The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

OM-D is Camera of the Year 2012 on DPR

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
They would have transplanted the concept of the original OM much better if it had an optical viewfinder and a full-frame sensor. The original OM was nearly a Leica-sized full-frame camera. There was something especially sweet about that. With a 2X crop factor, the EM5 seems only superficially OM-like. That doesn't make it a bad camera or undeserving of its distinction. It just bothers me a bit that they are using the old name, but not delivering anything compatible. It seems to me that a prerequesite for using the OM name would be full compatibility with the OM-system lenses, and that would require a full-frame sensor to start.
35mm digital OM replacement: See Canon EOS 6D
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I would rather choose a D600! Just my 5c ....
As a Nikon user, that was my first thought too, but:

- That would mean changing the mount on my OM-lenses, leaving them unusable for the OM cameras unless I change back. With the 6D, I only need to fit an adapter to the camera.
- The 6D has interchangeable focusing screens. I believe split-screen/microprism is available as well (third party), and obviously the Eg-S screen from Canon.
- From what I've seen so far, the 6D seems better at high ISO.
- If video is a requirement, the 6D is better than the D600.
- The 6D has built in GPS and WiFi while the D600 has neither.

But since I'm also looking for a camera that would work as a digital partner with my F6, I should have both, right? :ROTFL: :loco: :deadhorse:
 

jonoslack

Active member
They would have transplanted the concept of the original OM much better if it had an optical viewfinder and a full-frame sensor.
HI Zlatko
That surely requires you first to define 'the concept of the original OM':
If you define it as a small, lightweight system which produces excellent results then it fits perfectly.

If, as you are suggesting, you define it as A full frame camera with an optical viewfinder, then Olympus would have been mad to make one; because it would have to compete with the D600 and the D6, and fast AF lenses would be as big as those from Canikon (even if they could make an OM sized body).

all the best
 

jonoslack

Active member
Tell me if I'm crazy for trading in a Nikon D90 with a 35/1.8 Dx lens and a 16-85 DX lens for an OM-D with a 12mm, 17mm and 45mm kit?
Sounds completely sensible to me; I think it makes a perfect companion to a Leica - sometimes more depth of field is a good thing!

all the best
 

Tesselator

New member
This became and interesting discussion. :)

A couple of points from me (even though you all already know this I think):

1) Popularity doesn't equal "best". In the world of gadgets and products it almost never does. There are literally millions of examples I could name but all ya gotta do is consider the dynamics of popularity. And who here doesn't understand advertising at this point in their lives? I'm sure some of us could even point to ad campaigns which sold parents on the idea of feeding their children actual poison. To them it was the "best" or at least a good thing to do (at the time). It's pretty easy to make something which isn't even close to "the best" popular. Maybe I take myself too seriously but when I'm asked to vote on a product for "Best of" rankings I become conscious of a few things like the limits of my own knowledge, the choices I'm being handed, and what "best" means within those confines. Of course it's the job of the pollster to set up their participants by instilling a little awareness of those kinds of things too so if this became simply a popularity poll I have to at least partially blame DPR.

10) Someone mentioned the GH3 as the best for video? Really? What is the RED? What is the A99?

and I skipped 2 through 9 just to save you all the pain. :)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
As a Nikon user, that was my first thought too, but:

- That would mean changing the mount on my OM-lenses, leaving them unusable for the OM cameras unless I change back. With the 6D, I only need to fit an adapter to the camera.
- The 6D has interchangeable focusing screens. I believe split-screen/microprism is available as well (third party), and obviously the Eg-S screen from Canon.
- From what I've seen so far, the 6D seems better at high ISO.
- If video is a requirement, the 6D is better than the D600.
- The 6D has built in GPS and WiFi while the D600 has neither.

But since I'm also looking for a camera that would work as a digital partner with my F6, I should have both, right? :ROTFL: :loco: :deadhorse:
1) The D600 has the far better AF system.
2) I do not see much sense shooting old OM lenses on a 24 (or 22) MP camera, they for sure are not up to the needs of this resolution
3) Using GPS and WiFi significantly reduces battery life, so when you want to shoot only close to home or in studio that does not matter ....
4) Not sure why you say the 6D has better video, I would assume the other way around
5) higher ISO is same or better with the D600 - do not believe all what is written in Internet published tests
6) if you have Nikon (lenses) already why mess up with Canon else you really want to go for some of their high speed primes, which are not available from Nikon

To make it short, for the 6D I would not jump ships, maybe only for a 5DIII with some high speed primes ;)
 

Jonas

Active member
It's close to half a year ago DPR Forum contributor Anders W posted about his findings. He was not the first one but probably the E-M5 user having checked his camera most rigorous.

I'm not sure about any consensus other than it is a good move avoiding shutter speeds around 1/60-1/125. Many don't recognize the problem. Everything is as usual.

I have the IBIS turned on, always, and I haven't run into any problems. Maybe I'm not good at peeping (but I thought I was) or I've just been lucky. That is in real life use. If I do a controlled test I can also see some minor problems with some lenses.

I think you are supposed to either perform your own test and go from there, or just not care.
 

greypilgrim

New member
I would rather choose a D600! Just my 5c ....
Heh, I went the opposite direction. I specifically chose the OM-D over the D600 (with considerable hand wringing). Lots of that choice based on ergonomics/weight. I shoot my nikkors on the OM-d with adapters quite happily when I want to use them.

I've said it before elsewhere, so far, the OM-D has come the closest to replicating the feel and experience of my favorite film camera (Nikon FM2).

Doug
 

greypilgrim

New member
Makes perfect sense to me :)
Tell me if I'm crazy for trading in a Nikon D90 with a 35/1.8 Dx lens and a 16-85 DX lens for an OM-D with a 12mm, 17mm and 45mm kit?
I shoot with the 12, panny 20, and 45. Plus, I use these nikkors regularly with an adapter 105mm f2.5, 55mm micro, and temporarily a 75-300 for distance. Sometimes I pull out my 75-150 Series E which does quite well on it.

I came from a D200 with 18-70 and 70-300vr (plus 12-24 Tokina, 105mm sigma macro, and legacy lenses).

The difference in the kit weight is wonderful. I have been able to shoot with reasonable impunity up to ISO 1600, and I have with care gotten good shots at ISO 3200.

I would say not crazy at all :).

Doug
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
1) The D600 has the far better AF system.
You are absolutely right, but the question was for a digital, 35mm OM replacement.

2) I do not see much sense shooting old OM lenses on a 24 (or 22) MP camera, they for sure are not up to the needs of this resolution
Correct also, but there is no current 35mm DSLR available that will mount the OM lenses and have less megapixels.

3) Using GPS and WiFi significantly reduces battery life, so when you want to shoot only close to home or in studio that does not matter ....
I'm doing a lot of travel photography, and stock agencies have started asking for coordinates. GPS would save me a lot of boring work during post processing. WiFi... I don't need that, but I suppose it doesn't gobble up batteries if it's switched off.

4) Not sure why you say the 6D has better video, I would assume the other way around
I saw a test somewhere, can't remember which website. Not important for me. A GH3 will eat them both for breakfast anyway with its superior functionality for video.

5) higher ISO is same or better with the D600 - do not believe all what is written in Internet published tests
This, I've seen documented a number of times. Interestingly, the 6D shows less noise than the 5DIII at high ISO as well, but at the cost of less detail.

6) if you have Nikon (lenses) already why mess up with Canon else you really want to go for some of their high speed primes, which are not available from Nikon
Again, it would be the digital OM, digital Contax etc.

To make it short, for the 6D I would not jump ships, maybe only for a 5DIII with some high speed primes ;)
Oh, but I am jumping ship... to m4/3. The 6D for me is rather hypothetical at the moment, and if I'm buying a camera with a 35mm sensor, the D600 would certainly be first on the list. But at the moment, I'm too busy buying m4/3 lenses and then there's the GH3 :)
 

Maggie O

Active member
Sounds completely sensible to me; I think it makes a perfect companion to a Leica - sometimes more depth of field is a good thing!

all the best
Good thing, because that exactly what I did, minus the 17mm and adding the 12-50 zoom. :bugeyes::bugeyes::bugeyes:

And I got an adapter for my Ai-S Nikkors, which are the 28/2.8, the pancake 50/1.8 and the mighty 105/2.5.
 

greypilgrim

New member
Good thing, because that exactly what I did, minus the 17mm and adding the 12-50 zoom. :bugeyes::bugeyes::bugeyes:

And I got an adapter for my Ai-S Nikkors, which are the 28/2.8, the pancake 50/1.8 and the mighty 105/2.5.
I've found the 105 does really well. Be sure to set the focal length for the ibis to 105 when you use it. Also, a good diopter such as the canon 500d or Nikon 3T or 4T makes for a decent close up lens when used with the 105 as well.

Enjoy,

Doug
 

Maggie O

Active member
I've found the 105 does really well. Be sure to set the focal length for the ibis to 105 when you use it. Also, a good diopter such as the canon 500d or Nikon 3T or 4T makes for a decent close up lens when used with the 105 as well.

Enjoy,

Doug
I have to admit that I don't know what ibis or the diopters are. :eek:
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Diopter - Camerapedia, quote:

"Diopter

Dioptric Adjustment, often known as a diopter (or Dioptre) is an optical control on the viewfinder of a camera that allows someone to adjust the viewfinder's magnification to their vision, removing the need to wear eyeglasses when looking through it. Diopter adjustments cannot compensate for all vision problems, only near and far sightedness can be compensated.

Technically, Dioptre is a unit for measuring the power of lenses, equal to the reciprocal of the focal length (in metres). Positive numbers are convex lenses, concave lenses have negative dioptric values. The unit is used by opticians to measure the strength of eye-glass lenses (hence the usage of the term for viewfinder adjustment), and by photographers to measure the strength of (for example) auxiliary close-up lenses. Close up lenses fitted to the filter thread on the front of a lens may typically have dioptre values of between +1 and +3."
 

Tim

Active member
Tell me if I'm crazy for trading in a Nikon D90 with a 35/1.8 Dx lens and a 16-85 DX lens for an OM-D with a 12mm, 17mm and 45mm kit?
Not crazy but with the components you have here I watch with big interest as to how you will bag and carry the kit?
I am pondering the same.

:watch:
 

dhsimmonds

New member
Not crazy but with the components you have here I watch with big interest as to how you will bag and carry the kit?
I am pondering the same.

:watch:
I carry two OM-D bodies, 9-18, 14-150, 12-50 Zuiko's, 100-300 Pana and 45/1.8 pana-Leica macro with spare batteries, 6 SD cards and an Oly FL600R flash in a small shoulder bag, the whole lot weighing in at 4.25Kg. (I could lose one of the mid range zooms quite easily)

Compared to my travelling DSLR bag with just three lenses, all in a Tamrac rucksack, the complete bundle weighing 9Kg. It was a nightmare checking in at international airlines....trying to look nonchalant as if the rucksack slung across my shoulder wasn't killing me!!

It's the OMD bag for me in future! The bigger bonus is that I haven't lost a thing in IQ for the sort of photography that I do.....natural history and travel. ;)
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Question:

What is the experience with using WA Leica M lenses on the OM-D?
Do some exhibit the well known red edge effect?

Thanks, K-H.
 
Top