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!
The first Olympus bodies were using a Panasonic 12MB sensor that wasn't very good. Things changed completely when the first E-M5 was issued with a Sony 16MB sensor. That sensor is still used in the E-M5 II (plus all the current bodies you listed) and it was a real game changer. More DR, less noise and a little more resolution. That, added to the 5axis stabilisation makes the OMDs very good all round cameras. With fast lenses it is up to the APSC performances of Canon bodies for instance.I'm wondering what the current (e-pl7/m10/e-m5II/e-m1) olympus sensors are. Sony? Something else. Does olympus make their own sensors. Forgive the ignorance. I haven't paid much attention to what and where since I've never owned an olympus digital. But lately, thinking of adding the e-m10 with the olympus 25 f1.8 to my ricoh gr for basic street shooting. I really like the 28mm of the gr, but want 50 and/or even the 90mm from the 45mm f1.8...
Over a year ago I did start some basic research into olympus but wound up with the gr. I'm back looking for a small/body lens combo with some more flexibility. A lot of the images I see posted here tell me the 16mp sensor and lens quality from olympus is enough for the work I do and the print size. I print, envisage, my images small. Probably 11x14 inch max.
Don’t forget Panasonic lenses—I have a 20/1.7 which I used for a few years on my Lumix G3 (now a backup body), and now on my Olympus E-M5, and it’s a ripper. There are others too. Three of my lenses are adapted 4/3 zooms, along with a Zuiko 50mm f/2 Macro. All outstanding even wide open, apart from the el-cheapo 40–150 f/3.5–4.5; it needs to be closed down a stop or more at longer focal lengths.I'm wondering what the current (e-pl7/m10/e-m5II/e-m1) olympus sensors are. Sony? Something else. Does olympus make their own sensors. Forgive the ignorance. I haven't paid much attention to what and where since I've never owned an olympus digital. But lately, thinking of adding the e-m10 with the olympus 25 f1.8 to my ricoh gr for basic street shooting. I really like the 28mm of the gr, but want 50 and/or even the 90mm from the 45mm f1.8...
Over a year ago I did start some basic research into olympus but wound up with the gr. I'm back looking for a small/body lens combo with some more flexibility. A lot of the images I see posted here tell me the 16mp sensor and lens quality from olympus is enough for the work I do and the print size. I print, envisage, my images small. Probably 11x14 inch max.
Not "all of the bodies" : notably, at least, is the E-M1 which uses the Pany GH4's sensor, if I understand correctly. (And one poster on LuLa praises the Sony vs. Pany (vs even the 1Dx & others) for its clean color.) Thus, it'll be interesting to see how the E-M1 is upgraded.The ... first E-M5 was issued with a Sony 16MB sensor. That sensor is still used in the E-M5 II (plus all the current bodies you listed) and it was a real game changer. More DR, less noise and a little more resolution. That, added to the 5-axis stabilisation makes the OMDs very good all round cameras. With fast lenses it is up to the APSC performances of Canon bodies for instance.
Thats a really interesting idea and shouldn't cost an arm and a leg to implement.Not "all of the bodies" : notably, at least, is the E-M1 which uses the Pany GH4's sensor, if I understand correctly. (And one poster on LuLa praises the Sony vs. Pany (vs even the 1Dx & others) for its clean color.) Thus, it'll be interesting to see how the E-M1 is upgraded.
As for future sensors, rather than just bumping 4/3 to 20mpx, what if an APS-C? 24mpx sensor were used to implement true multi-aspect (1:1, 5:4, 4:3, 3:2, 16:9 (2:1?)) captures for the 4/3 image circle? (I don't know what this implies in resolution per framing.)
-d.
Not "all of the bodies" : notably, at least, is the E-M1 which uses the Pany GH4's sensor, if I understand correctly. (And one poster on LuLa praises the Sony vs. Pany (vs even the 1Dx & others) for its clean color.) Thus, it'll be interesting to see how the E-M1 is upgraded.
-d.
Re the multi-aspect idea, starting w/1:1 as max and getting progressively more rectangular common framings (I think 5:4, 4:3, 3:2, 16:9 make sense) of the lens's image circle, if I've done my math correctly, the short side of APS-C is 15.7mm and the 1:1 4/3 side is 15.3. And ... I think that this implies an approx. 63% of APS-C real estate for the square 4/3 (max), which of 24mpx comes to less than 16mpx --> 15, 14.5?, 14.25, 14, 13-ish for that framing set (I only figured the square, and then my personal, rusty-dusty Pythagoras had to go for a nap).Thats a really interesting idea and shouldn't cost an arm and a leg to implement.
It is a good idea, and Panasonic already had an oversized sensor in the GH1 and GH2, giving different aspect ratios with only a slight reduction in megapixels. My GH2 was used mostly at 16:9, which was very convenient when carrying it together with the GH3 that didn't have an oversized sensor.As for future sensors, rather than just bumping 4/3 to 20mpx, what if an APS-C? 24mpx sensor were used to implement true multi-aspect (1:1, 5:4, 4:3, 3:2, 16:9 (2:1?)) captures for the 4/3 image circle? (I don't know what this implies in resolution per framing.)
-d.
Quite right - that's what I understood as well . . . at least, that the E-M1 sensor was made by panasonic and not by Sony - don't know about the E-M5 mk II though.Not "all of the bodies" : notably, at least, is the E-M1 which uses the Pany GH4's sensor, if I understand correctly. (And one poster on LuLa praises the Sony vs. Pany (vs even the 1Dx & others) for its clean color.) Thus, it'll be interesting to see how the E-M1 is upgraded.
This wouldn't work with the existing lenses - because they're designed for the 4/3 image circle - if you used an APS-C sensor you'd get chronic vignetting at the edges of the frame in 3:2 mode - which is why APS-C lenses are noticeably larger than 4/3 . . nice idea thoughAs for future sensors, rather than just bumping 4/3 to 20mpx, what if an APS-C? 24mpx sensor were used to implement true multi-aspect (1:1, 5:4, 4:3, 3:2, 16:9 (2:1?)) captures for the 4/3 image circle? (I don't know what this implies in resolution per framing.)
-d.
With the Leica M, using live view, you can press between showing framelines for the different ratios - useful.But having the various framings as options in one orientation seems quite beneficial, IMO, rather than cropping.
I do the same and find 1:1 useful if you can't decide which to use due to having to shoot quickly. You can make the aspect decision via a crop in post.I dither between 3:2 and 4:3, but what I THINK
I would really like, is a camera that detects its orientation
and switches automatically between 3:2 for my 'landscape' shots
and 4:3 for my 'portrait' shots.
?! But it DOES work, on the GH1/2, right? (I might be misunderstanding what comes with "APS-C sensor" : I mean only its size/real-estate, but particular pixel-fetching per image would need to be worked for 4/3 multi-aspect sizes.)This wouldn't work with the existing lenses --because they're designed for the 4/3 image circle--: if you used an APS-C sensor you'd get chronic vignetting at the edges of the frame in 3:2 mode - which is why APS-C lenses are noticeably larger than 4/3 . . nice idea though
Well, it's a matter of perspective what one has and what one thus is losing : w/o what I suggest & Pany once did for "true" multi-aspect of a lens's image circle, you do lose some of that --you have a compromised/reduced diagonal via cropping; or, as seen in the LX100 etc., you lose some bits on the silicon (for the LX100, we can believe that its lens is <4/3 circle, enabling speed w/less bulk; with the GH2, it had to be a larger sensor as 4/3 lenses work on it).Personally I'm happy to crop - at least you don't lose anything that way!