What's the story so far? OMD-EM5

[Terry]

My first, and so far only, foray into m4/3 was the EP-1, and the focus on that with the Panasonic 45-200 was just too slow, so I gave up.

Matt

A lot has changed in 3 years.

 

[Jeffg53]

Jeff,

In the menu system "gears-A", go to AEL/AFL and select Mode 3. The focus will move to Fn1 button on back. Unfortunately, for the design of my hand the Fn1 button is very difficult to hit while holding the camera up to one's eye. Over time I hope some of the smaller bones in my hand will move so I can accomodate this setting easier.

Gary

Gary, many thanks. I have small hands so I hope it will work for me. I'll try one out again armed with this new knowledge I'm so used to working this way that I really don't want to do it another way.

 

[MGrayson]

A lot has changed in 3 years.

Terry, I believe you.

What would you use for a fast tele/zoom?

Thanks,

Matt

 

[MGrayson]

I apologize if there is already a Must Have Lenses for OM-D thread, but I can't find one. Most folks seem to have a collection from earlier m43 cameras, or else have a large collection of old glass that they adapt.

Despite my harsh words above, after seeing the posted results, and reading the opinions of some of you that I have come (greatly) to respect, I ordered the wee beastie and grip.

All I have is the kit lens from the EP-1 and the Panny 45-200. I have the wide end covered with the M9, Zeiss 21, and 28 Cron. What I miss is reliable focus at the long end with shallow DoF. My favorite lens of all time is the Canon 85/1.2, although the 70-200/2.8 gets a lot more use. This is the functionality I'm going for with the OM-D. Is the 45/1.8 the first choice? Is there a good tele-zoom? Am I wrong about the wide end and once I start using the 7-14, or some other wide lens I'll always carry it?

If past experience is any guide, I'll end up with one of everything, but it would be nice to start off on the right foot.

Thanks, as always, for the excellent S/N ratio here,

Matt

 

[Terry]

Terry, I believe you.

What would you use for a fast tele/zoom?

Thanks,

Matt

There is a 35-100 f2.8 due out around Photokina. So, that is the 70-200 equivalent. The 12-35 f2.8 (24-70) is just starting to hit the stores now.

So, in terms of fast lenses the system has (all in equiv focal lengths with actual aperture - let's not have an equivalence argument) All native m4/3 mount

24mm f2
28mm f2.5
35mm f0.95 (voigtlander)
35mm f2.8 (just OK)
40mm f1.7 (the original gold standard for the system)
38mm f2.8 (Sigma - very good)
50mm f0.95 (voigtlander)
50mm f1.4
60mm f2.8 (Sigma)
90mm f2.8 (macro)
90mm f1.8
120mm f? (macro announced)
150mm f1.8

14-28mm f4
24-70mm f2.8
70-200mm f2.8 (coming soon)

Edit: OK I made the above lens list before reading your second post. Your two M lenses really don't cover you for wide because they are 42 and 56mm respectively.

If you wanted a really good kit....that was all AF

12-35 f2.8
35-100 f2.8 (wait a few months)
45 f1.8 is tiny and nice (a decent bit cheaper than the 45 macro)
75 f1.8 is looking like a great lens - pricey doesn't come with hood but will give you fast tele until 35-100 is released.
25 f1.4 is a very nice lens but some are saying with the 12-35 they don't need it
7-14 f4 I like better than 9-18
100-300 f3.5-5.6 for long (slow lens but worked fine on Safari)

on my wish list....a teleconverter for the 35-100

Welcome anyone else's list....I certainly would enjoy hearing about others choices for a native lens kit if they were starting from scratch today

 

[emr]

To be honest, the only thing the OM-D needs right now to make it a "perfect" (for me) camera is a function similar to focus peaking.

What?! I have been seriously considering getting one these last days, but I thought it DOES have focus peaking. In fact I more or less took it as a given. Are you saying it doesn't???

 

[MGrayson]

Terry,

Thank you for the comprehensive list. :thumbs:

How can one have an equivalency argument? There's only one answer, and it's obvious. :ROTFL:

-Matt

Edit: Oh, I know that the M lenses won't be wide on the OM-D. I'll use the M9 for landscapes. I just never got the hang of using it for people, as rangefinder focussing and I never clicked. For people, I drag out the 1DsII, and THAT's what I want to replace. Of course, laziness (or simple convenience) will set in, and I'll probably start shooting wide with the OM-D, but for starters, I want to cover the long end.

 

[Braeside]

What?! I have been seriously considering getting one these last days, but I thought it DOES have focus peaking. In fact I more or less took it as a given. Are you saying it doesn't???

No it doesn't have peaking. However a lot of folks are still managing to use it with their Leica R lenses never the less.

 

[Terry]

What?! I have been seriously considering getting one these last days, but I thought it DOES have focus peaking. In fact I more or less took it as a given. Are you saying it doesn't???

There is a magnified view but NO focus peaking.

 

[MGrayson]

If Jono "Focus Peak" Slack went with the OM-D over the NEX, that says a lot.

Come to think of it, I have a 75 Cron that almost never gets used, and a M to m43 adapter. That should be a nice test of MF on the OM-D.

 

[GaryAyala]

@MGrayson:

I'm not a µ4/3 fanboy ... but, (the big but), I am hoping to replace my FF cameras with µ4/3. For what I shoot and my expectations the IQ of µ4/3 is fine. What is missing is a native lens system behind the camera of what I'll call pro-quality photojournalist lenses. The wide fast and long fast lenses of Canon and Nikon. In 35mm film FOV, the 200mm & 300mm f/2.8, the 70-200mm f/2.8 and a 16-35mm f/2.8 would make me a very happy camper.

Panasonic has come out with a 12-35mm f2.8, Pre-orders are being taken for the Olympus 75mm f1.8 and I think Oly has announced a 35-100 f/2 and a 60mm macro ... so the long end seems to be covered. Meanwhile I can live with f/4 on the 7-14mm.

Gary

PS- As to "must have" lenses ... depends on what you shoot, but for starters the Oly 12mm and 45mm are at the top, toss in Pany-Leica 25 and you have a good start. Pany's 45-200 and the 100-300 are both very sharp. If you need a pancake the Pany 20mm and 14mm both pack a lot of punch for their size.

Kit lenses notwithstanding, the only lens that generally gets panned is the Oly 17mm and occasionally the Pany-Leica 45mm for its tendency to hunt (but it's a macro and macros hunt). At least that's been my observations.

G

 

[Ario Arioldi]

The possibility to use the magnification in conjunction with the image stabilizer makes the focus peaking almost unnecessary.

 

[m_driscoll]

What?! I have been seriously considering getting one these last days, but I thought it DOES have focus peaking. In fact I more or less took it as a given. Are you saying it doesn't???

emr: I thought focus peaking was a deal breaker, too. Jono, and my use of the body with M and R glass convinced me, otherwise. The E-M5's and the mft lenses have replaced the Nex 7 and the A77, along with, as Jono noted, all of that nice Zeiss glass.

Cheers, Matt

Zenfolio | Matt Driscoll

 

[MGrayson]

Well, I'll be damned. The 12-50 isn't ONLY zoom by wire. I guess I'll have to give it a try.

Hmmm... have to be careful. After accumulating a Leica M system, and thinking long and hard about MF digital, all this glass looks free, but I bet it adds up quickly.... :bugeyes:

-Matt

 

[djonesii]

Love my OM-D.

The D300 is now dead in the water. To paraphrase Cleese, and EX-Camera, bereft of life -- gone to meet its maker.

The OM-D is that good.

The Pana-Lieca is an exceptional normal lens. The Oly 45 is super.

I've never really needed fast and wide, so the 9-18 works just fine.

As of now, nothing to replace the 120-300 2.8 sigma, but then again, it weighs more than my entire m-43rd system combined.

I've really tried to like Manual Focus camera systems, but I'm just too old and my eyes are failing .... back to Python ... No! The RD-1 is gone, the Contax on the block now. Just can't bring my self to get rid of the 4X5 Polaroid or my Wife's Grand Fathers 645 folder.

Best;

Dave

 

[MGrayson]

Hi Dave,

Interesting what an improvement in quality we've seen at the 35mm and u43 formats in the past 6 months! Now to see what shoes drop at Photokina. The MF people have some catching up to do.

Disclaimer: (in case Marc "fotografz" reads this forum ) This is for entertainment purposes only, not mindless upgrading to the latest thing. Not a bit.

-Matt

 

[smartwombat]

The more I try with it, the more problems I encounter.
Like pull zoom shots.
If I zoom while shooting the camera stops!
Then once I stop zooming the AF and shooting continues.

That's a serious problem for my rally stage shots, where typically I'd take long shots and continue in a burst while zooming out as the car passes (then duck the flying stones).

 

[jnewell]

The more I try with it, the more problems I encounter.
Like pull zoom shots.
If I zoom while shooting the camera stops!
Then once I stop zooming the AF and shooting continues.

That's a serious problem for my rally stage shots, where typically I'd take long shots and continue in a burst while zooming out as the car passes (then duck the flying stones).

Based on my feeble experiments so far, sports/action photography is an area, maybe the area, where currently available m4/3 cameras just can't replace a good pro or pro-sumer DSLR. Given the rate of development in all technical hardware, maybe next year...

 

[jonoslack]

Based on my feeble experiments so far, sports/action photography is an area, maybe the area, where currently available m4/3 cameras just can't replace a good pro or pro-sumer DSLR. Given the rate of development in all technical hardware, maybe next year...

I think you're probably right.
The problem is continuous AF, which still seems to be the domain of Phase Detect AF systems.

I don't do much of this stuff, but have done some surfing shots - I got dreadful results using c-af. it was much better to use Single AF on the shutter release and to fully press the shutter (not half press) when you want the shot. I got a pretty good hit rate (because the AF is very fast) but if I was a professional sports shooter I'd still be on a big Nikon.

 

[jnewell]

I think you're probably right.
The problem is continuous AF, which still seems to be the domain of Phase Detect AF systems.

I don't do much of this stuff, but have done some surfing shots - I got dreadful results using c-af. it was much better to use Single AF on the shutter release and to fully press the shutter (not half press) when you want the shot. I got a pretty good hit rate (because the AF is very fast) but if I was a professional sports shooter I'd still be on a big Nikon.

Thanks for that input - it will be valuable. :salute: My sports photography still belongs to a pair of Nikons but later this month I'm going to be doing it in the UK with m4/3 for a couple of different reasons. I wouldn't have thought that single AF would work well, so your input on that is very much appreciated. I'll do some experimenting with it before I go.