I have met a lot of photographers who are using an Olympus camera. They are often very enthusiastic about their gear. A lot of their functions cannot be found in other cameras, which makes Olympus quite unique. If these cameras are so unique, why aren’t these more popular? I tried an Olympus for a few weeks to find out.
The Olympus OM-D cameras are compact and lightweight. A camera with a set of lenses can be carried in a small camera bag, perfect for traveling. When I guided a tour at Lofoten, the Olympus photographers in my group were the ones that traveled with only a small camera bag, while carrying more lenses than the Nikon, Canon, Fujfiilm, and Sony users.
The Olympus OM-D E-M1 II compared to the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV.
The thing that struck me the most were the amazing options that were built into these small cameras: live star tracking, seeing a long exposure gathering light live on screen, image stabilization that rendered a tripod unnecessary, and more. Often, I understood why the Olympus photographers were so enthusiastic about their cameras.
But at the same time, I wondered why Olympus cameras aren't more common. When I talked to the local camera shop, they said Olympus isn't selling very well. A lot of secondhand Olympus cameras were available. So, why is a Olympus camera not that popular, while it seems to be so great? To find out, I borrowed a Olympus OM-D E-M1 II with a nice set of lenses.
Capturing a rainbow in the sky and in the fountain (MZuiko 12-40mm at 34mm, ISO 400, f/11, 1/125)
I wanted to try an Olympus for two reasons. First of all, I wanted to learn more about this small camera. Making myself familiar with it would make it possible to assist the workshop and masterclass participants that were using Olympus much better. But it would also give an idea of the capabilities of the camera itself.
One Camera and Four Lenses
I received the Olympus OM-D E-M1 II together with a M.Zuiko 17mm f/1.2 lens, a M.Zuiko 25mm f/1.2 lens, a M.Zuiko 12-40mm f/2.8 lens, and a M.Zuiko 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7. It is a wonderful set for both portrait photography and landscape photography. The lenses are great quality, although the 75-300mm lens is a cheaper, lesser model. Unfortunately, the current crisis made it not possible to arrange more than a single portrait session, for which the 17mm and 25mm lens were perfect.
The Olympus set I used for almost a month.
The camera itself has a great design. Although it is very small, it feels very comfortable in my hands. The button layout is also very good. I don’t know if other Olympus camera models have the same feel, but I hope they do. There are two SD card slots available, something I find important. The one thing I did not particularly like was the rotation wheel around the shutter button, but it is something I could get used to. Although the PSAM wheel has the three custom settings, the Olympus also has a special handle to switch between two different states. It allows the user to customize the camera even more.
Part of the button layout of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 II.
I haven’t been able to adjust the camera completely to my own needs. There wasn’t enough time for that. But it became clear how the settings of this camera can easily be changed completely with just a single switch. If you like to perform different kinds of photography like I do, it is very easy to change the camera into a completely different one.
Browsing Through the Menu
The menu structure of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 II is very extensive. It has six main categories, covering most standard settings. But it is the custom menu that offers an enormous amount of pages, each having up to seven settings. The pages range from the letter A to J, some of which are divided in different numbers, like A1, A2, A3, A4, and so on. In total, there are 21 different pages, making it time consuming to find a certain setting. There is some logical order, but it will take some time to learn to find the right setting very quickly. In particular, the more exotic options are located far away, and it might take more time to reach a certain setting. Some options are somewhat cryptic, requiring the manual to find out what they do.
The menu is quite extensive. If you don't know where to find a setting, it can take some time to find it.
The buttons can be customized to your needs.
One of the amazing capabilities of this camera: the live bulb. See your image gathering light live on screen.
Unfortunately, Olympus does not provide a personal menu option, which would allow you to gather a selection of menu options that will be used very regularly. Although a lot of buttons can be customized, a custom menu option would be more than welcome.
It Is So Small Because It Has a Smaller Sensor
Using the Olympus OM-D E-M1 II is a lot of fun. But taking it with you is even more fun. Compared to my Canon EOS 5D Mark IV, it feels almost like a small compact camera, while offering more options than the Canon. The size and weight of the Olympus system makes it very convenient for travel or to take the camera with you on a long hike.
The Olympus has a M43 sensor. Yes, it is small.
The M43 sensor of the Olympus is the reason for its reduced size and weight, of course. The sensor is about half the size of a full frame, which makes it able to minimize the dimensions of the camera and lenses. On top of that, it is a mirrorless camera, which has to be taking into account also when comparing it to a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV. The crop factor of the M43 sensor is 2x, making it possible to reduce the focal length. That is why the 17mm and 25mm f/1.2 lenses are perfect portrait lenses, resembling a 35mm and a 50mm on a full frame. But instead of being large and heavy lenses, these are very compact. The 75-300mm lens is an equivalent of 150-600mm on full frame, while the size is similar to a 24-105mm lens.
The 25mm f/1.2 lens is perfect for portraits. The camera has eye-AF, and it works fine. (M.Zuiko 25mm, ISO 200, f/1.4, 1/2,500)
The sensor of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 II is about 20 megapixels, which is more than enough for most types of photography. It produces a great image and nice colors out of the box, although I change every photo to my liking in Lightroom. Because of the small sensor, noise is likely to occur more easily when the ISO levels are raised and when more extreme post-processing is performed also. I believe this is the biggest issue when it comes to Olympus cameras.
Noise Levels
How bad is the noise? Well, I was shooting small birds with the M.Zuiko 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 lens, which needed a higher ISO level because of its small aperture at 300mm. I bumped up the ISO levels to 2,500 and 3,200 and found out it wasn’t too bad at all. Yes, it has some noise compared to my big DSLR camera, but it can be reduced very well in Lightroom. This way, you end up with an image that can be used for a lot of applications.
Also, the dynamic range of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 II is not all that bad. Underexposed areas can be recovered reasonably well. Noise will occur more easily, of course. But then again, with the right amount of noise reduction, the result is acceptable.
The European Pied Flycatcher. The autofocus had some difficulties focusing on the bird's head. (M.Zuiko 75-300mm at 300mm, ISO 2,000, f/6.7, 1/125)
European robin (M.zuiko 75-300mm at 300mm, ISO 2,500, f/6.7, 1/125)
An Olympus Camera or Not an Olympus Camera?
I do like the Olympus OM-D E-M1 II very much. Its possibilities are amazing, and it handles very well despite its small size. But its small sensor makes it more difficult to shoot with high ISO levels. Also, the dynamic range of the camera's sensor is less than I would like to have, although I did not test it very thoroughly. For my landscape photography, I wouldn't care too much about the dynamic range of the sensor. On most occasions, it is better to use gradient filters or just plain old HDR. It is a completely different story when it comes down to my wedding photography. For that, I wouldn’t be happy using this Olympus camera.
A misty sunrise. Just use filters or bracketing for the exposure and you don't have to worry that much about dynamic range. Nevertheless, this is a single shot without filters. (M.zuiko 25mm, ISO 200, f/8, 1/60)
Sheep on a dike. (M.zuiko 12-40mm at 40mm, ISO 400, f/8, 1/125)
Just before the rain (M.zuiko 17mm, ISO 200, f/8, 1/100)
Bottom line, the Olympus is not the right camera for me. But I envy the users of the Olympus system for its small size and how easy it is to carry a camera and set of lenses with you. It is a very capable camera, with amazing possibilities that could benefit a lot of photographers. It is strange it isn’t more popular. I wonder, is it just because of its small sensor? Or is there another reason?
What do you think about the Olympus camera system? Are you using one? Please share your opinion or experiences in the comments below.
If you're passionate about taking your photography to the next level but aren't sure where to dive in, check out the Well-Rounded Photographer tutorial where you can learn eight different genres of photography in one place. If you purchase it now, or any of our other tutorials, you can save a 15% by using "ARTICLE" at checkout.
Maybe for older photographers they remember how Olympus abandoned them with the OM cameras? Once bitten, twice shy.
Many prefer optical finders to the electronic versions.
Canon and Nikon have much more advertising presence.
People who use a camera tend to recommend that brand - Olympus is already a small fish in a big pond.
So Canon should be on trouble? They changed mount in '87. If you like optical viewfinders Pentax is the way to go. All others will abandon the mirror.
Canon are in Big trouble, so are most of the other removable lens camera manufacturers, and there's a lot of change together with planned obsolescence happening.
RE the menu: The reviewer obviously didn't turn on the supercontrol panel. It allows access to all commonly used functions via the directional arrows or via the touchscreen. No one uses the regular A-J menu to change common functions.
The SCP menu is something I couldn't live without anymore. So brilliant!
I use these cameras for weddings all the time. Why wouldnt they be good enough?
I shoot primarily fashion, fitness, swimwear, beauty. Secondarily landscape. I sold my D750 and full set of gear to buy OMD EM1mk2 with 12-40 2.8 and 45 1.2 when we had 2 children and space was at a premium.
Loved the huge reduction in space and weight, so much easier to carry when children was coming along. I have printed 100cm wide prints that I'm happy with.
Did not like the noise at iso800 and above, felt that the eye focus lost accuracy in the evenings and lower light, the 45/1.2 did not give as shallow depth of field as I would like, and I felt the pro lenses cost as much as full frame lenses.
Those were my only 4 gripes, to the point where when kids grew up a bit, i bought Sony A7R4 with 85/1.4 and have never since used the Olympus. Single shot eye auto focus is much more accurate, noise is lower, and there's more fine details in landscapes.
I am going for a 3-week family trip and am considering to bring the Olympus instead of Sony to carry less weight and volume. But probably I'll carry the Sony and a 24-70. The 85/1.4 will stay home.
I wouldn't expect anything else. You are comparing a €4k body with a €1300 one. It would be quite disappointing if the Sony wasn't better.
That was a very important consideration for me. Yes a big difference in body cost. But once you have the body, your incremental costs are lenses, lights and accessories. My total system cost is much more than the body.
I live in the Middle East, the current retail price of A7R4 is about €3025 in the shops, not €4k.
The Olympus 45 1.2 cost as much as Sigma 85 1.4. Olympus 25 1.2 cost more than the Sigma 50 1.4. Olympus 17 1.2 cost twice as much as Samyang 35 1.4....
And that was a big headache for me... should i keep investing in lens collection or take one hit and switch body...
I use the same Godox studio and portable light setup, no cost of change except changing one trigger.
Comparing 3th party manufacturer vs brand own. Way to go... Compare the Pro line vs Sony GM or Sony Zeiss.
I'm more interested in the results than the logo on the lenses. There are no 3rd party f1.2 lenses for Olympus, hence you're stuck with top price Oly Pro lenses.
I'm not a professional reviewer or YouTuber, i take photos with gear that i buy for my own money. I can't buy $2500 GM lenses, I got mortgage and school fees to pay.
Anyway, I'm happy with the switch that I made. What is your experience and recommendation?
Good luck with your Sigma lenses. They are optical fine most of the time. Sometimes you will need an update and than it will become nasty.
Yes, Olympus's AF has lagged considerably. They are only promising bird tracking in the EM1X whereas Nikon has it in the Z50 and Canon in the R6. The way Olympus retains a minuscule market share is by crippling worse than any other brand, and neglecting AF. Then the sensor is already inferior by 2-stops, wrapping that inferiority in $0.99 apps like ProCapture and HHHR and panorama mode (which my 1990 film camera had!), just makes poor management decisions stand out. It's not only that MFT is being sold, but the entire MFT platform may go away.
It amazes me all the talk of MFT being no good due to high ISO performance. How did so many of the worlds most famous images get taken when high iso meant 400ASA/ISO and colour film was typically ASA/ISO. Add that for many subjects the Olympus Omd means you can shoot at a far lower shutter speed and you don't need the extremes.Also the word "full' frame used like it has any special merit. It is but the 'minimum' film size professionally acceptable for a completely different chemical technology....amusingly also scoffed at when it was the micro four thirds of its day..." Oh I couldn't possibly shoot on less the n medium format... 35mm? OK for snappers and tourists I suppose. Just look at the grain!"
I say that as someone who sold all their 35mm sensor sized kit and went MFT long ago and never regretted it.
Truthfully, in 9 out of 10 instances it takes a far better picture than my old Canon 5D ii as it is actually with me not in a cupboard.
Oh, and as for dynamic range, there is a lot of myth on this.Accirding to dxolab charts my current EM1 mkii has Higher dynamic range than my first full frame 5D had and nobody ever complained about the range on the 5D.
Sadly, an awful lot of "full" frame hype is a kind of misinformed photograohic snobbery with plenty of pros shooting MFT while amateurs insist they themselves "need" the larger sensor. Ask Joe Edelman!
That is the core of the mft/ff discussion. Its all about technically perfect photos, not about good/bad photos in terms of creativity. With any camera nowadays you can make any creative shots. But there may be technical differences visible for pros.
It's about technically comparable photos for the same $. Olympus with the 1/4 size sensor is poorly priced now. Inferior sensors cannot charge FF prices. That's what did Olympus in and gave them such a small market share they are on the verge of not existing anymore, both brand and mount.
There's more to cameras than mere sensor (and its size).
That's what people say when the sensor is inferior. They change the topic.
It is about the sensor. Sensor inferiority is what is threatening m43 with extinction.
And Olympus is losing so much $$ at those prices they have to pay JIP to take over their Imaging business.
My wife has the 5DII as well. She hasn't taken a single photo with it in the last 3-4 years. She prefers her original E-M5 over it. And why wouldn't she? That Canon is huuuuuge - and isn't even better. :)
I own the Olympus E-M1 mkii with a couple of lenses and mainly use it for wildlife. I have it paired with the PanaLeica 100-400mm which is perfect for bird photography. Although the system is very light, that isn't the main draw. It is the size of the set up that I love. I can fit my camera, the PanaLeica 100-400mm and my Olympus 12-40mm Pro in a small shoulder bag. As more of a casual shooter, I much prefer this to a much larger and more conspicuous set up.
Another huge benefit of the system, for me at least, is the 2x crop factor. Being able to have an 200 - 800mm equiv lens, that costs under £1000 and is very sharp that fits into a shoulder bag is amazing. You can never have too much zoom range when it comes to bird photography.
Handling is also an area I feel the Olympus nails. Once you get used to the menu system and the customisable function buttons, it becomes such a quick camera to use. The custom settings on the mode dial are great as well. Being able to set up 3 totally different modes that can be changed at the click of a dial is ideal. I have mine set for stationary wildlife, birds in flight and landscapes - all with different shutter speeds, ISO, autofocus areas, autofocus modes etc.
A few areas where the M43 systems do fall down is effective aperture and noise.. Having the PanaLeica at 400mm, the max aperture is f6.3 (so equiv 800mm and f12.6). This means that it is fairly hard to get good background separation (unless the background is really far away from the focal plane). Of course this can be mitigated by changing your shooting technique, but sometimes that is easier said than done.
As for noise, I haven't really found that to be an issue. I recently shot comet neowise with my brother who owns a Sony A7iii. We both used comparable settings and lenses and achieved very similar results. You had to blow them up to 1:1 to notice the difference in noise levels. My brother was really surprised in the result.
If Olympus (or JIP) developed a new M43 sensor with the latest technology, including animal eye AF, I would be all over that like a pack of cats. I guess the question is whether the M43 sensors have reached the physical limit of their capability... Other than that, the next camera I purchase will probably be either a Sony or Canon mirrorless. The R6 looks to be pretty special with some excellent glass to boot.
"I guess the question is whether the M43 sensors have reached the physical limit of their capability."
Nope. Maybe with the current technology but the physical limits are still far away.
I'm with you there and think that the noise is more down to processing than sensor size. Noise seems to be a processing problem deciding on whether the pixels should be red, green or blue and not getting it quite right. This can happen with all digital cameras and can even occur in parts of a photographed sky, often the lightest part the picture.
The 20mp M4/3 sensors pixel density if scaled up to Full frame would result in Full frame 80mp sensor. My guess is if all the FF sensors were at 80mp they'd have similar noise processing issues.
I've been shooting with Pentax pretty much the whole time. But getting an OMD EM 1 Mark II next year with their new M.Zuiko 12-45mm f/4 Pro. As a backcountry ski/splitboard guide and photographer,
both weight and size are something for me to keep in mind. After playing a bit with an OMD 5.II I fell in love with the system. So small, light and yet solid and weather proof. This set will go great with the rest of my gear (skins, extra layers, ropes, med kit, etc.) Can't wait to add it to my kit next season.
On my advice, my daughter, then age 26, traded in her Canon Rebel DSLR for the smallest OM-D. She added a long zoom, and I gave her a small Zuiko 35-100 zoom and two small Zuiko or Lumix primes. Well, she ended up leaving her M43 setup at home, relying instead on her iPhone. Yet this year, she replaced it with a Sony A ILC system because it's "better."
If you replace a MFT setup for a iPhone than buying Sony ff is also a waste of money. She won't notice any difference.
11 year old MFT camera vs current smartphone; https://youtu.be/yZqUyXRvMMU
It is all about using the right tool for the job. I worked as a press and commercial photographer for 31 years. I used everything from a Minox Miniature to an 8x10. If you are good at your craft you learn to exploit your chosen tool’s advantages, but also how to compensate for it’s short comings.
When I retired in Jan 2014, The Olly EM-1 had been on the market for a month or two. I had unloaded all my old work gear and wanted something more portable and lighter for amateur.My longtime supplier suggested the EM-1 and loaned me a rig for a week. Hated it at first, I had been shooting manual cameras my whole career. I was lost in the menus and getting pissed. After a bit I got it set to shoot Jpeg+raw files on manual. I was in love from that point. It does everything I need it do. If I was still working I would probably be using a full frame camera.
When people ask me what is the best camera, I tell them the one they will use the most.
Shutter shock is the reason people don’t buy them. I bought a whole system with the first EM1 after selling my 5D mk II’s. Never again. Shutter shock and an electronic setting they released to counteract it was a disgrace. Moved to Fujifilm and haven’t looked back
That was a problem fixed with a firmware update. Good luck with Fuji who had also problems fixed with firmware.
Sadly buying any new first edition novel camera from most manufacturers results in being a snagging tester. Just ask the videographers who bought the canon R5. You just have to trust they'll roll out a firmware fix sooner or later. Those issues tend to disappear across all brands if you buy into those models where the once latest and greatest feature sets are trickling down.
Topaz DeNoise AI works magic on Olympus high ISO RAW files. I don’t hesitate to shoot at ISO 1600 and 3200. What I give up in high ISO IQ us very little compared to what I gain in the weight of the lenses.
I moved from a D4 to an E-M1X for the vast bulk of my professional work. Being able to have a small backpack with two bodies (M1.2 and M1X) along with 9 lenses and a flash is...liberating to say the least.
My 7-14 2.8 is about the same size as my Nikon 85mm f/1.8. That's AMAZING. The 40-150, same size and length as my Nikon 24-70 2.8.
Low light performance is expectedly not great, ISO 1600 is my limit on the OMD. But being able to shoot the 25 and 45 PRO, and 75mm f/1.8 wide open with very little penalty in IQ is what keeps me from using such high ISO's in just about any situation.
One benefit that nobody seems to talk about is the smaller chip, using shorter focal lengths = greater DOF.
Shooting tabletop product work on the OMD is A M A Z I N G.
It means I can be at f/5.6-f/8 the whole time and have plenty of DOF to get everything in focus without diffraction ruining the party. Combine that with a Hi-Res mode that works with strobes, and my OMD reliably outputs product images with greater detail than my D810.
I use both-MFT and FF for work. I use a Lumix G85 for video, but I own 2 Olympus E-M5 MKII bodies that have done multiple trips overseas. They have been indispensable as i can carry them and a number of lenses in a small backpack. I have coaxed some incredible images out of them!
It don't look like the author ever used the Super Control Panel. I realize that it is not exactly the "custom menu" the author was looking for, but it does contain all the major control and puts them at one's finger tips with a double click of the "OK" button.
And on the E-M1 Mark III and E-M1X you do have a custom menu.
I have an EM-1 Mk III and absolutely love it. Three years ago we were preparing to go to England and hike across Hadrian's Wall (Mikledore arranged the B&Bs and I recommend them). Up to 17 miles a day with some pretty good elevation changes. I had been shooting Nikon since the late 60s and my current camera was a D800E with quite a few lenses, including the 80-400. I realized that I did not want to carry the body, a tripod, and 4 lens (including that one) and I had a friend who was ecstatic over his EM-1, so I decided to switch. I ended up with a Pen-F, which felt like a modern Leica M2R (which I owned long ago).
The stabilization was so good, I didn't need a tripod. We went to Stonehenge for the summer solstice and I got some amazing photos, including this one shot handheld with the 40-150 at dawn. I shot lots at high ISOs of that scene and other night shots and was able to make really nice 17x24" prints on my Canon PRO-1000. Noise was easily eliminated.
When the EM-1 Mk III came out, I got that and I am absolutely gob smacked (as my UK friends say). It is an amazing camera and I have customized all four of the custom settings and can switch back and forth at will. One of those allows me to shoot my landscape shots handheld and get a gorgeous 50Mpxl image. I shoot a lot of live musician stuff on stage and the ability to turn the knob and get the ProRes where I hold down the shutter halfway and when I trip it, I get the 16 previous RAW frames in the buffer - I never miss a shot now.
This is a great camera and I *hope* with all my heart that MicroFourThirds has a long and happy life, even if Olympus is carving out that division. I have zero regrets and have 8 lenses now - and I intend to buy the new 100-400 zoom (135 equiv is 200-800) for birding.
I promise you will have no regrets if you go with Olympus.
I use both of my Olympus cameras (E620 & OM-D E-M10 Mark II) for people/street, portraits, birds, flowers, zoo and general all-around shooting and can't complain about anything. If something does come out a bit "weird", it's my fault. At first I went a bit "nutsy" with the buttons and dials, but after a few "you tube" walkthroughs, I became easier to set and use its features. I'm going to see about and try night photography with it and see if I can do it right.
Interesting article, and discussion. My inputs on this topic:
I'm a photographer using two Olympus EM1-2 and a bunch of lenses (PRO 25, 45, 12-40, 12-100 and some others). I don't do wildlife and that sort of "Olympus" things, but portraits, studio shootings, landscapes, street.
Why did I go to this system and why I still stick to it?
- the small size and light weight, obviously. I was at the time fed up to carry the DSLR cumbersome things...
- the 4:3 factor, I like it over the full frame 3:2 which I find often too long. And I find interesting to observe that this 4:3 factor tends to the square which tends to the circle, optimizing the image delivered by the lens.
- several features such as IBIS, ergonomics (except the cumbersome menus), sturdiness...
- the optical quality of the Pro lenses.
I don't have the experience of the EM1-3 and I would love to use handheld HR and
Of course FF delivers better image quality at high ISO, but I rarely miss that. ISO 1600 is often enough and perfectly usable if correctly exposed and developed with a good software (Capture One for me). And the MFT IBIS is amazing for static subjects, allowing to use ISO 200 quite often (especially with and excellent wide open 1.2 lens).
And yes, the DOF is shallower with a FF camera with let's say an 1.4-1.8 lens. But this DOF topic is a bit overrated, a shallower DOF doesn't deliver always a better image! It is nowadays fashionable for some reasons, it is also an easier way to not compose an image, excluding the background matter...
My thinking is that M43 is still a very valuable system, even for pros.
I guess that the biggest mistakes that Olympus committed were a price tag too high and a bad and inconsistency communication policy. Not to speak of the big influence of some sad youtubers (only focused on the tech and perf sheets).
Great cameras but I think the main reason why most M43 shooters get into Olympus is that because they used to be substantially cheaper than full frame. However FF is coming down in price, and phone cameras are approaching (if not better) than a M43 camera with a kit lens, so it will be increasingly niche.
Current smartphone vs 11 year old mft; https://youtu.be/yZqUyXRvMMU
FF is coming down in price indeed. But an entry level FF can't be compared to a pro level MFT. There is so much more than sensor alone in a camera.
I agree with you completely, and the video was really intersting, thanks! The video does do the testing with a really nice prime lens, I was referring to the garbage kit lenses that exist for m43. However i think for most people phones are *good enough*, and using a 10 year old MFT camera will be a much worse experience overall, as its much more difficult to use and share photos for the average person. So that is really a moot point.
There are lots of nice m43 f1.8 and f1.4 primes which cost and weigh similar to full frame f2.8 primes. The em5 or em10 with the pana 20mm pamcake lens is a great combination. However, it's the pricing of higher end models which is terrible. The f2.8 pro zoom lenses for m43 are more expensive than many ff zooms, and dont let in enough light for the tiny sensor
Greetings People
I've never used and Olympus digital camera, although Olympus offered to send me one while I was on assignment but I never got back to them do to time restraints. What I don't get is this noise at high ISO or you can't do this or that or I can't shoot at 6400, so what? From what I've seen they are fast, very weather sealed, excellent lenses, and produce great, excellent results. If your having issues take a look in the mirror, you may see the problem. I'm getting ready to buy a E1 mk1 for the 16 mp with no AA filter, and for bad weather condition not to mention size. I guarantee I'll get excellent 20x24 prints with all the new software available today. But then I'm a boomer that's been in this business 43 years and I got my "pro" standing (what ever that means) by my work not paying for a membership. Oh well I'm sure the E1 M1 will work fine. How did we do it using ASA 100-400 film??
Stay safe
Roger
I found with a fast prime lens and amazing stabilisation you can gather enough light to shoot dark scenes without pushing the iso too much.
The EM1 marque 1 is a very good camera. I am quite happy with shooting at ISO6400with it. The main reason I use an EOS M5 is shallow dof and the ability to use my L grade lenses. The Olympus IBIS is second to none.
Hello everyone,
My points are:
- If you didn't trey out the system for at least 5000 photos, than you have no right to say is not good for what you need,
- I shoot weddings and I use glas with f1.2 and the results are as good as any FF camera in normal conditions. (not speaking about extreme low light),
- nobody mentioned that only a Olympus FL-600R is the only flash that you can use in the rain (for weddings, portraits, wildlife, and so on),
- If you shoot wildlife and didn't trey out PRO CAPTURE, you are missing something monumental,
- If you shoot astro or galaxy photos then take a look at Olympus 8mm f1.8 and LIVE COMP feature or LIVE TIME,
- for landscapes M1x and M1lll have digital ND and works great
- all FF cameras have just 12k kelvin and Oly has 14k. This is nice to have when you want to shoot a sunset and you don't need to bump it in the editing and burn the colors
- for landscape or architecture the high res option is a really nice feature to have,
And what is really funny for me, is seeing all the negative comments of the FF owners and after that o see their portfolios :))) I would be embarrassed to shoot with a '' professional FF camera'', 10.000$ equipment and to have so bad photos.
Here you can see some photos that I did since I switched to Oly last November:
https://500px.com/p/gheorghesilviu87?view=photos
F1.2 m43 lenses are not any cheaper or lighter than a decent f1.8 FF lens, but yeah every system has its advantages, I think the issue is that M43 and FF owners want to claim that their set ups are the best choice for everyone :) Nice pics!