OM-D E-M5 vs E-5 (build quality)

Started May 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
John King
Forum ProPosts: 12,795Gear list
Like?
Re: There was misrepresentation...
In reply to Great Bustard, May 16, 2013

Great Bustard wrote:

John King wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

philosomatographer wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Just Having Fun wrote:

Of course you can buy a refurbished E-PM2 for about $300 and use those Oly lenses, and especially at ISOs above 800, it will put the E-5 to shame.

I'm thinking philosomatographer would disagree.

Why would you think that? I agree 100%. The SHG lenses are absolutely starved for a better sensor. The slightly higher resolution, and the 1-2 stops better signal-to-noise ratio, of the OM-D E-M5 yields an appreciably better image, no doubt. The overall handling is just too quirky/slow (focusing, etc) for the benefits to be worth it for me. The E-5 was designed to handle well with these lenses, not the E-M5.

So what would your take be on the following comment:

I defy anyone to tell the difference with the naked eye between the printed images I have taken with my "antique" 5MP E-1 and those taken with my 10 MP E-510 or 12 MP E-30.

I'm thinking that if the difference between the E1 and E30 is not visible to the naked eye, then the same would be true for the E5 vs EM5.  However, if you disagree with the above statement, then, yes, I understand, and agree with, what you're saying.

Joe, I do not take kindly to you misrepresenting what I have said, specially since that misrepresentation has already been pointed out to you a number of times now in the thread you have referenced above.

You seem to have a bit of a mental block about the words in bold in your "quote" from my post above. Leaving them out of your "summary" is disingenuous, to say the very least.

Here, I will quote the entire paragraph:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51474405

I defy anyone to tell the difference with the naked eye between the printed images I have taken with my "antique" 5MP E-1 and those taken with my 10 MP E-510 or 12 MP E-30. And just BTW, any modern printer (since around the year 2000) has well over 100x the resolution of the very best display screens ...

In what way was me quoting the first sentence a misrepresentation?  If you feel you were misrepresented, please clarify what you meant if it was different from what you wrote.

Your statement:

"I'm thinking that if the difference between the E1 and E30 is not visible to the naked eye, ... "

misrepresents what I said because I was talking about the differences between the printed image, not the difference on screen, or on the Internet, or when displayed on my mobile phone, or on my PDA, or in any other place.

OTOH, your statement about what I said is all-inclusive in a way that mine never was, nor was ever meant to be. That is why I qualified it in the way I did.

I also made no comments about ways in which cameras may differ, only that they can and do:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51462748

but it doesn't suit your purposes or objectives on this forum or on the µFT forum to be accurate ...

IOW, you are making mischief merely for its own sake. Business as usual for you.

 John King's gear list:John King's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-510 Olympus E-30
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Hmm.New
Yup!New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow