I am thinking of downsizing - DPChallenge Forums

04/24/2015 08:09:58 AM · #26

Originally posted by RamblinR:

...

In regard to Fuji ... I understand they use a noise reduction algorithm even in RAW so that is why it appears less noisy than other cameras. I understand prints don't show the noise anyway so shouldn't be a problem.

...

Control wise, lens choice wise, IBIS, all those good things you'll get no argument from me...the EM-1 is the better camera. I don't particularly like the control layout on the Fuji, nor using the dials on the top.

However, while I have read the same as you about Fuji cooking their RAW files with noise reduction, if true, I'll say that they do a damn good job of it! Photos are still sharp with good edges and clarity, without losing detail. It's still early for me...having not used it enough, but that part impresses me. Photos don't need sharpening, but take it very well. That's something that always bothered me...when you need sharpening, it amplifies noise.

Olympus 300mm f/4.0 IS PRO M.Zuiko Digital ED

04/27/2015 07:04:02 PM · #27

I'm still really an amateur so excuse my lack of terminology, I have heard Fuji does use a NR algorithm which is why some people say the Fuji has less noise than the EM1 but I also heard the EM1 had an issue with the EVF and sunlight getting into it and causing permanent 'burning' on the viewfinder leaving green blotches, does anyone know if this has been resolved?

I'm leaning more toward the EM1, while I will go from having 5 lenses to only one to start with I can get an E-M1 with 12-40mm Pro Lens for AU$1,794.95 which doesn't seem too bad as I have read that lens can cover things like macro, portrait, landscapes, street photography, not sure how it would go with star trails as I have heard the EM1 isn't the best because of long exposure noise?

Any thoughts on that lens if someone is using it?

Thank you again for the advice.

Phocal

Olympus OM-1

04/27/2015 07:24:14 PM · #28

Originally posted by AussieChris:

I went from the Fuji XE1 a little over a year ago to the EM5 and on to the EM1, I could not be happier. The viewfinder problem has not been resolved officially but have followed a lot of talk about it. There really have only been a limited number of EVF's with this problem, general thinking is it was a bad batch of EVF's, but no one really knows for sure. I don't do long exposure shots but I have not heard of any particular problem with them on the EM1. I would assume that it does have a little more noise then some of the bigger sensors, but every camera is not good at everything.

04/27/2015 08:13:56 PM · #29

Originally posted by Kobba:

Thanks for the input Ronnie, If all goes well with the sale of my Nikon gear in the next few days I think I will just take the plunge and get the EM1.

I am just not sure what lens to buy with it, the body + 12-50mm for $1400 or the body + 12-40mm PRO for $1794 or I could go the other route and get the silver body for $1264 and buy the Olympus ED 40-150mm R f4.0-5.6 R Lens for $200.

If I was interested in macro, landscapes and say street photography would you recommend a lens to match?

Sorry for all the questions, I just don't want to make the wrong choice with my tight budget after selling my gear. :)

Message edited by author 2015-04-27 20:15:10.

Olympus 300mm f/4.0 IS PRO M.Zuiko Digital ED

04/28/2015 04:37:12 AM · #30

Seriously, just bite the bullet and get the 12-40 f2.8. You will not regret it. It may be the only lens you need. If you shoot only a little tele then the 40-150 3.5-5.6 will be all you need as it is an amazingly good lens for the price. But, if you need a faster lens then look at the Panasonic 35-100 (which is a more manageable size) or the new 40-150 f2.8.

Whilst the 12-50 is a good lens it just isn't as sharp across the frame as the 12-40 f2.8 which also focuses quite close so if you're not macro mad you might find it is all you need anyway.

I must say, that there are a lot of second hand olympus on the market. I'd suggest going second hand if you can find a good deal. Honestly, you are selling your gear and know there is nothing wrong with it and others do the same so why not look for a deal. Won't make the change so hard on the pocket.

Hope that helps.

Cheers

Phocal

Olympus OM-1

04/28/2015 07:48:14 AM · #31

Originally posted by RamblinR:

RamblinR said, you can't go wrong with the 12-40 �2.8 Pro lens. Build quality is great, it's weatherproof, great image quality, and it can focus pretty damn close (while not a true macro it can function in a pinch). For macro you can also get an adapter and use one of the old manual focus macro lenses. I have an old Lester Dine macro lens that I have used on my Fuji XE1 and now use on my EM1, but I did break down and buy the Oly 60mm macro because that lens is so great and super light. Do not forget about the old Olympus 4/3 lenses, some of the best lenses every made by anyone. I currently have one of those lenses (a 50-200mm) and a second one is arriving today. The SHG (super high quality) lenses by Olympus really are some of the most incredible pieces of glass every produced and the HG lenses are not fare behind. With an adapter you have full control of those lenses on a m4/3 camera, but only the EM1 will do an adequate job of focusing them because it's the only one with a hybrid focus system.

Ronnie

Tiberius

Samsung Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra

04/28/2015 07:59:30 AM · #32

I was tempted by the OMD-EM5 MK2 but I resisted. However, the12-40 �2.8 Pro lens was the only choice on my list.

04/28/2015 08:01:55 AM · #33

Thanks for the replies and advice on lens choice again everyone.

I have looked at second hand but from what I have seen they are only a couple of hundred cheaper than new but I will certainly keep it in mind though.

Message edited by author 2015-04-28 08:02:56.

Ann

04/28/2015 09:23:51 AM · #34

I don't know if you have this in Australia, but in the US anyway, Olympus sells refurbished bodies and lenses through their own site. Prices are similar to the used market, but they come with a 90 day warranty. I got my 12-40 that way. It's in a different box and I had to peel a sticker off the lens. Otherwise it appears to be new.

Everything else I got used. 20+% discounts on like new stuff was worth it to me.

And yes, it's worth getting an m4/3 body just to get that 12-40. It's that good.

Message edited by author 2015-04-28 09:25:43.

04/28/2015 03:54:47 PM · #35

I forgot about this comparison between the X-T1 and the E-M1. Was it flawed? Those Oly images look pretty noisy, is that characteristic in your experience? Or maybe his sharpening in processing was unreasonable. (Seriously asking for discussion, not trying to ignite a flame).

//cameralabs.com/reviews/Fujifilm_X-T1/RAW_noise.shtml

I do realize the argument that the Fuji is cooking those raws, but as I've said before, even if they are, I don't see a problem with those samples. Certainly if they could cook it without smearing and losing detail, I wouldn't mind, because I've never liked the results when I apply NR.

Message edited by author 2015-04-28 16:26:49.

Ann

04/28/2015 06:55:41 PM · #36

"both cameras are set to RAW and their images processed using Adobe Camera RAW (v8.4 Beta) using identical settings: Sharpening at 50 / 0.5 / 36 / 10, Luminance and Colour Noise Reduction both set to zero, the White Balance set to 3250K and the Process to 2012 with the Adobe Standard profile"

So he's setting every setting to emphasize the noise as much as possible. Pretty much the opposite of what any sane person would do in the real world.

Every camera is a compromise. If I were optimizing purely for high ISO noise, I'd get a Sony A7S. If I were optimizing for pure image quality, I'd get medium format. My experience with the E-M1 is that images are not the creamy full frame images that I get from my D800, but they're still quite good at any size people are likely to view them at. As a high quality travel camera, it's the best compromise of size, image quality, and shooting experience I could find.

I guess that's a long way around to saying that yes, the images have a bit more noise than my D800, but in real world use, that isn't a problem for me. Other than being a little careful with the sharpening and noise reduction settings in Lightroom, I don't do anything special, and it doesn't seem that the E-M1 is producing especially noisy files.

05/02/2015 04:32:08 AM · #37

Not sure if we are allowed to post links here but I still can't make my mind up and would love some advice.

Below are some links to some options I have, reason I am leaning more towards Fuji is because of the noise I have read about with the Olympus, reason for leaning more towards Olympus is the lack of options the Fuji has.

//www.ebay.com.au/itm/121594683848?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

//www.ebay.com.au/itm/161675304555?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

//www.ebay.com.au/itm/121606329193?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Message edited by Neil - fixed links.

05/02/2015 08:37:25 AM · #38

Originally posted by AussieChris:

I still haven't used my new X-T1 camera much because I've been too busy to go out shooting. Except for testing in the house and one outing. But I have a few more things I've learned that might help.

I like the 18-135 lens a lot, IQ wise. However, it's fairly heavy...it's actually almost as heavy as my Nikon 18-200. The reason for that is it seems to be made from metal rather than plastic. It's of course, weatherproof too. But realize the 18-55 is a great, lighter lens that also starts at F2.8 rather than F3.5, and only goes to F4. At 55mm the 18-135 is 4.7. Then again, the 18-55 is F/1,000,000 over 55mm--it cant even go there ;)
Personally, I knew if I bought the 18-55 version, I'd still end up buying the 18-135 (27-200), because I always like to have a all-in-one lens for those times you don't have a particlular shoot in mind.

The Oly has a several 28-300 equivalent lenses, and they are of course, lighter. But I'd say the Fuji lens is top notch IQ wise. I don't know how the Oly stacks up there.

The longest lens with IS in Fuji's line up right now is the 55-200 (82-300). It's supposed to be an excellent lens, and it's not too expensive. But there's no good 400mm option, and no good 600mm option either (I have the Panny 100-300mm (200-600) for my m43 G5, lens, which is pretty good.)

And Fuji keeps putting out great prime lenses and even a F2.8 24-80mm lens...but without IS. That puts me back to where I started with the Nikon 24-70, which is a FANTASTIC lens, perhaps my favorite. But it's disappointing to have the Fuji without shake reduction.

So the good news with Fuji is they're putting out some really great lenses. The bad news is that there are nowhere near the choices of the Oly. And if IS is important to you, except for most of the Fuji zooms, your out of luck. One could argue you don't need IS below 50mm, but I don't agree. And if that's true, why did Nikon put out a 16-35 VR. You could also argue you don't need it if your lens is F2.8 or below. But if that's true, that also means I can't shoot F4 and above to get the appropriate DOF, say, for an indoor architecture shot.

So for me, it looks like the biggest tradeoff I made for the Fuji IQ is lack of a variety of lens choices, especially tele. A 100-400mm (150-600mm) lens is however, scheduled for release in 2016, though I'm guessing it will be pretty big! Here's the roadmap . Pay attention to what doesn't say OIS next to it, because there's currently no in-body stabilization.

Which brings me to my next gripe. I just bought the metabones adapter ($140) which would let me use my Nikon lenses with the Fuji, filling the gap for occasional use. The Fuji has an advantage here, since the crop factor is just 1.5, just like my D7100. I tested all my lenses (except the 70-200 F2.8) in the garden and indoors. Focus is easy, even though it's manual. Results came out great, especially with my 50mm F1.4 or Fisheye. But using an adapted lens has great tradeoffs. There's no wide open use and then stopping down automatically when pressing the shutter. There's no IS. And the camera doesn't even record the F stop in the EXIF. And of course, if I were to rely on my Nikon pro lenses, I'd really be back to where I started, with heavy lenses! Why not then just use my Nikon. It's a lb and a half or more heavier and much bigger than the fuji, but the extra weight is worth getting autofocus and IS when available. So only the lighter, smaller lenses are candidates, like the 50mm F1.4 and the fisheye. The 105mm VR Macro is probably not worth the trouble since it's big and heavy and you lose VR. Though I do also have the 85mm Nikon Macro which I didn't think to test. All of these lenses would be twice the nominal focal length on the Oly. But you would have VR.

So remember in choosing: Does Fuji have the lenses you want and can live within? If so, it might be the better deal. If you want more options though, and lighter longer lenses, the Oly might be the better choice. Then you have to weigh that against IQ. The Oly seems to have great IQ, but the Fuji will be at least nominally better.

And while Oly has a great pro line of lenses, the "regular" lenses for Fuji are essentially pro quality for IQ, if not F2.8. To me, the 10-24mm F/4 is the most important. It has IS, is lightweight, and was only $799 on sale. The upcoming 7-14 Oly lens will be no doubt a great lens, but it will be much more expensive. It may even be heavier!

If it sounds like I'm still tossed up between the two systems, you're right. I chose the Fuji in the end because I wanted cleaner files, better JPEGs as a low work option, and they had two lenses I could live with (sort of). The 10-24 and the 18-135. But that doesn't make me not regret losing in body stabilization, a smaller system with smaller lenses, and a lot of interesting lens choices with the Oly/Panny. As a result of my choice, I need to keep my Nikons for the foreseeable future for those other lens options.

Actually, there's a third system I still drool over...the Sony A7 line! It's bigger still, with bigger lenses. But some great lens choices now, great IQ, and you can even eventually have three bodies: suoer high res (A7R) through super high sensitivity (A7S). And now they're even putting in stabilization. Alas, I didn't go that way this time because of lens and body size. Basically, I bought "in the middle" (the Fuji!).

Message edited by author 2015-05-02 08:38:32.

Ann

05/02/2015 10:33:36 AM · #39

It would be very hard to go wrong with either choice. My suggestion would be to figure out what lenses you are likely to get, both now, and down the road, and go from there. My personal choice was driven by my need for a travel system. The overall weight of the system with the lenses and accessories I needed for travel was the most important factor, and the pro quality m4/3 lenses are significantly smaller and lighter. If I'd been more willing to compromise on weight, I very well might have gone with Fuji, or just stayed with my D800, which has the best image quality and no shortage of lenses.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

05/03/2015 03:04:48 AM · #40

I really hate the idea of spending a lot of money on current camera technology, especially when subsequent generations of a camera line may only be just incremental advances. The choices you have laid out for yourself are expensive and are fairly large cameras bodies. For myself, I like to stay a year or two behind the current wave of technology for reasons of price and it also gives time the chance to work out the bugs and problems.

Two other camera body choices for you in micro 43 are the Oly OMD-EM5 version I, and the Panasonic GX-7. They sell for $499usd and $450usd respectively, and both have in body image stablization. The EM-5 verI has the 5 axis kind of the EM-1 and the GX-7 has 2-axis but is still considered very good. And they both have comparable image quality to the EM-1. The GX-7 in particular has excellent features such as terrific focusing for both manual and autofocus. It autofocuses down to -4EV and is very quick and accurate in all light. It also has focus peaking that really makes manual focus easy and painless. It's EVF is phenomenal, very clear and highly detailed with accurate colors. The GX-7 is also smaller than the other m43 choices you have made because it is thinner and lacks the VF hump. Build quality for both the EM-5 and GX-7 and superb. Either one of those would give you considerably more money to use for lenses, which will outlast camera bodies.

I also think that too much noise is made about sensor noise. The noise you see in a picture on the monitor may not be visible when printed out on paper and the size print also has a lot to do with how visible it is. Noise will also disappear when images are reduced in size for web display. Have you downloaded any full sized Fuji/Oly/Pany RAW files that you can get online and printed them out to the size you are likely to output? You'll not only be able to see the noise characteristics but also resolution. There may only be a half stop difference between an APS-C sized sensor and a m43 sized sensor, if at all.

One caveat with the GX-7 is that longest shutter speed in bulb mode will only be 2 minutes, so if you like to shoot long exposures it may not be the camera for you. It's really a street shooter.

05/03/2015 12:04:52 PM · #41

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

Yes, at $499, the E-M5 is even tempting me. After all, I actually have three M43 lenses: a fisheye, the 100-300mm, and the G5 kit lens. I also have a G5 of course, but I really don't like the button layout on that.

After playing around some more with adapted lenses yesterday, I found the 85mm Nikon Macro to be very nice on the Fuji. But I'll say Fuji made a big mistake not putting in IBIS. For adapted lenses, IBIS is really important, unless you always shoot with a tripod.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

05/03/2015 02:28:19 PM · #42

Originally posted by Neil:

EM-10 is also on sale but has more of the features of EM-1, like better VF. Only advantage to M-5-I is weather sealing. $450 for M-10 body only.

Originally posted by Neil:

After playing around some more with adapted lenses yesterday, I found the 85mm Nikon Macro to be very nice on the Fuji. But I'll say Fuji made a big mistake not putting in IBIS. For adapted lenses, IBIS is really important, unless you always shoot with a tripod.

I still prefer getting shutter speed up as high as I can to deal with subject movement but since using the IBIS on my new GX-7 I have to say I find it useful. A lot depends on focal length. On the Fuji it may be a little easier to get the SS up and still maintain image quality. I didn't see your m43 fisheye listed, so I'm guessing it's the body cap lens. More of a toy lens if that's what you have, so you really don't have a big investment in m43. It may be worth just sticking with the Fuji system since you prefer their files to Oly's. No system is perfect and Fuji's is still new and maturing.

05/03/2015 08:29:02 PM · #43

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

Originally posted by Neil:
Yes, at $499, the E-M5 is even tempting me. After all, I actually have three M43 lenses: a fisheye, the 100-300mm, and the G5 kit lens. I also have a G5 of course, but I really don't like the button layout on that.

EM-10 is also on sale but has more of the features of EM-1, like better VF. Only advantage to M-5-I is weather sealing. $450 for M-10 body only.

Originally posted by Neil:
After playing around some more with adapted lenses yesterday, I found the 85mm Nikon Macro to be very nice on the Fuji. But I'll say Fuji made a big mistake not putting in IBIS. For adapted lenses, IBIS is really important, unless you always shoot with a tripod.

I still prefer getting shutter speed up as high as I can to deal with subject movement but since using the IBIS on my new GX-7 I have to say I find it useful. A lot depends on focal length. On the Fuji it may be a little easier to get the SS up and still maintain image quality. I didn't see your m43 fisheye listed, so I'm guessing it's the body cap lens. More of a toy lens if that's what you have, so you really don't have a big investment in m43. It may be worth just sticking with the Fuji system since you prefer their files to Oly's. No system is perfect and Fuji's is still new and maturing.

I bought the Bower 7.5mm m43 fisheye last year to take on my bike trip. it's a great lens. I had the FZ1000 as my main camera, the G5 as my fisheye (the only lens I brought), and the Sony RX100 for my pocket and a camera I could shoot with WHILE RIDING.

The G5 is ok, but I am always hitting the buttons on the back by accident--it's just too small and the design of the trackpad buttons is ridiculous since they fall under your hand when you hold it and I'm always accidentally pressing them. I also really hate the ISO selection screen, another poor design choice. Besides that, the camera is ok and can take very nice pics--though I think the Oly's have better high ISO performance.

G5 shot from after the bike trip when we were in Portland Maine, Portland Head Light. Not bad actually, just a pain to use. The lens is great though.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

05/04/2015 12:38:11 AM · #44

Originally posted by Neil:

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

Originally posted by Neil:
Yes, at $499, the E-M5 is even tempting me. After all, I actually have three M43 lenses: a fisheye, the 100-300mm, and the G5 kit lens. I also have a G5 of course, but I really don't like the button layout on that.

EM-10 is also on sale but has more of the features of EM-1, like better VF. Only advantage to M-5-I is weather sealing. $450 for M-10 body only.

Originally posted by Neil:
After playing around some more with adapted lenses yesterday, I found the 85mm Nikon Macro to be very nice on the Fuji. But I'll say Fuji made a big mistake not putting in IBIS. For adapted lenses, IBIS is really important, unless you always shoot with a tripod.

I still prefer getting shutter speed up as high as I can to deal with subject movement but since using the IBIS on my new GX-7 I have to say I find it useful. A lot depends on focal length. On the Fuji it may be a little easier to get the SS up and still maintain image quality. I didn't see your m43 fisheye listed, so I'm guessing it's the body cap lens. More of a toy lens if that's what you have, so you really don't have a big investment in m43. It may be worth just sticking with the Fuji system since you prefer their files to Oly's. No system is perfect and Fuji's is still new and maturing.

I bought the Bower 7.5mm m43 fisheye last year to take on my bike trip. it's a great lens. I had the FZ1000 as my main camera, the G5 as my fisheye (the only lens I brought), and the Sony RX100 for my pocket and a camera I could shoot with WHILE RIDING.

The G5 is ok, but I am always hitting the buttons on the back by accident--it's just too small and the design of the trackpad buttons is ridiculous since they fall under your hand when you hold it and I'm always accidentally pressing them. I also really hate the ISO selection screen, another poor design choice. Besides that, the camera is ok and can take very nice pics--though I think the Oly's have better high ISO performance.

G5 shot from after the bike trip when we were in Portland Maine, Portland Head Light. Not bad actually, just a pain to use. The lens is great though.

I in fact have the very same fisheye but mine's rebranded Rokinon. Samyang, Bower, Rokinon all the same lens and I do like it but it still doesn't get much use, even though I want to. They also make a made for m43 12mm f2 lens, manual focus only, of course, but supposed to be excellent optically and a less extreme 9mm fisheye. Most of their m43 mounted lenses are full frame designs with just a m43 mount and so large and heavy. I also just got the Rok 85mm f1.4, imo too big for a m43 camera but sharp and gives great bokeh. However, in my first outing with it there was excessive chromatic aberration. In the past for some reason I have been unable to grasp the skill of fixing CA/PF in post. Something for my learn-to-do list.
Your Portland Maine shot came out very nice indeed. HDR?

I find that I don't hold smaller bodies like I did an SLR, but rather more with the fingers. Try backing your palm off the grip a bit and hold the camera more with your fingers and you may not run into inadvertently changing the settings as often. Takes some getting used to but I like this way better. Never held a G5 but my GX-7 ergonomically is the most comfortable camera I ever held.

Btw, another very nice feature of the Pany bodies is the silent shutter. I think the new OMD M5-II may have it as well. Saves wear and tear on the mechanical shutter, and is great for live performance shooting or street stealth mode.

05/05/2015 04:17:30 AM · #45

I have the Samyang fisheye. Wonderful lens as it's not as fishy on m43. It's fabulous for video also as the extra crop in video just about removes most of the fisheye effect but you get ultra wide. Great for wedding dance floors. Love it. So many choices with m43 its fabulous.

Must admits that the only other camera I would look at would be the sony A7 range for FF. I am so used to WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) that I couldn't go back to a normal dslr. My friend has an A7 so I will have a look at his and decide if it's in my future but at the moment with fast m43 glass ... I think not.

Message edited by author 2015-05-05 04:25:57.

05/05/2015 05:05:48 AM · #46

Well I took the leap and purchased the EM1 (silver and black body), I found a deal online that had the bonus of the battery grip thrown in along with the 12-40mm Pro lens so couldn't resist, it actually just arrived by courier today and I am charging up the battery as I type this.

I must say holding it with lens attached the build quality seems amazing, was quite surprised at the weight of it and I am certainly looking forward to trying it out tomorrow as it is getting a little dark over here.

One thing I am still a little concerned about though after doing some more research while I was waiting for it to arrive is the EVF and the green blotches that some have had appear on their screens, I even contacted Olympus about it but of course no reply from them.

Beautiful image by the way Neil.

Message edited by author 2015-05-05 05:07:37.

05/05/2015 05:11:44 AM · #47

I think you are talking about the burned EVF when someone lets the sun shine through the viewfinder into the EVF. Canon have a thing on their strap to put over the viewfinder to stop light leak when doing shots so if you were to think of it like this then just make sure you cover the EVF window when you have the sun coming in that direction.

Message edited by author 2015-05-05 05:12:02.

05/05/2015 06:55:03 AM · #48

Originally posted by RamblinR:

Wouldn't that mean doing it with most shots though?

I know I like the sun behind me when I take certain pictures.

05/05/2015 08:13:22 AM · #49

I generally have the camera to my eye so it isn't a problem. But, if you have it on a tripod make sure you shield the viewfinder from the sun if you feel it would be shining into it (sun has to be in the right position to shine into it). After all it is like a magnifying glass when the sun hits it and it would then burn into the EVF.