Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Nikon D3200'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • started by


Last Updated

  • started by


Filter by number of...


  • started by



Website URL








My cameras and kit

Found 1 result

  1. I've spent the last week reading as much as I could about micro four thirds cameras, and it looks like many people are trumpeting MFT as the "death of DSLR" or at least a viable option. Since I'm on the prowl for a new SLR, the MFT cameras - GH2 in particular - is making me think twice about going with a Canon/Nikon. But is MFT really that great? I have some issues/questions:[list] [*]The cameras appear to be smaller and made of plastic, i.e., cheaper. Yet they don't cost consumers any less. [*]MFT sensors are about half the size of the new consumer level Nikon D3200 (full frame). How can this NOT be inferior? - at least for stills? [*]Lens focal length and aperture are double that of 35mm film cameras, so a 45mm f/1.8 is effectively a 90mm f/3.6. To get 2.8 aperture, you need to buy an f/1.4. [*]Lenses are smaller and plastic and look like toys. The optics are WAY smaller. So they're probably a lot cheaper to manufacture. Yet the price is not cheaper. For example, the Olympus 85mm 1.8 is more than twice the price of a Nikon 85mm 1.8D. Not a fair comparison, you might think - well, there isn't a 42mm 1.4, so the closest I could find is a Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4 for $600. Doesn't anyone else have misgivings about laying down $400 for a little plastic prime lens? For just over $100 you can get a killer Nikon 50mm 1.8. [*]Optical viewfinders are rare on MFTs (and they'd be rangefinders), and electronic viewfinders will always suffer latency - perhaps not an issue for video, but would be for still photography. [/list] So the words that sum up the physical characteristics of a MFT system are[list] [*]Small [*]Plastic [*]Toylike [*]Expensive [/list] Smaller lens diameters and smaller sensors would seem to be more susceptible to dust and imperfections. I don't know - just hypothesizing. I've read that, for video, the GH2 has some magic that makes it on par with high end DSLRs. But still photographs are almost but not quite as good - from what I've read. Has anyone ditched their DSLR for MFT? These are the questions and concerns I have about micro four thirds. This isn't a list of gripes - just some things I've read. I haven't even SEEN a GH2 with my own eyes, but I've seen some of the other mirrorless cameras. So all this is just a synopsis of what I've read on the web. I'd like to hear from you people who know more than what the Oracle can provide. Thanks! - and I hope the above doesn't rile anyone. Just looking for opinions. B
  • Create New...