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!

E-M1 and 12-40mm f/2.8

Godfrey

Well-known member
Preference for 9-18 over 11-22 is a matter of personal taste. The ZD 11-22 is a better performing lens than either 9-18, is far more robust (weather-sealed and all that), it's faster, and the zoom range is more to my liking. I have little interest in 'normal' zooms (12 to xx) ... that's the range were I prefer to use primes (like the 25/1.4, 35 Macro, 42/1.2, etc).

My essential kit for the E-1 has been the 11-22 and 35 Macro for the past year and some. A huge part of my wanting the E-M1 is to use those same two lenses on the up to date sensor with all the other goodness that includes. And then I'll acquire a couple more of the compact and/or fast mFT primes (like the 17/1.8 and 25/1.4) to round out the system. :)

G
 

greypilgrim

New member
I don't have the 9-18, but I do have the Panny 7-14 and the 12 f2. The Panny is a fine lens, but I still veer towards the 12 f2 unless I need the extra width, and I wouldn't have gotten the panny if the 12 had been around. That said, there are shots that the panny gives me that I can't get with any other lens. It would be fun to have a couple of quality wider primes.

Take it with a grain of salt... I'm a prime shooter by nature.

My basic kit 12f2, 20f1.7, 45f1.8. OM-D

Then I play with lots of old nikkors.

Doug
 

Tim

Active member
I'm a prime shooter by nature.

My basic kit 12f2, 20f1.7, 45f1.8. OM-D
I am a prime shooter too. I have the 14 and 20 and about to order a black 45.

I still badly want a compact 10mm (or 9mm) prime that performs well and will even give up aperture for great performance. The 12mm while an excellent lens is not quite wide enough for my uses. I had a 21/40/100 kit in my OM4 days and miss it now!

I am curious as to if the EM1 has live HDMI output then external recorders like the Ninja Atomos or the Blackmajic Hyperdeck can be employed for video with other codecs. Its a shame Olympus won't enable live HDMI on the EM5.
 

jonoslack

Active member
I am a prime shooter too. I have the 14 and 20 and about to order a black 45.

I still badly want a compact 10mm (or 9mm) prime that performs well and will even give up aperture for great performance. The 12mm while an excellent lens is not quite wide enough for my uses. I had a 21/40/100 kit in my OM4 days and miss it now!
I remember reading an article about ultra wide angle lenses, which suggested that there really wasn't much penalty in making it a zoom - so possibly the panasonic 7-14 might be your perfect lens - it's certainly very good.

I've got the 9-18, but somehow I always find collapsible lenses rather a pain to use.

As for the 11-22 . . . I've just bought it a friend - the 12-60 SWD - it was my all-time favorite lens - looking around the net at reviews it's easy to see why - excellent quality right to the corners from 2.8 at all focal lengths. Good macro facilities and fast focusing.

Of course, I may easily find that they're too big and clumsy on the new camera (or the PDAF isn't that great), but I've bought them cheaply (mint, boxed 12-60 for £430), and it seems to me that they're hardly going to drop in value when the camera starts shipping.

Until then I can play with them on my E1 (if I can find the battery charger!)

All the best
 

Brian Mosley

New member
Congratulations Jono, that's a bargain 12-60 - mine is patiently waiting to be paired with the E-M1, but if the 12-40mm f2.8 is as good as I suspect... Hmm, decisions decisions!

Cheers

Brian
 

greypilgrim

New member
I remember reading an article about ultra wide angle lenses, which suggested that there really wasn't much penalty in making it a zoom - so possibly the panasonic 7-14 might be your perfect lens - it's certainly very good.

I've got the 9-18, but somehow I always find collapsible lenses rather a pain to use.

As for the 11-22 . . . I've just bought it a friend - the 12-60 SWD - it was my all-time favorite lens - looking around the net at reviews it's easy to see why - excellent quality right to the corners from 2.8 at all focal lengths. Good macro facilities and fast focusing.

Of course, I may easily find that they're too big and clumsy on the new camera (or the PDAF isn't that great), but I've bought them cheaply (mint, boxed 12-60 for £430), and it seems to me that they're hardly going to drop in value when the camera starts shipping.

Until then I can play with them on my E1 (if I can find the battery charger!)

All the best
Interesting, I wonder if that is why Nikon's 14-24 is so outstanding (by reports, I do not have one).

Besides prime versus zoom, the other delta for me is the size differential. I guess I have become a ridiculous size snob, fussing between the size of the 7-14 and the 12 :). Compared to what I used to carry...

Doug
 

jonoslack

Active member
Interesting, I wonder if that is why Nikon's 14-24 is so outstanding (by reports, I do not have one).
HI Doug
I think so - and the Leica WATE, and the Panasonic 7-14, and it probably also explains why there aren't so many ultra-wide primes around

Besides prime versus zoom, the other delta for me is the size differential. I guess I have become a ridiculous size snob, fussing between the size of the 7-14 and the 12 :). Compared to what I used to carry...

Doug
Ah - indeed - I'm just the same, the 11-22 used to seem like a really compact lens (when my other system was Nikon) Now it seems like a behemoth!
 

jonoslack

Active member
Congratulations Jono, that's a bargain 12-60 - mine is patiently waiting to be paired with the E-M1, but if the 12-40mm f2.8 is as good as I suspect... Hmm, decisions decisions!

Cheers

Brian
I quite agree Brian - my thinking is that the extra from 80 - 120mm is quite important to me, and the close up on the 12-60 is also really good. I just loved that lens!
Seems dPreview thinks we'll be disappointed with PDAF, but Ming and Pekka think it's fine - we shall see!
At any rate I can't see how I can lose out.
I am going to sell my 12-35 and 35-100 panasonic lenses though, somehow, good as they are, I've never loved them.
We shall see.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
...
Until then I can play with them on my E1 (if I can find the battery charger!)
Just buy yourself a BLM-5 + charger kit for your E-1. The BLM-5 battery that shipped with the E-5 returns more than double the number of exposures per charge with the E-1 than even a fresh, new BLM-1 does.

G
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Re: E-M1 and E-1 "vintage" lenses

Despite my grumbling about pre-ordering and rebates in the Olympus world of new product, I'm in. I checked over what I shot when I had an E-1 and 11-22, 14-50, 50/2, and 50-200 with which to fill those lovely 5M Kodak CCD pixels. The most satisfying results were with the 11-22 and the 50/2, and the 11-22 very rarely left its 11 mm setting. I waited out an ebay auction in which the bidding nearly reached $400 without clearing the reserve price. And for just a bit more there was a Canadian 11-22 offered that looked more complete and more carefully described at "buy it now."

So now for the E-M1 and its MMF-3 weather proof (beer and dog piss, too, if Olympus is still honoring the E-series standards) adapters. Done. B&H says shipping Oct 4! We'll see...

scott

PS: here's another 11-22 at 11, landscape shot (2004, low tide, Scotland north of the Firth)

 

tashley

Subscriber Member
My take on the new Oly is to look in the spare parts bin (AKA my camera cupboard) and wonder how and where it fits in.

I had decided to try the upcoming Sony Zeiss 16-70 F4 (equiv 24-105) on my semi-retired NEX-7. But it strikes me that the E-M1 plus new 12-40 F2.8 is a valid alternative.

In favour of the Oly combo are speed, focus, weather sealing, a wider choice of lenses and built-in stabilisation. In favour of the Nex is the fact that it has a larger sensor that I happen to like and that trounced the E-M5 on DXO. But if you take Ming's comments in his two recent review pieces on the Oly into account, you might guess that the gap in sensor performance has declined to the point whereby operational and optical factors will eclipse it.

I got really frustrated this summer trying to decide what camera to take on a multi-country trip: the D800 gear was simply too large and heavy, my Panny GH2 and glass not good enough, the Leica M240 I love but too much lens changing on the go makes for a filthy sensor very quickly and IMHO as a travel setup it is too bulky and heavy and expensive. The NEX until now has such poor lenses that the sensor is let down.

So now we have what looks like two very viable travel setups with the new NEX lens and the new Oly setup. Exciting times. I am tempted to go shopping for 'all of the above' and then sell what I don't want after trying both setups.

Additionally, whilst I really really want the full weather sealing of both lens and body (most of my best shots seem to be in bad weather!) I hate hate hate the M43 aspect ratio and cropping to 3:2 means throwing away an already compromised pixel count.

Anyone else considering these two systems as alternatives?

T
 
Last edited:
V

Vivek

Guest
FF NEX.

I have a lovely Leica MM (plus a few tiny lenses) as a go anywhere compact travel companion.

All these smaller format cams are looking less and less enticing. I wish the Pana GX-7 was announced in lieu of the GX1, a long time ago. They did miss the boat.

The recent Olympus evolution with built in EVF do not appeal to me at all. Lot of very compact real DSLRs are out there which are cheaper and much more versatile for my use. Canon 6D plus a few lenses, for example.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Additionally, whilst I really really want the full weather sealing of both lens and body (most of my best shots seem to be in bad weather!) I hate hate hate the M43 aspect ratio and cropping to 3:2 means throwing away an already compromised pixel count.
HI Tim
I think this is the crucial point -
If you like 4:3, then the sensor size difference really is pretty minimal:
13mm for µ43
15.6 mm for APSc

But if you're going to crop to 3:2 then it's really a big deal.

Personally, having had the NEX7 and the OMD side by side I just liked the images more from the OMD - simple as that. Then there's the image stabilisation. Now that Olympus are using Sony sensors, one imagines that this will do as well as other Sony sensors in DXO (FWIW).

I think Ming made some really valid points about that - and it's allowing you to use slower shutter speeds and thus lower ISO values - together with the fact that you get faster lenses for the same size in µ43 - of course this doesn't help with minimising DOF - but it DOES relate to exposure - so you immediately gain an exposure stop for the EM-1 sensor over the NEX with the Zeiss lens.

Pre-ordering an EM-1 seems like a no-brainer anyway, there's clearly going to be a shortage of supply, so it'll be possible to move it on quickly if you don't like it.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Lot of very compact real DSLRs are out there which are cheaper and much more versatile for my use. Canon 6D plus a few lenses, for example.
Is this the 6D you are talking about?



Add to this a 150mm eqv., an 85mm eqv., a 50mm eqv. an a WA zoom (14-28mm eqv.?) and the difference becomes a lot more. My two most used cameras are the GH2 and a D700. The difference is enormous. A WA zoom for the Nikon takes up three times as much space in my bag as the Pana 7-14 and a 150mm eqv. with IS (or OS, since the Sigma 150mm is the one that comes closest to the Zuiko 75mm) is just as bad. I use the Nikon when weight and size is not am issue and when I'm using primes between 20 and 85mm, but the Panasonic sees many times as much use, and as for image quality, it's mostly good enough.
 

hsteeves

Member
here I was, hoping that somehow I could get an EM-1 in my hands by the end of next week for my trip to Iceland ... and when I asked why I couldn't get the free grip here in Canada, both the retailer and Olympus Canada laughed at me. Its getting depressing.
 

raist3d

Well-known member
HI Tim
I think this is the crucial point -
If you like 4:3, then the sensor size difference really is pretty minimal:
13mm for µ43
15.6 mm for APSc

But if you're going to crop to 3:2 then it's really a big deal.

Personally, having had the NEX7 and the OMD side by side I just liked the images more from the OMD - simple as that. Then there's the image stabilisation. Now that Olympus are using Sony sensors, one imagines that this will do as well as other Sony sensors in DXO (FWIW).
It will do well but bigger sensors will always pull ahead at the same megapixel density. The fact that the technologies involved will now be the same, more than makes this a straightforward conclusion. Whether that difference is enough for you or not is an entirely different matter.

I considered the EM1 and I am very happy Olympus has a fantastic pro camera. The main reason I considered it was pragmatic- I have a full 4/3rds system- my original 4/3rds system intact- all lenses, and flashes. But after examining the jpeg and raws (there's raws around and Olympus viewer 3.1 can convert them already), I find both K-5 and Fuji Xtrans having better ISO/image quality, and Fuji is about to add back 14-bit raw to their mainline (the X100s already has it) which puts even more subtle color transitions.

The Em1 will be super fast. I do have concerns how well it will focus 4/3rds lenses- not in daylight but in lower light. The E-3/E-5 were rated to focus at -2 EV, I wonder how lower light the EM1 can go with 4/3rd lenses because other cameras like say the Nikon 1 system go to CDAF only as light decreases.

I am still very happy to see Olympus do this. The camera looks ergonomically superior to me to the E-3/E-5 and with native m4/3rd lenses it will be hyper fast. For my needs I would be more interested in a "pen 5 MK II" with the same sensor, capabilities and ideally a built in EVF even if small.

- Ricardo
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Ricardo, I agree that the Fuji and the Pentax are the most interesting alternatives to the Olympus if size matters. To me, the Fuji wins on image quality (although I haven't studied real world examples from the EM-1 yet), but loses on AF. While I can live with the m4/3 image quality, I can't live with out of focus images. What I hope is that the E-M1 has good enough AF-C to replace my Nikons in some areas. We'll see :)

As for Pentax, that's been a dilemma for me since the launch of the K7. They make the most useable compact DSLRs out there and some of the best lenses, but, but, but...
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi There Ricardo
I hope you're well
It will do well but bigger sensors will always pull ahead at the same megapixel density. The fact that the technologies involved will now be the same, more than makes this a straightforward conclusion. Whether that difference is enough for you or not is an entirely different matter.
Hi Ricardo - whilst what you say is certainly true . . . . the difference in sensor size is really quite minimal-especially if you like the 4:3 ratio, but even so it's much less than an order of magnitude . . . or a stop. So similar sensor in APSc is likely to have less than a stop ISO advantage
The image stabilisation in the OMD will give you back that stop . . . and the fast µ43 lenses probably another one - so that all you're going to be losing is DOF - which, of course, may matter to you.
The Em1 will be super fast. I do have concerns how well it will focus 4/3rds lenses- not in daylight but in lower light. The E-3/E-5 were rated to focus at -2 EV, I wonder how lower light the EM1 can go with 4/3rd lenses because other cameras like say the Nikon 1 system go to CDAF only as light decreases.
Well, you may be right, but there are plenty of excellent µ43 lenses which focus really well in low light with CDAF - if you want to do tracking focus in low light . . . well, we'll have to see, but it's an unusual requirement!
I am still very happy to see Olympus do this. The camera looks ergonomically superior to me to the E-3/E-5 and with native m4/3rd lenses it will be hyper fast. For my needs I would be more interested in a "pen 5 MK II" with the same sensor, capabilities and ideally a built in EVF even if small.

- Ricardo
It seems to me that comparisons using Olympus software are unlikely to be useful because one learns skills with both the processing and the files, so new files in unfamiliar software are unlikely to be as good as familiar files in familiar software.

But in reality it seems to me that an Olympus with a modern Sony sensor and no AA filter is going to produce decent image quality - beyond that it's ergonomics, functionality and available lenses which matters, and much as I loved my K5, it seems to me that the EM1 looks like a step forward in all these departments.

all the best
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Instead of going cross-eyed from reading all the numbers and statistics, and trying to divine why this camera is better than some other camera—or not—including some other camera that I already own. And reading all the various folderal of reviews and debates pro-con ad nauseam ....

I'm putting in my order because I want one. I'm sure it will be a fine camera, I can pay for it, and I'll use it.

What better reasons to buy a camera do I need? ]'-)

G
 

raist3d

Well-known member
Hi There Ricardo
I hope you're well

Hi Ricardo - whilst what you say is certainly true . . . . the difference in sensor size is really quite minimal-especially if you like the 4:3 ratio, but even so it's much less than an order of magnitude . . . or a stop. So similar sensor in APSc is likely to have less than a stop ISO advantage
If you like the 4:3rds ratio that does not change the nature of the photo sites.

The image stabilisation in the OMD will give you back that stop . . . and the fast µ43 lenses probably another one - so that all you're going to be losing is DOF - which, of course, may matter to you.
It depends on what subjects you shoot. If you are shooting moving subjects the image stabilization is not going to give you any advantages.

Well, you may be right, but there are plenty of excellent µ43 lenses which focus really well in low light with CDAF - if you want to do tracking focus in low light . . . well, we'll have to see, but it's an unusual requirement!
I wasn't talking about tracking in low light, I am talking about focusing in low light. I am not too worried about native m4/3rds lenses, I am more curious/want to see how 4/3rds lenses do here because those rely on PDAF, and I see the issue the Nikon 1 system has in lower light with PDAF- so wanted to see how Olympus solved this. Remember the 4/3rds user coming from an E-3/E-5 has a camera that can try to lock focus in lower light, that's why I want to know.

It seems to me that comparisons using Olympus software are unlikely to be useful because one learns skills with both the processing and the files, so new files in unfamiliar software are unlikely to be as good as familiar files in familiar software.
Well I have used Olympus software for a very very long time :)

But in reality it seems to me that an Olympus with a modern Sony sensor and no AA filter is going to produce decent image quality - beyond that it's ergonomics, functionality and available lenses which matters, and much as I loved my K5, it seems to me that the EM1 looks like a step forward in all these departments.

all the best
And I do not dispute at all what you just said. The EM1 will have quite decent and many times stellar/exceptional image quality (up to the photographer to realize that possibility of course, and hey, I still use my Q after all). And it will be a speed demon. That kit lens Olympus made looks very tasty and I think they did the right choices for ergonomics, size and quitting 4/3rds while still pouring enough resources to support an upgrade path.

This is I think the best professional digital camera Olympus has ever created. My comments are not meant as an exclusion of one system vs the other, they all have their trade offs. Yes, it is possible to like one system and while not buying another, still think that other is pretty darn good :).

- Ricardo
 
Top