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!

What's the story so far? OMD-EM5

jonoslack

Active member
I agree - it is definitely not a sports camera but for all other areas I am impressed.

Jim
hi Jim
It certainly isn't a sports camera if you use C-AF. But the AF is very fast, and the shutter lag is very small. I found I got a very high proportion of keepers shooting surfers with the Panasonic 100-300 and mashing the shutter with review switched off. It's a different technique, but it does work, Quite well.

Like Gary, I'd like to see functioning CAF, but the OMD does work for occasional sports stuff.
 

GaryAyala

Member
hi Jim
It certainly isn't a sports camera if you use C-AF. But the AF is very fast, and the shutter lag is very small. I found I got a very high proportion of keepers shooting surfers with the Panasonic 100-300 and mashing the shutter with review switched off. It's a different technique, but it does work, Quite well.

Like Gary, I'd like to see functioning CAF, but the OMD does work for occasional sports stuff.
I'll second that. Pumping S-AF works, but now you have to exercise your timing and wait for the peak of action before releasing the shutter. Having to calculate your shutter release combined with a slow EVF refresh, (when compared to an optical viewfinder), shooting action is not impossible, but just a lot more difficult (when compared to a dSLR) and resulting in less keepers and more missed opportunities. At least that's how it worked for me while shooting youth soccer, your mileage may vary.

Gary

PS- You're shooting surfers in the UK ... man I'd like to see a link ... what kind of waves?
G
 
Last edited:

JMaher

New member
Jono,

I am not really a sports shooter but I'll give it a try. I must admit that this camera has exceeded my expectations.

Jim
 

abry

Member
Hi, Alan,

your assumption is correct : the IBIS and specially the "halfpress shutter" stabilise the image in the VF while focusing. This is very much an advantage ! But, you have to input the correct focal length into the IBIS settings. Not a problem with primes, but sometimes a handicap when shooting with MF adapted zooms.

The IQ of the E-M5 is much better than the G1. The sensor is much better at low light levels, and shows a higher resolution. I can't compare to the Nikon bodies you mention, but from what I read, the E-M5 should be +/- equivalent to the mid-range cameras from Nicanon ...

C U,
Rafael
Many thanks Rafael. Slight pity about the zoom point. I have a Nikon 75-150 series E lens I like to use on the G1. I see you have one too. Anyway, I'm thinking about it.
Alan
 

abry

Member
HI Alan
I can't compare with the G1, but,
I've completely given up with the magnification - the IBIS with the half shutter stabilises the lens so well that you can easily see what's in focus - even shooting my 180mm f2.8 Leica R lens wide open getting good focus is easy (there is a kind of shimmer of extra contrast).

all the best
Thank you for chipping in with this Jonoslack. That's very encouraging to hear. That Leica should produce nice subject isolation wide open I would have thought, even on a micro 4/3 sensor.
Alan
 

pgmj

Member
I have seen many of your fine photos with legacy lenses. 2 questions. (1) Compared with the G1, is it any easier to obtain focus using manual focus lenses? (THe G1 as you know is awkward to get magnification and then shakes about due to the level. I assume IBIS helps with the latter. Is that what you were referring to when you referred to heaven?) (2) Do you see much difference in IQ compared with the G1 (which I always felt fell well short of my D200 and D40)?
Thanks
Alan
I have had a GH1 and D200 and the OM-D yields image quality significantly better than both. Compared to D700 and M8 at base ISO it doesn't quite get there, but it is close enough. The latter comparison is based on prints at 45/40x30cm.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Need to chime in here after a while.

I really like my EM5, it is a remarkable camera and gets you to great images pretty quickly using the right lenses.

Having said that I also use the D800E and this beast is far more demanding but if you find the right glass (some selected Nikkors and almost all Zeiss ZF.2) and fine-tuning the camera, the results are really outstanding. Same league as the H3D39.

Having said that, the H3D39 allows you to get there without any big effort in fine-tuning etc. But the advantage of the D800E is definitely the price and the big choice of lenses and very much advanced AF.

Coming back to the EM5 - never had a camera which produced better results without any effort out of the box in this league.

I am happy to enjoy all 3 brands though ;)
 

bab

Active member
Still out on the verdict for the OMD lots to like but just I don't know it gets the shots for the quick action sometimes and others Im faster with the M9. Also when you can get the metered light right in the M9 its a beautiful thing. Lots more situations to consider, but the OMD has its place. See what you think these two images were shot within minuets of each other. Sharpening the same on both corrected the files slightly same color temperature for both. The file that starts with L - Leica (35mm 1.4 asph.) Omd 25mm pany.
 

Hosermage

Active member
Call me crazy, but I've decided to let OM-D go. "It's not you, it's me." I still think that it's a wonderful camera, but since I'm still in love with the M9, the OMD simply don't get much love from me. It's competing for spaces in my bag, and it's competing for funds to buy lenses. When I took both camera out and compared the images at night, I simply love the M9 files more which make me believe that if I had the choice, I'd choose the M9 and hand the OMD to my wife, but it's a bit too big for her purse.

I originally thought that it would be a good compliment to the M9 because of the AF, zoom, macro, and video, but now I'm thinking the Sony RX100 might be a better fit for my needs. I've made sure that it will go to a good home because my friend has been waiting for it to be in stock to buy one.

So, nothing against the camera because if I didn't have the M9, this would be my camera of choice... but I've been spoiled.
 

kit laughlin

Subscriber Member
In contrast to bab and hosermage, I have decided to keep the OM-D and have abandoned all others—to my amazement, frankly.

I am working interstate (in Melbourne) and bought a Crumpler bag that holds the OM-D. the 12/2 and the 45/1.8 (and a paperback and other life necessities).

To get to this point, I borrowed a friend's M8 (I used to shoot with an M3 back in the days), but I really did not like its shape, or its size, frankly. The OM-D with Jim's grip is a tiny, light street carry that really fits the hand, and the M8, with its grip, did not feel as comfortable or as easy to carry, for me. The Oly AF and the fold-out screen are huge pluses in shooting on the street, too.

The 12/2 and the 45/1.8 are excellent lenses, too, and are my two favourite focal lengths. And as long as I use only the Oly lenses, no lockups, either.

My only complaint is that you can't change the minimum shutter speed/Auto ISO relationship easily, AFAIK; I needed ISO 1000, and 1/125+ last week (shooting a gymnastics seminar) and I had to change to shutter priority for that and set the ISO manually.

Well, it all used to be manual in the old days, so I don't mind that. The images that come out of this small package are excellent, and (at least this week!) GAS has released its hold.
 

pgmj

Member
My only complaint is that you can't change the minimum shutter speed/Auto ISO relationship easily, AFAIK; I needed ISO 1000, and 1/125+ last week (shooting a gymnastics seminar) and I had to change to shutter priority for that and set the ISO manually.

Well, it all used to be manual in the old days, so I don't mind that. The images that come out of this small package are excellent, and (at least this week!) GAS has released its hold.
Maybe this solves the auto ISO issue?
User Guide: Getting the most out of the Olympus E-M5: Digital Photography Review
 

GaryAyala

Member
Some Action Stuff - Youth Soccer:

#1


#2


#3


#4


While I think I did okay, the camera, when compared to a dSLR, was not in the same league regarding C-AF. The C-AF on the Oly simply does not work, the images were shot with S-AF and the operator pumping the focus button. The EVF sucks when compared to a dSLR optical. But if one continued to follow the action with both eyes open, using the right when the EVF refreshed, and the left between refreshes, one could manage. This was five year olds, dunno if I could shoot something faster with similar results ... like seven year olds.

The more I work with the OM-D, the easier it is to get the shots I want. Hopefully I'm only an update or two away from a viable C-AF.

The DOF, as expected, is much more distracting due to lack of fast long lenses, multiplied by the small sensor, than my usual working dSLR's.

Gary
 
Last edited:

jnewell

New member
Some Action Stuff - Youth Soccer:

#1


#2


#3


#4


While I think I did okay, the camera, when compared to a dSLR, was not in the same league regarding C-AF. The C-AF on the Oly simply does not work, the images were shot with S-AF and the operator pumping the focus button. The EVF sucked when compared to a dSLR optical. but if one continued to follow the action with both eyes open, using the right when the EVF refreshed, and the left between refreshes, one could manage. This was five year olds, dunno if I could shoot something faster like seven year olds with the OM-D.

The more I work with the OM-D, the easier it is to get the shots I want. Hopefully I'm only an update or two away from a viable C-AF.

The DOF, as expected, is much more distracting due to lack of fast long lenses, multiplied by the small sensor, than my usual working dSLR's.

Gary
Gary, you hit on the two things that I think are the things that keep the OM-D from solving all my needs, but honestly your results are so good that even though the OM-D may not be the *best* choice for sports/action photography, it is very clear that, for at least occasional use in those roles by a photographer who's developed a little (or more) skill with the camera, the OM-D is not a bad choice at all! :thumbs:
 

GaryAyala

Member
Gary, you hit on the two things that I think are the things that keep the OM-D from solving all my needs, but honestly your results are so good that even though the OM-D may not be the *best* choice for sports/action photography, it is very clear that, for at least occasional use in those roles by a photographer who's developed a little (or more) skill with the camera, the OM-D is not a bad choice at all! :thumbs:
I agree 100%. I doubt I could have captured anything better with a dSLR, (after all these were five year old), but a dSLR certainly would have made my job easier.

Gary



 

jonoslack

Active member
Gary, you hit on the two things that I think are the things that keep the OM-D from solving all my needs, but honestly your results are so good that even though the OM-D may not be the *best* choice for sports/action photography, it is very clear that, for at least occasional use in those roles by a photographer who's developed a little (or more) skill with the camera, the OM-D is not a bad choice at all! :thumbs:
I quite agree - as long as one doesn't try using c-af, then the really blazingly fast s-af can generally do the job - clearly if you're a sports shooter by trade it's not the right option. However, for someone like me who doesn't shoot enough sport to master the complicated c-af on a Nikon, the OMD may even be better in that it's simple and predictable.

all the best
 
Top