07-23-2012, 06:18 PM
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1342819921' post='19503']
I really fail to see the attraction of bigger mirrorless camera. They only offer the drawbacks (no OVF, no PD AF with tracking) and yet do offer a real size advantage. Remains a mystery to me.
[/quote]
I guess it depends what quality and handling you find acceptable. Weight-wise I changed from
Canon 400D + battery (~556g) + 16-35 MkII (625g) + 60mm macro (335g) + Sigma 100-300 (1440g), total 2.96kg
to
Panasonic G3 + battery (~382g), 12-35 (305g), 45 macro (225g), 100-300 (520g), total 1.43kg.
Camera + 3 lenses fit in the smaller camera bag that only took the 400D, 16-35mm and macro before, so much smaller too.
Particularly so if you mount the 14mm pancake, then it fits in my even smaller old compact camera bag and is suddenly light enough for mountain walking.
Basically around 2 times smaller and lighter depending how you count/measure.
I am fine with the EVF and and the live histogram (and metering) is a big boon - I would often have to take pictures several times as my 400D easily overexposed. The CDAF seems to be maturing too.
Then there is the depth of field argument. I mostly do landscape style pictures and I don't mind a bit extra for long tele. That leaves macro, where the depth of field is a bit too big in some cases but more suitable when very close - not really a problem for my use.
So far the only drawbacks are that the 100-300 is not of the same quality as the Sigma. I am not sold about IS in the macro either.. nor in the 12-35 except for video, perhaps.
I really fail to see the attraction of bigger mirrorless camera. They only offer the drawbacks (no OVF, no PD AF with tracking) and yet do offer a real size advantage. Remains a mystery to me.
[/quote]
I guess it depends what quality and handling you find acceptable. Weight-wise I changed from
Canon 400D + battery (~556g) + 16-35 MkII (625g) + 60mm macro (335g) + Sigma 100-300 (1440g), total 2.96kg
to
Panasonic G3 + battery (~382g), 12-35 (305g), 45 macro (225g), 100-300 (520g), total 1.43kg.
Camera + 3 lenses fit in the smaller camera bag that only took the 400D, 16-35mm and macro before, so much smaller too.
Particularly so if you mount the 14mm pancake, then it fits in my even smaller old compact camera bag and is suddenly light enough for mountain walking.
Basically around 2 times smaller and lighter depending how you count/measure.
I am fine with the EVF and and the live histogram (and metering) is a big boon - I would often have to take pictures several times as my 400D easily overexposed. The CDAF seems to be maturing too.
Then there is the depth of field argument. I mostly do landscape style pictures and I don't mind a bit extra for long tele. That leaves macro, where the depth of field is a bit too big in some cases but more suitable when very close - not really a problem for my use.
So far the only drawbacks are that the 100-300 is not of the same quality as the Sigma. I am not sold about IS in the macro either.. nor in the 12-35 except for video, perhaps.