re: Mirrorless Cameras

quote:

---

Really only need a few lenses. Was thinking about getting these.


Sony PZ 18-105mm


Sony E 16-55

Is that the only reason you sold the camera?

---

It really is a good camera. I made some great pictures with it. I just prefered the Olympus micro 4/3 ssytem. I looked at the 18-105 and the Zeiss 16-70 and went with the 16-70 because it was much smaller. The 18-105 had poor close focusing, vigniting, and wasn't very sharp. Same could be said about my 16-70. In comparison in the micro 4/3 word for the same used street price (going by Fred Miranda buy sell forum pricing) the Olympus 12-40 f2.8 you get a true Pro quality lens that's super sharp from corner to corner all all aperture ranges, a stop faster, goes great close focusing (most other companies would have given it a Macro label for it's 1:3 magnification ratio), is weather sealed, and is smaller than the 18-105 and about the same size as the 16-70. In the Fuji world the 18-55 2.8-4 runs circles around the Sony offerings as well. The real difference comes when you start looking at fast prime lenses. Comparable fast primes on a Sony would be 2x the cost as the Olympus/Panasonic alternative.

The Sony with a Kit lens (16-50 or 18-55) and the 55-200 standard zoom v. Olympus/Panasonic with a kit lens (~14-42 and 45-150) and standard zoom IMHO the Sony wins. If you want to start expanding your photography and getting better lenses the mu43 starts quickly distancing itself in lens availability, quality, and price.