NFR Cameras

Non-fishing related
I have the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 for my Oly micro 4/3 system. It is a very nice, fast lens and only $400. On a m4/3 system it is equivalent to a 112mm, so it's great for portraits. Would be 84mm to 90mm equivalent on APSC bodies, still a good portrait length.
 
What do you guys think about m43 cameras? The lens ecosystem seems a bit more budget friendly. The bodies in my price range all have IBIS too, along with 120fps 1080p.

I'm not overly concerned about Olympus; it seems like the new owners are committed to their m43 line. Some folks are arguing that m43 may actually be around longer than APS-C, because many APS-C users will eventually go full frame and there will always be a desire for small m43 cameras. I may take Canon off the short list, because EF-M is now a dead end. Panasonic GX9 also seems like a reasonable option.
 
Last edited:
If you’re interested in supporting local businesses, I suggest you take the deal you find in the online stores to Kenmore Cameras and ask if they can meet or beat it.
I did this with the Nikon price from B&H and Kenmore matched it. You also get the bonus of getting to physically handle and tryout the camera.
 
jaredoconnor said:
Thinking about finally pulling the trigger on a decent camera, with a baby on the way. I definitely want it to be mirrorless. Beyond that, I don't know much. Below are the requirements.
  • 60fps 1080p video
  • Clean HDMI output
  • General purpose lens
  • Prime lens (general portrait use)
  • No second hand gear
I will probably add a macro lens at some point, for fly tying, but it's not an immediate requirement.

Budget is $1,000. Is this doable? Any suggestions? It seems like some camera bodies are very cheap, but the lens system can explode the total cost very fast.
Click to expand...
While you're not looking for a macro lens just yet, whatever camera and lens Scottp is using for his photos in the 'What's in your vise' thread is very high quality.
 
springburn said:
While you're not looking for a macro lens just yet, whatever camera and lens Scottp is using for his photos in the 'What's in your vise' thread is very high quality.
Click to expand...

I probably won't get a macro lens, after all. I will probably get an Olympus TG-7 instead, when they come out. For a little bit more than a decent macro lens, I would get a waterproof camera and it has exceptional macro. I expect that to be more useful for us.

I believe ScottP said he uses a fairly simple point and shoot, but I may be getting him mixed up with someone else.
 
(This is just me thinking outloud) Great info from all the previous. Cutting edge info.

Sony and the other mirrorless would be the way I'd start anew and will go soon, but there are atleast a couple of us on here that shoot Olympus m4/3 bodies. I go back one more step in evolution; I have shot Olympus OM since I was in jr high in the late 70's and use only old manual focus lenses via a cheap $20 adapter on my Olympus OMD EM-1 m4/3 body. I don't own an autofocus lens.
I strictly shoot 1970-80's manual lenses on a digital body. I enjoy my throwback system. Can put a $30 50mm Zuiko f1.8 lens on and have great portrait lens. My 300mm lens thinks it is a 600mm on the crop body.

I have no baby shots, but use the 50mm old fast lenses today all the time (see hawk below from a couple weeks back).

My working system with about 3-4 lenses and body would come in under $500 total I guess.
Don't overlook some of the older manual focus lenses if you do not need fast focus.

Below: Which one is digital and which one is film? (Answer: EM-1 Digital left/ OM4 Film body right)

oly44444eee.jpg

Manual Zuiko 50mm f1.4 lens used below
retsilsmile.jpg
 
Last edited:
Gyrfalcon22 said:
(This is just me thinking outloud) Great info from the all the previous. Cutting edge info.

Sony and the other mirrorless would be the way I'd start anew and will go soon, but there are atleast a couple of us on here that shoot Olympus m4/3 bodies. I go back one more step in evolution; I have shot Olympus OM since I was in jr high in the late 70's and use only old manual focus lenses via a cheap $20 adapter on my Olympus OMD EM-1 m4/3 body. I don't own an autofocus lens.
I strictly shoot 1970-80's manual lenses on a digital body. I enjoy my throwback system. Can put a $30 50mm Zuiko f1.8 lens on and have great portrait lens. My 300mm lens thinks it is a 600mm on the crop body.

I have no baby shots, but fav portrait lens is my Olympus Zuiko film era 50mm f1.4 I bought in 1976..still use it today (see recent hawk photo).

My working system with about 3-4 lenses and body would come in under $500 total I guess.

Don't overlook some of the older manual focus lenses if you do not need fast focus.

Below: Which one is digital and which one is film? (Answer: EM-1 Digital left/ OM4 Film body right)

View attachment 3819

1970's Zuiko 50mm f1.4 lens used below
View attachment 3822
Click to expand...

if he wants to shoot 50% video the autofocus functions of the camera become much more important.
 
Pretty much the only thing holding me back from the Olympus m43 is that the AF doesn't seem to be as good as even the cheapest Canon/Sony APS-C cameras. I imagine fast AF matters, when it comes to kids.

More and more, it is looking like it is cheaper and better to get multiple cameras than load up on fancy lenses and whatnot.

iPhone
  • Slow motion video
  • Fast movement video
Olympus TG-6
  • Macro (ie. fly tying)
  • Fishing
Canon EOS M200
  • Portraits
  • Everything else
I would be a bit over budget, but it seems like this combination is more versatile than anything I could get out of a single mirrorless, unless I spend a lot of money.
 
Last edited:
A couple reasons I would not recommend Olympus m4/3, just from my personal experience. I buy used without warranty. I have had one camera shutter lock up and it is done. I bought a 2nd body and it is going a year later, but on occasion will lock up. I take the battery out, put back in, and give the camera a light THUMP, and it gets rolling again. Might just be the luck of the draw and old cameras, but I have read online this is not uncommon with the Oly m4/3 bodies. Premature shutter failure.

Also, the finder is not real big and if I was shooting video, I'd want a bigger finder. Oly m4/3 excels in traveling light, not staying close to home. If I was staying mostly local or indoors, I'd shoot with a full-sizer and not worry.
 
Last edited:
jaredoconnor said:
Pretty much the only thing holding me back from the Olympus m43 is that the AF doesn't seem to be as good as even the cheapest Canon/Sony APS-C cameras. I imagine fast AF matters, when it comes to kids.

More and more, it is looking like it is cheaper and better to get multiple cameras than load up on fancy lenses and whatnot.

iPhone
  • Slow motion video
  • Fast movement video
Olympus TG-6
  • Macro (ie. fly tying)
  • Fishing
Canon EOS M200
  • Portraits
  • Everything else
I would be a bit over budget, but it seems like this combination is more versatile than anything I could get out of a single mirrorless, unless I spend a lot of money.
Click to expand...

When it comes to fishing, what does the TG-6 offer that the iPhone doesn't?
 
MarshRat said:
Aren't all iPhones waterproof at this point?
Click to expand...

I don't trust it. Also, iPhones are not impact resistant. I would rather break a $500 camera that isn't particularly important than a $1,300 phone that I basically can't live without.
 
Last edited:
I haven’t gone the mirrorless route yet. I still run dslrs. I just got a used d750 because I wanted a smaller body. Running a d3 before that. I only consider a full frame. I just like them. My d750 does video but I haven’t messed with it. I use a GoPro for video. The most important thing I found is spend your money on the lenses. I love my 24-70 2.8 And then I run prime lenses. I have a 24mm, 50, and the 105mm macro which is a beast for macro photography.
 
I'm trying to understand the pros/cons of a manual macro lens vs. an AF zoom/prime lens, with extension tubes.

The main cons of the manual macro lens seem to be that (1) lack of AF may make it hard to use for video and (2) focus bracketing/stacking won't be supported.

From my research, if I get extension tubes that pass through the contact points, all the features of the lens will continue to work. Thus, video AF and focus bracketing/stacking will be possible. Is that correct?

I am specifically wondering if a 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 or 30mm f/1.4 lens would suffice, assuming they're being used on an M43 camera. Any ideas?
 
I use a Panasonic Lumix G7 that fits your qualifications. They are under $700 and mirrorless. It's a great camera, and I can't imagine you would need anything more. I can list my lenses later if you have any interest in that. Keep in mind that you can buy old manual lenses, and mount them with special brackets on your mirrorless. I have an awesome Canon 50mm 1.2 prime that works out to be 85mm-100mm. Super cool look to it. I would look on YouTube for reviews of the ones people are listing here. So helpful in getting something that works for you.
 
jaredoconnor said:
I'm trying to understand the pros/cons of a manual macro lens vs. an AF zoom/prime lens, with extension tubes.

I am specifically wondering if a 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 or 30mm f/1.4 lens would suffice, assuming they're being used on an M43 camera. Any ideas?
Click to expand...

I don't see any benefit to buying multiple lenses all at once. It's hard to know what you need until you start shooting. Personally, I would get the 14-42 first and see if it does everything you want it to. If the focusing distance isn't close enough for you, then you could mess around with manual lenses or extensions for your fly tying content. If your portraits don't have the depth that you want, then you can pick a prime lens to suit your needs. Additionally, I picked my prime lens after using an 18-55 for a while and identifying which focal length matched the type of shots I take most often.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top