3 ms·

A good list with a lot of very useful features. One thing I found interesting there was, that Olympus was the brand which implemented a lot of those features. M

by _ph_ 5y ago

A good list with a lot of very useful features. One thing I found interesting there was, that Olympus was the brand which implemented a lot of those features. Micro Four Thirds is often ignored for its "small sensor". But in practise, a lot of features often count more than the sensor size (which of course has a lot of advantages for optics design, as size and portability). All photographers should pay more attention to Olympus, or rather OMDS, as the new company is called. They are making really good and versatile cameras.

tuatoru 5y ago
Olympus also has some excellent lenses quite reasonably priced. The brand is seriously underrated. (Ssh, don't tell anyone.)
- _ph_ 5y ago
  Indeed, it is. The lenses just are great. I have a large Olympus setup. Could I have gotten any full frame camera? Yes, but for most tasks I consider the Olympus the better choice in the combination of features, great optics and a small kit which can be carried even with a bad back. For me, the only real competitor is the Leica M system :)
  - tuatoru 5y ago
    I agree, and I would love to try a Leica, but I don't have that kind of money for one among several hobbies. :-) I also don't get this term "full frame". When I started photography, "full frame" was 120 format. 35mm was "compact camera". And I think you need to go to 120 (at least) to do noticeably better than Olympus micro four-thirds.
    - _ph_ 5y ago
      It is just a term which got established. Most of the times, I just talk about the 35mm format. The best explanation is, that Canon and Nikon used to sell digital versions of their 35mm camera with smaller sensors. And when they started to make 35mm digital sensors, these cameras were "full frame", as the digital camera had the same sensor size as the film cameras of the same system had. I don't care to much about those terms, I am happy with Olympus. With respect to the Leica: if you can trust your self control, by all means try out a Leica, it is an experience one should have. But yes, deposit your credit card at a safe place, they are lovely. For me the downfall was that I bought a M-mount Voigtländer 40/1.4 as a short tele lens for mFT, back then when there where not many prime lenses to choose from. It works lovely on a digital M :)
      - tuatoru 5y ago
        > if you can trust your self control Ok, thanks. That's a no for me, then! :-)

by _ph_ 5y ago

tuatoru 5y ago

Olympus also has some excellent lenses quite reasonably priced. The brand is seriously underrated. (Ssh, don't tell anyone.)

_ph_ 5y ago
Indeed, it is. The lenses just are great. I have a large Olympus setup. Could I have gotten any full frame camera? Yes, but for most tasks I consider the Olympus the better choice in the combination of features, great optics and a small kit which can be carried even with a bad back. For me, the only real competitor is the Leica M system :)
- tuatoru 5y ago
  I agree, and I would love to try a Leica, but I don't have that kind of money for one among several hobbies. :-) I also don't get this term "full frame". When I started photography, "full frame" was 120 format. 35mm was "compact camera". And I think you need to go to 120 (at least) to do noticeably better than Olympus micro four-thirds.
  - _ph_ 5y ago
    It is just a term which got established. Most of the times, I just talk about the 35mm format. The best explanation is, that Canon and Nikon used to sell digital versions of their 35mm camera with smaller sensors. And when they started to make 35mm digital sensors, these cameras were "full frame", as the digital camera had the same sensor size as the film cameras of the same system had. I don't care to much about those terms, I am happy with Olympus. With respect to the Leica: if you can trust your self control, by all means try out a Leica, it is an experience one should have. But yes, deposit your credit card at a safe place, they are lovely. For me the downfall was that I bought a M-mount Voigtländer 40/1.4 as a short tele lens for mFT, back then when there where not many prime lenses to choose from. It works lovely on a digital M :)
    - tuatoru 5y ago
      > if you can trust your self control Ok, thanks. That's a no for me, then! :-)