November 12th, 2013, 09:18 PM
My E-M1 behaves just like my E-M5 when using my iOptron Skytracker. No unusual noise problems.
November 12th, 2013, 10:02 PM
Perhaps it might be helpful to show an example for those concerned with this & give details of settings & timing between frames etc. I would imagine there is a facility for NR to operate for interval sequential frames unlike earlier cameras without an intervalometer using continuous sequential shooting.
Originally Posted by Sammyboy
Last edited by Ross the fiddler; November 12th, 2013 at 10:06 PM.
I fiddle with violins (when I'm not fiddling with a camera).
Cameras: OM-D E-M1, Olympus Stylus 1, OM-D E-M5 with HLD-6, E30 with HLD-4.
Lenses: M.ZD12-50, M.ZD60 Macro, M.ZD75-300 Mk II, MMF-3, ZD14-42, ZD40-150, ZD70-300, ZD14-54 II, ZD35 macro, EC14, EX25, OM50 1.8, OM28 2.8, Sigma 150mm F2.8 APO Macro DG.
Flashes: FL36R X2, FL50R, FL50. Other: Soligor bellows & adapters. Velbon Sherpa 600R tripod.
November 12th, 2013, 11:25 PM
You say "Yep!". However, E-M5 with NR turned Off gives way way better results vs E-M1! And it's not because E-M5 has black frame applied by default. If that was the case E-M5 would cook jpg/raw files at a double of the exposure time, but it doesn' happen. Moreover, why on earth would E-M5 need NR at all, if the dark frame subtraction was there by default?
Originally Posted by Ross the fiddler
Obviously, both E-M1 and E-M5 have same function assigned to NR Off / On, but the image quality is so different!
The following member thanks xlsmile for this post:
November 13th, 2013, 03:22 AM
Hello all, I'll chime in here with my findings.
I'm a paid photographer and working part-time in camera sales, avid MFT user after using Nikon (APS-C) for years and being tired of lugging around heavy lenses and bodies. Currently using the Panasonic GH3 as the main camera but have been using the E-M5 extensively in the past year, loving it to bits and pieces. I was extremely happy to hear about the E-M1 and I ordered one through my work immediately. I also considered selling my trusty E-M5 to fund the newcomer. I always spend an hour or so to initially set up my cameras, and did so with the E-M1. Naturally, I set NR and NF to OFF which had been my full-time setting with the E-M5 all along. I've done quite a few long exposures with the E-M5, I was kayaking in the middle of the darkest night with it last year, shot some great "impossible" images with it.
I was curious to test LiveTime over WiFi and it was an immediate disaster. I don't think I've seen anything worse with my older Nikons OR the Panasonic GH2 which explicitly sucked at long exposures! After some more testing, also discussing the issue with my professional colleagues in the camera store, I was PRETTY SURE that I had received a lemon, definitely a faulty unit. At that point I didn't even consider it possible as a non-defect. The difference compared with my E-M5 was huge.
So promptly I contacted my account manager at Olympus, he thought it sounded no doubt like a defective unit/sensor! So I did some more testing, compiled a folder of JPEGs showing the nature of the problem quite extensively, files from both the E-M1 and the E-M5 with the exact same settings. I was told that the next batch of cameras was coming in so I tested one camera in that batch, along with another one from the same batch as mine. I was lulled with the fact that this has to be corrected by Olympus, it can't be that bad... So I received an offer at my E-M5 and had it sold, got more than I expected. :) I was a little hesitant but thought well, if all else fails I'll have to buy another one. ;)
Yesterday I received an email from Olympus with the verdict from the camera team, they had sent my samples off to Germany/Japan and now had an answer. They're just telling me that unfortunately there will be no fix for the long exposure noise. The advice from Olympus is to make sure NR is enabled or left on AUTO at all times. I called them up to have an explanation and all the support guy would say is that the E-M1 is noisier than the E-M5 due to compatibility with the FT lenses (i.e. the PDAF-sites on the sensor) OR the omission of anti aliasing filter. They didn't have a clear answer as to which one of those new "features" to blame, really.
I will make another call to my contact today and see what conclusions we will make. I have a very good relationship with them but this is probably the biggest disappointment ever in my dealing with new attractive cameras. After all, one of the main arguments with the E-M1 is the ability to shoot long exposures with LiveTime remotely from the iPhone/iPad, light painters rejoice and also great appeal to astrophotographers and nocturnal wanderers like me. :) Now I am totally confused, disappointed and undecided upon keeping the camera hoping for a miracle (if Oly receive enough feedback from us end users they may have to change their mind eventually and come up with a solution, if ever possible that is) or get rid of it before it'll lose interest when this hits the masses! I am seriously considering switching back to the trusty old E-M5 which after all have been perfect.
On a last note, the idea of cooked RAW/JPEG in the E-M5... I just don't buy it. First of all I have yet to see one single evidence of negative side effects of the E-M5 RAW-engine whatever it does, I don't mind really... the images come out beautifully and stars in the skies all seem to shine nevertheless. And why on earth would Oly make a PRO version of the E-M5 with this TOTALLY UNWANTED speckle matrix coming out of the RAW/JPEG engine if they had a choice on removing it before it hits the JPEG or the ORF???
Finally, take a hard look at these images I stuffed in a zip for download from the Dropbox link below:
Now, take a look at the two images numbered '11' in the LNRon folder... here I did what Olympus told us, NoiseReduction ON/AUTO! So folks... which of the two cameras would you buy for long exposure work...?
The following 8 members thank cablefreak for this post:
November 13th, 2013, 04:33 AM
It would be very kind of you if you had some samples to share with us, also a short note on how you setup your camera, settings, exposure times etc. Maybe you have a non-defective camera or found a solution? Grateful in advance! :)
Originally Posted by Sammyboy
November 13th, 2013, 07:45 AM
Thanks for the long and detailed report Cablefreak.
Your experience tallies with the O.P's,
Originally Posted by cablefreak
yet some users report nice smooth results at long exposures.
Can it be there are two distinct batches with different long-exposure noise?
If so ... it would be valuable to check serial numbers from both 'species'.
Oly e-P1&17mmF2.8 e-600, e-410&40-150MkI, E-1&14-54MkI, Tokyo-Koki 300mm
Lumix G1&Yashinon45F1.7, e-pL1&Z9-185, e-P2&45mm. e-pL2&30mmF2.8 e-pM2&20mmF1.7
November 14th, 2013, 01:31 AM
Thank you, cablefreak for sharing your story!
I can sign under every word you've spoken regarding the sensor issue on E-M1. I haven't got any reasonable answer from Olympus neither. I was still hoping my batch was faulty and my unit could be replaced with a quality one.
Unfortunately, according to Olympus, and as quoted by you "there will be no fix for the long exposure noise". So, it seems like I'll have to return my E-M1 where I bought it from.
I've checked all the images comparing E-M1 vs E-M5 performance in both NR "ON" and "OFF" situations. E-M5 definitely delivers much better results in ALL but one (0.5sek ISO25600 LNR OFF) situations.
What a disappointment with E-M1!
Last edited by xlsmile; November 14th, 2013 at 01:55 AM.
November 14th, 2013, 02:24 AM
Thanks, and you're welcome :)
Originally Posted by xlsmile
I am thinking of returning the E-M1 too, and get another E-M5 since I just had it sold. ;)
In my opinion, as good as the E-M1 is for daylight use, for the typical user of this camera (based on daily personal contact with customers buying the E-M5 or the GH3, both flagship MFT models) and especially landscape photographers should think twice before buying the E-M1...
November 14th, 2013, 03:21 AM
Thanks everyone for reporting this hot pixel issue with the E-M1. It got me curious, so I ran some quick and dirty tests of my own last night between my E-M1 and E-M5 (which, fortunately, I have not sold), and, lo and behold, there were these white specks in the E-M1 shots, whereas the E-M5 has more normal noise, regardless of ISO setting, if both Noise Reduction and Noise Filter were turned OFF.
However, I never shoot any long exposure shots with Noise Reduction set to OFF, so I set the cameras back to my normal long exposure setting, which is Noise Reduction "AUTO" and Noise Filter "OFF". I went on to test the cameras at ISO 200, 400, and 1600, for 30-second shots. At ISO 200 and 400, the results were pretty much the same between the two cameras (except that the E-M1 produced better white balance in AUTO mode even for RAW). At ISO 1600, both were equally noisy, but the image from the E-M1 is littered with white noise, whereas the E-M5 image has more normal color noise. I will try to post my images tonight, but based on my tests, I am happy with the result of the E-M1 because of the way I use the camera. If I were to make long exposure shots, I would always use ISO 200, so I am not concerned about the white specs at higher ISO under long exposure.
Having said that, I can certainly understand why others are upset, as there shouldn't be such an issue to begin with for a top-of-the-line camera, especially, when there is no such issue with the E-M5... I do hope they will come up with a fix...
November 14th, 2013, 05:56 AM
Hmm.. maybe NR is stuck on in your EM5 :) I get lots of hot pixels on mine in a 60 second exposure with it off.. was out with my EM1 last night at iso 400 and 30 seconds and had very little. but I had it set just for jpg, really dont need raw for night sky.. maybe tonight I will shoot them at the same part of sky at exact same settings and lenses after the moon sets.. a few minor meteor shows going on.. maybe I will catch a few testing :).. If this is true its gonna be another reason for me not to sell the em5 to use it for shooting thru my telescopes
Links on this page may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.