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

Photopaque said:
The mark looks very similar to the one in that thread but in a different direction. I wonder if it was caused when assembling the camera. Mine is only 3 months old so i have contacted Olympus. Hopefully they should arrange collection and fix it within a week. Well other brands manage this so lets see.......hehe.
Click to expand...

Yep they look much the same,maybe their were some bad cameras send out with faulty sensor :(
 
Hmm just looking at the pre-order offer on the EM5 MkII free messenger bag and 5 1/2 year warranty (odd amount !? ) im tempted sell one of my Canon lenses to give me that little extra i need to get the offer in time.
Id not bothered so much usually but that and fact i can get some discount makes it all very tempting to get :D

Ah damn id still struggle to get it if i did sell a lens.. don't fancy getting rid of 2 lenses only to want buy them back 2 week later :eek: still might be a okay deal for someone the promotion.
 
Last edited:
To remove the well-known special smudge-line you actually need to LICK YOUR SENSOR.
Insert tongue, lick upwards seven times.

You will then have a special bond with your camera. It increases C-AF BIF hitrate, or so I've heard.
 
Had a fail. Brought the e-m10 to Sofia with me. Must've accidentally knocked the switch and turned it on pre take off...land in Sofia and no battery life.

I have a spare battery at home but didn't think I'd need it. D'oh.
 
Nope :( oh well. I'm working anyway but would've been a good opportunity
 
It'll teach me to be more careful / more prepared. And I was going to bring the xf1 instead...Sod's law
 
When I'm out and about, I always use 2 batteries every time. One to run the camera. And the other for "massive" peace of mind.
 
Last edited:
Olympus gonna clean or replace my sensor. Will send it off on monday after i have had a play with my new 12-40.
Must not buy another body while its away.....lol
 
Just got my E-M1 today, ive got the 12-40, 40-150 (not the pro!) and panny 100-300mm but after a recommendation for a fast tele lens. The 50-200 4/3 seems to get good reviews but are there any others?
 
I was looking for longer than that really, i see the 300mm f4 is due out this year but dread to think the price of that!
 
Euan said:
I was looking for longer than that really, i see the 300mm f4 is due out this year but dread to think the price of that!
Click to expand...

You can always add the 4/3rds EC-14 teleconveter to a 50-200 SWD, it's a perfect combo. Gives 283 mm FL.
Having said that the new MC-14 before the MMF converter would also do the job.
 
I'd love to know about the 55-200 too, but now you've mentioned the Pany 2.8 that is quite interesting.

My major concern about the 40-140 2.8 is the size\weight - I moved to m43 to get away from big lenses and while I grant you its smaller and lighter than the full frame offerings it is undeniably big and heavy.

Using whats becoming one of my favourite sites I thought I'd compare (link) and the 35-100 keeps for me the ideal of the m43 format - looking deeper I wish it had the close range that the 40-150 has for macro style shooting which is something I would want, but that size - I just have difficulty getting over that.

Has anyone had real life handling of both and what were their findings, especially given the price difference too.
 
I saw one out in the wild and it does look big but thats due to the hood.
I know what you mean about switching for size so why get big lenses. But the size of the m4/3 pro lenses are still tiny compared to crop or FF.
 
I totally agree, in a like for like they are so much smaller - but when the reason for swapping from FF is to reduce size, or in my case I had wrist\backache after a day out then it doesn't really matter what its compared to - its either too heavy or not.
 
JohnN said:
I totally agree, in a like for like they are so much smaller - but when the reason for swapping from FF is to reduce size, or in my case I had wrist\backache after a day out then it doesn't really matter what its compared to - its either too heavy or not.
Click to expand...
Pentax Q? Hehe
 
JohnN said:
I'd love to know about the 55-200 too, but now you've mentioned the Pany 2.8 that is quite interesting.

My major concern about the 40-140 2.8 is the size\weight - I moved to m43 to get away from big lenses and while I grant you its smaller and lighter than the full frame offerings it is undeniably big and heavy.

Using whats becoming one of my favourite sites I thought I'd compare (link) and the 35-100 keeps for me the ideal of the m43 format - looking deeper I wish it had the close range that the 40-150 has for macro style shooting which is something I would want, but that size - I just have difficulty getting over that.

Has anyone had real life handling of both and what were their findings, especially given the price difference too.
Click to expand...

I've had both John, I should rephrase that.... I had the 35-100 f/2.8 and sold it on when I got the 40-150 f/2.8.
Both lenses offer excellent optical quality, both are splash and dust proof, both focus internally.
The 35-100 is smaller and lighter but looses a fair bit in terms of reach and close up ability. And the big plus is the MC-14 works extremely well with Oly Pro lens (as you would expect).
To my eye a 40-150 shades the 35-100 in image quality and build.
Size of the 40-150, yes it's bigger and heavier but as Photopaque says the hood gives the impression of much more bulk than there is.
I will quite happily walk about with mine on the E-M1 on trek, much lighter and smaller than the Pentax gear I had a few years back.

Here's one from lunchtime today with the 40-150 Pro and the MC-14 @ 210 mm
 
Last edited:
Huw - that is a great shot and I'd be drawn to the close up ability as I could see myself using it for dragonflies.

One day I'll no doubt cave in but it will have to be when they're popping up second hand - who knows that limbo I hat e so much when selling might work to my favour for once :D

Shame the TC doesn't play well with others though.
 
Last edited:
JohnN said:
I'd love to know about the 55-200 too, but now you've mentioned the Pany 2.8 that is quite interesting.

My major concern about the 40-140 2.8 is the size\weight - I moved to m43 to get away from big lenses and while I grant you its smaller and lighter than the full frame offerings it is undeniably big and heavy.

Using whats becoming one of my favourite sites I thought I'd compare (link) and the 35-100 keeps for me the ideal of the m43 format - looking deeper I wish it had the close range that the 40-150 has for macro style shooting which is something I would want, but that size - I just have difficulty getting over that.

Has anyone had real life handling of both and what were their findings, especially given the price difference too.
Click to expand...

I have used them both 55-200 & the 35-100 F2.8,still got the 35-100 great little lens thats easy to use and not much weight,the 55-200 i used to use on the Olympus DSLR it a lot bigger and heavier (n)
 
The 40-150 Pro is smaller than the 50-200 SWD f/2.8-3.5, a superb lens that I've also had the pleasure of owning/using with my now long gone Oly D-SLR gear.
 
Regarding weight of lenses, when I first bought the 40-150 I actually thought I been conned in some way, at first I thought that the box must be empty and then after I opened it that the lens must just be a plastic display model, I still find it hard to get me head around how light these things actually are, my Fuji 18-135 must weigh as much as my 14-42, 40-150 and 75-300 combined, I might slightly exaggerate there but I'll check later.
 
Greytop said:
The 40-150 Pro is smaller than the 50-200 SWD f/2.8-3.5, a superb lens that I've also had the pleasure of owning/using with my now long gone Oly D-SLR gear.
Click to expand...
I too have had both and agree about the size and weight.
As said before, with the lens hood retracted the 40-150 pro isn't too big at all. It does weigh lots more than the 40-150R but is in a different league, and focuses way faster than my 50-200 ever did.
I had to sell my 7-14, 35mm macro and 40-150R to help cover the cost of the pro but it is so worth it.
 
True. And to top a good week, the electrician has just put his foot straight through the ceiling.

Is it beer o'clock yet ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top