Should I keep building a Micro Four Thirds kit or switch to a DSLR first?
Asked 10/16/2011
5 views
2 answers
0
I was given a Panasonic GF2 with a 14mm lens and have about $500–600 to improve my setup. I’m an intermediate hobbyist and mainly shoot landscapes, architecture, sculpture, and some HDR. Video quality also matters because I may occasionally need to shoot for web work and possibly grow into paid work later.
I like the compact size of Micro Four Thirds for travel, but I’m wondering whether it makes more sense to invest in lenses for the GF2 or move now to a DSLR system instead. My concern is whether Micro Four Thirds will let me grow long term, especially compared with Nikon APS-C bodies.
Is it smarter to keep using the GF2 and add lenses until I hit real limitations, or to switch systems before buying more gear?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
14y ago
2 Answers
9
So let me get this straight.
You have a small, light weight camera that can use a good selection of lenses, and you are thinking of changing systems. You like the camera, it weighs less with a lens on than a Nikon DSLR does without. If you are travelling, the weight is not going to dig into you back.
My questions are why change? Have you reached the limitations of what the camera can do?
Remember it isn't the camera that makes a good photographer, the camera is just a tool.
to quote Ken Rockwell again
Buying new gear will NOT improve your photography
Chase Jarvis even made a book from images taken from his iPhone. (interesting ideas in that book BTW)
My advice is pick up your excellent tool. and trash it until it begs for a break. By doing this you will understand a lot more on what you want to say, how you want to say it, and what you need to do to say it. When you have done that pick up your camera and start using it.
Last Christmas I went out and downgraded, deliberately. I bought a Pentax Spotmatic with a 50mm f1.4 for $130 NZD ($100 USD). It is lighter, I only have one lens, and it is brilliant. I wanted to learn how to see again, instead of "I need that $4000 lens so I can..." Because of this I have rediscovered an area in which I love. Night street scenes. While I have experience with clients and projects, I needed a reminder that it isn't a race to get into more debt.
It is being able to tell what I want. How I want. And the more simpler tools, mean I have to think harder. Which mean I am happy with any camera in my hand now.
I love photography. I love telling stories. I love expressing myself. The camera is just the means to that.
Originally by user5140. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user5140
14y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
If the GF2 is meeting your needs, the safer choice is to keep it and invest in lenses only after you know what’s actually limiting you. Several answers point out that Micro Four Thirds is already a capable system, and APS-C is not a dramatic jump from it; the bigger leap is to full-frame, which is much more expensive.
For your subjects—landscapes, architecture, travel, and general shooting—the compact size and lighter lenses of Micro Four Thirds are real advantages. Smaller filters, tripod, and bag can also reduce total system cost.
A DSLR system can offer a broader lens ecosystem, so switching can make sense if you already know you need that wider selection. But if you’re still developing your style, changing systems now may not improve your photography much.
Best practical advice: keep shooting with the GF2 until you can clearly identify its limitations. If those limitations become specific and important, then consider switching with a clearer goal in mind.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI14y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Are Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds lenses and cameras compatible?
What macro lens should I get for an Olympus E-3, and can I keep using Four Thirds lenses if I switch systems?
Can you use a Micro Four Thirds lens on a Four Thirds camera body?
Why do Micro Four Thirds primes seem more expensive than Canon’s 50mm f/1.8?
Can a C-mount lens be adapted to a Four Thirds DSLR mount?