Thanks Ken for the sobriety.
I sorta came to similar thoughts, without having my hands on testing.
At Bestbye they did not have the E-M5 just the E-M10 and the E-M1.
The E-M1 felt the best but not really much smaller than A7. There was
also the A6600 with 18-135 lens. I had the A6000 with that lens before
giving to grand daughter. So my thought was to wait. I liked the A6000
with 18-135 lens. With the A6600 using larger battery... felt right in hand.
As you say, I started looking a the lens situation and one could
easily spend more on them than the camera.
For small and compact, the RX100vii seems quite capable. Almost
too small though. It's hard to go backward with cameras.
At 6/22/2020 03:25 PM, Ken wrote:
>> I'm leaning toward the smaller camera for me to be the E-M5 iii. One big
>> attraction for me is the good (27mm) eyepoint relief viewfinder.
>I think I can weigh in on this as I've recently researched and tried
>the various cameras looking for something, uh, modern, and serious.
>The E-M5 III is actually a very nice camera, but the viewfinder just
>wasn't quite there. You KNOW you're giving up something with this
>camera. It's strange, because the camera is extremely competent, but
>it's "off" somehow. I harken back to the film OM days and it's
>definitely a two-digit model as compared to the single-digit models.
>It's very hard to quantify the tangible differences because the specs
>are so close, but the intangible differences are real and significant.
>Panasonic's DfD focus system is very good -- when using Panasonic
>lenses. For all but the pickiest of us, the focus system is quite
>adequate. With legacy or other brand lenses, it's not going to be
>nearly as fast and might frustrate. However, the G9's viewfinder is
>worth the price of admission. In the entire world of m43, I maintain
>that the G9 is the best overall camera. Honestly, it feels a lot like
>the E-3 in that you know this thing was designed for serious use and
>not to be fiddled with.
>There is a blogger I follow once in a while who had a "complete"
>system in three different formats. He had a medium-format digital, a
>FF digital, and a crop-sensor digital system. He ended up selling off
>all but one lens for the medium format, and minimized the crop-sensor
>system to just two "general purpose" lenses. His primary system is the
>FF. What he discovered was that by building up a complete crop-sensor
>system with gobs of top-end glass, he had a system that was
>effectively as large and heavy as the FF system. And his take on that
>was is if he's going to drag that much weight around, it's going to be
>the FF system. He uses the crop-sensor camera when he wants to travel
>light, not when he wants to just shoot with a POTENTIALLY lighter
>In that regard, this is pretty much where I'm at right now. The
>Pansonic GX85 with the 12-32, 50-150, and 25/1.7 make a very nice
>"grab-n-go" kit that fits anywhere and weighs almost nothing.
>Alternatively, the E-400 with 14-42 and 40-150 is also a fantastic
>little grab-n-go kit. While I would love to flesh out the m43 kit with
>tons of fancy lenses and bodies, it really doesn't fit because if I'm
>going to be serious about my photography, I'm carring serious cameras
>Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/