Olympus OM-D E-M5 Specs and Preview article posted

<p>I'm going to buy this camera as well. It's a clear upgrade to my GF1.</p>

<p>When m4/3 hit the scene, I felt pretty sure that it was a matter of a short period of time before the advantages on APS-C and APS-H sensors would diminish relative to the m4/3 offerings. I bought my GF1 knowing that it was clearly my FIRST m4/3 body and would not be the last. Don't get me wrong, I know there are still advantages to cameras with larger sensors, just none that matter much to me at this point. The Oly E-M5, to me, is proof that I was correct in my assumption about the narrowing gap, but more importantly, is just an awesome addition to the m4/3 system.</p>

<p>It's also why I hoped Fuji would make the interchangable lens version of the X100 with a smaller sensor and the lenses compatible with the m4/3 standard... you can get outstanding results with a m4/3 sized sensor if you engineer it properly AND have good image processing. I think there is plenty of room for players like Fuji to push the envelope of what you can get from a smaller sensor, and in the case of Fuji, would also be a welcomed addition to the assortment of lenses available.</p>

<p>Personally I find Fuji and Oly pretty exciting right now, and more or less feel bored and unimpressed with Canon and Nikon's recent offerings. I am happy I divested my dSLR stuff. Tomorrow I will ship my EOS flash to my father as a gift, I no longer see any reason to waste time on those bulky things.</p>

<p>I had decided to sell my Nikon D7k with assortment of lenses; it was all simply too heavy to carry around with me all the time - I didn't go out to shoot anymore, only for specific things going on like the Occupy protests. While it was awesome to have it for things like that, I just wasn't using it enough.<br>

<br /> At first I wanted to go for the Fuji x-pro1: it looked like everything I really wanted.. fast primes, viewfinder and relatively small. But all the reviews complaining about both the manual and autofocus made me doubt. My biggest problem with the m4/3 system was that I wasn't aware of any fast primes, but then I discovered the 12mm f/2.0 and leica 24mm f/1.4 and the decision was rather easy to make. So I've ordered the OM-D with these 2 lenses. Maybe I'll even get the Nokton f/0.95 eventually.</p>

The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 spectacular. Aside from build quality it's perhaps a tier above the Leica 24mm.

 

I think the ever improving lens choices is making m4/3 very attractive.

<p><em>"How much of an improvement in anti-shake does the E-M5 offer over prior models? And how many total stops of anti-shake does the M5 now offer? Of course, one will look to subsequent tests."</em><br>

<em></em> <br>

<em></em>Compared to all previous Pen models, it sounds substantial. Not only in terms of the multi-direction corrections, but, like using a Mega OIS-equipped lens on a Panasonic body, you will see the IS at work in the E-M5's eyelevel finder. Something you do not have with any Pen body. This new IS actually puts Olympus' in-camera IS on a level plane with the in-lens OIS system of Panasonic as far as being able to see the results in the finder as you view and compose, but you will have it with the E-M5 using ANY lens.</p>

<p>What Olympus claims in their marketing materials (5 stops) vs. what real-world use produces in terms of stops of advantage will have to wait until we see, not just reviews, but good reviews. Not just this "stuff" some sites put out just to say they are the first out with anything on a new model to try and draw hits to their site.</p>

<p>FWIW, I will have the E-M5 in my hands in 2 weeks or so.</p>

<p>Josh, when you do review it, please comment on the fit and finish.</p>

<p>The fit and finish on the pre-production versions I saw at CES were very nice. So I would expect even better with the production cameras. I did think the black looked slightly better than the silver. But that might just be personal opinion.</p>

Finally preordered it. Getting a sigma 30mm f2.8 and pany 14mm f2.5 to go with it initially. Goal is pany 7-14, pany 14/2.5, pany 20/1.7,

sigma 30/2.8, oly 45/1.8 and a few legacy lenses. It'll probably take me a few years to get there sadly. I'd love the oly 12/2, but just too

expensive to get any year soon. Likely the same with the oly 75/1.8.

 

In my experience with my wife's E-PL1 the IBIS is good for at least 3 stops, so if this improves on that by more than a stop, I'll be very

impressed. With the 14-42 on the wide end if I am being careful I can easily manage sharp 1/4-1/8s shots.

<p>If you go for the 14/2.5 and 45/1.8 first, you might not need the 20mm and 30mm at all. There's absolutely no need to have every focal length covered! Use the 14mm for panos to get a wider vista those times you need it.</p>

<p>If I was in Matthew's shoes, I think I'd skip the Sigma 30 and get the Panasonic 20 first. With the 20 and eventually the Oly 45, I'm not sure how much use you'd have for the 30. That just seems like an awkward focal length on Micro Four Thirds. (This is why I'll probably never buy the Pentax 40/2.8 [if I end up staying with Pentax], despite it being a great lens -- the focal length on APS-C just doesn't work for me).</p>

For me some of it is budget, right now I just can't swing another 150+ on a second lens on top of what the sigma 30 runs. Also some of it

is a carry over from film for me. I like having primes about 50% frame coverage apart, which with the current lens line up, would be more

or less the 14, 20, 30 and 45 primes that are out there now. I might manage with 14 and 45 now, but I'd need to do a lot of cropping for

some photos with nothing in between. If there was a decent and inexpensive and fast 25, I'd consider skipping both the 20 and 30 lenses,

even though it would make then"steps" larger, but 20 to 45 or especially 14 to 45 for awhile is just too big.

 

I also have a lot of legacy glass. Even if it isn't autofocus, my MIJ Zuiko 50/1.8 is very sharp and should cover the role of the 45/1.8 for a

year or two at least.

 

I also have 3 young kids, 4, 2 and almost 2 weeks and 45 is just too long most of the times for a portrait lens. I find my 50/1.4 right now is

a little short sometimes, but my 85/2 is almost always too long to shoot portraits of them. The 85/2 is wonderful for adult portraits, but i

need shortest working distance to keep my kids an anyway interested in smiling.

 

Worse comes to worse the sigma 30 is super cheap, so if I find in a couple of years that all I am really using is the 15, 20 and 45 it isn't a

big loss to sell it on eBay and take the loss. Frankly I'd go with the sigma 19 as well, but the extra stop and a half of the pany 20 and the

smaller size are worth almost twice the price (in the price range the lenses are) to mr.