Used E-M10 or E-M10 ii?

wildbill001

New to Mu-43
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
5
New to this forum so if this has been covered in the past , sorry.
Around the holidays, before everyone stayed inside all the time, I took out my Canon T3i (or 600D) and took some shots of the grandkids at the park and playing in the yard. They came out great but I felt like I had been carrying an anvil around all day. The T3i with a lens is a fairly heavy beast or I'm getting older that I thought. Back in the good 'ole days I had an OM-1 and I loved that camera--still do. But I had to sell years ago to pay the bills.

Then the other day I get a notice from somewhere about the olympus 4/3rds being #1 in Japan. So I started looking and see that the E-M10 seems like a pretty good deal--especially used. The E-M10ii is a close 2nd. But I have questions and now with Covid the local camera stores only take appointments to talk to you. So I've started searching the web. And I have questions if ya'll don't mind

  1. I wear glasses, will I be able to see the whole image in the view-finder with either of these? On my OM-1, I had to slightly move the camera to get the whole view.
  2. I know the E-M10ii is newer than the E-M10 but is it really worth almost double the price of the E-M10 (used, same condition)?
  3. What is considered the equivalent to a 50mm lens in 4/3rds? 90mm and 135mm? and 70-210mm?
  4. What should I watch out for when looking at either of these?
  5. I like some of the "old" glass that is out there which means manual focus. One of the biggest headaches for me with the T3i is making sure I am in focus. Is it easy to manually focus on either the M10 or M10ii?
Sorry this is so long but I would really appreciate any and all answers and suggestions.

Bill W
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
382
Location
Hoher Fläming, Germany
I'll start trying to provide some insight:

1: I don't wear glasses, so I unfortunately can't comment on that topic. However the Mark II offers a larger EVF (.62 magnification) than the original E-M10 (.57 magnification) and features quite an improved resolution, leading to a sharper image. Last but not least the Mark II uses an OLED panel, which provides more contrast and better colors for the EVF.

2: In terms of image quality, the differences are minor: Both are using the same sensor and the Truepic VII image processor. The Mark II offers a full 5-axis IBIS vs the less efficient 3-axis stabilization found on the original E-M10. The control layout on the Mark II is in my opinion much better, with the Off/On/Flash switch on the top left and all dials on the top right side.
Depending on the actual price difference, I personally would rather pay a bit more for the better IBIS and EVF. That being said, the first generation E-M10 is otherwise still an interesting choice.

3: For Micro Four Thirds the calculation is very simple - it's a 2x cropfactor. So a 25mm lens for MFT offers a similar field of view as a 50mm for 35mm terms. For 90mm you'd need to look for a 45mm MFT lens, for 135 it would be 67,5mm and your 70-210 would be a 35-105mm MFT lens.
Most common focal lengths are covered, for example Olympus has two different 45mm primes resulting in your 90mm fov. For the 70-210 you'd either have to go with the Panasonic 35-100 or Olympus' own 40-150 zooms. 135mm is tricky, you'd either have to go with the 75mm 1.8 which equals 150mm or take a look at something like the Sigma 56mm 1.4 ART lens, equaling 112mm.

4: The Olympus 45mm 1.8 is a well received prime, small, light, sharp, fast AF. Not too expansive either, especially used. Panasonic offers an alternative with their 42.5mm 1.7
For a telezoom, the Panasonic 35-100 2.8 is rather small and light. Olympus offers a 40-150 2.8 which is larger, heavier, but also offers much more reach on the long end and I think has an edge in overall image quality. There also is a budget version, 40-150 4-5.6, it is much smaller, much lighter, while the build quality is much worse and very plasticky, the image quality is said being pretty decent and it costs just a mere fraction of the big 2.8 counterpart.

5: You'll get two kinds of focusing aids which you can use either combined at the same time or just one of them. The first being focus peaking, blinking lights highlight the areas which are in focus. Second would be focus magnification, you can magnify the focusing point and visually check whether the area is in focus or not.
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,686
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
I think it is definitely worth getting an E-M10 Mark II over the first version. I upgraded from version I to II a few years ago and like the Mark II better, for the reasons given by @Ghostbuggy .

I think one of the best places to buy used Olympus cameras is on their Refurbished website. You can get a refurb E-M10 Mark II with kit lens for $349 right now. You should probably act quickly on this because the Mark II is getting old and most of the offerings now are for the Mark III (worse than Mark II) and Mark IV (more expensive):

https://www.getolympus.com/us/en/outlet/reconditioned-cameras.html?p=1

The advantage of buying refurb there is that you get what looks like a new camera, a manual, a new charger and battery. You essentially get a new camera; only wirnkle is that the warranttee is only 90 days (I think).

Anyway, that's what I recommend. Welcome to the forum! :)
 

exakta

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2015
Messages
839
I have the E-M10 (mkI) and wear glasses. I have no trouble seeing the entire finder, whether with glasses or without glasses and using the diopter correction

I'd get the mkII unless money is really tight for the following reasons:

Feature wise, the mkII has 5-axis IS rather than 3-axis, but I've found even the 3-axis IS to work well, allowing me to handhold at 300mm. Half-depress of the shutter makes the vibration in the finder change to rock solid.

The mkII finder is slightly higher magnification, higher resolution and the screen is OLED so looks much better than the mkI LCD. You get an electronic (silent) shutter option that can go up to 1/16000 (the mechanical shutter stops at 1/4000). There are more video format choices than the mkI.

As far as focal lengths, simply divide the 35mm SLR focal lengths by 2:

25mm MFT = 50
45 MFT = 90

etc.

For the other focal lengths you asked about the closest equivalents in MFT to 135mm in a prime lens would be 56mm (112), 60mm (120) and 75mm (150) primes.

For the 70-210 zoom, there are a couple 40-150mm (80-300) and 35-100 (70-200) zooms.
 

Michael Meissner

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
720
Location
Ayer, Massachusetts, USA
If you wear polarized sunglasses at times, note the E-m10 mark I has a TFT LCD viewfinder and the E-m10 mark II (and III/IIIs/IV) have an OLED viewfinder.

The TFT LCD viewfinder refreshes faster than OLED, but it has severe image distortion if you shoot in horizontal (landscape) orientation and you use polarized sunglasses. If you switch to vertical (portrait) orientation, then there is no distortion.

I haven't used the E-m10 mark I, but I have used other Olympus cameras with TFT LCD displays. All of them except for the E-m5 mark II that I tried in the store distort about 1/2 of the screen, so with practice you can learn how to use the areas you can see clearly to frame a shot and let auto focus work. I doubt you would be able to do serious manual focusing using the TFT LCD viewfinder with polarized sunglasses.

While you can use OLED viewfinders with polarized sunglasses , I do find compared to the TFT LCD viewfinders, that the colors in the OLED are a little more saturated. I just mentally tone down the saturation. If you liked the colors that pop like that, you would likely need to adjust the levels in post processing somewhat. Personally, since I need to wear polarized sunglasses all of the time when I'm out in daylight due to migraines, I much prefer the OLED viewfinder cameras. I bought a used E-m10 mark II specifically for the OLED viewfinder to complement my E-m1 mark I, and now I have upgraded to the E-m5 mark III.

If you are interested in doing macro (close-up) shots for non-moving objects, the E-m10 mark II has a mode called focusing stacking where it takes multiple shots and varies the focal point slightly. In post processing, you can combine these shots to give you much more depth of field than you would get with a single shot. I've not used this, but I know it exists.

Being a newer camera, the E-m10 mark II has a few more ART filters (2 I think). Yes, you can often do what is done in the ART filters in post processing, but it is simpler if you let the camera do it, and you can see the image immediately.
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,686
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
If you are interested in doing macro (close-up) shots for non-moving objects, the E-m10 mark II has a mode called focusing stacking where it takes multiple shots and varies the focal point slightly. In post processing, you can combine these shots to give you much more depth of field than you would get with a single shot. I've not used this, but I know it exists.
Do you mean focus bracketing (not stacking)? Focus stacking (at least in its current form on E-M5.3 and E-M1.3) is done in-camera, delivering ONE image to you from combining the stack in-camera. Focus bracketing is like exposure bracketing, and sounds like what you described - automatically taking a series of photos at different focus points and then you stack them in PP with image editor. Maybe the E-M10.2 has both types (like the E-M5.3, etc)? I have one but I'm not sure...

Edit: I looked things up. Cameras that do focus stacking (like E-M5.3, etc) mainly produce one jpg that is a combined version of the stacking operation. They may also produce individual jpgs (and probably raws if you shot raw+jpg) - the manual doesn't say. Cameras like the E-M10 II (and all flavors after that, I think) do bracketing, which works as described earlier by @Michael Meissner - you must combine the shots yourself. Anyway, it is a very useful feature. Bracketing is more powerful and flexible, of course. But stacking is faster for lazy folks like myself.
 
Last edited:

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
3,283
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
And the T3 is not even a heavy APS-C camera.
That is the reason I switched from APS-C to m4/3.
For weight, I would stay away from Olympus PRO lenses, as they are heavy. The non-pro lenses are generally "good enough" and are much lighter, but are generally slower.

The strap may also be contributing to the feeling of your T3 being HEAVY.
A strap around the neck will pull down on the neck.
A wide strap resting on your shoulder and worn cross body, is much easier to handle the weight of a camera. This is how I carry my cameras.

Caution, Your T3 will autofocus better on fast moving kids than the EM10. The EM10 uses Contrast Detect Auto Focus (CDAF), not Phase Detect AF (PDAF), which your T3 uses. CDAF is not as good as PDAF for dealing with fast moving subjects, such as kids and dogs.
To get PDAF in an Olympus, you need to use the EM5-mk3 or the EM1 series.

1 - I wear glasses and have no problem with the viewfinder of the EM10-mk2.

3 - Equivalent lenses is a bucket of worms.
As was said, divide by 2, to get the equivalent m4/3 focal length.
So 50mm / 2 = 25mm m4/3 equivalent​
But this assumes that your reference lens is used on 35mm film (your OM1) or FF digital.​
If you are referencing those lenses on your T3, then you first have to adjust for the APS-C crop.
Example
1) 50mm x 1.6 (crop factor for the Canon) = 80mm FF equivalent​
2) 80mm / 2 (m4/3 crop factor) = 40mm m4/3 equivalent​
Note: When you do this equivalence calculations, many time, you will end up with a m4/3 equivalent lens that does not exist. Then you have to select the closest lens (prime or zoom) that does exist. See the example below.

Here is a trick that I use.
The lens you are referencing is a 135 on your OM1.
On your OM1, a 50mm lens is a "normal" lens. So divide the film lens focal length by 50, to get a magnification number. 135mm / 50mm = 2.7x
For m4/3, a 25mm lens is considered a "normal" lens. So multiply the normal lens by the magnification. 25mm x 2.7x = 67.5mm.
Then look for the closest lens to 67.5mm.
On the short side it will be a 45, or the Sigma 56. On the long side the 75.​
But the 45 is the m4/3 equiv to a 90mm on your OM1, so maybe you want the 56 or 75.​
Warning: The 75 is not a small/light lens.​
Some lenses like the 135, which was a very common lens back in the film days, are no longer available today in FF. So even with FF, you are forced to another lens, zoom or prime.
 

wildbill001

New to Mu-43
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
5
Wow! Great info, folks. I may have to take another look at the Mii and save a few more pennies. Like the OM-1, it looks like it is pretty solid and will not disappear overnight.

Thanks so much!
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
3,283
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
Another option is a used EM1, AKA EM1-mk1.
I've seen those at very good prices, especially now that they are up to the EM1-mk3.
But there is a known issue with I think the rear dial, on some of them.
But the EM1 is bigger and heavier than the EM10.
 

Michael Meissner

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
720
Location
Ayer, Massachusetts, USA
Do you mean focus bracketing (not stacking)? Focus stacking (at least in its current form on E-M5.3 and E-M1.3) is done in-camera, delivering ONE image to you from combining the stack in-camera. Focus bracketing is like exposure bracketing, and sounds like what you described - automatically taking a series of photos at different focus points and then you stack them in PP with image editor. Maybe the E-M10.2 has both types (like the E-M5.3, etc)? I have one but I'm not sure...
Yes, I meant focus bracketing, not focus stacking. Thanks for the the update.
 

PakkyT

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
4,145
Location
Massachusetts, USA
the E-m10 mark II has a mode called focusing [bracketing] where it takes multiple shots and varies the focal point slightly.

Noting also that this feature only works with certain supported lenses, so for the OP to use they might need to seek out specific lenses adding more $$$ to the purchase.


For m4/3, a 25mm lens is considered a "normal" lens. So multiply the normal lens by the magnification. 25mm x 2.7x = 67.5mm.
Then look for the closest lens to 67.5mm.

That's your trick? Seems like a really round about way to get to "135 / 2". But if it works for you... ;)
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
3,283
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
That's your trick? Seems like a really round about way to get to "135 / 2". But if it works for you... ;)

Round about, but to me simpler.
m4/3 vs. FF = 2x crop, that is easy. But what about other formats?

To me, it is simpler to reference off the normal lens for that focal length, than having to know the crop factor of the format and computing to/from another reference format.
  • Example1, what is the equivalent m4/3 lens for my APS-C 50mm lens? The crop factor of m4/3 to APS-C is not common knowledge; it is 1.333x. So you have to convert from APS-C up to FF (50mm x 1.5x = 75mm), then from FF down to m4/3 (75mm / 2 = 37.5mm). To do this, you have to know what the crop factors are for the relevant formats.
  • Example2, what is the equivalent 6x6 lens for my m4/3 45mm lens? I have no idea what the reverse crop factor from FF to 6x6 is. But I do know that the normal lens that I use for 6x6 is 80mm. So 45mm / 25mm = 1.8x magnification. 80mm x 1.8x = 144mm.
    I can apply this logic to/from any format, as long as I know what the normal lens is for the formats, which is usually known.
I do not like to deal with crop factors, because I work in multiple formats: 35mm/FF, 6x6, 4x5, APS-C, m4/3
So while APS-C crop is 1.5x and m4/3 crop is 2x, what is the crop factor for the 1" sensor of the Nikon 1, and the reverse crop factor of 6x6 and 4x5 film?
It is just simpler, for me, to reference as magnification based on the normal lens.
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,686
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
Noting also that this feature only works with certain supported lenses, so for the OP to use they might need to seek out specific lenses adding more $$$ to the purchase.
This is getting confusing. As far as I know, focus BRACKETING does NOT require any special lenses other than that the lens have AF. Since all it needs to do is change focus, it's not a big deal. Just to be clear, the E-M10.2 does not have Focus STACKING (which DOES require special lenses), so it isn't anything for the OP to think about here, and he does not need to think about getting special lenses to use it (because it doesn't do it).

Edit: Looking at the manual some more, it says that "Focus bracketing is not available with lenses that have mounts conforming to the Four-Thirds standard." In other words, you need to use a m43 lens (not the old four-thirds with an adapter). Not to worry!
 
Last edited:

fredlong

Just this guy...
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
1,782
Location
Massachusetts USA
Real Name
Fred
No one’s mentioned the 65mm lenses as an near 135mm equivalent. The Sigma 65/2.8 is fantastic and inexpensive. The Olympus 65/2.8 macro is also fantastic and 1:1 macro but more expensive.

The Oly 65mm has become my first choice for portraits pushing aside the 45/1.8. If I could have only one I’d stick with the 45 because, for me, it’s overall more versatile.

EDIT: As the next couple of posts point out, these are both 60mm. Brain damage I guess.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
270
Location
Chattanooga, TN
Real Name
Butch Oakey
No one’s mentioned the 65mm lenses as an near 135mm equivalent. The Sigma 65/2.8 is fantastic and inexpensive. The Olympus 65/2.8 macro is also fantastic and 1:1 macro but more expensive.

The Oly 65mm has become my first choice for portraits pushing aside the 45/1.8. If I could have only one I’d stick with the 45 because, for me, it’s overall more versatile.
The Sigma and Olympus are both 60mm, sorry.
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,686
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
The Sigma and Olympus are both 60mm, sorry.
That might explain why I was scratching my head wondering what he was talking about and that maybe they were old four-thirds lenses (not m43). So, we mean m43 60mm, right? If so, then I agree, the Olympus is great. The O m43 30mm is also very good.
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,686
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
I don't find the Sigma 60mm macro on B&H. But I also don't see the Sigma 19mm (which I have but dislike) there either. Seems like they have discontinued some models. All I see there now are 16mm, 30, and 56 (all "Contemporary" lenses).
 

PakkyT

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
4,145
Location
Massachusetts, USA
m4/3 vs. FF = 2x crop, that is easy. But what about other formats?

Well in the case of this discussion the OP was asking strictly about 4/3rds format and how it related back to his old 135 film days. So 2x. No need to get him all turned around with a bunch of extra steps to get to that same number.


I do not like to deal with crop factors, because I work in multiple formats: 35mm/FF, 6x6, 4x5, APS-C, m4/3
So while APS-C crop is 1.5x and m4/3 crop is 2x, what is the crop factor for the 1" sensor of the Nikon 1, and the reverse crop factor of 6x6 and 4x5 film?
It is just simpler, for me, to reference as magnification based on the normal lens.

Ya, I don't deal with anything but 4/3rds so life is easy for me. If you deal with a lot of formats, then I can see how this method might work for some. But I have to ask, what is the different between memorizing a crop factor vs. memorizing a "normal" focal length for each system and then doing a bunch of math? But to answer your question, the 1" Nikon is 2.7x, 6x6 is 0.55x, and 4x5 is x0.27 (I would just say "0.3" as close enough). :thumbup:


This is getting confusing. As far as I know, focus BRACKETING does NOT require any special lenses other than that the lens have AF. Since all it needs to do is change focus, it's not a big deal. Just to be clear, the E-M10.2 does not have Focus STACKING (which DOES require special lenses),

Ya looking at my manual (don't have camera on hand to test) I think you are right that bracketing is not restricted to any specific set of lenses. But now you need to find a way to combine them, which to the best of my knowledge Olympus doesn't supply with their Workspace software, so a 3rd party SW is needed. Now that I am thinking about it, that is where I got stuck last time I thought about this. I was going to try the free trial of Affinity since it was claimed it could do it, but never got around to trying it, partially because I was also thinking about potentially getting the 60mm macro at the time and since I didn't, focus bracketing is much less interesting with the lenses I have.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom