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

Incredible detail. I took some iffy moon shots earlier but had trouble with my little 200mm lens, must upload them to the laptop and see how they look. Of course they will be nothing close to that!
 
Cagey75 said:
Incredible detail. I took some iffy moon shots earlier but had trouble with my little 200mm lens, must upload them to the laptop and see how they look. Of course they will be nothing close to that!
Click to expand...
Thanks Keith, I enjoy taking images of the Moon, you could probably say that I'm slightly obsessive about it looking at my flickr page :)
 
Greytop said:
Thanks Keith, I enjoy taking images of the Moon, you could probably say that I'm slightly obsessive about it looking at my flickr page :)
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with that, I have a fair amount of various moon shots on my page too from through the years :) My mother was fascinated by the moon, she was of the belief that the cycles of the moon affected our minds. She would call us 'lunatics' whenever we acted up during full moons :LOL: and now every time there is one it reminds me of her, so it's cool :)
 
Greytop said:
Anyone else use Capture One Pro? Or am I the only one (been using it for years) :)
Click to expand...

Me, been using it about a year now and while it's different and takes getting used to, it's way better than LR in my view. Im still on V9 though, dont feel that v10 is worth the extra £7 a month.
 
Donnie said:
Me, been using it about a year now and while it's different and takes getting used to, it's way better than LR in my view. Im still on V9 though, dont feel that v10 is worth the extra £7 a month.
Click to expand...

I'm on 10.21, I go for the perpetual license, usually upgrading each year when a new version comes out. Not sure whether that works out cheaper or more expensive though.
I've always been very impressed with the amount of detail it can extract from a RAW file, great bit of software.
 
Here's one of our Norwegian Forest Cat roaming around, EM5II and 75mm, cropped a bit.

38609073516_7f8635dfcb_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
Still getting to grips with the 300mm F4 Pro lens, but one things for sure, it's bitingly sharp. Conditions were far from ideal, very cold (bitterly cold <5°C) windy and raining with the occasional spot of sunshine. Conditions which may would have you believe only APS-C or FF cameras can shoot in. Well I beg to differ.







 
Sootchucker said:
Still getting to grips with the 300mm F4 Pro lens, but one things for sure, it's bitingly sharp. Conditions were far from ideal, very cold (bitterly cold <5°C) windy and raining with the occasional spot of sunshine. Conditions which may would have you believe only APS-C or FF cameras can shoot in. Well I beg to differ.









Yep, that works a treat.

Although for the money I'd expect it to be superb.



Click to expand...
 
Sootchucker said:
Still getting to grips with the 300mm F4 Pro lens, but one things for sure, it's bitingly sharp. Conditions were far from ideal, very cold (bitterly cold <5°C) windy and raining with the occasional spot of sunshine. Conditions which may would have you believe only APS-C or FF cameras can shoot in. Well I beg to differ.







Click to expand...

Lovely bird images. What do you use for noise control? they're very clean
 
Keith, if they are shot at a modest ISO's (say ISO 800 downwards) I just tend to use Lightrooms own NR with a lot of masking applied. If shoot slightly higher (ISO1,600 upwards) then I tend to develop in LR, then turn off all sharpening and noise reduction in LR, then select "Edit in Photoshop", and when in PS, using my Topaz Labs "Denoise 5" plug-in for NR and then run it though the Topaz Labs "InFocus" plug-in before saving and sending back to LR. Seems to work for me ?

Whilst the 300mm F4 is an expensive lens, the beauty for me is that extra stop of light. If I used my Nikon D500 for example, which has at least 1 stop better high ISO capabilities than my Olympus, I would be using my Tamron 150-600 lens (or if I owned one the Nikon 200-500 lens), and both these lenses would be F5.6/6.3 at the long end and so this tends to mitigate the ISO difference. Then I have a much smaller / lighter package with superb image stabilization and great image quality. Obviously I still have to be realistic with my ISO's so only shoot up to around ISO 3200-4000 max on the Olympus, whereas on the D500 I can go up to ISO12,800 with careful exposure and processing so it sort of depends on what the conditions will be like on the day. Also, whilst I have the 1.4x teleconverter (to give me 840mm effective), that reduces my aperture back to F5.6 so tend to only use that when the light conditions are good (i.e. birds in the open and not in shade / undergrowth).

TBH, it's one of the reasons I sold my Fuji kit, as the Olympus system does me for 80% of my shooting and when the conditions get tricky I have my D500 and long lenses (as well as a few fast primes) and for me at least, the Fuji (whilst a very nice system), did really add anything new for me image quality wise, that I couldn't get with the other two.
 
Last edited:
Sootchucker said:
Keith, if they are shot at a modest ISO's (say ISO 800 downwards) I just tend to use Lightrooms own NR with a lot of masking applied. If shoot slightly higher (ISO1,600 upwards) then I tend to develop in LR, then turn off all sharpening and noise reduction in LR, then select "Edit in Photoshop", and when in PS, using my Topaz Labs "Denoise 5" plug-in for NR and then run it though the Topaz Labs "InFocus" plug-in before saving and sending back to LR. Seems to work for me ?

Whilst the 300mm F4 is an expensive lens, the beauty for me is that extra stop of light. If I used my Nikon D500 for example, which has at least 1 stop better high ISO capabilities than my Olympus, I would be using my Tamron 150-600 lens (or if I owned one the Nikon 200-500 lens), and both these lenses would be F5.6/6.3 at the long end and so this tends to mitigate the ISO difference. Then I have a much smaller / lighter package with superb image stabilization and great image quality. Obviously I still have to be realistic with my ISO's so only shoot up to around ISO 3200-4000 max on the Olympus, whereas on the D500 I can go up to ISO12,800 with careful exposure and processing so it sort of depends on what the conditions will be like on the day. Also, whilst I have the 1.4x teleconverter (to give me 840mm effective), that reduces my aperture back to F5.6 so tend to only use that when the light conditions are good (i.e. birds in the open and not in shade / undergrowth).

TBH, it's one of the reasons I sold my Fuji kit, as the Olympus system does me for 80% of my shooting and when the conditions get tricky I have my D500 and long lenses (as well as a few fast primes) and for me at least, the Fuji (whilst a very nice system), did really add anything new for me image quality wise, that I couldn't get with the other two.
Click to expand...


Good stuff, thanks for the info. I would love that lens, but not a chance of that anytime soon.

I have a fairly ancient version of PS, must check it to see what plug ins I have, I mostly just use LR. I do similar NR, controlled luminance adjust and masking. I got an old em5 to mess about with, see how I find the files, and so far I'm wondering a bit what all the fuss is about when it comes to the smaller sensor. I've used FF and APSC for years, so while I do notice differences, those differences are nothing near what I see people constantly rant about. I've directly compared my X-T1 to the em5 with similar lenses and settings at various ISO levels, and I'd say the Fuji is barely half a stop better, but it's not as simple as that. I found that Fuji add NR whether you want it or not, and the noise that is there seems artificially 'softened' because of it. The files are slightly under exposed at the same values toward the Olympus ones too. I feel that this helps give the impression that the Fuji is better than it actually is for noise handling. When I lift the exposure slightly to match there is less of a difference if any between 800 - 6400, the mft sensor seems to produce a 'sandier' grain but it feels more realistic. The Fuji is still better overall for straight up IQ, but I know a lot of that is down to the lens, the 35 1.4 is a tough one to beat for sharpness and clarity. But the liitle cheap and cheerful Pany 25 isn't all that far behind.
 
I found the same with my Fuji system I just sold (my X-T2 and a set of lenses). Whilst there's no doubt the Fuji X system is a very nice camera system with quality lenses, I just found that as you say, certainly up to ISO 3200 I wasn't seeing much in it between the EM1 MKII and the X-T2, but obviously exposure and the lens used also comes into play. Of course there was a difference (the physical size of sensors dictate that), but not as much as I was expecting. Like Fuji the Olympus lenses are bitingly sharp and contrasty (as are the Panasonic "Leica" lenses), and I don't think there's one single dud in the line up. I was also surprised to see that at the extended high ISO's (say ISO12,800) where the little Olympus really struggles, contrary to what I'd read, I found (again in my experience) that the D500 produced much nicer files that cleaned up superbly than my X-T2 which started to look really rather horrible.

Of course I have to say (before I'm strung up from the nearest lamp post) that I'm not saying that the Fuji System isn't good - it is, very good in fact, and if I didn't have a lot of money invested in both Nikon and M4/3 and was starting from scratch, I can see how this system would be very attractive. It's got great lenses, a great company behind them who seem to actually care about it's users and constantly give new features via their "Kaizen" updates, it's just that for me, it didn't really bing anything spectacularly new to the game against what I already had. I must admit I did buy into the Fuji hype that somehow Fuji files were as good as full frame and nothing else came near (which is why I had to try it), but as good as the images are, for me at least they weren't spectacularly better that what I already owned, and that coupled with actually having to use different PP methods and even different software to get the best out of the Fuji RAF files, meant it just wasn't' for me.

What I think it does show however is how far Micro Four Thirds and the the Fuji X system have come in such a short space of time, and how lethargic it makes Canon and Nikon look, where they are still pushing big heavy FF bodies and lenses with no serious mirrorless equivalent from them at the time being. They might have just missed the boat already ?
 
Last edited:
The amazing IBIS and those cheap yet excellent little prime lenses are what attract me most to M43. I just can't afford to buy Fuji's nicer glass atm, or even an X-T2, which I would want nice glass for anyway. I had a D800E for years, bought one of the first ones in Ireland, I was a bit more flush then [€3200 at the time], had it pre-ordered and got some really nice glass to go with. But after years of using it, I miss nothing about it! Not the gigantic files, the weight or the bulkiness.

When i check my Flickr stats [which doesn't cover even half my shooting, but it is the best indicator I have] I see that I am mostly shooting at lower ISO, up to 1600, in the 2.8 - 4 aperture zone with mid focal lengths [35-80] I only need a cheap tele for garden birds. The rest of the time I'm happy with primes, and M43 has a lot to offer in that dept for reasonable money. I can actually consider buying a new lens at any time, rather than worrying about missing bills for it :D

I am pondering selling the XT1 to get a G80 or em5II and some primes. I'm never tied to any one system, I like it that way. If it goes tits up, I can just sell off and rebuy the old gear
 
Just processed this one - nothing special just a head portrait of a grey squirrel, but I think it debunks the myth that micro four thirds smears all the detail away at high ISO. This was at ISO 2500 (OK so not super high, but not bad nonetheless), but when zoomed into 100% (have a look at it on my Flickr for a better view) I was stunned by the detail this lens and sensor was able to record, and most importantly the AF was absolutely spot on (no front or back focus here).

 
Last edited:
Whatever the ISO, looks good to me and perfectly exposed.
 
I get nervous when i go over 2K with the Fuji :D nowt wrong with either of those images. The detail on the squirrel is brill
 
I stopped worrying about noise when i realized the images where only for me, yes i put them on the web but if they are not sharp enough or too noisy for some folk well its not my problem.
 
mikew said:
I stopped worrying about noise when i realized the images where only for me, yes i put them on the web but if they are not sharp enough or too noisy for some folk well its not my problem.
Click to expand...


It depends on the image, I have shot at 10K in the past, but only when there's no other way. A little noise can add character to an image, I do love gritty B&W too. But if you were doing say natural light portraiture, that's when it matters, or macro. With very close up macro you just don't want noise interfering with finer detail. In general, I'm the same, I was exaggerating a little ;) But I still prefer to stay below 320-0 no matter the camera.
 
Sootchucker said:
Still getting to grips with the 300mm F4 Pro lens, but one things for sure, it's bitingly sharp. Conditions were far from ideal, very cold (bitterly cold <5°C) windy and raining with the occasional spot of sunshine. Conditions which may would have you believe only APS-C or FF cameras can shoot in. Well I beg to differ.







Click to expand...
Wonderful set of images, the detail is pretty amazing, especially if you have used noise reduction software on them.
 
Had my first serious shoot last Sunday with my OMD-EM5 MKII & Zuiko M45mm f1.8 lens here one of my first frames a jpg available light indoors
iso1000 f2.0 1/125sec

\Sara by Philip Higgins, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Sootchucker said:
Still getting to grips with the 300mm F4 Pro lens, but one things for sure, it's bitingly sharp. Conditions were far from ideal, very cold (bitterly cold <5°C) windy and raining with the occasional spot of sunshine. Conditions which may would have you believe only APS-C or FF cameras can shoot in. Well I beg to differ.







Click to expand...
Lovely set of images !
 
Cagey75 said:
How do you find the 45 1.8? Looks to be a nice lens, I've been eyeing that or the Panasonic 42.5 1.7



A few from today in Dublin City with the em5 :


Love on Grafton street by K G, on Flickr

Waiting by K G, on Flickr

Dublin Spire by K G, on Flickr

Street debate by K G, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Nice set of street shot images (y)
The Oly 45mm f1.8 is a cracking lens it was highly recommended to me by a number of togs and I'm not disappointed in any way its a bargain at the price I purchased s/h and also the 17mm but the 2.8 version.
I would like to add a 25mm but not to sure if i should go with OLY 1.8 or Pan 1.7 so I'm holding out at the moment but I'm mighty impressed with IBIS. Just wish it was on my Fuji so i could get the best out of my XF Primes.
 
Phiggys said:
Nice set of street shot images (y)
The Oly 45mm f1.8 is a cracking lens it was highly recommended to me by a number of togs and I'm not disappointed in any way its a bargain at the price I purchased s/h and also the 17mm but the 2.8 version.
I would like to add a 25mm but not to sure if i should go with OLY 1.8 or Pan 1.7 so I'm holding out at the moment but I'm mighty impressed with IBIS. Just wish it was on my Fuji so i could get the best out of my XF Primes.
Click to expand...

IBIS and cheap and cheerful primes are the very reasons for me giving MFT a good go ;)

I shot this one hand held at 1/8, and it was bitter cold so add in cold shivers. It's just a tester shot but it shows what is possible to me, I could go longer on a warm night perhaps :D, couldn't have done it with the X-T1:

Dublin City by K G, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
IBIS and cheap and cheerful primes are the very reasons for me giving MFT a good go ;)

I shot this one hand held at 1/8, and it was bitter cold so add in cold shivers. It's just a tester shot but it shows what is possible to me, I could go longer on a warm night perhaps :D, couldn't have done it with the X-T1:

Dublin City by K G, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Wow thats a cracking image Im well impressed a Stirling job sir (y):olympus:
 
Phiggys said:
Nice set of street shot images (y)
The Oly 45mm f1.8 is a cracking lens it was highly recommended to me by a number of togs and I'm not disappointed in any way its a bargain at the price I purchased s/h and also the 17mm but the 2.8 version.
I would like to add a 25mm but not to sure if i should go with OLY 1.8 or Pan 1.7 so I'm holding out at the moment but I'm mighty impressed with IBIS. Just wish it was on my Fuji so i could get the best out of my XF Primes.
Click to expand...
FWIW Panasonic 25 - obviously there are differences but the Panasonic is a bargain at £150 there's one in the classifieds here for less
I've been sorting my Flickr into albums by equipment - mainly as self justification for upgrading my Olympus 17mm f2.8 to the 1.8 ;) - if you want to see some examples.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/amcuk/albums
 
Phiggys said:
Lovely set of images !
Click to expand...

Cheers :) :plus1:

I have an Olympus M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f/4-5.6 R on the way, just got it to try out for my garden bird shots. I have an old MF lens I use for it, but sometimes .... I'm lazy :D I'll find other uses for it too, I hear it's a pretty decent lens for the money.

I have that and the Pany 25 1.7, now I need something wider, or in between those. Maybe just even one of the many kit lenses, for video and wider general shots. I also like the idea of the 42.5 Pany or 45mm Oly. Since I have the G80 now the 42.5 might be better, it also focuses closer, which I like.
 
Cagey75 said:
Cheers :) :plus1:

I have an Olympus M.Zuiko ED 40-150mm f/4-5.6 R on the way, just got it to try out for my garden bird shots. I have an old MF lens I use for it, but sometimes .... I'm lazy :D I'll find other uses for it too, I hear it's a pretty decent lens for the money.

I have that and the Pany 25 1.7, now I need something wider, or in between those. Maybe just even one of the many kit lenses, for video and wider general shots. I also like the idea of the 42.5 Pany or 45mm Oly. Since I have the G80 now the 42.5 might be better, it also focuses closer, which I like.
Click to expand...


That 40-150 R lens is stupid good for the money.

Best £70 I've ever spent on photo stuff............... ever!

You'll be amazed.
 
GreenNinja67 said:
That 40-150 R lens is stupid good for the money.

Best £70 I've ever spent on photo stuff............... ever!

You'll be amazed.
Click to expand...

Got mine for £79 from MPB, I was tempted to get a 100-300 but reviews on that are very mixed. For my needs 150mm with a bit of crop should be sufficient.
 
Cagey75 said:
Got mine for £79 from MPB, I was tempted to get a 100-300 but reviews on that are very mixed. For my needs 150mm with a bit of crop should be sufficient.
Click to expand...

I got the Panasonic 100-300mm but not been able to get out atm to try it out:(
 
Wow some fantastic images posted today, better add my own :). Had a quick walkabout with the Oly 45mm which came today. Conditions weren't great, but I wanted some snow shots and I'm pretty certain it'll be all gone tonight, the snow that is!

Snowtrees by Steve Vickers, on Flickr

Powerlines by Steve Vickers, on Flickr
 
Another from Sunday shoot
Had my first serious shoot last Sunday with my OMD-EM5 MKII & Zuiko M45mm f1.8 lens here one of my first frames a jpg available light indoors
iso1000 f2.0 1/125sec

Sara by Philip Higgins, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
I seem to have messed up my em5 mkii, I cant get the live view on the LCD, its just displaying the SCP instead. Help, I've been cycling through the menus for the last hour!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top