[The Squirrel Mafia]

grispie guessed.

Olympus OMD5

It is not better than Pentax, of course. But it is better for me I guess.What do you think?

---------- Post added 12-04-18 at 09:17 AM ----------



Olympus OMD EM5 Mark II review - | Cameralabs


Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II Review ~ ROBIN WONG

The OMD E-M5 Mark II is a nice camera. My younger brother has one. I think the IQ is good up to ISO 3200 & decent up to ISO 12800. I'd say that the IQ is similar to the IQ of my K-50, but the K-50 still does a bit better at higher ISO. I do think that the E-M5II's AF performance is a bit more accurate & faster than the AF in my K-50, but it's really not that big of a leap. The 5-axis IBIS in the E-M5II can stabilize a lens way better than what the IBIS in my K-50 can do.

[Francisco Carneiro]

The OMD E-M5 Mark II is a nice camera. My younger brother has one. I think the IQ is good up to ISO 3200 & decent up to ISO 12800. I'd say that the IQ is similar to the IQ of my K-50, but the K-50 still does a bit better at higher ISO. I do think that the E-M5II's AF performance is a bit more accurate & faster than the AF in my K-50, but it's really not that big of a leap. The 5-axis IBIS in the E-M5II can stabilize a lens way better than what the IBIS in my K-50 can do.

Yes, you have to accept, if you buy this camera, that more than 3600 ISO is to avoid...
If you can live with that...
Sure it is not the best camera in the world, but it is very balanced and has some great advanced features.

[repaap]

I have Oly E5 MII, with 14-42 kit lens. I have also adapter to use my K-mount lenses. it is far from being high ISO camera. I’d say that ISO1600 is max for me. in dark rely on SR or use tripod.

But it is fun little camera. DR is nothing to call home for, but in good light and well exposured shots it is not so bad. silent shutter is handy and video is good enough. Small size is also nice. I have not got used of it’s menu/buttons, but it is doable. Lot of fun for the money. I have K-1 for more serious shots.

[grispie]

i was a bit unimpressed with the handling of those cameras (olympus..) to be honest. One handed was quite difficult due to no grip especially as i am used to pentax grip. And with the pro lenses on it, it is still considerable size & weight anyhow. not sure if i'd want it as my main camerasystem.
And i felt they looked better in pictures than in reality.

Believe om5 II is out for quite some time. Probably due for replacement . It's older than kp no?..

imo, i'd prefer the kp for small size & handling.
cant comment on IQ, but probably its fine, as most cams are these days.
Still, it's all about the lenses..

[northcoastgreg]

I have the E-M5ii, and I had the E-M5i before that. Very nice compact cameras — perhaps the best of that breed. In terms of DR and ISO, I would put those cameras about on par with my K200D. ISO noise is a bit better with the Olympus, but that's at the price of color and contrast. I used these cameras mostly for hand-held work. The 5-axis stabilization is the real thing. However, image quality with Pentax is just better. While the m43 lenses are sharper, once you factor in the larger APS-C sensor, it comes out to about a draw. And Pentax lenses render better and Pentax image processing, combined with Pentax lenses, produce richer, more satisfying color.

Since purchasing the Pentax KP over a year ago, I haven't used the m43 nearly as much. While the KP 5-axis stabilization isn't quite on par with the E-M5ii, it's close enough for my purposes, and the image quality of the KP, particularly when paired with the Limiteds (or even the 55-300 PLM), is just flat out better than anything I've run across in the m43 world.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

Yes, you have to accept, if you buy this camera, that more than 3600 ISO is to avoid...
If you can live with that...
Sure it is not the best camera in the world, but it is very balanced and has some great advanced features.

Just about every camera has a compromise. It's just a matter if figuring out which compromises you're willing to deal with. The E-M5II is still a pretty nice little camera, even by today's standards. It has a lot of neat features that are specific to it.

I'm gonna throw in another suggestion. Have you take a look at the Panasonic G80/G85? It's also a very nice m43 camera. It's similarly priced to the E-M5II. I'd personally get the G80/G85 over the E-M5II. I like the style of the Panasonic bodies a bit better. Not to mention that it can also shoot slightly better video & can have up to 6.5 stops of stabilization with it's combined 5-axis IBIS & OIS with some lenses. I think the IBIS alone is good for 5.5 stops or so.

[Rondec]

You just have to know what you are getting with micro four thirds. You get smaller cameras with very nice in body image stabilization, but not as good high iso performance (more noise and less dynamic range) and not as good low iso performance (less dynamic range). Olympus, in particular, has a really nice jpeg engine which can help, since you said that you don't really like to do a lot of post processing.

[mikesbike]

I have an experienced friend who shoots with Olympus 4/3 and the cameras he has are impressive in their smaller size. IQ is very good, but with some relative compromises. I am impressed one can get a fast f/2.8 constant aperture zoom lens, a FL roughly equivalent to say the Pentax 16-50mm but much smaller and lighter. All that said, however, there are inevitable penalties to some degree as one descends in sensor size. The 4/3 size is yet more compromise in quality matters of noise, IQ, DOF, etc that is a shade or two below that of APS-C, which is a shade or two below a good FF sensor. But the gap between APS-C and FF quality has been in many ways tightened up quite a bit during the last few years.

So it depends on how much in compromise one wants to accept and still find satisfaction with the resultant imaging. My friend is satisfied with the feel of the equipment, the features offered, and the results he gets. That is all that matters. In handling his equipment, I would not be. He gets good imaging, but I think mine is visibly better. For me, I like compactness, but from handing the alternatives and their controls, my sensation was that getting smaller but getting too small, and going too far in reducing controls layout, and reducing IQ quality, etc. taken all together gets into a realm less satisfying to me than what I am used to.

As in his case, each person has to determine what meets his or her needs, and is adequate in IQ issues, features, controls, and handling of those controls. Sometimes ergonomics are so small, or alternatively so sparse as to be a pain in the operational aspect. Again, this is an individual matter as to what is needed or expected.

[Francisco Carneiro]

I have Oly E5 MII, with 14-42 kit lens. I have also adapter to use my K-mount lenses. it is far from being high ISO camera. I’d say that ISO1600 is max for me. in dark rely on SR or use tripod.

But it is fun little camera. DR is nothing to call home for, but in good light and well exposured shots it is not so bad. silent shutter is handy and video is good enough. Small size is also nice. I have not got used of it’s menu/buttons, but it is doable. Lot of fun for the money. I have K-1 for more serious shots.

When I read your comment, I realise how you see the Oly 5II, something of a kute cam, nice litle camera, but not so serious. I understand.
Hey, I did not buy it yet!

[repaap]

When I read your comment, I realise how you see the Oly 5II, something of a kute cam, nice litle camera, but not so serious. I understand.
Hey, I did not buy it yet!

It is nice little camera. E1MII, would be more serious one. I use my oly usually for taking video. I did take also oly on my trip to shanghai with me. for 80% of shots made that trip it was more than enough, but I thing that someone would have been completelly happy with it. my problem is that I look my photos at pixel level(zoom in to enjoy also little details). That is why K-1 is coming on my travels, even If I know that it is just for those 10-30 shots out of hundered, what I’m happy with. Some times I wont even get those and would have been happy with smaller gear.

you know it is all of your preferences, what you want. I’m not so happy with my K-3 shots anymore either, because K-1 has deeper dynamic range (DR). But sometimes and for someone K-3 or evem more so K-P would be more than enough, let alone m 4/3. If small size and value is what you are after, Oly is nice. K-P could be better. you know, both of these cameras(all of them) needs great lenses to work at optimum level. I wish that I would have got 12-40/2.8 zoom instead of 14-42 with that oly, because it was cheaper in kit, but opted for 300€ less, because I thought that it would not matter for the purpose that I bought my Oly for. for next trip I will take my oly with me and explore more RAW and HRD and that pixelsift/super resolution what they have in it.

all of cameras are compromises. FF is big(not as big as MF), high quality, tripod is good to have. APS-C smaller size little less bulk less DR. m 4/3, even more so less DR, but really compact and still even pro level images and really good video. you know, not necessarily enough for landcapes for bigger prints and shooting at dusk.

I’d consider upgrading possibilities too, if that concerns you.

these new cameras now a day are amazing, you get plenty to choose from. but for prize range that you are in, there are not so many options. for weather resistance you also need WR lenses.so that little narrows it down. I’m not putting any camera down by it’s size. They are tools and good for what they have been designed for great thing would be to get in shop and try it your self first.

---------- Post added 12-05-18 at 10:18 ----------

Here is one lbum from my flickr with Oly E5MII

oly E-MD m5II | Flickr

have a look. It is not bad camera at all.

[Francisco Carneiro]

i was a bit unimpressed with the handling of those cameras (olympus..) to be honest. One handed was quite difficult due to no grip especially as i am used to pentax grip. And with the pro lenses on it, it is still considerable size & weight anyhow. not sure if i'd want it as my main camerasystem.
And i felt they looked better in pictures than in reality.

Believe om5 II is out for quite some time. Probably due for replacement . It's older than kp no?..

imo, i'd prefer the kp for small size & handling.
cant comment on IQ, but probably its fine, as most cams are these days.
Still, it's all about the lenses..

I think Olympus 5II is from 2015

---------- Post added 12-05-18 at 01:26 AM ----------

I have the E-M5ii, and I had the E-M5i before that. Very nice compact cameras — perhaps the best of that breed. In terms of DR and ISO, I would put those cameras about on par with my K200D. ISO noise is a bit better with the Olympus, but that's at the price of color and contrast. I used these cameras mostly for hand-held work. The 5-axis stabilization is the real thing. However, image quality with Pentax is just better. While the m43 lenses are sharper, once you factor in the larger APS-C sensor, it comes out to about a draw. And Pentax lenses render better and Pentax image processing, combined with Pentax lenses, produce richer, more satisfying color.

Since purchasing the Pentax KP over a year ago, I haven't used the m43 nearly as much. While the KP 5-axis stabilization isn't quite on par with the E-M5ii, it's close enough for my purposes, and the image quality of the KP, particularly when paired with the Limiteds (or even the 55-300 PLM), is just flat out better than anything I've run across in the m43 world.

It makes me think :
is it worth to sacrifice quality, big sendor in the name of the best 5axes stabilization?
I am taking the good route?

---------- Post added 12-05-18 at 01:31 AM ----------

Just about every camera has a compromise. It's just a matter if figuring out which compromises you're willing to deal with. The E-M5II is still a pretty nice little camera, even by today's standards. It has a lot of neat features that are specific to it.

I'm gonna throw in another suggestion. Have you take a look at the Panasonic G80/G85? It's also a very nice m43 camera. It's similarly priced to the E-M5II. I'd personally get the G80/G85 over the E-M5II. I like the style of the Panasonic bodies a bit better. Not to mention that it can also shoot slightly better video & can have up to 6.5 stops of stabilization with it's combined 5-axis IBIS & OIS with some lenses. I think the IBIS alone is good for 5.5 stops or so.

PanasonicG80 is a better camera than the Oly5II, sure.
Stabilization is also very good.
I would look at the Lumix GX9 instead. Looks very kute too. I would be happy with that one, unless I would not like the viewfinder,
wich is not the strongest point of it.

Besides, I will have to see the GX9 viewfinder in a store in Paris. No need to rent it.
Read my last comment, (conclusion), after answering to everybody...

---------- Post added 12-05-18 at 01:38 AM ----------

You just have to know what you are getting with micro four thirds. You get smaller cameras with very nice in body image stabilization, but not as good high iso performance (more noise and less dynamic range) and not as good low iso performance (less dynamic range). Olympus, in particular, has a really nice jpeg engine which can help, since you said that you don't really like to do a lot of post processing.

Right.
With my enthousiasm, I forgot that I am downgrading a litle bit to much.
I want solutions, but upgradind in the same time.

Smaller sensor, bigger noise.
Also, I Iike to shoot at dawn and (late) sunset, taking advantage of mixed light.
1600 ISO is very limited. I can't make macro with very low light in nature, without a flash, just an example.
I can do it with my old XE1, until a certain point, of course.

---------- Post added 12-05-18 at 01:41 AM ----------

I have an experienced friend who shoots with Olympus 4/3 and the cameras he has are impressive in their smaller size. IQ is very good, but with some relative compromises. I am impressed one can get a fast f/2.8 constant aperture zoom lens, a FL roughly equivalent to say the Pentax 16-50mm but much smaller and lighter. All that said, however, there are inevitable penalties to some degree as one descends in sensor size. The 4/3 size is yet more compromise in quality matters of noise, IQ, DOF, etc that is a shade or two below that of APS-C, which is a shade or two below a good FF sensor. But the gap between APS-C and FF quality has been in many ways tightened up quite a bit during the last few years.

So it depends on how much in compromise one wants to accept and still find satisfaction with the resultant imaging. My friend is satisfied with the feel of the equipment, the features offered, and the results he gets. That is all that matters. In handling his equipment, I would not be. He gets good imaging, but I think mine is visibly better. For me, I like compactness, but from handing the alternatives and their controls, my sensation was that getting smaller but getting too small, and going too far in reducing controls layout, and reducing IQ quality, etc. taken all together gets into a realm less satisfying to me than what I am used to.

As in his case, each person has to determine what meets his or her needs, and is adequate in IQ issues, features, controls, and handling of those controls. Sometimes ergonomics are so small, or alternatively so sparse as to be a pain in the operational aspect. Again, this is an individual matter as to what is needed or expected.

As I said, small sensor, bigger noise.
I want to upgrade, anyway.

---------- Post added 12-05-18 at 01:54 AM ----------

It is nice little camera. E1MII, would be more serious one. I use my oly usually for taking video. I did take also oly on my trip to shanghai with me. for 80% of shots made that trip it was more than enough, but I thing that someone would have been completelly happy with it. my problem is that I look my photos at pixel level(zoom in to enjoy also little details). That is why K-1 is coming on my travels, even If I know that it is just for those 10-30 shots out of hundered, what I’m happy with. Some times I wont even get those and would have been happy with smaller gear.

you know it is all of your preferences, what you want. I’m not so happy with my K-3 shots anymore either, because K-1 has deeper dynamic range (DR). But sometimes and for someone K-3 or evem more so K-P would be more than enough, let alone m 4/3. If small size and value is what you are after, Oly is nice. K-P could be better. you know, both of these cameras(all of them) needs great lenses to work at optimum level. I wish that I would have got 12-40/2.8 zoom instead of 14-42 with that oly, because it was cheaper in kit, but opted for 300€ less, because I thought that it would not matter for the purpose that I bought my Oly for. for next trip I will take my oly with me and explore more RAW and HRD and that pixelsift/super resolution what they have in it.

all of cameras are compromises. FF is big(not as big as MF), high quality, tripod is good to have. APS-C smaller size little less bulk less DR. m 4/3, even more so less DR, but really compact and still even pro level images and really good video. you know, not necessarily enough for landcapes for bigger prints and shooting at dusk.

I’d consider upgrading possibilities too, if that concerns you.

these new cameras now a day are amazing, you get plenty to choose from. but for prize range that you are in, there are not so many options. for weather resistance you also need WR lenses.so that little narrows it down. I’m not putting any camera down by it’s size. They are tools and good for what they have been designed for great thing would be to get in shop and try it your self first.

---------- Post added 12-05-18 at 10:18 ----------

Here is one lbum from my flickr with Oly E5MII

oly E-MD m5II | Flickr

have a look. It is not bad camera at all.

Yes, it's not a bad camera, those photos are great.
Of course, they are not so bright as K1 photos I've seen, but they are very good.
The problem is when you compare!
The best camera is ALSO the one that capture the unique moment that happens to be in front of you.

[Francisco Carneiro]

Well, am I trying to be to rational?
Somehow I am a victim of my projections...

Anyway, (trying to be objective),

the all thing began because I want to shoot with vintage lens but in the same time I want to upgrade.
The main reason to live Fuji would be for stabilization.
XT1 and XT2 have very good viewfinder and are weather sealing.

The question is :
Until what point I am "torturing" myself in the name of vintage lens?
What are the best reasons to use manual lens?

The first one for me, the one I felt, the one that is real, (not just an idea or an information), is price.
They are affordable.

Fuji has very good zooms, I already have one. I would just have to extend with the 50 - 230, if I am not wrong. Someone here said that to me, and it's very wise, I understand it better now.

For my experience, I can easily use vintage prime lens with the Fuji without big concerns. I already did it. I can buy a Fuji lens once in a while. I already have a 23mm fuji pancake.

For big primes I guess it's another story. May be I will have to buy Fuji, but those are the last ones for me.



I like Fuji image, even with XE1. I can do many things with that.

I can allways get a XT1 or XT2. I can get the XT2 later. Or now.

Sell the XE1 with the 16 50 zoom, (I have two of them), and buy a XT1 or XT2 nacked.

I can do anything later.
Olympus, Pana, Pentax, whatever. Later...


I like the clear image of Fuji without being oversharpened, that's what makes part of the singularity from Fuji, for me, (also colors), and the sucess of it. It is their way of being natural. There are others.
This is may be related to the processor. How Fuji interpretates or manages the information given by the sensor. Not just information. How brands process is the way people think and feel.
I like the way Fuji does it, (although I am not necessarily stick to it).

My initial idea of jumping to Pentax was about the stabilization, (encore manual lens), Pentax being a good alternative to Fuji. This is what this conversation is about.

---------- Post added 12-05-18 at 02:31 AM ----------

What I don't like the most in the present situation is the XE1 viewfinder, and sometimes, (less important however), the lack of resolution.
This is real.

---------- Post added 12-05-18 at 02:35 AM ----------

Would I agree that the KP is better than the XT2?
What would be the price to pay for changing to the KP?
Is it reasonable to sell everything for something not superior?
Big waste of time, money and energy.

I can allways be wrong, comments wellcomed.

[repaap]

If you want to use vintage lenses and not spend arm and leng buying system, then Pentax is good option. Perhaps K-P? Great ISO, quite cheap plm RE zooms to start with, if you need modern zooms besides your Fuji system. SR is good with Pentax. With m 4/3 it is or might be little more challengin to shoot with vintage, because of crop. Nice 50 or 28 mm lens becomes tele lens.

I happen to really much like menu and button layouts with Pentax. I like it’s colours too.

[Francisco Carneiro]

If you want to use vintage lenses and not spend arm and leng buying system, then Pentax is good option. Perhaps K-P? Great ISO, quite cheap plm RE zooms to start with, if you need modern zooms besides your Fuji system. SR is good with Pentax. With m 4/3 it is or might be little more challengin to shoot with vintage, because of crop. Nice 50 or 28 mm lens becomes tele lens.

I happen to really much like menu and button layouts with Pentax. I like it’s colours too.

Yes, litle lenses become tele lenses. Good point.

[Rondec]

I think what you need to do is figure out what lenses you are going to want/need for a given system. They don't have to be lenses you buy at day 1, but things you will be able to save up for and get over time. I think things will be a bit clearer after you do that. Camera bodies come and go, but glass lasts a long time.

Fuji has some really nice glass, unfortunately, it is pretty pricey. The used prices of lenses like the DA limiteds are much more reasonable to me.

Don't worry too much about your choice either. It isn't life or death and the journey is often as much fun as the goal. As long as you have a camera, you can make images and enjoy the process of improving yourself and your skills -- and thinking about whatever your next lens will be down the road.