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

Oh James N I do like that!
 
I see Olympus are making a announcement in September about a new OMD camera.
My issues is do I wait or get the E-M5 that is on sale at Jessops with interest free credit and a free battery grip??
How much better do people think the new one will be.
 
Tucksy81 said:
How much better do people think the new one will be.
Click to expand...

Recent rumours have been particularly vague on this one, so it's risky to speculate. You can look at the recent releases and deduce a few things, like better viewfinder and focus peaking, but there's even rumours that a lower end OMD might be released, so it's risky to wait for something much better.

My view is that expectations of the new version are too high. Just because they hit a home run with the current one doesn't necessarily mean they will next time (sadly it's often the way in life). And a lot of people seem to think that adding phase-detect AF on sensor will be some magic bullet to amazing focus tracking (it's not, there's much more to it than simply detecting phase information).

Having said that, I'd personally wait, but only because I'm a tech junkie with GAS. It's only 2 months away, so I'd want to have all the information available to me before making my buying decision, and I'd probably reckon on a small price drop (or second hand bargain) on the current OMD if I'm disappointed with the new release.

Personally, I think it'll be an incremental rather than generational upgrade, unless they pull one out of the bag again and nail AF tracking. It'll cost a lot more, and the current OMD is a very good camera in it's own right, so the actual real-world improvements might not be worth it you (depending on what you shoot).
 
Xenon54 said:
... And a lot of people seem to think that adding phase-detect AF on sensor will be some magic bullet to amazing focus tracking (it's not, there's much more to it than simply detecting phase information).
Click to expand...
Yes, and Olympus have a history of particularly simplistic/poor C-AF tracking in their (phase-detect) DSLRs anyway. I'm not sure they even WANT to have a decent tracking system ...
 
Lot of good points mate :D thanks

I've just sold my SLR to go MFT and not sure I can wait another 2 months without a camera but then don't want to buy and regret it once a newer better version is out.
I'll just be shooting every day life for personal use.
 
Ulfric M Douglas said:
Yes, and Olympus have a history of particularly simplistic/poor C-AF tracking in their (phase-detect) DSLRs anyway. I'm not sure they even WANT to have a decent tracking system ...
Click to expand...

Indeed, but their marketing boys will be making a BIG deal out of PDAF on sensor and how amazing the tracking is, even though it's likely real world tests will show it still doesn't match Canon and Nikon.
 
Tucksy81 said:
I'll just be shooting every day life for personal use.
Click to expand...

In that case, if you're not shooting fast action (and benefit from potentially better AF), or shooting lots of manual lenses (and benefit a lot from focus peaking), then its probably getting difficult to justify the extra £400-£500 odd that it'll likely cost, because you'd get a very nice lens for that much and the current OMD is already very capable for everyday use.

This is all just my guess though, based on rumors and other speculation. I hope there are a few surprises on new features.
 
archstanton said:
Cripes, thanks for the earlier link about HDEW - the e-m5 body only is £585...can feel my resolve cracking.
What are they like as a retailer? Been using SRS happily for years, are they similarly trustworthy, UK warrantied stock etc?

EDIT - just found the huge thread about HDEW, yay for the search button...
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=215462&highlight=hdew
Click to expand...

I've been monitoring the price dropping on HDEW for a while, considering getting a second body and dumping my EP3 and G5.
 
Hi all, haven't posted in here before. I've had my OM-D for close to a year after learning on my Dad's OM-1 when I was a youngster. Here's a photo I took at Bushy Park as a starter:


Deer vs Jogger by frankiedewar, on Flickr
 
Just coming to the end of selling my Canon equipment and considering replacing it with OMD.

Big issue for me is to be able to use filters. Do Olympus lenses allow filters and for that matter lens hoods?

Advice please?

Thanks
 
Engineer73 said:
Do Olympus lenses allow filters and for that matter lens hoods?
Thanks
Click to expand...

Yes and Yes. Most (if not all?) lenses take front screw filters typically around 46mm to 56mm diameter (which are cheaper becuase they're smaller). But Olympus have the crazy nuts policy of NOT including hoods with their lenses :)bang::bang:) so you'll need to buy em seperate ... but the official ones are expensive, so most people use 3rd party ebay alternatives that seem to work just great (eg JJC, or is it JCC, whatever).

Edit: it's also worth mentioning that I've read reports that some of the primes can benefit a lot from a hood (perhaps more so than most people typically think about with dslrs), so I always attach them when possible for better contrast. Why wouldn't you when they don't cost much and add some protection as well as improve IQ?

Edit 2: And because of the screw thread you can also attach square drop in filters (grads and NDs etc) via an adapter like the Cokin P.

Will
 
Last edited:
I think the only native MFT lenses (by the system manufacturers) that don't take filters are the Panasonic 7-14mm and Panasonic 8mm fisheye.

I doubt the Samyang 7.5mm fisheye takes them either.

I don't know about the other third party lenses. I would think all lenses except ultra-ultra-wides and fisheyes would have a thread.
 
Last edited:
Xenon54 said:
Yes and Yes. Most (if not all?) lenses take front screw filters typically around 46mm to 56mm diameter (which are cheaper becuase they're smaller). But Olympus have the crazy nuts policy of NOT including hoods with their lenses :)bang::bang:) so you'll need to buy em seperate ... but the official ones are expensive, so most people use 3rd party ebay alternatives that seem to work just great (eg JJC, or is it JCC, whatever).

Edit: it's also worth mentioning that I've read reports that some of the primes can benefit a lot from a hood (perhaps more so than most people typically think about with dslrs), so I always attach them when possible for better contrast. Why wouldn't you when they don't cost much and add some protection as well as improve IQ?

Edit 2: And because of the screw thread you can also attach square drop in filters (grads and NDs etc) via an adapter like the Cokin P.

Will
Click to expand...
Thanks for your help. This makes the decision much easier.

Jeff
 
Llamaman said:
I think the only native MFT lenses (by the system manufacturers) that don't take filters are the Panasonic 7-14mm and Panasonic 8mm fisheye.

I doubt the Samyang 7.5mm fisheye takes them either.

I don't know about the other third party lenses. I would think all lenses except ultra-ultra-wides and fisheyes would have a thread.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your help. My last lens goes this weekend so I'm nearly there

Jeff
 
Well... i have owned my OM-D for a week and love it. Came from a Panasonic G3 which I thought was the dogs dangles and the difference would not be noticeable when I changed cameras. How wrong I was. Everything seems so much snappier in use. I love the jpeg colours and quick focus.

The shot below is straight out of the camera. I dont think photobucket does the camera justice as viewed full screen on my monitor the eye furthest from the camera is sharp.

Taken with my Oly 45mm.

P7140040_zps9daa0ca2.jpg
 
archstanton said:
Look, over there, that's my resolve lying on the floor crying!

Now a member of the OM-D club :clap:
Come on postie...
Click to expand...

Good man. Two of my old Nikon lenses went this weekend. Just the 18-200 to go now.

I'm really enjoying the OMD and what a versatile system it is. My OMD with a 14-42PZ and an Oly 40-150R fits in a very small camera bag. Just ordered the Panasonic 100-300 to complete my kit.

James
 
My 100-300 arrived today. Well built for the price, very small for its reach and balances nicely on the OMD. I was a bit concerned over sample variations but mine seems to be a good one - a couple of quick shots in the garden this evening produced some very pleasing results. Looking forward to having a proper play at the weekend.


Panasonic 100-300 Test 1 by little barker, on Flickr


Panasonic 100-300 Test 2 by little barker, on Flickr

James
 
james n said:
My 100-300 arrived today. Well built for the price, very small for its reach and balances nicely on the OMD. I was a bit concerned over sample variations but mine seems to be a good one - a couple of quick shots in the garden this evening produced some very pleasing results. Looking forward to having a proper play at the weekend.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/littlebarker/9368615320/
Panasonic 100-300 Test 1 by little barker, on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/littlebarker/9365837813/
Panasonic 100-300 Test 2 by little barker, on Flickr

James
Click to expand...

Awww, you could have bought mine that I'm selling in the classified section :-(
 
Just a quick update, camera arrived on Thu, took it to a friends wedding on Friday - absolutely love this camera! Got some great pics of the event and the bride was very happy.
I'm set for a while - no camera upgrades required :)
Lenses now, they're another matter entirely...damn you gear envy!
 
Ulfric M Douglas said:
Lindsay I like your colours and subtle vignetting : they all match. Crisp, too.
Click to expand...

Outdoors I usually shoot on Daylight white balance, I find it's incredibly accurate and natural looking, I never have to tweak it (unlike my Canon DSLRs).

If the animal is relatively small in the frame then the normal sized focus box (I always select the centre focus box) is a bit too big and it's all too easy to end up with focus locking on the background, so I assign the magnification function to the Fn2 button and I whack the size of the box right down. You probably know this, but when you perform another function or switch the camera off and on again you will default to the larger focus box, but all you have to do after setting it up initially is to press the Fn key and the focus box becomes tiny (or however big you set it). Hope that makes sense. It does make a difference when trying to lock onto things which are relatively small or distant.
 
As always a very impressive set Lyndsey! You have a gret eye, and wonderful technique. Thank you for sharing!
 
Hi Lindsay, great set of pics again! But I couldn't help thinking about your comments on shutter speed.

When I shot my 5dii I came to the opinion that with the higher pixel densities on modern sensors you really needed more like 1/(1.5 x focal length) to keep things critically sharp. Then, with my OMD I naturally increased this closer to 1/(2 x FL) on the basis of (a) even higher pixel density, (b) the very light weight camera/lens combo being harder to hold steady, and (c) a suspicion (not tested) that the IBIS effectiveness starts to fall away quite a bit at longer focal lengths.

So shooting my 40-150 @ 150mm I try not to let SS drop below 1/500 (or perhaps 1/400) rather than the conventional rule of thumb of 1/300. Often though, this bumps up the ISO a bit, which is the lesser of two evils (I'd rather a noisier sharp image than a blurry one).

Then, here you are, producing some fine shots, indicating that 1/(1 x FL) works great. So now I'm wondering if I should be making much more effort to hold the camera steady (didn't think my technique was that bad!), or if, in reality, while possible to get great results at 1/(1xFL), the keeper rate actually drops off a bit or you have to be really steady to maintain it?

It would be nice to hear your thoughts having spent a lot of time with the 100-300 where this stuff matters a lot.

Will
 
Xenon54 said:
Hi Lindsay, great set of pics again! But I couldn't help thinking about your comments on shutter speed.

When I shot my 5dii I came to the opinion that with the higher pixel densities on modern sensors you really needed more like 1/(1.5 x focal length) to keep things critically sharp. Then, with my OMD I naturally increased this closer to 1/(2 x FL) on the basis of (a) even higher pixel density, (b) the very light weight camera/lens combo being harder to hold steady, and (c) a suspicion (not tested) that the IBIS effectiveness starts to fall away quite a bit at longer focal lengths.

So shooting my 40-150 @ 150mm I try not to let SS drop below 1/500 (or perhaps 1/400) rather than the conventional rule of thumb of 1/300. Often though, this bumps up the ISO a bit, which is the lesser of two evils (I'd rather a noisier sharp image than a blurry one).

Then, here you are, producing some fine shots, indicating that 1/(1 x FL) works great. So now I'm wondering if I should be making much more effort to hold the camera steady (didn't think my technique was that bad!), or if, in reality, while possible to get great results at 1/(1xFL), the keeper rate actually drops off a bit or you have to be really steady to maintain it?

It would be nice to hear your thoughts having spent a lot of time with the 100-300 where this stuff matters a lot.

Will
Click to expand...

Hi Will, my view is that it depends very much on the individual and the subject - I think some people are better than others at handholding at longer focal lengths. I'm not as good at this as some of the photographers I know, but employing sound technique and putting in some practice does make a difference and I found that although conventional wisdom should be quoted as a guide, it is often possible to successfully shoot at slower shutter speeds without recourse to a tripod.

However this is also subject dependent to an extent since clearly some subjects will move faster than others and that in turn will influence our calculation. Other factors exist, as you point out the size to weight ratio is very important - and this is where IBIS has additional value in my opinion. I find the 40 to 150 quite hard to hold steady when zoomed out because it is very lightweight but if I concentrate I can still obtain sharp results at comparatively slow shutter speeds so I would attribute that to very good in body stabilisation and photographer concentration. I often shoot the 40 to 150, at the long end, using shutter speeds below 1/100, even though we might strive for 1/300 or higher. I juggle all of those things when I'm determining the shutter speed I am likely to need, rather than relying entirely on the standard equation. The 100-300 is quite a niche lens, and it's not an easy lens to use much of the time, so one has to work harder to overcome some of the challenges it poses. But the equation is always a good starting point for newcomers. Hope that makes sense.
 
Lindsay D said:
Hi Will, my view is that it depends very much on the individual and the subject - I think some people are better than others at handholding at longer focal lengths. I'm not as good at this as some of the photographers I know, but employing sound technique and putting in some practice does make a difference and I found that although conventional wisdom should be quoted as a guide, it is often possible to successfully shoot at slower shutter speeds without recourse to a tripod.

However this is also subject dependent to an extent since clearly some subjects will move faster than others and that in turn will influence our calculation. Other factors exist, as you point out the size to weight ratio is very important - and this is where IBIS has additional value in my opinion. I find the 40 to 150 quite hard to hold steady when zoomed out because it is very lightweight but if I concentrate I can still obtain sharp results at comparatively slow shutter speeds so I would attribute that to very good in body stabilisation and photographer concentration. I often shoot the 40 to 150, at the long end, using shutter speeds below 1/100, even though we might strive for 1/300 or higher. I juggle all of those things when I'm determining the shutter speed I am likely to need, rather than relying entirely on the standard equation. The 100-300 is quite a niche lens, and it's not an easy lens to use much of the time, so one has to work harder to overcome some of the challenges it poses. But the equation is always a good starting point for newcomers. Hope that makes sense.
Click to expand...

Well I'm glad you've also found the 40-150 quite hard to hold steady. There's been several occasions where I've got home only to find quite a few shots are not critically sharp (more than I'd like). So I think I'm going to spend some time practicing this because it sounds like I can improve, and it's always good to occasionally go back and work on your basic technique (I probably don't do this enough). I guess I must have become a bit sloppy with the 5dii + 70-200 f4 IS combo. Changing camera systems has certainly highlighted a few unexpected issues for me to improve on (especially with moving subjects, where I got particularly lazy using Canon's AF tracking!). Thanks.
 
First reaction to seeing Lindsay’s pictures was “Whatever it takes to take great shots, I ain’t got it” but then reading down the subsequent posts I actually think i might have learn’t some things that I can try for myself. This is more than I have picked up in 2 years of being in a camera club and looking at images in the competitions. Most talk seems to revolve around what was done/should have been done in Photoshop with no mention of setting up the camera and getting to the point of pressing the bloody button!

Great stuff folks - keep it coming for the people like me.

Thanks, Phil
 
I feel quite overwhelmed by that Phil, thank you. Knowing I've passed on some tips is a great feeling and makes the blogging worthwhile. I believe in keeping things simple and learning the basics - you can't go wrong with that approach in my opinion. And if you think you haven't got what it takes to create great shots, you are very wrong! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top