Olympus OM-D E-M5, E-M1, E-M10 - Mk1, Mk2 & Mk3 Owners Thread

[Nawty]

Anyone moved from a Nikon D7000 to either an E-M1 or E-M5 mk2. Which would you recommend?

I've got both, basically its down to size.

 

[Greytop]

I've got both, basically its down to size.

Ditto

 

[damianmkv]

How are you finding the new Panasonic Ned ?
Was out with a friend last night who shoots FF canon and 35mm f1.4 sigma art...got my GAS going. Really miss that shallow DoF from the d7000 but it's all a juggling act isn't it ? Obviously the d7k isn't FF but I was left wanting as he shot at iso6400 and they looked pretty clean

 

[Mark Johnson]

I have a preference for the Em10, as it has an incorporated flash.

Have never used the 5 though.

mj

 

[Nawty]

How are you finding the new Panasonic Ned ?
Was out with a friend last night who shoots FF canon and 35mm f1.4 sigma art...got my GAS going. Really miss that shallow DoF from the d7000 but it's all a juggling act isn't it ? Obviously the d7k isn't FF but I was left wanting as he shot at iso6400 and they looked pretty clean

It is rather wonderful really. I'm sure there's an element of emperors new clothes but it really is very nice, being able to shoot at 800mm eFL without paying much attention to technique is rather fun really, there are some shots here which I took on a walk along a canal path - I'd have never of dreamt about getting a Blackcap when out on a stroll without such reach:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/72341657@N02/albums/72157667227745912

If I had to be critical I would say that the micro-contrast isn't the best I've seen (still very good though), which can be seen in the slight lack of definition in the squirrel's fur but this is nit-picking. On the whole the images just look nice, with little effort and I think that is pretty high praise for a lens. There is a Spitfire aerobatics show near me tomorrow so will see how it copes with that.

I think alongside the 40-150 pro it'll be a great pairing, fast f/2.8 when it gets dim and long 400mm when the light is good. What I also like is that both the 40-150 and 100-400 have 72mm filter size (or for me, interchangeable lens caps).

 

[ian-83]

What is the reason for change the 5 is smaller

https://flic.kr/p/DVSVKr

Finding the D7000 a bit bulky to lug around. Mostly shoot static stuff.

 

[ian-83]

I've got both, basically its down to size.

Think I might need to pay my local John Lewis a visit as they have both in stock to see what feels better to hold.

 

[seriousrikk]

Hi,

I have had both the EM10 II and the 5 II...

I decided at the beginning of this year to sell my DSLR kit in exchange for a camera that I would actually take with me a lot more. After doing lots of home work I settled on the Olympus system, and it made sense to get the smallest Olympus EM camera, so I got the EM10 II with the pancake 14-42 and the 25mm prime. This camera is really good and light weight but I was finding that I wasn't taking it with me on walk/ family days out and I had a think why- mainly it was the use of the camera, I didn't like the electric zoom on the lens and the camera felt too toy like in my hand. Also, living in the wet north I was finding myself leaving the camera in the car if there was the slightest hint of rain (most days!).

So.... last week I decided to swap my EM10ii for a EM5ii, ever so slightly bigger and heavier so that it feels a lot nicer to hold and the all important waterproofing so I can truly take it anywhere. I also got the 12-40mm pro which is an outstanding lens and not a big as I though it would be, although I will be getting a 17mm prime for days when I want a really compact setup. The 25mm is still here but I might sell it yet- undecided. For my type of shooting the 12-40 really is good enough quality to replace primes in that zoom range but obviously has the extra weight. The EM5ii seems to have a better rear screen and viewfinder and also I prefer the articulated screen but that's personal preference.

The EM10 II is a superb camera but the EM5 II just feels nicer to use when you've come from DSLR.

All my opinion of course but hope you find it helpful in your decision.

Thankyou for your input, apologies for not coming back to thank you sooner!

I decided on the 10 in the end. Mainly based on cost. For the difference in price after cashback I could buy the 45mm and 17mm F1.8 lenses (with some careful buying). Then I just need a 25mm and my mini kit is done.

I may upgrade to the 5 later - but now it it is more important to get the kit in my bag and being used!

 

[ancient_mariner]

Just bought a lightly used E-M10 + 14-40EZ pancake zoom for my wife. We finally mamaged to try it out today - is this lens normally a little soft at typical landscape distances? It seems universally soft, like a compact, rather than having a soft corner or edge caused by a decentred lens.

I'll be back to ask more questions later.

 

[Nawty]

Just bought a lightly used E-M10 + 14-40EZ pancake zoom for my wife. We finally mamaged to try it out today - is this lens normally a little soft at typical landscape distances? It seems universally soft, like a compact, rather than having a soft corner or edge caused by a decentred lens.

Nope. Mine, for the little I've used it, is as good as any other kit lens. Which is to say perfectly good.

 

[alfbranch]

Nope. Mine, for the little I've used it, is as good as any other kit lens. Which is to say perfectly good.

Same here.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Here's an example from a jpg file SOOC: f8.0 1/250, 23mm focal length, image stabilisation on. I'd wondered if I were being unfair, but it's quite a bit softer than a Sigma 18-250 for my Sony.

Basic image

100% Centre

100% LH edge

It's not a 'great' pic - my wife was snapping wildflowers in the local wood - but it's a fair example. I may seem like a picky b*st*rd but the point of buying her this was to improve the basic quality of her images over the Panasonic P&S she has been using.

 

[woof woof]

Could the f8 be a part of it? That's a smallish aperture at 23mm.

Personally I like to shoot my MFT cameras at equivalent apertures, crop factor DoF wise. Maybe results might be a little better at a slightly wider aperture? If not, f3.5-5.6 zooms can be a bit limiting and maybe it's best to view whole images rather than pixel peep?

 

[ancient_mariner]

TBH the images at 5.6 are no better, and I've not used one of them because the Ai selected 5.6 and reduced shutter speeds to =>100th which might allow shake to become an issue. Are you suggesting that f8 (equivalent to f11 for APS-C) is going to cause this kind of softness?

On a side note, I also need to find a way to set the focus point to the centre of the frame, so that it becomes possible to tell the camera where to focus instead of it choosing random and non-helpful parts of the image - I didn't find that in the verious menus I trawled through.

 

[magicaxeman]

Can I ask for your collective input/experience on a scenario I'm seriously looking at as I really need some help on this one.

EM5 m2, 40-150 pro on a powered tripod head ( I have a long extension lead for the head control) connected to MBP via 20 metre USB repeater cable, camera controlled by Olympus capture software.
Camera would be unattended in the back garden as I'm stuck in bed 24/7 and want to shoot the wildlife/birds in my back garden which I can only view presently via a Y cam I have set up out there.
I could use a shorter USB cable say 10 metres but would need at least that length and wifi is a no go, it won't work out there, I've already tried it and it dies if the camera is outside the bathroom window.

The other alternative is to use a longer lens and shoot out of the open bathroom window but the 300mm F4 is currently out of my price range so it would mean using the 1.4 TC with the 40- 150 and cropping heavily.


Are there any pitfalls or problems you can see with the first solution?

 

[woof woof]

TBH the images at 5.6 are no better, and I've not used one of them because the Ai selected 5.6 and reduced shutter speeds to =>100th which might allow shake to become an issue. Are you suggesting that f8 (equivalent to f11 for APS-C) is going to cause this kind of softness?

On a side note, I also need to find a way to set the focus point to the centre of the frame, so that it becomes possible to tell the camera where to focus instead of it choosing random and non-helpful parts of the image - I didn't find that in the verious menus I trawled through.

It sounds like you've got some clever recognise something or other focus mode enabled. I never use them and instead I just use the centre and move it about as required.

Other than that... yes, these kit zooms tend to be a bit soft wide open which does give quite a small window to operate in before diffraction could be an issue. Maybe you could shoot a series of shots and see if there's a happy medium somewhere?

 

[ancient_mariner]

It sounds like you've got some clever recognise something or other focus mode enabled. I never use them and instead I just use the centre and move it about as required.

Other than that... yes, these kit zooms tend to be a bit soft wide open which does give quite a small window to operate in before diffraction could be an issue. Maybe you could shoot a series of shots and see if there's a happy medium somewhere?

So in your opinion this isn't too bad for this type of lens used like this?

Will have another 'adventure' exploring Olympus' menu system to turn off whatever face recognition or something mode is on.

 

[damianmkv]

If you set the AF mode to ( say ) 9 points, the camera will choose one of those points to focus. Maybe this is enabled ?

 

[woof woof]

So in your opinion this isn't too bad for this type of lens used like this?

Will have another 'adventure' exploring Olympus' menu system to turn off whatever face recognition or something mode is on.

I have two Panasonic "kit" lenses and they're not stellar and if I'm honest 100% viewing if not actually depressing doesn't exactly make my heart sing either.

As I said, maybe shoot a series of images in good light and see if there's a sweet spot or not.

PS.
I'd deffo look into turning whatever clever focus mode you're using OFF

 

[damianmkv]

I agree about pixel peeping at 100% - I still do it and more often think "meh" so am trying to get out of the habit

 

[woof woof]

I agree about pixel peeping at 100% - I still do it and more often think "meh" so am trying to get out of the habit

I think it can be very lens, aperture and ISO dependant. I too try not to worry too much about what a shot looks like at 100% but I can't stop myself from taking just a peak sometimes I'd say that shots taken with a nice prime or my Panny 12-35mm f2.8 at low to mid ISO's can stand up well to 100% viewing but my variable aperture zooms do much less well.

I'd post some examples taken with my kit zooms but Photobucket tends to make everything look a bit soft.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Thanks for that, I may have been foolish to assume that this format would deliver roughly similar image quality to the larger formats, though it's capable of 'good enough' for many purposes. For the purpose intended this offers a modest improvement over the compact, with the added benefit of a viewfinder that should help ensure images are more likely to come out straight and level.

 

[woof woof]

Thanks for that, I may have been foolish to assume that this format would deliver roughly similar image quality to the larger formats, though it's capable of 'good enough' for many purposes. For the purpose intended this offers a modest improvement over the compact, with the added benefit of a viewfinder that should help ensure images are more likely to come out straight and level.

I don't think that it's the format that's necessarily the problem. I can pixel peep at 100% and be quite pleased but in your examples something is going wrong. I think that the first thing I'd do is sort the focus mode out as I just don't trust those auto modes that light up different points in the image when you look through the VF and I'd much rather have just the one point and put it where I want to focus rather than leave it up to the camera to focus on God know what.

The next thing I'd do is shoot a series of pictures in good light at lowish ISO stepping through the aperture range to see what performance is like.

It is IMO a good system capable of very good results which should comfortably better what you get from a compact and when looking at my shots I do often forget what camera I used, my FF Sony A7 or my MFT but with all of these or any system if you are going to pixel peep at 100% you should really be giving the gear the best possible chance to succeed and get you the results you want and I'm just a bit worried that f8 with a kit zoom set to some sort of auto focus recognition / select mode isn't going to be absolutely optimum.

The last time I used one of my kit zooms was just a few weeks ago and before that I can't remember the last time I used one, anyway, when viewing the results at 100% I wasn't impressed but when looking at shots taken with one of my better lenses such as my primes or my Panasonic 12-35mm it's a different story. I wont post examples as Photobucket seems to mangle all of my shots but if you want some shots taken with decent lenses to pixel peep at I'd be happy to drop box you a couple if it'll help restore your faith in the system.

The next things for you to do IMO are to take a look at the focus and then shoot a series of shots to assess what the lens can do. I hope that doing this can restore your faith and help you move on and get better results Just let me know if I can help at all.

 

[srhmoto]

I have the Panny 14-42mm mk II and use it on my GX8. Maybe I'm just lucky, but my copy is fantastic and stands up to 100% viewing easily. I've often considered upgrading to the 12-35mm f2.8 but as far as sharpness is concerned I can't bring myself to spend circa £600 for what would only be marginal sharpness improvement. Of course brings a lot of other things to the party, but for stopped down landscape work a massive boost in sharpness compared to my 14-42mm kit lens wouldn't be one of them. This album was all shot using the GX8 + 14-42mm mk II

https://flickr.com/photos/60309810@N08/sets/72157657638872606

Having said that, not all m4/3 kit zooms are created equal. I have a good friend that shoots with an Olumpus 14-42mm power zoom that came as a kit with his OM-10. Having compared the same scene shot at the same time using his lens and my 14-42mm mk II, his just can't compete with mine.

The format certainly can easily stand up to pixel peeping, but like every format the lens plays a huge part in this.

Cheers,

Simon.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Thanks gents, time for a tripod and some intentional control. In the case of the example I posted I'm sure focus isn't an issue, and I really wanted to know if this kind of performance was what I should expect with this lens - reading between the lines it's probably typical.

Simon, I had a look through your flickr feed, and the larger images there look very very soft (those from Newcastle). Is that Flickr simply enlarging a small image to fill the screen? Generally it's hard to tell if your pictures are sharp or not because they're all so small - not a criticism, but I can't use them as an example of camera & lens performance.

 

[srhmoto]

Thanks gents, time for a tripod and some intentional control. In the case of the example I posted I'm sure focus isn't an issue, and I really wanted to know if this kind of performance was what I should expect with this lens - reading between the lines it's probably typical.

Simon, I had a look through your flickr feed, and the larger images there look very very soft (those from Newcastle). Is that Flickr simply enlarging a small image to fill the screen? Generally it's hard to tell if your pictures are sharp or not because they're all so small - not a criticism, but I can't use them as an example of camera & lens performance.

It must be Flickr. The images are uploaded at either 1024 or 2048 pixels. The 18x12 inch prints I have are perfect

 

[ancient_mariner]

Must be flickr then - when I try to follow any image to see a larger size it only showed me 1024, which is too small to be meaningful.

It *looks* like I've managed to mostly force it to use the centre focus detection area, and I've also got it to spot-meter, and the patterned metering was all over the shop too. One thing I'd love to know is how to make it silent: when I half press the shutter I can hear a hiss for a few seconds as the mic and external speaker works briefly. It's not a problem, but it IS annoying.

 

[Nawty]

It *looks* like I've managed to mostly force it to use the centre focus detection area, and I've also got it to spot-meter, and the patterned metering was all over the shop too. One thing I'd love to know is how to make it silent: when I half press the shutter I can hear a hiss for a few seconds as the mic and external speaker works briefly. It's not a problem, but it IS annoying.

That noise is the IBIS working and you can't stop it, even with IBIS disabled.

 

[D40 Guy]

That noise is the IBIS working and you can't stop it, even with IBIS disabled.

It used to bother me but now it gets so I don't even notice it. Apart from today when I left the camera on with the lens cap in place. The camera was making the noise which helped me remember I had forgotten to switch it off

 

[crusher]

TBH the images at 5.6 are no better, and I've not used one of them because the Ai selected 5.6 and reduced shutter speeds to =>100th which might allow shake to become an issue. Are you suggesting that f8 (equivalent to f11 for APS-C) is going to cause this kind of softness?

On a side note, I also need to find a way to set the focus point to the centre of the frame, so that it becomes possible to tell the camera where to focus instead of it choosing random and non-helpful parts of the image - I didn't find that in the verious menus I trawled through.

I think this has been posted before on here, but it's worth a look: http://www.biofos.com/mft/omd_em1_settings.html

 

[ancient_mariner]

Thanks Keith, I'll take a look. I'll also try a firmware update (currently in 1.2 & the lens on 1.0).

 

[seriousrikk]

Well, I must say I love my little EM10ii

It certainly had a workout on it's first day out, as I decided to leave the full frame kit at home and take it to a local music venue with an all day festival. Struggled a bit with the 17mm F2.8 (was very dark) but well pleased with the shots from the 45mm F1.8. This is going to turn out to be a nice sub for when I can't be doing with my full frame gear - exactly why I bought it!

 

[ancient_mariner]

OK, a slightly more controlled look this evening, setting aperture, focussing on a specific point (it still wants to focus outside the centre sometimes! Why, dammit?).

At 14mm the lens is soft at every aperture from 3.5 to 11, though sharpness peaks around 5.6-7.1. I was getting a little caught by the auto-ISO feature, and the jpgs were heavily denoised, while the raw files were actually pretty good. It also blows detail from light areas really easily, even when they aren't exactly bright.
At 23mm it's fair between 5.6 and 11, and provided exposure is controlled (and I'll build in 1/2 stop under-exposure in future) it would be quite usable.
At 42mm the lens is soft at every aperture, but is better between 7.1 and 8.0.

Looks like 7.1 is the go-to aperture for this lens if one doesn't mind losing control of depth of field and a lot of light. I'm impressed with the relative lack of noise at ISO 1250, which is a camera feature, and suspect a *part* of the blowing of highlights is simply the lens' inability to cope well with microcontrast. I had been wondering about picking up the 14-140 (SRS have it on offer + cashback that would make it £279) but understand from the reviews that lens performance is even weaker than the 14-42EZ. Might be better to look at a prime (pro zooms being out of my financial range) if I want to use it seriously.

 

[Bebop]

Well, I must say I love my little EM10ii

It certainly had a workout on it's first day out, as I decided to leave the full frame kit at home and take it to a local music venue with an all day festival. Struggled a bit with the 17mm F2.8 (was very dark) but well pleased with the shots from the 45mm F1.8. This is going to turn out to be a nice sub for when I can't be doing with my full frame gear - exactly why I bought it!

I've been really enjoying taking the 17mm 1.8 to gigs instead of full frame. So much less obtrusive! I'm also blown away by the ability of the M5ii to record video - not only visually, but also the audio is amazingly good even when I've been quite near the speaker cabs and had ear plugs in. I've just ordered the 45mm 1.8 and looking forward to getting some closer shots.

 

[woof woof]

The Oly 25 and 45mm f1.8 are both good and used ones crop up quite often somewhere between £110 and £150, I think the 17mm f1.8 is a bit more. These lenses are very useable wide open and give very good results when stopped down a bit. To get similar shots to what I get with a FF camera I like to shoot with MFT at wide open to f4 or 5. IMO the wide or constant aperture lenses give a lot more options and better performance that the variable aperture kit zooms.

 

[D40 Guy]

OK, a slightly more controlled look this evening, setting aperture, focussing on a specific point (it still wants to focus outside the centre sometimes! Why, dammit?).

At 14mm the lens is soft at every aperture from 3.5 to 11, though sharpness peaks around 5.6-7.1. I was getting a little caught by the auto-ISO feature, and the jpgs were heavily denoised, while the raw files were actually pretty good. It also blows detail from light areas really easily, even when they aren't exactly bright.
At 23mm it's fair between 5.6 and 11, and provided exposure is controlled (and I'll build in 1/2 stop under-exposure in future) it would be quite usable.
At 42mm the lens is soft at every aperture, but is better between 7.1 and 8.0.

Looks like 7.1 is the go-to aperture for this lens if one doesn't mind losing control of depth of field and a lot of light. I'm impressed with the relative lack of noise at ISO 1250, which is a camera feature, and suspect a *part* of the blowing of highlights is simply the lens' inability to cope well with microcontrast. I had been wondering about picking up the 14-140 (SRS have it on offer + cashback that would make it £279) but understand from the reviews that lens performance is even weaker than the 14-42EZ. Might be better to look at a prime (pro zooms being out of my financial range) if I want to use it seriously.

I went with the 2.8 pro zooms. I got the Olly 12-40 and Panna 35-100. I got these used on the forum for around £700 for the pair. Then sell your other lens(es) to ofset the investment needed.
I am pleased with both of mine
Steve

 

[Nawty]

OK, a slightly more controlled look this evening, setting aperture, focussing on a specific point (it still wants to focus outside the centre sometimes! Why, dammit?).

At 14mm the lens is soft at every aperture from 3.5 to 11, though sharpness peaks around 5.6-7.1. I was getting a little caught by the auto-ISO feature, and the jpgs were heavily denoised, while the raw files were actually pretty good. It also blows detail from light areas really easily, even when they aren't exactly bright.
At 23mm it's fair between 5.6 and 11, and provided exposure is controlled (and I'll build in 1/2 stop under-exposure in future) it would be quite usable.
At 42mm the lens is soft at every aperture, but is better between 7.1 and 8.0.

Looks like 7.1 is the go-to aperture for this lens if one doesn't mind losing control of depth of field and a lot of light. I'm impressed with the relative lack of noise at ISO 1250, which is a camera feature, and suspect a *part* of the blowing of highlights is simply the lens' inability to cope well with microcontrast. I had been wondering about picking up the 14-140 (SRS have it on offer + cashback that would make it £279) but understand from the reviews that lens performance is even weaker than the 14-42EZ. Might be better to look at a prime (pro zooms being out of my financial range) if I want to use it seriously.

I had a look at my shots with this lens, there weren't that many and most of those where my wife with it on a PM2 (same sensor as the EM10) but to be honest the performance looks fine to me, sure its not as sharp as the primes or pro lenses but its as sharp as any kit lens I've used (maybe bar the Nikon 18-70). Maybe you have a dodgy copy?

 

[seriousrikk]

I've been really enjoying taking the 17mm 1.8 to gigs instead of full frame. So much less obtrusive! I'm also blown away by the ability of the M5ii to record video - not only visually, but also the audio is amazingly good even when I've been quite near the speaker cabs and had ear plugs in. I've just ordered the 45mm 1.8 and looking forward to getting some closer shots.

Yes, the 17mm is already on my 'to buy' list, I'm glad it performs as well as I hoped.
Not sure I would work an accredited show with the m43 kit (yet) but while shooting for my enjoyment it felt like a breath of fresh air.

Here's a quick shot from the 45mm wide open. I didn't use it much because the venue was small and once it started to fill up I didn't have the room... but that is why I want the 17mm Also very impressed at the quality delivered at ISO3200.
Outcry by Richard Lindley, on Flickr

 

[srhmoto]

Morning all.

I'm looking for a daypack to carry my camera gear plus other bits and bobs when I'm out and about and wondered what others were using. It needs to be able to have a tripod strapped to it and have space that could store stuff that I might need when I'm out with my family or if I'm out for a photography day on my own (eg lunch / snacks, waterproofs, first aid kit etc). Ideally, I'd also like to be able to access my camera quickly without taking the pack completely off but also have a good enough opening to easily access my gear if I've taken the bag off to set up for a landscape shot. Some water resistance or a built in weather cover preferred.

Budget is probably around the £100-£150 max (preferably closer to the bottom end of that range ).

It's always going to be a compromise, but any help in narrowing down my search would be appreciated!

Cheers,

Simon.

 

[Nawty]

I just bought a Lowepro Photo Sport 200 and that would seem to fit your requirements exactly.

I bought mine for an upcoming trip and the camera compartment fits my EM1 with 12-40 attached and either the 40-150 pro or 100-400 beside it (this maxes out its depth/width), the camera is accessible from the slide like a sling pack. In the hydration pouch I can put my Macbook (or a hydration pack), in the main compartment I can put fleeces/lunch/lenses/stuff and in the 'helmet' pouch on the outside I can stuff a coat for easy access. A tripod can be put in the side pocket and strapped in, a first aid kit could be put in the top pocket.

If you want to be able to fit a bit more stuff in it or a camera with long lens attached maybe the Photo Sport 300 would be better but my requirements were as small as possible to fit all my kit for transporting in hand baggage and then use as a day pack when I get there (I will put an EM5ii body and the 100-400 lens, both wrapped, in the main compartment and there is still room for a fleece and bits and bobs).

I got mine from Jessops for £85 with a code (from camerapricebuster) which was cheap enough to stop me looking at mindshiftgear backpacks.