[dave]

Last time I looked wide options were limited.

Same response as usual to this - there's a decent cheap tiny pancake 14mm, a more expensive well regarded Zuiko 12mm, a larger cheaper well-regarded Samyang 12mm and 10mm manual focus lenses, plus other native MF offerings by voigtlander etc. Plus the Olympus, Panasonic and Samyang fisheyes, plus all the zooms. Oh and if you've got a grand there a Panasonic 12mm 1.4 and also recently they added a 15mm 1.7.

So looking at primes alone there are more practical options for wides available than there are for, say, the Nikon DX system.

[El Mocho]

What's the benefits of the EM-5 over EM-10?

Not overly keen on using the old OM lenses esp as they will be quite long (less so the 17mm which is crap anyhow) was just a ££ issue. Guess if I could pick up an EM-? for around £300 maybe with the zoom lens they often seem to come with (14-something?) I could also get a prime straight away and build from there.

None of you like the Fujifilm? They seem to have decent reviews.

[dave]

The EM-10 is slightly newer than the EM-5, but from what I remember there's not a lot between them in the spec. Can't remember specifics. Obiwan has got an EM10, I've got an EM-5. Main difference is when they were released Em5 was pitched as the top-of-the-line model so expensive, where as EM-10 was supposedly lower-spec but newer and cheaper when new.

When I was buying mine I had deliberated for ages and decided to buy a brand new EM-10 for like £5-600 or whatever they were, and when I walked into Harrisons the guy handed me a second-hand EM-5 complete with the battery grip they had just got in for £400 so I bought that instead.

[gingerninja]

not one of the cameras you mentioned but i have a canon eos m2 for sale with the 18-55 kit lens and the converter to use standard canon lenses. was looking at £260 for it. its great for a carry round camera, especially with the 22mm f2 lens. its all boxed with charger and a spare battery. think i even have a second charger but its in spain so will bring it back next time im out there.

[dave]

None of you like the Fujifilm? They seem to have decent reviews.

The fuji stuff looks great, but I think when I was buying the one I would have bought were too expensive, plus I already had m4/3 lenses from my GF1 which I got before Fuji brought their stuff out.

[cheque]

recently they added a 15mm 1.7.

This is a brilliant lens, size and price very reasonable compared to the other “Panaleica” ones. The Panasonic 7-14 is also good value secondhand at around £400 if you don’t need a filter thread. It’s more flare-prone on Olympus bodies apparently though.

[Johnny Brown]

Last time I looked wide options were limited.

Same response as usual to this...

Ok, so which did you go for? What would you recommend for Ben, given his budget?

Looks little improved to me - the kit zooms get you to 14mm anyway, then you can spend a fortune to get either a tiny bit wider, a fisheye or a pricey slow zoom. And if I was going to drop a monkey on a 12mm I'd get a pro zoom. Samyang 10mm is the only one that sits in between but is huge, and again pricey. Plus limited used market on any of these as they're all new. Fuck knows why no one got the memo that m4/3's USP is size.

I agree Nikon DX is even worse, one reason mine hasn't been used in 18 months. But no one's suggesting considering Nikon DX.

Ben, pretty sure your wide was a 19mm. Dig it out and we can check if it's usable on my A7 - I'm sure it will be fine. The A7 manual focus experience is the best I've ever used. The only negative I've found is the combined viewfinder and shutter delay are noticeable when coming from a pro DSLR, but I soon got over it. The A7 Raw files are head and shoulders above any others I've produced - great colour, no noise and bags of shadow and highlight latitude. With the 90mm macro I can lend you it'll also function as a very good slide scanner.

[dave]

Ok, so which did you go for? What would you recommend for Ben, given his budget?

The Panasonic 14mm/2.5 is tiny and dirt cheap, and good enough, although I sold mine as I shot virtually everything at 20mm or 45mm. I have a tiny collapsible 12-35mm zoom which I would use for wide now, although it comes out almost exclusively for video only.

And if I was going to drop a monkey on a 12mm I'd get a pro zoom.

Fuck knows why no one got the memo that m4/3's USP is size.

So it would seem.

[Johnny Brown]

The m4/3 pro zooms are way smaller than the 35mm equivalent. The m4/3 wide primes mostly aren't.

I doubt 14mm will be wide enough for Ben's tastes given his 19mm back catalogue. The great thing about full-frame mirrorless is the lens choice, you've got 60+ years to go at with every budget catered for.

[dave]

The pro zooms are still pretty big for m4/3. They only look small compared with the latest stuff from Nikon, where they have gone full crack-bubbling in terms of huge zooms.

Yet some of the primes are tiny. I think the Zuiko 12/2 is smaller than any non-Leica 24mm legacy prime. The Panasonic 14mm is barely any bigger than an OM rear lens cap. Even the Samyang 12mm is overall probably less bulk than a Nikon 24mm. Some of the third party primes like the Voigtlanders and Samyangs are annoyingly big, but partly because they're building them cross-platform to also work on Fuji system etc etc. Also the general trend in new primes is to make them huge with big front elements (see the latest zeiss stuff, and of course voigtlander and zeiss are bother made by cosina).

I agree the Sony system looks a winner for using legacy glass, if you're happy with the focussing. Just a shame that all the Leica M glass at the wider-than-normal end on the Sonys seems to be crippled in terms of edge performance from what I've seen.

[cofe]

I've got an EM5 with an Oly 12-50 and a 50 1.8. The latter is superb. The former is fine considering it costs nothing: it's a bit long (length, not focal length), sure, it's a bit slow, sure, but having 24-100 equiv. when out and about is dead handy. It's light too. Great for big MTB days. The mk2 versions of the EM5 and EM10 have improved handling from what I remember. In an ideal world I'd have a Fuji or Sony setup.

[cheque]

I have no personal experience with one but the 6000 series is notorious for heavy rolling shutter- not good for anything where the camera's going to move quickly or anything's going to move quickly past it.



M43 works well for video for me.

[Johnny Brown]

I haven't used the 6000 series, but another one to consider might be a used Sony RX10. It's basically a high end bridge camera but is very highly regarded for video. The Mk1 is now an absolute bargain used, and includes a 24-200 (equiv) constant f/2.8 Zeiss zoom. Yes. I know. I've shot two walking guides for Cofe now with mine and it's an amazing bit of kit. It's a one inch sensor which is a step down from m4/3 or DX but is a lot bigger than the average cinecam sensor.

[Nigel]

Hey, I'm off travelling in a month, and myself and my girlfriend would like to get a decent new camera to share. Neither of us have any photographic knowledge at all although I don't mind learning "the basics" if there is such a thing. So realistically we're probably looking for something easy to use and compact that gives good shots. Am happy to take alternative suggestions though. Probs going to be of people and landscapes mainly. I expect we'll go up to £200 ish. Any good Black Friday deals out there that people have seen that I should check out?

[Johnny Brown]

Panasonic Lx7, or see previous post about RX10. Harrison's have a couple in second hand at the mo for £375. This is a Deal.

[Wood FT]

Ive been using Flo’s LX7 and it’s great Nige, videos great too, I recommend it. I had a RX100III and didn’t like it.

If you’re after something cheaper you can’t go wrong with the canon S-(bigger number = more £) range, full manual and decent video in a very small camera. Buy a bunch of batteries off eBay.

Have a great time

[Nigel]

Nice one guys, I knew the experts would come to the rescue! Might catch you before we go Guy, you coming works do?

[Paul B]

If you’re after something cheaper you can’t go wrong with the canon S-(bigger number = more £) range, full manual and decent video in a very small camera. Buy a bunch of batteries off eBay.

I'm not convinced my S95 gives outputs much better than Nat's iFern 5C or my much cheaper Moto G4 (if you ignore RAW capability which I'm assuming Nige will).

[kelvin]

My S95 video is pretty poor. The photos can be good, depends if you make an effort. However, it's survived many a drop that would have killed a phone and it still keeps on working well. So far over a 1000 shots in Font this month and that's 900 more than I'd take with a camera as I'm happy to clamber up trees and boulders with it in my hand.

Can't say I'd get another one, I think generally the equivalent Panasonic takes better pics but I can't complain about it either.