EM1 vs A7 II?

[sagar]

Okay, I know about key sensor differences viz. noise & dynamic range. But if you have to chose only one for people, street and occasional landscape with lenses no longer than 100mm (upto 75mm/1.8 for Em1), which you think would probably be a better tool?

I have handled both the cameras and ideally would love to have them both, but that's not possible. My heart says Olympus and my brain says FF sensor has something that will always be missed specially for people photography.hence the question.


PS: I searched on internet and looks like most of the threads in other forums ended up in brand fan war. Audience here being different, I am really hoping some good feedback based on actual experience.

 

[jonoslack]

HI There
I'm afraid I'm going to be no help here, as I have both cameras and can't make the decision between them.

What I would say however is that good lenses for the Olympus are a much smaller and cheaper proposition, and there are some fantastic native Zuiko lenses available - there's nothing like the 75 f1.8 available for the A7ii . . . unless you go very expensively 3rd party.

If you're a demon for wafer thin depth of field . . . . or you have a lovely collection of old SLR lenses, or you want to print significantly bigger than 24" then I guess you're going to want to go for the A7ii. (I love mine)

If you just like some nice bokeh, you intend to use native lenses and you aren't going to print bigger than 24", then I'd recommend the E-M1. (I love mine)

My trouble is that all of those statements are true for me!

Good Luck with your decision and tell us what you decide on

All the very best

 

[ptomsu]

Owning the EM1 and the 1.8/75 I only can say this is a dream combo - fast, sharp, great size and weight ......

I also would consider the Fuji XT1 plus 1.2/56 - this is at least as capable as the EM1 combo, maybe even sharper - and with the latest FW it is even as fast as the EM1 (maybe faster).

I do not own the A7/A7II but I handled both and still cannot get friend with them - but this is maybe only me, as lot of other people like them.

 

[kevinparis]

Been shooting the e-m1 and the e-m5 since they came out... almost all the shots over the last few years on my flickr page (link in sig) were shot with one of these two bodies.

I shoot a lot of street, music performances, family events - almost always with primes - the 17 and the 75 being my go to lenses. I occasionally use a 50-200 and 50 macro I had left over from my 4/3 days

I am currently flirting with the A7II - actually with Jono's A7II . He has a very open relationship with his cameras

The A7 would not replace the e-m1 certainly not in the short term- i would use it for legacy lenses.

The E-m1 would remain my main camera due to body size, size and quality of the lenses and the fact that I am more than happy with the overall quality of images I can get out of it.

Obviously your needs and expectations may be different

But if was starting from a blank canvas today, I would probably still get the E-M1

cheers

K

 

[k-hawinkler]

Jono makes many excellent points.

I have the E-M5/1 and NEX-5N/7, A7R, waiting for A7RII, A9; something with IBIS and higher resolution than the A7II.
I bought the A7R so that I finally could shoot my Leica R-lenses on an FF camera.

I really like the E-M1, especially for tele lenses for birding and such. It's a great walking around system.

If you like shooting in the dark a FF Sony won't disappoint you.
I found the A7R with FE 35/2.8 also very useful to hand around to "non-photographers" as a P&S camera around the Christmas tree in a dimly lit room.

 

[serhan]

I use both systems also, but usu I go for m43, gm1 with small m43 primes, for silent shutter, fast/low-light af, and small package vs higher IQ for A7R. Since I own m43 lenses already, I will keep one big m43 body eg cheaper/smaller gx7 for the bigger af lenses eg Oly 75mm/75-300mm, but those 2 sides compliments each other and killed my usage of apsc/m43 cameras like nex-6/E-M1...

 

[dhsimmonds]

If you chose the Olympus E-M1 don't discount their new professional range of lenses. The mZuiko 12-40 F2.8 zoom is a great street lens. The 75 F1.8 prime is a superb lens but maybe a bit 'long' for some street work. The 17 F1.8 is another great lens for working much closer. Both lenses are in the mZuiko Premium grade of Oly lenses. the Pro lenses tend to be a bit heavier but fully weather sealed and constructed to last in tough working environments.

More mZuiko pro lenses are also on the way, with a nice F2.8 7-14 and 300mm F4 prime promised for this year. The Panasonic Leica 42.5mm Nocticron F1.2 (85mm equiv FF) would also be another contender.

The Oly Pro zoom lenses should not be discounted because they are zooms. At most settings they are usually as sharp as their equiv. primes, but this is also reflected in their price!

Where are the Sony lenses to fit their A7 series cameras?

 

[sagar]

Thank you everyone! I can not stress enough how helpful this has been to me.

I am finally concluding that one system solution may not be feasible for my requirements. I need FF for that FF look (Bokeh??) specially for people and I also need a camera that I can carry all the time which should be as compact as possible with minimum compramizes. So I am inclining towards EM1 as main kit supplemented by traditional lower end FF SLR viz D6xx/6D coupled with 50/85mm.

As much as I liked size and weight factor of A7s', if I have to go for big F1.8/F4 AF lenses or upcoming HUGE 90mm macro and 35mm/f1.4, it doesn't serve my purpose of having an compact FF kit. I find Pany\Oly f1.2/1.7/2 and f2.8 zooms much better optically and size wise. On top of that if I add cost factor, while costlier than my original budget, two camera kit with carefully selected lenses offers much better value vs performance ratio!

Once again, thank you everyone! That's why I like this forum. I can't imagine posting this question on DPR or other gear forums and getting so sensible and civilized feedback

 

[mmbma]

wait for the EM5 II
if rumors are true, then it will solve the (printing beyond 24'') issue Jono mentioned, for stationary subjects at least

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

If you are going to have two systems, one of them being a DSLR, I would go for max resolution for that one (D800/E/810), since the weight difference compared to a D610/750/6D won't be significant once you start adding lenses. Used D800 bodies are very cheap now.

The A7 II is a fine camera, but mostly with legacy glass, since the size/weight of the native lenses kind of kills the point of having a compact camera.

m4/3 offers what is possibly the best collection of native mount glass at the moment (although being challenged by Fuji), and the compact size of those lenses really helps. There's so much to choose from that it's hard to make a recommendation, but the 75mm is a given. Apart from that, I would choose lenses that go in a large pocket. I used to carry a camera with lens in my hand and one lens each in the two cargo pockets of my shorts, no bag.

I would wait for the E-M5 II. There seem to be interesting improvements coming with that camera.

 

[iiiNelson]

I'll go another way completely. If you don't anticipate shooting longer than 100mm then I'd go with a Leica M camera if you can afford it. If you need autofocus or have older FF legacy glass then I'd follow Jonoslack's advice.

As a complete system Micro 4/3 is further along. It was my main system for a couple of years before moving on to Leica M as I mostly did street. I've evolved into needing telephoto capability the last few years so that is when I've moved on from M although I did supplement the M with a APS-C DSLR because I couldn't wait on the EM-5 at the time but ultimately I wasn't happy with a cropped sensor so I sold that system off and got the Sony A7/A7R. I've sold my M9 since then as well.

 

[Godfrey]

I have FourThirds (E-1)/Micro-FourThirds (E-M1, E-PL1, E-PL7[soon]), Leica M9, and Sony A7 (used exclusively with Leica R and Nikkor lenses) systems.

Choosing between E-M1 and A7 as native systems, I'd toss the A7 in two minutes as there are more and better lens options for the E-M1 if I want to take advantage of a modern system. The E-M1 is also a much more sophisticated, solid performer in many ways.

Using the A7 as a surrogate for a Leica R digital body, it has lots of merit when I am not worried about speed or taking advantage of modern features. The A7 acts like a digital version of a late-1970s SLR body, which is exactly what I was after. When I really need modern DSLR performance capabilities, well, the E-1 fitted with Olympus E-system HG lenses is as good as I need (and I can use the same lenses on the E-M1, which is better in most respects other than doing sports sequence work).

The Leica M as a rangefinder system operates in such a totally different manner and at such a different pace that I can't find it comparable at all to the E-M1 or A7. RFs are simply much more limited in one sense (focusing and framing accuracy limiting the lens selection) and much less constrained in others (so much less to distract you, such stunning lenses even the third party ones...).

In the end, no one camera or camera system does everything best. Each has its plusses and minuses. Since we're all constrained by cost at some point or another, whatever you end up with, you have to learn to workaround the rough spots and exploit the good parts. I've done sports work with the Leica M and street photography with a Hasselblad 500CM ... because they were what I had with me at the time.

Such is the way it is, there is no magic bullet other than your own creativity. Pick whatever appeals to you most and work with it.

G

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I have FourThirds (E-1)/Micro-FourThirds (E-M1, E-PL1, E-PL7[soon]), Leica M9, and Sony A7 (used exclusively with Leica R and Nikkor lenses) systems.

Choosing between E-M1 and A7 as native systems, I'd toss the A7 in two minutes as there are more and better lens options for the E-M1 if I want to take advantage of a modern system. The E-M1 is also a much more sophisticated, solid performer in many ways.

Using the A7 as a surrogate for a Leica R digital body, it has lots of merit when I am not worried about speed or taking advantage of modern features. The A7 acts like a digital version of a late-1970s SLR body, which is exactly what I was after. When I really need modern DSLR performance capabilities, well, the E-1 fitted with Olympus E-system HG lenses is as good as I need (and I can use the same lenses on the E-M1, which is better in most respects other than doing sports sequence work).

The Leica M as a rangefinder system operates in such a totally different manner and at such a different pace that I can't find it comparable at all to the E-M1 or A7. RFs are simply much more limited in one sense (focusing and framing accuracy limiting the lens selection) and much less constrained in others (so much less to distract you, such stunning lenses even the third party ones...).

In the end, no one camera or camera system does everything best. Each has its plusses and minuses. Since we're all constrained by cost at some point or another, whatever you end up with, you have to learn to workaround the rough spots and exploit the good parts. I've done sports work with the Leica M and street photography with a Hasselblad 500CM ... because they were what I had with me at the time.

Such is the way it is, there is no magic bullet other than your own creativity. Pick whatever appeals to you most and work with it.

G

Spot on, Godfrey :thumbup:

 

[Annna T]

I'd say : wait for the soon coming E-M5 II; it is rumored to have a completely new implementation of the sensor and should allow 40mb using tiny sensor shifts and combining several shots. That could equal the A7r, although we don't know yet how it work and how it will perform, probably only for still standing objects and may need a tripod (?).

Of course, a FF camera will offer you an easier play with DOF when photographing people. However you will often get such razor thin DOF that you would stop down your lens from F1.4 down to F2.8 in order to get both the ears and eyes in focus and the risk of slightly misfocusing would be higher. You can compensate the two stops difference of MFT by different things like going nearer of your subject, putting the background further away from your subject or getting a longer focal length (the 75mm at f1.8 will give you what you are after).

May be go with your heart. With MFT you will have more fantastic lenses and you would keep your system much lighter. But before that, if you can : hire an A7 in order to see how you like the Sony camera before taking the plunge.