Canon or Olympus for second body to Digilux3?

[cfc247]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello everyone,

 

I have been thinking over this for quite a while now. I currently use a Digilux 3 with the kit lens, 25 1.4, R 35-70 f4, Contax/Zeiss 50 1.7, and a Hexanon 50 1.7. Although I eagerly await the introduction of the R10 as my next step up, though most of my glass will not be compatible. I also have hopes for the upcoming m4/3 body(ies) from Oly and Panny for a backup compact body.

 

Although I would love to have a 4/3 sized sensor on a Sigma DP1 sized body (as in the upcoming Oly), for a full sized DSLR, the E3 or E30 are just not appealing to me with the same sensor size as a E5xx, low-resolution LCD (compared to Nikon/Canon) and smaller and dimmer viewfinder(?).

 

Personally, for me these are the two areas of greatest complaint with the Digilux 3. Viewfinder and sensor limitations(noise, ISO capabilities).

 

I know that many of you are either using the Oly or EOS bodies as your "bridge" system. Could you share your thoughts on which way to go given my current equipment?

 

For Canon I am considering the 5D Mk1 and the 40D. Although I prefer the FF 5D, it seems that the 40D has much better compatibility with legacy glass. But getting the Canon would be no IS, new flash (currently have the Oly Fl36R), no Leica D glass compatibility, and more $ for AF lenses with EF mount. I would basically have two systems here in the long run I guess, with the legacy glass going back and forth.

 

Again, with the Oly bodies, I am just not drawn to their current lineup. Any thoughts would help!

[Ruhayat]

Generally, I'd go for Olympus if I want cheap, high quality prime portrait lenses or teles (how about Summicron 100mm/f2 or Summilux 150mm/f1.4?). Oly also has nice colours out of the camera. I'd say go for E520 with 28mm Elmarit-R and zone focusing (or use the Live View) for a tiny walkabout camera that is bristling with features.

 

I'd go for Canon if I tend more towards low light people or event shooting and fast action. The 5D would be the Canon for me, perfect for landscapes, tight portraits (with full frame you get back the actual DOF), prime wide angles and normalised 50mm's.

 

If I had money I'd buy both. They complement one another very nicely. I'd say Oly for hobbyist work, Canon for semi-professional or commercial work (the E3 is nice, but not as nice as the 5D for certain purposes).

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ASpes]

Hello everyone,

 

I have been thinking over this for quite a while now. I currently use a Digilux 3 with the kit lens, 25 1.4, R 35-70 f4, Contax/Zeiss 50 1.7, and a Hexanon 50 1.7. Although I eagerly await the introduction of the R10 as my next step up, though most of my glass will not be compatible. I also have hopes for the upcoming m4/3 body(ies) from Oly and Panny for a backup compact body.

 

Although I would love to have a 4/3 sized sensor on a Sigma DP1 sized body (as in the upcoming Oly), for a full sized DSLR, the E3 or E30 are just not appealing to me with the same sensor size as a E5xx, low-resolution LCD (compared to Nikon/Canon) and smaller and dimmer viewfinder(?).

 

Personally, for me these are the two areas of greatest complaint with the Digilux 3. Viewfinder and sensor limitations(noise, ISO capabilities).

 

I know that many of you are either using the Oly or EOS bodies as your "bridge" system. Could you share your thoughts on which way to go given my current equipment?

 

For Canon I am considering the 5D Mk1 and the 40D. Although I prefer the FF 5D, it seems that the 40D has much better compatibility with legacy glass. But getting the Canon would be no IS, new flash (currently have the Oly Fl36R), no Leica D glass compatibility, and more $ for AF lenses with EF mount. I would basically have two systems here in the long run I guess, with the legacy glass going back and forth.

 

Again, with the Oly bodies, I am just not drawn to their current lineup. Any thoughts would help!

 

Mark,

 

do not take this wrong, no offence or slight intended, but it seems to me you're a bit too concentrated with hardware and less with your photography.

With this I mean to say that by today standards the D/3 is neither perfect nor the best camera around but it's a pretty good camera with some features, mostly the layout but not only, that make it sort of unique on the DSLR market, and capable of outstanding results. I agree the finder is not the brightest you can have, but nevertheless it's quite usable in all light conditions. I also agree its sensor is not as noise-free as we would like it to be, but again it's quite usable up to 400 ISO without any problem. Beyond that limit, a light touch with a de-noising programme might be pretty enough, the biggest trick of course being just not to underexpose.

 

Guess you already know all this, but it seems you're still struggling with your choice of the D/3, so in my opinion you have three good options.

 

First one is to give up your D/3 and switch to the new 5D from Canon, where I expect you can use the additional lenses you have (but not the 4/3 ones). Enjoy it and come back to Leica, maybe in a couple years, when you'll see the R10, if we'll ever get one.

Really hope I'm wrong, but IMO Leica has limited resources, they're pouring them at the moment on the S2 and a future M9, that's where profits hopefully will be and let them survive. The R10 will likely get none unless it's a (costly) system revolution, something that could be done in good times but the current ones are not.

 

Second one. As you say you're ready to invest in an R10, which is unlikely to be on the cheap side, why don't you take your chance with the current offer and get an M8 with a couple lenses?

Of course you'll need to adapt a bit to it, no AF and a bit quirky, but it's as close as you can get to a 35mm FF with Leica at the moment, and to say its results are good is just a plain understatement.

It would cost you about the same money, or, more likely, even less of an R10 and will let you enjoy some of the best glass you can have, even lots of good bargains on used lenses around.

In this case you could keep the D/3 for long lenses and enjoy both worlds. This could be the only situation I see in your case where two different systems could integrate and not double, something I would not definitely suggest.

 

Third choice. Get to grips with your D/3, and add a second body with another D/3-L1, (or maybe an E-30), and invest in good glass, Oly has lots.

 

Whatever your choice (my bet would be on the 1st one, my suggestion on the 2nd and my wallet on the 3rd ...) do not let hardware issues stump you psychologically any longer and just focus on your images ... and of course do not forget to share some of them with us, I sort of feel we would be enjoying them.

 

Just my 2 (euro)cent, and ... best of luck.

[cfc247]

Thank you both for your comments.

 

Aspes, I agree that its easy to get caught up with the hardware instead of the photography. Perhaps there is an element of truth in what you said. But hardware does matter, and it should matter, as long as it is not getting in the way of one's photography.

 

Coming from the Nikon D200, more than anything, the viewfinder of the D3 is hard to get used to. I can put up with the noise on the D3 and use a flash instead of going above ISO400. I really think the biggest thing for me is the viewfinder. Especially with manual focusing, I want to enjoy looking through the viewfinder.

 

I guess the sensible thing to do is to wait for the next generation of 4/3 and/or m4/3 bodies since they would be fully compatible with my lenses. My thought on the Canons was to pick up a used one at a discount and use it for a few years until the "next" solution, either from Leica or 4/3.

[Bob Ross]

 

I really think the biggest thing for me is the viewfinder. Especially with manual focusing, I want to enjoy looking through the viewfinder.

 

The best 4/3rds viewfinder is in the E-3, but as you said it comes with a full size body. That full size body also comes with in-camera IS for all lenses, live view and probably more dang options than you'll ever need. I haven't figured them all out after using mine for over a year. The next best manual focus option may be the E-420 & E-520 with an alternative focus aide screen. MFT looks promising.

The new full frame candidates are impressive, but if you ever work with 16bit conversions, you'll need a lot of computing power to push around a 100MB+ image file.

The M8 suggestion is good, but expensive, unless you have the lenses.

Bob

[cfc247]

thanks for your comment Bob.

 

Exchanging comments is clearing things a bit for me. At the moment, the only digital SLR Leica option is the R glass + 4/3 body or the DMR. The latter is not an option for me since I will have occasional AF needs. But since the R lenses are built for film cameras or FF, and unlike the Oly glass which are built ground up for a 4/3 body, I am wondering if the Canon bodies are more suitable in terms of transferring the kind of image quality that the R glass is able to render (I am here referring to the FF Canons). I also recently saw someone put R glass on a Nikon D700.

 

With these possibilities, I began to consider the benefits that came with either the Canon/Nikon over the D3--viewfinder, FF, etc. Have anyone tried R lenses on both FF and 4/3?

[Bob Ross]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

thanks for your comment Bob.

 

Exchanging comments is clearing things a bit for me. At the moment, the only digital SLR Leica option is the R glass + 4/3 body or the DMR. The latter is not an option for me since I will have occasional AF needs. But since the R lenses are built for film cameras or FF, and unlike the Oly glass which are built ground up for a 4/3 body, I am wondering if the Canon bodies are more suitable in terms of transferring the kind of image quality that the R glass is able to render (I am here referring to the FF Canons). I also recently saw someone put R glass on a Nikon D700.

 

With these possibilities, I began to consider the benefits that came with either the Canon/Nikon over the D3--viewfinder, FF, etc. Have anyone tried R lenses on both FF and 4/3?

Hi mark,

I use a variety of OM and R lenses on my E-1 & E-3 and when I do it is at the wider apertures. Closed down there isn't any reason not to use the 4/3rds zooms or macro primes. At the moment I have the 50mm on the E-3 and the 35mm on the E-1.

The key to the format choices is your type of photography. The lenses with the best Bokeh are those in the 80mm+ range and they impose a narrowed FOV. Now, that suits my type of photography and I don't mind giving my human subject some space, as I back up. Cropped sensors have probably lulled me into expecting sharp corner to corner images and when I either hear or see FF user comment about corner softness, I stop and remember the good old days.. The 4/3rds glass for the most part is very impressive. The viewfinders vary a lot, but the lenses are fine.

Bob