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!

  • Recently, there has been an increased activity from spammers, which may result in you receiving unwanted private messages. We are working hard to limit this activity.

Em5iii

iiiNelson

Well-known member
For me the Sony success mainly comes from really listening to their customers. If you compare e.g. the A7R3 and the A7R4 then you notice immediately that the total haptic has significantly improved over the past 2 years. It is today on a level where it is hard to complain anymore and this is just in the haptics department. But as we all know that is not the only difference and evolution, more importantly there is also the eye AF that works in Sony cameras meanwhile like in no other brand and I dare to say that others will also in the coming years not come close to that and finally there is the 61MP resolution that is currently not offered by anyone else than Sony, although that will change.

The Oly EM1X was far too expensive from the very beginning - I maybe had bought it for 2K a year ago, but today I would not even care any longer. What is really overdue is a EM1.3 with a better (newer) sensor (24 to 28MP with better DR and high ISO capabilities) and a very much improved EVF (5.7MP with 120Hz as in the A7R4. If they had such a model ready by early 2020 then I could be convinced to stay with Olympus and not switch to Sony FF. But my hopes have almost vanished and I strongly believe now that we either will never see such a camera from Olympus or if we do so then maybe around 2024 or 2025. And that time span is definitely too long for my liking as I live now and want to use such equipment now and not in 5 to 6 years.

I hope that these few thought of mine describe now one of the biggest failing points of Olympus today.
I think Sony has always listened to many of their owner’s concerns. I do believe that we are at the point where perhaps many simply prefer a small size... and that’s fine for most. I happen to have large hands (even for my height) which is what prompted me to want a larger body because some of my client work has indeed changed from when I originally bought into the system. All things equal though, I’m perfectly happy with the results of their cameras though I do get occasion envy of aspects of some other systems... namely Fuji and Panasonic. I still keep a light kit for Micro 4/3 and I regularly go back in forth on adding a GFX.

In all seriousness I could get by with two A7III’s for all pro work and have a GFX for pro portraits and the rest of my personal work and be entirely fine with that. I wouldn’t mind an updated Sony 50mp sensor with the improved benefits of the GFX100 camera... simply because o find that the GFX 50S is probably as big of a cameras as I’d want to go. I’m in no hurry and my next camera puts chase is likely the Tamron 70-180/2.8 and the next gen Sony bodies to upgrade my existing ones that are 4-6+ years old. Again... I know that Sony takes heat for releasing bodies slightly more frequently but they keep the older ones around as value options.

As for Olympus, I worry (somewhat) about their long term future but apparently they do much better commercially in Asia than in USA.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Well my 2 cents, all the stellar lenses from Olympus and PL deserve a better camera, better sensor, and faster, much faster readout time.

I hadn't shot my E-M5.2 for more than a year.
Didn't remember much about its user interface.
But working with it for a couple of hours, it all came back easily.
Relative to the E-M5.2 the UI of the E-M1.2 is improved.
I would expect the E-M5.3 to follow that trend.

At the moment there are 3 cameras that I primarily use, namely Fujifilm GFX 50S, Sony A9 FW version 6.0, and to a lesser degree my Olympus E-M1.2. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :grin:
 

SrMphoto

Active member
Well my 2 cents, all the stellar lenses from Olympus and PL deserve a better camera, better sensor, and faster, much faster readout time.
<snip
The sensor readout time for M1m2 and M1x is apparently 1/60. Except for Sony A9 (1/160), all other cameras have 1/15 or slower readout speeds, AFAIK.

I assume M5m3 has the same readout speed as M1m2.

IMO, the main disadvantage and advantage of Olympus cameras is the same: the sensor size. The sensor quality of newer Olympus cameras is pretty good. The dynamic range when shooting above ISO 200 is very close to Nikon Z7 numbers.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
It's been years since I have used a M 4/3 camera, but I think this new Olympus OM-D Mark 5 III may fit the bill for me---and worth trying. I'll wait until the body is finally released and pricing matures.

I'm simply looking for a small camera to complement my Cambo and IQ4150. I want more than a P&S but need something a bit more capable than a P&S, without taking up a lot of room or weight. One good Olympus lens might be all I buy. I considered other mirrorless options including APC and FF sensors, but I really don't like the 3:2 format and much prefer the 4:3 format better.

More megapixels would be nice, but not sure if there are other suitable options/candidates to consider?

ken
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
It's been years since I have used a M 4/3 camera, but I think this new Olympus OM-D Mark 5 III may fit the bill for me---and worth trying. I'll wait until the body is finally released and pricing matures.

I'm simply looking for a small camera to complement my Cambo and IQ4150. I want more than a P&S but need something a bit more capable than a P&S, without taking up a lot of room or weight. One good Olympus lens might be all I buy. I considered other mirrorless options including APC and FF sensors, but I really don't like the 3:2 format and much prefer the 4:3 format better.

More megapixels would be nice, but not sure if there are other suitable options/candidates to consider?

ken
Okay. :thumbs:
What focal length? :facesmack:
Fast or slow lens? :banghead:
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
I'm thinking the either the Olympus 12-40 or the 12-100 "Pro" lens.

I'm thinking snapshots and landscape accompanying camera to my Cambo. The high res option on a tripod might be nice for occasional landscapes. The 4:3 ratio makes it easy to visualize how the MFDB will frame. I have no intentions of investing more than 1-3 lenses or a full blown out system----that's not it's intended use/purpose.

Is the Olympus OM-D Mark 5 III a decent choice, or should I consider other options? Fuji XT series? But I really don't like 3:2 format as well...

ken
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I'm thinking the either the Olympus 12-40 or the 12-100 "Pro" lens.

I'm thinking snapshots and landscape accompanying camera to my Cambo. The high res option on a tripod might be nice for occasional landscapes. The 4:3 ratio makes it easy to visualize how the MFDB will frame. I have no intentions of investing more than 1-3 lenses or a full blown out system----that's not it's intended use/purpose.

Is the Olympus OM-D Mark 5 III a decent choice, or should I consider other options? Fuji XT series? But I really don't like 3:2 format as well...

ken

My E-M1.2 has the same sensor as the new E-M1X and now the brand new E-M5.3. For me that was the first mirrorless camera without focus hunting issues. So in m43 land I wouldn’t go back to a lesser camera.

In terms of lenses I have the excellent Olympus 7-14/2.8 Pro, 12-40/2.8 Pro, and the 40-150/2.8 Pro (pretty large lens). I don’t have the 12-100/4Pro. If I intended only to have one lens it would have to be the 12-100/4 Pro.

There are also a few fast primes.
Olympus 17/1.2, 25/1.2, 45/1.2 Pro, and 75/1.8, and the 60/2.8 macro lens.
I am happy with the PL 42.5/1.2 so didn’t see the need to also get the 45/1.2.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Is the Olympus OM-D Mark 5 III a decent choice, or should I consider other options? Fuji XT series? But I really don't like 3:2 format as well...

ken
That is a difficult call. I started my personal digital photography with Olympus m4/3 and have certainly recommended them to others. The image quality can be very good. And if you like the 4:3 ratio, there is not much choice.

However, I am shooting a Fuji X-series camera. The X Pro2 with a handful of lenses. Like you, I never gravitated to the 3:2 format, but I have to say that has changed after putting time into my Fuji. I also shoot 1:1 and 16:9 with my X Pro2, which has become my multi-format camera (it is still a 16MP image at 1:1). I really like the fuji optics.

Since those system were separated by a significant amount of time, I will not compare the image quality directly.

I guess if I were looking for a really compact system, the m4/3 would be my choice. If I were looking for a small portable system, then I would look at APS-C as well. The Fuji is basically my travel system.

This is the best article I know of that puts m4/3 into context. It is from a professional adventure photographer and starts with 35mm cameras, but keep going toward the bottom where he discusses m4/3.

https://alpineexposures.com/phototips/tips-from-the-pros-which-camera-gear

If you want more insight into the Fuji system, I would check out Andy Mumford's blog. He is a Fuji ambassador, but he primarily shoots with the X-system for landscape photography. He is a good photographer and gives some compelling arguments.

https://www.andymumford.com/blog

I kind of have a love/hate relationship with "cameras I can take everywhere." Some have been really portable, but not really satisfying to use. Others have been great to use, but a pain to carry. Personally, Fuji was the sweet spot for me: X Pro2, 14mm, 23mm, and 50mm lenses. But the m4/3 could be that too. Naturally, the optical finder in the Fuji is what attracted me to the system and there is not much competition. I would try to get my hands on these cameras and lenses.

Also, as you well know, your skills as a photographer will be a greater factor in the final image quality than any difference in sensor size or specs. Who knows, perhaps they will help you kick the MFD habit! Just think how much money and back break you could save...
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I'm thinking the either the Olympus 12-40 or the 12-100 "Pro" lens.

I'm thinking snapshots and landscape accompanying camera to my Cambo. The high res option on a tripod might be nice for occasional landscapes. The 4:3 ratio makes it easy to visualize how the MFDB will frame. I have no intentions of investing more than 1-3 lenses or a full blown out system----that's not it's intended use/purpose.

Is the Olympus OM-D Mark 5 III a decent choice, or should I consider other options? Fuji XT series? But I really don't like 3:2 format as well...

ken
Hi Ken!

I am shooting m43 for years now as my only system and I have an EM1.2 and a number of the Olympus Pro lenses. I like them all!

I think the EM5.3 is a great camera, basically a mini EM1.2 with a much improved EVF (still 2.4MP but great OLED display) and if you want one lens to go with it I would take the 2.8/12-40 which is absolutely stellar.

The downside of Olympus (and any m43) is the small sensor as this limits resolution as well as stellar high ISO performance. This is why I would choose today the Fuji X system over m43 - I shot several Fuji cameras and lenses over the past years and actually thinking now about that I liked these more than my m43 system. The APSC sized sensor is a huge advantage, especially looking into the future as I can foresee some 32MP resolution sooner than later, which will almost for sure not come in m43 territory over the next 10 years - hugh...

Today if I were looking for a small camera (system) to complement MFD I would go Fuji XT3 with either the 18-55 or the 16-80 zoom or if you want really small take one of the excellent and weather resistant F2 primes. And you always could expand that system even to a complete sports or wedding or what else setup.

This from a year long m43 user who kind of lost trust and interest in the future of m43.
 

eddystone

Member
Hi Ken!

I am shooting m43 for years now as my only system and I have an EM1.2 and a number of the Olympus Pro lenses. I like them all!

I think the EM5.3 is a great camera, basically a mini EM1.2 with a much improved EVF (still 2.4MP but great OLED display) and if you want one lens to go with it I would take the 2.8/12-40 which is absolutely stellar.

The downside of Olympus (and any m43) is the small sensor as this limits resolution as well as stellar high ISO performance. This is why I would choose today the Fuji X system over m43 - I shot several Fuji cameras and lenses over the past years and actually thinking now about that I liked these more than my m43 system. The APSC sized sensor is a huge advantage, especially looking into the future as I can foresee some 32MP resolution sooner than later, which will almost for sure not come in m43 territory over the next 10 years - hugh...

Today if I were looking for a small camera (system) to complement MFD I would go Fuji XT3 with either the 18-55 or the 16-80 zoom or if you want really small take one of the excellent and weather resistant F2 primes. And you always could expand that system even to a complete sports or wedding or what else setup.

This from a year long m43 user who kind of lost trust and interest in the future of m43.
I don't really get the emphasis placed on the difference in sensor size between M43 and APS-C. Ever since my first 35mm film camera I've cropped off the sides of 3:2 so for me the comparison needs to be normalised to 4:3 (even that is quite "rectangular" compared to 4x5, 10x8). On that basis M43 is 221 sq.mm and Fuji becomes 15.6 x 20.8, i.e. 324 sq.mm, approximately 50% bigger. Hardly comparable with the difference between APS-C and "FF" and yet I've heard of people, possible the same people, hail Fuji APS-C as the "new full-frame".
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I don't really get the emphasis placed on the difference in sensor size between M43 and APS-C. Ever since my first 35mm film camera I've cropped off the sides of 3:2 so for me the comparison needs to be normalised to 4:3 (even that is quite "rectangular" compared to 4x5, 10x8). On that basis M43 is 221 sq.mm and Fuji becomes 15.6 x 20.8, i.e. 324 sq.mm, approximately 50% bigger. Hardly comparable with the difference between APS-C and "FF" and yet I've heard of people, possible the same people, hail Fuji APS-C as the "new full-frame".
I never said that I am preferring 3:2 over 4:3, so this would be my least important argument to prefer Fuji over m43. What makes Fuji for me so enjoyable are

1) their approach to photography (and meanwhile also videography)
2) their color science, and although the Oly CS is pretty excellent, I occasionally prefer Fuji color from certain film simulations - just easier than applying my own presets
3) their innovation - also comes down to much more frequent releases of new cameras and sensors as the current X-Trans4 in the X-T3, X-T30 and now X-Pro3, while Olympus (and actually also Panasonic) still stick with their 4 year old 20MP sensor that is not even BSI

Olympus is not bad at all, I just am a bit tired of their slow cycle of innovation - and when they innovate it is with lenses like that soon TBA 150-400, which will be in the €7-8K price range and definitely not in the range of what I want and can spend.

WRT Panasonic - except the GH2 many years ago I never shot Panasonic m43 anymore and I do not regret this.

I hope this answers clearly why today rather Fuji than Olympus for me.

PS1: Oh and BTW FF - we all know that FF requires also much bigger lenses! And if I would go FF again than there are 2 systems to consider from my side - Sony FE and Nikon Z. But I so far could not find enough arguments for me to move FF again. But hey, never say never again.

PS2: WRT MFD - I left MF with my Hasselblad 39MP back ten years ago and while I know (as I hope most others here) the advantages of MF, these are not so important for me that I would go back that route again in my life - so this is a clear NO - for who it may concern :cool:
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I still have my Olympus E-M1. Yes, it's obsoleted by newer models, models which have more features, more pixels, etc etc. Doesn't matter to me at all. Like the Olympus E-1 that I also still have, it's an excellent camera that I like a heck of a lot and is barely worth the effort it takes to put it on the market and sell.

I actually like the user interface and vast menu system. It gives options and such that no others of my cameras ever had or have. The Olympus Zuiko Digital lenses I have that I use on both of these cameras are superb. The photographs I've made with both of them are satisfying: great quality and very saleable if I were still interested in that (I sold and licensed hundreds if not thousands of them when I was still running my photo business).

I don't use either very much at present. I've been more involved in using my Leica lenses on APS-C and FF for the past few years, and in shooting mostly medium format film. And I'm soon to have the MFDigital Hasselblad 907x Special Edition because it suits what I'm doing photographically right now.

Will I ever get back to using the Olympus cameras a good bit? I don't know, but given the resurrection of my interest in shooting Minox 8x11 format film in recent weeks, I can't say no or never. Each camera sees differently, and when a camera's way of seeing aligns with my interests in seeing, I use it. I am loathe to dispense with my Olympus cameras and lenses because they have unique qualities and capabilities that others of my cameras do not.

Far as I'm concerned, these cameras are about as good as eternal as any other cameras are. As long as the batteries are available and the sensors work, they just keep on going. They're never going to produce work any better than they could the day they were made, like any other camera, but if that was good enough, then they'll still be good enough.

It was, it will be.

Sorry for the ruminations... :D

G
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
I still have several months before I will even consider a small camera purchase. After digesting some of the different offerings, my thinking is now closer to Peter's (are you scared yet, Peter? :ROTFL:)

It's not so much the "size" of the sensor as it is the aspect ratio that I like about the Olympus. But I am now more seriously considering the Fuji XT30, which is almost a mirror of the XT3 in a smaller package. And the size of the XT30 is similar to the OMD Mark 5 III.
Had Olympus offered a new cutting edge m4/3 sensor it might be a different outcome. But imo, it seems the Fuji offers a better BSI CMOS sensor in a similar small package. Too bad Fuji doesn't offer the ability to choose shooting in the 4:3 aspect---only 1:1, 2:3, and 16:9.

I'm still firmly seated with my Cambo and IQ4. The Fuji just may be the better compliment at this time for me.

Ken
 

retow

Member
I still have several months before I will even consider a small camera purchase. After digesting some of the different offerings, my thinking is now closer to Peter's (are you scared yet, Peter? :ROTFL:)

It's not so much the "size" of the sensor as it is the aspect ratio that I like about the Olympus. But I am now more seriously considering the Fuji XT30, which is almost a mirror of the XT3 in a smaller package. And the size of the XT30 is similar to the OMD Mark 5 III.
Had Olympus offered a new cutting edge m4/3 sensor it might be a different outcome. But imo, it seems the Fuji offers a better BSI CMOS sensor in a similar small package. Too bad Fuji doesn't offer the ability to choose shooting in the 4:3 aspect---only 1:1, 2:3, and 16:9.

I'm still firmly seated with my Cambo and IQ4. The Fuji just may be the better compliment at this time for me.

Ken
A system is made by the sum of its parts. The sensor is just one to consider. I gave the X-trans sensors a chance, more than once. But the results never convinced me. But maybe it was just my pp incompetence or unwillingness to jump though extra loops to squeeze the max out of its raw files.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
A system is made by the sum of its parts. The sensor is just one to consider. I gave the X-trans sensors a chance, more than once. But the results never convinced me. But maybe it was just my pp incompetence or unwillingness to jump though extra loops to squeeze the max out of its raw files.
As an alternative perspective - not that I care what anyone else buys or doesn't - the Fuji Xtrans files from my Xt-2 nd XT-3 are no more difficult or easy than any other digital files I've ever come across - in fact the film simulations Fuji has either in camera or via C1/Adobe are an excellent starting or end point. I'd be interested in a photo of yours which displays difficulty.

pete
 

Shashin

Well-known member
A system is made by the sum of its parts. The sensor is just one to consider. I gave the X-trans sensors a chance, more than once. But the results never convinced me. But maybe it was just my pp incompetence or unwillingness to jump though extra loops to squeeze the max out of its raw files.
The X-trans sensor has a checkered past. Adobe products, Lightroom and Photoshop, do not have a good reputation for processing Fuji RAW--I nearly returned my X Pro2 when I first processed images in Photoshop (the worm effect in foliage). But there are other RAW processor that do much, much better. I ended up with Iridient Developer. The good news is the Capture One now supports Fuji RAW files and does an excellent job (Ken does use C1). C! also has a free version for Fuji owners and that is worlds apart from Adobe with X Trans images. But you are right, Fuji X-Trans seems a little different than Bayer equivalents and it took me a a little while to understand it.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I just didn't find the XTrans differences from Bayer sensors compelling enough to be worth the effort and change in workflow required to work with them. That and other factors about the Fuji cameras led me away from them ... I tried three times and gave up.

Working with the Olympus/Panasonic cameras and FourThirds sensors had its own learning curve too, but I found the results to my liking so I used them quite a lot. Similar for Pentax, Canon, Sony, and Nikon, although I liked the cameras less and didn't stick with them.

I have to say I find the files that my Leica digital cameras produce both the easiest to work with on rendering and the cameras' ergonomics amongst the best for me. That's why I use them now. The bit of preliminary time I've spent with the Hasselblad X1D files so far impresses me in the same way, which is one of the reasons I've got an order in for the 907x camera. Can't say anything about the ergonomics of working with that one (or with the back on my 500CM) yet, but it looks good in concept so far.

G
 

raist3d

Well-known member
I should have an EM5 MKiii hopefully tomorrow. Tried one last Sunday.

And after that I need to get rid of 2-4 cameras, and only keep one backup. I want to focus harder on photography and less on equipment.

Quick note on Fuji- I sold my X-E3 to my brother along several lenses. I still love Fuji, but I can't get out of linking the Olympus 75mm lens a bit much for some of what I do.

Anyway, should have the Em5.3 tomorrow. For me it's a jump over what I have for sure. For others with m43rds already or such, it's nice if you value small and light.

- Ricardo
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I should have an EM5 MKiii hopefully tomorrow. Tried one last Sunday.

And after that I need to get rid of 2-4 cameras, and only keep one backup. I want to focus harder on photography and less on equipment.

Quick note on Fuji- I sold my X-E3 to my brother along several lenses. I still love Fuji, but I can't get out of linking the Olympus 75mm lens a bit much for some of what I do.

Anyway, should have the Em5.3 tomorrow. For me it's a jump over what I have for sure. For others with m43rds already or such, it's nice if you value small and light.

- Ricardo
Ricardo,

that is great news and looking forward to your photos from the EM5.3.

A question aside - die the Fuji X-Pro3 not appeal to you, I am personally very much interested in that camera.

Peter
 

raist3d

Well-known member
Ricardo,

that is great news and looking forward to your photos from the EM5.3.

A question aside - die the Fuji X-Pro3 not appeal to you, I am personally very much interested in that camera.

Peter
Disclaimer: All cameras are great now.

Fuji X-Pro3 - on some level it did, but it's a camera that is too big for me. It's Leica M sized. If size is not an issue, it does look pretty interesting. I think forcing you not to chimp as often as silly as it sounds, I think it's good and I do think that it works a bit.

I also like the feature set as a whole Fuji put in it.

All the people that complain on that either the camera is not for them, or they need to read on the latest human habit research :)

Anyhow, if you like the appeal of having an OVF, great. I rather at this point have it without an OVF, and knock off $200 USD of the price :)

- Ricardo
 
Top