bob_topp

<p>See: <a href=" , shot handheld, using Rokkor 135/2.8 on OM-D. Image stabilization was excellent, and the manual focus assist quite good as well. <br>

See also: <a href=" , shot handheld indoors using Nikkor 200/4. <br>

and: <a href=" shot in good light, handheld using the 200/4.<br>

The discussion of stabilization above should be addressed a bit. In-body stabilization for the lens would have been there all the time on the Olympus bodies, but stabilization of the EVF image is relatively new (and works quite well). It was no fun at all doing manual focus with the Panasonic GH-1. And yes, entering the correct focal length for the lens makes a big difference on the OM-D!<br>

I would like to add that metering with the manual lenses is no trouble at all. I set the camera up in either Manual or Shutter Priority, look at the exposure meter through the lens, and adjust the aperture ring on the lens until the desired exposure is obtained on the meter- works pretty much like an old match-needle system with AE set to wide area metering. Obviously the image may become a bit dimmer in low light if you stop down very far, but f/5.6 to f/8 should be fine for most shots on the OM-D anyway.<br>

Regards, Bob</p>

<p>I have both the D700 and the OM-D EM-5. I am happy with the performance of both, but they are for somewhat different purposes. I use the D700 mainly to shoot salsa dancing and some to shoot action tennis. Salsa is in dimly lit club atmospheres, and I use a Tamron 28-75/2.8 with SB-600 or SB-800 flash, typically shooting at ISO 2000 or so. I am beginning to experiment with the OM-D for salsa- it did pretty well in a few shots at around ISO 5000 using the supplied, very small flash: <a href="http://public.fotki.com/hbn-photos/salsa/2012-09-13-salsa-at-pinz/first-cut/hbn00725-copy.html">http://public.fotki.com/hbn-photos/salsa/2012-09-13-salsa-at-pinz/first-cut/hbn00725-copy.html</a> Note, though that I have not been able to do a one-for-one comparison in Camera Raw yet (have to update my CS4 to CS6)- one thing that is impressive about the D700 is the ability to manipulate the raw images without much damage, pulling a lot of background out of the shadows with the fill slider; I hope to see this come true with the Olympus, but must wait...<br>

As far as other applications, I have been playing with some legacy lenses on the OM-D and doing strictly manual focus. It is a real pleasure to use in this way and will get me a lot of reach over the D700 when shooting tennis tournaments at public courts, where there are often courts I can't reach easily with the 70-200/2.8. <br>

While playing with a Rokkor 35 mm/f2.8 lens indoors (because the weather was so bad), I pushed the ISO all the way to 10,000 for the available light, took advantage of the in-body stabilization and pulled off this handheld shot at f/5.6, 1/30 second: <a href=" This is a JPEG directly from the OM-D. I have the noise filter turned off in the OM-D and the sharpening turned all the way down. As a result, I applied two layers of high-pass sharpening at a radius of about 2.1, 100% opacity. There is minimal noise in the shadows, which could be filtered very easily if it were critical.<br>

Although the OM-D's weakest capability is continuous auto-focus, AF-S works quite well in moderate-to-good light. In the club shot above, the built-in focus assist light had no trouble at ranges of 15-20 feet; although I was using the 14mm/2.5 at about f/5.6, so I probably had quite a lot of DOF to work with. The few shots I made in the club were relatively snappy (responsive); note that even the D700 struggles to get off shots in this lighting from time to time.<br>

Personally I am very pleased to have both cameras at hand. The Olympus is portable, and I have a whole handful of inexpensive, high quality second-hand lenses to use with it, along with the 12-50, Panasonic 14/2.5 and Panasonic 100-300. High ISO performance is quite good and responsiveness is far better than the GH1 I just retired.<br>

Best regards, Bob</p>