|
DJExile posted:Hell yes Well, not going to draw any serious conclusions until we get to know each other a bit better, but from a brief outing: There is an ABSURD amount of options for configuration on this camera. You know it's bad when they have to group the config menu into a bunch of sections, and then some of the items in each section have their OWN submenus. Yeah. They definitely did not leave much out here. The rear LCD is absolutely loving fantastic. Big, bright, sharp, fast. Have not played much with the touch interface, but swiping through images is definitely not as snappy as e.g. my iPhone. Nifty but, eh, could live without it. The touch-to-focus-and-shoot function is pretty cool though, and while I don't see myself using it much it is nice for others who borrow the camera. The EVF was a major worry for me since I have yet to meet one I like. Well, it is still an EVF (and therefore inferior in my mind), but I must admit it is pretty darn good. Far less "digital" looking than the NEX-7 one, which I thought was supposed to be the best on the market today. Again, super configurable, so I bet I can get it setup juuuuust the way I want it. Thanks, Olympus. When using the art filters (which are pretty fun), it does lag a fair bit. When doing normal shooting it is very responsive and clear though. Blackout is very brief, no worse than many DSLRs. Dynamic range appears to be every bit as good as claimed. I intentionally shot some very tricky scenes in iAuto mode just to see what would happen, and it was nearly impossible to get it to blow any highlights. Natural, smooth transitions from light to dark, with plenty of detail left everywhere. Shooting jpegs for now so no telling how the raws look though. Build quality is top notch. The two dials have just the right amount of resistance and "click" in them. Everything about this camera feels solid. The buttons are a little mushy but I gather that is due to the weather sealing. The dreaded strap lug issue is not an issue for me at least. People claim it "digs into" their hands and it's horrible oh me oh my how could Olympus design a camera with such a flaw bla bla bla, but when I hold it the lug naturally lands between my first two fingers and sits there nicely. The thumb grip on the back is brilliant and perfectly placed for me. I guess I don't have giant manly American hands like most of the Internet, but c'est la vie. I have read a lot about the "fantastic" shutter sound. Right. Sounds like a shutter, with a little weird "whirr" thing at the end. Meh. My 1DsII sounds far sexier if shutter sounds are your thing. Have a feeling this one came from people who upgraded from a point and shoot or something. Image quality: both impressed and not. The dynamic range as mentioned is superb by any digital camera standard, and blows anything else I have seen from m4/3 away. However, so far the jpegs out of camera do have a bit of the "small camera" look somehow. You know, the not-quite-sharp-in-every-detail, not-quite-crisp when you look into fine detail like grass. I will hold judgment until I shoot some raws though, but at this point it lacks the microcontrast and "snap" of the X100. Using the 20/1.7 lens which is impressive resolution wise, but it is possible the PanaLeica has more microcontrast. Or that I get more out of the raws. Admittedly I am pixel-peeping here though; doubt there would be a big difference in prints at normal sizes. Also, weak AA filter confirmed (100% crop):  and a bonus shot showing off the Olympus jpeg colors, which I do approve of: 
Clayton Bigsby fucked around with this message at 21:50 on May 25, 2012 |
#
?
May 25, 2012 21:41
|
|
What are your impressions so far?
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:11 |
|
|
You did disable sharpening and noise filtering right?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:You did disable sharpening and noise filtering right? I did this evening after doing some reading. Will do some more serious shooting over the next weeks. Have not seen any examples of how much this affects the image, but it appears most are doing it so I gather it yields some improvement.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 22:05
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:I did this evening after doing some reading. Will do some more serious shooting over the next weeks. Interested to see the results. 
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2012 22:07
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Image quality: both impressed and not. The dynamic range as mentioned is superb by any digital camera standard, and blows anything else I have seen from m4/3 away. However, so far the jpegs out of camera do have a bit of the "small camera" look somehow. You know, the not-quite-sharp-in-every-detail, not-quite-crisp when you look into fine detail like grass. I will hold judgment until I shoot some raws though, but at this point it lacks the microcontrast and "snap" of the X100. Using the 20/1.7 lens which is impressive resolution wise, but it is possible the PanaLeica has more microcontrast. Or that I get more out of the raws. Admittedly I am pixel-peeping here though; doubt there would be a big difference in prints at normal sizes.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
HPL posted:gently caress that. I was messing around with m43 cameras the other day. It's stupid because you pick up the camera and think: "Oh, it's a pretty good size" and then you realize you have to extend the lens to use it even at its widest setting and it becomes stupid because you've got this tiny camera with a lens so long that you could turn it sideways and people would think you've got a monopod mounted on it.  Really? It doesn't extend that much and most of the mass is still towards the rear of the camera anyway. Obviously the idea is that you collapse it for storage, what difference does the length make when you're actually using it?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2012 03:16
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:and a bonus shot showing off the Olympus jpeg colors, which I do approve of: That's a really good exposure considering the lighting conditions, and impressive dynamic range. It impresses me a lot more than a lot of the m4/3 pics I've looked at.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2012 03:59
|
|
|
Augmented Dickey posted:Really? It doesn't extend that much and most of the mass is still towards the rear of the camera anyway. Obviously the idea is that you collapse it for storage, what difference does the length make when you're actually using it? Even better if extending the lens turns the camera on. I'd probably go for a collapsible prime on NEX if it did that. Make it more like an XA.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2012 04:25
|
|
|
Well, now I have armed myself with LR 4.1 and some quite decent presets to toy with for raw development. I have to say that the raw files are FAR nicer than the jpegs. I know the colors are lovely bla bla with the OOC jpegs, but give me raws like these any day. Huuuuuge dynamic range and tack sharp; I am glad to see the 20/1.7 is performing as well as I expected. For fun, went out and did some "stress test" shooting. This one was a brightly sunlit tree against a dark forest. Any of my other cameras would have turned the forest into black mush and/or made the tree a blown out mess. Not this guy. I had to work the raw pretty hard but the info was there.  Fine details and smooth tones, no problem. Superb detail even when pixel peeping.  And being able to tilt the LCD to get close to the ground is fun too.  Now that we are getting to know each other a bit better, I am starting to really like mr E-M5. A few times I forgot I was even using an EVF since it was so smooth and sharp. Also noticed I can jab the lcd/evf switch with the side of my thumb which is much nicer than repositioning my hand to use my index finger. Ergonomics, while a VERY compact camera, are not bad.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2012 19:26
|
|
|
I like the skin tones when shooting people with the E-M5 as well, very natural. Wilfred by alkanphel, on Flickr  Gerald by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 00:41
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:I like the skin tones when shooting people with the E-M5 as well, very natural. I don't know, seems to be skewing a little yellow in your pics.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 01:34
|
|
|
Costello Jello posted:I don't know, seems to be skewing a little yellow in your pics.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Hmm you think so? Looks fine enough on my monitor though. Just making an off-color joke.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 02:32
|
|
|
Two for two, nicely done. I'm starting to consider a NEX-7 again. Question for those of you who have used them - could you envision using it for events (weddings, fundraisers) with a full-sized flash and adapted Alpha/Minolta lens? I know that both will fit, I just don't know how practical they would be in practice.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 03:30
|
|
|
If you get the LA-EA2, bigger lenses become more comfortable to use on the NEX because the adapter makes it more ergonomic in that holding the adapter part in the left hand feels almost like using a DSLR. Go to a camera store and try it and you'll see what I mean.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 04:10
|
|
|
You'll also have phase detect focus, so auto-focus speed won't be a barrier either. You will lose ~30% of your incoming light, though, since the LA-EA2 uses Sony's SLT. If you can find an LA-EA1, you won't lose light, but you'll still be stuck with the built-in contrast detect. I've tried the LA-EA2 in stores. I desperately want it for the AF and broader lens selection, but at the same time, I moved to a NEX camera explicitly to avoid bulk. 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 05:52
|
|
|
I'm not too worried about the light loss - my main camera these days is the Sony a77, which uses the exact same sensor & SLT mirror. The reason I'm asking about practical use is that the NEX-7 would replace my backup camera, so I need to be sure it's usable with both a flash and an Alpha adapter. I had the LA-EA1 when I had the NEX-5n; I agree it's the best option in terms of light loss, but the autofocus was so slow as to be unusable. For both the grip and practical use, the LA-EA2 is the best option. For daily use, I'd probably just get the Sigma 30mm f/2.8, and eventually add the Sigma 19mm f/2.8 and the Sony 50mm f/1.8. No sense in recreating the wheel,
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 06:50
|
|
|
Costello Jello posted:Just making an off-color joke. I wanted to make a bad joke about that they're not really named Gerald and Wilfred. But your joke is even more racist.  
spankmeister fucked around with this message at 09:40 on May 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 09:38
|
|
|
Holy crap touch-to-focus-and-shoot is neat. Using it with 2s self timer to avoid vibrations, and drat it is a joy. Tripod low, tilt screen up, tap and bam, you are done. More upbeat (100% crop here if you want to see detail: http://beyondthematrix.com/P5270025-2.jpg): 
Clayton Bigsby fucked around with this message at 22:05 on May 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 21:55
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Holy crap touch-to-focus-and-shoot is neat. Using it with 2s self timer to avoid vibrations, and drat it is a joy. Tripod low, tilt screen up, tap and bam, you are done. E-P3 had the same screen as the E-M5, except non-tiltable. But I'm happy they kept it, I prefer it to the higher-res screens on the Sonys because the OLED is so vivid. And the touch interface is kept simple.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2012 23:10
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Holy crap touch-to-focus-and-shoot is neat. Using it with 2s self timer to avoid vibrations, and drat it is a joy. Tripod low, tilt screen up, tap and bam, you are done. When I got my 5N I had fully intended to use old MF lenses with it, but I really fell in love with the touch screen for focusing. Instead of focus->recompose with spot focusing I have gotten very used to touching to spot focus wherever I want - very useful and very natural. I feel like the touch area could be more sensitive, though as it often is a quarter inch or so from where I intended. I hope that over time companies isolate the really useful features like these and cull them from some others that seem less useful...swipe to change photo, for example - the scroll wheel is so much easier and it seems like they are just trying to emulate smartphone functionality in some ways.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2012 02:57
|
|
|
Attention fellow X-Pro 1 owners, Adobe has RAW support finally! http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/05/30/Adobe-Camera-Raw-v7-1-Lightroom-v4-1-Fujifilm-X-Pro1 "Adobe has launched final versions of Photoshop Lightroom v4.1 and Adobe Camera Raw v7.1 that include support for the Fujifilm X-Pro1. Both versions include the advanced defringing tools introduced in the Release Candidate versions they replace as well as promising to address 'performance issues.' Both versions include support for the Fujifilm X-Pro1 non-Bayer color filter array. They can be downloaded from the Adobe website now. Adobe Camera Raw 7.1 works with Photoshop CS6." But a big eff you to Adobe for not supporting it in previous versions of LR and ACR. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2012 07:33
|
|
|
Wow, it looks like you can find new in box Panasonic GF3's (body only) for $200 or less on Craigslist. It's not cutting edge or top of the line, but its not ancient either, anyone aware of a cheaper way to get a new camera to play around with micro four thirds?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2012 05:26
|
|
|
da weed wizard posted:Wow, it looks like you can find new in box Panasonic GF3's (body only) for $200 or less on Craigslist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2012 14:01
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:E-PL1 for $150 on Amazon, though I'm not sure how the two compare. Or sub-200€ Sony nex c3 on ebay.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 00:58
|
|
|
I've been in the market for a couple of new cameras recently. Still looking for something newer in the dSLR space and also a smaller camera to replace a lovely Sony P&S that shoots photos that look like pastel paintings. Forgot how cheap that EPL-1 was these days and snagged one for 280 off amazon with the kit lens. Now I'm not coming into it thinking its going to shoot faster than my current dSLR or fill the hole that the 5dmk3 or D800 I'm eyeing. What I do know though it's it's image quality will be leaps and bounds better than our laughable P&S, and probably focus quicker to boot. That said are there any tweaks, preferred settings, or anything along those lines I should do out of the box to make it as enjoyable as possible? I'm also slightly interested in maybe a telephoto for it or a manual focus macro lens with adapter for it so when my fiancé and I go on hikes, we can both be shooting whatever with each of our cameras.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 17:35
|
|
|
Olympus E-PM1 question: It seems my Pen is very "conservative" (for lack of a better term) about auto choosing ISO. Pretty much any indoor scene, it opts for 1600 when I can still get sufficient shutter speed at, say, 800 or less if I set the ISO manually. I don't mind leaving my max ISO set at 1600, since that can still be useful at times, but is there any way to make the auto ISO a little more aggressive? I don't always want to have to fiddle with it manually if I don't have to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 16:09
|
|
|
SupahCoolX posted:Olympus E-PM1 question: Welcome to pretty much every camera with Auto ISO ever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 17:59
|
|
|
Eek, my E-M5 arrived at da camera store today, much earlier than I was expecting. Did anyone bother with the rebate Olympus was offering, or know if they still are honoring it due to the lack of supply?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 18:44
|
|
|
So after running around Europe with my NEX-5 and shooting primarily with the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 and occasionally the 16mm pancake (that is as sparingly as I could), by the end of the trip I was really yearning for a zoom lens that could cover those two lenses and was worth a drat. Would my best option for a good zoom lens be to get a LA-EA2 adaptor and whatever good Alpha-mount zoom lens that's within my budget?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 18:56
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Eek, my E-M5 arrived at da camera store today, much earlier than I was expecting. Did anyone bother with the rebate Olympus was offering, or know if they still are honoring it due to the lack of supply? Not only do we have to pay more here in Europe, I didn't get a drat rebate either. Will be fun to see how you like it. It's a lovely camera. Get the kit lens?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 19:19
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Eek, my E-M5 arrived at da camera store today, much earlier than I was expecting. Did anyone bother with the rebate Olympus was offering, or know if they still are honoring it due to the lack of supply? Mine is currently out for delivery but its being delivered to the office I normally work at but I'm halfway across town at our other office covering for someone who is away on vacation. Hopefully the shipping receiving guys don't have nervous breakdown and do something silly like give it to any of my awful co workers when they can't find me. http://www.olympusamerica.com/crm/rebates/e-m5_accessory_mir_form.pdf Seems to still be active and as long as you bought it before the 30th of June you should still be able to get the mail in rebate assuming you get the mail in rebate post marked before the 13th of July
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 19:33
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Not only do we have to pay more here in Europe, I didn't get a drat rebate either. I light fires posted:http://www.olympusamerica.com/crm/rebates/e-m5_accessory_mir_form.pdf  Additional question: Do I have to buy the accessory at the same time? Can it not be a separate purchase? Cacator fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Jun 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 20:10
|
|
|
Edward IV posted:So after running around Europe with my NEX-5 and shooting primarily with the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 and occasionally the 16mm pancake (that is as sparingly as I could), by the end of the trip I was really yearning for a zoom lens that could cover those two lenses and was worth a drat. Would my best option for a good zoom lens be to get a LA-EA2 adaptor and whatever good Alpha-mount zoom lens that's within my budget? There's no good E-mount zoom. And none that we know of even coming on the horizon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 20:37
|
|
|
HPL posted:Welcome to pretty much every camera with Auto ISO ever. Odd, the X100 doesn't do that at all. I tries to keep to the minimum shutter speed you specified, only bumping up the ISO when it would have to go below that speed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Yeah, the 12-50. Don't expect to use it too much because the primes are so much better but it's too versatile for me not to get it, since I'm getting rid of the EP3 + 14-42. Also trying to offload the 20mm f1.7 for the 25. When I first ordered I forgot to include the accessory so I called and had them add it on before it shipped but the very nice woman told me that it didn't matter if it was a separate order or not. I think you need to buy it from Olympus though not from a regular retailer though I could be wrong on that part. Make sure you call customer service though their online sales rep thing is a travesty. Also my OM-D has arrived and the shipping/receiving guys didn't even lose it or give it to the wrong person or throw it away by mistake. Looks like I'm taking the long way home. I light fires fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Jun 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 23:23
|
|
|
LiquidRain posted:Yup. I figured. Though then again, the LA-EA2 adapter does give the camera phase detection autofocus but at the expense of image stabilization. The lack of IS won't be a problem for since I'm only looking for a zoom lens in the less than 50mm range. Plus, I'm going to be going to Disney World with my niece and nephew who are 4 and 6 respectively and I'm probably going to need that fast, accurate autofocus. While I suppose I could ask in the camera gear thread, I'm guessing that the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 described in the thread's title and OP and applicable for Alpha-mount cameras and even for an adapted E-mount cameras. Would that be correct?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 01:56
|
|
|
Yup, that Tamron lens is your best bet. I also don't understand why you'd say you'd lose IS - I wasn't aware of that side effect. I believe it should be fine and work with Alpha IS lenses. You'll lose IS from buying the Tamron, though. (the non-IS version is better) Wish I could go with the EA-2 and Tamron combo myself, but the size difference is just a bit too much for me. vvvvv f/3.5-5.6 
LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 04:30 on Jun 12, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 02:15
|
|
|
Edward IV posted:So after running around Europe with my NEX-5 and shooting primarily with the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 and occasionally the 16mm pancake (that is as sparingly as I could), by the end of the trip I was really yearning for a zoom lens that could cover those two lenses and was worth a drat. Would my best option for a good zoom lens be to get a LA-EA2 adaptor and whatever good Alpha-mount zoom lens that's within my budget? Supposedly the 16-50 f/3.5-5.6 G pancake zoom is due out by August. God knows how much it will cost, but probably not more than a LA-EA2 + lens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 03:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:11 |
|
|
LiquidRain posted:Yup, that Tamron lens is your best bet. I also don't understand why you'd say you'd lose IS - I wasn't aware of that side effect. I believe it should be fine and work with Alpha IS lenses. You'll lose IS from buying the Tamron, though. (the non-IS version is better) If I remember correctly, the image stabilization for Alpha cameras are in the body while IS for NEX cameras are in the lenses and the LA-EA2 adapter doesn't allow for either form of IS to work. I'm not sure if it's technically possible for an adapter like that can make IS work. If it is, I'm sure Sony will try to postpone its release as long as they can so as to not undercut their E-mount lenses. That's why I ended up getting the E-mount 55-210mm zoom lens instead of going with an equivalent Alpha-mount lens. Despite it probably not being not a terribly great lens, at least it does have image stabilization so I can shoot without needing a tripod at long focal lengths. I would probably have to always need to shoot with a tripod if I were to use an Alpha-mount lens. Just to make sure, this is the Tamron lens I want, right? It's the only 17-50mm Tamron for Alpha-mount cameras that I could find on B&H. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/423718-REG/Tamron_AF016M700_17_50mm_f_2_8_XR_Di.html#pr-header-423718
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 05:04
|
|