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

Messages
295
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Great. You’ve posed the drivers well.
Well, actually, I didn't, there's a bit of a story behind this one.

We're at Eastbourne, getting the cars out of the lorry, and a photographer wanders past in a high-vis, I assumed he was one of the track's "official" 'togs so I got chatting to him. Turns out he was from a magazine called "Jocks&Nerds" ( https://www.facebook.com/jocksandnerds/ ), apparently a mens lifestyle magazine, doing a piece on stock car racing, and he was going around the pits getting drivers to pose by their cars. He asked if he could come back when we were ready and do a group photo of the guys and their cars.

So a bit later he came back and posed the cars and drivers as shown, and I just stood next to him and took some pictures myself, although in this one I think they are all looking at me. Not sure what this guy with his Canon 5D and 24-70 f/2.8 thought of me with my little Oly EM10? He took some more pictures with me and the rest of our party (the guy's girlfriends) in the shot.

The magazine is produced quarterly, it's 250 pages, no ads, and apparently it's printed on top quality paper, and costs £25. I'll be buying the next issue regardless of whether any of us are in it.
 
Messages
5,372
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
Yes
Well, actually, I didn't, there's a bit of a story behind this one.

We're at Eastbourne, getting the cars out of the lorry, and a photographer wanders past in a high-vis, I assumed he was one of the track's "official" 'togs so I got chatting to him. Turns out he was from a magazine called "Jocks&Nerds" ( https://www.facebook.com/jocksandnerds/ ), apparently a mens lifestyle magazine, doing a piece on stock car racing, and he was going around the pits getting drivers to pose by their cars. He asked if he could come back when we were ready and do a group photo of the guys and their cars.

So a bit later he came back and posed the cars and drivers as shown, and I just stood next to him and took some pictures myself, although in this one I think they are all looking at me. Not sure what this guy with his Canon 5D and 24-70 f/2.8 thought of me with my little Oly EM10? He took some more pictures with me and the rest of our party (the guy's girlfriends) in the shot.

The magazine is produced quarterly, it's 250 pages, no ads, and apparently it's printed on top quality paper, and costs £25. I'll be buying the next issue regardless of whether any of us are in it.
Thanks for the explanation. Love these stories.
 
Messages
1,766
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
Anyone using the Oly 12mm f2 or 17mm f1.8? Am after a small, light, wide(ish) prime to go with my 25mm and 45mm for when I need to travel light. Likely to be used stopped down a little for landscapes and cityscapes.

Thanks in advance.

Simon.
 
Messages
805
Name
Maarten
Edit My Images
Yes
Anyone using the Oly 12mm f2 or 17mm f1.8? Am after a small, light, wide(ish) prime to go with my 25mm and 45mm for when I need to travel light. Likely to be used stopped down a little for landscapes and cityscapes.

Thanks in advance.

Simon.
I have both. IQ on the 12 f/2.0 is probably better than on the 17 f/1.8, but 17mm is a more useful prime focal length for me. Also I think the 12 f/2.0 is slightly heavier than the 17 f/1.8. If you're definitely bringing the 25mm and the 45mm, the 12mm may complement these focal lengths better.
 
Messages
11,237
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
How about the Panasonic 15mm f/1.7
I had the 12mm and the 17mm you mentioned, former is good albeit rather expensive and the latter was just ok
 
Messages
329
Edit My Images
No
Anyone using the Oly 12mm f2 or 17mm f1.8? Am after a small, light, wide(ish) prime to go with my 25mm and 45mm for when I need to travel light. Likely to be used stopped down a little for landscapes and cityscapes.

Thanks in advance.

Simon.
I have the Olympus f1.8 17mm, the Panasonic f1.7 25mm and the Olympus f1.8 45mm.
The 17mm is by far and away my most used prime.
When travelling very light I take the Oly 14-42mm EZ and the 17mm (sometimes in a pocket) and never really worry about the other primes.
I don't think there's much overlap between the 17mm and 25mm, whenever I try to use the 25mm as a walkabout I'm frustrated that it seems too long but that's just me.

I know not everyone rates the 17mm so I wonder how much sample variation there is between them.
I think mine's pretty good - these are the results I'm most pleased with... https://flic.kr/s/aHsm2xFXw1

Never used the 12mm and never really felt any justification for it as it's a fair bit more expensive.
Psychologically the f2.0 seems a lot slower than f1.8 though I know that's really nonsense :)

I agree with the comment above that there might be more logic in the 12 - 25 - 45 trio - if money isn't an obstacle that might be the better choice.
 
Messages
11,237
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
Have to say I got fed up messing about with different lenses and use my 12-40 most of the time now
Just as good and in some cases better than the primes mentioned here.
Did keep the 25mm f/1.4 for those low light occasions when nothing else would do the job.
Also got a 35-100 f/2.8 and that's it, more than covered with these three for my photography
 
Messages
9,163
Name
Robert
Edit My Images
Yes
Have to say I got fed up messing about with different lenses and use my 12-40 most of the time now
Just as good and in some cases better than the primes mentioned here.
Did keep the 25mm f/1.4 for those low light occasions when nothing else would do the job.
Also got a 35-100 f/2.8 and that's it, more than covered with these three for my photography
I've got a 12-60, 35-100 f2.8, 45 f1.8 and 100-400.
Tbh I've hardly used the 45 f1.8 since I got the 35-100 f2.8
I think I could get by with just the 3 zooms no problem.
 
Messages
11,953
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Have to say I got fed up messing about with different lenses and use my 12-40 most of the time now
Just as good and in some cases better than the primes mentioned here.
Did keep the 25mm f/1.4 for those low light occasions when nothing else would do the job.
Also got a 35-100 f/2.8 and that's it, more than covered with these three for my photography
That is the only lens I missed after switching to Fuji, so I just bought it's bigger cousin, the 16-55 2.8 :) twice the size and weight almost, but just as nice to use, just as sharp - what the Olympus does better though, and I do wish the Fuji had it, was that lovely close focusing ability. That 12-40 is such a fun little lens to use, a proper keeper. If I ever buy M43 again that's the first lens I would be looking for
 
Messages
14,225
Edit My Images
No
12-40mm is a great lens, nice bokeh and a real workhorse. The only reason I use primes is to get shallow DOF, f2.8 on M4/3 isn’t very shallow (unless at min focus distance or there abouts).
 
Messages
11,953
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
12-40mm is a great lens, nice bokeh and a real workhorse. The only reason I use primes is to get shallow DOF, f2.8 on M4/3 isn’t very shallow (unless at min focus distance or there abouts).
But the 12-40 only needs 2.8, it focuses so close and does 1/3 mag, granted, not all lenses for M43 can do same but even the 1.7 primes can get plenty enough shallow DOF. I think people are a bit obsessed with the 'bokeh' lately. Me I want closer focus, but not for that purpose specifically. I just like to isolate a subject but still have that subject in as much detail as I need.
 
Messages
11,237
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
Just purchased a 12-100 f/4 Pro, seen rave reviews for this lens and keen to see if they are true.
Got it on my daughters behalf, she wants it for a specific holiday, but I'm interested to see how it performs.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,766
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
I have both. IQ on the 12 f/2.0 is probably better than on the 17 f/1.8, but 17mm is a more useful prime focal length for me. Also I think the 12 f/2.0 is slightly heavier than the 17 f/1.8. If you're definitely bringing the 25mm and the 45mm, the 12mm may complement these focal lengths better.
How about the Panasonic 15mm f/1.7
I had the 12mm and the 17mm you mentioned, former is good albeit rather expensive and the latter was just ok
I have the Olympus f1.8 17mm, the Panasonic f1.7 25mm and the Olympus f1.8 45mm.
The 17mm is by far and away my most used prime.
When travelling very light I take the Oly 14-42mm EZ and the 17mm (sometimes in a pocket) and never really worry about the other primes.
I don't think there's much overlap between the 17mm and 25mm, whenever I try to use the 25mm as a walkabout I'm frustrated that it seems too long but that's just me.

I know not everyone rates the 17mm so I wonder how much sample variation there is between them.
I think mine's pretty good - these are the results I'm most pleased with... https://flic.kr/s/aHsm2xFXw1

Never used the 12mm and never really felt any justification for it as it's a fair bit more expensive.
Psychologically the f2.0 seems a lot slower than f1.8 though I know that's really nonsense :)

I agree with the comment above that there might be more logic in the 12 - 25 - 45 trio - if money isn't an obstacle that might be the better choice.
Thanks guys. I’m more leaning towards the 12mm if I’m honest, but I’ll have to purchase 2nd hand. I have previously used the Panny 15mm, so that could very well be an option too.

Simon.
 
Messages
11,953
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Just purchased a 12-100 f/4 Pro, seen rave reviews for this lens and keen to see if they are true.
Got it on my daughters behalf, she wants it for a specific holiday, but I'm interested to see how it performs.
I considered that when I still had the G80, but I can't see it being better than the 12-40 in that range, not great for indoors without flash etc
 
Messages
1,766
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
Have to say I got fed up messing about with different lenses and use my 12-40 most of the time now
Just as good and in some cases better than the primes mentioned here.
Did keep the 25mm f/1.4 for those low light occasions when nothing else would do the job.
Also got a 35-100 f/2.8 and that's it, more than covered with these three for my photography
I've got a 12-60, 35-100 f2.8, 45 f1.8 and 100-400.
Tbh I've hardly used the 45 f1.8 since I got the 35-100 f2.8
I think I could get by with just the 3 zooms no problem.
That is the only lens I missed after switching to Fuji, so I just bought it's bigger cousin, the 16-55 2.8 :) twice the size and weight almost, but just as nice to use, just as sharp - what the Olympus does better though, and I do wish the Fuji had it, was that lovely close focusing ability. That 12-40 is such a fun little lens to use, a proper keeper. If I ever buy M43 again that's the first lens I would be looking for
12-40mm is a great lens, nice bokeh and a real workhorse. The only reason I use primes is to get shallow DOF, f2.8 on M4/3 isn’t very shallow (unless at min focus distance or there abouts).
I have the 12-40mm f2.8 and 40-150mm f2.8 and they are both superb lenses. However, I do enjoy heading out with one or two primes from time to time, and just enjoy the challenge they present. The shallower DoF can also be handy from time to time, but isn’t the main driver.

Cheers,

Simon.
 
Messages
11,953
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I have the 12-40mm f2.8 and 40-150mm f2.8 and they are both superb lenses. However, I do enjoy heading out with one or two primes from time to time, and just enjoy the challenge they present. The shallower DoF can also be handy from time to time, but isn’t the main driver.

Cheers,

Simon.
I had some nice primes too, had the 25 1.7 which I still think is under-rated, had the 15mm 1.7 which was lovely but wasn't for me - hated the aperture ring as it was too loose, and the lens was just too small for my liking. I'm not into pancake type lenses at all, prefer something I can get a grip on. But no denying the output was excellent. Also had the Sigma 60mm 2.8, another excellent value lens, so, so sharp! But the 12-40 more than made up for all 3 of these for me.
 
Messages
11,237
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
I considered that when I still had the G80, but I can't see it being better than the 12-40 in that range, not great for indoors without flash etc
My daughter wants it for a specific holiday in a harsh environment where lens changing isn't really an option.
At the moment she just uses primes, so this hopefully will be a do it all lens if its as good as the reviews say
 
Messages
1,766
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
I had some nice primes too, had the 25 1.7 which I still think is under-rated, had the 15mm 1.7 which was lovely but wasn't for me - hated the aperture ring as it was too loose, and the lens was just too small for my liking. I'm not into pancake type lenses at all, prefer something I can get a grip on. But no denying the output was excellent. Also had the Sigma 60mm 2.8, another excellent value lens, so, so sharp! But the 12-40 more than made up for all 3 of these for me.
I currently have the Oly 25mm F1.2, 45mm F1.8 and 75mm F1.8. They’re all superb, but so far I’ve found the 75mm to be my favourite and will often just take it when we’re out as a family. It’s an amazing bit of glass. Mind you, the 25mm F1.2 ain’t too bad either :)

Cheers,

Simon.
 
Messages
11,237
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
I currently have the Oly 25mm F1.2, 45mm F1.8 and 75mm F1.8. They’re all superb, but so far I’ve found the 75mm to be my favourite and will often just take it when we’re out as a family. It’s an amazing bit of glass. Mind you, the 25mm F1.2 ain’t too bad either :)

Cheers,

Simon.
I'm seriously thinking about getting the Panasonic 12mm f/1.4, reckon I would use that a fair bit.
Went out today just with the 25mm f/1.4, but most of my photography is travel related and prefer a wider angle
 
Messages
11,953
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
I currently have the Oly 25mm F1.2, 45mm F1.8 and 75mm F1.8. They’re all superb, but so far I’ve found the 75mm to be my favourite and will often just take it when we’re out as a family. It’s an amazing bit of glass. Mind you, the 25mm F1.2 ain’t too bad either :)

Cheers,

Simon.
Before I switched, I was very tempted to give the 25mm 1.2 a try out, I also pondered on the 75 1.8 forever but never got round to it. I think between those and some cheap tele lens for me bird pics, it's all I would need for general shooting
 
Messages
14,225
Edit My Images
No
But the 12-40 only needs 2.8, it focuses so close and does 1/3 mag, granted, not all lenses for M43 can do same but even the 1.7 primes can get plenty enough shallow DOF. I think people are a bit obsessed with the 'bokeh' lately. Me I want closer focus, but not for that purpose specifically. I just like to isolate a subject but still have that subject in as much detail as I need.
Yes but not every shot you want to have shallow DOF can have the subject 1 ft away or closer ;) As you know, the car picture I took in Cuba was with the 45mm f1.8 and I still wanted more isolation and pop, at f2.8 there would have been little to no isolation (y)
 
Messages
11,953
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Yes but not every shot you want to have shallow DOF can have the subject 1 ft away or closer ;) As you know, the car picture I took in Cuba was with the 45mm f1.8 and I still wanted more isolation and pop, at f2.8 there would have been little to no isolation (y)
It's tack sharp at every distance, close up is just what I liked it over other zooms for. At 12mm you could fit a whole care in and isolate it enough I imagine. But as I continue to say, this isolation thing seems much more important to some than others, I can only speak for me, which is what I have done here tbh
 
Messages
295
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
I pre-ordered the Olympus TC2.0 from Wex a couple of weeks ago, and just received an email telling me it's in and being shipped today!

I chose the free 4 working days delivery so might not get it till next week, but glad I'll get it in time for my next circuit race, which is Snetterton on 14th July, as that's when I find I need more reach than the 40-150mm + TC1.4 gives me.
 
Messages
1,835
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
I pre-ordered the Olympus TC2.0 from Wex a couple of weeks ago, and just received an email telling me it's in and being shipped today!

I chose the free 4 working days delivery so might not get it till next week, but glad I'll get it in time for my next circuit race, which is Snetterton on 14th July, as that's when I find I need more reach than the 40-150mm + TC1.4 gives me.
Wouldn’t mind getting your take on the teleconverter before I decided to order one or not, so will be interesting to see how it works out next week.
 
Messages
295
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Wouldn’t mind getting your take on the teleconverter before I decided to order one or not, so will be interesting to see how it works out next week.
Proper test will be the weekend of 13th / 14th July, got 3 race meets in one weekend, Birmingham on the 13th, Snetterton and Yarmouth on the 14th. The Snetterton meet will be the real test.

I will of course try to get some use of it before then, and as soon as I have some thoughts on it I'll post here.
 
Messages
14,225
Edit My Images
No
Proper test will be the weekend of 13th / 14th July, got 3 race meets in one weekend, Birmingham on the 13th, Snetterton and Yarmouth on the 14th. The Snetterton meet will be the real test.

I will of course try to get some use of it before then, and as soon as I have some thoughts on it I'll post here.
How do you find the 1.4TC, I've been contemplating it for the 40-150mm f2.8. I'm not sure I'd want the TC2 as I have the 100-400mm for extra reach. I tried to convince my wife that I needed the 300mm f4 but she wasn't buying it ;)
 
Messages
295
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
How do you find the 1.4TC, I've been contemplating it for the 40-150mm f2.8. I'm not sure I'd want the TC2 as I have the 100-400mm for extra reach. I tried to convince my wife that I needed the 300mm f4 but she wasn't buying it ;)
The way I see it, for less than £300, and a measly 100g in the bag, I get a FF eq 100-400mm f/4 from my 40-150mm f/2.8, perfect for what I do, and many weekends I might not even take it off the lens.

This photo that you commented on in the GT thread was with the 1.4x



As far as I'm concerned IQ is as good with it fitted as without. I suppose some scientific testing and pixel peeping might say otherwise, but in practise I don't notice.

I had the PL100-400mm, and traded it in at Wex, couldn't get on with it and am convinced it was a bad copy. I know the idiot behind the camera is usually to blame but I just couldn't take a sharp picture with it, and I hope you'd agree I can take a sharp picture with the 40-150mm f/2.8. Thing is I bought it on sale at 20% so traded it in for nearly what I paid for it, and it financed the Oly EM10 Mk2 + 40-150mm f/4-5.6 I bought as a travel camera.
 
Messages
329
Edit My Images
No
Proper test will be the weekend of 13th / 14th July, got 3 race meets in one weekend, Birmingham on the 13th, Snetterton and Yarmouth on the 14th. The Snetterton meet will be the real test.
Snetterton is close to me, an old friend races in F1000 (formerly Jedi) so if I can I pop down when they're there.
They race the full 300 circuit and I'm usually alright with the cheap 40-150 though I'm never getting in that tight and the F1000 are ridiculously quick so tighter in I'd get even fewer keepers :)

Does your step-son's formula use the 100 track?
I can imagine you'd need more reach for that - the banking at Palmer is quite good as you can see Oggies too but you're a long way back from the track - especially compared to ovals like Gt. Yarmouth.
https://www.snetterton.co.uk/circui...late=MSV-CircuitInfoV2&mapId=23789#circuitMap

My amateur attempts from the last time I was there are here.
https://flic.kr/s/aHskYh2AZa
 
Messages
11,237
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
Just received the 75mm f/1.8 and first impressions are its probably the sharpest lens I have ever had.
Really is exceptional, its actually my daughters, just testing it before handing it over.
Reckon she is lucky its a focal length I would hardly ever use (only kidding, but it is that good)

Still don't get this not supplying a hood with a lens that costs around the 800 quid mark
Need to take a leaf out of Panasonics book on this matter, just comes across as penny pinching
 
Messages
1,766
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
Just received the 75mm f/1.8 and first impressions are its probably the sharpest lens I have ever had.
Really is exceptional, its actually my daughters, just testing it before handing it over.
Reckon she is lucky its a focal length I would hardly ever use (only kidding, but it is that good)

Still don't get this not supplying a hood with a lens that costs around the 800 quid mark
Need to take a leaf out of Panasonics book on this matter, just comes across as penny pinching
That lens is just phenomenal
 
Messages
295
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Snetterton is close to me, an old friend races in F1000 (formerly Jedi) so if I can I pop down when they're there.
They race the full 300 circuit and I'm usually alright with the cheap 40-150 though I'm never getting in that tight and the F1000 are ridiculously quick so tighter in I'd get even fewer keepers :)

Does your step-son's formula use the 100 track?
I can imagine you'd need more reach for that - the banking at Palmer is quite good as you can see Oggies too but you're a long way back from the track - especially compared to ovals like Gt. Yarmouth.
https://www.snetterton.co.uk/circui...late=MSV-CircuitInfoV2&mapId=23789#circuitMap

My amateur attempts from the last time I was there are here.
https://flic.kr/s/aHskYh2AZa
@AMcUK , no, Snetterton is something else, I have a friend who competes in a club bike competition called "No Limits" :- http://nolimitsracing.co.uk/ which will be on the 300 circuit.

I took these :- https://flic.kr/s/aHsmyTBkbK at a No Limits track day earlier this year with the PL100-400mm, they're OK but nothing special.
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,225
Edit My Images
No
As far as I'm concerned IQ is as good with it fitted as without. I suppose some scientific testing and pixel peeping might say otherwise, but in practise I don't notice.
That's good enough for me (y)

I had the PL100-400mm, and traded it in at Wex, couldn't get on with it and am convinced it was a bad copy. I know the idiot behind the camera is usually to blame but I just couldn't take a sharp picture with it, and I hope you'd agree I can take a sharp picture with the 40-150mm f/2.8. Thing is I bought it on sale at 20% so traded it in for nearly what I paid for it, and it financed the Oly EM10 Mk2 + 40-150mm f/4-5.6 I bought as a travel camera.
Shame that as I rate it, but unfortunately there are bad copies of just about any lens out there :( It's obviously not as sharp as the 300mm f4, or the 40-150mm f2.8 but it's only a smidge off from my experience.
 
Messages
1,766
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
First run out in ages hoping for a decent sunrise and got 100% low cloud cover :LOL:. Turned out to be a 'long exposure mono morning' instead.

Durham University Stockton Campus
by Simon Harrison, on Flickr

EM1 mk II + Oly 12-40mm f2.8 + Filters.

Cheers,

Simon.
 
Messages
5,372
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
Yes
Need a bit of help. When I Format my cards the image counter resets to zero. I want to have continuous numbering.
??

M1 mk2
 
Messages
14,225
Edit My Images
No
Just received the 75mm f/1.8 and first impressions are its probably the sharpest lens I have ever had.
Really is exceptional, its actually my daughters, just testing it before handing it over.
Reckon she is lucky its a focal length I would hardly ever use (only kidding, but it is that good)

Still don't get this not supplying a hood with a lens that costs around the 800 quid mark
Need to take a leaf out of Panasonics book on this matter, just comes across as penny pinching
The 75mm is a really nice lens, has nice pop to it. £800??? :eek:
 
Messages
14,225
Edit My Images
No
Need a bit of help. When I Format my cards the image counter resets to zero. I want to have continuous numbering.
??

M1 mk2
Olympus numbering is a bit weird imo. It's actually date then file number so it may look as though it goes back to 0 a lot of you discount the first 3 numbers. so for example if I take an image of mine I've just looked at it's P2271817. This is actually P-'February'-27th- file number 1817. I can't remember off the top of my head whether it I shot the next day it wold start at P2280001 or P2281818 :oops: :$

I'll look into it over the weekend ;)
 
Last edited:
Messages
5,372
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
Yes
Olympus numbering is a bit weird imo. It's actually date then file number so it may look as though it goes back to 0 a lot of you discount the first 3 numbers. so for example if I take an image of mine I've just looked at it's P2271817. This is actually P-'February'-27th- file number 1817. I can't remember off the top of my head whether it I shot the next day it wold start at P2280001 or P2281818 :oops: :$

I'll look into it over the weekend ;)
Thanks Toby
 
Top