Never! lol
Actually, I am pretty impressed with what I am hearing from Sony right now. Be nice to see a cpl other manufacturers jump on board with some good mirrorless tech. Nikon's announcements were fairly sad so far. 2 updates after less than a year of the products on the market. A 58mm that seems a bit far fetched at $1700... Lame
At least Canon's 70D has some new tech in them.
Yes the mirrorless stuff is starting to look good. I had a look at a mate's Oly a few months ago and the electronic viewfinder is almost good enough. I think m4/3 is still short of really good long zooms which is a problem for me and the contrast focusing is not up to scratch, although I believe they are starting to bring out hybrid contrast/phase systems that are ok. Still a long way short of an EOS1 body in that regard though.
As you probably know once you have a lot of gear it gets pretty expensive to swap.
The 100-300 ( 200-600 equivalent in 35mm ) Lumix zoom lens is pretty good. I think the weakness of the M4/3 systems for me was the AF did not match my 1 series Canon bodies. My GH3 was fine for big cats laying around while shooting from a Land Cruiser, but not really for birds in flight. A friend says the new Oly OM-D E1 will grab birds in flight; if true, that is quite significant.
The decision by Panasonic and Olympus, to incorporate lens error correction into the camera bodies themselves, means that the Lumix 100-300 zoom is pretty decent, small, light, and for $600 is very inexpensive compared to a Canon L 600mm lens. No lens corrections needed in Lightroom or Photoshop, since they are already corrected in software inside the camera body.
I shot this with an OM-D E-5 with the Lumix 100-300 -
Pretty lame shot compared to what normally gets on this thread, but yesterday early morning I did a little cat and mouse with bald eagles up and down the northern Oregon coastline. They were quite amusing waddling about the sand.
Actually I think that's a nice shot, I've never seen an eagle going for a surf before.
Re m4/3, I downloaded the official demo shots from a site, 2-5MB each and they were not what I would consider sharp. I also started a thread on the "Cambridge in colour" forum and a lot of people posted examples, IIRC none of them were sharp as well, even at web size in many cases.
Here's an example if you want to download a 4.5MB file
Lovely shot but not even close to being pin sharp.
That cheetah shot certainly looks sharp at that res though, and as a nature photographer you have to love the 2x factor for all your lenses (although I already use 1.3x crop factor bodies for wildlife).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
