snapshot said:

there is some really good used stuff out there. i bet a used 5d2 or 5d3 is cheaper than a lot of compact cameras. 5D2 is still a great camera. maybe a 28-104 or a Tamron 28-300mm superzooom? maybe a 420ex flash?

Click to expand...

Ozarker said:

Yeah, going with the cheaper "good enough" is an economic decision. I think it's a separate deal. I used to have the 85/1.2, 50/1.2, and the 28-70/2. All fantastic. Right now, good enough is all I can afford. It ain't got nuthin' to do with Canon not keeping up. Besides, regular enthusiasts ain't buying halo lenses. It takes a real obsession with lenses to drop that kind of cash. Who are these "regular people" you know that can afford $30k in camera gear? I've got news for you, they ain't regular people. High end gear isn't marketed to "regular people". That's what smart phones are for. That's regular people.

Click to expand...

Czardoom said:

Alan, my apologies. I realize now that I was not clear in my comments. I said:

"Clearly, the advantage of the MFT 2x crop factor comes into play if you crop all, or most of your images, as is the case with me. Obviously you understand that if you crop a FF image from the R5 II - or any FF camera - to the size of the MFT image or smaller, than the OM-1's 20 MP sensor totally out-resolves any and all Canon and Nikon FF cameras, and is about the same as the R7. If you have used both the OM 150-400 and the Canon 200-800, then any comparison is a joke. Basically a top-level pro lens with a very good consumer lens."

My comparison about resolution ends with the words "same as the R7". When talking about sensor resolution of different cameras, the lenses are not normally mentioned and it is always implied that any comparisons are using lenses of the same focal length. Clearly I should have started a new paragraph when then comparing the Canon 200-800 with the OM 150-400.

Other than that, I believe nothing was wrong or misleading about my comments. Considering I only entered the discussion because Tom R5R7 said:

It appears that crop sensor bodies are the redheaded stepchild of multiple brands. Birders of limited means are not amused.

Since many Canon owners are looking forward to an R7 II, which they hope has a stacked sensor, faster readout, faster buffer, more programmable pre-capture, I thought it might be a good idea to mention the OM-1, which has all of the above specs. I did not realize that this was a major blunder, and that clearly I should have responded that they should just get the Canon R5 and the 200-800, which is obviously the better choice!

Click to expand...

AlanF said:

Speak for yourself! People most often do not deliberately mislead, especially here, but unfortunately deliberate misleading is the curse of the age. I didn't conveniently ignore the built-in TC. You can add an external TC to Canon lenses, and it's the the number of pixels in the image of a duck we were discussing, not whether a built-in is more convenient, a topic currently being debated in another thread. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion on whether to to choose MFT or FF or APS-C because that is purely a personal choice as they are all compromises in different ways, and I do listen to you. It's just the facts behind that choice are open to discussion.

Click to expand...

blackcoffee17 said:

Often when i recommend a sub $1000 camera to my friends or family members (who earn a few 1000 a month), they find it too expensive. A $3000 lens is unthinkable for many.

Click to expand...

TexPhoto said:

Cool. How does it fit? Does it feel secure?

Can you post a photo of the inside of the cap?

Click to expand...

neuroanatomist said:

Time to start swapping out the old ones!

Click to expand...

snapshot said:

what is the difference between Canon and Nikon?
Both had very loyal customers.
Both had comprehensive systems. D850 was thought to be better than 5D4.
Nikon had a more complex lens/body compatibility matrix.
Nikon was buying Sony sensors while Canon was designing/fabing their own.
Nikon was rebadging Tamron lenses while I am not aware of such from Canon.
Nikon was slower to release MILC products and seemed to trail in autofocus performance.
Perhaps Nikon was slower to adopt influencer marketing

Click to expand...