Olympus OM-D E-M5, E-M1, E-M10 & Mark 2 Owners Thread

Messages
6,420
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
Thanks to those who gave me some pointers on using the E-M1ii for motorsport. Got to say I was so impressed with the focussing system of this camera. My expectations were probably set quite low as my m4/3 experience is mainly based around the E-M5 and E-M5ii both of which would have been pretty frustrating for this. Normally I'd use a Nikon DSLR and expect a pretty good hit rate. The E-M1 ii just didn't miss anything all day, regardless of conditions, light, acquisition speed, just nailed everything totally effortlessly. It was almost boringly easy! I did have a few frustrations with it. Every now and again I'd accidentally change something and have no idea how or what I'd changed and took a while to figure out behaviour. This always happens to me with Olympus cameras. Sometimes, I think they're just too complex, blessing and a curse. The test and wow 40-150 2.8 didn't arrive with a hood which was a problem when it really started raining. Speaking of which the camera, seemed to go a bit mental after a bit of a soaking. Was behaving like a button was pressed down. Turning off and on again cured it though and it's behaving fine now. In fairness it was a really heavy hail storm and among the worst conditions I've ever photo'd in so not too worrying.

My intention had been to mess around with settings a bit and really play around but a couple of cancelled stages and only 25ish cars per category didn't really give me much chance to play around. Also, though I'm not complaining, well organised rallys now pen spectators in quite tightly so creative compositions become quite challenging.

Anyway, a few pics.

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 3
by G.A.D, on Flickr

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 8
by G.A.D, on Flickr

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 6
by G.A.D, on Flickr

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 7
by G.A.D, on Flickr

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 9
by G.A.D, on Flickr
 
Messages
2,757
Name
Al
Edit My Images
Yes
Thanks to those who gave me some pointers on using the E-M1ii for motorsport. Got to say I was so impressed with the focussing system of this camera. My expectations were probably set quite low as my m4/3 experience is mainly based around the E-M5 and E-M5ii both of which would have been pretty frustrating for this. Normally I'd use a Nikon DSLR and expect a pretty good hit rate. The E-M1 ii just didn't miss anything all day, regardless of conditions, light, acquisition speed, just nailed everything totally effortlessly. It was almost boringly easy! I did have a few frustrations with it. Every now and again I'd accidentally change something and have no idea how or what I'd changed and took a while to figure out behaviour. This always happens to me with Olympus cameras. Sometimes, I think they're just too complex, blessing and a curse. The test and wow 40-150 2.8 didn't arrive with a hood which was a problem when it really started raining. Speaking of which the camera, seemed to go a bit mental after a bit of a soaking. Was behaving like a button was pressed down. Turning off and on again cured it though and it's behaving fine now. In fairness it was a really heavy hail storm and among the worst conditions I've ever photo'd in so not too worrying.

My intention had been to mess around with settings a bit and really play around but a couple of cancelled stages and only 25ish cars per category didn't really give me much chance to play around. Also, though I'm not complaining, well organised rallys now pen spectators in quite tightly so creative compositions become quite challenging.

Anyway, a few pics.

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 3
by G.A.D, on Flickr

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 8
by G.A.D, on Flickr

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 6
by G.A.D, on Flickr

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 7
by G.A.D, on Flickr

Pirelli Rally Kielder Forest 9
by G.A.D, on Flickr
Nice set! Those conditions certainly seem challenging!

I've only ever had the EM5mkII so have been thinking about the EM1mkII on and off for a while, so this is useful for me - thanks.

How did you find it felt weight and size wise in comparison - did you notice much of a difference in reality?

I'm more likely to try the auto focus on birds and other small animals so do wonder sometimes if the AF if the same on those small things.
 
Messages
6,420
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
Nice set! Those conditions certainly seem challenging!

I've only ever had the EM5mkII so have been thinking about the EM1mkII on and off for a while, so this is useful for me - thanks.

How did you find it felt weight and size wise in comparison - did you notice much of a difference in reality?

I'm more likely to try the auto focus on birds and other small animals so do wonder sometimes if the AF if the same on those small things.
Yep, it was certainly a little 'changeable'. Even saw the sun at one point!

I'll try to help but I must admit I'm still facing a bit of a dilemma myself with it. It's much bigger and heavier than an E-M5ii. That probably means that for me, it can't really replace the E-M5ii as I use that for hiking when I want to travel with a small, light but capable camera. The E-M1ii would be okay at that but I wouldn't need the extra ability so it would be dead weight. But on the plus side, actually holding the camera for any period of time and especially using with big lenses, the E-M1ii is far more comfortable. And I could use BBF which is far too awkward on the E-M5ii. Good for action. I'd love to find room for an E-M1ii or G9 in my collection but I'm not sure I could justify it at the moment but I'm going to give it some thought as I loved using it.

As for birds, no idea I'm afraid. Probably more challenging than motorsport I would think. But I will say that the AF system is unrecognisable from the E-M5ii. Just totally different level so it might work well.
 
Messages
2,757
Name
Al
Edit My Images
Yes
Yep, it was certainly a little 'changeable'. Even saw the sun at one point!

I'll try to help but I must admit I'm still facing a bit of a dilemma myself with it. It's much bigger and heavier than an E-M5ii. That probably means that for me, it can't really replace the E-M5ii as I use that for hiking when I want to travel with a small, light but capable camera. The E-M1ii would be okay at that but I wouldn't need the extra ability so it would be dead weight. But on the plus side, actually holding the camera for any period of time and especially using with big lenses, the E-M1ii is far more comfortable. And I could use BBF which is far too awkward on the E-M5ii. Good for action. I'd love to find room for an E-M1ii or G9 in my collection but I'm not sure I could justify it at the moment but I'm going to give it some thought as I loved using it.

As for birds, no idea I'm afraid. Probably more challenging than motorsport I would think. But I will say that the AF system is unrecognisable from the E-M5ii. Just totally different level so it might work well.
Thank Graham. The weight does concern me and is why I stopped using my previous system. Other than AF, I'm happy with my EM5mkII. That said the 100-400 is not really that light compared to other lenses I have so might be better on a G9 or EM1mkII.

I suspect I will go on debating for a while!
 
Messages
6,420
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
Thank Graham. The weight does concern me and is why I stopped using my previous system. Other than AF, I'm happy with my EM5mkII. That said the 100-400 is not really that light compared to other lenses I have so might be better on a G9 or EM1mkII.

I suspect I will go on debating for a while!
Don't want to give the wrong impression about 'bulk'. It's not that much heavier (think it's 100g or so) but that represents about a 20% weight increase so you notice it. But it is quite a bigger in all directions it seems. The G9 seems bigger and heavier again but I really have a soft spot for that camera. Seems so well thought out.

Could you do the test and wow thing that I did? It's a great option for seeing if it would work for you.
 
Messages
8,435
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Thank Graham. The weight does concern me and is why I stopped using my previous system. Other than AF, I'm happy with my EM5mkII. That said the 100-400 is not really that light compared to other lenses I have so might be better on a G9 or EM1mkII.

I suspect I will go on debating for a while!
Don't want to give the wrong impression about 'bulk'. It's not that much heavier (think it's 100g or so) but that represents about a 20% weight increase so you notice it. But it is quite a bigger in all directions it seems. The G9 seems bigger and heavier again but I really have a soft spot for that camera. Seems so well thought out.

Could you do the test and wow thing that I did? It's a great option for seeing if it would work for you.
To be honest, I was surprised when I received my EM1 MKII, I was expecting something much bigger. Its obviously larger than a EM5 MKII but that is a small camera. I owned a XT1/2 for a number of years and they're about the same size.
 
Messages
6,420
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
To be honest, I was surprised when I received my EM1 MKII, I was expecting something much bigger. Its obviously larger than a EM5 MKII but that is a small camera. I owned a XT1/2 for a number of years and they're about the same size.
Yes, not a big camera in it's own right and very comfortable. If I used the hand grip on the E-M5ii, I suspect I'd be thinking it's quite similar.

The grip maybe makes it seem bigger than it is in that it's more volume but doesn't necessarily occupy much extra practical space if you were to carry it anywhere.

Forgot to mention, the battery life is miles better. Wish it did onboard USB charging.
 
Messages
13,748
Edit My Images
No
Unfortunately I won't be able to make it tomorrow, but I'm looking forward to see some of your shots!
Well I have to say I’m a bit on the fence with the 40-150mm f2.8, or should I say what to do in terms of my Nikon gear. I was hoping that I’d be completely blown away with the 40-150mm and I could sell my remaining Nikon gear without hesitation, but shooting the Marathon with both setups I do still prefer the images from the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8. It’s kind of left me in a bit of a quandary :(

The EM1-II and 40–150mm f2.8 is certainly a lot lighter, and as such more pleasing to use. AF performance is very good too, a few more missed shots that the D850 and 70-200mm but not bad at all. So the Olympus combo is certainly good enough in terms of AF for events like this, and IQ is very good, it’s just that thing nagging away that whilst it’s a great bit of kit it’s just not quite as good in terms of the final image.

I’ll have to ponder on it some more (y)
 
Messages
1,355
Edit My Images
Yes
Picture review is one area Olympus could improve. It would be nice to have picture-in-picture review that doesn't obscure the live image.
Maybe there is a button-press-review possibility. Where there is no automatic review, but hold a button pressed to see the last shot.
If you turn off image review in the menu, it just means they don’t review automatically. You can still review them by pressing the image review button.
 
Messages
11,197
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Well I have to say I’m a bit on the fence with the 40-150mm f2.8, or should I say what to do in terms of my Nikon gear. I was hoping that I’d be completely blown away with the 40-150mm and I could sell my remaining Nikon gear without hesitation, but shooting the Marathon with both setups I do still prefer the images from the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8. It’s kind of left me in a bit of a quandary :(

The EM1-II and 40–150mm f2.8 is certainly a lot lighter, and as such more pleasing to use. AF performance is very good too, a few more missed shots that the D850 and 70-200mm but not bad at all. So the Olympus combo is certainly good enough in terms of AF for events like this, and IQ is very good, it’s just that thing nagging away that whilst it’s a great bit of kit it’s just not quite as good in terms of the final image.

I’ll have to ponder on it some more (y)

Is it subject separation? sharpness or overall feel of the images?

I must be in the minority of those who didn't like the Nikon 70-200 at all. I was excited to buy it at the time, but it ended up disappointing me. Can't really say why ... I thought it would be better for portraits and wildlife, but it didn't cut it for either. Bought the 1.4x TC, still not enough, ended up buying the 300F4 and the 70-200 just sat in the bag mostly from there on. I preferred using the 85 1.8 for portraits and gigs/street or the 300 for wildlife. Ended up selling the 70-200 on at a profit though :) had bought it from a Dutch website for a good 500 less than UK prices so there was no loss my end. That's what has held me back from buying the likes of the Pany 35-100, these in-between tele lenses are too in between for my liking. I would have thought the Oly 40-150 would be much better though
 
Messages
13,748
Edit My Images
No
Is it subject separation? sharpness or overall feel of the images?

I must be in the minority of those who didn't like the Nikon 70-200 at all. I was excited to buy it at the time, but it ended up disappointing me. Can't really say why ... I thought it would be better for portraits and wildlife, but it didn't cut it for either. Bought the 1.4x TC, still not enough, ended up buying the 300F4 and the 70-200 just sat in the bag mostly from there on. I preferred using the 85 1.8 for portraits and gigs/street or the 300 for wildlife. Ended up selling the 70-200 on at a profit though :) had bought it from a Dutch website for a good 500 less than UK prices so there was no loss my end. That's what has held me back from buying the likes of the Pany 35-100, these in-between tele lenses are too in between for my liking. I would have thought the Oly 40-150 would be much better though
Mainly overall feel, a lot of the Olly images look a bit flat in comparison. I've tried all different kinds of PP and profiles but can't quite get some to stop looking a bit flat. Some are very similar though. Which 70-200mm did you have? I've always loved mine, it's the nicest rendering lens I've had barring the Sigma 85mm f1.4,
 
Messages
11,197
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Mainly overall feel, a lot of the Olly images look a bit flat in comparison. I've tried all different kinds of PP and profiles but can't quite get some to stop looking a bit flat. Some are very similar though. Which 70-200mm did you have? I've always loved mine, it's the nicest rendering lens I've had barring the Sigma 85mm f1.4,
70-200 VRII, previous to that I had the Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM, have to be honest I didn't notice much of a difference :/ But then, I had even less of a clue what i was doing back then :D
 
Messages
13,748
Edit My Images
No
70-200 VRII, previous to that I had the Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM, have to be honest I didn't notice much of a difference :/ But then, I had even less of a clue what i was doing back then :D
You clearly didn't ;) :p It's night and day between the sigma and Nikon IMO. I bought the Sigma first, was OK but not blown away, took it back and 'swapped it' for the Nikon and been extremely happy with it ever since (barring the weight ;)). Better colours, renders much nicer imo, and faster AF (y)
 
Messages
11,197
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
You clearly didn't ;) :p It's night and day between the sigma and Nikon IMO. I bought the Sigma first, was OK but not blown away, took it back and 'swapped it' for the Nikon and been extremely happy with it ever since (barring the weight ;)). Better colours, renders much nicer imo, and faster AF (y)
Yeah just not the range I care too much about, as I say, much preferred just using the 85 1.8. Cheaper, lighter, sharper IMO and brighter.
 
Messages
13,748
Edit My Images
No
Messages
786
Name
Maarten
Edit My Images
Yes
Mainly overall feel, a lot of the Olly images look a bit flat in comparison. I've tried all different kinds of PP and profiles but can't quite get some to stop looking a bit flat. Some are very similar though. Which 70-200mm did you have? I've always loved mine, it's the nicest rendering lens I've had barring the Sigma 85mm f1.4,
Keep in mind that the light wasn't that great yesterday: overcast with not much sunshine. I do find that this usually results in images that look a bit "flat" in general. Once the sun comes out, the look of the images improves dramatically for the better. I guess this is one scenario that is better handled by Nikon FF.

Example from yesterday - no sun:

20190428_093429_029
by Maarten D'Haese, on Flickr

Sun breaks through the clouds a few seconds later:

20190428_093551_054
by Maarten D'Haese, on Flickr

I understand why you are torn between the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 and the Oly 40-150 f/2.8. The rule I've set for myself is that for anything serious telephoto I'll invest in m4/3 because:
1. It's much lighter
2. It's cheaper
3. It's probably good enough
4. Personally I end up leaving heavy telephotos at home anyway unless I can bring them in a car - my commitment to the cause is not as great as most other people on these boards! In general the lighter and the more compact, the more likely I am to bring it and use it.

So for my Canon setup I have two telephoto options: a beaten-up EF 135 f/2.0 that I bought cheap on eBay years ago and the EF 70-300 f/4.0-5.6 II IS USM that I bought cheap with a cashback deal at Christmas - incidentally this is a pretty good lens but probably no match for any of the Nikon or Canon 70-200 f/2.8 or F/4.0 lenses out there.
 
Messages
266
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Can't live without my 40-150mm f/2.8, even noticed something I'd not noticed before, you can go through the full zoom range 40mm - 150mm in a quarter turn of the zoom ring, which I can do with my left thumb or forefinger with just the right amount of feel / resistance, found it came in very handy at Cadwell Park a couple of weeks ago, as you can get so close to the action.







 
Messages
13,748
Edit My Images
No
Keep in mind that the light wasn't that great yesterday: overcast with not much sunshine. I do find that this usually results in images that look a bit "flat" in general. Once the sun comes out, the look of the images improves dramatically for the better. I guess this is one scenario that is better handled by Nikon FF.

Example from yesterday - no sun:

20190428_093429_029
by Maarten D'Haese, on Flickr

Sun breaks through the clouds a few seconds later:

20190428_093551_054
by Maarten D'Haese, on Flickr

I understand why you are torn between the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 and the Oly 40-150 f/2.8. The rule I've set for myself is that for anything serious telephoto I'll invest in m4/3 because:
1. It's much lighter
2. It's cheaper
3. It's probably good enough
4. Personally I end up leaving heavy telephotos at home anyway unless I can bring them in a car - my commitment to the cause is not as great as most other people on these boards! In general the lighter and the more compact, the more likely I am to bring it and use it.

So for my Canon setup I have two telephoto options: a beaten-up EF 135 f/2.0 that I bought cheap on eBay years ago and the EF 70-300 f/4.0-5.6 II IS USM that I bought cheap with a cashback deal at Christmas - incidentally this is a pretty good lens but probably no match for any of the Nikon or Canon 70-200 f/2.8 or F/4.0 lenses out there.
Yeah I understand about light, but I was shooting with both systems yesterday and there’s a noticeable difference to my eyes. So much so that I’ve decided to keep the Nikon, a little bit reluctantly.

With other genres the difference is extremely minimal and so I’m more than happy to use m4/3, but for this kind of event the difference is quite a bit (to my eyes), bloomin big heavy lenses :rolleyes: TBH even my wife can see the difference. I just hope the charity finds them acceptable (y)
 
Messages
2,383
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
Can't live without my 40-150mm f/2.8, even noticed something I'd not noticed before, you can go through the full zoom range 40mm - 150mm in a quarter turn of the zoom ring, which I can do with my left thumb or forefinger with just the right amount of feel / resistance, found it came in very handy at Cadwell Park a couple of weeks ago, as you can get so close to the action.







They are some of the sharpest images I have ever seen, fantastic colour rendition.
 
Messages
2,460
Edit My Images
Yes
Can't live without my 40-150mm f/2.8, even noticed something I'd not noticed before, you can go through the full zoom range 40mm - 150mm in a quarter turn of the zoom ring, which I can do with my left thumb or forefinger with just the right amount of feel / resistance, found it came in very handy at Cadwell Park a couple of weeks ago, as you can get so close to the action.







Hi Mark

What did you use to process those?
 
Messages
266
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
What did you use to process those?
Photoshop.

They've all had some work done but in general I use Camera RAW Filter for exposure and noise reduction (I usually just hit "auto" on the exposure panel and these didn't need much noise reduction as they were all shot at base ISO), then I add a high pass filter overlay layer for sharpness (sometimes with a layer mask to paint in just the bits I want to sharpen), then a curves adjustment layer, hitting the Auto button with Alt / Option to bring up the auto colour correction options, and select "find dark & light colours", this gives it a nice subtle contrast.

All of these have then had a gradient fill layer added (reverse reflected). For #2 I then painted back in (via layer mask) the rider's left knee, and for #4 I just added a gradient to the top of the image and painted back in the top half of the rider and bike.

But in short, sharpness is via a high pass filter overlay layer, and colour pop via a curves auto colour correction layer, and I have most of this stuff recorded as actions so it doesn't take any time, just the painting over layer masks if required.

For reference, here's #3 before I did any work on it.

 
Messages
1,355
Edit My Images
Yes
Photoshop.

They've all had some work done but in general I use Camera RAW Filter for exposure and noise reduction (I usually just hit "auto" on the exposure panel and these didn't need much noise reduction as they were all shot at base ISO), then I add a high pass filter overlay layer for sharpness (sometimes with a layer mask to paint in just the bits I want to sharpen), then a curves adjustment layer, hitting the Auto button with Alt / Option to bring up the auto colour correction options, and select "find dark & light colours", this gives it a nice subtle contrast.

All of these have then had a gradient fill layer added (reverse reflected). For #2 I then painted back in (via layer mask) the rider's left knee, and for #4 I just added a gradient to the top of the image and painted back in the top half of the rider and bike.

But in short, sharpness is via a high pass filter overlay layer, and colour pop via a curves auto colour correction layer, and I have most of this stuff recorded as actions so it doesn't take any time, just the painting over layer masks if required.

For reference, here's #3 before I did any work on it.

Thank for sharing. It's a great capture and your processing really suits the image.
 
Messages
266
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Should just add, I'm no Photoshop expert, I'm only now learning what can be done myself and am amazed at how simple it is sometimes to bring images to life, although I guess if I shot JPG I'd get somewhere close, RAW files tend to be "flat" to begin with.

Pretty much everything I've learnt about Photoshop comes from this guy:-

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMrvLMUITAImCHMOhX88PYQ
 
Messages
1,355
Edit My Images
Yes
Should just add, I'm no Photoshop expert, I'm only now learning what can be done myself and am amazed at how simple it is sometimes to bring images to life, although I guess if I shot JPG I'd get somewhere close, RAW files tend to be "flat" to begin with.

Pretty much everything I've learnt about Photoshop comes from this guy:-

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMrvLMUITAImCHMOhX88PYQ
I follow him too. He's brilliant and he has made me delve more into what can be done, though I often play safe and stick with what I know in Lightroom.
 
Messages
2,460
Edit My Images
Yes
Photoshop.

They've all had some work done but in general I use Camera RAW Filter for exposure and noise reduction (I usually just hit "auto" on the exposure panel and these didn't need much noise reduction as they were all shot at base ISO), then I add a high pass filter overlay layer for sharpness (sometimes with a layer mask to paint in just the bits I want to sharpen), then a curves adjustment layer, hitting the Auto button with Alt / Option to bring up the auto colour correction options, and select "find dark & light colours", this gives it a nice subtle contrast.

All of these have then had a gradient fill layer added (reverse reflected). For #2 I then painted back in (via layer mask) the rider's left knee, and for #4 I just added a gradient to the top of the image and painted back in the top half of the rider and bike.

But in short, sharpness is via a high pass filter overlay layer, and colour pop via a curves auto colour correction layer, and I have most of this stuff recorded as actions so it doesn't take any time, just the painting over layer masks if required.

For reference, here's #3 before I did any work on it.

Thanks for providing your workflow Mark. The processing really makes the images pop, however one still has to begin with a good image to achieve the end result. (y)
 
Messages
13,748
Edit My Images
No
Messages
4,662
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
TIP:
(I just remembered this lesser known Olympus trick.)
If you suddenly need to get a really quick picture of something. But your camera is switched off, hold down the shutter button when you switch it on. It has an emergency one shot mode, that will focus and take a picture within 1 second of starting up.

There are some limitations to the mode and settings that I can't quite remember. But it's useful to know for that surprise situation. HTH. IMG_20190501_160420.jpeg
 
Messages
8,435
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Some pics from the London Marathon 2019, unfortunately I can't share the ones that I shot for the Charity "Versus Arthritis" yet but I'm sure I will in due course

1.

P4280266-Edit
by TDG-77, on Flickr

2.

P4280345
by TDG-77, on Flickr

3.

P4280582
by TDG-77, on Flickr

4.

P4280783
by TDG-77, on Flickr

5.

P4280915
by TDG-77, on Flickr

6.

P4281013
by TDG-77, on Flickr

7.

P4281138
by TDG-77, on Flickr

8.

P4281145
by TDG-77, on Flickr
Great set of images, Toby.

Having looked at your flickr and all the shots you took at the marathon, I'm struggling to see, image wise, what the D850 gives you over the Olympus, other than a little more depth of field.
 
Messages
13,748
Edit My Images
No
Great set of images, Toby.

Having looked at your flickr and all the shots you took at the marathon, I'm struggling to see, image wise, what the D850 gives you over the Olympus, other than a little more depth of field.
Thanks. Having now edited them all the difference isn't as big as I first thought, however I do still prefer the Nikon ones as they have (to my eyes) more of that illusive 'depth' that is very hard to quantify. I am still contemplating whether that little 'edge' is worth the weight penalty though o_O

I think the one's that I took for the Charity highlight some of the difference more, hopefully I can post them soon. Obviously though, when it comes to image rendering this gets very subjective, it's not something like sharpness where you can kind of quantify it. I am seriously thinking about swapping the D850 for a Z7. I know full well that the Z7 isn't as good camera as the D850, but it is a noticeable weight saving especially as I tend to use the D850 gripped when shooting sports. That way I'll have something in-between the Olly set up and what I have now. There's no doubt that the Olly system is going to be my motorsports and wildlife system though.
 
Messages
1,355
Edit My Images
Yes
Some pics from the London Marathon 2019, unfortunately I can't share the ones that I shot for the Charity "Versus Arthritis" yet but I'm sure I will in due course

1.

P4280266-Edit
by TDG-77, on Flickr

2.

P4280345
by TDG-77, on Flickr

3.

P4280582
by TDG-77, on Flickr

4.

P4280783
by TDG-77, on Flickr

5.

P4280915
by TDG-77, on Flickr

6.

P4281013
by TDG-77, on Flickr

7.

P4281138
by TDG-77, on Flickr

8.

P4281145
by TDG-77, on Flickr
Really love 1.3. and 4. in 4, the separation from the background is lovely, and she really stands out sharp.
 
Messages
13,748
Edit My Images
No
Really love 1.3. and 4. in 4, the separation from the background is lovely, and she really stands out sharp.
Thanks :)
 
Messages
13,748
Edit My Images
No
Does the EM1 MK2 have a better DR than the EM5 MK2?

I'm stunned by the quality of Toby's and Mark's shot posted here.

May have to do a bit of trading in if the difference is this significant.
Thanks for the kind comments. TBH there’s very little difference in IQ between the EM1-II and EM5-II, we’re talking 0.4ev and 0.7 colour depth, not really anything. The EM1 is better at noise handling though.

TBH imo it’s a more down to the lens and PP. for me Olympus files need a lot of tweaking to make them pop, they are quite lacking in contrast SOOC. You may notice that often the files don’t fill the histogram in LR, ie not reaching the blackest blacks and whitest whites. I actually used my Nikon files as a ‘standard’ then set up a preset for my Olympus files that could match the Nikon ones as closely as possible, in doing this I found my shots had more ‘pop’

Not just the DR, but performance in general.

It looks like chalk and cheese to me but Mark's processing skills come into it as well obviously.

Those shots are sublime
What’s chalk and cheese?
 
Top