# Advice on CSC Camera



## Mick (Mar 10, 2016)

Hi all.I need advice on a CSC camera. As im getting older im realising I need a CSC camera for when im travelling or just out and about. Carrying my 1DX and a load of lens's can be a pain at times. Ive never owned a CSC but would like one that will be used only for landscapes/streetscapes and general travel. ISO 100-400 is all I use for landscapes, need a good lens quality with it, wide as possible. Im a Canon fella but im open to any manufacturer. I don't as a rule do video recording but now and again might do a bit. Oh and not one that costs £1000's as it will only be used now and again and printed no bigger than A2/A3. People I know have small cameras from Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Canon and all rate each one highly.

So has anyone got any advice on a decent CSC camera that might fill my needs. 

Thanks for any advice everyone.

Mick


----------



## old-pr-pix (Mar 10, 2016)

Not sure I can advise, but I can relate my own journey. Three years ago I faced the same dilemma you face today. I wanted a small 'travel' camera as an alternative to the gripped Canon bodies I usually shot with. I wound up getting an Olympus OMD E-M5 with the battery grip and 12-50 EZ 'kit' lens. Since then I've added an OMD E-M5II body and several lenses including two of their PRO series lenses (12-40 f2.8 & 40-150 f2.8 - fully the equal of Canon L series IMO). Reasons: 1) Olympus reputation for quality optics. 2) can be very tiny - E-M5II with the pancake zoom is cargo pants pocketable. Normal prime lens fits regular pants pocket. 3) Body and many lenses weather sealed - I've used my E-M5 in driving rain on multiple occasions. 4) When I don't care as much about tiny I use the grip and it feels more dSLR like, just lighter. 5) Focusing and frame rate are plenty fast for most things I shoot - tracking is ok, not great. 6) Most stuff I shoot for publication goes into small formats or web - m4/3 sensor is more than up to the task. 7) EVF preview of effects of things like exposure compensation I found helpful - lag was not an issue to me. *8*) Olympus IBIS is fantastic for up to medium telephoto - new 300 mm PRO adds in-lens to IBIS for claimed 6 stops!? 9) I liked the retro look.

I went with the E-M5's vs. the E-M1 for reasons #2 & #9. 

To be honest, I find myself grabbing the Oly gear more often than the Canon. I still love the Canon gear, but I really appreciate the smaller size and lighter weight of m4/3. I noticed lately my son is doing the same thing. He got an E-M10 (for in-built flash) and uses it frequently for business travel and family stuff while his 5DII kit stays home. Lastly, Olympus has been excellent in providing new features and improved performance via free firmware updates. I haven't had to rely on their service; but I'm convinced Canon is far better there.

There are lots of great choices now - even better then 3 years ago. Just realize you are likely going to invest in a new system, not just a one-off body/lens combo! Good luck. If you go mirrorless get lots of batteries!


----------



## NorbR (Mar 10, 2016)

I can also talk about Olympus, although I'm not quite as invested in the system as the poster above. I'll also preface this by saying that my point is not to recommend Olympus over other systems, Fuji, Panasonic, etc. I haven't tried these other systems, so I can't talk about them.

In short, I am extremely happy with my Olympus E-M10. I think for the price it's a fantastic camera, really feature-packed. The current version II is probably even better. And frankly, the IBIS alone makes it worth it. Great stuff. I have a few lenses with it: Samyang 7.5mm Fisheye, Panasonic 14mm f/2.5, Olympus 25mm f/1.8 and Olympus 45mm f/1.8. The fisheye is fine, not much to tell about, I don't use it that much, but when I do I'm happy. The Pana is spectacularly small and light, all of 55 grams ! Otherwise a pretty unremarkable lens, does the job fine, but nothing exciting. The Olympus primes are really where the value is. Both fantastic imho, light, cheap, and very sharp, even wide open. Fast focusing too. That 45mm might be the best value I've ever seen, across all systems. Brilliant lens. 

On the other hand, if shooting wide is important to you, I think I would not recommend any micro 43 at all. I just think the system is too limited at that end. The choice of primes become very limited below 24mm eq. Zooms are there, but expensive, bulkier (all relative, but still) and from what I've read, nothing spectacular in terms of IQ. For me that's just not where the micro 43 ecosystem shines. It's brilliant for normal to short tele, great size vs quality compromise there, decent DOF control and still lightweight. But not built for the wide end. My opinion. 

Not sure what else to recommend at the wide end then. I personally use (and love) Canon M with EF-M 11-22 there, but that's a whole other system, that is sooooo limited in so many other aspects (that's the reason I went to Olympus in the first place).


----------



## old-pr-pix (Mar 10, 2016)

NorbR said:


> ... On the other hand, if shooting wide is important to you, I think I would not recommend any micro 43 at all. I just think the system is too limited at that end. The choice of primes become very limited below 24mm eq. Zooms are there, but expensive, bulkier (all relative, but still) and from what I've read, nothing spectacular in terms of IQ...



I agree fully except for the new Olympus 7-14 mm f2.8 PRO (FF eq. 14-28 mm) and the 8mm f1.8 PRO fisheye which both have outstanding IQ, but at premium prices ($1200 zoom, $800 fisheye). Other than these PRO lenses, quality choices wider than about 24 mm equivalent (12mm on m43) are indeed limited. However, for me, the issue is the 4:3 aspect ratio of the format as much as anything. If I'm going to shoot a really wide rectilinear lens it makes more sense to use a sensor with a wider (say 3:2) aspect ratio to begin with. Sure I can shoot 3:2 or even 16:9 on the E-M5, but that is just throwing pixels away.


----------



## martti (Mar 12, 2016)

I've had the Sony A6000 for one year now. Maybe the A6300 is better handling. 
I am happy with the picture quality. The sensor is good. The choice of Sony lenses is limited. With the Metabones adapter EF lenses can be used and they even autofocus occasionally. I would not recommend it to a friend unless he was buying it.


Looks like the 4/3 has the best selection of lenses. People on forums love their Olympuses though there are complaints about small parts falling off. They just glue them back on and go on taking pictures. 


Panasonic / Leica –combo would be something I'd go for if I was in the market now buying into a new system. Just an opinion. This lens reviewed here looks great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRwa0GYl-3o


----------

