1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Is A7ii the way to go? Anyone made a move from m4/3 to Sony FF or back again to m4/3?

Discussion in 'Sony Alpha E-Mount Cameras' started by mesmerized, Jul 21, 2016.

  1. mesmerized

    mesmerized New to TalkEmount

    7
    Mar 26, 2014
    Dear Users,

    I'm seeking your advice on the following matter. I own an Olympus E-M5mk2 + 12-40mm PRO f/2.8 lens. In general, I've been a huge Olympus supporter since the days of my Dad's original OM camera and I've been more than please with the E-M5mk2 (especially since I consider myself a lousy photographer) and I actually love the way it feels in my hands with the extra grip. It's extremely precise and everything works just like in a Swiss made watch. Sometimes it feels like a terminator. The thing is that I've found myself quite limited by the size of the sensor for portrait photography and in need of more megapixels for landscape photography. I've looked at the upcoming Fuji X-T2 and I have to say that it's a brilliant camera. I know there are rumors saying that Olympus might go FF, but god knows when that will happen. I have a chance to sell my Oly for the money I invested in it and I know a chance like that won't happen any time soon. I need to have a camera for my Japan trip in August and I was wondering if A7ii could be the solution. I've had it in my hands and aside from the shutter button that is kinda soft and goes deep in, the camera had a fairly pleasant feel to it... I was thinking of getting two primes (size matters for me a lot) 35mm and 55mm.

    Is there anyone here who moved from m4/3 to Sony FF? Is there anyone who got back to m4/3 after that?

    Any opinion would be appreciated.

    Best
     
  2. NickCyprus

    NickCyprus Super Moderator

    Oct 11, 2012
    Cyprus
    Nick
    IIRC there's a dedicated long thread here for migrating from m43 to sony...let me see if I can find it...
     
  3. bargainguy

    bargainguy TalkEmount Regular

    72
    Jun 29, 2016
    I started in Nikon film cameras and lenses, then crop format Nikon (APS-C), dabbled in m4/3 and now have an a7ii with 55/1.8 and 28/2 lenses. Still have my film, APS-C and m4/3 systems, so I haven't completely given up on those. Playing with Nikon lenses adapted to FE mount; my 105/2.8 AF-D Micro Nikkor is a favorite. Also have a couple RX100s (I & II), and that's what got me interested in Sony.

    The images coming out of the a7ii are stunning. Detail, lack of noise, edge-to-edge sharpness are all excellent, easily the best quality of any of my systems. The 55/1.8 and 28/2 are very nice, at least for my purposes.

    What I don't like as much: Short battery life, esp with IBIS on. Menus are futzy just like my RX100s. Not that many native FE lenses out yet, and there aren't many cheap native FE lenses out, the 50/1.8 (not the 55/1.8) and 28/2 being the cheapest I can think of.

    I don't think I'm going to abandon my a7ii anytime soon. It's a game changer for me, at least for the time being. This, from a guy who thought he was going to migrate to Nikon full frame. Guess that's not gonna happen now.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. mattia

    mattia TalkEmount Regular

    143
    Dec 13, 2013
    I have both systems, and like both for different things. For landscape, the Sony A7r is tough to beat, certainly for the money. But it is a kludgy camera compared to the Oly, which is far more refined. The files are gorgeous. For static landscapes, though, the High Res mode on the E-m5mk II will give you tons of resolution. Also makes sure you really need the resolution - do you actually ever print really, really big? See Ming Thein's posts on the subject, where people had trouble picking a D800 file from a 16mp 43 file printed large. Print is forgiving.

    Fuji is maybe not the best option for landscape, as X-trans sensors can do weird things with foliage. Some find it a problem, others don't.

    What specific portraiture issues are you running in to? What setting? Flash or no flash? Formal? Informal? What focal length? Because the cheapest option for you to get some stunning portraits done with MFT would be buying the Olympus 75/1.8 or the Panasonic nocticron 42.5/1.2; most portraits don't need hair thin DoF, and will benefit from stopping down a bit. Want more creamy bokeh? Playboys subject distance ( long lens, camera close to subject, background far away from subject). Check the MFT forum for portrait shots. Fuji is a great option for shooting people photos from what I've seen.

    Honestly all my telephoto work is with my Olympus. The one thing the Sony does much better on in terms of DOF is wide angle fast glass - fast 35mm on FF is something only the manual focus Voighlander 17.5/0.95. approaches with MFT. Simply getting a camera with a bigger sensor will fix some options, but not all.
     
  5. JonathanF2

    JonathanF2 TalkEmount Veteran

    257
    Aug 16, 2014
    I shoot both and I tried transitioning to Sony fully, but there are just too many nifty advantages to M43. I've dedicated my Sony A7 II rig as mainly a portrait rig using adapted Nikon AF glass and my M43 kit is composed with 3 of my favorite primes.

    BTW - Don't mention these thoughts on mu-43, they'll crucify you! Lol
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2016
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. greywater

    greywater TalkEmount Regular

    140
    Sep 28, 2014
    It's a sad fact that most people will view your photographs on a @*&# cell phone. Resolution pleases the photog. Others rarely notice.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  7. WT21

    WT21 TalkEmount Top Veteran

    611
    Aug 7, 2011
    What greywater said, at least in my experience (unless you are actually printing). BUT resolution could be useful in the future, as screens continue to climb the resolution chart. Remember how 640X480 images took up the "whole" screen of monitors from days gone by? Now they look itty-bitty.

    That said, I was in m43 since 2009 until last year. Have been in Sony alone in 2016. The biggest issue is lenses. If the system has the lenses in the price and size you want, it is well worth the switch.

    For me, full frame adds a layer of "depth" to my photos -- even those viewed only on a computer, that m43 and even APS-C doesn't do well with (you get the look occasionally, but I get it consistently with my a7, even with the 28-70 kit).

    For the shutter button -- I agree. It's soft. Toss on an after market soft shutter release (from eBay).

    Two main trade-offs, IMO:
    • a7 will never be as compact as m43. Never. ever. ever.
    • You have to be sure of the lenses, because the selections in Sony tend to be one or more or all three of:large, expensive, quality-issues-prone (be it weak design, or QA issues)
    If you can come to grips with those two, the system is worth it and better, IMO, than the other options. If you can't or if all that research gets you down, then just stick with m43. I understand there is a new Oly-designed, Sony-produced sensor coming. Trading systems is expensive. Prudence is always warrented.

    btw -- not sure Fuji is the answer. Check into their x-tran issues, especially for landscape. And in terms of MP, they are the lowest on the block for their sensor size, IIRC. I am testing an XT10 right now, and TBH, it feels like a toy compared to my a7. I think it's headed back as a return.
     
  8. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    I've recently decided that I'll be selling my E-M5 and the two lenses I have left. I finally convinced myself that it'll be more practical to have a second A7x body to use all my lenses on. That was a hard decision to make. But (1) I need a back up body and (2) I've wanted a Kolari-modded sensor for a while for my legacy lenses.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2016
  9. WoodWorks

    WoodWorks Super Moderator

    Dec 12, 2012
    Ashland, OR, USA
    David
    True. But I only shoot to please myself. And you all look at my stuff on big honking monitors, so... :laugh:
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    The people that matter will view them as prints.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Sigh. I made the mistake of mounting my Olympus 150mm f/2 to my E-M5 this morning. Back on the fence. Maybe sell the E-M5 and the 75mm f/1.8 and wait for the used E-M1 price drop after the mkii announcement? Sigh...
     
  12. WT21

    WT21 TalkEmount Top Veteran

    611
    Aug 7, 2011
    EM5 can't have much resale value at all, though. If you love the lens, then just sit tight and go and out shoot instead???

    That's what I have to tell myself from time to time!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    $350 would be a decent down payment on a used EM1 in a couple of months. And the pleasure of the 150mm is limited by the lack of PDAF currently.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. rayvonn

    rayvonn TalkEmount Regular

    35
    Jan 3, 2016
    @MAubrey@MAubrey , so what's replacing the Olympus 75mm for you? (I only ask as, in addition to the m43 size, that lens has always been the primary reason stopping me from leaving that system).
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2016
  15. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    I'm still working on that one. The fact of the matter is that I haven't used the 75 for at least 8 months. It's been a major reason for staying in the system, too.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. JonathanF2

    JonathanF2 TalkEmount Veteran

    257
    Aug 16, 2014
    It's odd, but M43 seems to do really well around the extreme focal lengths. The ultra wide zooms are insanely sharp and the telephoto lenses like the Olympus 300mm f/4 Pro is by far one of the best lenses I've used. The focal ranges I like on my A7 II are from the middle range (20mm to 85mm), where M43 can't really match the look.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  17. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Yeah, that's basically my view. I'm always eyeing the 7-14mm. There's nothing that small and that fast for either APS-C or FF. That's a fact. And between the: 40-150mm f/2.8, 75mm f/1.8, 150mm f/2, and the new 300mm f/4, it's hard not to want to keep with the system.

    But my day to day shooting is primarily between 21mm and 85mm (mostly, 21mm, 35mm, and 85mm, if I'm honest with myself). For me, FF wins in that range in terms of the balance of DOF, lens size, weight, and ISO. I know there are μ43 shooters who'd question that, but they're the same people who think that the 25mm f/1.4 and 75mm f/1.8 are somehow massive and heavy lenses. And those people simply can't be reasoned with.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. WoodWorks

    WoodWorks Super Moderator

    Dec 12, 2012
    Ashland, OR, USA
    David
    Maybe so. But I owned the 7-14 back in my µ4/3 days, and I was impressed at the time. But when comparing images in my LR library between it and the 16-35, the 16-35 wins easily.

    :laugh1:
     
    • Like Like x 2
  19. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    That doesn't surprise me at all. My problem has been that I have wanted something faster than f/4. I've never pulled the trigger and as of this past month, I probably never will. I'm happy with the CV12mm f/5.6. Can't beat that for size/weight. Slow yeah, but when that's an issue, I recently picked up the Voigtlander 21mm f/1.8. I don't think I have a need for a ultra-wide zoom any more. 20/21mm is a favorite FL for me.