New member - Query on buying new system. Possibly Olympus

[thequacksoflife]

I can tell you with 100% certainty that the lenses are completely interchangeable between all MFT cameras.

Glenn is sort of right Olympus lenses don't have image stabilisation on the lens. Oly has it in the sensor. The lenses will work perfectly on panny bodies but they will lack stabilisation.

if i was buying an m4/3 system today I'd probably buy a g3 or a gx1.

[bumbles]

I am not dead set on a mirrorless camera. I am not that knowledgeable when it comes to cameras and lenses. I originally was interested in a DSLR camera, the Olympus E5 and then I read about the E 30. What I am looking for in a camera is one that will give me quality photos. From information out there it seems like the quality is in the lens. Is that true?

I have been researching on cameras and lenses lately and do not know much. Part of the reason for joining this site was to learn and get information from people as yourself that are knowledgeable about cameras and lenses.

Any feedback would be helpful.

[Shadowman]

I am not dead set on a mirrorless camera. I am not that knowledgeable when it comes to cameras and lenses. I originally was interested in a DSLR camera, the Olympus E5 and then I read about the E 30. What I am looking for in a camera is one that will give me quality photos. From information out there it seems like the quality is in the lens. Is that true?

I have been researching on cameras and lenses lately and do not know much. Part of the reason for joining this site was to learn and get information from people as yourself that are knowledgeable about cameras and lenses.

Any feedback would be helpful.

One of the other key benefits of the mirrorless camera is that it is light weight, I wouldn't necessarily recommend this camera as a substitute to a DSLR or even a bridge camera, it is just a nice addition to your equipment if you want to invest in this technology.

[inkista]

...What I am looking for in a camera is one that will give me quality photos.

The problem with this is that everybody's idea of what makes a "quality" photo differs. Depending on what/how you shoot and what/how you want to deliver as a final image, even a point and shoot can deliver a "quality" image.


Canon S30. Very old point and shoot, 3MP camera, used in "P" mode, with a low iso to get a slow shutter speed, on a small plastic tripod.

From information out there it seems like the quality is in the lens. Is that true?

Yes. And no. In technical terms, there are only two things that "touch" the light and make the image: the lens, and the sensor. So those two things do matter.

But in addition, proper technique, a good eye for an image, and strong compositional skills also come into the mix. The camera is just the tool. A tool without which you cannot make photos--so, it is important. But the camera alone doesn't make the image. You + the camera is the full equation.

I have been researching on cameras and lenses lately and do not know much....

Everybody has to start somewhere. Don't worry. We don't bite. Ask questions, and we'll answer them, and hopefully that can give you some of what you need to know.

Generally speaking, my advice would be that if you have a p&s camera, make sure that you know how to use it to its limits before you go looking to upgrade to a better camera. Until that P&S camera is frustrating the crap out of you for some reason(s), chances are good, you could make huge improvements simply by learning some technique or post-processing skills. Reading a book or two about composition might not hurt, either. (I really like Bryan Peterson's Learning to See Creatively for composition, and Understanding Exposure for exposure basics like iso, aperture, and shutter speed and what they can do for you.)

Better cameras/lenses have fewer limitations. They can take sharper pictures. Pictures with less noise. Picture with less motion blur. Pictures with more out-of-focus blur, or more saturated colors, or less distortion. But better images? That may still be up to you.



Switching from a fixed-lens point and shoot to an interchangeable lens system is a big shift in paradigm, and a huge leap upwards in cost. Look at the camera price, triple it, and that's liable to be what you spend getting yourself a basic outfit of lenses, bag, filters, tripod, and maybe a flash or post-processing software along with the camera. Just a thought.

[bumbles]

Thank you for the advice and pointers. I currently have a Point and Shot Sony Cyber Shot. What I do not like about it is many of my photos are blurry. I know it is from not holding the camera still when shooting. I have made a conscious effort to hold the camera still to no avail. Part of my reasons to buy a better camera are for the stabilization and then more professional looking pictures. I would like my photos clearer and at the same time be able to see details.

Do you think I am going about this all wrong?

[Glenn NK]

Part of my reasons to buy a better camera are for the stabilization and then more professional looking pictures. I would like my photos clearer and at the same time be able to see details.

Do you think I am going about this all wrong?

I don't think so - that's what it's all about.

If the IS systems (lens and body) of different brands don't function with each other, then they are not really compatible are they?

Glenn

[inkista]

Thank you for the advice and pointers. I currently have a Point and Shot Sony Cyber Shot. What I do not like about it is many of my photos are blurry. I know it is from not holding the camera still when shooting. I have made a conscious effort to hold the camera still to no avail. Part of my reasons to buy a better camera are for the stabilization and then more professional looking pictures. I would like my photos clearer and at the same time be able to see details.

Do you think I am going about this all wrong?

No, I don't think you're going about this wrong, but I do think that you may want to study the problem a little more before dropping cash on a "solution" that may not actually solve all your problems.

If you're absolutely certain that it's not holding the camera still that's the issue, have you tried a tripod? That British Museum shot I did above with with a P&S and a small plastic tripod. A tripod can hold your camera absolutely still. Using it with a timer can eliminate the vibration from pushing the shutter button. If it's just a matter of stabilizing the camera, built-in stabilization might be the most convenient way to do it, but it's also less effective than using a tripod or simply placing the camera on a level surface and not touching it while it takes the picture. Stabilization can only help you increase your shutter speed two or three stops. A good tripod can let you take minute-long exposures.

Secondly, if you're taking images at much lower than safe handholding shutter speeds, subject motion blur may be what's causing the issue. That cannot be fixed by stabilization, better handholding technique, or a tripod. That can only be fixed by using a faster shutter speed. And that typically requires either using a higher iso setting, or a larger aperture setting. Those two things are determined by the camera and lens that you're using.

Thirdly, camera shake blur is exaggerated the more you zoom in. The longer the focal length, the more magnification you get, and the bigger the shake will be in the final image. Have you tried zooming out? That will also give you more maximum aperture to work with.

Technique may help mitigate your issues with your current point and shoot. If technique doesn't work, then it's time to get less limited gear.

Chances are good your P&S camera doesn't have much low-light capability, and that's what's holding you back, but make sure you've exhausted technique first. You'd feel really dumb spending $500 on a new camera if it turns out a $10 travel tripod could have solved your issue.

[Shadowman]

Thank you for the advice and pointers. I currently have a Point and Shot Sony Cyber Shot. What I do not like about it is many of my photos are blurry. I know it is from not holding the camera still when shooting. I have made a conscious effort to hold the camera still to no avail. Part of my reasons to buy a better camera are for the stabilization and then more professional looking pictures. I would like my photos clearer and at the same time be able to see details.

Do you think I am going about this all wrong?

Have you tried placing the camera on a stable surface and using the timer?