OMD-EM5 Pics

[celluloidprop]

Man, the "that looks like a P&S!" comments are popular with every new mirrorless release. Strange how the M9/D800/IQ180 never gets them even with similar images.

 

[Texsport]

I'd say the images are pretty nice---and surely good enough for what the camera is meant for.

Texsport

 

[Johann Espiritu]

Here are a few from me:

(With Nokton 35/1.2):


Mavis + Elian by The Johann Espiritu™, on Flickr

(With the 12-50 kit lens):


Vern + Mavis + Marga by The Johann Espiritu™, on Flickr

<and with the DG Summilux 25/1.4):


Michelline by The Johann Espiritu™, on Flickr

Some of these and others in my flickr and my previous thread with other lenses: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117866/showthread.php?t=117866

 

[Faintandfuzzy]

Looks like pics taken from "insert name here" p/s camera. I'am sorry but i don't see anything special with any of these images

I'm not certain what P/S camera could obtain the shallow DOF of an m 4/3 camera with an f1.7 lens....but I'm all hears to hear of one.

 

[DNG]

I am loving these photos...
Keep Posting..

It just makes me more impatient as I wait for my E-M5 to be delivered from B&H....🙂

 

[intheviewfinder]

Charlie Brown & Snoopy, the Seattle night shots are solid, and Johann's shots are wonderful (I especially like the one in color) but honestly the image quality does not look any better than the ground breaking Nikon D90 (2008). So in some ways I'm thinking it's a big improvement for micro 4/3s sensors but still behind the APS-c sensor. I'd expect the 4/3s to catch up pretty soon. Definitely within the next couple of years.

--Rich

 

[rparmar]

Superb images Johann!

the image quality does not look any better than the ground breaking Nikon D90 (2008).

I am wondering, in all seriousness, what would the images have to look like to impress you? I understand that for many people "good enough" is indeed "good enough" and we hit that point a long while back. But I imagine that such people don't need to look at new camera releases at all. 😉

I should also point out that the Nikon is much bigger and heavier, without weather-sealing, an articulated screen, or any of the advantages of mirrorless. So this seems an odd comparison.

 

[plummerl]

Charlie Brown & Snoopy, the Seattle night shots are solid, and Johann's shots are wonderful (I especially like the one in color) but honestly the image quality does not look any better than the ground breaking Nikon D90 (2008). So in some ways I'm thinking it's a big improvement for micro 4/3s sensors but still behind the APS-c sensor. I'd expect the 4/3s to catch up pretty soon. Definitely within the next couple of years.

--Rich

Thanks, I guess. I'm really impressed with the way people can examine a photograph consisting of 1000x750 pixels (from a JPEG) and come up with such a detailed comparison to other cameras.

 

[rbelyell]

people see what they want. imo its almost impossible to judge IQ given the downsizing required here. having said that, larry i,m amazed at a couple of those night shots taken with that SLOW kit zoom. i think theyre pretty damn good considering the lens used. i'd like to see what the d90-or whatever-produces in that light at 6.3!

btw, mine is on its way--wednesday!
tony

 

[Keith]

Image quality is a pointless analysis on the internet. A friend of mine just bought herself a G12 and has been sending me some of her efforts via email ... if she was using my D700 I supect I wouldn't be able to tell the difference! The little (point and shoot) Canon is very good.

How hard is the camera to focus, does the interface suit you, does it actually expose correctly most of the time without blowing highlights? These are the sorts of things that interest me about the OM-D ... not dumb IQ comparisons with other cameras!

 

[plummerl]

Image quality is a pointless analysis on the internet. A friend of mine just bought herself a G12 and has been sending me some of her efforts via email ... if she was using my D700 I supect I wouldn't be able to tell the difference! The little (point and shoot) Canon is very good.

How hard is the camera to focus, does the interface suit you, does it actually expose correctly most of the time without blowing highlights? These are the sorts of things that interest me about the OM-D ... not dumb IQ comparisons with other cameras!

Hi Keith!

My experience, so far (based on about 60 hours use!), is that the interface is going to take a bit of learning, but not that much. Given the size (ever so smaller than an OM-1), there are fewer buttons on the outside (compared to my E-510). This has been very much helped, by the touch screen back, as well as the one button access to the large info panel for adjusting parameters (not to mention the two top dials and two function buttons that can be re-assigned). I have only tried it by accident, but the touch screen can be used in a point for focus, followed by a shot.

In this morning's shots (before sunrise) I did not change the metering method (used default) and only had to adjust exposure (very easy!) by one or two stops. Focus in every case was perfect (I was using F8 with a tripod). One thing I can say, the grip should be considered an extremely desirable option. So far, I have been using the landscape part of it only. I am so far, extremely impressed with the EM-5.

My E-510 was noticeably larger than an OM, the EM-5 feels more like a return to the OM.

 

[Rayt]

I ran into a friend last week at a camera shop. He had an OM-D w/Pan-Leica 25/1.4 and an X Pro 1 w/ 35/1.4 in his camera bag. I played with both and my first impression was that the X Pro 1 was pretty average at AF while the OM-D was instantaneous and accurate. The X Pro 1 took me back to the 90's when I had my N5005 Nikon with 28-70 plastic zoom. Of the two I would certainly pick the OM-D if AF speeds matters to your photography. And the rear screen is huge and beautiful!

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Thanks for the input, Ray. I'm thinking of getting the OM-D and its nice to hear how it compares to other new gear.

 

[BTMarcais]

Jamie- there was still one left when I left work today... 🙂
You'll have to stop in and check it out.
It's a quick little guy, that's for sure!

-Brian

 

[Ruhayat]

If people want the ultimate in image quality, they're looking in the wrong thread. D800 and 5D Mk III are that way >>

My GF1 gives me brilliant image quality that is all I expect out of a digital camera - which I use as backup for my film cameras. But top end image quality is not why I ditched my Canon 5D to get a Leica M6TTL and the GF1. It's all to do with this simple question: what good is the best camera in the world when it's not with you at all times?

My GF1 + pancake 2.8 fits in a belt pouch I wear everywhere, and I hardly notice the weight. Can a D800 do that? Hmm.

 

[Ruhayat]

All of which is to say, SLR Lens testing says the new batch of m4/3 sensors, when combined with the high resolution primes, are now as good as APS-C. That's more than good enough for me.

 

[gilpen123]

I actually don't find the UI difficult, maybe because I've used the EP2, EP3 and EPL2 before the OMD. A nice addition is that IMO very useful control knobs for aperture and exposure compensation. If you put it in S mode then the wheel can change your speeds as needed.

 

[shadowfox]

Larry,
That is just gorgeous!

 

[ankaka]

What lens was used for this?

 

[BMacW]

Image quality is a pointless analysis on the internet. A friend of mine just bought herself a G12 and has been sending me some of her efforts via email ... if she was using my D700 I supect I wouldn't be able to tell the difference! The little (point and shoot) Canon is very good.

How hard is the camera to focus, does the interface suit you, does it actually expose correctly most of the time without blowing highlights? These are the sorts of things that interest me about the OM-D ... not dumb IQ comparisons with other cameras!

Most sensible thing I've heard in a long while.