There's been some talk about this in many forums and blogs lately. I thought I'd post some of my thoughts on the subject just to get it out of the way. By that I mean I need to analyse my own thoughts on my own GAS. As I see it, this problem really exists where people think that buying the latest and greatest will improve their photography, making up excuses and needs that really don't exist to justify their purchases. This problem (I won't call it an illness because it isn't) will exist until people realise that it's not the equipment that matters. You've probably heard that argument a hundred times either in magazines, on blogs or books or just by word of mouth. It won't make a difference for a lot of people because they just don't want to hear it. All that matters to them is that next lens or the newest camera. The only solution is to think differently not only about your photography but also about how you live your life. Until that changes then there will be no solution to G.A.S. Olivier Duong (www.f-stopeight.com) posted some interesting articles about his own GAS and how he solved it for himself. Part 1 can be found here. Just read that one and keep going. It really is a great read and will certainly get you thinking. At the bottom of the first article are links to part 2 and 3. Do yourself a favour and please do read the article. I certainly have a lot of gear, many cameras and a hoard of lenses. But, I know that more equipment will not improve my own photography, I just love collecting. There's only one thing that will improve your photography and that is to train your eye. Practice, practice and more practice. You hear a lot about taking more photographs, which could be interpreted as meaning holding your finger on the shutter release button. That would be foolish of course because all you get is a lot of images of the same thing. Try looking at it this way; work the subject. Look at it from different angles and work the subject. Go high, go low, get closer to the subject or put a telephoto lens on your camera and see what you get. All the equipment in the world isn't going to help you improve your eye, I should know.
The mirrorless cameras may hunt in low light and have difficulty in focusing when the light isn't optimal but give them good light and the focusing is solid, very accurate. They may not be for sports photography, but they do everything else pretty well.
I focused here on the nearest eye and had only a couple of seconds to do it and it was spot on. So when someone says that focusing is slow on these cameras, take it with a pinch of salt because it's all relative. I must admit the OM-D is very a fast focusing camera, probably the fastest mirrorless camera out there right now. It could even have been faster if I had a prime on there like the Olympus 45 f1.8 or the 12 f2.
I would rate the Fuji X series on par with the Sony Nex series, and they aren't on the same level as the Olympus and Panasonic models. A bit slower I'd say but I still wouldn't class them as slow. Take a Sigma DP series camera, and see what slow focusing is. They would drive me nuts.
This is the last image for now taken with this combination and I hope it gives you an idea of the type of image you get if you're planning on purchasing either the OM-D or the original Panasonic G Vario f4-5.8.
As a matter of interest the woman in the above photograph is an Olympic Gold Medalist. The horse was simply out of this world, a beautiful creature.
Oversized clothes pegs, made of wood too. See those chains hanging from the bottom? Well they actually had cars hanging from those chains, about 10 of them in a row (one car to a peg of course). I think they were going for some recors or something similar. Just shows you how big they really were.
I just love these shots, just looking up and seeing these towering buildings. I think I'd have a field day in New York. Oh..and look, there's another crane! Just can't get away from them these days.
Here's a shot of nearly all of the musicians. As you can see they're always moving about and I didn't quite get a shot with all of them in the same frame.
Problematic of all were the photographers that were bouncing around all over the place. And believe me, there were a lot of them. Having seem some statistics on the Internet comparing sales of DSLRs against mirrorless cameras, it seems that the DSLR still rules. DSLRs outsold mirrorless by quite a margin, which really has me puzzled. There isn't a lot in it imagewise and the mirrorless are much smaller making them easier to carry around. Maybe it's the myth that DSLRs are the real thing, a real camera.
One thing I have noticed however, is that the price of mirrorless cameras have risen in the last few months making them more expensive than the DSLR at introduction. This has me really scratching my head too, for it must be cheaper to make a mirrorless camera than a DSLR. Maybe it's the quantity that makes a difference. It could also be that normal people (I'm a bit of a camera geek so I don't class myself as normal in this respect) buy a camera and keep it for a long long time. But that doesn't explain who is buying the new DSLRs. One thing is for certain, the prices of mirrorless cameras has to come down; I believe they the manufacturers are pricing themselves out of the market. Just look at the pricing of the Nex-7 or OM-D and even the new EP-5. Each one is around or over the €1000 mark. Way too expensive in my opinion. I think if they reduced the price they would sell a lot more of them as cash is pretty scarce these days. Not everyone is prepared to spend a €1000 on a camera body.
Personally, I would love to own the new Leica X Vario, but not at that price. The Sony RX1 is a superb camera and I would dearly love to own that one too, but again, not at that price.
I would love to hear your opinion on how the manufacturers could increase their market share.
Both the OM-D and the Panasonic 14-140 f4-5.8 have image stabilisation but I believe the one implemented in the OM-D is better so I switched the one in the lens off. All of these images were taken with that configuration.
Both ILIS and IBIS have their advantages and disadvantages, the IBIS can be used with every lens you mount on the camera, even the very old legacy lenses. As these functions are developed, ILIS gets better and better too, but it can't be relaced in the lenses you have already bought. That means that once you have bought a lens then you're stuck with the ILIS that came with the lens. People may argue that that also applies to the system in the camera. I have to agree with that but I tend to buy lenses that will stay with me for some time. I.e. I don't buy a lens and expect it to be replced very soon, and cameras tend to come and go at regular intervals. A camera that costs you €1000 today will most likely be heavily discounted in a years time and can be picked up for a third of the original price; or less. Lenses tend to be expensive toys and there is little point in duplicating the focal range already covered. So people tend to be very careful when buying a lens or a range of lenses, especially zoom lenses. They normally do their research before buying.
The only time you will normally find the focal length duplicated is when prime lenses are bought that a zoom lens already covers. The reason being of course: the speed of the lens. These prime lenses usually have a maximum aperture of f1.4, f1.8 or f2.8. They are normally used for indoor shots such as in bars, during performances or indoor sport venues.
A photographer can be split into two categories; 1. A prime lens user and 2. A zoom lens user. This doesn't mean that they don't use the other type of lens, but prefer using one sort over the other. I like prime lenses but tend to use zooms because I'm always finding myself in a situation where I've got the wrong prime lens mounted. Some would call me lazy but there are situations where you just can't zoom with your feet and zoom lenses are excellent for just this reason.
This group was always on the move, never standing still. it was pretty hard to get a clear and clean shot of any of them. The two young women at in the front with their backs to me were two sax players and they were having fun. As a matter of fact they all were.
They played for some time with a large crowd gathering around them, and it struck me, how do they manage to remember all those notes. It's probably because I'm tone deaf that I can't imagine how they do it. I'm impressed with such people though.
