[Samurai]

Originally Posted by R2D2

But I won't get take up cudgels just because people don't share the same enthusiasm about my preferred camera system (DSLRs). IMHO, these systems cater to different requirements and customer preferences, including financial budgets.

But then you have your own opinion and I have mine, with neither one owing each other an explanation.

Sigh.

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

Samurai San, keeping with the same logic, when you go out to what you love most (i.e. offroading) you don't take your i10, right?

I believe in using the right tool for the right job. I am an practical kind of Engineer. See this: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/shift...ml#post1618768

Just like how I use CJ340 for offroading, Grand Vitara for badroad/highway driving, and i10 AT for city driving, I believe different photographic needs require different cameras. Dragging along a dSLR for every need, is like carrying a huge sledge hammer all the time looking for things to hit. I love my Olympus E-3 and even the E-500, I know most of you have no clue about these cameras, but I know they are very good.

The Ford Endeavour Test drive was covered using my E-3: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/offic...-off-road.html

But they don't suit all situations. While the fully weather proof E-3 does well in rain drenched offroad photography, packing and unpacking 100s times a day gets too much. Also carrying it every where without looking like as if I am on a photo-walk was also a problem. Therefore, EVIL option become attractive.

I am an early adopter and like companies that innovate a lot. I started off my photography with a fully manual Minolta SLR in 1989. In July 1993 I saw this fixed zoom lens SLR (Olympus IS-3 DLX), featured in an US Photography Magazine. Two month later I bought it although most people at that time wondered what good is a fixed lens camera even though it had 35-180mm zoom. It served me very well until 2006 when I moved on to Olympus E-500. I also bought my first digital camera in 2001 when most said film will never go away. It was so convenient to use over the IS-3, I almost ignored the IS-3.

So I tried out EVIL camera option. Didn't exactly workout as I expected. I thought I could replace my dSLR with EVIL. But EVIL is not yet ready for dSLR world domination. If you think I am a blind EVIL camera fan, look at #250, I have actually listed out the problem with EVIL. I still use the E-3 or E-500 when required. I still love/prefer the feel of the dSLR over EVIL. Still I see myself using the E-PL1 more than E-3 since it is easy to carry everywhere.

So why do I argue with you guys? Because most of you are passing judgement without trying it first hand. Holding it in a shop doesn't count. I hear all kind of deep technical arguments, just gut feel arguments, all against EVIL while HellwratH is grinning over his growing MF lens collection.

Besides HellwratH and I, which active poster here owns one of the EVIL cameras? The people who own and use EVIL cameras on regular basis know that it scores over dSLR in areas of portability, convenience and certain special aspects like compatibility with legacy MF lenses. Sometimes, those benefits are indispensable.

[HellwratH]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Still I see myself using the E-PL1 more than E-3 since it is easy to carry everywhere.

So why do I argue with you guys? Because most of you are passing judgement without trying it first hand. Holding it in a shop doesn't count. I hear all kind of deep technical arguments, just gut feel arguments, all against EVIL while HellwratH is grinning over his growing MF lens collection.

Besides HellwratH and I, which active poster here owns one of the EVIL cameras? The people who own and use EVIL cameras on regular basis know that it scores over dSLR in areas of portability, convenience and certain special aspects like compatibility with legacy MF lenses. Sometimes, those benefits are indispensable.

The same goes with me. I have a 350D and have used it a lot before I got my Panasonic G1. The Panasonic G1 + 20mm combo is so light and portable that it goes with me everywhere. I mean, literally everywhere. I never leave it home, because I don't feel it to be an overhead or heavy. And to be honest, I have got some good shots (subjective, good according to me) because of this portability. And over the past one year, the 350D has seen the daylight only 3-4 times. I am planning to sell everything I have in the canon line up because I am not using it at all.

Some examples,





The above shots are a little difficult to do without a tripod. In fact, tripods are not allowed at these places. Guess what, I could slide and place my camera and the 20mm on a flat structure and take these shots. That wouldn't have been possible with my 350D.



This perspective would have been difficult for me because there is a rock similar to those two from where this was shot. I could shoot with a 350D and UWA but I don't have an UWA. So, I used a mini tripod with the G1+20mm and placed it on that rock and got this.

Now, the above shots might not be up to a lot of people's expectation here but I am happy with them. Most of my photos (99.99%) never get printed, so to me, this camera setup serves well.

I had said this one a different thread before but I'll state it again. When I started looking for my first DSLR, I remember Tanveer's post about how Pentax K100D could take old lenses and that they were available for cheap. I was thrilled because back then (and even now) lenses were expensive but the sad part was Pentax cameras were/are not available in India. So, I ended up buying a used 350D from Jayesh. Then, I saved up and added a few more lenses (50mm, Sigma 105mm). All this changed when I landed in the US, and realized how easy it is to get hold of old MF lenses and what better system to get into than micro four thirds.

So, why micro four thirds for old legacy lenses? The 2x crop factor. Like I stated in an earlier post, some of the old lenses are not sharp at the corner, but due to the fact that it is a 2x crop, you end up getting mostly the center areas of the image circle. Also, I'll quote NC again,

"The microlenses on each photosite of a digital sensor are designed so that light needs to strike them in a perpendicular fashion to maximize the light gathering capability.

Many lens designs optimized for film were done in such a way that light further away from the center of frame struck the capture surface (film) at increasingly oblique angles. This was not a problem with film given the permeability of the emulsion, but when the same thing happens to a digital sensor, photosites (with their microleses) further away from center of sensor/image circle are able to gather less and less light, leading to vignetting."

The thread: carl zeiss Lenses

The 2x crop factor takes away this vignetting to a large extent. I acquired a 70-200 f4 L lens for $550 dollars. All the legacy lenses that I have acquired (2 Kiron, 1 Vivitar, 4 Nikon AIS, 1 Nikonos (was a mistake on my side, but don't regret it), 1 Canon FD, 1 Olympus OM, 1 Pentax) have cost me a little over $100 than the 70-200 F4 L. And how do they fare?

Kiron and Vivitar macro lenses are among the best macro lenses out there.
Some info about these,
Making Not Taking: Vivitar Series 1 90mm f/2.5 VMC 1:2 "Bokina"
Making Not Taking: 105mm Kiron Iterations

Three Nikon lenses that I absolutely love are 55mm f2.8, 105mm f2.5 and 75-240mm. Guess what the 105mm f2.5 is famous for? Yep, Steve McCurry used it to shoot "The Afghan Girl". All of the Nikon lenses were acquired at throw away prices because the guy selling it didn't have a clue about these. The 105mm never ceases to amaze me, must have posted this earlier, but check this:

Pretty eyes? | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

And I could go on about these lenses, but well, I'll let it be for now. All I am trying to say is that if people can't afford to buy awesome and expensive new lenses they should definitely give EVIL cameras a try with old legacy lenses. And if they get bored, they can always sell them as there's a big market for old legacy lenses now. I couldn't imagine getting a tele-photo lens (300mm, 400mm) earlier, but now I can get a good tele-photo lens without spending much. I agree that the legacy lenses have it's flaws but to my needs (mostly macro), they are awesome. And for everything else, there's the 20mm.

And to top it, not so old used micro four thirds cameras are cheaper than a used 350D! But, as I always say, if you're happy with something, keep using it because at the end of the day it's personal preference and let's make photographs than spend time arguing over which system is better or not. Conclusion is that sooner or later EVIL will take over, mwahaha :P. Kidding, ofcourse .

[kaushik_s]

EDIT: @ Samurai San, : Sigh!! Sorry, I quit. When you've posted your response you already had in mind that we are against EVIL cameras, which we are not, atleast I'm not and neither we are passing judgements here. We are just trying to say that DSLR's won't going to loose it's usability (which seems to be a judgement passed by some here) just because of EVIL cameras are in and that's all about it.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by Samurai

He is merely agreeing with you, so you give him the candy.

See again the point of me explaining myself.

I said he speaks the truth, which is quite simple, evil caters to a different crowd. No the enthusiasts, not the advanced shooters, not the hobbyists, not the pros but rather the happy snappers. That doesn't mean pros cannot be happy snappers, almost every pro/advanced shooter used to have a p&s with them which got replaced by canon G series and is now being replaced by evil kit because they can put there preferred range of zoom.

It might wound rude but I get this vibe that everytime I try to say evil caters to different market, you take it as, I am saying evil is not good enough. Which I have never said, I feel evil is more than good enough. Evil is becoming better and I am hoping to replace my gdr2 with an evil kit one day.

But taking the noting of evil completely replacing dslrs is a bit far fetched. No chance of getting same ergonomics as 1d/d3 series which is a must. Remove th fact that build quality and other things matter. Just the fact that a pro who handles FF camera for 10-12hrs a day, will get massive cramps between thumb and first finger, ala carpet tunnel syndrome and trust me on this, it hurts like hell.

[HellwratH]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

No the enthusiasts, not the advanced shooters, not the hobbyists, not the pros but rather the happy snappers. That doesn't mean pros cannot be happy snappers, almost every pro/advanced shooter used to have a p&s with them which got replaced by canon G series and is now being replaced by evil kit because they can put there preferred range of zoom.

....

But taking the noting of evil completely replacing dslrs is a bit far fetched. No chance of getting same ergonomics as 1d/d3 series which is a must. Remove th fact that build quality and other things matter. Just the fact that a pro who handles FF camera for 10-12hrs a day, will get massive cramps between thumb and first finger, ala carpet tunnel syndrome and trust me on this, it hurts like hell.

Interesting, so you're saying an advanced shooter/pro will NEVER replace his DSLR with an EVIL camera?

So, what about this highly advanced shooter?
Olympus PEN E-PL1 review diary

Please note, he is considered one of the best macro shooters out there. He moved from film to D200 to EPL1. And no, EPL1 is not a back up camera for him, it's his primary camera.

I am not saying that every pro out there is going to make the switch (depends on their needs), but generalizing is something I do not agree with. Again, I am not expecting you to explain what you said, but presenting facts for anyone who comes looking for information on this forum.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by HellwratH

Interesting, so you're saying an advanced shooter/pro will NEVER replace his DSLR with an EVIL camera?

So, what about this highly advanced shooter?
Olympus PEN E-PL1 review diary

Please note, he is considered one of the best macro shooters out there. He moved from film to D200 to EPL1. And no, EPL1 is not a back up camera for him, it's his primary camera.

I am not saying that every pro out there is going to make the switch (depends on their needs), but generalizing is something I do not agree with. Again, I am not expecting you to explain what you said, but presenting facts for anyone who comes looking for information on this forum.

You do understand it when I use the word completely??

Let me give an example, I know 2 pro photographers who shoot weddings for living and have switched from canon to nikon. Now both say since they switched there photographs are better and they don't care about lenses anymore. Additionally both agree that they came from 3 pro bodies, 10+ lenses and 2 flashes to 3 pro bodies, 3 zooms, 2 primes and 2 flashes. Does this mean canon as a system is a failure ???

Certainly not, canon as a system did not suited there shooting style and that is it, there is nothing else to it. Similarly the guy you mentioned has a distinct shooting style which works better with evil, so he went with evil kit.

Similarly m43 kit might suit to someone's shooting style and it might not, just like leica is. But this does not mean evil will replace dslr completely, which is what samurai and you are putting forward.

Once again evil as a whole is good, but it's not for everyone. Evil is here to stay and so is dslr. They will go on hand in hand, just like mf/lf/FF/pac/aps did.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

It might wound rude but I get this vibe that everytime I try to say evil caters to different market, you take it as, I am saying evil is not good enough.

But taking the noting of evil completely replacing dslrs is a bit far fetched..

That's what this is boiling down to - an EVIL fan-boy thread. If you don't sing praises about EVIL ("best thing in cameras..blah blah") and appreciate folks who shifted from DSLRs to EVIL - you are biased. What I do believe will happen is DSLRs will have their reflex mechanism replaced by elec. viewfinders some day, making them slightly more compact and lightweight. EVIL replacing DSLRs? I doubt it.

The litmus test is pros using EVILs completely instead of as a backup body or as a 'product on test' . For us non-pros camera systems are expensive hobbies at best or expensive toys at worst. I don't see the pros shifting even in the medium term.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Once again evil as a whole is good, but it's not for everyone. Evil is here to stay and so is dslr. They will go on hand in hand, just like mf/lf/FF/pac/aps did.

That's what I have been saying too. These are different systems and will co-exist to cater to different customer preferences.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by R2D2

That's what this is boiling down to - an EVIL fan-boy thread. If you don't sing praises about EVIL ("best thing in cameras..blah blah") and appreciate folks who shifted from DSLRs to EVIL - you are biased.

Just wondering, do you read before replying? Sorry about the sarcasm, but when you call EVIL users are biased, I have to wonder.

I posted the following in post #255:

Originally Posted by Samurai

So I tried out EVIL camera option. Didn't exactly workout as I expected. I thought I could replace my dSLR with EVIL. But EVIL is not yet ready for dSLR world domination. If you think I am a blind EVIL camera fan, look at #250, I have actually listed out the problem with EVIL. I still use the E-3 or E-500 when required. I still love/prefer the feel of the dSLR over EVIL. Still I see myself using the E-PL1 more than E-3 since it is easy to carry everywhere.

Originally Posted by Samurai

However, I confess that some of my assumptions have been wrong.

1) I thought I could use my excellent 4/3 lenses with E-PL1. The adopter itself costs some $250, that was the first disappointment. Secondly, the AF doesn't work well. The dSLR bodies use phase detection, while EVIL bodies use contrast detection. Thirdly, I placed my 12-60mm next to the E-PL1 body and groaned, it defeats the whole purpose.

2) I totally overlooked the fact that I was used to fast zoom lenses. And EVIL has no fast zoom lenses right now. I have been lamenting about that for quite some time on this thread.

3) I bought 9-18mm and 14-42mm m4/3 lenses hoping to make up for the unavailability of 12-60mm lens in m4/3. But it is not really working out that way.

HellwratH and I have discovered that there are advantages to EVIL, so have thousands all over the world. But it is not the same as dSLR. You can't expect every feature of dSLR in EVIL, it will look like a failure if you see it from dSLR point of view. Reminds me of the time when Maruti 800 was first launched. The Amby owners of the day could go on forever about why Maruti 800 won't survive in the market. All the arguments sounded very valid too. But Amby is still around, so EVIL will not fully replace dSLR, some will continue to use it. But lot of people who bought dSLR for lack of better choice, will start considering EVIL.

If you are unable to discern what I am saying, please don't bother replying. Just go here: http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadget...lr-thread.html

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Just wondering, do you read before replying? Sorry about the sarcasm, but when you call EVIL users are biased, I have to wonder.

I posted the following in post #255:

Oh boy! I wonder why you react the way you do.

I've been handling cameras since I was a kid in the 1970s starting with a Yashica rangefinder Electro 35GS, a Yashica SLR (can't remember the model) my granddad's Kodak Brownie, a Canon AE-1, 2 Sony digital PNSes a range of Nikon film SLRs and and including the pro and semi pro models. Having worked with different bodies, systems and accessories I can tell you for sure that I always considered a camera and lens as a tool.

You may also want to read very carefully what rajb3125 and I have been posting - DSLRs, PNS, EVILs are separate systems with pros and cons and catering to different consumer segments and preferences. But the overall impression one gets from several of your posts is a doomsday scenario for DSLRs, which is what we disagree with. As for the pros and cons of DSLRs and EVILs there's enough said on the 'net that I don't need to repeat here. We all make our choices for our own personal reasons - let us respect that and enjoy the world of photography. I frankly care two hoots about what camera and/or lens combo takes the photo as long as it is pleasing (to my eyes). Hellwrath's pics posted here are great. However I'd much rather give credit to him rather than the camera and lens.

Have a good weekend.

PS - I am already pretty active on the DSLR thread

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by R2D2

But the overall impression one gets from several of your posts is a doomsday scenario for DSLRs

So you don't really read what I write. Thanks for the confirmation. Have a nice day.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by Samurai

So you don't really read what I write. Thanks for the confirmation. Have a nice day.

Sorry mate but he's right, your posts do sound like your quite baised towards EVIL and paint a picture of doomsday scenario for DSLR`s.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Sorry mate but he's right, your posts do sound like your quite baised towards EVIL and paint a picture of doomsday scenario for DSLR`s.

Really? I guess that explains why I used Olympus E-3 (instead of E-PL1) for my last OTR trips.

I don't know how to explain this. Is it possible for you to believe that somebody can use a product without being a fanboy? No... then I understand your predicament.

But I am no fan boy. I have used Olympus 4/3 system for more than 5 years, I love it, yet I don't recommend it. Fan boys can't do that. See here: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadge...ml#post1772047 (The DSLR Thread)

I have 27" iMac, iPod, iPad2 & iPhone. Yet, my friends know I am no Apple fan. I run Win7 most of the time on my iMac.

This whole argument in the last few pages is between EVIL users and non-users. EVIL owners are talking about the pros and cons, but the non-owners are saying it can't replace dSLRs, no way!

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Really? I guess that explains why I used Olympus E-3 (instead of E-PL1) for my last OTR trips.

I don't know how to explain this. Is it possible for you to believe that somebody can use a product without being a fanboy? No... then I understand your predicament.

But I am no fan boy. I have used Olympus 4/3 system for more than 5 years, I love it, yet I don't recommend it. Fan boys can't do that. See here: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadge...ml#post1772047 (The DSLR Thread)

I have 27" iMac, iPod, iPad2 & iPhone. Yet, my friends know I am no Apple fan. I run Win7 most of the time on my iMac.

This whole argument in the last few pages is between EVIL users and non-users. EVIL owners are talking about the pros and cons, but the non-owners are saying it can't replace dSLRs, no way!

In the end of the day, I am just putting forward what comes from your posts and not one but many. If you choose to ignore it, well really doesn`t matter to me

[joe1980]

How would the Sony Aplha NEX 7 compare with the other DLSR cameras available? This one from sony looks handy and the review says that it is a good compact replacement for those bulky DLSR's available in the market. Any suggestions on that? Is this one from Sony a DLSR or a P&S?

Note from Support: Post moved here from DSLR thread. Thanks

[HellwratH]

Sigh, I am done with this thread unless something new happens in this technology and I need information. And, I'll definitely look forward to more people who actually have hands on experience and post photographs to prove their point than someone who doesn't post anything at all.

I guess, some people don't consider reading what was written in the brackets and make generalizations. Please go back couple of threads back and re-read what I said. If you can't, I am sorry I can't help it, but don't mis-quote me.

FYI, here's what I said in post #256

"But, as I always say, if you're happy with something, keep using it because at the end of the day it's personal preference and let's make photographs than spend time arguing over which system is better or not."

And here's what I said in post #259,
"I am not saying that every pro out there is going to make the switch (depends on their needs), but generalizing is something I do not agree with. "


Forgive me for not understanding posts with no or little contexts, I have never been good with signs, I prefer complete explanation.

BTW, I was out in West Virginia today, witnessing some amazing fall colors. And yes, all of them were shot with the G1 and a few lenses, if you want to see them, they will eventually make it to the non-auto image thread <begin sarcasm> which some of you may not know that it exists because you don't care to post any image on this forum at all </end of sarcasm>.

Have a nice day.