keep D600 or swap to OMD EM5

[J1nxy]

Last year I bought a Nikon D600, kit lens, 50mm f1.8, 70-300 and sb700. I love the image quality and speed of the camera but the overall size and weight of it but puts me off from carrying it around or taking out on family outings.

I'm contemplating going back to micro 4/3 and specifically the OMD EM5 due to the overall size of the system.

Just wondered if anybody had any other suggestions of an alternative system or camera it's worth considering.?

 

[J1nxy]

The difference in weight of the 2 cameras with kit lenses is 1.4KG for the D600 and 630g for the OMD EM5, thats over twice as heavy. Granted the 50mm 1.8g reduces that difference but then it also reduces the flexibility of the D600 dramatically. The physical size difference is very simliar with the OMD being much smaller that the D600.

As I've said the image quality of the D600 is fantastic, but then the OMD isn't exactly bad, and from the test shots I have is comparable to the likes of the A55 that I've had previously, maybe not quite with the same depth of field, but then thats not exactly the be all and end all of photos. Responsiveness is near instant as is the AF, apart from when using AF-C but then most mirrorless cameras struggle with that and I don't use it very often so not a big worry to me.

The biggest concern with all this is having a decent camera with me when I go out and about with the family, etc. The D600 to me feels like its intrusive, so half the time I don't want to pick it up as its so damn big. With the 70-300 lens mounted its massive and very heavy, particularly to lug about all day.

The smaller systems from the other manufactures suffer from size problems as well, as the body might have shrunk, but the sensor and therefore the lenses are APS-C sized so there is no real advantage to those either.

I need to have a proper play I guess with the 2 and decide if the reduction in quality is something I can live with if it means that I have a camera with me rather than not.

 

[J1nxy]

I have 2 kids that I have to lug half the house round for, the extra 1-2KG+ of weight and the additional bulk is where the main problem lies.

The serious reviewers of the OMD have rated the image quality on par with most of the current APS-C sensors so the reduction is not anywhere near where it was in the earlier days of the M4/3 and there is a very good selection of lenses from Olympus/Panasonic and other third parties to choose from.

 

[J1nxy]

Your weight fluctuates by more than 1 or 2kg a year in all likelihood, I honestly don't see it as being a significant issue.

The serious reviews are comparing an OMD to a D3200 with a kit lens etc. You absolutely have to use top quality glass to get anything approaching decent quality out of a m4/3s sensor. With something like a D600 you could use pretty much any lens at pretty much any aperture and get a sharper image than the OMD would give you with it's best and most expensive glass. Iso performance will still be poor, tracking performance will still be poor and IQ will still be poor.

If the difference between you picking up the camera and not is 1kg... Either you need to get better at photography so that it's more rewarding than that, or you seriously need to go to the gym...

The serious reviewers are the guys who use the thing not most of the review sites. I am aware that the quality of the D600 is better but its degree of better that I'm interested in. Do you have or have you used the OMD EM5?

And your last comment is just silly...its an ADDITIONAL 1+KG to what I already have to lug about and that might be all day, string a 1-2KG weight round your neck and spend the day chasing round after kids and whilst carrying coats, bags, other random household items.

 

[J1nxy]

I think the issue is people get scared of DSLR's, both the user and subject. If your using something like a x100s, you look more of a trendy kid just taking some snaps. I think the smaller bodies are more socially acceptable if that makes sense.

It does indeed make sense, I took the D600 to my younger daughters school play with the 70-300 attached and felt a bit of a berk using it to be honest, as its not exactly inconspicuous...

 

[J1nxy]

My main types of photography are family get togethers, going out with my kids to theme parks, zoo's, that sort of thing. I occasionally go to motorsport or airshows but they are of lesser concern to me.

I have no problems with EVF compared to OVF and zero preference between the two, the latest OLED based EVF on the A77/A65, NEX 6/7 and the OMD are more than fine for what I want.

I might give the RX100 another go as I tried one last year and liked it, but at the time had enough cameras to sink an entire battle group rather than just the battleship.

 

[J1nxy]

Agreed....my D600 with the 50 1.8 is very manageable in any situation

Apart from where 50mm is insufficient reach, like hmmm I don't know, maybe my daughters school play where I'd have had to have been on the stage for the 50mmto be of any use at all?

 

[J1nxy]

But I'm not paying the same amount? The kit for the D600 is 1800 the kit for the OMD is 950 so is half the price, and also includes the 45mm F1.8 lens and a spare battery.

Ok I get it won't have the same ISO performance, or resolving power as the D600 but then does it have the same IBIS system as the OMD or is it as small? Its swings and roundabout.

If I'm not printing building size prints am I likely to notice the difference in image quality for the types of photos I want to print?

 

[J1nxy]

Well I ordered the OMD to have a play with and it arrived today and my mate Boris decided to give me a quick hand testing it. These are 4 pictures taken with the D600 and the OMD where I've tried to use the same focus point and focal length to give a bit of a comparison.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/p3j9zubxd58rsch/D600-1.JPG

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eh192n4zllb6khg/OMD-1.JPG

https://www.dropbox.com/s/3l8sh2n8f1wiq1y/D600-2.JPG

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gc29143xpt7r0y9/OMD-2.JPG

They are all shot as fine JPG and taken straight from the camera with no PP or anything applied.

 

[J1nxy]

Not only do the new m43 camera offer better IQ, any mirrorless system that uses an APS-c sensor will get stuck with the main issue that the lenses still have to be too big to be truely portable.

The canon 100d would be a great bet if you only wanted some relatively normal length lenses, the likes of the 40mm pancake.

Thats where all the other mirrorless systems fall down, the 45-175 lens for something with a 35mm equivalent length of 90-350 is tiny, and its none extending as well.

 

[J1nxy]

So? You could use a 70-200 on a D600 or D800 and just crop in and get the same performance.

A lens can only be so sharp, and there don't exist any lenses sharp enough to make up for the difference between APS-C and full frame, let alone the difference between micro 4/3s and full frame.

I said it at the start and I'll say it again. If you want to go lighter/smaller then go with a system like the X-E1, if you want to go smaller still then an X120. No point going to micro 4/3s as there are just way too many compromises.

Just my 2 pence.

Sorry who are you replying to with that top comment about the 70-200??

And as I've said the APS-C mirrorless cameras suffer from the need to have a large lens, which negates almost entirely the reduction in body size. The X-E1 and XPro also suffer from poor AF speed, which given what I'm try to take pictures of is a big put off. To be honest having played a bit today the OMD is pretty much equal too if not better at static AF than the D600 which is quite surprising.

 

[J1nxy]

Right well clearly you're thoroughly convinced that there's absolutely no drawback to a penny sized sensor so I'll leave you to it then :/

Have I said there isn't any draw backs? The image quality is better on the D600 and its noticeable when you use 1:1 mapping on a decent res monitor. The ISO performance is also better, but then having to lug enormous, heavy pieces of glass around is also not exactly an advantage for some people, including me.

Its a case of making a compromise do I stick with the ultimate image quality of the D600 and be put of from taking the camera with me, or do I switch a smaller system that I'm happy to carry around and accept that the image quality won't be as good. From what I can see the reduction in ultimate image quality is there but not to the extreme sense that you'd like us to believe. I suspect from your comments you don't and have never owned one of the M4/3 system cameras that use the modern sensors.

 

[J1nxy]

Right well clearly you're thoroughly convinced that there's absolutely no drawback to a penny sized sensor so I'll leave you to it then :/

And I still don't understand who or what you were replying to with your 70-200 comment?

 

[J1nxy]

I find having something to take the images with a much bigger motivation for having a camera that I WANT to take with me when I go out.