12.1 MP Cameras in 2017

A

aagiv

Member
Local time
12:48 AM
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
15
To put the main question right at the top of my post, how have older m4/3 cameras aged? Who still uses one? Would you buy a used one now? I'm thinking about cameras like the Panasonic DMC-G2, but would like to know current attitude towards any cameras of that time-frame.

I had a Nikon D5xxx for a brief period about three years, but dumped it as I moved into film photography. Now I find myself relying on the iPhone more and more for convenience, and I can see a role for a dedicated digital again. I was thinking of picking up an older APS-C DSLR, but I like the idea of a m4/3 system. I would want a built-in EVF, so that narrows the field quite a bit, but the DMC-G2 I mentioned above looks like it would do what I want. DSLR or m4/3, I would probably be looking at a "fast normal" (f/1.8-2) plus a kit zoom.

I know 12 megapixels is plenty of resolution, but how do you view this era of camera now? Dynamic range, ISO performance up to 1600, jpeg engine, etc? Also, how about build quality? Were these cameras built in such a way to still be viable 10 years down the road? What about the quality of EVF? I've never actually looked through (at?) an EVF on any camera, only optical finders.

Edited to add: I know I can find discussion about these cameras here and other places, but much of it takes place when these models were newer. I'm posting this thread to get input on how folks still feel about them with newer options around.
 
It's not only resolution is it? I thought there was significant improvements in ISO/DR going from the older 12mp to the 16mp sensors. And the 16mp sensors themselves are getting quite old now. Apart from the sensor side improvements theirs a big jump when it comes to AF speed/IBIS etc as well. Unless the price is really good, I would not buy a 12mp m43 camera. Not when you can buy a EM-1 mk1 for $400.
 
Can't speak specifically to the Pano G2, but the Olympus 12mp Pens, EP-1, EP-2, EPL-1, have held up very well, and several members here still use them. The older EVFs are not as good as the newer ones, but they are usable.
 
Much of my photos are done with my old 6MP camera.
I don´t think about Megapixels when I grab a camera that suits my needs.
So 12MP will be fine. Try it... ;)
 
12 MP is Plenty! (So is 6 MP!)

12 MP is Plenty! (So is 6 MP!)

I still shoot a Canon 5D and 40D. The color is fantastic.
Would you buy a new model guitar or keep your 1950's Strat?

Some older models (even digital!) are very much better than the newer ones who brag about high ISO and pixel count. Don't forget that there are always compromises to advance one feature over another.

All major makers have models that are still professional favorites.
I'm not selling my CCD Monochrom!

And don't forget, if you are a nature boy climbing cliffs, riding rapids, or a brave soul shooting in an excited crowd, don't risk bringing along your $10,000 M10!
 
I have an Olympus E-PM1 I bought last year. While, I can't speak for the EVF (since they're terribly expensive and I paid <$100 for the camera used), I've been quite happy with the system. I can only assume the EVF behaves in a similar way to the back of the camera, but what I've found absolutely essential is the ability to magnify the view (5x to 14x on this model). I almost never miss critical focus when using adapted lenses because of it. I can foresee not going back to optical viewfinders.

Dynamic range is good, probably as good as my APS-C Nikon D80 that's almost 10 years old. I don't think the dynamic range is anywhere near what is available with other cameras now, even a recent cell phone camera like those found in the iPhone. Likely newer m4/3 cameras would perform much better. I work around those limitations (and my subject matter is stationary, so it's easier) by shooting multiple images and combining them to reduce noise, and using the ETTR technique.

Where these camera excel is their unobtrusive size and quietness. I always feel a bit conspicuous using an SLR in public. Whereas the m4/3 just looks less like a serious camera. And if I want to use a long lens, it isn't intimidating like some of the full-frame 80-200 lenses (which I couldn't afford anyway).

I don't have a native lens in the format, unless you count the 15mm f/8 Olympus body cap lens. I personally enjoy being able to adapt all kinds of lenses, and not pay much for the privilege. The only thing really missing in my kit are fast wide-angle lenses. I've gotten kind of used to the 50-70mm equiv. range.

I've also gotten quite used to the 4:3 aspect ratio. There's always a bit of room to crop anyway, and I do quite a bit of panoramic stitching, so aspect ratio is something that happens in post.

As far as durability goes, the camera seems like a little workhorse.

I've really enjoyed the camera, what it's capable of, and most importantly the price. I know I would less positive about the camera had I bought it new. A larger sensor would win out if I were shopping for a new camera. Also, I can't imagine paying hundreds of dollars on lenses for this format. When the trend seems to be in the direction of bigger sensor sizes, it doesn't make sense to me to spend so much for a lens that covers such a small format. Lenses seem to be the part of the camera system which holds value, and the sub-full-frame seems like a bit of a dead end. I'd rather adapt lenses with big coverage and grow the camera to meet those.
 
I still use my EP1 that was a grad present, however I would not pay more than £50 for any of the 12mp ones with lens except the Pana G1 if it has the 14-45. It is worth looking at the G3, it has the newer 16mp chip, is smaller than the G1/2 has better AF etc and you can pick them up if your patient for less than £100. Actually being patient can get a lot of interesting older cameras for less than the cost of a night out. I picked up a decent Samsung NX system paying less than £30 for each body and a Nikon V1 with a busted battery door for the same. The Nikon is only 12mp loses in low light but the AF is blazing fast, same ratio as 35mm film but is only 10mp. The big plus of the m43 over these though, it is still a living mount so new lenses will be released and a lot of them are great lenses, even the maligned by some 17 2.8 Olympus is quite acceptable. I am looking to get another G3, it is one that I miss and with the 45mm 1.8 it was a nice little portrait camera.
 
al1966 said:
It is worth looking at the G3, it has the newer 16mp chip, is smaller than the G1/2 has better AF etc
Click to expand...

I hadn't completely missed this the G3 option, but I wondered about the ergonomics. All I have is pictures to go by, but it appears that most of the grip is gone and that some usability might have been sacrificed for reduced size.
 
I like using the E-P2 and the newer E-PL1. Both are very good cameras overall. I would not use them otherwise. Main shortcoming for me is not to own an excellent M 4/3 wide angle lens. I like very much the Panasonic 25/1.4 "Lux". The colors are superb too.
 
EP-L 1 up to 1250 ISO works great . I suggest to get one of the fast primes : Lumix 15/1.7 , Zuiko 17/1,8 , 25/1,8 ,20/1,7,45/1,8
 
Newer cameras have many advantages, but...

... 12mp is fine as long as you are not printing larger than about 20x25 and you can shoot at or near the base ISO.

I still shoot my Pany G1 (as old a m4/3 as you can get) and the images are excellent. Displayed on a monitor or printed up to A3+ they compare favorably with the Nikon D800 images that I deal with daily.
 
A favourite of mine of this era is the Panasonic GF1. Its such a nicely designed camera - very pretty to look at and so nice to handle and use. Plus it handles images very competently though not capable of course of the high ISO wizardry of modern cameras. I took the following with a Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 on a GF1 and while of course the majority of the image result has to be put down to the lens it does serve to demonstrate what the camera is capable of when matched with good lenses.

The only gripe I have with this camera is that it takes an accessory EVF (which is pretty cheap to buy these days) but it is of such low resolution I would not bother - use the rear LCD and you will get on fine.

Fiefy by Life in Shadows, on Flickr
Save​
 
There are, of course, tradeoffs.

I went from 6MPx to 12 to 24. Each step was a significant step up. Ability to make large prints. Higher ISO without problems. Newer, better AF. Some improvements in ergonomics, menus, etc. Biggest thing for me is ability to shoot effectively in room lighting, the lighting we use for indoor evening social interactions.

All that said, needing a camera in a pinch for a recent wedding, my 6MPx Nikon D70 produced excellent photos, just as it always has.

To the OP, for your tradeoff now, I think it's basically a question of how much you want to spend to re-enter digital. 6 and 12 MPx cameras you can probably get cheap, including reasonable lenses.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dektol Dan
I still shoot a Canon 5D and 40D. The color is fantastic.
Would you buy a new model guitar or keep your 1950's Strat?

I don't think this analogy works really...

Should age have precedence over performance? If I had my choice with women that would be my standard.
 
If you can get one, the 16mp cameras were a big jump over the older 12mp models, although the GF series and GH1/2 were pretty good. Dynamic range and colour were the main reasons why the 16mp sensors were better; the 12mp sensors didn't have the dynamic range of the contemporary aps-c sensors, but the 16mp sensors closed that gap a fair bit.

Depending on your budget, a used Olympus E-M5 or Pana GH2 could be a good bet. I love shooting with my Panasonic GM1 (16mp), and you can pick up one of those pretty cheap.

In 2017 there are a number of cameras that do better than the older 12mp m43 cameras, but I still enjoy the Sigma DP1 (2008), Ricoh GXR (2011) and Fuji X100 (2012). It's a matter of what you like and what level of operational performance you will work with.
 
OK, while we are on 12mp cameras, where does the Nikon D300 rank?

I've got the old glass and it would get me back in the game.

B2 (;->
 
I'm probably crazy, but I'm thinking about buying a Nikon D3s (for my old Nikkors)...

(Please, talk me out of it!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top