[Rondec]

I think you would see a difference between your Em-5 and a K5 II. Biggest thing would be dynamic range at base iso. K5 II is at 14 EVs, while the Olympus is at 12. That is something that is going to allow for more bumping of shadows and photos that process better. I doubt you would see much difference between them with regard to ability to print large. K5 might print a little bigger. Looks like K5 is a half stop better in high iso -- probably a real thing, but not a big deal for landscape photographer.

Full frame is going to give you a little better dynamic range than the K5 (although few are actually better than the K5 is at iso 80) and will give you a lot better high iso shooting (probably not a big deal for most landscapes, since you should be shooting on a good tripod at lowest iso available). Obviously full frame will be able to print bigger, with better resolution.

Lenses are going to be a big deal -- Sigma 8-16 or Pentax 12-24 would be best zooms, the DA 15 is my favorite wide angle.

Good luck in your decision.

[interested_observer]

I wound up choosing Pentax about 8 years ago for several reasons - lens comparability being one (I had some older lenses from 30 years ago). Along with not liking Canon and Nikon in terms of their ergonomics. Since this is just a hobby for me, I decided that I would just stay with one brand - sort of like getting to know your own devil. Every brand/format has their own problems and shortcomings as well as their own strengths. I figure that over time whatever systemic problems will be worked out - its not like I have a customer that I am trying to satisfy.

I do think that there are advantages to shooting with a larger sensor for landscapes, but it comes down to how much you are going to spend, and want to lug around. I do think that you can gain nearly as much experience shooting with a smaller sensor (be it ASP-c or M4/3, or whatever), and put off gear decisions until you start to sell some works and know specifically what you want to do (and why) - based on your experience and needs.

There is always the option of renting if you need a larger format for a specific customer engagement. Where I am going, is that with landscape (or any other specialty), it's the fundamentals, the concepts, the execution, the location and timing, along with post processing - that is really all independent of gear. All of your experience can always be translated and transferred to whatever vendor you are shooting with.

Have you been to the various image sites - 500px, flicker, etc. where you have searched for "EM-5", just to see what others have been able to do with your current body/lens. There are some pretty specular shots there to see. But, then every format (645, FF, ASP-c, M4/3, etc.) are going to have their great images along with their dogs & cats. Any format you choose, there will always be a larger format with additional benefits beckoning.

I think that the key is gaining the experience while not going broke in the process - so with that experience, you can then determine what you really need, and have the ability (and capital) to acquire and support. Even here in this forum, folks are pulling off some really amazing shots with just the kit lens. It's the ability to see the shot, and the experience, talent and skill to make it happen, that is the difference. The only camera that is necessary for that, is the one in your hand (or on the tripod in the case of landscapes).

[beachgardener]

So two sheets in each holder? Did not know that, I only shot with him once, helped carry the gear

yes, 2 sheets per holder, expose one, turn holder around, expose second sheet. the dark slides in the holder flips around so the notches on the dark slide tab indicate exposed film, (useful in the darkroom/bag) and the metal pin moves around to lock the slide.

[jatrax]

expose one, turn holder around, expose second sheet.

I remember him doing that now. It was quite an experience he even let me look under the cloth hood and look at the glass with a loupe. Very different to what we do today with digital DSLR. Ten minutes or so adjusting and fussing with the camera, then 'click' and pack up and go home.

[beachgardener]

I donated my old (monorail) 4x5 view camera to the local High School, hopefully they are showing students what large format photography is all about (and still is about) as yes the students will have an assortment of cameras and not had the large format experience with the time it takes to get an image onto film, and to get the right light and all can take some time, and I think that is the key in being able to see the light

[Shamwow]

I was hoping you good folks over here could help me out with something that's been eating at me recently.

I've been in M4/3 for about a year now (EM-5) and I'm playing with the idea of attempting to dabble with landscape photography at the (entry level) professional level - (Still could use LOTS of practice)

I am well aware of the differences lenses and techniques can play into these types of scenarios - let alone composition, lighting, subject matter....and so on....


BUT from strictly the sensor output level:



1. Will I be blown away by the difference in files out of the K5iis vs the EM-5?


2. Might I be better off saving my pennies and to make the jump to a FF sensor system such as Nikon D800 or one of the A7s?

I would be more focussed on lenses than formats. If you are pairing the D800 with the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G, you might be blown away. If you use it with a kit lens, maybe not.
I always felt that m4/3's was lacking good ultrawides. For Pentax, the Sigma 8-16, Pentax 12-24, and DA15 are all highly regarded, as well as a few others.
By the way, you don't need ultrawides for landscapes. My best landscapes have come from my DA70.

[adwb]

Go to your local store and if you can test drive a Sony A7 you migh be surprised