Really love 1.3. and 4. in 4, the separation from the background is lovely, and she really stands out sharp.
I agree with Bebop number 4 is my favourite the runner really stands out from the background. Thanks for sharing your photos.
Really love 1.3. and 4. in 4, the separation from the background is lovely, and she really stands out sharp.
What’s chalk and cheese?
Maybe it's an excuse to buy another body I don't know.
I'm happy with the 5MK2 but I'd like less noise in the photos.
Here's one I took that I was rather happy with, especially as it's shot under moonlight.
Moonlit Tower De Fished by Terence Rees, on Flickr
Chalk and cheese are opposites used in this context Toby.
Perhaps night and day would be a better metaphor
PMSL, the wonders of the internet and misinterpretationsYou've really never heard this expression!? It's same as night and day as mentioned above, or apples to oranges
PMSL, the wonders of the internet and misinterpretations
I know what chalk and cheese means but I meant what was the reference, the two bodies or the processing styles?
Sorry, I’m being a bit thick tonight (pretty usual that ). I think I’m on track now, so you’re saying you think the images you’re getting with the EM5-II are chalk and cheese with those you’re seeing on the EM1-II?I imagined the bodies but it may as you say be mainly down to processing
Thanks Keith.
Need to explore what the EM5 MK2 can do I think before splashing out more cash
Having owned both the biggest improvement is in af, especially for moving subjects. I also think the em1.2 feels better in the hand. IQ wise it's much of a muchness. You also get dual card slots which its usefulCheers Toby, I think I just need to use the Oly a bit more now the light's better.
Although it's always nice to get a new bit of kit.
I picked up some Pentax stuff the other week and can say the K3ii is a superb bit of kit.
The lack of an AA filter really shows, even with a kit zoom.So I'm having fun with that and the Oly at the moment.
I haven't gone looking for it, but I didn't really notice a difference in the files from the EM1ii and the EM5ii.
Here are a few from the Pen F this last weekend. I had some trouble with banding from the lights. At the gig I tried the anti flicker on auto, 50Hz and 60Hz and went back to auto in the end, but it didn't seem to make much difference. Any tips on that from anyone?View attachment 243942View attachment 243943View attachment 243944
Nice images! - On the banding, the only thing I can think of off hand is to try various shutter speed to counter, try different match ups of ISO/SS, trial and error. DO you have any images from the gig that didn't have banding? check the exif data from those, see what worked on that occasion
Is that a typo or are you genuinely finding a lot of difference? I can't really split it except for the resolution and noise handling.I've got the E-M5II and the E-M1II and in terms of IQ there's that much difference between them IMO. The E-M1II has pretty decent CAF performance for moving subjects and a bit more resolution. It also handles better with most PRO glass, so these are the main reasons I would consider for getting an E-M1II.
Nothing wrong with that imo, life's here to enjoy. Having owned both I would choose the EM1-II over the EM5-II without hesitation for the following main reasons.Thanks all.
It's obviously just GAS
Is that a typo or are you genuinely finding a lot of difference? I can't really split it except for the resolution and noise handling.
Is that a typo or are you genuinely finding a lot of difference? I can't really split it except for the resolution and noise handling.
Nothing wrong with that imo, life's here to enjoy. Having owned both I would choose the EM1-II over the EM5-II without hesitation for the following main reasons.
Better (for me) ergonomics, especially with the heavier glass
Better AF-C, it's night and day difference
Better controls (such as dedicated buttons for AF modes and bracketing)
Better noise handling
The extra resolution is nice but doesn't make that much difference imo.
Why I would choose the EM5-II
It's prettier
Yep the EM1-II is one hell of a camera, in fact I'd go as far to say it's been my favourite camera to date to use. The 40-150mm f2.8 again is one great lens, the combo really is very good indeed@snerkler - great photos of the London marathon, looking at your Flick though it's pretty obvious which are the EM1.2 and which are the D850, the separation of subject from background is something we can't get with the EM1.2, even with the 40-150mm f/2.8 at 150mm and f/2.8, and the whole image seems to have a "creamy sharpness" (if that isn't a contradiction in terms!) with the D850 whereas the EM1.2 has a certain "roughness" by comparison.
For me the differences are too slight to warrant the cost / size / weight of the FF system, but you can't deny the difference is there.
Like the panning shot of the lady in the wheelchair though, there's the motorsport photographer in you coming out!
@GreenNinja67
I would echo what @snerkler says about the EM1.2, I can't comment IQ wise compared to anything other than the only other camera I've ever owned, which was a Nikon D3300, but I bought it for it's feature set, not image quality. Fully weather sealed, superb AF, insane FPS, huge buffer, ergonomics (big enough to handle the bigger lenses but not too big to hang round my neck all day without really noticing), buttons (lots of them and customisable) and I also use the 3 presets a lot.
FWIW I made the decision to buy the EM1.2 around about this time last year, when I went to Cadwell Park to watch my friend race his bike. The camera I had at the time, the Nikon D3300 + "consumer" zoom lens just wasn't up to it, AF was poor, tiny buffer, and I had to put it away when it rained. I've just dug out a photo I took then and applied the processing techniques I've learnt since to it.
Even being considerably more aggressive with the sharpening it's not up to the quality of the EM1.2, and although the Nikon D3300 is an entry level camera I believe the sensor is highly regarded. I suspect my problem then was the glass in front of it. There's no doubt in my mind that the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO is a stunning lens, it beats the pants off all my other lenses, including the 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO, so as an entirely unscientific test I guess the lens is the critical factor here, rather than the sensor behind it, or the PP "skills" of the photographer (it's nice that you guys think I have "skills", but I really don't!).
It's just one that I created myself, well I have several tbh for different scenarios although use one for general stuff. I use adobe colour profile as I prefer it to camera natural, use strong contrast tone curve but then with the contrast slider at -10 (sounds a bit counter intuitive I know ). Shadows and whites raised a touch, vibrance and saturation raised a touch. I have sharpening etc left at default, and I have shadows in the calibration section at the bottom set to -2, ie slightly to the green. I have tweaked some of the saturation, hues and luminance on the individual colour channels but this is just preference. I have then saved all of this as a user preset and just apply this on import.Snerkler - could you post a link which explains the kind of pre set that you are talking about in LR? I could really use a couple of those for my Canon and Oly files.
Wish the Olympus stuff had USB charging though!
And this is the bit I'm struggling with, ie is it worth the difference? One minute I think yes, the other no One thing that I also have to remind myself of is that these shots may be used on websites, social media, and could also appear on large banners and the like.@snerkler - great photos of the London marathon, looking at your Flick though it's pretty obvious which are the EM1.2 and which are the D850, the separation of subject from background is something we can't get with the EM1.2, even with the 40-150mm f/2.8 at 150mm and f/2.8, and the whole image seems to have a "creamy sharpness" (if that isn't a contradiction in terms!) with the D850 whereas the EM1.2 has a certain "roughness" by comparison.
For me the differences are too slight to warrant the cost / size / weight of the FF system, but you can't deny the difference is there.
The Nikon Z's can be charged using USB, but you can't use them whilst they are chargingCan any?
Common camera battery voltage (across makes): 7.2V, USB (not USB C, obv) 5V
Not impossible to step up, but the electrickery needed is unlikely to be conducive to speedy charging or battery health, far better off with a mains charger + spare batteries. EXPro ones are a decent price compromise. A couple of batteries is also likely lighter than any charging kit to carry with.
What were you hoping to use as a charging source? A laptop port is limited to 500mA on USB2 on a good day...... that would drop to something like 250mA after stepping up.
I'd be very surprised if USB C powered chargers don't appear over the next year or so, that would connect up to a USB C which should give 900mA, not sure what the overall advantage might be.
Can any?
Common camera battery voltage: 7.2V, USB (not USB C, obv) 5V
Not impossible to step up, but the electrickery needed is unlikely to be conducive to speedy charging or battery health, far better off with a mains charger + spare batteries. EXPro ones are a decent price compromise. A couple of batteries is also likely lighter than any charging kit to carry with.
What were you hoping to use as a charging source? A laptop port is limited to 500mA on USB2 on a good day......
I'd be very surprised if USB C powered chargers don't appear over the next year or so, that would connect up to a USB C which should give 900mA, not sure what the overall advantage might be.
Most Fujis and Panasonics offer this. Most of the recent full frame mirrorless too and I think the E-M1x?
On my X100T I use it for car charging. Bascially means I can leave camera in glove box and know it's always got juice if needed. There are work arounds of course but all involve more faff and thought.
But the biggest thing for me would be the ability to charge overnight via a powerbank when wild camping. I carry a separate USB charger and cable at present. Not the end of the world but it would be much neater to not have to bother.
The Nikon Z's can be charged using USB, but you can't use them whilst they are charging
The EM1X is USB-C, the mess that is the USB-C standard is something that may well trip up your view of how it would work, when not plugged into mains. Your portable powerbank may well not work, and you will be likely better off with multiple batteries.
Something like this http://www.exprodirect.com/ex-pro-o...cs1-ezi-power-usb-charger-with-usb-cable.html would answer some of your requirement.
TBH I use USB-C for most things now so it's not an issue for me, but I can see how it's a pain if you're mainly using standard USB. I only charge from mains so again not an issue for me, but if you are one that charges from battery packs then again I can see it being a pain. However, I would rather carry extra batteries rather than having to carry a battery pack and wait for the camera battery to charge.Another USB-C.
USB-C allows for power negotiation (up to 20V @ 5A, if it is there....), and while it is theoretically backward compatible you won't get a quart out of a pint pot, and your historic understanding of USB charging needs an adapter to these new "standards"
TBH I use USB-C for most things now so it's not an issue for me, but I can see how it's a pain if you're mainly using standard USB. I only charge from mains so again not an issue for me, but if you are one that charges from battery packs then again I can see it being a pain. However, I would rather carry extra batteries rather than having to carry a battery pack and wait for the camera battery to charge.
'sactly.
Most people think, USB Charging? I can carry that with me. USB-C (and I'm speaking of it as if it were a single thing - it really isn't! the standards are a real mess) doesn't necessarily work like that.
Also, as I suspected it is only the newer cameras that have been built around USB-C that support in camera charging.
Don't get me started about Garmin and their approach to in device charging.
.... First with the X100T and then with X-T2. ....
Have we to guess which is which?I have both. And I find comparing the two I get very 'different' results.
One gives quite good images. While the other is very smeary on a blackboard. On the other hand, in a sandwich, it's the other way round, with cheese giving the better results.
Ah yes, they do, even though it is a 7.2V battery. Reassuringly the charging current of about 250mA matches my expected guess.
Ultimately you have to carry with you n mA/hr of power. I've always found that having a single central source is actually counter productive, as you worry whether you will have power for <whatever> so go straight into power conservation mode. Whereas, if you separate sources, you always know how much you have for your phone, GPS, camera, whatever. Weight wise, if you chose carefully there is little if any difference, sometimes even weight saving. For example, if you have a single source, you might go for a mahoosive battery pack, which you won't end up draining so carrying more capacity and weight than you need.
When you say "off the grid", do you really mean without any power source? And, still using a smart phone? If you just want phone/text, consider a dumb nokia for about £30, it will last the week on a single charge*. For seven days without any power source, I'd think about a Powermonkey or the like.
*Of course it would mean ANOTHER charger if you wanted the capability......