Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D

Started Mar 27, 2013 | Discussions
dave gaines
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,160Gear list
Like?
E-5 over the OM-D, paper or plastic, blond or brunette?
In reply to daddyo, Mar 27, 2013

Thanks for posting these comparison shots. I think it's very hard to judge considering two different lenses were used. Also, the focus point appears to be different for the two faces. The focus point can be seen from the eyebrows which wrap around the face and from the eyes at the pupils. For the E-5 & 50-200 mm shot the focus point appears to be at or just forward of the eyes so the nose remains in focus. For the E-M5 and Panasonic 35-100 mm shot it is focused at the eyes or slightly beyond and the nose is OOF. The f-stop difference should offer 2/3 stop better DOF for the E-M5, but it isn't readily apparent. I would guess that the 50-200 is a sharper lens than the much panned Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8.

I like them both and they will never be viewed at this magnification. You focused at or near the eyes, which is perfect. I can see more sharpness in the brunette's hair taken with the E-M5. But in the final analysis, I prefer blonds with green eyes to brunettes with blue eyes.

-- hide signature --

Dave

 dave gaines's gear list:dave gaines's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Olympus E-330 Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vu Dang
Forum MemberPosts: 60Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to GNapp Studios, Mar 28, 2013

Please not be crazy

- If you plant to shoot tele/action, not in low light inviroment, not mention in weight and you can buy HG, SHG lens: you can choose E-5 over OM-D

- Otherwise OM-D almost is better than E-5: light weight, much better low light performance, operation performance, image quality, multi good choice prime lenses

Do not forget another choice: Fullframe camera.

 Vu Dang's gear list:Vu Dang's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pris
Senior MemberPosts: 2,151
Like?
Very valuable contribution,
In reply to Vu Dang, Mar 28, 2013

Vu Dang wrote:

Please not be crazy

- If you plant to shoot tele/action, not in low light inviroment, not mention in weight and you can buy HG, SHG lens: you can choose E-5 over OM-D

- Otherwise OM-D almost is better than E-5: light weight, much better low light performance, operation performance, image quality, multi good choice prime lenses

Do not forget another choice: Fullframe camera.

I am sure he didn't think of all that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bofo777
Contributing MemberPosts: 577Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to Vu Dang, Mar 28, 2013

Vu Dang wrote:

Please not be crazy

- If you plant to shoot tele/action, not in low light inviroment, not mention in weight and you can buy HG, SHG lens: you can choose E-5 over OM-D

- Otherwise OM-D almost is better than E-5: light weight, much better low light performance, operation performance, image quality, multi good choice prime lenses

Don't fool yourself I've done many lower light events in churches etc with beautiful results with my 2.0 lenses and the E-5.......and who needs all those primes when you have a 35-100 2.0 and 14-35 2.0 in your bag......

Do not forget another choice: Fullframe camera.

 bofo777's gear list:bofo777's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
skeys
skeys MOD
Senior MemberPosts: 1,478Gear list
Like?
Another monitor-cleaning event avoided...
In reply to pris, Mar 28, 2013

pris wrote:

Vu Dang wrote:

Please not be crazy

- If you plant to shoot tele/action, not in low light inviroment, not mention in weight and you can buy HG, SHG lens: you can choose E-5 over OM-D

- Otherwise OM-D almost is better than E-5: light weight, much better low light performance, operation performance, image quality, multi good choice prime lenses

Do not forget another choice: Fullframe camera.

I am sure he didn't think of all that.

since I have learned, from prior experience, not to drink my morning coffee when reading posts here. Now I have to decide whether to listen to "Don't Be Cruel" by E Presley, or "Don't Be Cruel" by B Brown.

-- hide signature --

My comments and opinions are my own. I am neither a staff member, nor a paid employee, of DPReview.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vu Dang
Forum MemberPosts: 60Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to bofo777, Mar 28, 2013

bofo777 wrote:

Vu Dang wrote:

Please not be crazy

- If you plant to shoot tele/action, not in low light inviroment, not mention in weight and you can buy HG, SHG lens: you can choose E-5 over OM-D

- Otherwise OM-D almost is better than E-5: light weight, much better low light performance, operation performance, image quality, multi good choice prime lenses

Don't fool yourself I've done many lower light events in churches etc with beautiful results with my 2.0 lenses and the E-5.......and who needs all those primes when you have a 35-100 2.0 and 14-35 2.0 in your bag......

Do not forget another choice: Fullframe camera.

Fool? How about your money spent for gears? Another choice will beat almost your result :).

 Vu Dang's gear list:Vu Dang's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Skeeterbytes
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,076
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to GNapp Studios, Mar 28, 2013

Don't have a lot to add beyond what's been discussed on the technology. I find the two cameras complementary, each with advantages over the other and with a rather large area of overlap.

It's ironic you can't shoot the fast µ4/3 primes wide open in daylight w/o added filters. You can with the E-5, in large part because of the 1/8000 shutter.

Am in the midst of a big spring break road trip and my only body is the E-M5, plus a mix of system, 4/3 and legacy lenses. The kit is flat-out working and let me tell you, NOT lugging the honking E-5 around SeaWorld for eight hours is a blessing I can't place a value on. I finally figured out the CAF, as a small bonus.

Cheers,

Rick

-- hide signature --

"Whiskey is for drinking, digicams are for fighting over."
—Mark Twain

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
skeys
skeys MOD
Senior MemberPosts: 1,478Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to Vu Dang, Mar 28, 2013

Vu Dang wrote:

Fool? How about your money spent for gears? Another choice will beat almost your result :).

Why would YOU be concerned about how someone else spends their money? Does how someone else uses their assets affect you, personally, in any way?

Steve

-- hide signature --

My comments and opinions are my own. I am neither a staff member, nor a paid employee, of DPReview.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ulfric M Douglas
Senior MemberPosts: 3,977
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to GNapp Studios, Mar 28, 2013

The E-5 and the e-pL1 were the last Olympus to offer ISO100 ...

I use ISO100 in 90% of my photographs.

For my common uses the e-M5 is just too sensitive, actually twice as sensitive as my favourite cameras.

The quest for smooth high-ISO leaves some of us behind.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GNapp Studios
Regular MemberPosts: 386
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to Skeeterbytes, Mar 29, 2013

Skeeterbytes wrote:

............

Am in the midst of a big spring break road trip and my only body is the E-M5, plus a mix of system, 4/3 and legacy lenses. The kit is flat-out working and let me tell you, NOT lugging the honking E-5 around SeaWorld for eight hours is a blessing I can't place a value on. I finally figured out the CAF, as a small bonus.

Cheers,

Rick

When I go on vacation I bring the E-5 and the 18-180mm.  It allows me to bring 1 body and 1 lens that can capture a wide variety of situations.

The OM-D offers great primes but limited telephotos.  I would tend to say that the E-5 and the 18-180mm would be similar in weight to the OM-D and 3 primes and the 12-50mm kit lens.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vu Dang
Forum MemberPosts: 60Gear list
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to skeys, Mar 29, 2013

skeys wrote:

Vu Dang wrote:

Fool? How about your money spent for gears? Another choice will beat almost your result :).

Why would YOU be concerned about how someone else spends their money? Does how someone else uses their assets affect you, personally, in any way?

Steve

-- hide signature --

My comments and opinions are my own. I am neither a staff member, nor a paid employee, of DPReview.

Could you tell me: how many threads disscussed about "right choice", "better choice"? I'm Olympus user but I'm not crazy :). Same as almost people: choose the best I can. In photography, of course the favourite sometime = small value, sometime = big money :). But totally: choose one of the best

 Vu Dang's gear list:Vu Dang's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
skeys
skeys MOD
Senior MemberPosts: 1,478Gear list
Like?
Read your PM, Vu.
In reply to Vu Dang, Mar 29, 2013

Vu Dang wrote:

skeys wrote:

Vu Dang wrote:

Fool? How about your money spent for gears? Another choice will beat almost your result :).

Why would YOU be concerned about how someone else spends their money? Does how someone else uses their assets affect you, personally, in any way?

Steve

-- hide signature --

My comments and opinions are my own. I am neither a staff member, nor a paid employee, of DPReview.

Same as almost people: choose the best I can.

Did anyone in this forum use the word "fool" to describe your choice of equipment, how you spent your money, or how you should have made your choices? Adding a question mark after the word "fool" does not, in any way, change its meaning. You have a PM; read it carefully.

skeys, moderator

-- hide signature --

My comments and opinions are my own. I am neither a staff member, nor a paid employee, of DPReview.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vu Dang
Forum MemberPosts: 60Gear list
Like?
Re: Read your PM, Vu.
In reply to skeys, Mar 29, 2013

Mod,

Rules in your hand. Of course I read it carefully. Finally I agree almost your meaning.

Only one thing: another member use "fool" word to me. I ask him again about that word meaning. I never said that! Please read again!

 Vu Dang's gear list:Vu Dang's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pris
Senior MemberPosts: 2,151
Like?
Read doesn't necessary equals understand.
In reply to Vu Dang, Mar 29, 2013

I think we see a language barrier in action... "almost" - I don't think this word means what you think it means. Same goes for the expression "don't fool yourself" which you obviously misunderstood.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
skeys
skeys MOD
Senior MemberPosts: 1,478Gear list
Like?
Re: Read doesn't necessary equals understand.
In reply to pris, Mar 29, 2013

pris wrote:

I think we see a language barrier in action...

Thank you, pris; I didn't recognize there might be a language barrier.

Steve

-- hide signature --

My comments and opinions are my own. I am neither a staff member, nor a paid employee, of DPReview.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
the bluesman
Regular MemberPosts: 410
Like?
I prefer my E5 over the OMD as well
In reply to Ulfric M Douglas, Mar 29, 2013

I was just thinking that this morning, don't get me wrong as the OMD is a fantastic camera but I just feel at home with my E5 and will be using it more now, I almost forgot about it when I got the OMD and all the primes but I think the E5 is the better all rounder, it is nice to have both though

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Forgottenbutnotgone
Regular MemberPosts: 173
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to Skeeterbytes, Mar 30, 2013

Skeeterbytes wrote:

I finally figured out the CAF, as a small bonus.

Could you please elaborate? It would seem to me that any information you can share in this regard could quite potentially be quite a large bonus to a great number of people.

Thanks!

Robert

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Forgottenbutnotgone
Regular MemberPosts: 173
Like?
Re: Pris...and Steve (the forum member)
In reply to pris, Mar 30, 2013

pris wrote:

I think we see a language barrier in action... "almost" - I don't think this word means what you think it means. Same goes for the expression "don't fool yourself" which you obviously misunderstood.

More specifically, I think that his use of the word "almost" probably would be best interpreted as "most always", which is actually an understandable transliteration of the word.

I also agree there is a misunderstanding, and perhaps a language barrier. I do think though, that perhaps the misunderstanding is not on the part of Vu Dang, but rather yours and Steve's.

I don't think that Vu misunderstood the expression "don't fool yourself". His reply of "fool?" in the context of what bofo777 said, would better understood as  "how am I fooling myself?", (in direct response to bofo777's "don't fool yourself")  Again, he's not calling anyone a fool, on the contrary, he is responding to someone else's use of the word.

Next, his question, "how about your money spent for gears?" is more accurately a statement that the cost of the SHG lenses and and E-5 body do not justify the results, explaining why he doesn't feel he is fooling himself because the OMD is arguably a much better choice. That statement is in no way taking anyone to task for choosing to spend their money a certain way if one were inclined to do so, but merely pointing out the fact that for a majority of people who have budget restraints, cost is a legitimate mitigating factor, and the OMD is a better alternative.

His other point, mentioning full frame, is a very valid one, and it ties in with his first point to show that often this forum sacrifices credibility in it's rush to defend the four thirds dogma. Basically stated, if you are defending the use of the E-5 and SHG lenses, versus the OMD for low light photography, you are contradicting most of the longstanding arguments against full frame, namely, size, weight, cost and image quality, another valid point.

I'd like to also say that if my understanding of his meaning is correct, your bitingly sarcastic reply to him can easily be taken as pretty rude, especially in light of the guidelines that precede the posting window where one types their reply, "The basic rules for discussions on dpreview.com are simple: be polite and civil..."

Looking at it from Vu's point of view, you have probably insulted him and Steve appears to be making light of the fact and agreeing with you.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51176161, "Another monitor-cleaning event avoided...since I have learned, from prior experience, not to drink my morning coffee when reading posts here.".seemingly giving his tacit approval.

Not the best look for prominent forum members and a good object lesson as to why this excerpt from posting rule number 5, "If you think someone is wrong it may be because they are new. Don't jump on them, think first", may also need to include the possiblity that one doesn't speak the language as well as another.

Robert

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pris
Senior MemberPosts: 2,151
Like?
Wow...
In reply to Forgottenbutnotgone, Mar 30, 2013

Forgottenbutnotgone wrote:

pris wrote:

I think we see a language barrier in action... "almost" - I don't think this word means what you think it means. Same goes for the expression "don't fool yourself" which you obviously misunderstood.

More specifically, I think that his use of the word "almost" probably would be best interpreted as "most always", which is actually an understandable transliteration of the word.

I also agree there is a misunderstanding, and perhaps a language barrier. I do think though, that perhaps the misunderstanding is not on the part of Vu Dang, but rather yours and Steve's.

I don't think that Vu misunderstood the expression "don't fool yourself". His reply of "fool?" in the context of what bofo777 said, would better understood as  "how am I fooling myself?", (in direct response to bofo777's "don't fool yourself")  Again, he's not calling anyone a fool, on the contrary, he is responding to someone else's use of the word.

Next, his question, "how about your money spent for gears?" is more accurately a statement that the cost of the SHG lenses and and E-5 body do not justify the results, explaining why he doesn't feel he is fooling himself because the OMD is arguably a much better choice. That statement is in no way taking anyone to task for choosing to spend their money a certain way if one were inclined to do so, but merely pointing out the fact that for a majority of people who have budget restraints, cost is a legitimate mitigating factor, and the OMD is a better alternative.

His other point, mentioning full frame, is a very valid one, and it ties in with his first point to show that often this forum sacrifices credibility in it's rush to defend the four thirds dogma. Basically stated, if you are defending the use of the E-5 and SHG lenses, versus the OMD for low light photography, you are contradicting most of the longstanding arguments against full frame, namely, size, weight, cost and image quality, another valid point.

I'd like to also say that if my understanding of his meaning is correct, your bitingly sarcastic reply to him can easily be taken as pretty rude, especially in light of the guidelines that precede the posting window where one types their reply, "The basic rules for discussions on dpreview.com are simple: be polite and civil..."

Looking at it from Vu's point of view, you have probably insulted him and Steve appears to be making light of the fact and agreeing with you.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51176161, "Another monitor-cleaning event avoided...since I have learned, from prior experience, not to drink my morning coffee when reading posts here.".seemingly giving his tacit approval.

Not the best look for prominent forum members and a good object lesson as to why this excerpt from posting rule number 5, "If you think someone is wrong it may be because they are new. Don't jump on them, think first", may also need to include the possiblity that one doesn't speak the language as well as another.

Robert

Robert, the depth of your analysis IMO greatly exceeds what this exchange deserves. I'll limit my reply to two points.

Word "almost" still means "Not quite; very nearly" so attributing language barrier to our misunderstanding instead of erroneous use of the word is a bit of a stretch. Not even speaking about your guess of his meaning - how do you know he didn't just confuse and substitute it for "always?" Speaking three languages, I often encounter situation with so called "interpreter false friends" - words that sound intuitively familiar, or similar to something yet mean something different. Word "presently" would be one of the examples - 100% foreigners, no exceptions, use it as substitute for "currently." So, let's not turn it into linguistic analysis and leave it at the simple fact that there IS language barrier in this case, shall we?

That "bitingly sarcastic reply" was referring to the fact that his entry offered very trivial advice to a very competent photographer. If a layman tells a NASA physicist not to forget Moon gravity when he calculates spaceship trajectory, do you tell him his advice is a bit inappropriate or do you start defending it because, indeed, Moon gravity should be taken under consideration? In my "I am sure he didn't think of that" I elected the former; I am afraid in your analysis you are doing the latter.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Skeeterbytes
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,076
Like?
Re: Why I Prefer the E-5 over the OM-D
In reply to Forgottenbutnotgone, Mar 30, 2013

Forgottenbutnotgone wrote:

Skeeterbytes wrote:

I finally figured out the CAF, as a small bonus.

Could you please elaborate? It would seem to me that any information you can share in this regard could quite potentially be quite a large bonus to a great number of people.

Thanks!

Robert

Hi Robert,

If folks don't mind indulging me talking about the E-M5 here, in contrast with the E-series, the fourth AF mode is CAF+Tr, for tracking rather than CAF+MF for manual focus as with the E-series. Especially with the "R" µ4/3 lenses, I was able to employ it on my DIF--daughter in flight--running around at the beach while retaining my desired framing. (My usual process is to lock focus between frames using SAF, but I seldom get the best framing this way since I keep her dead center.)

In CAF+Tr, the green focus square was able to follow around the full frame as she raced around the shore, not merely back and forth but also moving nearer and farther away. I'm just now uploading and reviewing a couple thousand shots so haven't pored over them, but on casual review the results look promising. I used the humble mZD 40-150 a lot on this trip, and wonder whether the system works reliably with a faster long tele with shallower DOF.

It's not perfect. The tracking frame would occasionally wander off my kid to a cresting wavetop or other, more "interesting" subject. I question its potential in very busy (cluttered) settings, but those are experiments for another day. I did try tracking the beach gulls and it was able to do so, somewhat, although they were awfully close and I had to pivot on my feet to try and keep them in the frame.

I'm also trying to figure out why I occasionally get a white focus frame when using a manual legacy lens. It might be face detection trying to work, but I just don't know.

In complexity per ounce, I've never used a camera that approaches the E-M5. It's a challenge.

Cheers,

Rick

-- hide signature --

"Whiskey is for drinking, digicams are for fighting over."
—Mark Twain

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads