Author Topic: The cost of switching (Read 3064 times)

lisandra · « **on:** March 19, 2012, 08:14:42 PM »

The price of m4/3s gets disputed a lot around the web, and people certainly come up to me about it a lot. So a couple of months back I did the digging around as to what the expense would be going from APS C to m4/3s or vice versa for a "working's photographer" kit. First off, prices for these are new, and the lenses chosen were optically similar in sharpness (even though the 100$ 50 1.8 is in there). Theres no point in getting an 'advanced" body if youre gonna throw the cheapest lens you can find at it.
The prices are all from amazon (last time I checked, about 2 months ago). The lenses included were (all equivalent focal lengths):
50mm 1.4
portrait 1.8
macro 2.8
wide zoom 2.8
70-200 2.8
TTL flash

So, assuming the new panasonics are gonna go for about 1100$, the total for m4/3s without a body is
3970$. with the GH2 its 4870$ or with the OM D its 4970$. With the grips its 5270$

The total for sony (aps c) is
5600$. with a A77 its 7000$, with a grip its 7200$

Fun! lets do canon...
6450$. with a 7D its 8050$ with a grip its 8220$
Even if you went with the much cheaper 60D youd still end up with 7520$

So worst case scenario for m4/3s is 2000$ cheaper than APS C with a package thats un-oticeably close in noise performance and dare I say...sharper
what do you think?

voyager · « **Reply #1 on:** March 19, 2012, 09:38:53 PM »

People can look at Micro Four Thirds lenses and think that they should be much less because they're smaller. They really are, but people don't take into account how much it really costs to have another brand with the same kind of features.

adash · « **Reply #2 on:** March 20, 2012, 12:38:18 AM »

Quote

People can look at Micro Four Thirds lenses and think that they should be much less because they're smaller.

The needed manufacturing tolerances are tighter so there may be a reason for them being as expensive as they are.

lisandra · « **Reply #3 on:** March 20, 2012, 08:24:16 AM »

And yet they're really not more expensive.

adash · « **Reply #4 on:** March 20, 2012, 08:37:06 AM »

In your original post you mention 7D and 60D, which IMHO are the most overpriced cameras out there. A 5DII might be more appropriate, but body and lenses will cost incredibly more....

lisandra · « **Reply #5 on:** March 20, 2012, 08:40:46 AM »

Quote from: adash on March 20, 2012, 08:37:06 AM

In your original post you mention 7D and 60D, which IMHO are the most overpriced cameras out there. A 5DII might be more appropriate, but body and lenses will cost incredibly more....

they are, but Canon doesn't offer anything else in the "advanced" department. And heck, the 60d is cheaper (i think) than the gh2, the omd, and the a77. The problem is Canon glass is ridiculously overpriced, even for the quality they offer.

tamoio · « **Reply #6 on:** March 20, 2012, 12:59:03 PM »

Several people have told me they think the Canon C300 is the perfect camera for me, so I started doing some calculations. The original philosophy or "promise" with MFT was portability without compromising IQ. My perspective as a video producer/digital filmmaker that uses MFT format goes something like this:

Most of what I do is in the field and out of small aircraft and helicopters, my current AF100 package takes 6 cases to transport and in that package I have everything from a 3 light kit to an interview audio rig, and focal length range covered from 11mm to 420mm (with no gaps), plus a GH2 for B cam. Everything plus one human assistant and myself easily fits into the gross-weight-limit of a Cessna 206 float plane with room for one additional (skinny) passenger.

If I sold everything tomorrow and tried to assemble the same lens range with a Canon system I would need 2 additional cases just for lenses and my camera case (for the AF100) would have to be the next size up and substantially bigger. The cost would be sort of astronomical too, even if I went with a manual focus 300 (like I do now) and shopped around for some used lenses its five figures just in lenses. I would lose length at the long end, a 300 f2.8 is relatively portable and with a 1.4X I'm getting a super telephoto on MFT format. To match the same FOV of a 420mm f4 (300 f2.8 + 1.4X) I would need something that does 588mm (lets say 600) on the C300. A fast 600 is a chunk-of-change and it weighs a ton, I'm currently using a Miller DS25 fluid head and with the AF100, 300 f2.8, base plate and rods, follow focus, it just balances out, I would definitely have to get a bigger fluid head to balance a 600mm. Anyone here ever look at the price of fluid heads?

Then I look at the video I'm getting out of the AF100 and GH2. Everyone is impressed when they see it on a big screen, and that's really the bottom line. I went to the movie theater exactly twice last year (war horse and tinker tailor). 90% of what I watch (and everyone else statistically) is either on their home display (which generally is over 40" these days) or over the net on a laptop or mobile. From what I am getting on big displays out of the AF100 and GH2 I really see no compromises with MFT, and a lot of advantages.

lisandra · « **Reply #7 on:** March 20, 2012, 02:56:27 PM »

Quote from: tamoio on March 20, 2012, 12:59:03 PM

Several people have told me they think the Canon C300 is the perfect camera for me, so I started doing some calculations. The original philosophy or "promise" with MFT was portability without compromising IQ. My perspective as a video producer/digital filmmaker that uses MFT format goes something like this:

Most of what I do is in the field and out of small aircraft and helicopters, my current AF100 package takes 6 cases to transport and in that package I have everything from a 3 light kit to an interview audio rig, and focal length range covered from 11mm to 420mm (with no gaps), plus a GH2 for B cam. Everything plus one human assistant and myself easily fits into the gross-weight-limit of a Cessna 206 float plane with room for one additional (skinny) passenger.

If I sold everything tomorrow and tried to assemble the same lens range with a Canon system I would need 2 additional cases just for lenses and my camera case (for the AF100) would have to be the next size up and substantially bigger. The cost would be sort of astronomical too, even if I went with a manual focus 300 (like I do now) and shopped around for some used lenses its five figures just in lenses. I would lose length at the long end, a 300 f2.8 is relatively portable and with a 1.4X I'm getting a super telephoto on MFT format. To match the same FOV of a 420mm f4 (300 f2.8 + 1.4X) I would need something that does 588mm (lets say 600) on the C300. A fast 600 is a chunk-of-change and it weighs a ton, I'm currently using a Miller DS25 fluid head and with the AF100, 300 f2.8, base plate and rods, follow focus, it just balances out, I would definitely have to get a bigger fluid head to balance a 600mm. Anyone here ever look at the price of fluid heads?

Then I look at the video I'm getting out of the AF100 and GH2. Everyone is impressed when they see it on a big screen, and that's really the bottom line. I went to the movie theater exactly twice last year (war horse and tinker tailor). 90% of what I watch (and everyone else statistically) is either on their home display (which generally is over 40" these days) or over the net on a laptop or mobile. From what I am getting on big displays out of the AF100 and GH2 I really see no compromises with MFT, and a lot of advantages.

its certainly something to think about...its easy to place a gh2 besides a t3i or a d3100 and say "hey, the size is not that much different. Wheres the advantage?". But when you think about all of it as a system the size really starts to add up. In this bag

i can fit the gh2, the 100-300 attached, the 25 1.4, the 20 1.7, the 14-140, and a macro. With a lenspen, cloth, spare battery, colorchecker, a vari nd and a rocket blower. How much canon could you fit in there?

panzerfaustnl · « **Reply #8 on:** March 20, 2012, 03:04:50 PM »

The C300 is a pro-film camera. That uses DSLR technology. On the 300PL also can use PL lenses, the standard in the film industry. This camera is not comparable to what you are mentioning.

The camera can record AND relay-recording at the same time on two CF cards with a speed of 50 Mbps.

Standard output formats like HD-SDI, Timecode-, Genlock- and Synch-terminals for sessions with multiple cameras.

You can go to 200.000 ISO, you can record your own recording profiles in the camera memory ánd on SD-card so you can take them to any other C300.

You can play with the frame speed while recording in steps of 1 fps.

And last but not least you can handle the camera via wi-fi from your laptop or desktop computer. Alter any variable via the computer, iso, aperture, filters etc.

Quote from: lisandra on March 19, 2012, 08:14:42 PM

The price of m4/3s gets disputed a lot around the web, and people certainly come up to me about it a lot. So a couple of months back I did the digging around as to what the expense would be going from APS C to m4/3s or vice versa for a "working's photographer" kit. First off, prices for these are new, and the lenses chosen were optically similar in sharpness (even though the 100$ 50 1.8 is in there). Theres no point in getting an 'advanced" body if youre gonna throw the cheapest lens you can find at it.
The prices are all from amazon (last time I checked, about 2 months ago). The lenses included were (all equivalent focal lengths):
50mm 1.4
portrait 1.8
macro 2.8
wide zoom 2.8
70-200 2.8
TTL flash

So, assuming the new panasonics are gonna go for about 1100$, the total for m4/3s without a body is
3970$. with the GH2 its 4870$ or with the OM D its 4970$. With the grips its 5270$

The total for sony (aps c) is
5600$. with a A77 its 7000$, with a grip its 7200$

Fun! lets do canon...
6450$. with a 7D its 8050$ with a grip its 8220$
Even if you went with the much cheaper 60D youd still end up with 7520$

So worst case scenario for m4/3s is 2000$ cheaper than APS C with a package thats un-oticeably close in noise performance and dare I say...sharper
what do you think?

Strange prices. Are these US values? Because the 7D costs in Europe, Netherlandse, 1200 Euro, The Olympus P3 700 euro (all with 19% VAT). The Olympus OM-D will cost the same as the 7D.

lisandra · « **Reply #9 on:** March 20, 2012, 03:21:04 PM »

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 03:04:50 PM

The C300 is a pro-film camera. That uses DSLR technology. On the 300PL also can use PL lenses, the standard in the film industry. This camera is not comparable to what you are mentioning.

The camera can record AND relay-recording at the same time on two CF cards with a speed of 50 Mbps.

Standard output formats like HD-SDI, Timecode-, Genlock- and Synch-terminals for sessions with multiple cameras.

You can go to 200.000 ISO, you can record your own recording profiles in the camera memory ánd on SD-card so you can take them to any other C300.

You can play with the frame speed while recording in steps of 1 fps.

And last but not least you can handle the camera via wi-fi from your laptop or desktop computer. Alter any variable via the computer, iso, aperture, filters etc.

Quote from: lisandra on March 19, 2012, 08:14:42 PM
The price of m4/3s gets disputed a lot around the web, and people certainly come up to me about it a lot. So a couple of months back I did the digging around as to what the expense would be going from APS C to m4/3s or vice versa for a "working's photographer" kit. First off, prices for these are new, and the lenses chosen were optically similar in sharpness (even though the 100$ 50 1.8 is in there). Theres no point in getting an 'advanced" body if youre gonna throw the cheapest lens you can find at it.
The prices are all from amazon (last time I checked, about 2 months ago). The lenses included were (all equivalent focal lengths):
50mm 1.4
portrait 1.8
macro 2.8
wide zoom 2.8
70-200 2.8
TTL flash

So, assuming the new panasonics are gonna go for about 1100$, the total for m4/3s without a body is
3970$. with the GH2 its 4870$ or with the OM D its 4970$. With the grips its 5270$

The total for sony (aps c) is
5600$. with a A77 its 7000$, with a grip its 7200$

Fun! lets do canon...
6450$. with a 7D its 8050$ with a grip its 8220$
Even if you went with the much cheaper 60D youd still end up with 7520$

So worst case scenario for m4/3s is 2000$ cheaper than APS C with a package thats un-oticeably close in noise performance and dare I say...sharper
what do you think?

Strange prices. Are these US values? Because the 7D costs in Europe, Netherlandse, 1200 Euro, The Olympus P3 700 euro (all with 19% VAT). The Olympus OM-D will cost the same as the 7D.

nothing strange
7d in the US
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-CMOS-Digital-Camera-3-Inch/dp/B002NEGTTW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1332285311&sr=8-1
OM D in the US
http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Interchangeable-3-0-Inch-Tilting-Touchscreen/dp/B0074WDDN8/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1332285351&sr=1-2

But lets say for sayings sake that you went to the UK and got a 7D there for 600$ less...that still puts you at 6900$

panzerfaustnl · « **Reply #10 on:** March 20, 2012, 03:30:21 PM »

Quote from: lisandra on March 20, 2012, 03:21:04 PM

Oh wait I didn't get it, it's inclusive with the lenses.

You want to buy a set for pro usage? Very simple there are 2 companies, Canon or Nikon. Because you are only looking at hardware. You are forgetting things like the Canon Professional Network, same with Nikon. The camera is just a tool, all those things around it are far more important. Camera break down? Pickup and replacement in 4-24 hours is much more important than the price you pay.

No camera is no money.

Weather sealing? Canon, Nikon, Pentax and the new Olympus OM-D.

What you are going to do leads you to the correct camera.

tamoio · « **Reply #11 on:** March 20, 2012, 04:04:11 PM »

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 03:04:50 PM

The C300 is a pro-film camera. That uses DSLR technology. On the 300PL also can use PL lenses, the standard in the film industry. This camera is not comparable to what you are mentioning.

At the end of the day the C300 can output no better than 4:2:2 10bit HD, same as I can do with the AF100 using my BMD shuttle and the standard HDSDI out. I used PL mount lenses for years on film cameras, no big deal, the adapter is available for MFT and lots of people use PL mount lenses on both the AF100 and the GH2. Ever handle a PL mount lens? They are huge, they weigh a ton, and if you want to buy one they cost a fortune, $3K minimum for a true cine PL mount prime-back to my original post.

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 03:04:50 PM

The camera can record AND relay-recording at the same time on two CF cards with a speed of 50 Mbps.

. . .its still compressed in-cam codec. The AF100 and C300 both have HDSDI out and that is the best quality either camera will produce.

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 03:04:50 PM

Standard output formats like HD-SDI, Timecode-, Genlock- and Synch-terminals for sessions with multiple cameras.

The AF100 has all of these features. By-the-way, HD-SDI is not an "output format" it is transport/communication protocol for delivering HD video which by definition is either 1080i or 720p.

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 03:04:50 PM

You can go to 200.000 ISO, you can record your own recording profiles in the camera memory ánd on SD-card so you can take them to any other C300.

You can play with the frame speed while recording in steps of 1 fps.

One of the best reasons for using the AF100 is that it will record 1080 HD with variable progressive frame-rates up to 60p. I use this all the time. To my knowledge the C300 can not do this, I might be wrong but I'll check it out. Camera setup profiles are modifiable and I have about 30 of them on one SD card, just load whichever one I want whenever. ISO 200,000? I suppose this is useful to someone but I don't think its a very good reason to buy a camera, it looks good in a marketing PDF or advertisement.

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 03:04:50 PM

And last but not least you can handle the camera via wi-fi from your laptop or desktop computer. Alter any variable via the computer, iso, aperture, filters etc.

This is sort of handy if you are hot-heading a camera on a crane or maybe running a steady-cam rig. I use remote cameras often but frankly the C300 is too big for my remote needs. I think this is basically a feature to impress all the other Mac nerds in the crew with a ipad.

I guess I'm just not "pro" enough for this "pro-film" camera

panzerfaustnl · « **Reply #12 on:** March 20, 2012, 04:13:23 PM »

I don't know if you are pro or not. As I say in other occasions, the usage leads you to the right camera. A pro doesn't complain about weight etc he just wants the best quality.

I didn't knew the AF-100, just looked at it with google, but that's a comparable machine. I am just using my 600D for filmmaking. I am already impressed by the fact that I can manual focus.

The C300 weights 1.7 kg is that heavy?

http://philipbloom.net/2012/01/06/christmas-shootout/

lisandra · « **Reply #13 on:** March 20, 2012, 04:22:46 PM »

heck, lets say you live in the UK...heres the price for canon including the 7D all from amazon UK
6264
Heres the price for m4/3s all for amazon UK AND assuming the two panasonics are 1100 euro each (which is what im assuming for US price). Also, the power grip is supposed to be free with the pre order but lets throw it in with the US price (could i couldnt find it in amazon UK)
4740

for canon this is with a equivalent 50ish 1.4, a 50 1.8 (to get 80 1.

a 70-200 a 16-35 and a macro 2.8. i end up with a 35-70 gap. A body, a grip and a flash

tamoio · « **Reply #14 on:** March 20, 2012, 04:32:54 PM »

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 04:13:23 PM

A pro doesn't complain about weight etc he just wants the best quality.

Maybe some pros do this, pros with insane budgets, sure. If I wanted the best quality for projection (not broadcast) I might rent a RED epic, but that would also include adding another person to the crew, now we are running into the practical limits for single load in anything smaller than a Cessna Caravan, because all the gear to hang off a RED, and then the tripod to support it has just about doubled the size of my production package. Scarlet has no advantage here. The point is that: if you aren't shooting a project for projection (theater) why bother if the IQ in the MFT gear is more than sufficient for broadcast HD?

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 04:13:23 PM

The C300 weights 1.7 kg is that heavy?

Yes, you have to read the fine print at the bottom.

"total equipped weight C300 PL: 2900g"

I didn't know that until I checked. The C300 has a strange little (but typical canon) offboard monitor and xlr audio interface that along with battery, they don't count in the weight at the top of the list. That is about double the AF100, but in my original post I was pointing out the bulk and weight penalties of having to use the EF L series lenses that would cover the bigger sensor format (I wasn't even considering PL mount).

Honestly, I think if you work at it a little you could get a picture as good as the C300 with a GH2, I'm not alone in that opinion.

panzerfaustnl · « **Reply #15 on:** March 20, 2012, 04:35:14 PM »

Quote from: tamoio on March 20, 2012, 04:32:54 PM

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 04:13:23 PM
The C300 weights 1.7 kg is that heavy?

Yes, you have to read the fine print at the bottom.

"total equipped weight C300 PL: 2900g"

I didn't know that until I checked. The C300 has a strange little (but typical canon) offboard monitor and xlr audio interface that along with battery, they don't count in the weight at the top of the list. That is about double the AF100, but in my original post I was pointing out the bulk and weight penalties of having to use the EF L series lenses that would cover the bigger sensor format (I wasn't even considering PL mount).

Honestly, I think if you work at it a little you could get a picture as good as the C300 with a GH2, I'm not alone in that opinion.

And the FS100? That not an option?

tamoio · « **Reply #16 on:** March 20, 2012, 05:24:14 PM »

Quote from: panzerfaustnl on March 20, 2012, 04:35:14 PM

And the FS100? That not an option?

A lot of people like the FS100, I've only seen video samples online but they look fine. The only real drawback, and the reason why I wouldn't buy one, is that there is no built-in ND. If you work outdoors with available light built-in ND is very nice option. I thought the build quality on the AF100 was quite a bit better compared to the FS100 I handled but that's a very subjective thing. I can't remember if the FS100 has hdsdi either, that is a big deal. The image quality differences between all these cameras is really slim, particularly when you take cost into consideration. the C300 and Sony F3 (and probably the 5diii) all have better DR than Panasonic, but I've dialed in my camera settings and shooting so that I really don't feel like I'm at a disadvantage.

lisandra · « **Reply #17 on:** March 20, 2012, 05:49:18 PM »

the fs100 is an ergonomic nightmare

adash · « **Reply #18 on:** March 20, 2012, 11:38:27 PM »

Let me get it straight here - someone is vigorously defending the APS-C sized video cameras, without ever holding one in a hand, while others are showing vivid real-life examples, which the original someone refuses to believe? The moral of the story - Marketing is king, not image quality, not portability, not even sanity in the face of the eminent fail. Separate examples of the same are the hypes around the introductions of Pentax K-01 and Canon G1X....

lisandra · « **Reply #19 on:** March 21, 2012, 04:22:05 AM »

Quote

You can go to 200.000 ISO,

Top ISO on the c300 is 20,000 not 200,000, and even then, that ISO 20000 is nothing but a useless marketing hype number. Real life testing showed that actual sensitivity at that ISO on the c300 is ISO 6400, which is not bad in any account, but that's almost two stops of overhyping and not much higher than what current cams do.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/6876/dispelling-the-myths-is-the-canon-c300-worth-15999

lisandra · « **Reply #20 on:** March 21, 2012, 04:35:59 AM »

And sensor size in video has been proven to be just sooooo overrated, do the people really need more samples? 50mbits? Andrew Reid already has a 5d mk3, and he says that even at the super high bitrate of the canon the gh2 still has waaaaaay more resolution. The samples and crops from the 5d3 he posted look like, um, well they look like shit.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/7528/spring-revolution-my-shoot-with-the-canon-5d-mark-iii-first-impressions

There are far more important things like how the camera downscales and how it processes the image, what it does to deal with moire and rolling shutter, noise "look", heck the list goes on

voyager · « **Reply #21 on:** March 21, 2012, 03:55:07 PM »

Alight, so for the hell of it, back to the original topic, let's compare how much basic kits cost with the same feature sets.

I'm going to do a comparison between Canon and Olympus. I'm taking all of my prices from Adorama.

Canon:

Digital Rebel T3i with 18-55mm kit lens: $799
Canon 55-250mm: $250
Canon 50mm f/1.8: $125
TOTAL: $1174

Olympus:

E-P3 with 14-42mm: $799
VF-3: $179
Olympus 40-150mm: $299
Olympus 45mm f/1.8: $399
TOTAL: $1676

Olympus is considerably more expensive than Canon for the average user.

lisandra · « **Reply #22 on:** March 21, 2012, 06:31:25 PM »

keep adding lenses

lisandra · « **Reply #23 on:** March 21, 2012, 06:41:28 PM »

Actually, thats a very good argument for canons marketing. They know how to get peoples foot into the DSLR door with cheap entry prices and generally good bodies. They get a loyal customer that starts to see theres way more quality to be had from better bodies and glass, and slowly starts to get into the expensive stuff. he might not even notice at first, buying 1 L glass at a time.

Bif · « **Reply #24 on:** March 21, 2012, 07:24:25 PM »

Somehow I'd gotten myself into a 7D, 60D, and T3i. Two L series lenses, a few primes, the 55-250 EF-S.

I'd kind of followed M4/3 developments some and then an amazon vendor pupped up with Pen e-pl1's with 14-42mm "kit" lens for $290. Since I was looking for a lightweight cam to have with me without having to "lug" a Canon & some lenses I jumped at it.

I liked it! A lot!

So I sold off the 7D, T3i, and one of the L lenses (the other is listed on several sites) and I can tote a Pen with "kit" zoom and 3 other lenses covering most of my needs in a fairly small light Domke "messenger style" bag. And I've preordered the OMD with 12-50.

Author Topic: The cost of switching (Read 3064 times)

adash

adash

adash

Related Topics

Find Something?

Recent Topics

Recent Gallery