Thinking about changing from Four Thirds to Nikon

pepper

pepper

Messages
802
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm in the very lucky (or difficult) position of having enough lenses Four Thirds, Canon or Nikon to be able choose which digital camera I change too.

At the moment I have my Fathers Panasonic DMC-L1 and my Daughter has my old Olympus E-500 but I'm not happy with the darkness of the viewfinder and as I have a Nikon F5 sitting here with some lovely lenses I thought about changing to a D90 it would actually be the first digital SLR I have bought as all my previous ones I've bought off my Father as he upgraded.

He passed away in July hence I've now got his Panasonic which during the day is a great camera but its virtually impossible to use at night!

The lenses for the Nikon are

35-105 3.5-4.5

35-70 3.3-4.5

85 1.8

24 2.8

and a Tokina 70-210 4-5.6

I've also got a Miranda Nk-AF36 flash so I reckon buying the camera with the kit 18-55 VR lens would make a great kit.

Now don't get me wrong the Four Thirds system is pretty good but the viewfinder is annoying and the lenses I have are brilliant but having all these Nikon lenses sitting here its very tempting to change over systems.

So would you change over or stick with perhaps a newer four thirds?
 
Come over to the Dark Side...we're very friendly here...
 
The Panasonic is somewhat ancient now, but the 14-50 Panasonic kit lens is much better than any of the nikkors on your list. Depends what other fourthirds lenses you have. The fourthirds lenses are the reason the system is special - many of them trounce the equivalent competition in terms of sharpness and lack of distortion together with superior weather sealing.

If you have used the E-30 or E-3 (or even the E-620), the viewfinder size is really not an issue. All the crop-sensor bodies have quite small viewfinders compared with the old full-frame film cameras - the D90 is no exception.

The sensor performance of the latest fourthirds camera is on a par with Canon and Nikon, and I would expect to see refreshes of the E-xxx models within the next few months (with video and the latest sensors we have seen already on the micro fourthirds models).

Here's a comparison of viewfinder size you might find useful: http://www.wrotniak.com/photo/43/view-size.html.

Here's a review of the Panasonic GH1, comparing its sensor with the 7D. Add in the D300s and you will see it even beats the opposition at some ISOs! http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...xOMark-review-for-the-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH1

Andy
 
With the Nikon lenses you've got you are almost obliged to go the whole hog - full frame. I am sure that the improvement in sensor noise and low light performace that you would see would mean that you would never look back.
 
BTW, the old lenses will struggle a bit in terms of IQ on the crop-sensor body. The older lenses are not up to either the resolution requirements of the crop sensor or the anti-flaring lens coating requirements of a digital sensor. The results will be okay, maybe good, if stopped down, but not as good as the latest nikkor lenses. In effect, I would not consider the legacy lenses much of an impetus to change system. The build quality of the L1 (as it was rebadged for Leica, panasonic made a great job) is excellent - the D90 cannot match that, although it isn't bad either.

Andy
 
Some of these Nikon Lenses are still available new now, they are the AF D lenses so are pretty current.

Looking at those viewfinder sizes no wonder I'm having problems, the DMC-L1 is far smaller than even the E520!
 
pepper said:
Some of these Nikon Lenses are still available new now, they are the AF D lenses so are pretty current.

Looking at those viewfinder sizes no wonder I'm having problems, the DMC-L1 is far smaller than even the E520!
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was a little confused when you mentioned the F5! The IQ of the 14-50 on a modern fourthirds body will be hard to beat. The Zuiko 12-60 is a bit more practical and the Zuiko 14-35 is faster and sharper (and a lot more expensive), but you have a peach of a lens in the Leica D 14-50.

Andy
 
pepper said:
Oh I agree the Leica 14-50 is a fantastic lens but I can't see anything through the viewfinder! Don't even try the live view ;)
Click to expand...

It's not just the size on the L1 - it's the darkness - the L1 uses a porro finder rather than a pentaprism. They a very dark!

I'd recommend an E-620 - very capable with articulating screen, built-in IS and very small and compact. With the video-enabled models very soon, the 620 is going to be heavily discounted...

Andy
 
I do agree about the viewfinder, the E500 that my daughter has now is far easier to see through.

I may go and have a look at the E620, and see if there are any good deals around.

I like Olympus cameras and own Om1-n and OM10 SLRs and have some lovely older Zuiko OM lenses.
 
pepper said:
I do agree about the viewfinder, the E500 that my daughter has now is far easier to see through.

I may go and have a look at the E620, and see if there are any good deals around.

I like Olympus cameras and own Om1-n and OM10 SLRs and have some lovely older Zuiko OM lenses.
Click to expand...

Good fun to play with the older lenses with a cheap adapter off ebay. The Zuiko 100/2.8 is a great short telephoto - nice and compact and very sharp, even on the demanding fourthirds body. The 50mm f3.5 macro (if you find/have a later MC version) is amazingly sharp and almost as good for macro as the new ZD 50mm f2 (which is known as one of the sharpest lenses around).

The E-600 is basically a de-spec'd E-620, and can be cheaper, although there are plenty of deals on the E-620 around.

I have had virtually all of the OM cameras (1n, 2n, 4, 2SP, 10, 20 ,30, 40, 101, 707) at one time or another, but just keep the 10 as it was my late father's. The build quality and compactness are great - something that carries over into the E-series (okay, the E-3 is a bit of a monster, but there aren't many cameras that survive being engulfed in the sea and then rinsed under a tap!).

Andy
 
See I'm an Olympus fan, but looking through all the reviews between the E620 and the D90 this evening and Olympus have been left standing.

The Om10 is my favourite camera with a manual adaptor plugged in its just the nicest little camera I've ever used.

I've also had 101 707 Om1n om40 and I always come back to the OM10 if I want a nice simple camera.
 
pepper said:
See I'm an Olympus fan, but looking through all the reviews between the E620 and the D90 this evening and Olympus have been left standing.

The Om10 is my favourite camera with a manual adaptor plugged in its just the nicest little camera I've ever used.

I've also had 101 707 Om1n om40 and I always come back to the OM10 if I want a nice simple camera.
Click to expand...

The reviews and the practice are quite different. The D90 sensor performance is excellent and surpasses the E-620 performance at higher ISOs (lower ISOs, there really isn't much difference). The latest microfourthirds cameras beat the D90 sensor wise, and, if you can afford to wait a couple of months, get the updated model which should have performance as least as good as the likes of the Pen E-P2, E-PL1 and the Panasonic G-... cameras and probably better.

I think the E-620 is a good value package because it is about to be superseded. The kit lenses that come with the 620 are excellent - never forget about the glass. The articulated screen on the 620 also makes liveview a genuine benefit - shooting above your head over crowds or low-down on the floor.

The differences in sensor between the 620 and the D90 are only going to be felt if you need to shoot often in low-light conditions.

Andy
 
pepper said:
Oh and I forgot the main pet hate of my old E500 had been the AF assist using the flash! DO I really need to bolt a bigger flash on to get IR assist?
Click to expand...

Yes - the FL-36 is the most compact option for this. But remember the AF system in the 620 is a massive leap over the E-500's 3 point (and only 1 cross-type) system. The need for AF assist is diminished anyway.

Andy
 
The differences in sensor between the 620 and the D90 are only going to be felt if you need to shoot often in low-light conditions.

Andy
Click to expand...


Funnily enough, this is a circle back to where we started with the Four Thirds, my primary complaint is I can't see in dim light and then when I do take a photograph the quality is poor too.

I must admit the articulating screen is a big bonus, my old Canon A80 had an articulating screen and it was a brilliant idea.

Ahh decisions decisions.

Having this Leica 14-50 lens sitting here is probably making this the hardest choice as its a brilliant lens and I know that getting a lens to compare to the Leica will be very expensive!
 
pepper said:
Funnily enough, this is a circle back to where we started with the Four Thirds, my primary complaint is I can't see in dim light and then when I do take a photograph the quality is poor too.

I must admit the articulating screen is a big bonus, my old Canon A80 had an articulating screen and it was a brilliant idea.

Ahh decisions decisions.

Having this Leica 14-50 lens sitting here is probably making this the hardest choice as its a brilliant lens and I know that getting a lens to compare to the Leica will be very expensive!
Click to expand...

The difference in high ISO capabilities between the L1 or E-500 and the E-620 (or E-30, E-3, E-450) is very noticeably better - about 1-2 stops. Factor in in-body IS and a relatively bright f2.8-3.5 on the Leica lens and the need for higher ISOs is diminished anyway. You could quite easily end up comparing ISO 400 on the E-620 with ISO 1600 on the D90.

Andy
 
You just don't want another person to move away from Olympus do you ;)



But what you're saying is very true, putting the Leica lens on the E-620 then using the in body image stabilisation and the differences between the actual pictures taken would be very minor.
 
pepper said:
You just don't want another person to move away from Olympus do you ;)



But what you're saying is very true, putting the Leica lens on the E-620 then using the in body image stabilisation and the differences between the actual pictures taken would be very minor.
Click to expand...

Absolutely - it would be a shame to go away from Olympus. Their glass is superb - even at the basic 'standard' grade level. Over the last year, they've closed the gap with their sensors (okay, Panasonic, as their provider has). With the very latest microfourthirds cameras, the gap has all but disappeared - and that should continue with the latest fourthirds cameras coming out soon. You then look at the rest of the package - the in-body IS, build quality & reliability, AF system, articulating screen, quality of the out-of-camera JPG and it looks very compelling. I have no hesitation in recommending them!

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