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

Musings: If you downsized your EM-1, what would you get?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by Aushiker, May 30, 2015.

  1. Aushiker

    Aushiker Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 12, 2014
    Fremantle, Western Australia
    Andrew
    I was watching this video by Michromatic last night on what is in his camera bag and I was struck by the small size and how much he could carry ... the simplicity of his setup appealed.



    Anyway then there was the post today, The Myth of More and it has me curious about downsizing from the EM-1 and what could it be replaced with.

    If I would do this I would prefer to stay with Micro Four Thirds so I can use my existing couple of leneses and stay in the family and preferably with Olympus (love the IBIS) but open to Panasonic or other systems at least for discussion purposes.

    So if you where going to sell "your" EM-1 for a camera which embodies the "smallness" of MU43 what camera body would be your preferred choice? Oh the price limit has to be sub say $2,000.

    Andrew
     
  2. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I would say don't be fooled into thinking that a smaller m4/3 body is really going to change things much. But just to answer your question, I think a GM5 is probably the ultimate tiny camera body. It's smaller than a lot of premium compacts and yet it still has a hotshoe, and EVF and reasonable controls.



    Yes if you put the GM5 and E-M1 side by side, the E-M1 looks huge. But in terms of a bag to hold a body and a few lenses, you aren't going to be able to use a smaller one if you switched to a small camera. It's really only a tiny cam if you use one small lens with it. In terms of a full kit with a few lenses and accessories, that bag in the video would fit an E-M1 kit just as well as the smallest camera body.
     
  3. tyrphoto

    tyrphoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2014
    Seoul | NYC
    ㅇtㅈyㅅr
    I "downsized" from the E-M1 to the E-M5 II because frankly I didn't need the large grip of the E-M1 and I prefer the button layout of the E-M5 II as well. The fact that it's slightly smaller was a plus since I only shoot primes.

    If I really had to downsize to just one camera and a couple lenses, it'd be a tough choice between my E-M5 II or my X100T with both conversion lenses. Really a tough choice choice as I love both cameras for different reasons.
     
  4. Aushiker

    Aushiker Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 12, 2014
    Fremantle, Western Australia
    Andrew
    I am on the look out for a GM1 or GM5 at the moment as second body and as my bikepacking/bushwalking camera so getting one of those will give me size comparison that is for sure.

    I just look at my Lowe Nova Sport 7L AW bag and with the EM-1 + O 17 mm I just don't seem to have the compactness shown in the video.

    Andrew
     
  5. janneman

    janneman Mu-43 Veteran

    414
    Dec 6, 2012
    Netherlands
    Jan (John) Kusters
    Surprisingly similar to my bag, although I use slightly different gear; E-M5, with 4 primes and one telezoom. The biggest difference are small non reversing lens hoods that stay on my lenses, and 2 extra batteries. Like him I switch between neck- and wrist strap, like him I use a macro filter, so all in all pretty similar. But I am pretty sure the E-m1 would fit just as well in my bag. It is the small primes that make the biggest difference.
    I tried to get smaller by getting an Oly PM2, but that made no real difference (as a prime shooter, it is nice to have a second body, and it provides some insurance as a back up as well, so no huge disapointment there).

    If I really wanted to go small, the Panasonic GM1 would be my first choice, and looking back, I should have bought the GM in stead of the PM2. With its small standard zoom and the also smallish tele zoom, it makes a great mini set, while still offering a second body and back up.
     
  6. sdb123

    sdb123 Mu-43 Veteran

    249
    Jul 25, 2014
    Northants, UK
    Steve
    I think the differences will be down to the bag you use and more the lenses you have (and if you have lens hoods attached or not)...yes, the E-M1 is larger however the other elements will contribute to the overall package more IMO.

    I use a Lowepro Event Messenger 150 and have the following:

    Main Compartment
    Gripped E-M10
    PL 15/25/42.5, Oly 75 & P 45-175 (all with lens hoods attached)
    Tablet in internal sleeve pocket

    Front Pocket
    ND Filter
    Lens Pen
    Memory cards
    Extension Rings

    Side Pocket
    Mini Tripod & Torch

    Rear Pocket
    Reflector

    I don't take the reflector or tripod at all times however it all fits together so compactly that it never feels like a chore carrying the kit around.
     
  7. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The body doesn't make that much difference IMO. I've got E-M1/GM5 (used to have an E-M5/GM1) which you'd think are worlds apart but if the camera is being worn on a strap outside, the only thing that really makes a big difference is lenses. Although the GM5 takes my flashes and bigger lenses, it's not very comfortable. It also doesn't sit as well on my tripod as the E-M1 with L-plate.

    Where the GM5 really stands out is being coupled with the smaller m4/3 lenses. When I go to a social event or something where I really don't want to take my kit, I typically just take the GM5 with either the 15mm + 45mm for evenings, or 12-32mm + 45mm for daylight.

    As far as bags... I never ever use a dedicated camera bag. I have various pouches and things, depending on how much gear I want to carry, that go into whatever pack I'm going to be carrying anyway. Currently I mostly use this: http://www.xcsource.com/p_detail.php?id=2571.
     
  8. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Atlanta
    OM-D EM-1 Mark II when it is released at Photokina in 2016.

    Coming from Canon FF 35mm kits the EM-1 and Pro lenses are already small in comparison. In my Tenba Messenger bag I can carry 4 lenses, a flash, batteries and charger, two bodies, and my Macbook. Beats the heck of the previous 50+ pound rolling camera bag that barely fit in an airline overhead compartment.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    Simple answer for us: E-M5 ll + O17 & O45 for me. E-M10 + EZ & O25 for my wife. Plus microfiber, extra batteries and SD cards, etc., in an insert. We are attracted to compact size of the m4/3's kit.
     
  10. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    I find that the smallest I can go and be comfortable holding the camera is an EM5Mk2 or a Fuji X100 size body. Any smaller and it just doesn't feel right to me.
     
  11. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    I downsized my E-M1 and E-P5 to an E-M10 and GM5. But part of my downsizing was also the realization that how I use my m4/3 setup just doesn't require the advanced features of those bodies. The GM5 12-32 & 35-100 are my convenient kit with the E-M10 being the heavy weight with primes and a longer telephoto.
     
  12. sgreszcz

    sgreszcz Mu-43 Veteran

    439
    Oct 7, 2012
    I downsized from my em5 and ep5 with 12-40/2.8 to an lx100. The raw file output is definitely good enough for me and the manual controls are great. I still use a GX7 with the p35-100/2.8 if shooting an event or with the P25/1.4 for indoors/lower light.

    I've been toying around with the idea of getting an em5-ii or em10, but when it comes down to the size/quality/functionally trade off, the lx100 is hard to beat.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. ashburtononline

    ashburtononline Mu-43 Veteran

    389
    Jan 21, 2015
    New Zealand
    I know it's not m43 but I stick a Sony RX100 in my pocket . It takes fabulous images
     
  14. Jfrader

    Jfrader Guest

    I don't think I could get used to anything smaller than my EM5+RRS grip for regular shooting. I have a PM2 but use it primarily as a pocketable back-up, normally equipped with the 17mm. The little guy takes fine pictures but just feels clumsy and insubstantial in my hands, good for the occasional grab shot but not for sustained shooting.

    Of course, I came from Canon 35mm and all-metal Pentax K5 digital so anything in m43 feels small and light to me.
     
  15. agentlossing

    agentlossing Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jun 26, 2013
    Andrew Lossing
    "Downsizing" by reducing the size of your camera isn't something I would be interested in -- I have an EM10 but always leave the grip on it, and while I love my new GM1 I wouldn't ever want to solely own that camera. Something that fits my mitts is important.

    Maybe downsizing lenses makes more sense; in terms of compactness, maybe a 15mm f1.7 instead of a 12mm or 17mm, a 20mm pancake instead of a 25mm f1.4, that sort of thing. Or, in the "myth of more" sense, cut down to fewer lenses and use them religiously. I think my Olympus 25mm is actually a great lens for that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The PL15 is no smaller than the 17mm... the 12mm isn't that much bigger either, you could do smaller 12mm with the 12-32 pancake though.
     
  17. agentlossing

    agentlossing Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jun 26, 2013
    Andrew Lossing
    I haven't seen a copy of the 15mm up close, I thought it was pretty tiny a la the GM1/5 it came out alongside. But the 12-32mm, that makes sense.
     
  18. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I pretty much agree with that, with regard to my primary camera. An E-PM2 or GM1 with a pancake is a nice small solution when you need it, but if you are going to put any larger lenses on those small bodies it just negates the size advantage while creating handling issues. I'm using a Nikon A instead of such a set up, along side an E-M5 + 25/1.8 and 60/2.8.
     
  19. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    836
    Feb 29, 2012
    LX100 for me as well is the ultimate down-size.
     
  20. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014
    My phone, I generally have a phone on me at most hours adding a camera on top of it is going to add size no matter what (unless they add a phone to a camera... which came first?).

    The E-M1 with a small lens is already a tiny unassuming package compared to almost all DSLRs, going any smaller sacrifices usability as E-M1 is already at the limits of what I can use due to the size of my hands (with many lenses I find it hard to keep my fingers out of the frame).

    If the proposed picture to be taken is outside the limits of my phone then I'm going to suggest that a smaller kit probably won't fair much better, I doubt anyone but pixel peepers will notice or care for web use or printing smaller sizes anyway. If you're earning money on the picture you should be using a camera that can reliably achieve the quality needed for your desired output (key word is reliably, there's always outliers which should not be taken as the norm).
     
    • Like Like x 1