[Jeroen]

[quote=joe1980;4321566]

Originally Posted by joe1980

I just have the 12-40mm lens. But sometimes I felt that I needed a tele lens but I use my legs to cover that up! I keep saying this - The OMD EM 5 MK II is a gem of a camera!

Yes you can do that, although it’s not the same. If you want those nice compressed, shallow DOV images you need to keep your distance!




Jeroen

[joe1980]

@Jeroen With which lens did you get that shot? The image looks as though it was shot from a full frame camera with the exception of the Bokeh which is not as butter smooth as it would be! Awesome anyway!

[Dry Ice]

Originally Posted by autorahul

However, recently Olympus announced OMD-EM10-MarkIII which retains similar design and adds 4K. I believe that should be the most rounded choice for you. Priced at $700, it fits well in your budget too!

Originally Posted by joe1980

I have been using the Olympus OMD EM 5 Mark II and I'm completely satisfied with the quality of pictures I get with this one. You should certainly consider the OMD as an option! Not sure about the price difference between the a6300 and the OMD EM-5!

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

If your hands are young and your hold is rock steady, or if you can afford to buy all Sony OSS lenses, fine. My hands are not, and that in-body stabilisation is really a dream.

Will look at the Olympus as well, thanks for the suggestions.

Reg. the stabilization - I am not giving it too much weightage, as even my current camera doesn't have any stabilization and I have been managing fine so far. I don't intend to go tele zoom on this one, mostly stay between 18-50mm, pans and tilts, on a tripod. So the Sony kit lens should be fine. May get a prime if I feel like, but that is for later.

[Vid6639]

Almost going to pull the plug on the Olympus OMD-EM10 Mk2. Decided against the MK3 as it still uses the same old 16MP sensor and it more expensive. Plus loses out on the heavy customization of the Mk2 as they have made the UI more simpler.

Just need to see whether to get from Singapore or US.

[VW2010]

Just a suggestion. Check the Rx100 series. Brilliant little camera specially for video. Does exceptionally good video. Very small and light makes it an exceptional travel buddy as well as its pocket size.

I use this very frequently and some have even tried to couple it with scopes. And if video is priority do check for used A7s or GH series. They are/were made for video than stills.

Just need to see whether to get from Singapore or US.

Check with Anish, his prices are very close to B&H prices and comes with warranty and exceptional customer service.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by VW2010

Check with Anish, his prices are very close to B&H prices and comes with warranty and exceptional customer service.

Who is Anish? Any contact details pls.

[VW2010]

https://www.facebook.com/videolinksgroup/

Impeccable service and exceptional customer satisfaction oriented dealer who will ship in a day or two and their packaging is something even amazon can learn from.

https://www.videolinks.com/ (Their online shop)

Best is via Facebook and pinging Anish George

https://www.facebook.com/Anishvideolinks

[autorahul]

Originally Posted by Dry Ice

Will look at the Olympus as well, thanks for the suggestions.

Originally Posted by Vid6639

Almost going to pull the plug on the Olympus OMD-EM10 Mk2. Decided against the MK3 as it still uses the same old 16MP sensor and it more expensive. Plus loses out on the heavy customization of the Mk2 as they have made the UI more simpler.

The Olympus Mk2 is a great choice if lack of 4K is not something tht bothers you.

Yesterday, I found another deal that might be helpful for both of you.

Panasonic DMC-GX85 with 2 lenses (12-32 mm and 45-150 mm) along with 64 GB SanDisk Pro Extreme SD card, camera bag and a $50 gift card to add for just $597 on BHPhotoVideo.

Link: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ess_micro.html

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by joe1980

@Jeroen With which lens did you get that shot? The image looks as though it was shot from a full frame camera with the exception of the Bokeh which is not as butter smooth as it would be! Awesome anyway!

Olympus Zuiko 40-150mm 2.8

Br Jeroen

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by Dry Ice

Will look at the Olympus as well, thanks for the suggestions.

Reg. the stabilization - I am not giving it too much weightage, as even my current camera doesn't have any stabilization and I have been managing fine so far. I don't intend to go tele zoom on this one, mostly stay between 18-50mm, pans and tilts, on a tripod. So the Sony kit lens should be fine. May get a prime if I feel like, but that is for later.

I would choose the biggest sensor for the buck.

Re certain features and capabilities: one needs to figure out whether those f/c add significant value. Depends on unique needs/wants.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by autorahul

The Olympus Mk2 is a great choice if lack of 4K is not something tht bothers you.

Yesterday, I found another deal that might be helpful for both of you.

Panasonic DMC-GX85 with 2 lenses (12-32 mm and 45-150 mm) along with 64 GB SanDisk Pro Extreme SD card, camera bag and a $50 gift card to add for just $597 on BHPhotoVideo.

Link: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ess_micro.html

The GX85 got great reviews but most reviews I read mentioned that out of the camera JPEG shots weren't great. This is the only reason I decided against this as my primary use will be shoot and upload to Team-BHP or share on albums. Can't sit and tweak RAW.

Plus I already have a NEX-5T which is an APS-C camera that is known for good image quality. Changing to a m4/3 system already looks to be a downgrade and in my budget only the Olympus looked like a step up.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Dry Ice

Reg. the stabilization - I am not giving it too much weightage, as even my current camera doesn't have any stabilization and I have been managing fine so far. I don't intend to go tele zoom on this one, mostly stay between 18-50mm, pans and tilts, on a tripod. So the Sony kit lens should be fine. May get a prime if I feel like, but that is for later.

Not exactly a novice, but yeah... a novice, because I am relearning what I might have once known using film and long since, forgot. And, having had a good day with my cheapo Neewer 35mm (about 50mm equiv) on the a6000, I can say that I can see what you mean.

I would never say no to stabilisation. but, faster lens, faster shutter speed, is probably better, right? Especially when one's subjects won't sit still anyway.

Here's another aspect to automation: Sony's various forms and flavours of mix-and-match autofocus, are, no doubt, very good for many a photo, and they will do some very clever things but... I came home from my first concert outing with this camera with some amazingly sharp pictures of microphones! With the very non-auto focus of the Neewer, I can physically focus (not by-wire) on the guy's eyelashes, or ensure that the details on his face would be good enough for a dermatologist to work from and... sorry, Mr Microphone, but I would actually rather not have you in my pictures at all!

So, despite all the technology in the camera, I find myself happy to be rediscovering photography as it used to be. And perhaps my next lens purchase will be a longer fully manual lens from China.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I would never say no to stabilisation. but, faster lens, faster shutter speed, is probably better, right? Especially when one's subjects won't sit still anyway.

Well, I guess it depends a bit on your preference and the circumstances. The Olympus stabilization system for instance is very, very good. It will allow you to shoot handheld at very low shutter speeds.

You can disable horizontal or vertical stabilization as well. So, for instance if your tracking and shooting race cars that would be a benefit.

As per your example, anything that wont sit still and moves very randomly you probably want to get the highest shutter time.

Still, faster lenses is always at the end of the scale. So if your i age require an aperture of say 5.6or more what difference is a fast lens going to make. (Other then fast lenses are often better across the whole range of course.).

But again, down to personal preference and budget. If you can afford, get it all!

Jeroen

[Dry Ice]

Originally Posted by autorahul

The Olympus Mk2 is a great choice if lack of 4K is not something tht bothers you.

Yesterday, I found another deal that might be helpful for both of you.

Panasonic DMC-GX85 with 2 lenses (12-32 mm and 45-150 mm) along with 64 GB SanDisk Pro Extreme SD card, camera bag and a $50 gift card to add for just $597 on BHPhotoVideo.

Link: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ess_micro.html

Thank you for sharing this. Will check it out.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

I would choose the biggest sensor for the buck.

Re certain features and capabilities: one needs to figure out whether those f/c add significant value. Depends on unique needs/wants.

I would too, that's why leaning towards the Sony more than the micro 4/3.

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I would never say no to stabilisation. but, faster lens, faster shutter speed, is probably better, right? Especially when one's subjects won't sit still anyway.

Now, what do I say to that! I think I should invest in Bitcoins to increase my budget and get the A6500, or maybe A7R (depending on the appreciation).

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

You can disable horizontal or vertical stabilization as well. So, for instance if your tracking and shooting race cars that would be a benefit.

Wow. Just wow. I didn't even know there were cameras with that facility!