Mike99999: A great design experiment that lives on in X-T1 and A7 series cameras.
The problem is the sensor. The E-M5 produces flat and digital-looking images. Worse so than older, albeit more noisy, micro four thirds sensors.
Flat is such a subjective term and is strongly related to the lens used.
All digital and print images are flat and it is the mind that assembles the image to give the perception of depth.
Depth often relates to the amount of fine detail you see in the different distance layers of a scene.
The EM5 has no problems capturing detail with a good lens ... have a look at DPreview and DXO.
In Lightroom you can add and limit depth by using the Clarity, Sharpening and Saturation tools.
Sirandar: If Pana and Oly want to make "Pro" lenses they need to know what kind of pros they are targetting and realize they are competing against their own 40-150mm lenses which usually can do the job. I love my OMD-E5 to death but if I was really making my living with it I probably would be forced to used FF, if only because my customers would expect it. Thankfully I am free of the bondage of actually trying to sell photography.
Take home message .... there is not much point making 1000$ plus pro lenses for M4/3. The rich want more prestige cameras and the middle that loves and supports M4/3 cant justify the price when the 40-150 is only 149$
If the Oly primes I wanted dipped below the 400$ mark I would buy them tomorrow (12mm and 75mm). That is the price these primes should be.
There is a lot of truth to what you are saying. Looking at DXO, often even the best lenses do not reach a perceptual MP rating comparable to a 16MP sensor. It all comes down to how well the whole thing is put together AND dynamic range AND high ISO performance.
In that the OMD series in no slouch but not the very best available, BUT with the OMD you can fit your whole photo studio in one small bag ...... because I know, if it isn't in my 30X20x20cm bag that I carry with me it just isn't going to be used.
I just wish that Oly could come up with a 40-150 with a little better F values for less than 1000$ as IBIS can only do so much and freezing even slight movement is difficult.
The Oly 40-150 also suffers from shutter shock under conditions that you are sometimes forced to use resulting in ghosting. The antishock really does help but is no panacea.
Micro 4/3 is positioned in the middle of FF and truly compact cameras and the new larger sensor M4/3 like cameras.
Looking at the full DXO scores and the usability only some of the pro lenses are significantly better. I tested the Oly 45mm 1.8 and was impressed with the resolution and DOF and it fulfilled a function none of the zoom lenses had. When it dipped below 400$ I bought it.
The other lenses are harder to justify. I was interested in the zoom lenses in the 300mm range but they are all to slow to use at the long end IMO. The 12mm Oly prime is too expensive for what it is useful for, as for wide scenes the extra detail that this lens could capture is only available under perfect conditions because of the distances involved. That and proper use of good panorama software with cheaper lenses you can often get more fine detail than any single lens can.
If Pana and Oly want to make "Pro" lenses they need to know what kind of pros they are targetting and realize they are competing against their own 40-150mm lenses which usually can do the job. I love my OMD-E5 to death but if I was really making my living with it I probably would be forced to used FF, if only because my customers would expect it. Thankfully I am free of the bondage of actually trying to sell photography.
Micro 4/3 is positioned in the middle of FF and truly compact cameras.
There are several new fixed lens m4/3 like cameras that have usable performance now and this squeezes thing even tighter.
Pana and oly needs to significantly cut the prices of their lenses to remain competitive.
The price of a lens is more determined by how useful it is and the DXO score than costs to manufacture.
I bought the Oly 45mm 1.8 for 349$ and I was very happy with the price and performance.
The Oly 50-150 sells for 149-199$ in Canada and it is a great lens almost too cheap. The only problem is that it is too slow for many applications and the effective MP is only about 6. This leaves the only solution as the pana 30-100 F2.8 with is 1300$ and that doesn't have enough zoom. That is a 20 fold increase in price.
Fascinating at all levels:
"His notes on the sexual behavior of the penguins, which included violent assault, homosexuality and necrophilia, were considered too indecent for the times, and didn’t come to light until published in the journal Polar Record in 2012"
That never seemed to have made it into any of the Penguin movies we are bombarded with.
Only took 100 years for it to come to light ;)
Sirandar: I also checked out the similar legacy lenses from the 70s and 80s. They were beautiful creations but the images were nothing special .....
They were not sharp as the midrange m43 lenses I had and the contrast was sometimes good sometimes poor and the colours were mostly washed out. It is very hard to fix washed out colours convincingly in Photoshop.
They were dirt cheap and I still didn't buy them.
Nothing even cane close to my 45mm Oly Prime in any aspect let alone all three.
I also found a new respect for my cheap Oly 40-150. My copy is pretty darned good for any price. If only it was faster .....
You can't judge a lens much by how it looks or what is made of, or a red dot.
You judge it by the images and how easy it is to use.
My money would be on that it isn't worth 359$ as that is about what I paid for my Oly 45mm prime but we will see.
By similar I meant I had a similar experience to another poster who tried legacy 1970-80 lenses. I was in no way implying that the manufacture, tolerances and coatings on the Mitakon 42.5mm were outdated in any way. Unfortunately my post didn't show up as a reply to the poster who tired the 1970- lenses.
As for my final comment "My money would be on that it isn't worth 359$ as that is about what I paid for my Oly 45mm prime but we will see" I apologize and admit I didn't practice what I preached. :(
I also checked out the similar legacy lenses from the 70s and 80s. They were beautiful creations but the images were nothing special .....
Sirandar: No matter how good it is, it is obsolete with no micro SD card.
Too bad ... I was interested. If the 64GB one was a reasonable price I might consider it, but you can usually never find those and if 649$ is starting price, the 64GB will be 849$.
My crappy Galaxy S3 with 100GB is still a better phone for me because it is more than quick enough, does everything well enough and I can store all my files, music and pics on it and never sync again unless there is something new I want to put on. And you can get an S3 now almost for free.
To Tom Z:
I would agree that many do not need more than 32Gb, but many also do. MicroSD is not about storing apps as even now it is unwise to put apps on a SD card .... it causes problems eventually as many apps aren't written properly.
microSD is about storing and accessing your own files anywhere any time and never having to sync. A nice sized music collection fits well on a 64Gb microSD and once its there you just enjoy all your music anywhere any time.
Many people have very little music to store or huge pirated collections that would never fit on a phone. But for dedicated music appreciators, A Samsung S3,4,5,6 is the ultimate music device with a good set of earphones or connected digitally to a home audio system.An S3 running PowerAmp connected to a good audio system is almost all you need even for home audio, but it is much better to use a PC
I always wonder where the heat does in these sealed drives? Sustained transfer of data and the spin motor generates a fair amount of heat .... maybe that's why people have issues with these drives.
SSD drives generate almost no heat and seem the logical choice for this kind of drive. A platter drive is always suitable to shock especially when it is on and read/writing. Their drop data isn't realistic because you would need to set up the drop test with replicates from every drop angle and pick the worst case, which I doubt they do. It doesn't really matter how tough the case is when the drive itself is the most fragile component. ..... Unless your drive routinely gets run over by a truck. Water resistance is much more important but any drive with a USB port us unlikely to be truly waterproof.
If you really wanted to make a rugged waterproof drive it would probably need to be SSD, completely wireless and chargeable via induction.
steve_hoge: I wish I could recommend LaCie products, but - while I haven't had any catastrophic failures - my experience of their product support is pretty dismal. After a few years of market life on a device not only do the bug fixes cease (even though the same code base is being updated for new products) but the devices themselves are locked down so you can't maintain them yourself.
I am curious .... how are they locked down ? Firmware or software?
No matter how good it is, it is obsolete with no micro SD card.
How bright would the light have to be to get 18,500 fps ?
Sirandar: This is just a simple dishonest attempt to charge park entry fees and targets photographers because they are figured to have money. It will be unenforceable because the Parks department will have to prove that it is a current photograph and not a pre-legislation one. Then they will have to update the law so all past present and future images of a park are property of the state as per the license.
Or they will just charge a fee to bring a camera into the park, which is really just an entry fee just like we have in Canada.
Why not just cut the crap and the huge legal battles that will make lawyers rich and just charge an entry fee.
This is what the government wants anyway.
Parks don't need protection from cameras. They need protection from people. Manufacturing a camera and driving to the park endangers a park more than any anount of photographs given people can visit the park anyway.
And how will the Forest Service define Commercial. If I take a photo and someone buys it later it is commercial. If someone views my photo on a site with paid advertizing, then it may be considered commercial.
It will come to ugly lawsuits after the fact or a blanket fee to bring a camera into the park.
I didn't update to the most recent version of Lightroom (non CC) because there was nothing in it for me and there were forum posts that it was slower than previous versions.
I have a feeling Adobe is no longer putting its best programmers on Lightroom and every update will be risky. I almost consider it a finished product.
Is this really a viable alternative to Lightroom 5 on a decent laptop?
Or even Lightroom on a desktop? How often do you really have to edit photos on the go? Are these mobile apps even 1/10 as powerful as Lightroom on Windows 7?
I have a decent Win7 laptop with a SSD drive with Lightroom and I don't even don't even use that much because a desktop is just so much faster for building and viewing previews. Checking fine focus on multiple pics can be taxing even on a decent laptop. How long would an IOS device take to build previews on the fly. Does it have any photo database strengths like Lightroom?
If Android and IOS Lightroom is as quick and feature rich as the Windows version ..... then Adobe is almost criminally guilty of poorly optimizing Lightroom and should fix it.
There is no excuse for equivalent performance on a Ipad/OIS device as compared to a PC with an SSD, 4 cores and a good gaming card.
This is just a simple dishonest attempt to charge park entry fees and targets photographers because they are figured to have money. It will be unenforceable because the Parks department will have to prove that it is a current photograph and not a pre-legislation one. Then they will have to update the law so all past present and future images of a park are property of the state as per the license.
Parks Canada and Ontario Parks charges quite large fees just to enter parks, usually 20$ just to enter and up to 50$ a night to stay, despite the taxes we pay already. An this money doesn't even go back into parks as that would give taxpayer far too much control. This is also an embarrassment.
If the US and Canadian governments had any integrity, they would charge a reasonable fee just to enter a national or state park based on actual costs of maintenance and that money would be directly invested back into that particular park. But then governments would wait a few years and cut tax funding and then charge exorbitant park entry fees so only the privileged could enter.
What is the US coming to ? ..... what an embarrassment.
Pure corporate greed .... now they are saying the light bouncing off natural environments is corporate property. Yes corporate as the US gov, like most are controlled corporately.
If you look at the US and Canada from above from a plane the landscape looks like a virus infection due to agriculture and development. It is utter devastation and it is only relatively stable soils that prevents a complete washout like you see in rainforest devastation.
The US and middle-southern Canada is devastated in terms of what would be there without our activities.
Now the law wants to protect parks from unsanctioned theft of photons.
Such a destructive activity. It is photo Fraking ....
Greed and control ..... plain and simple
Over a 1000$ in current after tax dollars is a huge amount of money these days plus the expensive lenses .... and I expect post purchase software updates wherever possible .....
If Oly expects to keep my loyalty it needs to not forget about cameras that are still heavily used like the EM5. The E-M1 has not made the EM5 obsolete.
Oly needs to explain on the software side why it isn't supporting the EM5. If there is a tech reason that is fine unless someone later hacks the program a reveals its a lie .... thats a sure ticket to no repeat purchase.