BLOWING OFF STEAM by Robin Procter, on Flickr
GATHERING SPEED! by Robin Procter, on Flickr
Friday Night Walkies by Dave Kiddle, on Flickr
OM-1, 9mm fisheye bodycap lens, 1/10 sec, f/8, ISO 80.
I thought someone might ask. No, native is 200. It was user error after a few beers!
.... The most beneficiary ISO option recommended by OMDS is ISO 200 but ISO 80 can be useful in balancing the holy trinity (Shutter + Aperture + ISO) sometimes. I shoot fully Manual and so this can come into play. For example, panning moving trains in harsh sunlight.
'BRITANNIA' IN ACTION! by Robin Procter, on Flickr
I had mine fail at the end of May, was out shooting and briefly saw a red battery warning symbol saying 'battery empty' flash up in the viewfinder and the camera switched off.
tern again by jeff cohen, on Flickr
Life in the slow lane
A fly guy 
Hi Ya Mate
I have set one of my front buttons to switch the subject detection on and off. If you hold it down and then move the front dial, you can scroll through all of the options including turning it off.
, is I won't be offended it you tell me so....
Dicyrtomina saundersi by Alf Branch, on Flickr
Do you mean?
Do I own one?
Answer yes
Does any shop have one in stock?
Maybe not new
London Camera Exchange
The London Camera Exchange supplies second hand cameras, new cameras, digital cameras and other camera equipment and provides a camera part exchange in photographic shops all over England, UK.www.lcegroup.co.uk
Ok thanks. Yes, I saw his wasp image taken with the 90mm macro. Incredible shot.
After some thoughts from those that know better than me...
I'm contemplating rationalising my camera gear and trading my current Fuji X-S20 and a couple of lenses plus a Panasonic LUMIX FZ2000 bridge for single system. I've looked at a number of options including getting a Sony RX10 iv (and sought some advice in the relevant Talk Photography forum), but I want to keep things relatively compact and the RX10 is a bit of a beast - heavier than my FZ2000 (and still expensive everywhere).
After much research and deliberating I'm now leaning towards an EM-5 mk iii, initially with either the:
I like the idea of weather sealing (neither of the Fuji or Panny are weather sealed and whilst I'm less cautious with the Panny, I rarely take my Fuji out if weather looks anything but dry and generally avoid taking the Panny as well when rain is about.
- Olympus 12-40 f2.8 Pro
- Olympus 12-45 f4 Pro
- Olympus 12-200 f3.5-6.3 12.
Any of the above lenses will offer more flexibility in reach than my Fuji 18-55 as a walk around lens, and the 12-200 will better my Fuji 50-230 (although that requires me to swap lenses which the 12-200 wouldn't. With a M4/3 sensor sitting between the 1" Panny and the ASPC Fuji, both of which taken nice enough images I think I'd be more than happy with IQ, especially looking at the images you folks post here.
Although my photography is pretty broad based I do like taking wildlife shots, although it tends to be as I come across it when out and about rather than a dedicated plan going out looking for wildlife, so the 12-200 appeals knowing it'll give me up to 400 (equiv) at the long end, but I've read that it gets quite soft there. However initially my preference would be for one of the two shorter zooms and I'm interested to hear if whether despite both being "Pro" lenses, whether the 12-40 is significantly worth the additional outlay.
A final throw away is that I've never owned any Olympus (or any M4/3) gear before. I came within a gnats whisker of getting a Panasonic G80 before I bought the Fuji, but was probably swayed by the lure of a bigger sensor and more megapixels. I held an Em-5 mk iii in a shop today with a 12-200 attached and it looked and felt pretty nice. Whilst the FujiX-S10 is similar in size, and delivers very nice images, I can't say it gives me a whole lot of enjoyment in using it.
Of course this all might be a combination of GAS/"the grass is greener" syndrome
Thanks
I have just bought one from Panamoz at a cracking price (but it was bought with two other higher value items).
Excellent, they didn’t have any stock the last time I looked. I’ll grab one from there, thanks @Chris_911
I've 'rationalised' down to a couple of µ43 bodies and a handful of lenses. I usually lug around an OM-5 and 12-100mm which is an ungainly lump but the combo is slightly lighter than the RX10 IV I was carrying before.After some thoughts from those that know better than me...
I'm contemplating rationalising my camera gear and trading my current Fuji X-S20 and a couple of lenses plus a Panasonic LUMIX FZ2000 bridge for single system. I've looked at a number of options including getting a Sony RX10 iv (and sought some advice in the relevant Talk Photography forum), but I want to keep things relatively compact and the RX10 is a bit of a beast - heavier than my FZ2000 (and still expensive everywhere).
After much research and deliberating I'm now leaning towards an EM-5 mk iii, initially with either the:
I like the idea of weather sealing (neither of the Fuji or Panny are weather sealed and whilst I'm less cautious with the Panny, I rarely take my Fuji out if weather looks anything but dry and generally avoid taking the Panny as well when rain is about.
- Olympus 12-40 f2.8 Pro
- Olympus 12-45 f4 Pro
- Olympus 12-200 f3.5-6.3 12.
Any of the above lenses will offer more flexibility in reach than my Fuji 18-55 as a walk around lens, and the 12-200 will better my Fuji 50-230 (although that requires me to swap lenses which the 12-200 wouldn't. With a M4/3 sensor sitting between the 1" Panny and the ASPC Fuji, both of which taken nice enough images I think I'd be more than happy with IQ, especially looking at the images you folks post here.
Although my photography is pretty broad based I do like taking wildlife shots, although it tends to be as I come across it when out and about rather than a dedicated plan going out looking for wildlife, so the 12-200 appeals knowing it'll give me up to 400 (equiv) at the long end, but I've read that it gets quite soft there. However initially my preference would be for one of the two shorter zooms and I'm interested to hear if whether despite both being "Pro" lenses, whether the 12-40 is significantly worth the additional outlay.
A final throw away is that I've never owned any Olympus (or any M4/3) gear before. I came within a gnats whisker of getting a Panasonic G80 before I bought the Fuji, but was probably swayed by the lure of a bigger sensor and more megapixels. I held an Em-5 mk iii in a shop today with a 12-200 attached and it looked and felt pretty nice. Whilst the FujiX-S10 is similar in size, and delivers very nice images, I can't say it gives me a whole lot of enjoyment in using it.
Of course this all might be a combination of GAS/"the grass is greener" syndrome
Thanks
.... There is no doubt that both the Fuji and Sony systems are excellent quality, especially full-frame. But Olympus/OMD PRO range (must be PRO) have weathersealing second to none with international IP53(?) certification. I do all my photography outdoors regardless of weather and this ability is very enabling. After a surfer session I usually rinse my OM PRO gear under a gentle shower at home/hotel afterwards and have done so for several years (since 2019).After some thoughts from those that know better than me...
I'm contemplating rationalising my camera gear and trading my current Fuji X-S20 and a couple of lenses plus a Panasonic LUMIX FZ2000 bridge for single system. I've looked at a number of options including getting a Sony RX10 iv (and sought some advice in the relevant Talk Photography forum), but I want to keep things relatively compact and the RX10 is a bit of a beast - heavier than my FZ2000 (and still expensive everywhere).
After much research and deliberating I'm now leaning towards an EM-5 mk iii, initially with either the:
I like the idea of weather sealing (neither of the Fuji or Panny are weather sealed and whilst I'm less cautious with the Panny, I rarely take my Fuji out if weather looks anything but dry and generally avoid taking the Panny as well when rain is about.
- Olympus 12-40 f2.8 Pro
- Olympus 12-45 f4 Pro
- Olympus 12-200 f3.5-6.3 12.
Any of the above lenses will offer more flexibility in reach than my Fuji 18-55 as a walk around lens, and the 12-200 will better my Fuji 50-230 (although that requires me to swap lenses which the 12-200 wouldn't. With a M4/3 sensor sitting between the 1" Panny and the ASPC Fuji, both of which taken nice enough images I think I'd be more than happy with IQ, especially looking at the images you folks post here.
Although my photography is pretty broad based I do like taking wildlife shots, although it tends to be as I come across it when out and about rather than a dedicated plan going out looking for wildlife, so the 12-200 appeals knowing it'll give me up to 400 (equiv) at the long end, but I've read that it gets quite soft there. However initially my preference would be for one of the two shorter zooms and I'm interested to hear if whether despite both being "Pro" lenses, whether the 12-40 is significantly worth the additional outlay.
A final throw away is that I've never owned any Olympus (or any M4/3) gear before. I came within a gnats whisker of getting a Panasonic G80 before I bought the Fuji, but was probably swayed by the lure of a bigger sensor and more megapixels. I held an Em-5 mk iii in a shop today with a 12-200 attached and it looked and felt pretty nice. Whilst the FujiX-S10 is similar in size, and delivers very nice images, I can't say it gives me a whole lot of enjoyment in using it.
Of course this all might be a combination of GAS/"the grass is greener" syndrome
Thanks
RUSHING THROUGH THE HEAVY RAIN by Robin Procter, on Flickr
HAVING FUN! by Robin Procter, on Flickr
WET WEATHERPROOFING by Robin Procter, on Flickr
Had a trip out mid week at my favourite Kingfisher spot weather was a kind of stay indoors day so tried my hand a bit of pseudo macro work with the Olympus 150-400 this lens just keeps on surprising me and yes no Kingfishers!
. I call it close-up work but our terms mean the same.
I don't believe the Olympus 12-200 f3.5-6.3 12 is weather sealedAfter some thoughts from those that know better than me...
I'm contemplating rationalising my camera gear and trading my current Fuji X-S20 and a couple of lenses plus a Panasonic LUMIX FZ2000 bridge for single system. I've looked at a number of options including getting a Sony RX10 iv (and sought some advice in the relevant Talk Photography forum), but I want to keep things relatively compact and the RX10 is a bit of a beast - heavier than my FZ2000 (and still expensive everywhere).
After much research and deliberating I'm now leaning towards an EM-5 mk iii, initially with either the:
I like the idea of weather sealing (neither of the Fuji or Panny are weather sealed and whilst I'm less cautious with the Panny, I rarely take my Fuji out if weather looks anything but dry and generally avoid taking the Panny as well when rain is about.
- Olympus 12-40 f2.8 Pro
- Olympus 12-45 f4 Pro
- Olympus 12-200 f3.5-6.3 12.
Any of the above lenses will offer more flexibility in reach than my Fuji 18-55 as a walk around lens, and the 12-200 will better my Fuji 50-230 (although that requires me to swap lenses which the 12-200 wouldn't. With a M4/3 sensor sitting between the 1" Panny and the ASPC Fuji, both of which taken nice enough images I think I'd be more than happy with IQ, especially looking at the images you folks post here.
Although my photography is pretty broad based I do like taking wildlife shots, although it tends to be as I come across it when out and about rather than a dedicated plan going out looking for wildlife, so the 12-200 appeals knowing it'll give me up to 400 (equiv) at the long end, but I've read that it gets quite soft there. However initially my preference would be for one of the two shorter zooms and I'm interested to hear if whether despite both being "Pro" lenses, whether the 12-40 is significantly worth the additional outlay.
A final throw away is that I've never owned any Olympus (or any M4/3) gear before. I came within a gnats whisker of getting a Panasonic G80 before I bought the Fuji, but was probably swayed by the lure of a bigger sensor and more megapixels. I held an Em-5 mk iii in a shop today with a 12-200 attached and it looked and felt pretty nice. Whilst the FujiX-S10 is similar in size, and delivers very nice images, I can't say it gives me a whole lot of enjoyment in using it.
Of course this all might be a combination of GAS/"the grass is greener" syndrome
Thanks
.... I have never owned or even handled one but I think it will have some weather sealing but just not to the same high standard of the OM PRO range.
Unless you need to go very long, or wide apertures, I would recommend the 12-45 f4 Pro and the 45-150 f4 Pro. Gives you a reasonable reach with (relatively) minimal weight, and top-class weather resistance. Only consider the 12-40 f2.8 if you really need f2.8 as it's a heavier lens, shorter maximum focal length, and questionable extra IQ.After some thoughts from those that know better than me...
I'm contemplating rationalising my camera gear and trading my current Fuji X-S20 and a couple of lenses plus a Panasonic LUMIX FZ2000 bridge for single system. I've looked at a number of options including getting a Sony RX10 iv (and sought some advice in the relevant Talk Photography forum), but I want to keep things relatively compact and the RX10 is a bit of a beast - heavier than my FZ2000 (and still expensive everywhere).
After much research and deliberating I'm now leaning towards an EM-5 mk iii, initially with either the:
I like the idea of weather sealing (neither of the Fuji or Panny are weather sealed and whilst I'm less cautious with the Panny, I rarely take my Fuji out if weather looks anything but dry and generally avoid taking the Panny as well when rain is about.
- Olympus 12-40 f2.8 Pro
- Olympus 12-45 f4 Pro
- Olympus 12-200 f3.5-6.3 12.
Any of the above lenses will offer more flexibility in reach than my Fuji 18-55 as a walk around lens, and the 12-200 will better my Fuji 50-230 (although that requires me to swap lenses which the 12-200 wouldn't. With a M4/3 sensor sitting between the 1" Panny and the ASPC Fuji, both of which taken nice enough images I think I'd be more than happy with IQ, especially looking at the images you folks post here.
Although my photography is pretty broad based I do like taking wildlife shots, although it tends to be as I come across it when out and about rather than a dedicated plan going out looking for wildlife, so the 12-200 appeals knowing it'll give me up to 400 (equiv) at the long end, but I've read that it gets quite soft there. However initially my preference would be for one of the two shorter zooms and I'm interested to hear if whether despite both being "Pro" lenses, whether the 12-40 is significantly worth the additional outlay.
A final throw away is that I've never owned any Olympus (or any M4/3) gear before. I came within a gnats whisker of getting a Panasonic G80 before I bought the Fuji, but was probably swayed by the lure of a bigger sensor and more megapixels. I held an Em-5 mk iii in a shop today with a 12-200 attached and it looked and felt pretty nice. Whilst the FujiX-S10 is similar in size, and delivers very nice images, I can't say it gives me a whole lot of enjoyment in using it.
Of course this all might be a combination of GAS/"the grass is greener" syndrome
Thanks
