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!
Yes Scott . . . but I haven't asked for it back yet!The OM-D E-M5 Vii has super powers. Not only does it get under the skin of recovering GASaholics, it even has psychotherapeutic abilities. Has anyone noticed that Jono has remembered to whom he loaned his tripod?
Incidentally - I'm finding startup time to the EVF to be rather slow - any hints on improving it?I'm curious about the qualities of the AF in this firmware release. How does it handle scenes with multiple fast moving objects: small children, dogs, basketball players...?
scott
Ricardo,I have to say as much as I am enjoying the new camera, the Fuji files have this "pizzaz" I am not quite seeing in my OMD. Not that the OMD files are bad. Just that it's like Fuji has the photos painted on metal. Very chromic.
It's as if the OMD EM5 MKII still had some level of AA filter or something.
But I know if I go OMD (and looks like that's the way I am heading), I am giving something up for the size. I guess it's hard to give up the Fuji color richness.
- Ricardo
Hmm. While Fuji ergonomics had something to do with it, the basic reason I didnt like the Fujis was that the colors seem off to my eye and the files always seemed mushy, particularly in the greens. I much prefer the Olympus more neutral raw files.this is exactly what/how I feel about IQ from Fuji versus Olympus - and I must say nothing changed over the past 3 years.
The Oly's typically excel in AF speed and performance, size, system size, etc, but IQ wise I still very much prefer the Fuji files.
The 40-150/2.8 PRO is an outstanding lens.I just shipped off my Fuji gear (X-T1 and 3 lenses) for sale after using the OMD E-5II. Will use the proceeds for the 40-150 Oly lens. I could never come to terms with Fuji X raw processing results - inconsistent.
I guess I just don't like the Fuji cameras or their notions of colors and processing requirements. Olympus makes better cameras for me, and I greatly prefer their out of camera files and the processing required.I do agree fully with Ricardo - the Fuji colors are just more neutral if you wish or you can easily choose whatever film-effect we know (remember) from film times. Especially the Classic Chrome effect is something reminding me on Kodachrome, while Provia for me is how I usually see and remember the shot. And the really great thing - you can apply these film simulations in LR to RAW files, so these are not limited to JPEG and can be changed as you desire. Well - in the light of all these Irident discussions - I for myself cannot find too many differences between LR, C1 Pro and Irident for either Olympus or Fuji RAWs - so the only effect for me using Irident so far is to complicate the workflow (mind you I am using LR and C1Pro simultaneously).
Also WRT detail and sharpness Fuji is better for me than Olympus, this may be due to what Ricardo described, but reiterating from my side - I never had any issues here from LR or C1 Pro.
The Olympus is not far apart, but it definitely is apart from the Fuji results. Where the Oly shines is responsiveness, AF modes, operability of the complete system etc. - here Fuji can still learn and I am sure they will! The advantage Fuji has is especially the larger APSC sensor, which will easier allow to increase resolution without sacrificing IQ.
Interesting to see what develops out of this competition in the future, but currently both systems have their place for the photpgraphy I do!
Hi JonoK-H is right Bart - keep away from stores - especially don't look at the silver one (actually I chose the black, but that's just a reflection of my black heart).
Resistance is Futile
Selling my A7ii - wannabuy?
HI ThorkilHi Jono
Allow me to ask: If you hadn’t got the Leica M, would you still sell the A7II and prefer the E-M5II instead? And why? Colours seem to be a tiny bit more “rich” and more “complete” from the A7II, or? The E-M5II looks more neutral but also a bit more “cold”/clinic?
And how about the subjective feeling for the two cameras? Which will do the better talking to you, instant handling etc.?
Thorkil
Jono, I think we're on exactly the same page. Now that I have the M-P, I find myself liking it much more than either M9 or Sony A7. Given my collection of R lenses, I'll be evaluating them on the M-P as soon as the mount adapter arrives, after which the A7 body might well be relegated to be for pinhole and other edge uses only.HI Thorkil
No indeed, I guess if I didn't have the M, then I'd definitely keep the Sony - but I'd also keep the Olympus, I think the combination of µ43 and full frame is really useful .
...
I've always liked the non-committal colour of the Olympus cameras, and to be honest, the lens line up compared to the Sony is a no-brainer (on quality / size / price). M lenses play better on M cameras (we all know that) .
The Olympus cameras seem to be successful Jack of All Trades - but the lenses are really special.
The Leica R lenses also work well on the E-M5II, particularly in HR mode. Shot below with the Leica R 50mm Summicron on the E-M5II. Processed raw in Irident and then exported 40 MP jpeg to Flickr.Jono, I think we're on exactly the same page. Now that I have the M-P, I find myself liking it much more than either M9 or Sony A7. Given my collection of R lenses, I'll be evaluating them on the M-P as soon as the mount adapter arrives, after which the A7 body might well be relegated to be for pinhole and other edge uses only.
The Sony simply doesn't inspire the same confidence in use that I get with the Oly and am getting with the M-P.
G
Such words are essential to me.The Sony simply doesn't inspire the same confidence in use that I get with the Oly and am getting with the M-P.
G