Anyone contemplating E-M5

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>first question in the forums section, after lurking here for a while.<br>

Q is really simple: do you like Olympus' new sibling?<br>

Me I don't know. I guess I will have to handle it first (that will be a long wait because it's due end of March.) I think IQ will be more than sufficient for me but I won't to know how it handles and how the EVF works out for me.</p>

<p>Interested in reading what you guys (and gals) think about it...</p>

<p>Here's an interesting read..</p>

<p><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5118208599/hands-on-with-the-olympus-om-d-e-m5">http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5118208599/hands-on-with-the-olympus-om-d-e-m5</a></p>

<p>I'm getting one. No doubt. Was considering waiting until after a trip I'm going on in late May, but I just may try and nab me one before-hand.</p>

<p>A: Yes.</p>

<p>"Yes" for me as well. The built-in eye level viewfinder is the draw.</p>

<p>Most likely yes. I want to see how it works, especially the viewfinder. In chrome trim it looks so much like my first OM-1 that I need one just for nostalgic reasons. That and the new 1.8/75 are on my shopping list for this year. I am starting to wish someone made a 1.4x or 1.7x extender for m4/3s.</p>

<p>Another most likely yes. Have to size up my Pentax kit and mull over the "big decision". I was previously in 4/3's, loved my E-330. This OMD looks like the real deal, but only if I can get enough out of my Pentax kit to justify it.</p>

<p>Txs for the answers thus far!<br>

The hands on on dpreview is quite positive, although I didn't like to read about the small buttons. I have an E-30 I want to replace it to, but before I do I want to know if ergonomics is on the same level, and especially the EVF (like I said already.)<br>

Another Q for those who answered yes: silver or black? ;-)</p>

<p>I've never owned a Micro Four Thirds camera, though I borrowed an E-P1 from my father-in-law a while back and liked it. The OM-D has definitely got my attention. I like the basic idea of an E-P1-like camera with a built-in EVF and styling like the classic OM film cameras. I'll probably get the silver body if I get one. It looks more like my chrome OM-2N.</p>

<p>Most likely, yes. The OM-D just might be the digital camera that lures this film user into the digital camera world.</p>

<p>Yes; on pre-order. After weeks of rain rain rain and a bit of sleet, the weatherproofing beame quite attractive; along with the evf for the very rare bright day, and a better ( I hope!) sensor. Also the 12-50 with weatherproofing will be v useful as long as it is better a bit stopped down than the mtf on the Olympus site suggests. And still small and light enough to take on long hill days. Black.</p>

<p>I will, eventually, when the price drops and there are user reviews which support the decision.<br>

I understand that the view you get through the viewfinder is the same as I do with my EP-2 through the VF-2. The problem with the VF-2 is that the grips to hold it down are too lose and eye pressure lifts it on the hinge, so the E-M5 would be better.<br>

There is a lot of interest amongst macro users where there was little interest in the EP and EPL series.</p>

 

<p>Small camera has small buttons. There is just no way around that. Not a problem. They could have made the rear screen a bit smaller, but I suppose that is not politically correct. I have an E-3 but I much rather use the E-620 because it is smaller and lighter. I will get the silver one. Without handgrip to keep it small. I dont care for the new kit zoom. I sometimes use the old collapsible zoom just because it is small. But these cameras are best with fast fixed lenses.</p>

<p>I think it's a good camera, and it's about time that Olympus stepped up, but I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this camera. Everyone is talking about it like it's revolutionizing photography. Save for weather sealing and in-body stabilization, Panasonic gave us all of this and more with the GH2 over a year ago. Feels ergonomic in your hand thanks to the grip and viewfinder, well-thought-out controls, tilt screen, great sensor performance, etc. In addition, it has a swivel screen, multi-aspect sensor, etc. It doesn't have weather sealing, but my only camera that has ever had it is my D200, and I've never destroyed a camera due to inclement weather, from point and shoots all the way to my medium format camera. So no, I will not be getting an E-M5. When the GH2 drops a bit more in price (it was available last holiday season from stores like Adorama for $700, with 14-42mm lens), and I'll probably jump on it to replace my current G2. I feel like Olympus has been behind the ball every step of the way in m4/3 land, but for some reason their products are being given more credence than Panasonic's. The E-P3 also had this kind of celebration, even though it's essentially the same camera as the GF1, just a few years late.</p>

<p>@Ariel: it's not that Panasonic doesn't make good camera's, but the ergonomics (especially the user interface) are not the best. Too much oriented towards beginners, which leaves advanced users without the right controls. True, you can get used to it, but it leaves everything to be desired. No matter how good the GH2 (and LX5) are, that together with the lack of IBIS and the fact that Oly has the upper hand in JPG processing, was enough for me not wanting them and waiting for the right Oly to arrive...<br>

Seems that with the OM-D Oly ticks a lot (if not all) the boxes: EVF (if it's any good remains to be seen for me - I didn't like the NEX-7 either), good to excellent ergonomics, weather sealed, FAST AF, new IBIS, and some nice additions (like live Bulb) packed together in a very nice looking body (at least that is sth everyone seems to agree on.) True, it's not revolutionary but it has enough to draw attention... That's all.</p>

<p>Thinking about it. We'll see how business does and how well I do at getting funds for my wedding/honeymoon next summer.</p>

<p>As far as the camera goes, I like everything but one detail, the lack of a built in 3.5mm headphone jack. You have to add the module to the hotshoe, which then means I can't add a mic in there. Not so bad, if I was mounted on a rig of some sort, but bad if it's just me and the camera.</p>

<p>While IBIS is a nice feature, I don't use image stabilization very often, and if people use it like it's supposed to, I don't think many others would either. Thom wrote a great article about it. His is specific to Nikon, but save for a few small points, the idea holds true for all mechanical image stabilization implementations.<br>

http://bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm<br>

If I had to choose between IBIS and a multi-aspect sensor, I know which I'd choose 100 times out of 100. I also don't agree that the Panasonic menu and control system is tailored to beginners. Look at the GH2, or even my G2, and try to defend that statement. The only thing I have to go into a menu for is image stabilization mode and metering, one of which is always handy on my Q.menu button. If I don't like using the touchscreen, there is heavy redundancy in the controls for you to not have to use it. Look at any reviews, and my feelings are backed up by others. Michael Reichmann, for example, is probably one of the biggest respected photographers that is a heavy proponent of m4/3:<br>

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/panasonic_gh2_first_look.shtml<br>

DPReview:<br>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicDMCGH2/5</p>

<p>As far as JPEG processing, that's a red herring. Panasonic provides decent JPEG processing options in camera, but it's all a wash anyway if you shoot RAW. Lightroom 3 is currently on sale for $80-$130 at the various online stores right now, and for the price it will improve your photos more than any hardware. With Lightroom, I can shoot RAW, and thanks to its organizational features, batch processing, and quick menus, I spend LESS time handling my RAW files in-computer than someone without an image editing program spends organizing and uploading their JPEGs. And Photoshop Elements 10 is $50 right now some places, which makes sense to pick up whether you're a JPEG or RAW shooter.</p>

<p>Overall, I think that these arguments are more about brand loyalty and making up excuses after the fact than an objective look at both companies.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>As far as JPEG processing, that's a red herring.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A typical boundless arrogance statement that reflects, "every one does, or should think like me". Some of us can actually decide what works best for what we shoot, how we shoot and what we do with what we shoot without looking for approval and justification from a bunch of internet pundits.</p>

<p>I personally like olympus better than panasonic's m4/3rd offerings but I agree with Ariel's assessment. And I have both a olympus and a panasonic m4/3rd.</p>

<p>FWIW Ariel, Thom Hogan uses Oly himself.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I don't use image stabilization very often, and if people use it like it's supposed to, I don't think many others would either.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Peronally I find that very disputable. Thom Hogan's assertion is true when talking about optical image stabilization, but doesn't hold true for In body IS. He talks i.e. about the longevity of a lens with IS/VR being shorter and, while that is true you don't have those problems with IBIS (which I think is as durable as a non moving sensor YMMV.)<br>

Anyway, while I have steady hands, IBIS has been a life saver for me various times, and OIS has three side effects which makes it a no go for me:<br>

a) OIS has a (minor) effect on optical quality<br>

b) it is more expensive (more so if you try to compensate for the loss of optical quality<br>

c) the shorter longevity as discussed above</p>

<p>I should have said I agree mostly with Ariel's assessment. I do like oly's jpegs better, IBIS and a few other oly things. But I agree, just shoot raw if you don't want panny jpegs...really not a big deal. Panny cameras has builtin finders (if you are into that) and better AF usually (until the EP3)...</p>

<p>I personally think it's pretty cool one has the option of either Olympus or Panasonic bodies to use the same set of lenses, and we have the option of using either in-lens or in-camera stabilization. The thing that takes Olympus stabilization to the next level with the E-M5 is, the stabilization now also stabilize the finder like the Mega OIS of the Panasonic in-lens stabilization always has, when used with a lens that has it. It's just now with Olympus, it is available with any lens, micro four-thirds or adapted.</p>

<p>I am sure it will eventually find a place in my arsenal but am not an early adopter. I like to wait until a new model has been out for a while more or less as a principle. Maybe I am just a beard stroker when it comes to laying down 1500.00 -w grips etc- for one more camera when I have several already and a number of HG lenses and multi size batteries and chargers galore to keep track of. I bought my E-3 as a refurb and it is doing just fine. I have gear lust, but try to keep it rational.... <br /> I am still getting used to the many novel qualities of my GH2, no cheapie that one (which is fairly well built you know, but not as apparently slick as the OM-D construction of knobs etc) so first I buy another micro lens, likely the well regarded 45mm 1.8 from Olympus. <br /> No, micro 4/3 will not supplant my 4/3 kit, but it certainly gets at least as much use as adjunct tool for grab and go. <br /> I do not shoot at settings that require stabilization, but I can see why it has merits too. The OM-D looks like a well thought out camera and a handsome one. Best thing is that it says the company is not sliding into product purgatory like some of our good buddies of PN have predicted. (We can take down the 'black crepe'maybe.)</p>

<p>Contemplating? Yes, definitely. I can't afford it right now, and I try to avoid buying the first model of any new product line (whether it's cameras, cars, computers, or anything else)... but this is the first camera I've been truly EXCITED about in a very long time.</p>

<p>The main thing I'm hesitant about, at this point, is moving from APS-C to a smaller sensor. I'm satisfied with the shallow depth of field I can get with an APS-C sensor and 3.5-5.6 lenses, but I'm concerned about whether or not I'll be able to do that with Micro Four Thirds. I realize that Olympus and Panasonic make some faster glass that would give me similar results to what I'm getting now, but it's mostly out of my price range. Being able to use a variety of old (and fast) manual focus lenses with adapters would be nice... but the crop factor is a concern. My Pentax 50/1.7 would make a great "100/1.7" portrait lens on MFT... but I don't do a lot of portraits, so I'm not sure how useful that would be for me. My Nikkor 28/2.8 would become a "56/2.8" and I'm not sure how useful that would be either. Lenses wider than that go beyond my price range, even the used ones. My Tamron 70-300 would become a "140-600" which would be very cool, but it's an AF lens and not very easy to focus manually.</p>

<p>I'd like to see how the new Olympus 12-50 lens performs. I'm disappointed by how slow it is at the long end (6.3), but I could get past that if the image quality is really good.</p>

<p>One obvious reason, if you use raw capture, for not buying right out of the gate is, early adopters wind up waiting weeks or even a couple of months or longer before most third-party software makers issue updates that allow you to work raw files, and Olympus Viewer software is not, on any level, a substitute for Adobe Camera RAW. or really any other capable raw converter.</p>

<p>At this point, I expect Lightroom 4 and Photoshop CS6 could well be out by the time the E-M5 hits the shelves, so chances are, the Adobe Camera RAW software in my Photoshop CS5 program will not get updated to support the E-M5, so that's another $200 upgrade (which I would do anyway) that I will have to do before I can use it to process E-M5 files.</p>

<p>Using the Micro 75-300 zoom handheld at 300mm, a stabilized finder would be a nice thing to have, whether you fundamentally think image stabilization for still capture is a good idea or not. It sure would make composition easier.</p>

<p>ILKKA ...I just added an OLY TCON x1.7 to my G3 with a just arrived 62>55 step down ring.<br>

This is on my 014140 lens. In hand held tests I found it vignetted a bit but since usually one is after more rather than less reach I will live with that and crop a bit ... so x1.7 280 AoV gives me about 500mm plus AoV without buying more than the stepping ring ...I have the TCON from earlier.<br>

I also have a Raynox 2020 but this didn't give so good results although it is a direct fit on the 014140 ... close anyway 62/63 thread. Next job is to find a lenshood for the TCON, found the 2020's one in a plumbing wholesaler's store ... a plastic pipe connector :-)<br>

Both adaptors loose about 4/3 stops when testing against a nice clear blue sky compared to about half a stop when used on my FZ50 which is already quite fast, f/3.2 at full zoom. instead of the 014140's f/5.8. "swings and roundabouts" :-)<br>

Since I am not a deprived Olympus owner without built-in EVF I can wait awhile to see what Panasonic bring out instead of rushing for the E-M5 :-) Though IBIS is attractive.</p>