EM5-OMD for professional work

[Tejasican]

What are the exact weight and equipment cost requirements for a"professional" photographer? Having serious RA I doubt that I could reach the weight ones ever, making me eternally unworthy, I guess, but I am curious.

 

[willie_901]

The weight and requirements are directly proportional to the project budget.

The most wonderful budgets require assistants there's so much stuff to deal with.

 

[Thardy]

Ming Thein, a working pro uses the OM-D extensively.
He is an excellent writer on photography in general, more than just another gearhead reviewer.
He recently wrote on the subject:
http://blog.mingthein.com/2013/08/24/the-demise-of-the-dslr/

I was going to suggest asking a professional photographer, since he's wondering what would a pro photographer would do.

Ming would be a good start. He actually shoots for hire, uses a m43 camera, uses his real name on many different internet venues, is very approachable and rarely pontificates.

I bet he could point you to others.

 

[--]

Although not a pro I would think the only downside is the difficulty operating it with gloves on - in particular heavier gloves. The E-M1 seems to rectify that.

/Xpanded

 

[Murchu]

Of course you could get lucky by finding clients that just want to pay

..or get even 'luckier' by building a high quality body of work, having the skills to produce high quality images consistently, and developing a reputation as a trustworthy professional that simply delivers 😉

 

[leicapixie]

Professional work is judged by the results, the gear,
you and possible entourage.
A pro camera is any one, which makes money.
That's the simple answer..
The reality can be biased by narrow old fashioned thinking.
Many years ago i shot a "His and Hers" for a fashion magazine.
I used a Leica-M, a 21mm Super-Angulon,
35mm Summicron and 50mm Summicron.
Film was Kodachrome II.Maybe a strobe?
The shoot was downtown Saturday morning
in some of the retail outlets,
involved in the spread.Film in pocket.
Lenses in other pockets of jacket.
It was done in "Candid Street Style".
The Picture Editor was most unhappy with the small equipment..
It was one of the best editorial shoots that year!
I was also not invited to shoot again for them..

 

[Godfrey]

I'm starting to use this camera for professional work, mostly editorial and non-profit organizations who use the work online. Contemplating a M4/3 system for editorial travel assignments in the fall (in-flight magazine). So far I've had no disappointments from art directors or designers. Have you? What are the limitations of this system for pro work in your experience? Can it go all the way to architecture, large groups, weddings, anything else that may be double pages or large prints?

I used FourThirds SLR and Micro-FourThirds TTL-electronic cameras for all my professional and personal work from 2008 until I closed my photo business at the end of 2010. The cameras I used were the Panasonic L1, Olympus E-1 and E-5, and Panasonic G1. They produced a huge amount of saleable (and sold) work.

Not a single problem with any of them, and I never had a complaint from any client regards image quality or whatever. The E-M5 is a more technically competent camera than any of them, with the possible exception of the E-5 for situations involving fast sequence capture. With what I had, there were no evident limitations on any score once I had the E-5 (netting two stops more sensitivity for event work in poor light). The E-M5 is even better.

I sold all but the E-1 and a couple of lenses when I closed the business, but I still shoot with the E-1. Still love it. Recently found a used and very inexpensive E-PL1, and I'll likely buy a GX7 or E-M1 to add to the kit again.

I wouldn't worry too much. If the E-M5 appeals to you, just concentrate on making photos and exploiting it.

G

 

[DNG]

Most of the arguments against micro 4/3 are the same arguments that were used against 35mm cameras in the 1940s and 1950s. Back then it was the "unprofessional" Leica vs. the "professional" Speed Graphics and Rolleis.

I know an old pro photographer who just had major shoulder surgery--the result of carrying around heavy camera bags all his life. It is not "lazy" to want to avoid this.

The better APS-C cameras and the OM-D have reached a level of sufficiency for most work. If the smaller cameras can do the job, and they can withstand your working conditions, then why not use them?

Sports photographers will choose fast, reliable tracking autofocus and high ISO over megapixels. Landscape photographers who print big need more pixels, and they may prefer the richer tonality of medium format. But everything in life is a trade off. The smaller cameras get taken more places and don't leave you sore and tired after a day of shooting, so you get shots you'd miss otherwise. And frankly, I like the image quality I get from my micro 4/3 primes more than the equivalent Brand C and N.

I'm not sure that FF or medium format shooters are automatically more "serious." It may just be an artificial barrier to reduce the number of applicants. An Art Director might think that the person with the big cameras is more serious, but he may just have more money than brains, or he may have succumbed to the same groupthink as the A.D.

Thank You...
Well stated!
I think many AD's are just "Gear-heads" with too many Art Degrees, more then they are editors. And thus, will push aside really talented photographer's because "They" have no clue on the IQ coming out of the top end m4/3 these days. (READ POST 46 again by leicapixie)

H*ll, (can I say that?), The E-M5 and GH3 surpass MOST APS-C cameras in DR, and ISO noise to 6400.
And can make some FF's sweat in fear...

The DOF thing is overstated.... LOOK at a DOF Calculator and compare a FF and m4/3 DOF... it is minimal a CM or 2, at the close range, and Moot at INF. 25mm m4/3, 50mm FF for example. And with a PROFESSIONAL Portrait.. do you Really want just one eye and everything else OOF?? I'd never buy your print! I want my "Eyes, Nose, and mouth" in focus thank you.

The E-M1 can AF any 4/3 lens with it's image sensor that has PDAF on it... It is reported to be tad slower than CDAF with native m4/3 lenses!

NO, the m4/3 are not "Highspeed Tracking" cameras for Serious Sports Photographers... But, for everything else, sure it is, even for complicated Wireless Strobe setups. And Weddings with the Pany 12-35 f/2.8, 35-100 f/2.8, P/L 42.5mm f/1.2....

Look at the photographers Portfolio, not his/her gear to "SEE" if they are "Professional" enough to do you Wedding or Job..

I am not a Professional, just a hobbyist..
And, 35mm was the underdog back in the 30-60's... Leica, Nikon Canon and the Contax III (Which was more expensive then the Leica with a similar lens), had to really SELL 35mm to the PRO market... BTW... Nikon did not have a 24x36 frame until the S2 in 1954 or 56, I believe. It took the 35mm SLR to change that perception.

Now, the only thing not mentioned is the "Worldwide" Repair/Rental availability... that only is important to those who travel on a weekly or monthly basis to assignments...So, C/N may be the only option here....

Lenses in the stable? ANY LENS, ANY MAKE you want is available with Mirrorless.. with a FOV adjustment....

BUT, with the Megabones Speed Booster in .7 and .5 soon...... you can shoot at the FF FOV and gain 1-2 stops more light gathering power to boot!!

It will happen...many PROs are already buying high-end m4/3 and the Pro Line lenses that have deep enough stable for 90% of the work out there.. Oly just introduced a weather sealed 12-40 f/2.8 for $900.. and I'd guess the sister 40-120 f/2.8 (or so), is near to market also.

I give about 3-5 years to be a Standard Pro System for all but High-speed sport requirements, a few other venues... but will be more than fine for 90% of the jobs..

 

[amalric]

Here are 2 fashion photogs shooting with the E-M5:

http://www.43rumors.com/using-the-e-m5-for-fashion-by-andre-arthur/


http://www.43rumors.com/whitby-goth-weekender-damian-mcgillicuddy/

To me it is quite evident that what they are selling is their peculiar style, and that the E-M5 is flexible enough to convey it.

Another important factor IMHO is that lighting and good PP come before the camera. As you can see in the links above, use of speedlights or strobes literally creates the image long before the camera clicks.

I don't yet have a book as a street shooter, but m4/3 equipment has provided me a considerable increase in the number of flickr views, since I never feel that the camera comes between me and my subject. Thus it has led me to better *content*.

The trouble with the FF argument is that people make the camera come long before content, as if gear could replace photographic imagination. The E-M5 works in many cases (not necessarily all) because of its blazing responsiveness and flexibility, I find.

 

[DNG]

Here are 2 fashion photogs shooting with the E-M5:

http://www.43rumors.com/using-the-e-m5-for-fashion-by-andre-arthur/


http://www.43rumors.com/whitby-goth-weekender-damian-mcgillicuddy/

To me it is quite evident that what they are selling is their peculiar style, and that the E-M5 is flexible enough to convey it.

Another important factor IMHO is that lighting and good PP come before the camera. As you can see in the links above, use of speedlights or strobes literally creates the image long before the camera clicks.

I don't yet have a book as a street shooter, but m4/3 equipment has provided me a considerable increase in the number of flickr views, since I never feel that the camera comes between me and my subject. Thus it has led me to better *content*.

The trouble with the FF argument is that people make the camera come long before content, as if gear could replace photographic imagination. The E-M5 works in many cases (not necessarily all) because of its blazing responsiveness and flexibility, I find.

When you have an attitude (As above), that conveys that you (the person) behind the camera is the 1st most important element to capture a "Professional image". THEN, the camera is an extension of "your" creativity. Picking the right camera can also increase your success rate.

Of topic a little...
IF. N/C/P/S would make APS-C sensor and FF sensors would make sensors that have the resolution and DR (not # of MPs) as the high end m4/3 sensor MUST have along with high resolution lenses because of the smaller sensor. Then. the APS-C and FF sensors will be TONS better than they are now... In comparison of the size... IE: m4/3 specks vs APS-C specks.

Look, That's is why the high end m4/3 sensors are VERY CLOSE in IQ to these others (old tech) sensors... IF the larger sensor makers kept up with imaging tech, then theirs would be far ahead of the m4/3's all the time! Their not, and and gap is closing fast!

How many NEW larger sensors are really in these APS-C and FF cameras? Mostly, just internal firmware and a few tweaks here and there... and BAM, a "new, improved" sensor... Hay, Oly does it also... they all do... Buy, Oly has changed sensor makers... Sony now makes Oly sensors...

The E-M5 is a very able camera, as will be the new E-M1.
It still starts with the one behind the camera, and their knowledge on how to prepare and execute an idea to a "Professional" image.

Build up your Portfolio "First:, not your gear. (Use the gear you have, you'll be surprised how much you can do with it). If your worth your "grain of salt", then the camera is secondary, and you'll pick up what ever one will deliver for you.

 

[amalric]

When you have an attitude (As above), that conveys that you (the person) behind the camera is the 1st most important element to capture a "Professional image". THEN, the camera is an extension of "your" creativity. Picking the right camera can also increase your success rate.

Of topic a little...
IF. N/C/P/S would make APS-C sensor and FF sensors would make sensors that have the resolution and DR (not # of MPs) as the high end m4/3 sensor MUST have along with high resolution lenses because of the smaller sensor. Then. the APS-C and FF sensors will be TONS better than they are now... In comparison of the size... IE: m4/3 specks vs APS-C specks.

Look, That's is why the high end m4/3 sensors are VERY CLOSE in IQ to these others (old tech) sensors... IF the larger sensor makers kept up with imaging tech, then theirs would be far ahead of the m4/3's all the time! Their not, and and gap is closing fast!

How many NEW larger sensors are really in these APS-C and FF cameras? Mostly, just internal firmware and a few tweaks here and there... and BAM, a "new, improved" sensor... Hay, Oly does it also... they all do... Buy, Oly has changed sensor makers... Sony now makes Oly sensors...

The E-M5 is a very able camera, as will be the new E-M1.
It still starts with the one behind the camera, and their knowledge on how to prepare and execute an idea to a "Professional" image.

Build up your Portfolio "First:, not your gear. (Use the gear you have, you'll be surprised how much you can do with it). If your worth your "grain of salt", then the camera is secondary, and you'll pick up what ever one will deliver for you.

It's not really only a matter of attitude, there are some objective factors.

The improvement in Sony's sensor technology was certainly a game changer. I still remeber when P. Potka was the first to discover that DR had increased by two stops over the earlier generation: what disbelief!

Sensitivity had also increased by two real stops, and per pixel density had increased because of a lower AA filter. Add to that the 5-axis IBIS which makes the E-M5 a Steadycam, and you can see why there has been a steady rise of interest among Pros.

However it was S. Huff with his Strange Comparisons that made me realise that the camera was 'good enough' to avoid FF. He challenged the onlooker to see a difference between a picture shot with the latest Leica M and the E-M5: my very eyes couldn't detect it: so why should I care? Lenses matter of course, but you have some v. high resolution ones to choose in m4/3. So again a moot point, all considered.

What you miss perhaps is the sheer size of the image: if I were into stock I might choose a 24 Mpx cam, because you can't alter the house rules, but that's a declining market anyway.

The fact that the camera is not the limit has been dubbed m4/3 being 'good enough' but I find it a likeable understatement. In any case the camera is not the limiting factor anymore, so one is free to think about the other choices, composition and style, the type of communication one wants to achieve.

You don't need a Space Telescope to do photography, one can leave it to future FF. Just like one didn't need Medium Format in film, except by deliberate choice.

If you check those two photogs above you can see that they do Street Fashion, i.e. they are*taking the camera out of the Studio into the street*, and m4/3, so portable, is ideally suited for it. Studio quality, for their purposes, is still there.

 

[sfaust]

Very well said. And one of the reasons my FF DSLR equipment is back in the studio with my assistant, while all I took to Barcelona/Stockholm/London was an E-M5, 14-54mm f2.8, 20mm f1.7, and a 75mm f2.5. I couldn't see what advantage there was to lugging around a kit that was 3 times the size, and 4 times the weight! I feel I could do much better traveling light and still getting 99% of what I need with regard to image quality and system functionally. I walked nine miles yesterday. Thank god I didn't have my FF gear 😀

Which reminds me. I'm in Barcelona Spain, with a gorgeous beach outside, interesting architecture, local flair, and people waiting to be captured. What the hell am I doing in a forum? See ya... 😉

It's not really only a matter of attitude, there are some objective factors.

The improvement in Sony's sensor technology was certainly a game changer. I still remeber when P. Potka was the first to discover that DR had increased by two stops over the earlier generation: what disbelief!

Sensitivity had also increased by two real stops, and per pixel density had increased because of a lower AA filter. Add to that the 5-axis IBIS which makes the E-M5 a Steadycam, ...