Biowizard: Funny how America gets all prissy about people playing with plastic flying toys, in case they could hurt someone - but lets its folks run amok with assault rifles and handguns.
Thousands of people are killed every week in the USA by tobacco (principally a US product); around 170 are murdered every week in the USA by firearms. Exactly HOW many people have been killed buy quadcopters?
FiveForm - a SHOTGUN would be a lot easier to use for that purpose than an assault rifle - for the same reason people use shotguns, not AK47s, on pheasant shoots ..
Well thankfully I live in a part of the world where most guns CANNOT be legally owned by private individuals - and there are SO few gun-related deaths in this country, that each one, when it does happens, becomes national news. 150 is roughly the annual death toll in the UK from guns. Still too many, but even taking our smaller population into account, WAY better than the USA. Most of US can see the TOTAL FOLLY of the US Gun Lobby. It's sick, frankly. Meanwhile, leave my drone alone! :-)
Funny how America gets all prissy about people playing with plastic flying toys, in case they could hurt someone - but lets its folks run amok with assault rifles and handguns.
The AIR is extremely exciting. That's what I would want hanging off my drone - quality on a par with a full size DSLR and weight not far off that of a GoPro. Bring it on!
KevinSB: these are not drones.. They are quad copters !!
Esquilo , your logic is good but your research is out of date. EVEN the lowly DJI Phantom can now be programmed, via an iOS app, to fly totally autonomously along a pre-programmed route, using GPS guidance. Just go visit www.helipal.com and read about it.
SIMPLES: these are DRONES. End of.
Gonna require some pretty incredible glass if there is any wish to get close to pixel-level resolution ...
And that's where your model helicopter differs from these quads ... the DJI Phantom (to name just one example) CAN and DOES fly autonomously. You can simply program it with a number of 3D waypoints, and send it on its way. Sure, it isn't a Predator laden with heat-seeking missiles, but to all intents and purposes, it is as much a drone.
I wonder whether DJI will source its camera technology from Olympus? Might even be able to do away with the expensive and cumbersome external 3-axis gimble, if they employed Oly's E-Mx 5-axis IS sensor!
It makes a lot more sense to jiggle a sensor about, than to jiggle the entire camera (as at present on, for example, the Phantom Vision +).
And I would LOVE to be able to use rectilinear lenses with normal fields of view (say 35mm in full-frame terms), rather than the omnipresent fish-eye lenses of today's "action" cameras.
Quadcopters are a type of drone, in the sense that any unmanned aircraft is generally described as a "drone".
Biowizard: Good to see the firmware updates continuing into a new version. I wonder whether they will add a 40mp "high res" mode at some point, to avoid the E-M1 being eclipsed by the E-M5 II? The physical hardware should support it ...
It would be strange for the "second tier" product (E-M5 II) to be allowed to continue to out-perform the "flagship" model - or maybe there's an E-M1 II in the wings? Having had my E-M1 for less than a year (after 10 years with an E-1), I'd rather not shell out on a new body - so Olympus, IF you can, PLEASE provide the 40mpix mode in a firmware update!
Biowizard: Well well well - who would have guessed that Olympus' OM-D E-M5II can out-resolve the Nikon 800E in its special high-res mode. SERIOUSLY impressive stuff for tripod-based shots of stationary subjects. Actually, rather amazed!
Bravo Olympus! Now all I want is the same functionality on my E-M1 please - Firmware 4.0???
Pity - not that I find the E-M1 images lacking in detail ...
Well well well - who would have guessed that Olympus' OM-D E-M5II can out-resolve the Nikon 800E in its special high-res mode. SERIOUSLY impressive stuff for tripod-based shots of stationary subjects. Actually, rather amazed!
Suzanne D.: I have an OMD EM-1 which I love, love, love. How does the new EM 5 II compare? The prices will be very comparable. My main interest is the smaller size of the EM5 II compared to the EM-1.
@Eugene232 - My first two digital cameras were Sony, back in the days when floppy disks were used for image storage. Sony's choices (non-user-changeable) of sharpening and saturation made for DREADFUL images. I always found I could improve them in Photoshop by adding a 1.5 pixel Gaussian Blur and desaturating to about -15%, before halving the size to get rid of the all-too-obvious JPEG artifacts. So on my 0.7 Megapixel Mavica, I ended up with web-usable, 512*384 pixel shots.
While I am SURE that Sony has improved since then - I still don;t trust their PHOTOGRAPHIC credentials. They are far too consumer-oriented. I don't want an expensive Zeiss lens on a CYBERSHOT.
Olympus, on the other hand, have always quietly been at the cutting edge of photography. I'll stick with the brand I love and TRUST, thank you very much.
Richard, many thanks for adding some comments and images about the E-M1. Very much appreciated! :-)
My OM-D E-M1 is already WAY smaller than my 11-year-old E1, and so like my original OM-1, that I don't want anything smaller. It's nearly perfect - except that the cheaper E-M5II has extra features by comparison!
Biowizard: Richard, great review, but as per my earlier comment - please update with at least some reference/comparison to the OM-D E-M1 "flagship". It seems that the E-M5 II surpasses the E-M1 with several of its new features, leaving the E-M10 in the dust, and so considerably less relevant to this article.
If nothing else, please could you at least extend the table on Page 1 (Introduction) to include an E-M1 column, and put in a visual comparison of the E-M1 vs E-M5 II bodies, which you say are of considerably different sizes?
It would be greatly appreciated by this E-M1 owner (and hopefully, others) ! :-)
Thanks Richard - I get your point about the existing table, but looking forward to whatever you can do! :-)
anselsmyhero: I bought my EM1 when they first came out but have never upgraded firmware. Too afraid I'll screw it up and render camera inoperable. :-(
I have kept my E-M1 firmware up to date. The ONLY issue I had was when moving from version 1.N to 2.0 - all my custom settings were wiped. Not a huge problem, I could set them up again pretty quickly - but I didn't NOTICE until I came back from a shoot, only to find NO RAW images and all my JPEGs are a reduced size and increased compression. Effectively, I wasted the shoot. So - DO upgrade the firmware, there are bug fixes and cool new features (like electronic keystone correction / virtual tilt/shift lens) - but check your settings immediately after!
Good to see the firmware updates continuing into a new version. I wonder whether they will add a 40mp "high res" mode at some point, to avoid the E-M1 being eclipsed by the E-M5 II? The physical hardware should support it ...
Richard, great review, but as per my earlier comment - please update with at least some reference/comparison to the OM-D E-M1 "flagship". It seems that the E-M5 II surpasses the E-M1 with several of its new features, leaving the E-M10 in the dust, and so considerably less relevant to this article.
Biowizard: Why no direct comparison in this review with the "flagship" OM-D E-M1?
Richard - the whole point is, I don't KNOW how much smaller the E-M5 II is than my E-M1 - which is why, at the very least, I would have liked it to be included in the comparison! The E-M1 is VERY similar in look and feel to the OM-1 I bought new in 1976, and still have in 100% working order. That's one of the things I love about it. But the E-M5 II seems to have stolen the lead on certain features (like the 40MP high res mode). So this makes them something of rivals for new buyers ... again, why I feel a comparison between the 5 II and the 1 would be a good idea!