Have E-M1, should I buy D610

Discussion in 'Other Systems' started by angelus984, Jan 3, 2016.

  1. angelus984

    angelus984 New to Mu-43

    Sep 4, 2015
    Hi, so, I'm in dilemma, I have E-M1 + E-PM2, and lenses; Panasonic 14-45, Panleica 25mm, ZD 14-54mk1, ZD50mm f2 macro, ZD50-200 mk1, 43ZD9-18. I mostly do landscape, it's my main thing, lets say 90%, and rest is Street and few portraits.
    Should I buy D610 and for starters 24-85 which I heard is really good on D610, or should I just stick with the E-M1, and wait for MK2 with handheld HiRes mode (if the rumors are true)?

    Will I benefit with FF camera with 24mp vs 2x crop and 16mp? I never had FF except film camera, so anyone who does landscape and is familiar with both systems I'm asking you for an advice.
    • Like Like x 1
  2. mannukiddo

    mannukiddo Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 28, 2013
    For landscapes I think you will definitely benefit with slightly better resolution, better dynamic range and lesser noise levels even at base ISOs than m43, especially if printing large. But then the downside you already must be aware of is the size, weight of the system along with a larger tripod, head and filters.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    If you have to ask, you do not.

    Unless you have identified some specific limits YOU have with m43 that are better handled by a FF there is no reason to jump to another system hoping for some magic to happen that will make you pictures better.

    FF has better noise performance but much less DoF. For landscapes you usually want a lot of DoF, so you are going to stop down the FF lenses about two stops more then m43 canceling out the noise (and diffraction) advantage. (EDIT: unless on tripod at base ISO...).

    FF has more dynamic range, so this could be good if you often struggle with clipped skies, but FF would simply make this problem less common and you'll still find situations where you have to solve the problem in different ways (underexposure and shadow recovery, HDR, graduated filters, etc.).

    Then you need good lenses on full frame or your pictures will simply look worse in terms of overall IQ:

    Full Frame vs Micro 4/3 Revisited with Pro Olympus Lens
    The Wandering Lensman: Further Thoughts on Image Quality Difference Between a Full-Frame Nikon D800E and an Olympus E-M1

    It seems like you are mostly looking for more resolution. Why this? Resolution is mostly relevant for print or heavy cropping. With 16MP you can easily print 30x23 inches (150 dpi) and, in practice, up to 150x115 if you consider that the typical viewing distance depends on the print size. And you can do panoramic stitching too.
    Then really taking advantage of higher resolutions requires a good tripod, lenses, discipline, etc. In this case the 16 to 24 is so small that IMO makes little to no difference anyway: it is a 30% more width (mostly due to the different 3:2 format) and a 16% more height.

    Probably the 12-40 would be a better investment, but again after you have identified what you are missing.
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  4. angelus984

    angelus984 New to Mu-43

    Sep 4, 2015
    Well, I'm using Olympus for 7 years in a row.. E-520, E-3, E-M1, E-PM2.. So, I know everything about that system, trust me. It's good, but not the best. It has great weather sealing, yesterday my camera was all covered with snow, and nothing happened to it. I love that. Great IS, nice lenses. I'm grateful for that.
    I do print my works, and the biggest that I have printed till now was 100x70cm (B1). Not bad, but could be much better with higher resolution, so, I hope Olympus will have higher resolution sensor in E-M1 MK2.

    What got me interested in FF were the RAW files from FF Nikon I have downloaded to try, and found that they are clean, waaaaay cleaner than Olympus, and much better DR. I hate blown up highlights when doing long exposure with ND filters by day, I need to take another shot without ND to merge in PS for the blown up highlights.

    I was thinking to get it as a second system, I would keep my Olympus gear..
  5. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    I have a D600 (same thing to the D610) and honestly I like the output better in normal shooting conditions, but I also I own the E-M5 II and using that camera in high res mode is also very good in ideal situations. The benefit of the E-M5 II though is that you're able to pull off files that are close and some ways better than even a D800 though they are limited in certain shooting conditions.

    If weight is of importance, I'd get an E-M5 II as a high res option. If you're okay with a little added weight (sturdier tripod, bigger lenses, etc.) I think the D610 will yield very nice images as well.
  6. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I came from Canon FF and I don't think that the 16Mp Olympus cameras are inferior in any meaningful way. In fact, the optics are better and the sensor handles shadow pushing so much better.

    The new Sony 36Mp FF sensors are definitely a step up though. For high quality landscape photography I'm pretty sure they'll do better than u43 (as anyone would expect!!). However, the u43 system has so many other things going for it - size, weight, cost, IBIS, camera usability, features like Live Composite. focus stacking etc etc .... so, on balance they are a better option for me. I do a lot of landscapes too and the IQ from my E-M1 is more than good enough.
  7. DoofClenas

    DoofClenas Who needs a Mirror! Subscribing Member

    Nov 9, 2012
    Traverse City, MI
    Skip the 610 and get a 12-40 and 7-14 for your em1. However, it's your money and if you want to have a second system, go for it. Personally I'd think keeping track of a third set of batteries, lenses, bags and such sounds more of a pain.

    I do a lot of landscape work myself, and find the 7.5, 12-40, and 75 is generally all I need with my em1. I haven't found a need for full frame. If I want a larger image, I plan carefully and do multiple stitched shots or I pull out the medium format film camera.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  8. spatulaboy

    spatulaboy I'm not really here Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    North Carolina
    If you can afford it I don't see why not.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. angelus984

    angelus984 New to Mu-43

    Sep 4, 2015
    Thanks guys on your replys. I'm still weighing should I spend money on 2nd system or not. Would be very nice to have cleaner files. Doof, I saw your photos and they are great!!
    Jonathan, well E-M5II is what I was considering, but as I love photos by water, I would get lots of artifacts, so hopefully I will get D610 or even better D800 in next few months. I love my E-M1, even tho it has problems with rear dial. I know m43 is good, even my E-PM2 is great little camera, I made a shot that was finalist in National Geographic contest Best of the world. But somehow I'm attracted to FF now.
  10. MoonMind

    MoonMind Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Oct 25, 2014
    I do shoot FF, and I do think there are tangible advantages over :mu43: - but for me as an enthusiast, those differences are firmly within the realm of "nice to have", not "need". And I also think that buying an FF camera without investing in suitable lenses doesn't make a lot of sense. A kit lens - as good as it may be - doesn't rival good primes or high-class zooms. I concur with the recommendation of the 12-40mm - that's what I'd do before trying FF (and that's what I actually did).

    However, if FF suits you, by all means, try it out. Just don't think that cheap lenses will magically deliver better images on a bigger sensor - on the contrary, optical problems will be more obvious, and limitations more frustrating. And remember, to use the additional capabilities of the sensor, you have to know how to shoot and force yourself to use better technique. The D610 is as good a choice as any modern FF camera (I personally think it's actually a very good one), and Nikon do offer a couple of very good, yet pretty inexpensive primes (the f/1.8 series) - with very strong offerings when it comes to wider angles. This'll keep things reasonably affordable without having to sacrifice optical quality in an irresponsible way.

    btw. I think the artifacts are probably caused by oversharpening - you'll get them with every kind of file if you don't use the Sharpening tool judiciously. In good light, :mu43: (RAW) files are amazingly clean and - depending on the lens, of course - really, really sharp.

    • Agree Agree x 6
  11. Clint

    Clint Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Apr 22, 2013
    San Diego area, CA
    The Clint's agree :) - see post 7. Buy either 7-14mm and a 12-35 or 12-40 with the money saved by not purchasing the D610 - Unless you are doing high end fine art work or making prints larger than 30".

    And then you would not want the D610 but the D810, 14-24mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200m f/2.8 (and/or commensurate primes), and an expensive tripod. My Nikon sits and is seldom used unless I need a camera with a long lens or I know I'm going to make very large prints.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. MichaelSewell

    MichaelSewell Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Sep 1, 2015
    Burnley, UK
    Michael A. Sewell
    I have to agree, as I'm currently in the process of making the transition from a shedload of Nikon gear, across to Olympus.
    And all because my wife thought it would be "nice" for me to have a different system for me to re-ignite the hobbyist interest.

    The thing is, the E-M1 does so many things better, I started using it for work, and then used it far more for work.

    Now? My Nikon stuff stays in the bag, except on the very rare occasions the E-M1 is challenged, although I'm finding ways of circumnavigating those challenges.

    Save your money.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. bikerhiker

    bikerhiker Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 24, 2013
    My advise...

    Be very careful to not over-extend your enthusiasm after you win contests. You may believe you're on top of the world now and you think you deserve something better so you can continue to be on top. Reasonable deduction. Everyone, including myself, been on top at one point in time and think the same way. But you don't stay up there for eternity and not with updating gear thinking perfect photos can continue winning contests. With photography, it's about skills, continued growth in the skills and new visions and gear is secondary. I know you probably think I'm babbling nonsense. But you'll see when you're on a loosing streak. I've been there myself. Only the wise seemed to have escaped mayhem. Heavily invested in expensive gear with debt money can do that..

    I agree with Doof and others that it would probably be wise to upgrade your lenses and then wait for the E-M1 Mark II/PEN-F for the newer Hi-Res option if you want. You know Olympus already.

    Running 2 systems will simply confuse you. Distract your focus from creating images. You want to be able to create images blindfolded with your camera and I think you can do that with your E-M1 could you? Changing light isn't going to wait for you.
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2016
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. Replytoken

    Replytoken Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 7, 2012
    Puget Sound
    My normal advice if you are on a budget is to upgrade or make changes to solve known problems in your own shooting. Having said that, I will admit that I own both an E-M1 and a D610 among other bodies. I mostly agree with Klorenzo, but will play a bit of devil's advocate with the following.

    If you like how Nikon raw files render, then there is some consideration for that. But, I find I like my D300 files better than my D610 ones when I am post processing in Lightroom. This may be due to familiarity, but my shooting style has yet been improved by a full frame sensor. Second, if you really want to make a jump, consider the D810. It is almost like a MF camera in a DSLR body, and if you are working on a tripod, then you will probably be taking advantage of what it offers.

    But I would first recommend renting ones of these bodies before purchasing. You might find that what you are buying is as much Nikon's approach to photography (handling, ergonomics, etc.) as any significant gains in IQ.

    Good luck,

    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. angelus984

    angelus984 New to Mu-43

    Sep 4, 2015
    Oh no bikehiker, dont get me wrong, I was just saying that m43 is not bad.. on the contrary... and I'm not one of those guys who think that they are on top of the world, and they need the best. That statement was just to point that m43 is good enough to battle with the best systems out there.
    My interest in Nikon is simply because of their DR and clean files. I would like to try something different only if it's much better, and reading all your posts here, I think I will just wait for MK2, hoping it will support 43 lenses like this one does.
    Great question biker, "You want to be able to create images blindfolded with your camera and I think you can do that with your E-M1 could you?" Yep, I sure do, when everyone hates Oly menu system, I kind of like it, I've been using it for so long, it's like my home.

    Michael, thanks for your reply, and for great advice on saving money. ;)
    • Like Like x 1
  16. bikerhiker

    bikerhiker Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 24, 2013
    Nikon full frame bodies (D750/D810) can potentially provide a better image quality if you will provide with it good glass, good support system and good shooting techniques. Check Mk2 to see if that is what will help you. If not, then you have your answer..
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2016
  17. mcumeda

    mcumeda Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 25, 2011
    I have both, and I use my EM-1 more. Both are great, but I love the size and IQ of my EM-1. I will always lean towards lenses since they are better "investment.". The bodies get better every year/six months, but lenses last a very long time. It takes years for them to get updated.

    Maybe you should rent a D610 and lens and try the 7-14mm on your m4/3 cameras.

    Good luck!
  18. scott rawson

    scott rawson Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 17, 2015
    west yorks
    I have had most M4/3 cams and like most folk gear lust drove me to buy a D610...while it was nice I had real trouble getting eyes sharp in my portraits..and to get sharp images across the frame you have to stop down quite a bit ..which negates the iso advantage...always had blurry or soft images...three times heavier and twice as big...means you really have to think twice before taking it out for the meaningless things..like a stroll round park with your kids...realised it wasn't for me.
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Geos

    Geos Mu-43 Rookie

    Jan 12, 2013
    The Sony a7 series is mighty compelling especially as prices come down. Smallest & lightest FF ILC. A pancake lens or two would make it even more intriguing. They have both OIS and IBIS so integration in the future seems likely. Oly needs to hit it out of the park at a really good price point with the E-M1 II or it will be left in the dust. An a6000 with IBIS and I jump ship immediately. I don't think I'd be alone.
  20. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    While I think an A6000 with IBIS would be interesting, Sony's lens selection is still mediocre, which means it would mostly be an adapted lens camera. But Sony's manual focus aids are not very good right now, so it would need a touch-screen as well to make me consider it. Also consider that the A7 / A7 II only offer about 1 1/3EV better low-light performance than an OM-D...while only offering f/4 zooms. So if you use zooms and you're hoping to improve your low-light performance with full-frame, you can look forward to 1 less stop of DoF, and 1/3 EV better performance. Underwhelming. Unless of course you're interested in a $1600, 630g 35mm/1.4.

    Every time I think about it, I realize that the only place an A7 would really benefit me is at base ISO for landscape images where the extra 1-2 stops of DR would obviate any need for HDR bracketing when shooting into the sun. But beyond that...? I guess shallow DoF with wide angles. But again, that requires huge, heavy, expensive lenses...