crsantin
Established
From time to time I still use my Oly EP-2 and EPL-1. When I use them I am always pleasantly surprised with the image quality. Not good for higher ISO work but otherwise they are still very nice cameras and with some of the nicer lenses for this system would deliver excellent results.
I also have a Nikon D300 that is still my main camera and it delivers excellent results. I'll keep using it for a while.
I also have a Nikon D300 that is still my main camera and it delivers excellent results. I'll keep using it for a while.
Dogman
Mentor
Just my own personal experience.
My first digital was 8mp. My first really good photo with that camera was a crop of 1/2 the frame--a quickly done grab shot thus necessitating the severe crop. I have made prints of it in 6x9 and 12x18 inches that still look quite good to me. I also have numerous photos done with 12mp cameras that print very well at these sizes, even when cropped. They would still hold up when printed 16x20, I imagine. That was beyond my normal enlargement limit when I printed 35mm film.
The quality of light, subject matter and framing are far more important than the equipment.
Again, just my own personal experience.
My first digital was 8mp. My first really good photo with that camera was a crop of 1/2 the frame--a quickly done grab shot thus necessitating the severe crop. I have made prints of it in 6x9 and 12x18 inches that still look quite good to me. I also have numerous photos done with 12mp cameras that print very well at these sizes, even when cropped. They would still hold up when printed 16x20, I imagine. That was beyond my normal enlargement limit when I printed 35mm film.
The quality of light, subject matter and framing are far more important than the equipment.
Again, just my own personal experience.
aagiv
Member
This is what will probably push me to the 16mp generation. I was originally considering an older APS-C DSLR in the 12mp range, but decided that m4/3 might be a better option for size and convenience. Affordable lenses like the Panasonic 15mm f/2.5 and 25mm f/1.7 have pretty much cemented that decision. I can't see where I can match that kind of selection and value in DSLR lenses.
willie_901
Mentor
Buy The Newest M4/3 Body You Can Afford
Buy The Newest M4/3 Body You Can Afford
For most of us, I don't think 12 MP is a handicap.
There have been significant sensor/data stream improvements in M4/3 bodies.
For bright light, the 12 MP Lumix DMC‑GF2 has about 2 1/2 stops less analog dynamic range than the Lumix DC-GH5 (data).
Similarly, the read noise levels for the Lumix DMC-GF1 and about twice those of the Lumix DC-GH5 (data).
In many situations, the lower DR and S/N aren't a problem. After all, people made wonderful photographs with the older m4/3 bodies. In terms of price-performance ratio, the oldest bodies are very inexpensive. A rough estimate would be doubling the technical IQ doubles the price. The largest overall impact would be in shadow-region quality.
I personally wouldn't buy the older technology m4/3 cameras. Compared to ISO 200, metered exposures at ISO 1600 are underexposed by 3 stops. That's a lot less signal. So, in many situations the noise level differences matter. I think middle generation M4/3 bodies are the best compromise between price and performance.
Buy The Newest M4/3 Body You Can Afford
For most of us, I don't think 12 MP is a handicap.
There have been significant sensor/data stream improvements in M4/3 bodies.
For bright light, the 12 MP Lumix DMC‑GF2 has about 2 1/2 stops less analog dynamic range than the Lumix DC-GH5 (data).
Similarly, the read noise levels for the Lumix DMC-GF1 and about twice those of the Lumix DC-GH5 (data).
In many situations, the lower DR and S/N aren't a problem. After all, people made wonderful photographs with the older m4/3 bodies. In terms of price-performance ratio, the oldest bodies are very inexpensive. A rough estimate would be doubling the technical IQ doubles the price. The largest overall impact would be in shadow-region quality.
I personally wouldn't buy the older technology m4/3 cameras. Compared to ISO 200, metered exposures at ISO 1600 are underexposed by 3 stops. That's a lot less signal. So, in many situations the noise level differences matter. I think middle generation M4/3 bodies are the best compromise between price and performance.
mod2001
Old school modernist
Can't help you here, also thinking of it
Love the results from the D3s, only the huge size of the body kept me away, at least until now.Jürgen
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
D300 is a damn good camera. Was my workhorse.
Austintatious
Well-known
You might take a look at the Sony NEX 6 or the NEX 7 also. I think they check the boxes on your list of wants at a reasonable price. Lots of glass to choose from out there too.
Kent
Finally at home...
Even if I think that a comparison with guitars is not entirely valid, you can perfectly use 12 MPix cameras today. I wouldn't see any reason why not. Just because newer models are getting better and better that doesn't mean old models become worse.
I disagree to the above mentioned statement that newer sensors are not better then older ones - they are - but as I said, it's a matter of "being sufficent". And this is different for everybody. One photographer can't have enough resolution (for whatever good reason), the other one - just like me - is fine with 16, 12 or even 10 MPix (which would be my Nikon Df, my Oly E-P3 and my Leica M8).
I do enjoy my 24 MPix Sony A7II, but not because of the higher resolution, but because of the overall image quality and noise levels. I also love my Df for its simply amazing sensor (and its looks) and I still adore my M8 (although it totally cannot match new sensors as far as noise levels are concerned).
So, in short words: 12 MPix might easily be enough for you.
I disagree to the above mentioned statement that newer sensors are not better then older ones - they are - but as I said, it's a matter of "being sufficent". And this is different for everybody. One photographer can't have enough resolution (for whatever good reason), the other one - just like me - is fine with 16, 12 or even 10 MPix (which would be my Nikon Df, my Oly E-P3 and my Leica M8).
I do enjoy my 24 MPix Sony A7II, but not because of the higher resolution, but because of the overall image quality and noise levels. I also love my Df for its simply amazing sensor (and its looks) and I still adore my M8 (although it totally cannot match new sensors as far as noise levels are concerned).
So, in short words: 12 MPix might easily be enough for you.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
FWIW, some of us can remember wondering if there was any point in going from 5 megapixels to 8 when 8 first appeared.
I guess it depends on how big you want to print bearing in mind that few can see beyond 300 dpi and somewhere between 100 and 200 is more than enough for most.
I did a lot of experiments to decide things when I was younger and could afford a huge printer and the cartridges. A lot of people are happy with 100 dpi and look at the pixel count per inch on a monitor.
Of course, to save a lot of heart ache there's always the Hasselbld X1D at 50 megapixels ;-)
Regards, David
FWIW, some of us can remember wondering if there was any point in going from 5 megapixels to 8 when 8 first appeared.
I guess it depends on how big you want to print bearing in mind that few can see beyond 300 dpi and somewhere between 100 and 200 is more than enough for most.
I did a lot of experiments to decide things when I was younger and could afford a huge printer and the cartridges. A lot of people are happy with 100 dpi and look at the pixel count per inch on a monitor.
Of course, to save a lot of heart ache there's always the Hasselbld X1D at 50 megapixels ;-)
Regards, David
BillBingham2
Registered User
I've been looking at them too, but I wonder about the viewfinder brightness and manual apertures. Can I still see to focus when I've stopped down to f16?
With the D300 and Nikkor AI glass I view through max aperture. On the down side they are larger and noisier than the NEX for early Fuji X cameras.
Thoughts/Experiences please and thank you?
Bill Bingham
Bille
Well-known
Pen E-P3 + external EVF + 25/1.8
You could always upgrade to the 16 megapixels E-P5 and possibly keep the finder. The 25/1.8 works on all MFT cameras of course. It´s a fine lens.
Samples (not mine)
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57522110
Bille
Well-known
The finder will compensate for brightness but you won´t be able to locate the exact focal plane due to depth of field and noise.
BillBingham2
Registered User
JeffS7444
Well-known
I was still using an Olympus E-P1 until a year or so ago. Nice camera at lower to middle ISO, not so pretty at high ISO: Off the top of my head I think I liked it okay up to ISO 400. Not a single thing went wrong with that camera, even the cosmetics still looked pretty good when I sold it.
willie_901
Mentor
I also remember ISO 400 as my personal maximum for color with my Panasonic LUMIX G DMC‑G1. Though I did enjoy the Lumix 20/1.7 lens.
ironhorse
Joe DuPont
I still very happily shoot all my color work with my D300.
Range-rover
Mentor
I had one of these before but needed a full frame to go with my Fuji so I picked
up a Canon 5D Classic (first one) and it's still nice after all these years, 12 megapixel
of goodness!
up a Canon 5D Classic (first one) and it's still nice after all these years, 12 megapixel
of goodness!
defconfunk
n00b
I wonder if the OP is still reading this? Never the less, here's my concern (and it has been echoed before): The EVF in the 12MP cameras is no where near as good as in the 16MP bodies.
I can live with 12MP, and I see plenty of great photos made with them. However, every time I try using the EVF on a pre-GX7 or pre-EM5 I find the experience frustrating and unenjoyable. They simply aren't good enough (specifically resolution and refresh rate) for me.
GX7, EM5 mk1, and EM-10 mk1, are all excellent cameras with good enough EVFs that can be found dirt cheap. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend any of them. I can't see a situation where I'd chose a 12MP EVF body over one of those, even taking into account that I might need to save up a bit more before buying the 16MP body - you're probably going to keep this for a awhile, and hopefully use it a lot; better to wait a bit and get something that will satisfy you than get something now and upgrade later.
I can live with 12MP, and I see plenty of great photos made with them. However, every time I try using the EVF on a pre-GX7 or pre-EM5 I find the experience frustrating and unenjoyable. They simply aren't good enough (specifically resolution and refresh rate) for me.
GX7, EM5 mk1, and EM-10 mk1, are all excellent cameras with good enough EVFs that can be found dirt cheap. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend any of them. I can't see a situation where I'd chose a 12MP EVF body over one of those, even taking into account that I might need to save up a bit more before buying the 16MP body - you're probably going to keep this for a awhile, and hopefully use it a lot; better to wait a bit and get something that will satisfy you than get something now and upgrade later.