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

Has anyone had any issues with the FL-LM3 flash that comes with the e-m5ii?

It works perfectly in iAuto, but in A or S it underexposes everything. If I manually set the ISO I can make it work. But with Auto-ISO it goes to 200ISO and gives me next to nothing. Looking at the settings that iAuto uses, its the same ISO (200), SS, Aperture and no sign of flash compensation... but the flash its much more powerful.

Any ideas? It's driving me mad.
 
Billy said:
When I come from my D750 to my EM5MKII the images look noisy even at Base iso but they are 2 different cameras my olympus performs better in certain situations.
I was also finding fault with the images at first but slowly started to see the positives in the camera and now I use my Olympus 80% of the time over my D750.
It was originally purchased as a holiday camera and now it's my main camera.
Click to expand...

I find these comments interesting. I got into photography a few years ago and started on M43 (Lumix G3) and I've had an E-M5 ii for quite a while. I love it to bits but I've been awfully tempted to move to a D750. What is it that keeps you away from the D750 - is it just the size/weight? Is the difference just not enough for what you're doing?

As I start to look at investing in more expensive lenses (12-100, 40-150 PRO etc) I wonder if its right to really invest in M43 or look to something else?
 
dclutter said:
I find these comments interesting. I got into photography a few years ago and started on M43 (Lumix G3) and I've had an E-M5 ii for quite a while. I love it to bits but I've been awfully tempted to move to a D750. What is it that keeps you away from the D750 - is it just the size/weight? Is the difference just not enough for what you're doing?

As I start to look at investing in more expensive lenses (12-100, 40-150 PRO etc) I wonder if its right to really invest in M43 or look to something else?
Click to expand...
What are you shooting and printing over A3 regularly that you need a big lump of mirror flapping about.
If you need to get a bigger sensor have you considered a Sony A7?

See my earlier post on compromise.
 
Last edited:
dclutter said:
Has anyone had any issues with the FL-LM3 flash that comes with the e-m5ii?

It works perfectly in iAuto, but in A or S it underexposes everything. If I manually set the ISO I can make it work. But with Auto-ISO it goes to 200ISO and gives me next to nothing. Looking at the settings that iAuto uses, its the same ISO (200), SS, Aperture and no sign of flash compensation... but the flash its much more powerful.

Any ideas? It's driving me mad.
Click to expand...

I have had similar issues with the flash that comes with the EM1 Mk II. I was taking photos of my Canon kit ready to sell it and all the photos were dark. I ended up using flash compensation.

I have only tried it that one time so haven't really studied the problem. It did make me think I would end up getting a proper speed light. The Nissin i40 looks good value.
 
alfbranch said:
They are lower powered so they do not last as long but I am happy with them.
Click to expand...
The ones I have are exactly the same power. You can buy the white ones which are more powerful too (y)
 
dclutter said:
I find these comments interesting. I got into photography a few years ago and started on M43 (Lumix G3) and I've had an E-M5 ii for quite a while. I love it to bits but I've been awfully tempted to move to a D750. What is it that keeps you away from the D750 - is it just the size/weight? Is the difference just not enough for what you're doing?

As I start to look at investing in more expensive lenses (12-100, 40-150 PRO etc) I wonder if its right to really invest in M43 or look to something else?
Click to expand...
As you can see by previous posts everyone has differing opinions and preferences. Here's my opinions.

If I want my out and out best quality images then I choose my D750, likewise if I'm shooting sports, wildlife, or low light. For C-AF and low light there's no comparison from my experience (owned the EM10, EM5-II, and now EM1). Also the D750 files are ridiculously clean, as you will see from my previous comments and others above who've come back to Olly after using the D750.

However, for general walkabouts, holidays etc the Olly is my camera of choice. The reduction in IQ is often so small (in some scenarios hard to tell them apart) that the weight saving takes priority and is a godsend. Plus for city breaks etc the Olly's much better liveview is also a trump card. Yes I was a tad taken aback on first returning that there's noise at base ISO, but when viewing at normal size it's really a none issue IMO (y).

I genuinely love both my cameras and am very fortunate that I'm able to run two systems. I have been around the houses trying to find a lighter setup (Olly, RX100-3, G7x, Fuji XT1) and for me have come to the conclusion that Olly is the perfect choice for me. It's such a great package and arguably the best compromise between weight and IQ. For example on my recent trip to Cambridge I loved how I could just chuck my 40-150mm in my pocket and pretty much forget it was there. There's no way I could've done that with the Nikon 70-300mm VR ;)
 
The only times I take out my FF Canon gear for wildlife is when the light is poor, like it is most of the time between November and April. Olympus, with their current high end stuff for wildlife have IMHO taken a massive leap forward for less money than I would have to spend with Canon for the same performance. I am fortunate enough to use the E-M1 Mkii with the 300mm F4 and 1.4 TC.

As we are constantly reminded this gives me 840mm FF equivalent. Now that I'm learning more about using this brilliant combination I'm able to get "blazingly fast AF" (sorry about the cliche, couldn't resist) in both AF and CAF, all handheld with wonderful stabilisation.

I can get 840mm out of my 1DX and Sigma 150-600C by adding a Canon 1.4x TC but by golly it's slow and I have to use some support for this combination. The IQ from the Canon (and Nikon) FF sensor is a thing of beauty, the m4/3 sensor is half the size and I feel is "picky", none of us are really surprised by the amount of noise by comparison.
 
Idlefrog said:
It did make me think I would end up getting a proper speed light. The Nissin i40 looks good value.
Click to expand...
The Nissin i40 is a normal flash. I think speedlight is the Canon one, or something?

I posted a review on the i40 in the (impossible to navigate) reviews section. Here.
It's a sensible sized flash for sensible sized cameras.
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
The Nissin i40 is a normal flash. I think speedlight is the Canon one, or something?
.
Click to expand...

Speedlight is just an 'American-ism' for hotshoe flash...... any hotshoe flash...... you can probably blame David Hobby/Joe McNally for that one...... :)
 
Last edited:
DekHog said:
Speedlight is just an 'American-ism' for hotshoe flash...... any hotshoe flash...... blame David Hobby for that one (strobist.com)...... :)
Click to expand...
Oh dear! We've been calling them flash guns for over 40 years, and the new guys arrive on the scene want to change it to something mixed with brand names. It's a bit like in the 90's an SMS was an SMS. An everyday word in Scandinavia, Europe and parts of Asia. Then 10 years later, the US got GSM so they could finally send SMSs. And they went and renamed it to "text". And embarrassingly, it seems the UK are following them.
 
Last edited:
I thought speedlight was used to distinguish between a flash mounted to the camera from studio type flashes on stands. I'm English and didn't realise it was an Americanism. At least there isn't a Z in it the word [emoji33]
 
The term wasn't used here a few years back. I had flash guns, being bracket or hot shoe mounted. And studio flash heads. Speedlite is new. And so is strobe. But the equipment has been around for a long time.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
The ones I have are exactly the same power. You can buy the white ones which are more powerful too (y)
Click to expand...
On further inspection, whilst my ExPro are the same mAh at 1220, the voltage is different at 7.2V vs 7.6V of the OEM so it would seem Alf is right. That being said, I've not noticed any difference. The white ones are the same voltage, and higher mAh at 1400.

All my other ExPros have been the same though ;)
 
I had a little bit of time before going to work so I went to Wasdale as the weather was passing through nicely I only had a couple of hours so here is what I got.


Wasdale weather by Alf Branch, on Flickr


Wasdale weather panoramic by Alf Branch, on Flickr


Wasdale weather LE by Alf Branch, on Flickr


Wasdale weather Panoramic 2 by Alf Branch, on Flickr




The Long exposure was with my E-M5II and 9-18 using a Cokin Nuances 10 stop
The other were handheld using my E-M1 and 12-40

I take both cameras when I shoot Landscapes and use on handheld and one on a tripod.
 
I wish I had scenery like that so close by. The long exposure is my favourite as I like the composition but I like the 2nd one too.
 
alfbranch said:
I had a little bit of time before going to work so I went to Wasdale as the weather was passing through nicely I only had a couple of hours so here is what I got.


Wasdale weather by Alf Branch, on Flickr


Wasdale weather panoramic by Alf Branch, on Flickr


Wasdale weather LE by Alf Branch, on Flickr


Wasdale weather Panoramic 2 by Alf Branch, on Flickr




The Long exposure was with my E-M5II and 9-18 using a Cokin Nuances 10 stop
The other were handheld using my E-M1 and 12-40

I take both cameras when I shoot Landscapes and use on handheld and one on a tripod.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure which I like best! The rainbow in the last one is a lovely touch.

Great shots.

Ps the landscape shots on your Flickr account are spectacular
 
Last edited:
alfbranch said:
I had a little bit of time before going to work so I went to Wasdale as the weather was passing through nicely I only had a couple of hours so here is what I got.


Wasdale weather by Alf Branch, on Flickr


Wasdale weather panoramic by Alf Branch, on Flickr


Wasdale weather LE by Alf Branch, on Flickr


Wasdale weather Panoramic 2 by Alf Branch, on Flickr




The Long exposure was with my E-M5II and 9-18 using a Cokin Nuances 10 stop
The other were handheld using my E-M1 and 12-40

I take both cameras when I shoot Landscapes and use on handheld and one on a tripod.
Click to expand...
Very nice Alf. This is a case of the grass is always greener I think as I'm lucky enough to live in the Peak District but I wish I had scenery like this on my doorstep ;)
 
Sorry it should say tail not "tad" bloody sausage fingers and auto correct on my phone
 
dclutter said:
I find these comments interesting. I got into photography a few years ago and started on M43 (Lumix G3) and I've had an E-M5 ii for quite a while. I love it to bits but I've been awfully tempted to move to a D750. What is it that keeps you away from the D750 - is it just the size/weight? Is the difference just not enough for what you're doing?

As I start to look at investing in more expensive lenses (12-100, 40-150 PRO etc) I wonder if its right to really invest in M43 or look to something else?
Click to expand...

I have recently bought the Oly 40-150 f/2.8 PRO. Before m4/3 I was using Canon full frame. To get an equivalent lens on Canon full frame I would need something like the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8, which is huge and very heavy. In fact the Canon 100-400 f/4-5.6 was already too much for me because I bought it new and basically never took it anywhere. The Oly 40-150 f/2.8 is similar in size and weight to a standard 70-300 f/4-5.6 full frame zoom lens, but its build and optical quality is far better. I still have a Canon 5D MkI but it gets used only 10-20% of the time.

Before you decide to invest in a full frame camera + lens, go to a camera shop and try to handle a few typical setups and consider if you would be happy to bring all this stuff along when you travel etc. If you want the best high ISO performance, full frame is the way to go, but for me it meant that I left most of my stuff at home most of the time. If I took my 5D, I would bring 1 or 2 lenses at most. By contrast, I was in Indonesia over Christmas and happily brought 2 m4/3 bodies and 6 lenses along, most of which I actually carried with me throughout a typical day in a small backpack with room to spare.
 
Thanks everyone for the responses. I'm still stuck, but I think what I probably need to do is borrow/rent a FF to see if the size/weight bothers me.

I know I need to invest to get the images I want, either in lenses in MFT, or both body/lenses. My setup does very well and was fairly frugal (e-m5ii, oly 9-18mm, pana 20mm, oly 45mm, pana 45-200). The 45-200 is small and light but its pretty average, and to get something decent I need to spend a fair amount hence exploring the idea of going all in on investing in FF (i.e. if I'm going to spend that much, why not spend a bit more and go FF).

alfbranch said:
What are you shooting and printing over A3 regularly that you need a big lump of mirror flapping about.
If you need to get a bigger sensor have you considered a Sony A7?

See my earlier post on compromise.
Click to expand...

It's not so much the print size, but struggling in low light situations (ISO 3200 is fairly borderline even on smaller images). I've looked at the A7, but the lens selection is still not quite there (though you can adapt) and you end up with only saving a bit on the body, because the lenses are just as big/heavy, or you're using adapted ones.

FYI I do a lot of travel and often try to get some nice evening/night shots in cities or landscapes. Also keen to do some more night photography. Been chasing a few birds lately too.
 
If you have the FF itch you may as well scratch it or you'll always be wondering and everyone's requirements are different. I sold all my FF gear after getting an EM10 and a year later realising I hadn't picked up the Nikon at all.
 
dclutter said:
Thanks everyone for the responses. I'm still stuck, but I think what I probably need to do is borrow/rent a FF to see if the size/weight bothers me.

I know I need to invest to get the images I want, either in lenses in MFT, or both body/lenses. My setup does very well and was fairly frugal (e-m5ii, oly 9-18mm, pana 20mm, oly 45mm, pana 45-200). The 45-200 is small and light but its pretty average, and to get something decent I need to spend a fair amount hence exploring the idea of going all in on investing in FF (i.e. if I'm going to spend that much, why not spend a bit more and go FF).



It's not so much the print size, but struggling in low light situations (ISO 3200 is fairly borderline even on smaller images). I've looked at the A7, but the lens selection is still not quite there (though you can adapt) and you end up with only saving a bit on the body, because the lenses are just as big/heavy, or you're using adapted ones.

FYI I do a lot of travel and often try to get some nice evening/night shots in cities or landscapes. Also keen to do some more night photography. Been chasing a few birds lately too.
Click to expand...
TBH it sounds as though you could do with two systems like me, as there's no ideal solution. 3200 ISO on m4/3 is too noisy for me and I will only use in extreme situations, however I will use 12800 on my D750. For BIF I still don't think you can beat DSLR as good as the mirrorless are these days. I don't think it will be long before mirrorless are there though looking at the EM1-II and XT2. However, as mentioned previously, for travel FF is a bit of a pain imo (although some are happy to carry it). Even carrying my D750 with 24-120mm f4 can get tiresome, especially in busy cities where you're pushing past people (I have my camera on a sling strap). If you then want to take something like a 70-300mm then it all gets very bulky very quickly. Being able to chuck my 40-150mm in my pocket is a godsend.

My main photography is Landscapes, wildlife and sport hence my want for DSLR and therefore if I was to choose only one system it would be this as I don't do a lot of travel. However, if I did a lot of travel it would be m4/3 all the way for me. As you say the Sony FE mount isn't there yet, plus the glass is still big. bulky and heavy. Fuji's a nice system and the lenses are great, however the rendering in certain landscapes and certain times with skin was very unpleasant hence me getting rid of it.
 
^
Absolutely right about travelling with gear. I'm off to Israel next month to catch the early Spring migration, Packing the m4/3 gear into a backpack and lugging it about is almost a pleasure.
A few years ago we went to Florida and I packed 2 Canon bodies, a 500mm F4 and a few other lenses. If it hadn't been for my very strong (and much younger) brother-in-law I'd have been well snookered!
 
Nawty said:
If you have the FF itch you may as well scratch it or you'll always be wondering and everyone's requirements are different. I sold all my FF gear after getting an EM10 and a year later realising I hadn't picked up the Nikon at all.
Click to expand...

Haha I have a feeling you're right on this one. My biggest challenge will be wife approval - any tips ;-)?

snerkler said:
TBH it sounds as though you could do with two systems like me, as there's no ideal solution. 3200 ISO on m4/3 is too noisy for me and I will only use in extreme situations, however I will use 12800 on my D750. For BIF I still don't think you can beat DSLR as good as the mirrorless are these days. I don't think it will be long before mirrorless are there though looking at the EM1-II and XT2. However, as mentioned previously, for travel FF is a bit of a pain imo (although some are happy to carry it). Even carrying my D750 with 24-120mm f4 can get tiresome, especially in busy cities where you're pushing past people (I have my camera on a sling strap). If you then want to take something like a 70-300mm then it all gets very bulky very quickly. Being able to chuck my 40-150mm in my pocket is a godsend.

My main photography is Landscapes, wildlife and sport hence my want for DSLR and therefore if I was to choose only one system it would be this as I don't do a lot of travel. However, if I did a lot of travel it would be m4/3 all the way for me. As you say the Sony FE mount isn't there yet, plus the glass is still big. bulky and heavy. Fuji's a nice system and the lenses are great, however the rendering in certain landscapes and certain times with skin was very unpleasant hence me getting rid of it.
Click to expand...

This had crossed my mind. I do love throwing the E-M5ii + 20mm in my coat pocket! My wife has a Panasonic G7 (well we in the process of trading to a G80) so it's not like i'd be looking to give up the lenses. She'll never move to FF due to weight. So keeping the E-m5ii wouldn't be a huge impact.

I have a feeling if we got a FF - I'd end up carrying and my wife using it. Usually how these things work out for me ;-).
 
dclutter said:
Haha I have a feeling you're right on this one. My biggest challenge will be wife approval - any tips ;-)?
Click to expand...

That's easy, don't tell her and disguise it as a sandwich.

32833782595_b6bef604c3_z.jpg
 
dclutter said:
My setup does very well and was fairly frugal (e-m5ii, oly 9-18mm, pana 20mm, oly 45mm, pana 45-200). The 45-200 is small and light but its pretty average, and to get something decent I need to spend a fair amount hence exploring the idea of going all in on investing in FF (i.e. if I'm going to spend that much, why not spend a bit more and go FF).
Click to expand...

On the long end there are 2 alternatives to improve optical performance: the obvious one is to get the Oly 45-150 f/2.8 but the other one is to get the Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6 OIS. I have both of these and the 45-200. For travel I would bring the Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6 OIS without a shadow of a doubt. You lose a bit of reach but it's even more compact and lighter than the 45-200 and optical performance is pretty impressive for a £100 lens (and better than the 45-200 in my experience). See also the following review: http://www.photozone.de/m43/845-panasonic45150f456.

In fact my travel setup looks a lot like the setup you have: E-M10II, GM5, Oly 9-18, Oly 12 f/2, Oly 17 f/1.8, Oly 45 f/1.8, Panasonic 45-150mm f/4-5.6 OIS, Panasonic 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS. As far as optical performance is concerned, I think the primes in this lineup are excellent and the zooms are very good, especially if you factor in price paid.
 
@dclutter

I can sympathise with your dilemma.

I’ve run dual systems in an effort to decide on whether the grass is greener but each time I have sold up and gone back to (m)4/3rds exclusively. My last foray into other territory was a Sigma SD Quattro and Art glass, the output from this camera rivals medium format/top end of 35mm for resolution and it’s as bulky as some 35mm frame cameras too.

And for me that is the key driver - bulk verses output.

The SD output is stunning but it didn’t get enough use. More often than not I would end up taking my E-M1 or E-M5 MKII with primes instead of my other gear.
On the whole for my purposes m4/3rds delivers and is quite capable of prints with excellent quality @ 60cm x 80cm (I’m looking at one this size on my wall right now). So since the Sigma, Fuji and the Pentax excursions I have now decided to stick exclusively with m4/3rds, especially as my new E-M1 MkII arrived a couple of days ago. Oh and a single system makes more sense from the financial side of things too.

Of course YMMV.:)
 
Thanks the Peak Design Cuff wrist strap recommendation - turned up today and I really like it.

PL25 is also sitting in the Amazon locker waiting for me - just too cold/snowy to venture outside to collect it :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top