[navin_bhp]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

I know nothing about this Sony, but if you are buying in the USA, B&H is an excellent place online.

Or even better, if you ever find yourself in NewYork, look up their store. It is truly amazing. Bring a credit card (or two!)

Jeroen

I hate paying tax when buying at the NY store. The sales people themselves ask if you are from a different state and suggest to get things shipped to avoid tax. But visiting the store is an amazing experience for sure. One can spend the whole day in there checking out all the electronics, cameras, bags and tripods. Adorama is another good store. Both stores ship super quick and have great deals.

[tsk1979]

I walked in to buy the A6000 + couple of lenses. And then I picked up a RX10-III. Played around with that, and walked out.
The store however was Best Buy and they were running a special where apart from low price a gift card was also included.

With the RX10-III, I am reaching out for the A7 only in special cases (Night). Regular stuff the 1" sensor is handling perfectly well.

[JMaruru]

Has anyone got first hand experience with Olympus PEN E-PL8? How is it compared to other mirror-less cameras? Especially Canon EOS M10?

I am looking for a compact camera with good street photography attributes.
Olympus PEN E-PL8 sells for $649/- with kit lens. Canon EOS M10 with kit lens costs $449/-

What say?

[condor]

Sony Overtakes #2 Position in U.S. Full-Frame Interchangeable Lens Camera Market



http://www.thephoblographer.com/2017...camera-market/

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Samurai

The Olympus OMD E1 MkII wins the Gold Award at DPReview.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/oly...-m1-mark-ii/11

To be frank, I ignored this camera because the cost was too high.

Today I visited dxomark website to checkout the score on my lenses, and found something crazy.

I own the 75mm, 45mm, 12-40mm, 40-150mm, 25mm (F1.8) and the Tokina 7.5mm lenses. The first 4 have dxomark scores.

This is the dxomark score when mounted on EM1 mkI and EM5 mk1.



Now check the score of same lenses when mounted on EM1 mkII.



What a jump... how crazy is that? Of course, the EM1 mkII body costs $2000, so they are not even selling it in India. I currently own EM5 mkII, but no dxomark score available for that mount.

Anyway, this tells me that I should someday switch to EM1 mkII, may be next year or the year after that. If it improves performance of all my lenses by that extent, it is not a bad deal.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Anyway, this tells me that I should someday switch to EM1 mkII, may be next year or the year after that. If it improves performance of all my lenses by that extent, it is not a bad deal.

Well, I don’t think you can actually draw that conclusion. And that is the problem with this score. It suggest that the performance of a lens/body combination can be rolled into one number. Whereas mathematically of course that is correct, it doesn’t necessarily translate easily towards what it would do to your particular type of photography. These overall scores are just a comparison based on use-cases (but not yours).

You want to make some sense and real use out of their data you need to dig into some of the details. Look at the use case scores.

Measurements is good for making your own comparisons. Mind you that one takes quite a bit of experience as well.

And by the way, if you shoot in JPEG rather then RAW all of dxomark results,becomes redundant completely, of course.

If you want to upgrade your kit, I suggest you try to be as specific as you can be, what it is that your current kit is lacking for your type of photography. If you can articulate that, you can figure out what options might be available.

If you just like to get new kit, because you enjoy that, that’s fine as well. Don’t expect your photography to improve because the new kit has a better score in whichever test. Photography improves because you know what your current images need to improve.

Jeroen

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by condor

Sony Overtakes #2 Position in U.S. Full-Frame Interchangeable Lens Camera Market



http://www.thephoblographer.com/2017...camera-market/

Lies, damned lies and statistics. Take two months of low DSLR sales data (Jan and Feb are traditionally slow for Canikon, the deals stop after New Year), when an attractive Sony offer was running in the US, extrapolate for the full year and pass tall claims? Good for their PR agency though

Anyway, I am glad to see such publicity for that press release. Nikon deserves all the kicks and bad press they are getting. Nikon's business management and marketing suck compared to Canon's. Loyal Nikon users are interested in roadmap and support, and about Nikon's plans for mirrorless and re connectivity/seamless photo sharing. What does Nikon do? Cut down on support staff, stop certain mirrorless products, minimize presence in important trade shows, while splurging on some silly New York campaign!

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

And by the way, if you shoot in JPEG rather then RAW all of dxomark results,becomes redundant completely, of course.

I haven't shot in JPEG since I switched to dSLR in 2006. Same habit continued when I switched to mirrorless in 2012.

So you will have to tell me how it feels to shoot JPEG using advanced mirrorless cameras or dSLR. I don't have a clue. I didn't buy OMD EM5 mkI and mkII to shoot JPEG.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

If you just like to get new kit, because you enjoy that, that’s fine as well. Don’t expect your photography to improve because the new kit has a better score in whichever test. Photography improves because you know what your current images need to improve.

Since your comments appear to be completely from a JPEG shooter point of view, I may have to explain myself bit more. I usually see big improvement in my images when I upgrade bodies, because I don't upgrade unless I see real value. For example, I still drive a SUV I bought in 2007. I don't see a reason to upgrade. Don't confuse me with GAS patients.

You probably don't follow dxomark rating. But those of us who do, we keep an eye on their Perpetual MPix rating, since it is useful to compare sharpness of the same lens across multiple bodies.

When it come crop bodies, lenses usually out-resolve the body. But as the bodies improve over years, they catch up with the lenses, or at least narrow the gap. That is the reason why I keep my lenses lot longer than the bodies.

The dxomark P-Mpix sharpness score tells me that EM1 mkII has narrowed the gap significantly compared to the EM1 mkI. Wish they had the numbers for EM5 mkII, but they don't. But I suspect it would be closer to the EM1 mkI than mkII.

By late next year, the EM1 mkII body price will nearly drop by 50%, that is usual for Olympus bodies. By then my EM5 mkII will be nearly 4 years old. So I am going to make use of that, to get more out of my lenses which I plan to keep for many more years.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by Samurai;4183377

You probably don't follow dxomark rating. But those of us who do, we keep an eye on their [URL="https://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Looking-for-new-photo-gear-DxOMark-s-Perceptual-Megapixel-can-help-you"

Perpetual MPix[/url] rating, since it is useful to compare sharpness of the same lens across multiple bodies.

When it come crop bodies, lenses usually out-resolve the body. But as the bodies improve over years, they catch up with the lenses, or at least narrow the gap. That is the reason why I keep my lenses lot longer than the bodies.

The dxomark P-Mpix sharpness score tells me that EM1 mkII has narrowed the gap significantly compared to the EM1 mkI. Wish they had the numbers for EM5 mkII, but they don't. But I suspect it would be closer to the EM1 mkI than mkII.

I am not sure about the secret sauce that has gone into the EM1 Mk2's sensor (e.g. lack of AA filter), but a broad guideline is that lenses have better scores on a higher MP camera. On a different note, lenses also score better on larger sensor cameras (true for DX/FX comparison). I am talking about the same lens, of course.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

I am not sure about the secret sauce that has gone into the EM1 Mk2's sensor (e.g. lack of AA filter), but a broad guideline is that lenses have better scores on a higher MP camera. On a different note, lenses also score better on larger sensor cameras (true for DX/FX comparison). I am talking about the same lens, of course.

The EM5 mkII and EM1 mk1 have the same processor and same MP resolution. That is probably why they haven't bothered to put up scores for EM5 mkII.

The EM1 mkII has next generation processor and higher MP. Dxomark has never disclosed the exact methodology, but their rating are generally accepted to be accurate.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Samurai

So you will have to tell me how it feels to shoot JPEG using advanced mirrorless cameras or dSLR. I don't have a clue. I didn't buy OMD EM5 mkI and mkII to shoot JPEG.

I must admit I have been using RAW for most of my photography from the moment I went digital. And I have been using it in simple camera’s such as Canon S90 as well. It’s not for sole use of advanced and or DSLRs. Also, I wouldn’t dismiss JPEG out of hand just because one has an advanced mirrorless and or DSLR either. It does serve a specific purpose. If it’s not yours that’s fine.

The number of peopling shooting in JPEG with an advanced mirrorless and or DSLR is something that can’t be underestimated. I do some 8-12 workshops/courses per year on photography/Photo editing. You would be amazed how many people do use JPEG rather then RAW. It was the same in India, UK, USA and the Netherlands.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Since your comments appear to be completely from a JPEG shooter point of view, I may have to explain myself bit more. I usually see big improvement in my images when I upgrade bodies, because I don't upgrade unless I see real value.

I trust you are a bit more accurate and pay more attention to detail in your photography then in the way you read my post. I did not say I shoot in JPEG, I did not suggest I shoot in JPEG all I said was:

And by the way, if you shoot in JPEG rather then RAW all of dxomark results,becomes redundant completely, of course.

But back to your original point which I do find interesting. Could you post some images that clearly show the big improvements you see? Thanks

Originally Posted by Samurai

You probably don't follow dxomark rating. But those of us who do, we keep an eye on their Perpetual MPix rating, since it is useful to compare sharpness of the same lens across multiple bodies.

I know them reasonably well. I have visited them in the past. A friend of mine, used to work there, so I got a nice peep under the hood so to speak. Pretty unusual as they are a bit of a secretive lot these days.

I have used their products such as OpticsPro Elite as well.

Originally Posted by Samurai

T Dxomark has never disclosed the exact methodology, but their rating are generally accepted to be accurate.

Depends on one’s view. As with an methodology there are always pro and con views. Search for "DxO score relevance" and you will find hundreds of articles, threads in various forums all over the world from people who don’t like their method at all.

Having said that, there is probably not an universal appreciated method. No matter what, you will always find people that want something different.

Jeroen

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

I trust you are a bit more accurate and pay more attention to detail in your photography then in the way you read my post.

Oh, I did read your post carefully. Since you carelessly assumed I am an JPEG shooter, I thought I should return the compliment.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

But back to your original point which I do find interesting. Could you post some images that clearly show the big improvements you see? Thanks

I don't know why you keep asking me to justify my upgrades. You have already asked me earlier, and I have answered in detail. Since I haven't upgraded since, that answer still holds good.

BTW, I don't have the time to create a detailed post on image improvements. Those who are familiar with my photography do notice the difference. For example, I shot a review using my OMD body in March 2015, and a friend noticed the difference.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Depends on one’s view. As with an methodology there are always pro and con views. Search for "DxO score relevance" and you will find hundreds of articles, threads in various forums all over the world from people who don’t like their method at all.

Well aware of it. However, most of the skepticism came up because dxomark didn't explain their methodology. Then there are fanboys who don't like it when their gear scores low. For me it is a useful metric, as opposed to not having one. I don't have the luxury of renting equipment before buying it, so I need to depend on some metric to have some idea. Based on my personal experience with my gear, I have grown to trust their number.

[navin_bhp]

I haven't used the camera yet but just going by the reviews the Em1-MKII has great improvements on the AF, buffer and speed to take advantage of the 300 f4 aimed at sports shooters. It is definitely going to be better overall compared to EM5 MKII and PenF but from the sample images I've see compared to these cameras I don't think the difference is huge. I love the Olympus lenses and like Samurai said would wait and buy the camera when it's price is like 700$-800$. While I would not mind paying couple 100$ more for their awesome lenses 2000$ for a m4/3 camera is crazy.

Also I would love to see the kind of pics both Samurai and Jeroen have taken. I don't see you guys sharing them a lot. Do you both have your own websites?

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Since you carelessly assumed I am an JPEG shooter,

Well aware of it. However, most of the skepticism came up because dxomark didn't explain their methodology.

I really don’t understand how you can read that in my post. It was just a general remark.

Fact remains that just about every high end camera on the market fully supports JPEG and RAW. Whether you use it or not is a personal choice, there is no good or bad. The only result that counts is how one’s images look. Nobody will be the wiser what kit or file format one has used.

Not quire sure why they never explained their methodology in full. Although lots is known these day. When it comes to their editing software, I have very little use for it. It was one of those expensive buys, that are really not worth it.

Jeroen

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Well aware of it. However, most of the skepticism came up because dxomark didn't explain their methodology. Then there are fanboys who don't like it when their gear scores low.

Sometimes DXOmark scores surprise me, especially sensor scores.
1. They test in the lab, not in real world conditions. There is a big difference between ISO 2000 in good light and in bad light.
2. They give excessive weightage to a sensor's performance in low ISO conditions (say ISO 100-200).
3. I see no reason why some excellent Canon bodies should have such low scores e.g. even something like the 5D full frame series. Canon would be out of business if one just went by the sensor scores of Canon cameras :-)

In my experience, the scores do not always reflect real world performance. I have extensively used the D7100 and D500. As per DXOmark there is little difference in sensor scores. But there is a big, big difference in sensor performance when shooting in the field.

If one looks at the 'Measurements' tab, and at individual curves for SNR 18%, Dynamic Range etc., those results partially, but not fully explain the absolute score. E.g. the SNR 18% curve does not at all reflect the noise difference - as I have seen - between D7100 and D500. While the Dynamic Range curves do, partially.

So IMO, it helps to use DXOmark scores as a broad, relative guideline, but trust one's eyes and experience when taking a final decision. I do realise that given your non traditional choices you might not have an easy opportunity to do so.
----------------------
Edit (this is not in response to Samurai's or other posts):

I sold prints of these photos last week. Excuse the aspect ratios, some were portraits or much wider. I had to force fit them into a grid using a mobile app.

Analyzing the gears, I realized that many of these photos were taken with older cameras. Bottomline: time spent out shooting outweighs reading/lusting about gear, which I am often guilty of