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

Fiddlesticks to the O-MD naysayers

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by kevinparis, Aug 13, 2012.

  1. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    There has been a lot of noise on the inter webs concerning the OM-D... everything from "it is the greatest thing since sliced bread" to "Olympus have got it all wrong" and all the shades in-between.

    Well I finally got my silver one a couple of weeks back and have been putting it through its paces taking the kind of photos I like to take and in the way I like to take them.... regular readers here will probably have seen some of my eclectic collection of images posted here over the years, taken on E-P1 and lately GH-2

    and my opinion for what its worth..... it is a mighty fine camera... and is probably a better camera than the vast majority of photographers, myself included.

    It feels great in my hands... I actually find my self picking it up just to hold..... the last camera I had that I bonded with this way was a Nikon EM back in the 80's.

    Yes it probably is a little too small... and they should sell just the upper part of the grip separately as it does make a difference to the handling.

    The EVF and IBIS seem to work very well indeed, as does the autofocus in the majority of cases.... though I think people overestimate the capabilites of such systems in any platform.

    The standard kit lens, which most people wrote off before even trying it, seems to me to perform very well.... the macro mode is particularly nice to have, and the slow aperture is less of an issue due to the combination of the IS and the useable ISO up to 3200.

    As for cornertocornertacksharpishness... well I haven't noticed any lack of it... but then again I am of the school of thought that says that if your audience is noticing that the corners aren't quite sharp , then your photo has failed, as hopefully your subject was somewhere nearer the middle of the frame.

    anyway enough ramblings... here are some pics

    7777066486_b651a8c333_z.
    P8060214 by kevinparis, on Flickr

    7777123424_cfebef3e0f_z.
    P8080233 by kevinparis, on Flickr

    7777126996_220d3f5493_z.
    P7270006 by kevinparis, on Flickr

    More here - some with 12-50, others with 50-200, 25/1.4 and maybe an odd leica lens.

    USA Summer 2012 - a set on Flickr


    cheers

    K
     
    • Like Like x 12
  2. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    Looks good Kevin! How do you like the OM-D in comparison to your GH2? We should grab a coffee again if you're free!
     
  3. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    Thanks Jonathon

    its a different beast to the GH2 which still rocks for video... the OM-D for stills just seems much more like a real old fashioned camera.


    I am in LA until beginning of Sept and would love to meet up for a coffee... I should have some time available... I will be in touch

    cheers

    Kevin
     
  4. st3v4nt

    st3v4nt Mu-43 Veteran

    317
    May 26, 2011
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    Would like to hear your experience to comparing GH-2 with OM-D. Being the former user of GF-1 and now all Olympus (EPL-1 & OM-D) I never have a chance to use GH-2 my self so would like to hear other perspective that hopefully difference with recent GH-2 user experience.
     
  5. cmpatti

    cmpatti Mu-43 Veteran

    263
    May 8, 2011
    Berkeley, CA
    This is my impression as well, but I have to relate an experience I had over the weekend. I was testing some lenses shooting resolution charts. My procedure was to mount the EM5 on a very sturdy tripod, carefully focus manually, and use the 2 second timer. For kicks, after I was finished I fired off a shot handheld using autofocus with the Pany 20mm at 1/40 sec (ie., the equivalent of the old 1/focal length "rule of thumb" for 35mm). Studying the results at 100%, I couldn't see a difference between the handheld and tripod-mounted shots. The old rule of thumb was supposed to give you "acceptable" results (although often it didn't). But with IBIS on the EM5, it appears that you can get tripod quality at those shutter speeds (at least with shorter lenses). I think that's pretty amazing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. zpierce

    zpierce Super Moderator

    661
    Sep 26, 2010
    Minneapolis, MN
    Zach
    Really like that third shot especially, thanks for sharing!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium

    I'm not the person to do a point by point comparison between cameras... I am not that gear oriented....over the last 5 years I have bought maybe a camera a year.. all of which I still have... e-p1, Canon 5d Mk2, GH-2 and now OM-D.

    All were bought to satisfy a photographic need that i saw as important at the time... The E-p1 to supplement my E-510 (which I also still have and occasionally use), The Canon because I wished to experience Full Frame and possibly to get into video, the GH-2 becuase it was lighter than the canon for video and was on sale at a good price, and the OM-D, well because since the E-P1 came out I had been hoping that Olympus would offer a camera with a built in EVF that harked back to the old OM's.

    The OMD happily arrived at a time when Olympus could put together an interesting package of technologies that are pretty much state of the art in their price range.


    But in the end a camera to me is a camera... a tool that allows me to take photos... what makes those photos is more my ability to recognise a combination of light and composition and capture that.

    Some factors can expand the range of opportunities that allow this to happen, and cleaner high ISO and IBIS of the OM-D allow me more flexibility in my picture taking.

    On the other hand the better video controls and to a degree the articulated screen make the GH-2 a better video camera.

    camera bodies will continue to improve... but none of them will make you a better photographer... all they will do is sometimes give you a little supporting nudge or encourage you to push your limits as a photographer

    K
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. MexicoMik

    MexicoMik Mu-43 Regular

    195
    Mar 19, 2012
    "and is probably a better camera than the vast majority of photographers,..."

    As is an 8 dollar disposable! :)
     
  9. twokatmew

    twokatmew Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 1, 2012
    Lansing, MI, US
    Margaret
    Kevin, is this car by any chance a 1948 Tucker sedan? Sure looks like it to me. :smile: If so, where was the photo taken, and if not, what make & model is it? Great shots BTW. :biggrin:

    Edit: I just did some googling and came across this interesting page:

    http://www.laubly.com/1948tucker.htm
     
  10. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    it is a Tucker...not sure what model and it belongs to Francis Ford Coppola, and he keeps it at his winery in N California!

    Of course he made a movie about the Tucker story... i am sure a google of coppola and tucker will give you more info

    cheers
    K
     
  11. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    probably true... but i was kinda aiming the comment at those who invest a little more in their equipment and photographic aspirations :smile:


    K
     
  12. Mikefellh

    Mikefellh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    939
    Jun 7, 2012
    Toronto, Canada
    But an inferior camera can limit you as a photographer. A better camera CAN expand your photographic abilities (I can hear the flame throwers being lit up). My first camera was from the 50's (I'm not THAT old), used ISO (ASA) 25 film, and the maximum shutter speed was 1/250. I can take pictures today that I just couldn't take back then...that's what I meant.

    For instance I can take pictures with the E-M5 that I couldn't with the E-300, or the C-700 before that.

    Some features like the Live Bulb really enhances my creativity in that I can see the results developing during the exposure, rather than having to think how many seconds I want for the exposure.

    There's no turning back now!
     
  13. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    A inferior camera or indeed lens may limit the technical possibilities of the photographs you take....as indeed a superior camera may allow you to take sharper, better exposed pictures in a wider range of situations...

    my point is that the factors that make a 'better photograph' are not always those that make a better photographer.

    K