's stuff inside them. Lenses are sometimes bigger too IMO and sometimes heavier with all that AF, IS and multiple special glass bits to make sure that the image is perfect at 100%. Yes, kit is often better but a lot of it is also bulkier and heavier. It's not so much the bulk it's the bulk plus the weight which killed my interest in DSLR's.

This comment...

How were all those wonderful pictures created before the era of the big fat bloated DSLR and lens combo? It truly baffles me.
was quite obviously in response to this utter nonsense…

I just don't get why someone would contemplate giving up a proper camera like a D850 for one of these silly little cameras mentioned earlier...
but you knew that didn't you Phil :D

Often Phil I find your posts verging on rude and your persistent and almost certainly deliberate misunderstanding and misrepresentation of what people post predictable and tedious but it's good to see your dedication to this and you've spent so long doing this you've elevated this to the level of an art form. Good luck with it.
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,621
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
#33
In the days of film all 35mm SLRs did the same thing really. They were just boxes to hold the film.
The difference was in the lenses and the guy (or gal) that took the photo.

Nowadays it's a marketing man's (or woman's) dream. Not many of us (even the pros) need the highest tech bodies out there.
 
Messages
18,912
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#34
In the days of film all 35mm SLRs did the same thing really. They were just boxes to hold the film.
The difference was in the lenses and the guy (or gal) that took the photo.

Nowadays it's a marketing man's (or woman's) dream. Not many of us (even the pros) need the highest tech bodies out there.
I read a piece recently by a guy who'd changed from something or other to Sony and it was interesting to read the guys final output needs... 3,000 pixels across for a full page advert in a magazine. I then looked at a TZ100 picture I'd taken at ISO 12,800 and once resized to 3,000 across it looks very nice after only very basic processing :D

Something like the TZ100 would be next to useless for many "pro" or high end enthusiast uses but for image quality at 3,000 across it's very nice even at its max ISO of 12,800 :D

I think this was the piece...

https://www.35mmc.com/16/01/2017/sony-a7rii-review/
 
Messages
224
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
#35
Sorry if this has been mentioned already, but I have the EM1 Mk2, shoot mostly motorsports, and have 3 pre-sets configured, C1 = Aperture Priority, used for shots of static stuff (cars in the pits + people), C2 = Shutter Priority + mechanical shutter @ 10fps, C3 = Shutter Priority + electronic shutter @ 15fps (and they all have other things set that I decided I'd only need in those cases, such as IBIS enabled for C1 but not for C2 or C3 etc.)

I wear glasses to read and can't operate the camera's menu system without them, but don't wear glasses otherwise, and not when using the camera, so I just rely on my presets (I can see well enough to tell C1 from C2!). I guess if I ever decided I needed a 4th or 5th case scenario I'd be buggered, but so far 3 pre-sets has covered all bases and means I don't need to access the menu system when out and about and not wearing glasses.
 
Messages
9,669
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
#36
I think it's mostly the pro photographer that has issues about size. They feel the need to be seen to look professional, and therefore have large expensive bulky gear that the average wedding guest or enthusiast sports 'tog with a one day pass to the sidelines couldn't afford. Now this is just 'my' take before any pros come to bite chunks out of me in defence :D I know when I had the D800E and large lenses I could go nowhere with it without some random stranger asking me to take their picture! Imagine this happening everytime you were taking pics with your phone, you'd be weirded out right? They see the big hulky gear and calculate 2+2 = must be pro - they'd add in "what paper do you work for, will we be in it?" - I have never experienced this when out shooting with Fuji, Olympus or Panasonic bodies. I've still had the odd person ask me about the gear and had some ask was I the guy who ran the local facebook group :D
 
Messages
16,689
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
#37
It’s small but very capable cameras that are the ‘new’ thing, not ‘bloated dslrs
Except these silly little cameras remain on the fringe and SLR's massively outsell them and will continue to do so until we have no choice to use these silly little cameras with flickering view finders and tiny little uninteligible controls.

Unless lenses suddenly massively get smaller these silly little cameras offer little weight advantage, particularly if you use 35mm sensors or bigger.
 
Messages
3,621
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
#38
Except these silly little cameras remain on the fringe and SLR's massively outsell them and will continue to do so until we have no choice to use these silly little cameras with flickering view finders and tiny little uninteligible controls.

Unless lenses suddenly massively get smaller these silly little cameras offer little weight advantage, particularly if you use 35mm sensors or bigger.

Are you saying it's impossible to take a professional quality photo with a smaller sensor size camera Steve?

I'm genuinely interested in your answer, and if you've ever "properly" used one.
 
Messages
16,689
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
#39
Are you saying it's impossible to take a professional quality photo with a smaller sensor size camera Steve?

I'm genuinely interested in your answer, and if you've ever "properly" used one.
Not impossible no and many have managed to do so. And yes I've had the misfortune of using these silly little camera's from Sony and Fuji and honestly give me an SLR sized things with a logical lay out (Canon and Nikon do ths well) and an optical finder and I am happy as are most people. SLR's outsell these silly little things for a reason, because they are better and simpler to use.

Do you think it is impossible to take a professional quality photo using an SLR with a larger sensor? II'm genuinely interested in your answer, and if you've ever "properly" used one?
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,334
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
No
#40
I think it's mostly the pro photographer that has issues about size. They feel the need to be seen to look professional, and therefore have large expensive bulky gear that the average wedding guest or enthusiast sports 'tog with a one day pass to the sidelines couldn't afford. Now this is just 'my' take before any pros come to bite chunks out of me in defence :D I know when I had the D800E and large lenses I could go nowhere with it without some random stranger asking me to take their picture! Imagine this happening everytime you were taking pics with your phone, you'd be weirded out right? They see the big hulky gear and calculate 2+2 = must be pro - they'd add in "what paper do you work for, will we be in it?" - I have never experienced this when out shooting with Fuji, Olympus or Panasonic bodies. I've still had the odd person ask me about the gear and had some ask was I the guy who ran the local facebook group :D
They probably equate size with quality. Small camera equals pish quality, big camera equals great quality.
 
Top