1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

EM-1 or 70D

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by shepx13, Sep 24, 2013.

  1. shepx13

    shepx13 Mu-43 Regular

    196
    Aug 7, 2012
    Tyler, TX
    Ken
    So, here's some background. I got into m4/3 last year, when I decided to downsize from my FF Nikon D700 and other gear. I used to do occasional wedding and family gigs, but did not have time for it for a while due to many things. And when traveling, the heavy gear killed my back :)

    So besides a basic photo course I teach once or twice a year, my photography has mostly been family stuff. When I sold my Nikon gear, I kept my Sigma 2.8 zooms for when my kids got involved in sports. Well, that day has come. As such, I bought a D7100 to use for their sports. But I have been highly disappointed with the AF on it during evening use. (There's even a 70D/d7100 comparison video on youtube that shows the same issue with backlit subjects I was having, and the 70D blows it away in these situations) So, I sent it back.

    Now I've got to decide what to do: Get a 70D and replace my Sigma lenses with Canon mount versions. Or, get an Em-1 and replace the Sigma glass with Olympus stuff (maybe get the Oly 55-200 SWD until the 40-150 comes out next year). In either case, I'm going to sell my Em-5 and replace with an EPL-5 to have a more compact kit for travel. (And I want something competent with video and with wifi built in, so these are the two best options IMO for me.)

    And as an FYI, my current m4/3 glass is: Rok Fish, 14 2.5, 45 1.8, 75 1.8, 12-50, 45-175.

    As I said, my primary use will be for family and personal hobby stuff, but I have had lots of recent requests for family photos and some weddings, and I do have the time to work some of them in my schedule again.

    So, if you were in my place, what would you do?
     
  2. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I'd want to go with the E-M1, so you have some synergy in your kit with the E-PL5, but I think it remains to be seen how well it can shoot action compared to something like the 70D.

    I think you are fine for weddings and family photos either way.

    Seems prudent to wait until you can validate capabilities of E-M1. If you need something in the short term maybe pick up a used D7000 since you still have the lenses. The in and out on that body won't cost you much at all and will allow you the time to make a well-informed decision on the E-M1.
     
  3. Clint

    Clint Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 22, 2013
    San Diego area, CA
    Clint
    The 70D and D7100 are excellent cameras in the right hands. The E-M1 may challenge them but at best will not provide functionality that exceeds either one of them.

    Why stay on the edge of what you need, just buy an D4 or EOS-1DX.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Dramaturg

    Dramaturg Mu-43 Top Veteran

    614
    Jun 7, 2013
    Ukraine
    Yevgen
    60D was a great camera, but it was very heavy and bulky. If my main purpose was family and travell photography I would go with E-M1, but if I'd wanted to do pro work time to time, I'd go with 60D.

    PS - now I also consider the video options. My friend does amazing videos with 550D (!) and 7D combo. It is sad that E-M1 is twice the price of 550D and still most likely won't be capable of producing smooth moire-free footage as 550D does. What's wrong with Olympus? Why Panasonic can have much better video output with the same sensor?
     
  5. lombardispot

    lombardispot Mu-43 Regular

    100
    Sep 19, 2013
    Why is the video considered so poor?

    I have one of the better Canon video cameras. It's the Vixia HF G10 with the HD CMOS Pro and it doesn't do 1080 60P. It does 1080 60i at 24Mbps, which is basically not far from 30P. And it has the same 24Mbps bit rate.

    Most of the time I'm converting my video to 1080P 29.97fps for Vimeo because nobody is going to watch my little video clips of my kids in a bluray player. And I'm not interested in slow motion at this point.

    By the time internet video gets to 1080P 60P, Olympus will have better video.

    For now, I would think it's plenty good for me and probably for most people.

    Are we stuck on comparing specs? Or is the video really "bad". The video I've seen from the OM-D EM-1 looks good to me.
     
  6. Dramaturg

    Dramaturg Mu-43 Top Veteran

    614
    Jun 7, 2013
    Ukraine
    Yevgen
    It is a well attested fact that OM-D's laggy codeck does not cope well with dynamic scenes and thus you get moire or a complete image collapse when panning or shooting any sort of action. I have it. Others have it too. OM-Ds video is good only for steady shoots. Panasonic, on the other hand, used a much better codeck that can deliver much better results from the same sensor. Your Vixia is much more superior to OM-D.
     
  7. slothead

    slothead Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 14, 2012
    Frederick, MD
    (1) This forum will be at least slightly biased.
    (2) I know nothing of Canon equipment and probably don't want to know.
    (3) I have been a Nikon person for the past years (although I was a Yashica person and an Olympus person long before that)

    So... I would recommend the Oly for its weight and because of my familiarity with it. No real valid reason that I can see.
     
  8. cdmicha

    cdmicha Mu-43 Regular

    74
    Dec 28, 2012
    Arkansas
    Chris
    I've got a 70D (actually "downgraded" all my other Canon gear to this model) and I like it a lot, but...

    Without knowing the low light capabilities of the E-M1, especially focusing, or the tracking ability with m43 lenses, I'd say it's a tough call to make. I will say that compared to the other Canon bodies I had (5d2, 60d) the 70d's focusing and tracking is much more solid. Is it better than the E-M1? I don't know. I know it's better than the E-M5. As far as video, it's awesome. The focusing in live view is the real deal (in decent light), and tracks slower (walking) objects well. It also gives low and high compression options for each resolution/framerate, which I understand can help people who do some serious video editing.

    I think the more important question would be can you get the glass you'll want for the Canon system? You've already got some good glass for the m43 system (isn't the 75 1.8 awesome???), so that's a pretty big consideration. I think if I didn't have decent glass to keep with my 70D I might have just gotten rid of my dSLR setup all together. Again, I don't know how the E-M1 sensor will perform, but the E-M5 sensor and 70D sensor score similarly at DXOMark.

    And one more thing... I believe Sigma will actually change mount types (from Nikon to Canon), for a fee.
     
  9. khollister

    khollister Mu-43 Veteran

    259
    Sep 16, 2010
    Orlando, FL
    Keith
    You could probably pick up a used D300s fairly inexpensively and I can speak from experience that the AF is solid on those. Given it is for your kid's sports, you aren't likely to be printing wall murals or anything, so I would trade the resolution for AF performance (i.e. D7k vs D300s). Seems crazy to have to spend more money on Canon glass.

    The other option for daytime sports is the Nikon V2. Pretty good IQ and very fast AF tracking as long as the light is good.

    Since you own the Nikon mount glass and you already are comfortable with the D700, a D300s would be seamless.

    As stated already, no one can offer any definitive guidance on the E-M1 since it isn't available yet for long term evaluation by large numbers of users under your scenario. It appears to track a lot better than the E-M5, but that may or may not be good enough for you. The S-AF is reported to be even faster, which also opens the possibility of not using C-AF at all.

    Another consideration is your comment about "Sigma 2.8 zooms" - I'm going to assume we are talking about the 70-200 here and not the 120-300/2.8 monster? If so, you will find that 200mm, even with DX, is not long enough for field sports past the kiddie stage (the fields get a long bigger in the older leagues). As a result, you will find that a 300/400 f/5.6 isn't really fast enough under the typical poor lighting for amateur sports. This is one area where the 50-200 or 50-250 43 lenses (or the upcoming 40-150/2.8) make m43 interesting. Couple that with the DOF advantage of m43 and you can actually shoot at f/2.8 or f/4 and have enough DOF at longer focal lengths and still get the 1 or 2 stop EV advantage.

    No clear right answer here. If time is not critical, I would wait to see how the E-M1 performs.
     
  10. fike

    fike Mu-43 Regular

    25
    Feb 11, 2013
    If sports photography is important to you, MFT is still inferior because of the lack of telephoto lenses and the focus speed. The E-M1 may change that equation a little bit, but in general, I think the Canon system still is best for this. The E-M1 may have better focus speed, and smaller points, but that doesn't change the fact that it lacks a high-quality super-telephoto that is reasonably priced. Canon has the 400 f.5.6, 300 f/4.0 and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6. Olympus doesn't have anything in that price range that comes close.

    This is why I keep my four-year-old 7D and my 100-400. I only take it out for wildlife and sports.
     
  11. LovinTheEP2

    LovinTheEP2 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    619
    Feb 15, 2011
    Toronto
    70d and wait for the next gen om-d's and maybe pickup either a used ep5 or em-5 as a 2nd body with 25mm Panasonic lens or 12-35 lens or the 12-40 becomes available.
     
  12. khollister

    khollister Mu-43 Veteran

    259
    Sep 16, 2010
    Orlando, FL
    Keith
    IF the E-M1 AF's reasonably well with 4/3 lenses, the Olympus 50-200 f2.8-3.5 SWD is $1200 brand new (versus $1700 for the slower Canon 100-400). I understand the 50-200 is pretty decent with the 1.4X teleconverter as well - an option you don't have with the Canon f/5.6 stuff. And of course the Panasonic 150/2.8 is coming one of these days, although price unknown.

    I'm also not sure how much worse the Panasonic 100-300 or Oly 75-300 are at 200mm than the Canon 100-400, although the 100-300 is no great shakes in the AF department. I say that because while the 100-400 is very popular and reasonably priced (certainly compared to Nikon's redesigned 80-400 VRII), it is not without its share of optical compromises.

    A couple months ago I would have agreed with you, but the E-M1 opens up the possibility that the Olympus SG/HSG glass is quite usable. While not as cheap as most of the native m43 lenses to date, it is still often quite a bit cheaper than equivalent Nikon or Canon items.

    It all hinges on how well the E-M1 PDAF works. I agree completely that based on stuff you can actually buy and use today, m43 is not there on the tele/C-AF front. Might be a different story in 3 months, though. I'm certain the AF will not equal a modern high end DSLR, but it might be good enough for sports.
     
  13. lombardispot

    lombardispot Mu-43 Regular

    100
    Sep 19, 2013
    Have you seen video samples from the om-d em-1? There are several showing action with horses. I didn't critically examine, but to the casual observer it looked adequate. It appears the codec is improved, but I need to take a more critical look.
     
  14. fike

    fike Mu-43 Regular

    25
    Feb 11, 2013

    I have also considered that 50-200 f/2.8, but on MFT it doesn't achieve the same reach as a 100-400 on APS-C unless you use a teleconverter.

    200 * MFT crop factor of 2 = 400
    200 * 1.4x converter * crop factor of 2 = 560
    400 * APS-C crop factor of 1.6 = 560

    The teleconverter option DOES look interesting, but you always lose some quality with a teleconverter. Are there any samples of pictures taken with that lens and teleconverter mounted. Losing one stop with the converter, it would yield a slightly faster lens at f/4.0.

    The 75-300 MKII is only an average performer. When used below 250mm, it is okay, but at 300 it really gets soft. I am curious to see if the E-M1 eeks out a bit more quality from this lens.
     
  15. lombardispot

    lombardispot Mu-43 Regular

    100
    Sep 19, 2013
    But he has a good point, that you can get good reach in 4/3 in a very small package. And do you really want to be that parent with the monopod and massive lens? I would rather be more discrete.
     
  16. lombardispot

    lombardispot Mu-43 Regular

    100
    Sep 19, 2013
    I would say take a look at the quality from the 50-200. It's amazing and probably enough reach for most sports.
     
  17. stripedrex

    stripedrex Do or do not. There is no try.

    373
    Jun 8, 2012
    Long Island, NY
    Alex
    I'm in a similar boat as you where a majority of my shooting is family and I have a 3 year old plus take pix of a lot of family kids that are still running around. I have an OMD and do find the need for better tracking. On top of that I'm also a hybrid shooter and take a good amount of video. I'm attracted to M43 because of size but find myself still wishing my kit was smaller when I'm on the go. That being said I've since purchased an LX7 and find I take that out more when I know I'll be outdoors and walking around. I'm also looking at the 70D for focus not only in photos but video. It's the first hybrid camera imo that can handle autofocus well in video mode (I think the sony alphas do a decent job too not as good though). Another thing pulling me to 70D is the sigma 14-35 F1.8. Another pet peeve of mine with the M43 system the faster lenses are all primes. I shoot indoors a lot and the 2.8 zooms are not enough without flash indoors. In short my opinion and what I'm very close to doing myself?

    Get a 70D and nice lenses (sigma 14-35 f1.8 for me will allow me not to have primes)
    Get a premium compact like the RX100 for times you need to go light.

    OR wait for the NEX FF or NEX 7 APS-C to come out. The one thing keeping me with my OMD is 5-axis image stabilization. It's unreal for photos and video but Sony will be implementing it in a few of their upcoming cameras and added bonus is the DO put effort into video unlike Olympus.
     
  18. fike

    fike Mu-43 Regular

    25
    Feb 11, 2013
  19. gochugogi

    gochugogi Mu-43 Veteran

    My impression of the 60D is exactly the opposite: really small and light. It's just a Rebel with a QCD. With that said, the 70D looks to be a fine camera if you don't mind the small form factor or mainly use small to moderate sized lenses.
     
  20. khollister

    khollister Mu-43 Veteran

    259
    Sep 16, 2010
    Orlando, FL
    Keith
    A few comments to various posts ...

    As far as needing something faster than f/2.8 without flash, I agree. However that Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 is the only sub f/2.8 zoom I am aware of from any maker. It is a DX only lens and is therefore a rather odd 28-55 equiv range. Since the OP was talking about tele's for sports, this is kinda a "never mind".

    I brought up the 75-300 because it is probably more than good enough considering the photos we are talking about are not going to be printed larger than 8x10 or viewed online. We are not talking fine art stuff that is going to be exhibited at 20x30. While photos of our family are important obviously, they are usually not exhibited (on line or otherwise) to the audience that "art" would be. I also agree with the poster that commented about bringing pro-level tele gear to your kids soccer game. While I could care less about what others might think of me, I can attest that when I take that type of rig to a family event, I tend to not participate in the event so much as concentrate on being a photographer. When it comes to documenting your kid, the 80% image you get with a camera that doesn't get in the way is far better than the state of the art image you occasionally get when you drag out the big gun.

    I must confess I don't quite understand the fixation on APS-C or FF compact bodies like the NEX. Unless you are going to treat it as a fixed lens system, the size and weight of the lenses are going to swamp the savings from the camera body compared to a smaller DSLR. Furthermore, most APS-C sensors are not substantially better (if at all) than the latest gen m43 ones. And while FF has advantages in noise, DR and DOF control, I don't think the lenses are going to be much smaller than FF DSLR stuff. At that point, the weight of a D600 or 6D isn't the limiting factor.
     
    • Like Like x 1