E-M5 mk III released at US$1199

agentlossing

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
4,276
Real Name
Andrew Lossing
I'll let you tell me that; but you should then let me tell you that I have printed huge prints for display, but I have never (until very recently) sent my lab anything other than 3000x2000 jpgs. Whether from a Canon 5D series or a Lumix GX series - my lab produces display-worthy prints. The Italian company that did my albums (when I worked weddings) also never complained and would produce 12x18 albums (that's 18x24 full spread) of excellent quality.
I don't get the point of resisting the fact that higher MP sensors produce more detail when cropped over a 16MP sensor cropped the same. It's pretty simple. There is an argument to be made that smaller MP counts provide better noise performance and larger photosites provide better capture, BUT all the 16MP sensors in M4/3 cameras are old, and sensor improvements have voided whatever benefits those 16MP sensors would have had over larger MP-count sensors of the same vintage.

I am not saying the 16MP sensors can't be cropped, nor that they don't produce "pretty good" results.
 

WaltP

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
1,304
Location
Colorado, USA, Terra, Sol, W. Milky Way
I don't get the point of resisting the fact that higher MP sensors produce more detail when cropped over a 16MP sensor cropped the same. It's pretty simple. There is an argument to be made that smaller MP counts provide better noise performance and larger photosites provide better capture, BUT all the 16MP sensors in M4/3 cameras are old, and sensor improvements have voided whatever benefits those 16MP sensors would have had over larger MP-count sensors of the same vintage.

I am not saying the 16MP sensors can't be cropped, nor that they don't produce "pretty good" results.
Sorry, I think you misunderstood my response. I can do some math, so I am aware that 24 is greater than 16. It's not really resistance, it's just not complete agreement that bigger is vitally needed for good photographs. Thus I gave an example of sending 6mp files to my lab. When I was still in business, we pretty much recognized that 12mp was more that enough for almost every photograph almost every person needs. Scientists need the most they can get. Astrologists have very special needs. But nature, people, wildlife, advertising, fashion - most of us would still be fine with a Nikon D2 and a 50/1.8. And the phones are showing us that computation has become almost as important as sensor, and will probably surpass it next year.

I agree with your point that the larger MP count is more crop able - but I don't think that is the only or most important factor in image quality - even if we are pixel-peeping. In the real world, those pixels are no longer the static objects they used to be.
 

agentlossing

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
4,276
Real Name
Andrew Lossing
Sorry, I think you misunderstood my response. I can do some math, so I am aware that 24 is greater than 16. It's not really resistance, it's just not complete agreement that bigger is vitally needed for good photographs. Thus I gave an example of sending 6mp files to my lab. When I was still in business, we pretty much recognized that 12mp was more that enough for almost every photograph almost every person needs. Scientists need the most they can get. Astrologists have very special needs. But nature, people, wildlife, advertising, fashion - most of us would still be fine with a Nikon D2 and a 50/1.8. And the phones are showing us that computation has become almost as important as sensor, and will probably surpass it next year.

I agree with your point that the larger MP count is more crop able - but I don't think that is the only or most important factor in image quality - even if we are pixel-peeping. In the real world, those pixels are no longer the static objects they used to be.
Alright, I misunderstood the main point of your post. On my part, it's partly coming from a frustration with how stagnant sensor development has been with M4/3. But your point seems to be more about being satisfied with the gear you have, which is a really good one. We can both be right on this one!
 

WaltP

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
1,304
Location
Colorado, USA, Terra, Sol, W. Milky Way
Alright, I misunderstood the main point of your post. On my part, it's partly coming from a frustration with how stagnant sensor development has been with M4/3. But your point seems to be more about being satisfied with the gear you have, which is a really good one. We can both be right on this one!
I understand that frustration; I think a lot of us have it. But I think Olympus is moving forward with software and that is a good thing. Things like Composite and Focus stacking are software upgrades, but the new phones are pushing all camera manufacturers to look at what "computational photography" means for the future of image-making. I am guessing future updates will start to focus our attention more on software and less on sensor to increase IQ. But at the same time, I'm old enough to hope I'm wrong. I sort of understand a pixel, but I'm not as comfortable with that pixel as a mere starting point for data manipulation. Even as I enjoy High-res mode, I remain uncomfortable that the pixel is used 8 times; yet I know it's where the industry is headed. Sigh for the "good 'ol days".
:) Thanks for listening.
 

SojiOkita

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,389
Location
France
But, all that aside, saying "OMG!! Plastic??!!" gets more attention, and we are all attention starved these days.
Some plastic bodies look good, some other look cheap.
I've no issues with my E-M10 being plastic, but the E-M5 mk III looks cheaper... juste like E-M10 mk II and III.
It's not a deal breaker for me, but was clearly a disappointment when I tested the body.
 

SojiOkita

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,389
Location
France
One another annoyance is that the E-M5 III is not supported by Lightroom 6.x (not Olympus's fault - just the way Adobe rolls). I wonder if it will be possible to go into the binary with a hex editor and using the profile from the E-M1 II for the E-M5 III. What are people using these days for RAW with the newer m4/3 bodies?
It's the way mostly every RAW software works. I also work with DxO from time to time... I've got to update to last version to (maybe) get E-M5 mk III support.

In Lightroom 6.x you can use DNG converter to get E-M5 mk III support. Not a perfect solution but it may work.

Getting a support is not only being able to read the file, but getting a correct color profile and so on.
That being said, it seems that last Lightroom version uses EM1X profiles for E-M5 mk III.
 

betamax

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
563
Location
Sydney, AU
Real Name
Alan
One another annoyance is that the E-M5 III is not supported by Lightroom 6.x (not Olympus's fault - just the way Adobe rolls). I wonder if it will be possible to go into the binary with a hex editor and using the profile from the E-M1 II for the E-M5 III. What are people using these days for RAW with the newer m4/3 bodies?
If you don't mind tinkering in the command window, exiftool would do the trick. See https://www.mu-43.com/threads/markii-raw-into-lightroom.74290/#post-762067.

In the end I got tired of it, and ended up with Exposure X5, but Capture One and DXO seem to be the top choices here, though they probably don't support the E-M5.3 yet.
 

animanic

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Oct 24, 2019
Messages
18
Some plastic bodies look good, some other look cheap.
I've no issues with my E-M10 being plastic, but the E-M5 mk III looks cheaper... juste like E-M10 mk II and III.
It's not a deal breaker for me, but was clearly a disappointment when I tested the body.
Wait, E-M10 is plastic? I have it for 5 years maybe and always thought it is metal or at least most of it
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
322
Location
Austin, TX
Real Name
M@
I can’t “see” that the body is plastic. I’d have to feel it in my hand. But, to be honest, there is nothing wrong with a polycarbonate body.
My MkIII should be in my grubby hands on Monday. I've got no issue with polycarbonate. I have handguns with polycarbonate frames. If they can withstand hundreds and thousands of tiny explosions and the impact of a pound of steel reciprocating on 'em, a camera will be fine.

Update, the camera will be in my hands tomorrow! yay!
 
Last edited:

animanic

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Oct 24, 2019
Messages
18
The polycarbonate body is fine. But the display is not that good in some conditions. It lacks some color depth and for a moment I even thought I messed up the image quality settings. But I noticed it just in one specific condition- when shooting against light grey-ish wall in a dim room and the wall not evenly lit.
 

dhazeghi

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
4,381
Location
San Jose, CA
Real Name
Dara
If you don't mind tinkering in the command window, exiftool would do the trick. See https://www.mu-43.com/threads/markii-raw-into-lightroom.74290/#post-762067.

In the end I got tired of it, and ended up with Exposure X5, but Capture One and DXO seem to be the top choices here, though they probably don't support the E-M5.3 yet.
Thanks, I'd forgotten about EXIFtool. The reason I mentioned modifying Lightroom is that I'd rather not tweak the files in case in the future I try to use them with something that does have good E-M5 III support. DNG is indeed an option too, but it doubles my storage requirements, which kind of stinks.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
378
Location
Thessaly, Greece
But, to be honest, there is nothing wrong with a polycarbonate body.
I can see 2 “wrongish” points, one objective and one subjective to my eyes.

Objective: I am pretty sure it does not cost as much as a metal body to produce so it should not be charged as such to the customer.

Subjective: Painting it in faux metal paint is an insult to proper quality plastic looks. Let plastic be plastic!
 

RS86

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
113
Location
Finland
It seems Olympus doesn't have MySets anymore in their cameras? And you can configure only one Custom mode to mode dial? This is quite horrible. I don't use many of those mode dial options so MySets with my E-M10 II have been great.

I sent email about this to Olympus. I'm wondering if others who find it important would do the same? It's ridiculous, this camera is not cheap model.

I'm thinking if I should buy another E-M10 II with good price, because my current one has almost 40k shutter count and I love the camera. I would get another battery and can wait if Olympus comes to their senses and if E-M5 III price drops enough to make me ignore this nonsense.
 

RS86

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
113
Location
Finland
Anyone have a guess what is the logic behind taking out MySets or 3 custom modes in mode dial (like in E-M1 II)? I can understand it being taken out of E-M10 III to boost sales of more expensive models.

But to take it out of E-M5 III? Isn't it supposed to be enthusiast camera? People have no option of having this function in smaller form factor? I'm amazed and pretty disappointed.

This makes me not to want to upgrade from E-M10 II (along with the fully articulating screen), so definitely it's not very good thing for them.
 

RAH

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
688
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
It seems Olympus doesn't have MySets anymore in their cameras? And you can configure only one Custom mode to mode dial? This is quite horrible. I don't use many of those mode dial options so MySets with my E-M10 II have been great.

I sent email about this to Olympus. I'm wondering if others who find it important would do the same? It's ridiculous, this camera is not cheap model.

I'm thinking if I should buy another E-M10 II with good price, because my current one has almost 40k shutter count and I love the camera. I would get another battery and can wait if Olympus comes to their senses and if E-M5 III price drops enough to make me ignore this nonsense.
I don't quite understand the issue here. Forgetting about the idea where you can program MySets to the different dial positions (I never liked this because I found it VERY confusing to then have mislabelled dial positions and remembering what was what), you have to go into the menu system to pick a Myset anyway, right?

So how is that worse than having to turn the dial on the E-M5III to the Custom mode and then going into the menu to pick which one you want? It seems better with the E-M5III, because you get one default (I think), whereas with the E-M10 models you HAD to go into the menu to pick one.

I guess that people are complaining because on the older system you could assign Mysets to (unrelated) dial positions. Yeah, I guess if you liked that and used it, then you've lost some capabilities. But otherwise, it seems similar to me, plus having a default which I don't think was available under Mysets.
 

RS86

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
113
Location
Finland
I don't quite understand the issue here. Forgetting about the idea where you can program MySets to the different dial positions (I never liked this because I found it VERY confusing to then have mislabelled dial positions and remembering what was what), you have to go into the menu system to pick a Myset anyway, right?

So how is that worse than having to turn the dial on the E-M5III to the Custom mode and then going into the menu to pick which one you want? It seems better with the E-M5III, because you get one default (I think), whereas with the E-M10 models you HAD to go into the menu to pick one.

I guess that people are complaining because on the older system you could assign Mysets to (unrelated) dial positions. Yeah, I guess if you liked that and used it, then you've lost some capabilities. But otherwise, it seems similar to me, plus having a default which I don't think was available under Mysets.
I don't use many of those other dial positions. I can choose setting for Macro + Flash to "Art" for example. I can put burst shooting settings to "Scn". I can put landscape tripod settings to another I don't use. Etc. I haven't found that I need to go to any settings, just twist the mode dial.

It's totally baffling why take this out from more expensive models, they have the software coding already. Or why E-M5 III in smaller form factor than E-M1 II doesn't have even those 3 custom modes on the dial.
 

SojiOkita

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,389
Location
France
Anyone have a guess what is the logic behind taking out MySets or 3 custom modes in mode dial (like in E-M1 II)? I can understand it being taken out of E-M10 III to boost sales of more expensive models.
I think some people found this too complicated.

I thought it was a wonderful feature: you could get 4 custom modes on the dial, plus you got rid of all the useless modes...
That was one of the reason who got me to Olympus... I was waiting for this since my first DSLR.

What I can't understand is why only ONE custom mode.
Every basic camera have more than 1. PEN-F has 4.

I don't understand either why they didn't put a better option to choose one of the 2 other modes. Getting into the menus is useless on the field. You can't even assign a custom mode to one button as it was possible with the E-M1.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom