I would like a small, retro style camera for hobbyist / snap shitting type photography. Image quality is important to me, but not the end all, be all. I do not want a full frame type camera such as the ZF. I already have a D850, and actually owned a ZF for several months, before getting rid of it as the lack of grip and overall hugeness made it very unfun to walk around and shoot with. Between the OM-5 and some Fuji cam, which is the best choice?
>>4486018Stop being 4chan-brained. Be normal. Get a sony a7c and a 35mm f2.8.
If you want small, retro, discreet, full physical controls, and IQ that's a clear step above a smartphone, nothing beats the Olly Pen e-p7 with a panny 20 (40mm equiv). Get one like this that's already located stateside to beat the Donny tax.https://www.ebay.com/itm/227104719248
>>4486020any reason to prefer this over the oly for example? I'm a hobbyist so I don't really care about marginal iq gains. The sony seems much larger, more expensive, and tbqh fugly
>>4486021I love the look of that cam... will investigate
>>4486020>>4486022
>>4486022Its anything but marginal. The olympus is essentially stuck at iso 1000 and cant use an autofocus lens faster than f3 unless spending sony money… then it can use a whopping f2.4. People will say 800 but the oly sensors are actually less sensitive and need more exposure at 200 than a sony iso 800. >>4486024So some fat tard from reddit scraped the seal off another model… who cares. You repost this and others a lot. Who pays you? I think i know who else you areKill phrase: fujifilm doesnt make good cameras. shooting raw is easier and faster. Now reply.
>>4486026As I mentioned, I have a D850 already, so I am accustomed to FF performance already, I don't necessarily think that the Sony is going to outperform my nikon if I want to go FF... I don't really shoot at wider apertures than f/5.6-f/8 anyways, which is why I'm not concerned about going to a crop sensor. The ISO issue is a little more relevant, but I assume that modern software can mitigate this...?
>>4486018I would just go back to the Zf and get a gripAre you a small person with short hands or a woman?
>>4486018OM has really nice colours sooc, but OM-5 is way to small for my hands...I own a OM-3 + OM 20mm 1.4 + Lumix 35-100 2.8 and I use it way more than my Canon EOS R.
>>4486028this is specifically what I said I would not doI am 6'2", 180lbs, 245 2 rep bench, but thanks for your input ;)
>>4486028more to whit, the combo you just described is larger and heavier than my D850 and a worse camera setup in every way
>>4486018Your best choice is to stop shitting up the catalog and fuck off to the gear thread faggot.
>>4486027Software can not add info the sensor couldnt record. ISO 100 is ISO 100, and you can use that shit everywhere, every day. Micro four thirds is pointless unless pick one>using long macro lenses or bird zooms for funsies>being /p/ brained and memeing yourself into thinking the only brand that sells anywhere near as many cameras as canon is somehow super shit (its clearly not, but the existence of the $1000 used a7c makes the om-5 totally fucking useless so it has to be for some terminally online fanboys here)>being super poor so its the only way to get a decent modern QOL mirrorless instead of a canon m50
>>4486018does this thing take old OM mount Zuiko glass?
>>4486040this is objectively untrue though? Equivalent focal length lenses for m43 and apsc can be tiny compared to ff lenses especially modern "optically perfect" ones. Mirrorless ff lenses have this insane case of bloat, even old dslr lenses are minuscule in comparison and have comparable IQ in many cases
>>4486037(you)
>>4486040i personally dont like the a7c because ff glass is huge and expensive the only way ff glass is small is if you're using a film era prime >>4486018why not pick up a z30 or z50ii, the z dx 16-50 kit lens is okay and a nice little pancake so its surprisingly portable
>>4486048actually had a z50ii, it's huge, as big as a z6. I don't like that the z30 lacks an evf. Is there a particular advantage of the APS-C over m43? I'm leaning towards the oly because I like how it looks and it seems like the glass is tiny, sharp, and gets great reviews
>>4486048Sony and canon have the only normal sized lenses that arent plastic junk like the nikon small primes. Canon even has the only real FF pancake. The samyang and zeiss 35mm f2.8 lenses are both smaller than most film lenses and about the same size as the nikkor z pancake with its hood (actually the other half of the lens body, containing the filter threads) and as far as i know sony is the only worthwhile* ff mount with a small portrait lens (sigma 90mm f2.8)*l mount would be worthwhile if the s9 werent dedicated to being absolutely worse than the a7c to keep it off the leica Qs toes
>>4486050m43 users are like ken rockwell. they call everything sharp when nothing is. The 17mm f1.8 (35mm f3.6) for example is pretty mediocre but they call it tack sharp. the 25mm and 45mm are actually sharp. but its a bunch of f3.6 primes, on cameras that are basically stuck at iso 1000 at their lowest setting. it can get gross quick and not because of muh bokeh.
>>4486052I already said previously that I never shoot below f/5.6 so f/3.6 is already way faster than I need. I did note the lack of a good 35mm equiv in the m43 ecosystem though.....
>>4486051plastic junk is small and light though, im coming from all-metal film era lenses and its fucking gay how heavy it is. if you're dropping and banging lenses around hard enough the plastic is a issue you're probably decentering the glass elements>>4486050larger sensor = better low light and iqiirc the oly glass doesn't get sharp until you pay a decent amount if you didnt like the z50ii that's fine, i was cross shopping the z30 and om5 and they fit damn near the same in my pockets at the camera store, the nikon has smaller lenses while the oly lens sticks out a bit unless you do a ez lens which sucks optically. i'm fine without a evf.
>>4486054I did like the kit lens a lot for the z aps-c but there are either no or only one prime, you either rock the kit lens or basically go fuck yourself in the nikon ecosystem
>>4486053Lenses improve the more they’re stopped down. A faster lens doesnt need to rely on as much color/contrast sapping, DOF falloff weirdening corrections to look good at f5.6. Hence why an m43 "f3.6" can often be larger than an FF f2.8 and m43 is very much the mirrorless look (flat). Classic photos looked better because undercorrected lenses clean up better stopped down and dont need shit for editing.
>>4486030okay lady hands
>oly lenses aren't sharp>oly lenses need to be stopped down>oly lenses are expensiveAnything else?
>>4486065Looks like fujiworms or one of those shitty plastic nikon lenses
>>4486065That looks great, but if you're going to start reposting this, you should also include some 100% crops to really hammer in the point. Also a good reminder most systems can look great when downsized to 9mp.
>>4486066Sorry anon, but the only worms here are in your mush brain, which appears to be melting from all the seething
>>4486018OM-5: Better AF, better weather sealing, RAW pro capture, long exposure helpers (live time, live comp), star auto focus, insane IBISFuji: More expensive, AF not that great, IBIS only on premium bodies, questionable weather sealing (again only premium bodies), the smaller cams (OM5 sized) dont have IBIS and weather sealingImage quality wise they don't differ that much. Both are baby sensor so you get noise no matter what. But for low noise you got a real Nikon camera so you're coveredFuji is very over-priced right now. At 50% of the price they sell at they would make more sense
>>4486026>OP: I need a fun small snapshitter camera>retard: OMG MUH ISO MUH APERTURE MUH EXPOSURE JUST GET THE HEAVY FULL FRAME OP AND BUY THE ONLY SMALL LENS THATS ALSO 15 YEARS OLD AND HAS SO ANNOYING FOCUS BREATHING THAT IT EVEN ANNOYS YOU WHEN YOU JUST TAKE STILLSthis fucking board
>>4486030I'm same height/weight OP and I too had the Zf. I found it extremely annoying to take with me just for fun shooting. It was OK for dedicated photo stuff but then again I'd get a proper gripped plastic blob body like the Z5II for that. I sold my Zf and got an OM-5 for the fun EDC stuffI still have my Z glass and a Z6II for when I need best image quality. But for everything else I have the OM-5 and it sparks joy
>>4486053there is the 17mm f1.2 from olympus - but that's the same weight, size and price as the Z 35mm 1.8S lol. (and I like the Z rendering way better)don't get me wrong - I shoot m43 - but it's strictly a fun system. not a primary system when you need image quality. m43 tards are delusional when they think their shitty OM1.2 can replace a Z8, R6, etc.Don't spend too much money on m43. Dont get the retarded oversized and overprized """pro""" lenses. For that weight/price you can get a FF lens and be better offBut absolutely get a small m43 body and the small lenses. They're fun and a joy to take with you.
>>4486070Noise is merely a symptom of the lack of light. If you want less noise, you add more light, not buy a new camera. Its that simple.
>>4486073The a7c is the same size as the om5. The sony 40mm f2.5 is smaller than the om 20mm f1.4 (40mm f2.8). The 35mm f2.8s are half as big.
>>4486070>its the rapefugeeYeah ignore this guy. He’s constantly melting down over m43 and doesnt really use his cameras.
>>4486073/thread.
>>4486083Panasonic ewaste and an om5/a7, are not comparable cameras. A buzzy ewaste 40mm f3.2 and the shittiest 35mm f2 ever made are not comparable either unless the prize is shittiest lens ever.
>>4486078he doesnt sound like hes melting down he sounds like hes saying theyre fun to use and great as a second camera but not a serious camera system i personally dont like how expensive om5s are still. $7-800 seems to be the floor for them and the lenses are surprisingly pricey and more importantly bulky...if they were cheaper i'd pick one up but im waiting for a decent nikon z30 refurb ($380 w/16-50 lens). 20mm f1.7 lumix is like $300 which isn't horrible>>4486055yeah not gonna lie that's my biggest problem with the z dx cameras, but that said if its your second camera you already have a d850 which shouldnt be too bad to lug around with a prime. all the small sensor cameras (m43/apsc) have pretty big primes anyways usually.
>>4486084Sorry, not buying your $1350 brick!
>>4486087>i personally dont like how expensive om5s are still. $7-800 seems to be the floor for them and the lenses are surprisingly pricey and more importantly bulky...if they were cheaper i'd pick one up but im waiting for a decent nikon z30 refurb ($380 w/16-50 lens). 20mm f1.7 lumix is like $300 which isn't horribleyeah, but everything is expensive nowadays. you cant find anything modern below $1000 new. used prices are even more retarded. just look at what a gx9 will fetch you. essentially ewaste still going for $700the bulky m43 lenses are those pro lenses I'd never buy. they're as big and pricey as their full frame equivalents. so I wouldn't touch those. the cheap 20mm f1.7 is more like the lens I'd get for my fun edc m43 camera. I personally prefer the 17mm f1.8 but also have the 15mm f1.7 - both small and the optical quality is reasonable for what they're intended fornikon z dx has its issues. i looked into it but meh ... there's like a handful of lenses that aren't full frame. i don't think there's even a 50mm ff equivalent dx prime atm
>>4486018it probably doesn't matter which you pick. and in the off chance it does matter, no one here is going to be able to make the discernment for you. so just pick which suits you better or get both and sell the one you don't prefer
