Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Olympus OM-D E-M5 review

By dpreview staff on Apr 30, 2012 at 09:07 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $999.0024 deals

We've just posted our review of the Olympus OM-D E-M5. The E-M5 is the first in a line of OM-D Micro Four Thirds cameras, featuring an electronic viewfinder and resembling the company's classic OM line of SLRs. It boasts a 16MP Four Thirds sensor and a '5-axis' image stabilization system, wrapped-up in a compact, weather-sealed magnesium alloy body with a tilting rear screen. It's also one of the most customizable cameras on the market. So does the range-topping camera live up to Olympus' promises? Click here to find out.

Click here for our Olympus OM-D E-M5 review

1426
I own it
261
I want it
172
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 577
123
Gully Foyle
By Gully Foyle (Apr 30, 2012)

I'm off to the "Olympus School of Customizing EM-5". After I graduate, I'll get one.

No, seriously, this is my next camera! I'm sold!

2 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Apr 30, 2012)

Murphy's Menu Law: manufacturers will make menus as difficult as possible. so. Like tax codes.

The 3D tracking AF apparently does not work as well as the early YT ad with the spinning dancer might lead one to believe. Or did narrow aperture make them sharp?

Video results seem nice, although not decisively better than what one obtains from cheaper alternatives.

The video pan shoots seem to show less jello but more "jaggies." Look at the splits in the flag poles. Am I mistaken? Comparisons to other cameras are hard, of course, without a standardized studio test of the sort used for still shots.
DPR reports: "...videos are shot one-handed, while walking slowly towards a distant subject (like all the best cinematographers recommend)."

This is an acid test for OIS or IBIS, but not a good way to shoot video. The second walking version with the IBIS "on" is still a bit wobbly. How would that Space Needle have looked at full zoom, standing still, with one or two hands?

0 upvotes
Tavi
By Tavi (Apr 30, 2012)

I really don't see where E-M5 is behind the APSC, at least according to the results on the dpreview's comparison tool. The output is generally nicer or very close to many other cameras, including mid-range DSLRs.

The price is a bit high but after factoring in the camera's qualities (size, weight, lenses, sealing, customizability, speed) I believe it will be a strong competitor in the enthusiast segment.

Great job, Olympus!

15 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 30, 2012)

Dynamic range, DOF, and even at base ISO, the Panasonic LiveMOS sensor has a tiny bit of noise (at least my GX1 does).

A camera like the D7000, or even K-01 will have cleaner images at base ISO with more DR. That's not to say the E-M5 isn't a good camera, just it hasn't caught up to APS-C. DPR is not correct in it's assertion that you need to go to FF to get IQ better than E-M5.

2 upvotes
Samtendo 64
By Samtendo 64 (Apr 30, 2012)

No, they are right in saying "significant" advantage, they are saying the differences are so tiny they are no longer visible unless you are pixelpeeping at 100%.

As someone who uses a Fuji X100 and used to own a NEX system, I see nothing the OM-D does worse, in fact it looks better in the studio comparison up to ISO 3200.

I've read hyperbolic statements on this site saying the Fuji X.Pro1 is better than some full frame cameras, but a MFT being every bit as good as the best APSC is apparently impossible despite the size difference between MFT and APS being MUCH smaller than the difference between APS and full frame...

19 upvotes
lensberg
By lensberg (Apr 30, 2012)

On the "Noise & Noise Reduction" page (16) ... include the Canon G1 X in the test... the Canon beats the Olympus OM-D E-M5 along with all of the APS-C competition...

The grey & black levels are simply spectacular on the Canon... and the queens head is the clearest & best defined of the bunch all the way till ISO 12800...

1 upvote
Samtendo 64
By Samtendo 64 (Apr 30, 2012)

Like I said, pixel peeping at 100%...

And the Canon better be exceptionally good at high ISO since it's forever stuck with a super slow built-in kit lens.
In real world-use I can mount a fast prime on the OM-D which allows me to use much lower sensitivities, making it infinetely better for low light than the GX-1.

Look at the whole picture, not just black & white noise levels at ISO6400 and above...

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
13 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 30, 2012)

@Samtendo 64

It doesn't have to be pixel-peeping to see a difference, and I find it hard to believe you shot an X100 and didn't see a difference in images vs m43 cameras. All m43 cameras, OM-D included get that weird green cast at high ISO. Colors suffer at ISO 3200 and up. That is a fact. Look at the comparison. The X-Pro1 images a significantly cleaner with better control of DOF. Same for the K-5 or K-01. The only advantage of m43 is size. The crop sensor is a major weakness if you like wide angle lenses, and the DR, even from my GH2 which has the best DR of any m43 camera, is much worse than a camera like the D7000. I suspect the reviewer owns a OM-D, and likes the camera. That doesn't mean it's as good as the best from APS-C or even a camera like the new Nikon D3200. It has nothing to do with pixel peeping. Go download the full-size D3200 samples from Nikons website, and try to convince that the OM-D is anywhere near as good. It is not.

0 upvotes
Samtendo 64
By Samtendo 64 (Apr 30, 2012)

Do you get paid by Nikon? The comment section is filled with you telling people to download Nikon samples, they're so much better etc...

I'm coming from a 5D MKII so I know what good IQ is, I just have abandoned DSLRS because I never used them due to the size/weight. What good is IQ if the camera is always at home.

Unlike you, I'm capable of seeing the pratical differences between the cameras and not just staring at pixel level high iso samples.

High ISO on the X100 is great, too bad that it either takes 5 tries to get focus in low light or it won't focus at all.

I take a picture with a little noise over one that doesn't exist because the camera is at home because it's too big or can't focus.

What you're talking about is theoretic blabber, MFT is bad for WA? Too bad that it's the only mirrorless system with very good wide angle zooms and primes.

"That doesn't mean it's as good as the best from APS-C"
Apparently you haven't read the review because that's exactly what it says.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
14 upvotes
fz750
By fz750 (Apr 30, 2012)

Looking at the examples using the DP image comparison tool the Nikon D3200 ones at low ISO look smudged in comparison (jpeg) and the OM-D is identical at very high RAW ISO. (3200-6400)..

Given that t he Olympus costs twice as much as the Nikon I suppose this is not surprising (but somehow using cost is comparing apples and oranges..) but to me the OM-D examples looks pretty amazing and beats my EOS550D hand down :-(

Seems pretty insulting to suggest that there is some bias here and the reviewer owns one..

(no, don't have one and can't afford one :-)

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 30, 2012)

@ Samtendo 64

Do I get paid my Nikon ? No I shoot m43. I told users to download the samples to refute DPRs claim that the OM-D IQ is as good as APS-C. It's smaller, but once you get a camera up on a tripod, what difference does it make if it's 500g or 1000g?

I just don't think it's particularly instructive of DPR to go around telling users that this camera IQ is as good as APS-C. The OM-D will sell itself, it doesn't need wild claim by reviewers to help it along.

0 upvotes
Samtendo 64
By Samtendo 64 (Apr 30, 2012)

Lol, do you ever take your camera out of the house to take pictures or do you just compare graphs and numbers on the internet?

For an active person who walks around all day, goes hiking, on a city tour, who has children, other stuff to carry, doesn't want to look like a nerd or paparazzi with a huge camera it damn well makes a difference if they have a small Mirrorless kit or a huge DSLR kit that needs an extra bag, weights several times more and draws looks from everyone around you.

"It's smaller, but once you get a camera up on a tripod, what difference does it make if it's 500g or 1000g? "

What? Now you can't take images wthout tripods anymore? What if I don't use one?
My 5D MKII with ONE single lens was 1,5 kgs, I can have a Mirrorless kit with 3 lenses for half of that. To me that makes the difference between taking the camera or leaving it at home.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Apr 30, 2012)

The review doesn't claim the E-M5 is as good as APS-C, it says it's close enough that you'll rarely encounter the difference - and that most people will find the size benefits outweigh the difference. And I stand by that completely.

And, for the record, I don't own an E-M5. (I actually own an APS-C camera)

3 upvotes
StephanSchmidt
By StephanSchmidt (Apr 30, 2012)

@MrButler: Don't feed the troll, especially one who confuses your review with a GH2/GX1 review by making irrelevant points comparing a GX1 to a Nikon D3200.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (May 1, 2012)

I'm not confusing anything, Mr. Schmidt. I have a GX1 and I know what it is and isn't capable. The OM-D uses the same exact 16mp LiveMOS sensor, but they have tweaked it to improve noise handling, both in JPEG and RAW. But the output from the OM-D, G3, and GX1 are nearly identical, with noise handling aside. So if you think 1/3 stop better high ISO performance now puts the OM-D equal to a K-5 where before the G3/GX1 were not equal, that's fine. Different interpretation.

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (May 1, 2012)

We don't know whether the E-M5 uses the same sensor as G3/GX1. Nobody has confirmed this AFAIK. That fact alone means that no conclusions about the IQ of the E-M5 can be drawn from experience with said Panasonic cameras.

1 upvote
Gesture
By Gesture (Apr 30, 2012)

Thanks for reviewing. Look forward to reading.

0 upvotes
Scrozzy
By Scrozzy (Apr 30, 2012)

As a Canon user, I'm happy to Olympus score well although I'm not swayed, but I hope other people are. The DSLR sector needs an almighty kick up its complacement and arrogant bum, so that it can start innovating. Viva la revolution.

26 upvotes
SnapHappy32
By SnapHappy32 (Apr 30, 2012)

Amen.

At least implement:

F-A-S-T AF point selection (via touchscreen)
IBIS (Saves weight on lenses!)
EVF overlay in the OVF for dark scenes (fuji-esque preferably)

5 upvotes
ayt
By ayt (Apr 30, 2012)

regarding this bit on page 3:
"Adding just the grip section results in pushing the tripod mount ever further off center."

isn't the tripod mount on the vertical grip about in line with the lens mount? why is it ever further off center?

0 upvotes
lovEU
By lovEU (Apr 30, 2012)

It somehow reminds of one of those 'Oly odds', that is, offering a really nice camera but including some kind of disgusting 'bug(s)' that will cause predictable dissapointment -- at least, that's my point of view.

0 upvotes
bitmatt
By bitmatt (Apr 30, 2012)

They must be referring to the portrait grip section, which does make the tripod mount farther offset than on the base of the camera itself. But, you're correct, the vertical (landscape) grip-only configuration centers the tripod mount with the lens. Another good reason to buy the grips.

1 upvote
sheepthief
By sheepthief (Apr 30, 2012)

Hang on, which grip part is which? I'm thinking of them as a half-grip and full grip, or a grip and a battery holder. A centred tripod mount is important to me for use on a panoramic head. I have the grip on order but it's not here yet. Well I guess I'll find out soon enough anyway.

0 upvotes
cesaregal
By cesaregal (Apr 30, 2012)

AF Performances.

AF speed is very important in my opinion. I don't see in the WEB or in the literature a complete answer in order to camera/lens AF speed values.

Which is E-M5/Zuiko 12mm AF speed?
Which is E-M5/Zuiko 45mm AF speed?

Excellent lenses but what about autofocus speed when joined to E-M5?

0 upvotes
toscha_seidel
By toscha_seidel (Apr 30, 2012)

AF speed is no longer a problem with the latest M43 models. The lenses you mentioned all have snappy AF on E-P3. The only problem though are the older lenses such as 20mm 1.7 and the 43 ZD lenses.

5 upvotes
bitmatt
By bitmatt (Apr 30, 2012)

And even the 20mm you mention is hardly pokey. Compared to the Oly 12 & 45, yes- but those two focus almost instantaneously. These are the three lenses I use on my E-M5, and the 20 is the one on the camera most of the time.

0 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Apr 30, 2012)

The 25 is blsiteringly fast too. Basically, S-AF is briallint, C-AF not so much so.

1 upvote
fz750
By fz750 (Apr 30, 2012)

I haven't had my mitts on one yet, but seen a couple in local shop windows and at first I thought it had a telephoto lens attached but on closer inspection it's just a normal 12-50mm?

How come it's so long? Seems twice as long as the one on my E-PL2 ??

0 upvotes
toscha_seidel
By toscha_seidel (Apr 30, 2012)

It has internal focus, the tube does not extend.

2 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Apr 30, 2012)

The lens on your E-PL2 is a 14-42mm, not a 12-50mm. The key point is not internal focus (both lenses have that), but that the 12-50mm also has internal zoom - it doesn't ever change length on either focusing or zooming. (It also offers a choice of mechanical zoom for stills or power zoom for movies, and has a pretty good closeup mode too.)

4 upvotes
fz750
By fz750 (Apr 30, 2012)

thank you for the explanation!

Personally, I would rather have had a smaller overall package to match the body size but i'm sure there's a good reason (less compromise I guess..)

0 upvotes
Don Wiss
By Don Wiss (Apr 30, 2012)

The reason for the fixed larger size, over the extending, is so they could weather seal it.

0 upvotes
compositor20
By compositor20 (Apr 30, 2012)

Great results in the noise comparison... at middle grey the results are better than nex 5-n until iso 6400! in the shadows they are comparable with nex having a slightly advantage.

For video the dynamic range that auto gradation has is fantastic!

There is a user reporting faster and accurate C-AF with the vivid setting and release priority.

You can set a minimum shutter speed with AUTO-ISO just choose a flash sync speed of between 1/30 until 1/250 according to the shutter speed you want to be minimum and it will do that effect.

2 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Apr 30, 2012)

I'm wondering why the reviewer said "The E-M5 can't completely overcome the light capture disadvantage brought by its smaller sensor, compared to APS-C".

E-M5 performs better than APS-C NEX5 to my eyes.

5 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (Apr 30, 2012)

Yes the noise at ISO 3200-6400 seems to be similar or better than many APS-C cameras.

Dynamic range and highlight recovery seems to quite good. Same class as my 5D mkII, which OTOH has smoother luminance noise at lower ISO.

2 upvotes
PeterNMIF
By PeterNMIF (Apr 30, 2012)

Regarding page 6 of the review, I have programmed the Right button of the 4way controller to be my dedicated ISO button. Or, was it the Up button? This is the problem with having no labels on the buttons....

Peter F.

0 upvotes
cesaregal
By cesaregal (Apr 30, 2012)

Finally a Gold Award for micro four thirds!

9 upvotes
SnapHappy32
By SnapHappy32 (Apr 30, 2012)

I don't think DPR have been holding back.
But Oly have.

Finally a M43 worthy of a gold medal!

6 upvotes
cesaregal
By cesaregal (May 1, 2012)

Panasonic GH2 was worth of a Gold Award, in my opinion.
Fast AF, good DR, video (1920x1080 24p 23 Mbps).

0 upvotes
PeterNMIF
By PeterNMIF (Apr 30, 2012)

Thanks so much for including references to the applicable (complicated) menu sections when making comments about settings. They're hard enough to find already! Your references help a lot.

Peter F

1 upvote
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (Apr 30, 2012)

Have you checked the manual? At least in past, Oly cameras were coming with extremely informative and (IMO) well organized manual. The menu structure and customization options were all described.

0 upvotes
Sergey Borachev
By Sergey Borachev (Apr 30, 2012)

Interesting to see this in the list of Pro's

- Very good selection of Micro Four Thirds lens is available.

But even with that significant advantage (which is extremely important for photographers), it still scores less than the NEX-7 (Score 81)

IMO, it should be rated higher as a camera that real photographers want to use than the NEX-7.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
Thoughts
By Thoughts (Apr 30, 2012)

I think you have your own score for this camera, which I agree with! :)

0 upvotes
SnapHappy32
By SnapHappy32 (Apr 30, 2012)

Guys.

Look at the SD1 - awesome IQ. A score of 71 for a camera without:

- LiveView
- Video

DPR puts the emphasis on IQ more than anything. That's good IMHO.

0 upvotes
bitmatt
By bitmatt (Apr 30, 2012)

Cameras are rated for the time of their release & in comparison to competitor's offerings. At the time the NEX-7 was reviewed it was a significant advance, worthy of an 81. If it were reviewed now, after the E-M5, I doubt it would score quite as highly (although still close). I'd say the Sony wins for video, the E-M5 for stills & overall usability.

It is a great time for cameras! So much innovation is exciting for everyone.

3 upvotes
sheepthief
By sheepthief (Apr 30, 2012)

Good point - perhaps DPR should have a built-in depreciation of scores, maybe 5% per year.

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Apr 30, 2012)

After one year, all cameras depreciate to 69, regardless of the starting point. Then people shell out another $1k for another three months of euphoria, with its credit card hangover. Like nicotine dependence?

0 upvotes
Agnima
By Agnima (Apr 30, 2012)

I preordered both the Sony NEX-7 and this Olympus model to try them side by side. They are both excellent cameras. However, as much as I love the features of the Olympus, it fails for my use on several key points. First is video; my clients want video clips, and the video from the Olympus is not as good as the Sony; I find pans to lack smoothness, and the overall look to be less refined than the Sony. The viewfinder is not as accurate a representation of the shot you will get, when compared with the Sony. The rear screen has a pronounced green tinge if you do not view it straight on. This is very distracting when composing shots. I wish I could keep both (or merge them into the perfect combination)!

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Apr 30, 2012)

But how do you deal with NEX-7 overheating while shooting video and shutting itself down? And needing a lot of time to cool down and be able to shoot again?

2 upvotes
Agnima
By Agnima (Apr 30, 2012)

I have not had this problem. Incidentally, the Olympus manual warns it will happen on the OMD as well.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Apr 30, 2012)

The OMD's battery probably runs down before the heat ceiling is reached. An HF G10, TM900, or even a VG-20 is probably a better choice for someone planning to shoot videos of long performances or events.

0 upvotes
brumd
By brumd (Apr 30, 2012)

I'm still in doubt whether I should buy the body only, or with the 12-50 lens. I like the fact that it's weathersealed, that could be really useful, but I am a bit worried how the motorized zoom affects battery life. I'm taking this camera out in the wild without any change to recharge batteries for more than a week.

Will the motorized zoom reduce the number of shots per battery dramatically, or will it be limited to, let's say, <10%?
Anyone knows? Thanks!

0 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (Apr 30, 2012)

I wouldn't worry about battery life when it concerns the 12-50; it's its image quality that seems to be an issue (at least according to some reviews I read, namely DxO's).

1 upvote
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Apr 30, 2012)

It's worth pointing out that right now it's a bit hard to get a hold of extra batteries for this camera, unless you order them from Hong Kong.

1 upvote
ReallyMadRob
By ReallyMadRob (Apr 30, 2012)

You can use the zoom manually as well - so power consumption is your choice :-)

1 upvote
brumd
By brumd (Apr 30, 2012)

@MadBob: aha! I was wondering that! OK, maybe that makes the lens interesting enough for me for €200 extra.
@thewhitehawk: I was hoping that within 2 months there would be chinese alternatives available. We'll see..

Thanks for your answers! :)

0 upvotes
kelux78
By kelux78 (Apr 30, 2012)

@brumd: Buy the 12-50mm kit lens. It is well worth the money. I was also uncertain about this, finally I went for the 12-50mm lens because of Robin Wong's field test's:

http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2011/12/olympus-mzuiko-12-50mm-f35-63-review.html

http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2012/01/olympus-mzuiko-12-50mm-f35-63-review.html

http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2012/01/olympus-mzuiko-12-50mm-f35-63-review_05.html

Kit lenses are not perfect, but this kit lens is the most versatile lens I have owned. 12mm wide angle, 43mm macro, 12-50 is a nice travel zoom, weather resistant....

@ManuelVilardeMacedo: Do not read lens reviews on DxO. In fact, do not use that site at all. It's a waste of time.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
brumd
By brumd (Apr 30, 2012)

that built in macro function sounds very interesting...

0 upvotes
PerL
By PerL (Apr 30, 2012)

Good camera but no breakthrough in AF-C. PDAF still seems to be the only way to go for action shooting.

1 upvote
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Apr 30, 2012)

@dpreview - one more thing- I honestly think this sensor goes beyond the G3's. After examining a shot vis a vis with a GH2 with dcraw, the EM5 shows an improvement in DR over 1 stop. I don't think this is the same sensor as the GX1/G3. If it's based on the same design, it has to be a hell of a hardware tweak on it.

I think shooting a high DR scene with both cameras and using LR latest also reveals this.

2 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Apr 30, 2012)

@dpreview- guys, maybe I am missing something, but what's the point of shooting ISO 6400 in good light conditions (shutter speeds of 1/4000th?!). Cameras tend to do better in those situations. How about F2.8 and 1/30th? 1/60th?

I see you have one F2.0 @ 1/250th (still a bit high). The closest seems the ISO 5000 at F2.8, 1/80th (guy in restaurant bar/shot).

I am honestly not quite sure how the shots for high ISO are supposed to show the good performance of the camera in real world situations where a photographer would want to use that high ISO...

7 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Apr 30, 2012)

Good point, I tested this Olympus in shadowy low contrast conditions, and even shooting raw, anything above ISO1600 was a problem.

Also DPReview must have a different ACR 6.7 beta, because ACR 6.7 rc1 in Photoshop CS5 does not open these Olympus raws. However UFRAW and Aftershot both open raws from this Olympus.

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Apr 30, 2012)

The latest LR 4 RC2 opens them. And yeah, that's sort of what I am seeing, that in those situations the camera goes below the best APS-c in a notable way. Still outstanding accomplishment by Olympus, but I like to know exactly where the goods and the bads are.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Apr 30, 2012)

Raist3d:

Right but is LR 4 RC2 running ACR 6.7 or ACR 7.0? (I believe it's ACR 7, assuming Lightroom 4 has been updated.)

No, even compared to the Samsung NX100, this Olympus is nothing special at high ISOs. And I don't think that 12mm-50mm zoom is particularly sharp.

Nice fast autofocus on the Olympus and a very good EVF.

0 upvotes
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Apr 30, 2012)

@dpreview
"The other thing Raw allows you to do is tailor the amount and type of noise reduction used to suit the image. Noise characteristics can depend on the light-source of the scene (natural light includes more green and blue illumination than tungsten light, for instance, so won't produce such noisy images at the same capture settings), so it's handy to be able to carefully tailor the noise reduction to get the best out of each image" nice of dpreview to point this out, I noticed this awhile ago from experience :

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Apr 30, 2012)

Same here. I noticed with my quirky camera, that I can lower noise reduction on scenes that shot at base ISO and has little shadows.

0 upvotes
Rocker44
By Rocker44 (Apr 30, 2012)

I think this is the first 4/3 cam I would like to have a play with. Also wouldn't say no to a go on an X-pro and Nex-7.

Weather sealing is a nice touch, especially since it's been raining in the UK for about 2 weeks. My DSLR got a bit soggy while shooting a wedding this weekend.

0 upvotes
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Apr 30, 2012)

Not sure how a client would feel though if they paid big money and you showed up with such a small camera. I don't think the E-M5 would be inadequate at all for that type of work considering the available lenses, but I don't think paying customers would feel the same way.

1 upvote
DarkShift
By DarkShift (Apr 30, 2012)

Most clients are not interested in what camera a photographer uses, they're interested how end results look. They usually don't know much about cameras at all.

Being more practical in many situations, a small mirrorless camera might bring better photographs. Depends on the situation.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Paul_B Midlands UK
By Paul_B Midlands UK (Apr 30, 2012)

And my friends keep asking why I always mention the K-5 weather sealing IS a useful feature!

1 upvote
bluevellet
By bluevellet (Apr 30, 2012)

Attach ridiculously oversized Top Pro FT lenses and clients would probably shut up.

Unless they know how slow they focus on MFT. ;)

0 upvotes
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (Apr 30, 2012)

@thewhitehawk
"How to overcome fears using Micro 4/3rds cameras in a professional environment"
http://blog.giuliosciorio.com/?p=550
:)

3 upvotes
bitmatt
By bitmatt (Apr 30, 2012)

I took the new E-M5 to use at two different shoots last week for clients, but I admit I brought along the 5DmkII to pull out of the bag in case anyone took issue with the small camera/lenses I was using. But, turns out nobody cared! The mkII stayed in the bag. That was refreshing. I'm leaving the Canon at home from now on.

0 upvotes
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Apr 30, 2012)

Thanks @Michele Kappa, I'm not a pro, so it's not much of a concern for me, but I hope that this camera helps break the skepticism a little. I know I will be doing my best to bring it up to the level of the "big boys".

1 upvote
Rocker44
By Rocker44 (Apr 30, 2012)

I don't think clients would mind, sometimes it's good to blend in. If someone asks I'll point to the 645 SLR in my bag ;)

I wouldn't see something like this replacing my big SLR body for main wedding work. Sometimes size and weight in a camera are an advantage: i.e. stabilizing a long lens, full-sized controls for someone with large hands.

But maybe for reportage stuff in the evening it could work. The weather sealing would also help with beer spillage.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (May 2, 2012)

@thewhitehawk
Well, photo professionals have to eventually overcome their fears just as other adults! ;)
@Rocker
hehehehehehe beer spillage XD

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Apr 30, 2012)

I'm pleased you did the shadow pull - vital info and especially relevant here (and I still don't think it is the G3 sesnor, but who knows?). That was my big worry on the camera. Seems fine - good, even.

I agree with your comment that if you want visibly better IQ you need to go right up to FF. If budget allows, I think the best bet is to have both. FF is a real pain to carry, as I found out during my four years of D3 use, but a brief loan of the new D800 showed that there is something there worth having. A D800 and an OM-D strikes me as the ideal combo, and I'll be trying to put it together...

10 upvotes
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (Apr 30, 2012)

I am doing the same , this tiny camera or NEX7 helps me a lot more than I thought in many places where I cannot use my FF Nikon or Canon.
Thanks Louis for giving me that idiea.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Apr 30, 2012)

I am not exactly sold yet that it's "very close to best APS_C that you wouldn't notice". I have shots at ISO 12800 and even 25600 that I can use. I am not sure I can would say that with an EM5. That said, sure seems to do good enough for many of the situations I would also think using it at.

1 upvote
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Apr 30, 2012)

@Raist3d the E-M5 definitely has a breaking point at the ISO values you mentioned. I don't think I'll ever go there when I get the camera, but then again, I'm not sure how often I'd ever feel the need to with those fast primes.

I'd be much more concerned about the ISO performance if I had chosen to go with a Sony, because there's a distinctive lack of fast-primes on that system (I think that there's still only one lens below 2.0).

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 30, 2012)

You can get visibly better IQ with a D3100 or D5100. I've shot with a GX1 and various APS-C cameras, and images from the latter are dramatically more rich. Even ignoring the more shallow DOF possible with APS-C (creamier bokeh with good lenses), images from an X100 or the above Nikons just look better. Don't agree at all with DPR on this one at all.

1 upvote
M Irwin
By M Irwin (Apr 30, 2012)

Different types of cameras marike. The ratings are within-segment, not between. If I'm going to carry a 3100 or 5200, I'm going all the way to the 5DMk2 or something. I use my GX1 for example for completely different things and accept a different level of image rigour.

5 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Apr 30, 2012)

I want to make clear- not saying the EM5 is bad. Just that there are other aspects to the image that I don't think it matches best APS-C. I would agree it matches some APS_C and that in by itself is quite an outstanding accomplishment.

@thewhitehawk- yeah, that's what I meant with most situations I would use it for. With the new fast small primes, I think I could deal with most situations I would normally would use it at night.

0 upvotes
Antony John
By Antony John (Apr 30, 2012)

@marike6

Now that DPR has disputed your comments in previous posts you don't agree with them?
Refer:
Just Posted: Olympus OM-D E-M5 test samples
You were lavish in your praise for DPR in:
Just posted: Nikon D800 test samples
Just posted: Nikon D800 first impressions and 'real world' samples

Let's keep it objective shall we?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Apr 30, 2012)

I don't know or care about very high ISO, but at low ISO the capture medium exceeds the output medium, which is to say the RAW capture exceeds JPG, screen and print for everything except res.

So, at low ISO, one competent camera of a given res produces the same print (regardless of size) as another competent camera (asuming any reasonable sensor size, which includes MFT, APS-C and FF).

At high ISOs the MFT camera lags an APS-C camera of the same sensor tech by a THEORETICAL 2/3 of a stop, which is nothing. According to this review (I've not looked at the high ISO samples) Oly's one jump ahead at the moment and overcome the theoretical disadvantage. OK, as long as that lasts.

But if you want max IQ you shoot at base ISO, and there MFT performs as well as anything else.

0 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Apr 30, 2012)

@Louis - I understand that your need are low iso needs. However, I am referring to the DPR review which is making the blanket statement on matching APS-C to the point of not care. As such I feel this needs to be pointed out.

BTW, forget the theoretical 2/3rds of a stop, it's more than that in reality. Not talking about theory here. Remember after all, Sony jumped far ahead tech wise.

As for base ISO- do keep in mind color depth and even more DR. Depending how you post process, you will still even then get a difference although for many situations virtually academic.

0 upvotes
Ah Pek
By Ah Pek (Apr 30, 2012)

This is the future. Small, light, feature rich and excellent IQ. Not one for the pixel peepers shooting brick walls and cats.

18 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (Apr 30, 2012)

I'm more likely to go for full frame from aps-c, than m43. Because of it's shallow DOF. This will be good in a compact though. Back in the film days , most compacts were full frame. (But had appalling lens quality).

1 upvote
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Apr 30, 2012)

@dpreview"Like all tilt-only screens, though, it adds nothing when shooting stills in portrait format."
depends if I'm doing natural subject unaware/reportage stills then I find it useful...

0 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Apr 30, 2012)

Inevitable typo:

"You're only likely to notice it in quiet situations and it's not loud enough to distract your subjects, so it's unlikely to every have any effect on your shooting experience."

I think you want "ever".

0 upvotes
emircruz
By emircruz (Apr 30, 2012)

rbuttler, any word on AF Performance of Four-Thirds Lenses? (sorry if I missed it, I only skimmed the review here at work :p)

1 upvote
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Apr 30, 2012)

not mention by dpreview that the E-M5 oesn't have spot metering linked to auto focus point - does dpreview not realise that some photographers use spot metering (and not just at the centre point)????????????????????????????????

3 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Apr 30, 2012)

Right.... about 0.05% of your shots are taken with spot metering tied to AF point.

3 upvotes
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Apr 30, 2012)

@photo nuts
NO, about 10-12% of my shots, ( I'm more adventurous with backlit subjects and other high contrast scenes), see the exif in my blogs or flickr........................

could easily be fixed in software update :D

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Apr 30, 2012)

Can't you have the EVF mimic exposure and then override manually anyway? That seems to me to be the biggest advantage of EVF and much faster than chimping or switching to spot and chimping.

0 upvotes
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Apr 30, 2012)

@Photomonkey
you can lock the exposure and recompose or adjust the EV (but they have reduced the EV to-3/+3 in the E-M5 compared to the E-5 which does -5/+5 EV).
In the main it is workable but you might miss some shots that are happening more dynamically and/or do lots of work to fix in post...

Panasonic since the L10 (before micro four thirds) have the spot metering linked to auto focus point....

0 upvotes
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (Apr 30, 2012)

I think only Nikon cameras have that feature spot metering with any AF point , maybe Pentax too but I am not very sure about Pentax system.
My Canon, Sony and all other brand cameras I have used do not have it.
But you are right , it is really handy to have that feature sometimes in very complicated landscape or studio.
This was actually the main reason why I decided to go all Nikon and sold Canon and Sony.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Apr 30, 2012)

@3systermuser
all Panasonic micro four thirds cameras have it as well as the Four Thirds Panasonic L10

0 upvotes
zstan
By zstan (Apr 30, 2012)

The Sony face detection works for spot metering on its own...

0 upvotes
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Apr 30, 2012)

Good review BUT............

How can DPR not have spotted how Oly E-M5 chooses significantly different aperture/speed settings than other cameras.
Example from DPRs own comparison widget:
E-M5 @ISO3200: f6.3 1/800s.
NEX-5N @ISO3200: f8 1/800s.
That means E-M5 has 2/3 stops more light to make the same picture.
One might go as far as call it "cheating".

By that I do not agree that Oly has closed the gap sensor-wise. Not that it is a bad camera, not all all, but when comparing cameras in such a "scientific" way, the comparisons must be under exactly the same conditions.

1 upvote
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Apr 30, 2012)

You're assuming the same lighting conditions.

This whole "cheating on ISO" thing springs from people who don't understand what "RAW" means.

5 upvotes
Robert N
By Robert N (Apr 30, 2012)

Different lighting conditions, different shutter speeds, different focal lengths, different focusing, JPEG-DR (?!!)...

What is the comparison good for?

2 upvotes
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Apr 30, 2012)

@Louis_dobson.
Of course I assume the same lighting conditions !
How else do you compare 2 cameras objectively ?

1 upvote
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Apr 30, 2012)

You're looking at noise at different ISOs. The lighting, and hence the shutter speed, makes no difference (unless it is extreme). In the meantime if you read the review you will see that the meter under-reads by, if memory serves, around 1/6 of a stop - well within normal limits.

Now the camera chooses to lightly saturate the sensor (preserving highlights) and amplify more than usual in the conversion (increasing noise). But that's Oly's business - it seems to work well. If you choose to shoot RAW you interrupt the process half way, and then you can decide if you want to do it Oly's way, or ETTR for less noise. But that's not "cheating" - there is no ISO standard for RAW exposure, only for JPG.

1 upvote
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Apr 30, 2012)

I am not talking about metering. I realise that the camera automatically tries to find the best exposure settings. But for guaging the sensor, you must keep the exposure settings constant. That, or you do a whole range of exposure test for EACH of the ISO settings. Then you can precisely find the exposure where the sensor saturates.

I look at it in another way, maybe simpler.
With a given aperture and shutter speed, what ISO setting do you have to select to get the right exposure ?
For the E-M5 i will probably have to choose ISO3200 where I could go to ISO1600 on the NEX-5N. That must be the conclusion based on DPRs comparison widget.

Also please note that I put "cheating" in quotes. Oly does not cheat per se. But I do find it a failure of DPR to not point out the difference.

0 upvotes
bg2b
By bg2b (Apr 30, 2012)

The dpreview guys have explicity stated that the lighting is not constant for the studio set-up, so you can't compare the absolute exposure parameters. The info you have to go by is the ISO accuracy section, which says that the E-M5 is off by 1/3 of a stop in metering. So assuming the 5N is perfectly accurate, you'll have to bump the ISO on the E-M5 by 1/3 of a stop to match the scene brightness in JPEG.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Apr 30, 2012)

The assumption that ISO on NEX-5N is also wrong.
According to http://www.sensorgen.info/SonyNEX-5.html,
3200 is 2055, 6400 is 4276 etc.

0 upvotes
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Apr 30, 2012)

bg2b.
where does DPR say that the studio lighting is not constant ?
You dont think that it is more or less a generic disclaimer.
I am an enginner who do measurements (amongst other things) for a living, and if I had the same conditions as what you say now (varying lighting in this case) I would always compensate for the variations by making a test-measurement with a know calibrated sensor.

Anyway, at the end of the day, for the studio comparison tests, the E-M5 got 2/3 stop more light than NEX-5N for the ISO3200 shots. I dont believe that DPRs studio lighting varies with a 1/3 stop which could explain the missing 1/3 stop in the equation.

1 upvote
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Apr 30, 2012)

They changed the lighting because, if I remeber correctly, the faster cameras were starting to out perform it.

And if you go away and think about it for a bit, you will see it makes no difference. The ISO is tested, and is 1/3 (I thought it was 1/6, but no matter) EV off. Or you can call it a test of the metering if you prefer.

EIther way both sensors got the same total light (give or take that 1/3 or 1/6 of a stop), albeit gained over different length exposures, and the test is therefore a fair test of noise.

1 upvote
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Apr 30, 2012)

If that shall make sense, then they changed it to darker, to allow measuring the sensors with very high ISO capability. So they did that between the NEX5N and the E-M5 tests ?
Other sites that do comparisons, have a dark and bright scene to make it possible to compare sensors at extremely wide ISO settings.
It makes sense, but I feel miffed since every laboratory measurement assumes identical conditions (or at least compensate for the varying conditions by separate measurements). A separate information "ISO accuracy" just confuses the matter even more. It means that what we see in the comparison widget is not the true picture so to speak.

0 upvotes
bg2b
By bg2b (Apr 30, 2012)

Your exact objections arose back when they first published the E-M5 studio tests. They pointed out in those threads that they don't hold the conditions constant (and that they had in fact recently changed the lighting so that they could deal with cameras like the 5Diii and D4 at their ginormous ISO settings). See for example, Andy's post here.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=40947640

0 upvotes
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Apr 30, 2012)

Andy Westlake said this in that thread:

/We're not tesing meter calibration - the camera's metering isn't involved in our ISO testing at all. Instead, we set the lighting up to a critically-controlled level (to within 1/10 EV) using a calibrated external lightmeter, then shoot the test camera in manual exposure and look at the JPEG output brightness of a specific grey target. We also double-check against a couple of recently-tested cameras to ensure consistency across reviews, and periodically check our calibrated photographic light meter (which reads in EV) against an independent scientific lightmeter (that measures in Lux, so is a bit tedious to use as a matter of course). /

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/message.asp?forum=1041&parent=40947308&thread=40933109&quote=1

Now I am confused. Is the studio lighting calibrated or not ?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bg2b
By bg2b (Apr 30, 2012)

The studio light may change. They do basically two tests. One (not the studio test) is with a calibrated light meter. For that test, they use a grey card, and they see whether the output level in JPEG (at the exposure indicated by the light meter) matches the level that "middle grey" is supposed to be, or whether the camera needs a bit more or less exposure to hit that brightness. That gets reported in the ISO accuracy section. Then for the studio scene (where the light may change), they set the lights, ISO, and lens aperture, then vary the shutter speed and look at the JPEGs until the grey card patch in the scene has the right brightness. That shutter speed is the one that gets show in the studio comparison widget.

0 upvotes
JesperMP
By JesperMP (Apr 30, 2012)

The way the latter part procedure works in your description (the studio comparison part) will mean that sensor differences are masked away.
The procedure effectively is a way to meter so that the end-result is an exposure balanced picture. The differences in the shutter speed can be due to differences in the light, or differences in the sensors ISO accuracy. One cannot know by looking at the values from the comparison chart. One has to take the additional info from the ISO accuracy test into account.
OK, at least I understand this now.

0 upvotes
NetMage
By NetMage (Apr 30, 2012)

Which is how most people expect to use the camera.

0 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (Apr 30, 2012)

Interestingly the dpreview comparison engine has no option for the xpro-1.
I have used the Panny GX1, which has the same sensor as this camera and it was excellent, but not in the same league as the xpro-1

Therefore i would say that the statement "to obtain a noticeable upgrade in picture quality you need to go to full frame" as erroneous

2 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Apr 30, 2012)

But the X-Pro1 operates very poorly in actual use.

From the preview of the X-Pro1:
"Realistically, anyone interested in the X-Pro1 will also be considering standout mirrorless models like the Sony NEX 7 and Olympus OM-D E-M5. Be warned though - if you're excited by the very fast autofocus performance of these cameras, you might be disappointed by the responsiveness of the X-Pro1."

Ouch. If a camera can't focus quickly enough, it's useless in my book.

11 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 30, 2012)

Also use the GX1 and have used an X100, and I totally agree. The Fuji images are dramatically better, with cleaner high ISO.

I would also question DPR on your point. Have they never shot with a D7000 or X100?

2 upvotes
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (Apr 30, 2012)

how do you know it was the same sensor in the GX1?
I thought the OMD sensor was new Samsung or Sony, if it is the old Panny used in the GX1 I am really disappointed.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Raist3d
By Raist3d (Apr 30, 2012)

@photonut " But the X-Pro1 operates very poorly in actual use."

That depends on what use. If AF is a priority for you, then it's an issue. There's something called manual focus. Not all photographers are allergic to it. And I think it's fair to say that if the X1 Pro has better image quality, then it's worth mentioning. For example a landscape photographer probably won't care about the much slower AF of the X1 pro, but will care more about the image quality over say an EM5.

It all depends.

1 upvote
Gethenderson
By Gethenderson (Apr 30, 2012)

From all accords it's a different sensor and outperforms the GX1, however, yes I believe the Xpro1 does far exceed it, however again, it exceeds all APSc sensors, for now, the Xpro1 is a bit of a beta camera, I believe it's not considered as seriously as the rest.

You technically are right, the Xpro1 does far better but that is the exception, also the Xpro1 is, in many peoples eyes, terrible in operation, I certainly would put the functionality of the OMD far in excess of the slight IQ gain.

1 upvote
SnapHappy32
By SnapHappy32 (Apr 30, 2012)

The XP1 IS terrible in operation. I sent one back.
Since there is no universally accepted standard for judging IQ I'll put emphasis on:

- Exposure
- Focus
- Composition

I own, love and adore my X100. It's a great snap-cam.
Just updated it to the newest firmware last night.
AF was fast. But it couldn't lock on to tricky subjects.

As for composition. No wonder rangefinders lost out to SLR's.
What's with the focus shift?
What is so extremely impossible about showing me the actual framing of the scene WITHOUT halfpressing the shutter?
If only the EVF was useful.

Don't get me wrong. I wish I was experienced and patient enough to get the best out of my XP1. It takes awesome pictures.

2 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (Apr 30, 2012)

its funny to read the comments that the xpro-1 is no good in operation, or is a beta camera.
The xpro has the best ergonomics of any aps-c camera at the moment. The operation is a dream, and its very fast
The AF is excellent, its super accurate and never OOF
I can only conclude that the people who comment against it have never used it or are particularly poor photographers.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Apr 30, 2012)

WOW! This is absolutely brilliant! I am so glad to see Olympus pulling this thing off! If this camera was released several years ago, I would have gotten myself into the 4/3 family. No doubt about it.

I love the size and weight of the E-M5. Love the lenses. Love the super image quality. Very, very impressive. This is the kind of camera the Nikon D3200 should have been.

I shall recommend this to friends and family looking for compact interchangeable lens cameras.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
emircruz
By emircruz (Apr 30, 2012)

GOLD!!!

0 upvotes
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Apr 30, 2012)

@dpreview @rbutler
The E-M5 has 2 custom white balances and a temperature one you can also use/save as a custom pre-set (checked for myself) please correct....

2 upvotes
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Apr 30, 2012)

Really happy to see what I "expected" when I pre-ordered the camera become a reality, but this is going to make the wait for it's arrival just a bit more uncomfortable, as I can't wait to take it out and shoot shoot shoot!

1 upvote
bradleyg5
By bradleyg5 (Apr 30, 2012)

I wish dpreview would just up and admit that the tilt screens are flat out superior to the tilt and swivel screens. They always have to put some little "however" in the description. "Like all tilt-only screens, though, it adds nothing when shooting stills in portrait format."

How about tilt and swivel screen you put a little text blob that comments how how much smaller the screen is in relation to the area it takes up? Or how about how down right hideous the hinge looks? Or how about you can't tilt the screen up without first swivelling it to the side, thus making it completely indiscreet?

How hard is it to take a self portrait without looking at an LCD screen, just hold it at arms length, point it at your face, and press the button???

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 30, 2012)

DPR has a point about tilt-swivel screens. How are you arguing for tilt only? Don't you see the folly in that?

2 upvotes
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Apr 30, 2012)

tilt only has some minor disadvantages against tilt and swivel
1. self shooting/framing on family shots (but can use guess work)
2. self video shooting ie lone reporters etc
3. the odd extreme angle but the E-M5 screen has a high viewing angle than previous LCD screens.
4. screen not protected when not in use

4 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Apr 30, 2012)

@ marike6,

I have an ancient Olympus C7070 that lets you tilt the screen back like this, and I love it for being able to take discreet pictures in the street. I hold the camera at waist level, look down, and nobody thinks I'm taking a picture because the screen is hidden behind the camera. Ever since I got a Panasonic G2, with tilt/swivel, I've been aware that at least some tilt/swivel screens can not be used in that way for discreet street photography.

On the other hand, both my C7070 and Panasonic G2 can be used for self-portraits and this screen apparently can't, so I do see your point.

But don't knock the ability to slide an LCD screen discreetly open behind the camera. It is extremely useful.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
mfj197
By mfj197 (Apr 30, 2012)

The review doesn't say anything about using the screen for self-portraits. The words are in your post - "Like all tilt-only screens, though, it adds nothing when shooting stills in portrait format.". That is perfectly true. I use a flip out screen for many of my photographs when shooting in portrait, either with the camera held near the floor (I have a 1-year old) or on a tripod. That is one thing I would miss with the E-M5.

1 upvote
sheepthief
By sheepthief (Apr 30, 2012)

Ah, you've fallen into the trap of thinking that everyone wants to use a camera in the same way that you do, which is pretty self-centred. For many of the types of work that I do the lack of a fully-articulating screen is a big problem. I often work close to the ground, and/or with a panoramic head, and in both cases in portrait mode. I will continue to use my E-M5 (I rather like it), but for much of my work I will have to continue to use my E-620 (which is a fine camera, it'll just be inconvenient to have to carry both).

2 upvotes
Samtendo 64
By Samtendo 64 (Apr 30, 2012)

Very nice informative review, but what I don't get is:

- if it's arguably the best Mirrorless model yet, why does it get a lower score than the Nex-7?
- the sample images: ISO 6400, f1.8 and 1/4000s in daylight, are those supposed to be practical examples?

2 upvotes
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Apr 30, 2012)

Because the NEX-7 takes slightly higher-quality (resolution?) RAW pictures and the NEX-7's video mode is a bit better.

If the lens ecosystem was part of the score equation however, I think that would bring up the score considerably in Olympus' favor, and it was the lenses that made decide to go with Micro 4/3 as opposed to Sony's system.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (Apr 30, 2012)

I agree
I think this review is over zealous and quite biased
Most people would agree (not 4/3s fanatics) that the Nex system and xpro-1 system out classes this caemra for IQ in every aspect
The xpro-1 has particularly amazing JPGs, unmatched by any other camera IMHO

3 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Apr 30, 2012)

I believe DPReview's definition of high quality RAW pictures is only considered at the lowest ISO level. Naturally, 24 MP is better than 16 MP in this regard. :)

Since I don't care about video as much as lens system, this makes the E-M5 a far, far better investment than Sony NEX offerings.

4 upvotes
Samtendo 64
By Samtendo 64 (Apr 30, 2012)

It just seems a little biased. The resolution is great, ah but that's only because of the 50mm macro, they don't say the IQ is great, they say it's comparable although the crops look alot better than the other MFTs, the Samsungs and at higher settings even the NEX-7; the samples are made with questionable settings (like I said ISO6400 in bright daylight, really?) so they don't look as good as they could, etc..

I tested the NEX-7 for a week and the OM-D in a store, the NEX is a very nice camera, but quite a bit slower in operation and has slower and less reliable AF, doesn't have IS and high ISO seems to be worse actually. The NEX-system only has one lens that can resolve those 24MP and it's 1000€s. I know it's just 1% but it seems odd to rate it higher.

1 upvote
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Apr 30, 2012)

First time I've ever seen people complaining that DPR had a pro-Oly bias! My, how times change.

22 upvotes
thewhitehawk
By thewhitehawk (Apr 30, 2012)

It all boils down to which camera you enjoy using the most. If I wanted a camera to take pictures mostly of still life, or nature, I might have chosen the Fuji.

If I was more interested in video, and I wanted really large RAW files to fix my compositions without relevant loss of quality, I would have gotten the Sony (and I probably would have purchase the Sony if it was not for it's, comparably poor, lens selection).

The Olympus is simply the most solid all-rounded performer in most regards, and it has, in my opinion, the best lens-ecosystem out of all mirrorless formats, and that's what made me shift towards it.

I think we can all agree that all three cameras are great devices that take great pictures.

1 upvote
herebefore
By herebefore (Apr 30, 2012)

People do tend to complain when a review doesn't agree with their pre-conceptions.

A lot of people expected DPR to do what they usually do with an Olympus camera.. Find some minor niggle and beat Olympus to death with it.. (Remember how "live view" was a cure looking for a problem?). Or how many times they mentioned that you had to wait for the self cleaning to cycle before you could take a photo?

The Olympus bashers have been sitting back waiting for DPR to trash the camera soundly, and DPR didnt do it, so the disappointed bashers are uncomfortable.. When uncomfortable, they grumble about prejudice and bias.

7 upvotes
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (Apr 30, 2012)

Samtendo 64, not only one lens that can resolve the NEX7 sensor but 4 lenses at least, the Sigma30mmf2.8, the Sony 24f1.8,the SLRmagic50mmf0.95 and Sony 50mmf1.8OOS.

that said , I go for the Oly muself and selling my NEX7 and listed lenses soon because as you said in body IS , the better Oly lens line up and faster and better AF of Oly/pana are all more important than a bit bigger sensor of the Sony for my needs.

plus, I realized that MFT gives faster shutter speed at given deep DOF.

thanks, DPR.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Apr 30, 2012)

@ harold68,

"Outclasses" is the wrong word. You do realize that words have meaning, right? The Nex7 and EM-5 without question belong to the same CLASS of camera. Whatever differences there are in IQ are relatively minor. Did you read the review? DPR made the excellent point that if you are ultimately serious about IQ, and the EM-5 is not enough, then you have to make the jump to full frame to get any obvious benefits.

That's because full-frame is a different CLASS of camera.

I hope this helps.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Apr 30, 2012)

They gave NEX-7 significantly higher performance score. Given that it autofocuses slower and overheats during video, it is pretty strange rating.

3 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (Apr 30, 2012)

Just brilliant, and as expected.

1 upvote
dara2
By dara2 (Apr 30, 2012)

I haven't read the whole article, will do at home but what is the price?

0 upvotes
HSway
By HSway (Apr 30, 2012)

Looks like Olympus has done a nice job on that sensor. And the whole camera looks nice, too. I wish they overcome those recent troubles and are doing well; they are some name in photography world and have contributed to it a great deal after all.

Hynek

5 upvotes
brettmeikle
By brettmeikle (Apr 30, 2012)

looks like a player, the wee beauty!

0 upvotes
Total comments: 577
123