OM-D E-M5 a huge disappointment for me...

Started Jan 27, 2013 | Discussions thread
nolaalon
Junior MemberPosts: 29
Like?
Re:Agreed - your copy must be bad
In reply to W A Stewart, Jan 27, 2013

W A Stewart wrote:

Admittedly my low light shots haven't been at more than 45mm (the prime) or 50mm (the kit 12-50 - not a bad lens but replaced with the 12-35). However, I've never noticed the problem. I recently shot a low light event for a pro photographer (Nikon user) who was receiving an honor. We didn't notice anything. (EM5 and 12-35 in that case; wished I'd brought a second body and longer lens as well, though.)

The main advantage of the camera, as usual, were its inconspicuous appearance, low noise at up to 1600, and very good SAF.

-- hide signature --

W Alex Stewart

Thanks for sharing your experience.  I agree with you on all of the advantages of the E-M5 that you have listed...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow