E-M5 vs Canon 40D

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by demiro, Aug 23, 2012.

  1. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I've been a Canon DSLR shooter for a few years, and I've always loved the 40D. Bought an E-M5 about two months ago, and probably have not touched the 40D for six weeks. For some reason I pulled it out of the bag tonight and took some throw away shots in my dimly lit office.

    Wow. A camera that I felt was ergonmically almost perfect feels like a big black rock in my hands. Shocked. Snap a shot. Shocked again. That shutter crash sounds almost violent in the quiet night. But it focuses fast and takes sharp pics, with the modest 50/1.8 attached.

    So I grabbed my E-M5 to do some modeling duty. Shoot a few in M; a few in A. Not bad, but not great either. Between the slowish shutter speed and trying to expose for the black subject properly I am not getting great shots.

    So I turn the tables. Shoot the Canon with the E-M5 + 45/1.8. Wow again. Beautifully sharp shots with the black camera exposed perfectly. We may have something with this E-M5 thing. :2thumbs:

    This is hardly a fair comparison. The 40D is many years old at this point, and the 50/1.8 is a $100 lens. But still, I am really surprised that the E-M5 just crushed it by comparison. A rematch is looming in a few weeks, when U8 soccer starts. I plan to shoot them head-to-head. Based on a few shots at practice with the E-M5 I am installing the Canon as a fairly heavy favorite to maintain it's title of "Sports Shooter". The E-M5 did OK, but it just can't track action all that well. I ended up shooting wider than I prefer to keep subjects in frame, and even with that my keeper rate was lower than I'd expect with the 40D.

    I am going to remain hopeful about the E-M5 though. I'd love to dump the DSLR rig in it's entirety.
     
  2. Yohan Pamudji

    Yohan Pamudji Mu-43 Veteran

    462
    Jun 21, 2012
    Mississippi, USA
    Looking forward to seeing the results of Round 2, but I suspect that the 40D is a heavy favorite for action photography for a good reason.
     
  3. Mikefellh

    Mikefellh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    939
    Jun 7, 2012
    Toronto, Canada
    I'm the opposite...I'm forced to use a Canon at work, and the E-M5 beats it in every way including comfort and image quality...and I just did some bif with my E-M5 over the weekend.
     
  4. cputeq

    cputeq Mu-43 Regular

    140
    Jul 27, 2012
    Albuquerque, NM
    Jeremy
    I have the same thoughts on action - CDAF in the OM-D (or any other CDAF camera that I know of) just isn't up to the task of tracking action.

    I occasionally like to shoot action, though, so the only thing I've tried do to is quickly pre-focus and shoot off shots - or AF-S on the subject quickly and take some shots. It really depends on the type of action.

    coming towards the camera, AF-S is useless (on the subject), because by the time it locks, the subject has already moved through the focal plane. But in other less-extreme movements relative to the camera, the AF-S can usually be okay, especially if one can anticipate the action (perhaps stay a bit zoomed out and crop later to see more of the frame).

    I was very tempted to keep my Canon 7D and 70-200 just for action, but I shoot it so rarely that really that would have been $2300 in gear just sitting around for no real reason.
     
  5. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I'll posts some comparison shots of the "showdown". :)


    That would be tough to live with. I've reduced my DSLR kit to 40D, 50/1.8, 55-250, 85/1.8 and 17-70. So maybe half of the value of your 7D and lens. The 55-250 does fall and spring soccer; the 85/1.8 basketall and ice skating. The 50/1.8 is almost not worth selling, and I keep the Sigma 17-70 just in case I want a walk-around lens on the DSLR.