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

Messages
242
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Morning Chris,

1) I personally would not be worried at all about selling, in a recent interview with the buyers they have said that they re committed to the brand & keeping Micro 4/3 camera on the high street as it were :)

2) I can only speak for the EM 1 Mk3, which personally I thing is excellent! it works fine for wildlife photograph, birds and all & for me personally the MX is just a bit too big and cumbersome but I’m just a fairly newbie hobbiest so for some the Mx may suit, but as far as I know the spec difference between the MK3 & the MX is minimal apart from the extra size & battery...

3) Again I can on,y talk for myself but the Oly 100-400 is brilliant & works really well with the 1.4 tele... I personally haven’t had hands on experience with the 2x but, again personally I find the 1.4 plenty as even without the converter your getting 200-800 effective focal range!

General/travel I use the 12-40 pro lense which is also very good quality, build and sharp & compliments the Mk3 well.

Hope this helps,
Joe :)


Thanks for the advice Joe, I wondered about the size of the MX, not sure I need the extra battery (y)
 
Messages
242
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes

Consider keeping the D500 and getting the Nikon 300pf lens.


Thanks for the reply Mike that's something to consider.(y)
 
Messages
242
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
The 12-100 zoom is very well-thought of as an all-purpose zoom but I have found that on certain types of subject matter - for example distant tree foliage and grassland - it produces "clumpy" detail when sharpened and subject to noise reduction. I'm sticking with it for now but in my opinion your technique needs to be absolutely spot-on for the best results. (It could be my particular lens or technique, of course.....)

Thanks Jeremy, technique is something we all have to work on.
 
Messages
13,296
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
The 12-100 zoom is very well-thought of as an all-purpose zoom but I have found that on certain types of subject matter - for example distant tree foliage and grassland - it produces "clumpy" detail when sharpened and subject to noise reduction. I'm sticking with it for now but in my opinion your technique needs to be absolutely spot-on for the best results. (It could be my particular lens or technique, of course.....)
Must say I haven't noticed this happening with my 12-100, will go and take a couple of photos now of the trees at the back of my place.
Just out of interest what camera are you using it with?
 
Last edited:
Messages
242
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes

Hi Chris

1 Should I be worried about Olympus selling its photography side of the business ? No as many users think Olympus will continue all be it under new ownership
2 Cameras I have been looking at are the OM-D E-M1 MarkII , Mark III and the M1X. What are the pros and cons? Each of the bodies has benefits some features maybe more benefit Olympus do a lot of work on firmware updates during the life cycle of the camera bodies adding features here's a link to Peter Forsgard an Olympus visionary who post weekly topics on all things Olympus


3 The lens I think would be the new Olympus 100-400 F5.6-6.3 IS. It looks like it takes the 1.4 teleconverter ok, does anybody use the lens with the x2 ? Recommendation for a landscape/general travel lens would be appreciated. Lots of views on new Olympus 100-400 but not many users have posted anything with regard to using the 2x TC. As to a landscape travel lens some recommend the 12-40-12-45-12-100 I have the 12-100 and have happy with the quality and find it wide enough for landscape plus the effective zoom range of 200 based on FF

I have been very impressed with diminutive size and the range of features on the camera. The menus are initially confusing but once you spend time reading and you tubing the menus become less confusing. As you may of read 4/3 sensors get bashed a bit by other camera users one bit of software which creates a more level playing field regarding the FF sensor performance in terms of high ISO performance vs 4/3 sensor is Topaz denoise which works really well.

The range of lenses is really good particular the pro lenses which have a really good build quality. One of the best features is the weatherproofing of both body and lens having IPX rated weatherproofing I have been out in a few wet days and the camera has performed fine.



Thanks for the info Terry, I'll look at the video later.(y)
 
Messages
242
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes

right from the weight p.o.v it would be a good move the 1-mkiii being the newest and probably best choice . but the mkii is still good with some killer deals on at the moment .. the 100-400 lens is in short supply worldwide at the moment so you might not get one this side of xmas ,it really is a stunning lens and as you surmised takes both t.c's .
you still have the slightly smaller sensor to overcome but as a lot of us have found topaz de-noise AI overcomes noise easily ..
I weighed mine last night and 1-mkii plus zuiko 100-400 comes in at 2kg add a couple of ounces to that for a t.c .. the olympus i.s system leaves any others I have ever used standing and I can state that in a year of ownership I have never yet had to use my tripod and gimbal , b.i.f is no problem with fast a.f and good lock on .. the menu system initially seems alien but offers far my choices than any Competion and you soon get used to it

olympus have stated they fully intend to carry on .the Portugal repair facility are still up and running and offer a quicker turnaround than sending anything to a u.k repair centre

and at the end of the day the results are what counts so choose a body and a lens then do a online search for photos ..

and BTW dont get bogged down by online fanboy quotes from other brands if you read the photographic ALL companies are in trouble due to the rise of phones and now covid


Thanks Jeff, I think i'm leaning towards the 1-MKIII, the 100-400 does seem in short supply. You are right about the online negativity without proof to back it up but it does get in your mind. I think Andy Rouse summed it up quite nicely on his blog. BTW your photos are excellent and super sharp (y)
 
Messages
2,807
Edit My Images
Yes
I don't see much negativity about MFT, guess I'm not looking in the right places
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,807
Edit My Images
No
right from the weight p.o.v it would be a good move the 1-mkiii being the newest and probably best choice . but the mkii is still good with some killer deals on at the moment .. the 100-400 lens is in short supply worldwide at the moment so you might not get one this side of xmas ,it really is a stunning lens and as you surmised takes both t.c's .
you still have the slightly smaller sensor to overcome but as a lot of us have found topaz de-noise AI overcomes noise easily ..
I weighed mine last night and 1-mkii plus zuiko 100-400 comes in at 2kg add a couple of ounces to that for a t.c .. the olympus i.s system leaves any others I have ever used standing and I can state that in a year of ownership I have never yet had to use my tripod and gimbal , b.i.f is no problem with fast a.f and good lock on .. the menu system initially seems alien but offers far my choices than any Competion and you soon get used to it

olympus have stated they fully intend to carry on .the Portugal repair facility are still up and running and offer a quicker turnaround than sending anything to a u.k repair centre

and at the end of the day the results are what counts so choose a body and a lens then do a online search for photos ..

and BTW dont get bogged down by online fanboy quotes from other brands if you read the photographic ALL companies are in trouble due to the rise of phones and now covid


Thanks Jeff, I think i'm leaning towards the 1-MKIII, the 100-400 does seem in short supply. You are right about the online negativity without proof to back it up but it does get in your mind. I think Andy Rouse summed it up quite nicely on his blog. BTW your photos are excellent and super sharp (y)
I think you have to weigh up what is important to you - if it's smaller and lighter, will you use it more? A tipping point for me was when I wanted longer lenses and the FF ones were so expensive and heavy. Topaz Denoise does a great job with high ISO images.

I have both Canon full frame and Olympus M43 systems. I use my Olympus much more and I'm far more likely to take it with me. However if I am shooting e.g. football under floodlights, such as I was this week, or if I'm shooting an event where I use flash, then I would use my Canon. (I only have the small Olympus flash). Shooting football during daylight and particularly in pouring rain, I would use my Olympus. I don't worry at all about getting it wet.

This guy is very impressive https://www.sulasula.com/en/home/

IMG_4801.jpg
 
Messages
10,277
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
only a gull in flight , popped along to the estuary this afternoon while the wife had her hair done , and tried out the lens under dark rainy skies ,, performed superbly no problem at all bar to many birds . and put my mind to rest a bit more as its been good weather since buying it . I'm pleased with the result anyway
dora the explorer by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
Messages
242
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
I think you have to weigh up what is important to you - if it's smaller and lighter, will you use it more? A tipping point for me was when I wanted longer lenses and the FF ones were so expensive and heavy. Topaz Denoise does a great job with high ISO images.

I have both Canon full frame and Olympus M43 systems. I use my Olympus much more and I'm far more likely to take it with me. However if I am shooting e.g. football under floodlights, such as I was this week, or if I'm shooting an event where I use flash, then I would use my Canon. (I only have the small Olympus flash). Shooting football during daylight and particularly in pouring rain, I would use my Olympus. I don't worry at all about getting it wet.

This guy is very impressive https://www.sulasula.com/en/home/


Thanks for the reply Bebop,using the camera more with it being more portable is one of my main considerations. The guy on the website is certainly impressive and loads of info.(y)
 
Messages
2,807
Edit My Images
Yes
I think you have to weigh up what is important to you - if it's smaller and lighter, will you use it more? A tipping point for me was when I wanted longer lenses and the FF ones were so expensive and heavy. Topaz Denoise does a great job with high ISO images.

I have both Canon full frame and Olympus M43 systems. I use my Olympus much more and I'm far more likely to take it with me. However if I am shooting e.g. football under floodlights, such as I was this week, or if I'm shooting an event where I use flash, then I would use my Canon. (I only have the small Olympus flash). Shooting football during daylight and particularly in pouring rain, I would use my Olympus. I don't worry at all about getting it wet.

This guy is very impressive https://www.sulasula.com/en/home/


Thanks for the reply Bebop,using the camera more with it being more portable is one of my main considerations. The guy on the website is certainly impressive and loads of info.(y)
Im intrigued how he does the
sharpening and noise reduction to acheive the results in foto 9z16
 
Messages
10,049
Name
Jeremy Moore
Edit My Images
No
I think you have to weigh up what is important to you - if it's smaller and lighter, will you use it more? A tipping point for me was when I wanted longer lenses and the FF ones were so expensive and heavy. Topaz Denoise does a great job with high ISO images.

I have both Canon full frame and Olympus M43 systems. I use my Olympus much more and I'm far more likely to take it with me. However if I am shooting e.g. football under floodlights, such as I was this week, or if I'm shooting an event where I use flash, then I would use my Canon. (I only have the small Olympus flash). Shooting football during daylight and particularly in pouring rain, I would use my Olympus. I don't worry at all about getting it wet.

This guy is very impressive https://www.sulasula.com/en/home/

View attachment 293569

Petr Bambousek is an amazing wildlife photographer! I note from his site that you can get 15% off TopazDenoise, which is currently on offer for $59.99 ($20 off). So using the Discount Code on www.sulasula.com you get it for $50.99.
 
Messages
10,049
Name
Jeremy Moore
Edit My Images
No
The 12-100 zoom is very well-thought of as an all-purpose zoom but I have found that on certain types of subject matter - for example distant tree foliage and grassland - it produces "clumpy" detail when sharpened and subject to noise reduction. I'm sticking with it for now but in my opinion your technique needs to be absolutely spot-on for the best results. (It could be my particular lens or technique, of course.....)

Thanks Jeremy, technique is something we all have to work on.

It seems to me that m4/3 is less forgiving of poor technique than Full frame.........
 
Messages
13,296
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
Thanks, just wondering if it has anything to do with the Sync IS?
I use a Panasonic body so its just the lens stabilisation being used and all seems good
Is it possible to just use lens or ibis on an Olympus body? If so maybe try one or another and see if it improves matters.
Just a thought, have read that sometimes in certain situations stabilisation can affect things detrimentally
 

Pag

Messages
79
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
I've ordered my Oly f4 100 - 400, and paid a deposit, so with any luck I may see it this side of christmas.
 
Messages
1,171
Name
Malcolm
Edit My Images
Yes
I've ordered my Oly f4 100 - 400, and paid a deposit, so with any luck I may see it this side of christmas.
I bought mine from ffordes this week - but I think it was their last one?
 

Pag

Messages
79
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
Paul i might know where there is one available, if youre interested?
Thanks but I 've already paid the deposit, and I'm also waiting on my free F1.2 prime from Olympus which I intend to trade in against the 100-400., so I'm in no great hurry.
 
Messages
10,277
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
A reasonable appraisal mal, but not telling us anything we didn’t know already ..
Having used the PL lens for over a year I knew within the first hour of ownership this lens was something special and although it suffers the same aperture limitations as the former one the results speak for themselves .

It’s fast ,it brings the camera to life, its needle sharp even in poor light . Yes you have to think what your settings are but in the u.k that’s the name of the game anyway
 
Messages
1,171
Name
Malcolm
Edit My Images
Yes
A reasonable appraisal mal, but not telling us anything we didn’t know already ..
Having used the PL lens for over a year I knew within the first hour of ownership this lens was something special and although it suffers the same aperture limitations as the former one the results speak for themselves .

It’s fast ,it brings the camera to life, its needle sharp even in poor light . Yes you have to think what your settings are but in the u.k that’s the name of the game anyway
Mine arrived on Thursday.
I've tested it in the usual way, car number plates at 50 yards etc., and it looks very sharp.
Hopefully this morning I'll actually mange to shoot some birds at my local nature reserve (if there's anything about - it's been like the grave!)
 
Messages
10,277
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
heres a b.i.f from yesterday with the 1.4 tc fitted handheld in high winds . caught a catchlight in there eyes to . AND notice only the permitted group of six together LOL
follow the leader by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,807
Edit My Images
No
BEST PRACTICES FOR NOISE REDUCTION AND SHARPENING
Well I'd be guessing but honestly Topaz Denoise is quite amazing at times.

I thought I'd try the compare on one of my own photos - this is 100% crop of an ISO 500 SOOC raw file, so not processed at all other than the right half of the screenshot below has had Topaz Denoise applied. I think it might be hard to tell without me raising the exposure a little, but it does make quite a difference.

Screenshot 2020-09-26 at 17.23.24.jpg

edit: This isn't the latest version of Topaz Denoise either as my licence has just run out.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,807
Edit My Images
Yes
I hear you, just looked like no detail at all in the head, however most of the images have sharp eyes with everything else blurred.
 
Messages
10,277
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
heres a great tit from me ,put through the latest version of topaz de-noise .. its simply made for MFT nothing more to add
hmmmmm by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
Messages
265
Name
Joe
Edit My Images
Yes
For me; As a total newbie to photography, wildlife photography (birds etc..) M4/3, Olympus & post processing.. Topaz De Noise has been brilliant!

I understand to a degree it’s best to try get the image as best as you can in camera, however it’a so nice to know that I can take a shot and not have to worry to much about noise, because to be honest there is so many other settings to worry about as it is lol and then to know that a program like Topaz can help me out and give me excellent noise reduction, easily without making the image look fake either :)

I must also give lots of credit to Jeff aka ‘the black fox’, for telling me about it & helping me set it up!
 
Messages
1,171
Name
Malcolm
Edit My Images
Yes
Mine arrived on Thursday.
I've tested it in the usual way, car number plates at 50 yards etc., and it looks very sharp.
Hopefully this morning I'll actually mange to shoot some birds at my local nature reserve (if there's anything about - it's been like the grave!)
Oops!
So I went out this morning with my EM1 iii and new 100-400mm.
Shot 120 images of a Kingfisher - static on a perch and hovering. Problem - not one in focus, irrespective of shutter speed and focus setting, with and without converter. Have binned the lot.
Very confused and very unhappy. Even I can't get everything that wrong.
Will go out again tomorrow with the 300mm Pro as well, to see if that's any different.
The only setting I could see that might have been problematic was the C-AF release priority was set to 'on', allowing shutter release even if focus has not been achieved.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,807
Edit My Images
No
I'm not disputing what Topaz has to offer
I think it works better on some images than others and you can mask it so it only applies where you'd like it. I start with the 'auto' setting and then tweak if I think it has smoothed things out too much or sharpened too much.

I was reading Pietr's blog about Lightroom and Capture One and it seems he takes his photos into photoshop too, so he probably does do a lot of processing. I suspect those pics taken in the rainforest must be under pretty poor light.
 
Messages
2,807
Edit My Images
Yes
I think it works better on some images than others and you can mask it so it only applies where you'd like it. I start with the 'auto' setting and then tweak if I think it has smoothed things out too much or sharpened too much.

I was reading Pietr's blog about Lightroom and Capture One and it seems he takes his photos into photoshop too, so he probably does do a lot of processing. I suspect those pics taken in the rainforest must be under pretty poor light.
What I was getting at was that the example displays the beak and eye massively sharp in the processed side and no details whatsoever in the back of the head in the unprocessed side. Basically is it stating the beak and eye were just as bad?
 
Messages
2,807
Edit My Images
No
What I was getting at was that the example displays the beak and eye massively sharp in the processed side and no details whatsoever in the back of the head in the unprocessed side. Basically is it stating the beak and eye were just as bad?
Ah I see. Yes I believe that is what it is showing, though it shows it the opposite way around to Topaz, so perhaps there has been more than just noise reduction and a tad of sharpening.
 
Top