Previous page Next page

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Review

Buy on Amazon.com From $1,299.00


Based on a production Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Firmware 1.0

The E-M1 is the second model in Olympus's OM-D series and extends the range further into semi-pro/enthusiast territory. There are two main distinctions that set the E-M1 apart from its little brother (the E-M5) - a more sophisticated autofocus system and a 'buttons for everything' design approach. As such the two models will coexist, with the E-M1 sitting at the very top of Olympus's lineup.

The biggest technological step forward on the E-M1 is the addition of on-sensor phase detection elements, giving the camera two distinct focus modes. The phase-detection system is used when lenses from the original Four Thirds system, which were designed for use that way, are attached. With native, Micro Four Thirds lenses, the camera will mainly stick with the contrast detection system that has proved so fast and accurate on the E-M5. Only if you use tracking AF will the camera utilize phase-detection information with a Micro Four Thirds lens.

The E-M1 also gains the excellent 2.3M-dot electronic viewfinder panel we first saw as the VF-4 accessory for the PEN E-P5. Not only is the resolution very impressive, but the viewfinder optics give a viewfinder with magnification of up to 1.48x (depending on display mode), which puts it only a fraction behind the 0.76x viewfinder in Canon's 1D X and ahead of Nikon's pro-grade D4 DSLRs.

There's also a more advanced 'TruePic VII' processor in the E-M1 that conducts a variety of lens corrections, when creating JPEGs, leading the company to proclaim the best image quality offered by one of its cameras. Not only can the E-M1 remove the colour fringing caused by lateral chromatic aberration, Olympus says that it also tunes its sharpening to take into account the lens's sharpness, and to combat any softening due to diffraction (particularly at very small apertures).

The biggest difference between the E-M1 and the E-M5, though, is the degree of direct control on offer. We really liked the E-M5's twin-dial control system, but the E-M1 goes beyond that by providing button-and-dial combinations for quickly changing almost every imaginable setting on the camera. It's the kind of approach you don't usually get until the very top of manufacturers' lineups - it means you have to get used to where every function is, but can shoot fluidly once you have.

The E-M1 inherits the '2x2' dial approach Olympus previously used on the E-P5 - flicking a switch on the camera changes the dials from controlling shutter speed, aperture or exposure compensation to changing ISO and white balance. However, all this direct control doesn't come at the expense of the potentially slower but easier to find touch-screen interface - the E-M1 has this too. Overall the camera can be operated pretty much however you fancy.

Olympus OM-D E-M1 specification highlights:

  • 16MP MOS Four Thirds format sensor with no low-pass filter
  • On-sensor phase detection elements
  • Twin control dials (front and rear) with '2x2' dual-mode option
  • '5-axis' image stabilization with automatic panning detection ('S-IS Auto')
  • ISO 'LOW' (100 equiv) - ISO 25,600
  • Up to 10fps continuous shooting (6.5 fps shooting with continuous AF)
  • 1.04M-dot 3" LCD touchscreen display - tilts 80° upwards and 50° downwards
  • Electronic viewfinder: 2.36M-dot LCD, 0.74x magnification (equiv.), eye sensor
  • Built-in Wi-Fi for remote shooting and image transfer to smartphone or tablet
  • Dust, splash and freeze-proof (to -10 °C)

Gained over the E-M5

  • True Pic VII processor, with lens corrections
  • 1/8000 sec top shutter speed, 1/320 sec flash sync
  • Built-in microphone socket (rather than optional accessory adapter)
  • Flash X-sync socket
  • Built-in Wi-Fi
  • Focus 'peaking' display
  • In-camera HDR blending (two modes), previewed in viewfinder

Four Thirds is dead. Long live Four Thirds.

As well as representing the highest-end Micro Four Thirds camera yet, the E-M1's role is also about offering continued support for users of the original Four Thirds SLR system. Olympus created some very nice Four Thirds lenses, but the company struggled to make enough impact in the SLR market to justify the cost of continuing development for both systems in parallel.

The company claims to have studied what the E-M1 and a hypothetical 'E-7' SLR could offer, and concluded that, while image quality, durability and speed would have been the same, the OM-D design allowed both a substantial size advantage and a much greater viewfinder magnification than would be possible with an optical finder. As such the E-M1 should be considered the successor to the E-5.

We'll look at the performance of the camera with Four Thirds lenses in a little more depth later in this article. But in principle, the on-sensor phase detection autofocus system should be much more effective than contrast detection when it comes to controlling Four Thirds lenses, all of which were primarily designed to be driven by phase detection-based systems.


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2013 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
1389
I own it
710
I want it
180
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 2065
12345
ThorstenMUC

Using the compare-tool on the last page I don't understand, why Nikon D7100 has a relevant higher rating for Viewfinder/Screen.

Arguable E-M1 "only" has an EVF... which is not as snappy as a real VF - but also has some benefits. So imho not much points to gain here, since the new EVF has almost no lag and a really high resolution.

Moreover E-M1 EVF is larger, than the D7100 VF, Screen is articulated whilst fixed on the Nikon... where does the higher score come from?

5 upvotes
photosen

Good, thorough review. I'd love to see how usable it is with longer 4/3 telephotos and specific lenses like the Panasonic/Leica 25mm 1.4. I liked the idea behind the EM5 but found it way too small for my hands, this would feel better. Part of the problem for Oly is that new consumers will look up the experience of previous owners and ask themselves: If I buy your new lenses will you abandon them like you did with 4/3? The brand's silence will be a negative point.

1 upvote
pdelux

they didnt abandon them.. this camera is made for 4/3 owners.

3 upvotes
achiinto

Totally agree with pdelux. I have been waiting for this camera for a long time being from the 43-era. Good to see how they have made such effort to release a camera for the 43-users.

1 upvote
Silverback46

Looks like a nice camera. The space needle shot is an art filter shot for those not familiar with Olympus art filters.

1 upvote
harold1968

Inexplicable scoring.
Dpreview's own partner DXOmARK has Nex 7 (just about to be replaced) significantly better then EM5 on every score.
Sure the Olympus sensor (now they are using sony) is better then previous versions, but the quality of picture is still far behind APS-c. I know, after editing both, the Nex pictures take far more battering in pp.
It is simply misleading to say otherwise

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
miketala

1) sensors are actually pretty close.

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/909|0/%28brand%29/Olympus/%28appareil2%29/736|0/%28brand2%29/Sony#tabs-2

2) Surely there is more to a camera than just a sensor? Ergonomics, viewfinder, weatherproofing (and level of weatherproofing), focus speed, continuous shot speed, native lenses, stabilization, etc.
Sony does some neat stuff, and in some ways their cameras push boundaries, but in other ways they're playing catch-up.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
bluevellet

I do like the implications of what harold is saying. So DPReview are misleading the public... but why? Bribes are involved? The owner is an Oly fanboy? A great internet-wide anti-Sony conspiracy of some sort?

4 upvotes
olypan

Absolute rubbish. You have to "batter" your files to get a decent image do you? Nice.

3 upvotes
caver3d

Harold - you don't know what you are talking about. I have both the E-M5 and the Fuji X-E1 (and X100 too), both great cameras with excellent image quality. The Fuji may get the edge, but that is it. There is NO significant difference between the two in "real life" shooting. A photographer can be happy with either one.

2 upvotes
pdelux

DPR reviews Cameras, not Sensors, you know the thing with the lens, buttons and dials, you press the buttons and it takes a photo..

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
DaveE1

@pdelux: Some people would consider the sensor to be quite an important part of a digital camera.

1 upvote
sarit

Wow, m4/3 format sensor, 500gm weight and a $1400 body only price ! Now wonder they are going bankrupt. I agree this is a great camera for what it is and especially weather-sealed, but this is not competitive in the market for that price range. Even more so as Sony A7 is weather sealed and comes at just $300 more with a FF sensor.

10 upvotes
Winston Loo

A7 is NOT weather sealed

7 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

sarit:

You may want to check Sony's unsteady finances, and the A7 sure is more audible than this Olympus.

3 upvotes
bluevellet

A7 is weather sealed, but the level of sealing is open to debate at this point. No videos of people hosing it (yet).

But the mistake many superficial users make around these parts is judge a camera entirely on the sensor, as if a car could be judged entirely on many cylinders the engine has.

The A7 is a barebone, entry-level, FF camera while the EM1 is a top-of-the-line semi-pro camera.

6 upvotes
kadardr

DXO Sensor comparison Overall ................ High ISO

OM D M1 ....................73......................757
D610 .........................94.....................2925

I do not think that D610 user experience is too bad. Size and weight? That may modify the picture.

Comment edited 7 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
FreedomLover

Oil splatters competing against shuttershock ;-)

0 upvotes
sarit

bluevellet wrote : "The A7 is a barebone, entry-level, FF camera while the EM1 is a top-of-the-line semi-pro camera."

Really, I'm not sure which "semi-pro" feature the EM1 has that the A7 doesn't have ? Even the EVF is much better in A7.

2 upvotes
bluevellet

You're really not sure?

EVF have same resolution, but the EM1 has greater magnification
Touch screen
Better build
Better weather sealing
IBIS
Faster AF
Faster flash synch
Faster continuous shooting with bigger buffer
More controls, more customization
Quieter shutter

6 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

kadardr:

Thing is unless you use Zeiss lenses on that Nikon the sensor of the Nikon isn't really going to beat that in the Olympus. Because the best Olympus lenses easily beat the best Nikon lenses for optical quality.

Yet again: DXO sensor scoring is next to useless because it doesn't account for the lens used and the incamera processing.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW

FreedomLover:

The Nikon 610 likely fixed the oil problem--time will tell.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover

HowaboutRaw, the official sample image for the Nikon D610 is full of oil spots again:
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d610/sample.htm

0 upvotes
peevee1

"Now wonder they are going bankrupt."

They are not:
"Olympus' operating profit increased 70% to some JPY 30 billion (USD 306 million), topping forecasts by JPY 3 billion (USD 31 million). "
This is the result for April-September 2013.

2 upvotes
wansai

The A7 is a completely different beast as are FF from this EM1.

The A7 will release with literally, barebones glass. You have to adapt everything. The EM1 is a faster camera all around. It's also signifigantly more quiet; and having owned and used Nex's and spent a great deal of money on them; not a single one, new or old, can compete with the OMD for sheer camera performance.

What you get with the Sony's will be absolute IQ over absolute performance wheras the OMD is absolute performance (relative to the Sony) over absolute IQ.

Also, you're looking at much bigger/heavier glass overall. Also, weather sealing, as far as I know, do not come with the lower FF cameras. You have to pay for it.

I own an EM1 with the 12-40 f2.8. The overall performance of the camera alone makes the asking price a bargain.

Do an analysis of what you get with the EM1 in that price bracket; I doubt you'll find anything comparable and even if you do, it's going to lose out to the EM1 in some fashion.

2 upvotes
caver3d

Not competitive in the marketplace? You have no clue whatsoever. What a joke.

And, it is NOT a m43 sensor as that does not exist. It is a 43 sensor.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

FreedomL:

Thanks for the link, slow connection so I'll have to look later, but why would Nikon post a flawed image?

Also as a rule this kind of thing is going to have to show up more than a few times for confirmation that the problem is still there, and this body hasn't been out long enough.

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
FreedomLover

HowaboutR, it looks like they absolutely don't care.

Of course there will always be plenty of people like you saying it's just a bad sample. They have been saying that for over a year now, why not say it for a few more years.

They never admitted having a problem, and there are enough reports from burned customers that they never fixed it.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW

FreedomLover:

I downloaded that linked jpeg of the lake; there are no oil spots on it.

Going by this one example the problem is solved. Of course that's the wrong approach.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover

HowaboutRaw, "Of course that's the wrong approach." Of course. As an example look at the dark round spot on X:760-800 Y:172-212. Enhance contrast to 90% to make it easier to see in the cloudy sky's top left corner.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

FreedomLover:

I think I see what you mean, but not clear it's an oil spot.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover

I know, it could also be UFOs hidden in the clouds and on the faces of your subjects. Regardless, there are many, they are hard to remove, and multiply.

0 upvotes
sarit

@bluevellet

The A7 has LED viewfinder with slightly more resolution with slightly less magnification. Weather-sealing and AF performance is something that I can't comment as A7 is not available for public yet.

Faster flash sync and IBIS are advantages for Em1. I don't think Sony released the buffer size specs of the A7 although given its much higher resolution, it probably will store less number of images. On the other hand, the much bigger sensor size, lower noise at higher ISO, Dynamic range, more control over DOF are in the favor of A7. A7 does have a lot of customizable buttons and options. So still I can't see how Em1 is pro and A7 is barebones. The advantages of Em-1 are really not that much.

2 upvotes
bluevellet

Resolution of the EVF is the same: 2.36 million pixels, only make and magnification differ.

Weather sealing is open to debate (though watch the camera store review for clues), but AF isn't. A7r is even slower because of the lack of PDAF.

But the buffer and continuous shooting are things that make A7(r) "barebone" because pro-level FF cameras don't skip on that detail. And you pay for that luxury.

Yes, A7 has buttons and customization, like many other cameras, but EM1 just has loads of it.

DOF control is a double-edged sword. Having more control is an advantage, but in RL situations, you will often find yourself stopping down because your FF lens has better IQ that way and/or it's easier to nail the focus (not every1 wants to have one eye in focus and everything else out of focus). The lenses often excell wide open already and DOF is not as shallow so shooting wide open also allows you to shoot at faster shutter speeds/lower ISOs. IBIS helps here too.

Almost over limit. Must stop

1 upvote
FreedomLover

With Samsung, Sony and Toshiba selling 4K TVs for under 4000 dollars already, the image quality offered by these small sensor cameras is visibly lacking. And dpReview's denial of the obvious double edges produced by shuttershock shown in their own samples is not going to help.

4 upvotes
mister_roboto

What are you babbling about? 4K resolution is only 8.3 MP.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 16 seconds after posting
8 upvotes
olypan

What "small sensor cameras" are you talking about. This is a discussion of the E-M1

7 upvotes
FreedomLover

Mister Roboto, "keep on trollin", "waxing poetic grouchiness", babbling in a good mood today :-)

Ultra HD displays of 3840x2160 show almost the full width of 4608x3456 pixel images. Noise and shutter shock displayed in the EM1 images even at base ISO become immediately evident.

Olypan, I like your dedication to Olympus. They have wonderful colours, a full frame camera from them would be great, global shutter, z-axis sensor focusing and light. Sony is planning it for 2015, Olympus could be first. It will be a hit and leading the way.

0 upvotes
caver3d

The E-M1 is NOT a small sensor camera.

3 upvotes
pdelux

"Ultra HD displays of 3840x2160 show almost the full width of 4608x3456 pixel images."

FreedomLover Ultra HD is still onlly 8MP which is half the resolution of the E-M1.

You will be viewing images at 50%, and even less if you want to fit the entire image...

Who in their right mind wants to only see half of an image... just because it fills the width of the screen

0 upvotes
FreedomLover

When it shrinks the image to 84% of its width so it fits the full screen, only the top and bottom 12% do not show. You should try it, it's great if you have high quality pictures.

0 upvotes
tecnoworld

Incredible that you already reviewed this camera which has just come to the market, while you never tested the samsung nx300, which has been out for more than 6 months now.

At least, take some nx300 samples with the studio scene, to show that its iq is outstanding.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
ThorstenMUC

Just a typical citation, why I like my Olympus cameras (ok - I'm a geek):

"This being Olympus, you can decide..."

(not the Canon way: Yes - this is a reasonable feature, which we could easily implement... if you want it buy the bigger model)

Though the new Pentax K-3 and Nikons 7100 are interesting competitors currently my decision goes to move to mFT with an E-M1 body.

If it just would have the illuminated buttons as my old E-620 ;-)

2 upvotes
peevee1

E-620 was not sealed. I guess the seals are made from black rubber, hard to illuminate through those. But probably possible if they try hard enough. ;)

0 upvotes
reefdreams

Seems like a very nice camera, I think if it would be APS-C instead of m4/3 with the same selection of lenses it would be even more successfull.

It is true though that with Sony pushing the full-frame pricing very low it might hurt the sales of a 4/3 sensor camera regardless of how good it is!

3 upvotes
MichaelKJ

If it were APS-C or FF, the lenses would be larger and heavier. Beginning with the E-M5, many of us have decided that m4/3 provides the optimal combination of IQ and size. I don't feel the need to go on threads about APS-C or FF cameras and criticize them for having larger and heavier lenses, and fail to understand why some people feel the need to criticize m4/3.

12 upvotes
Oly72

I could not have said it better myself Michael... Spot on.

0 upvotes
digitalanalog

There's no ideal or flawless camera out there.

But this one probably comes as close as it gets.

5 upvotes
Photomonkey

1788 comments in 24 hours! Must be a record.

2 upvotes
bluevellet

No, the comments for the reviews were added to the comments of the "first impressions review" from last month.

6 upvotes
Photomonkey
0 upvotes
bluevellet

The original first impression review got around 1450 comments during its run. Not bad at all. In recent memory, the only thing that comes close is the first impression review of the A7/A7r.

2 upvotes
Macx

Some people can't fathom that something that doesn't have a mirror and is smaller than 135 format has an appeal to other people. Their minds are blown, yet they are compelled to comment.

2 upvotes
faberryman

Back in the day, I had an extensive OM-1 system with multiple bodies and a full suite of lenses, all of which I sold some time ago. Since then, I have had several digital cameras. Currently, I am shooting with a Canon G1X, which is really the first digital camera I have been satisfied with due to its large sensor. However, I am thinking about moving to a more versatile DSLR, either jumping up sensor size-wise to a full frame Nikon, or down sensor size-wise to a OM-D M1.

The main issue for me is lens availability and selection, about which I am confused. Can someone explain to me which Olympus and Panasonic lenses I can use without the MMF-3 adapter, and which lenses require the adapter. Thanks.

0 upvotes
faberryman

I'll probably go FF. The FF sensor is 9x the size of the m43. It's the equivalent of shooting 110 vs. 35mm. $2500 for an OM-1D M1 and 12-40mmm f.2.8 lens to shoot 110?

0 upvotes
faberryman

Here is a 110 SLR with interchangeable lenses from the 1970s. What is old is new again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentax_Auto_110

0 upvotes
Carl

I have a question to the reviewers:

One of the main drawbacks of the E-M5 is image playback, because the playback button is very difficult to press, and once you pressed it the image only appeares in the LCD, but never in the viewfinder.

Is the E-M1 capable of displaying the image review in the viewfinder when you press the image playback button?

And is it possible to customze any other button besides the playback button for image review?

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake

The E-M1 can playback images in the viewfinder.

As you can see from the descriptions of button customisation in our [Controls page](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m1/5), you can't assign any other button for playback. But the E-M1's play button is much less inconveniently placed than the E-M5's.

2 upvotes
Carl

Thanks, very nice enhancement having playback on the EVF.

The new playback button in fact seems easier to press (than on the E-M5) but at the same time more difficult to reach without a little hand acrobatics (just an assumption from what I see), specially when one is looking through the viewfinder.

One of the two new customizable buttons in the front of the camera would have been nicer for (optional) image playback, as it was implemented on the Nikon D800.

0 upvotes
caver3d

Now that is really nitpicking. I can take ANY other camera and criticize the placement of buttons. Yes, ANY other camera. Silly.

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Carl

From my perspective it's not silly. I have intensively used the E-M5 for over a year now, and having shot ten thousands of images with it I can tell the image review button and behaviour were actually very awkward in real use, it's a thing that can slow down your shooting.

Having invested some money on glas for this system I have a real interest in a new body with enhancements where the E-M5 was lacking. The image review is one of the aspects where a mirrorless system is (or should be) in natural advantage over a DSLR - but only if the workflow is seamless. The placement of the review button is critical here.

I also own a Nikon system, and although you have to switch your eye from the EVF to the LCD to review an image, the process of image review takes me less time with the D800 than with the E-M5 - just because of the button placement.

1 upvote
Reilly Diefenbach

"Its Four Thirds sensor is smaller than the APS-C imagers of its Nikon D7100 and Canon EOS 70D peers, but we think the difference it makes in real world shooting is hard to spot. You need to put the E-M1 up against a full frame camera to really see a significant difference in image quality."

If the Space Needle shot is any indication, the D7100 thoroughly trounces this good offering from Olympus for subjects wanting lots of intricate detail. It's by no means a difficult call. The bar has been raised and the price of admission lowered.

4 upvotes
PDidd117w3n7y

that pic uses an art filter....idiot

6 upvotes
FreedomLover

Haha, and I fell for it too :-)

Actually I never really looked at that picture as I am interested in good quality. The first sample they post is purposely degraded using a "Grainy Film Art Filter". Don't know what they were thinking. Probably they wanted to be artists too, for once :-) Silly ...
Still Reilly Diefenbach is not an idiot :-)
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/2731320/p9240316?inalbum=olympus-om-d-em-1-final-review-samples

0 upvotes
caver3d

Dumb comment.

1 upvote
Reilly Diefenbach

I'm referring to the Space Needle shot on page 15 "raw image quality," you numbnuts.

1 upvote
FreedomLover

He is right, again, there is noise at base ISO, even in the clear blue sky. Looks like the sensor is just too small to capture high quality images.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m1/samples/raw/PA010046-ACR.jpg

0 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach

Space Needle, Raw Image quality, page 15, gentlemen!

1 upvote
Karl Gnter Wnsch

Why didn't you test the focusing performance in a more relevant scenario - where you use a tele zoom lens of 200 or 300mm length and not those piddly wide angle lenses? A big fail to put the finger on the sore wound that is focusing performance of this camera when challenged!

5 upvotes
Plastek

Classic. Similar mistake was done by plenty of reviewers for Nikon 1 - where they tried to test AF and concluded its brilliant only forgetting that depth of field reaches everywhere from 10 meters in front of target to 20 meters behind it. o_O

2 upvotes
FreedomLover

It's not by mistake, Plastek, they are usually just trying to sell as many cameras as possible while looking unbiased.

0 upvotes
mrdancer

I was waiting for DPReview to do a full review of the GX7, but I suspect it will be very similar to this review. It looks like Olympus has adopted some of the in-camera features that the GX7 has, such as the color tool and intervalometer.

I've been shooting with a GX7 for a week or so now. It's low-light capabilities have surprised me. The starlight photos are, well, stellar! With shutter set to 60 seconds with the F1.4 lens, I can capture thousands (millions?) of stars in the backdrop of a sharply-focused tree or un-lit building(although the stars appear slightly blurry due to earth's rotation during the 60 seconds - at least they all blur in the same direction!). It even captures stars when there are bright landscape lights on the horizon.

Of course, shorter shutter speeds reduce star movement, but don't quite capture the depth that a million or so stars can create.

4 upvotes
falconeyes

millions of stars create millions of white pixels, or a white wall :)

Number of stars visible to a human eye under perfect conditions is about 2000.

The challenge with night photography is to capture the starry night w/o trails and blur. A fast 35mm-equivalent F/1.4 35mm, or F/2.8 14mm, can do the trick. Exposure should be less than 30s, dep. on the focal length.

With a long exposure, any camera can capture the stars.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Raskolnikow90

stellar =D

there is also a new trick from pentax, to use the IBIS to compensate for "startrailing"
Astrotracer:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-5-ii-k-5-ii-s/7

0 upvotes
caver3d

falconeyes - in defense of the OP, keep in mind that once you have a camera set up for longer exposure (30-60 seconds), you will pick up a lot more stars than you would see with the naked eye. That is a fact.

0 upvotes
aandegoons

Nice looking large camera. Seems a bit expensive given it's limited photo and lens capabilities.

It would be nice if Olympus could release a camera that would not limit you to certain types of photography. Especially in this price range and size.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
pdelux

aandegoons, yes of course Medium format cameras are not limited at all, neither are 35mm cameras.

2 upvotes
leno

The only limit is your imagination

15 upvotes
wansai

in what way is this limited? IQ on par with APSC. Apart from tracking, camera performance is pro grade. Glass is small & extremely high quality optically and plenty of fast glass. Build is pro grade.

The only m4/3 glass that are of poor quality are the kit glass. Everythign else is mostly considered exceptional.

0 upvotes
digitalanalog

Optional nick name: OMG EM1

3 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic

“The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.” ― Dorothea Lange, American documentary photographer and photojournalist

If this camera allows people same that aim Dorothea talks about, then it is a perfect camera for all those who find it sufficing and made for their taste, and I can see, many can. I wouldn't mind either.

Everything else, like 80% of nonsense in these comments, is irrelevant.

6 upvotes
photobeans

After about 2 years of carrying around m43 cameras and lenses I can't go back to larger DSLRs. I stuff my m43 and 2 lenses in the small back pocket for a hiking trip and I don't even notice it. What's worse is when you have small kids with baby bottles, clothes, extra food, and still need to carry a camera. M43 is a blessing. Image quality is really good enough for the majority of shooters.

17 upvotes
RichRMA

A lot of people I know have made the same decision, despite some saying that the smaller camera would be a back-up system.

2 upvotes
JadedGamer

Personally, I cannot be without the strength workout that hand-holding a 5D mk III plus 100mm macro plus Sigma's ring flash gives me :)

3 upvotes
jtan163

I hang EM5 around my neck and stick the 2 spare lenses in my pockets!
A table top tripod and a polariser and lens cloth and off I go.
Then off I go.

I love my D7000 - but I certainly can't go out shooting with a pair of business slacks and a business shirt as my camera bag with the D7000.

0 upvotes
Allen Yang

I prefer Nikon D7100 to this!

5 upvotes
George Veltchev

who cares indeed ... but I just wonder is there a camera with more ridiculous code name .. OK ... lets repeat... OM D E M1 ... well bad, bad starting point Olympus ! Why don't you call it simply DeLorean DMC-12 ... from the Back to the Future film trilogy. It looks exactly the same as the car of that time !

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Rupert Bottomsworth

George, why can't you just call it the EM1? Seems simple enough to me.

15 upvotes
Andy Crowe

George, how about "Canon EOS Rebel T5i"? "Nikon 1 AW1"? "Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7"? Or maybe even "Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II"?

Most cameras sound stupid if use their full make, series and model number.

11 upvotes
Segaman

Yep, ridiculous names, as worst as a Big Mac ingredients sheet
Then again, there is a lot of technology under the hood, and they use it to sell a camera.

1 upvote
leno

Because it is Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark .

4 upvotes
BBking83

I guess you don't know Olympus' history then, do you George. Like the OM film cameras. And the D couldn't possibly stand for... Wait for it. DIGITAL!!

As for E-M1. Olympus have always used E for their SLRs, so M is for Micro (mirrorless). 1, well I'm sure you can cope with that.

1 upvote
AlpCns2

Camera names and/or model designations are completely irrelevant.

0 upvotes
ChromeDome

BBking83 - I'm with you up until the "1" bit. I don't get that. Why did my EM-5 start at "5" and not "1" surely someone in marketing, way back when, could spot the numbering anomaly? If EM-5 had been "1" then this camera could have been "2"

What happens when EM-1 becomes 2 then 3 then 4 then doh! ???

1 upvote
Andy Crowe

@ChromeDome "What happens when EM-1 becomes 2 then 3 then 4 then doh! ???"

Probably the same as the Canon 1D / 5D, where you'll get the EM-1 mk2/3/4 etc.

1 upvote
RichRMA

For those who think the camera costs too much, the E-5, the ancient DSLR this replaces, was $1800 new, for the body.

3 upvotes
boggis the cat

US$1700, back in 2009. ("Ancient", apparently.)

0 upvotes
CollBaxter

Boggis.

E-5 = US$1699 a month or 2 ago. :) All gone with no fire sales.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Plastek

And back in '80s you paid for each photograph taken. Who cares?!

2 upvotes
Brooks11

Thinking about purchasing this camera. I would like some feedback on how this camera works with the 7-14mm Lumix lens. Specifically fringing.

0 upvotes
pdelux

Olympus does CA correction for Olympus lenses only... so far..

0 upvotes
klauser
1 upvote
bluevellet

pdelux, did you even read the review? They talk about software correction on Panasonic lenses in the "Features" section.

Brooks1, they didn't test all lenses though. Gordon Laing at Cameralabs tested the lens you are interested in and noticed some purple flare artefacts when used with the EM1. You should check it out.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
SeeRoy

I really amazes me that people would buy, or consider buying, a camera of this sophistication (in the good sense) and then shooting JPEGs! The CA/defringing capacity of most RAW converters surely makes these problems a minor consideration. Flare's another matter of course.

2 upvotes
sdribetahi

Enjoy your purple flare!

3 upvotes
Don051348

SeeRoy...

And if the camera (any camera actually) can produce excellent OOC Jpegs why not use it? Using in camera software vs software on a PC; does it really matter which one you use if it produces the desired results? Software is software; doesn't really matter where it physically resides.

3 upvotes
pdelux

I Stand corrected, didn't see the features section.

0 upvotes
BJN

I notice that we no longer get comprehensive examples of the menu system UI in your reviews. It sounds like Olympus has made no progress simplifying camera configuration. That was the worst aspect of the E-M5, and the UI doesn't get much more friendly with familiarity. Finding and changing infrequently used settings is annoying with the complex and sometimes obtuse Olympus UI. It's also too bad that with a little extra bulk, Olympus didn't include a fully articulating display. Nice cameras.

1 upvote
SeeRoy

Yes indeed. Even after more than a year of continuous use I manage to blunder into unwanted VF modes and struggle to escape, not helped by the tiny buttons and a control layout that never becomes second nature. God help anyone for whom this is their first "proper" camera.

1 upvote
boggis the cat

Well, the solution to highly configurable cameras is to gradually set them up how you want. Then you use the user presets system ("Mysets" in Olympus speak) to store your setup(s).

I also prefer the "Super Control Panel" to the Canon-esque "Live Control" interface, to give you better access to functions.

1 upvote
Yohan Pamudji

Is there a mistake at ISO 6400 on the daylight studio shot? Up to ISO 3200 compared to the E-M5 and E-P5 the E-M1 is almost identical. Then at 6400 the E-M1 is very smudgy compared to the other 2. At 12800 they're comparable again. The problem doesn't seem to occur in the low light studio shots at ISO 6400 so it shouldn't be the camera at fault.

2 upvotes
jonathanj

Thank you for a very comprehensive review delivered extremely quickly! Sorry to point out 1 (very minor!) point, on the wi-fi page, where next to the screen shot of the app you say:
"• Remote Control - operate the camera from your phone or tablet. The mode is limited to iAuto only, but you can specify your desired focus point and set a self timer."
But later on down the page it's clear this mode works in PASM modes too. Did you copy that bit from the E-P5 Review? :-)

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
peevee1

Dear DPR, objective, quantitative testing of tracking performance please?

10 upvotes
white shadow

Agree.

Where is the quantitative testing of tracking performance?

I have tried this camera during the launch more than a month ago and found the tracking focus not really up to my expectation. I need an independant confirmation whether I am right or wrong. It would be good if DPR or someone out there can shoot a bird flying across the frame or a motorbike zooming across. I know I would be able to do it with my Canon 1DX and the EF 400 mm f/2.8L IS.

2 upvotes
Rockaw

Seriously. You're asking a $1400 camera to meet or surpass the $12,000 combo of 1DX and 400 F/2.8L lens. If it can't do it, it must be TRASH, right? If it gets 80% there, I would regard the E-M1 as a huge WINNER.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
32 upvotes
DaveE1

@Rockaw: It's a reasonable request.

2 upvotes
Brian Wadie

". It would be good if DPR or someone out there can shoot a bird flying across the frame or a motorbike zooming across."

have a look here:

http://imagesfromnature.foliopic.com/gallery/thruxton-race-meet-12-10-2013-19933

and

here

http://imagesfromnature.foliopic.com/gallery/hawk-conservancy-trust-15-10-13-19977

1 upvote
Ramyeah

Good series Brian...
Impressive shots indeed and demonstrates how the CAF works very well now.
And your prior experience with 7D is quite relevant to get a comparative perspective as well..
Cheers.

0 upvotes
wansai

If you've used the EM5, take that tracking as a benchmark. Now make it 90% accurate tracking a moderately moving target. That's the EM1's tracking performance.

It's usable and mostly reliable now relative to the useless tracking of the EM5.

1 upvote
peevee1

Guys, "objective, quantitative" means repeatable (by other reviewers too) and expressed as an easy to understand number, for the topic it would be "well-focused frames per second" on a controlled subject with controlled speed, trajectory and level of light (both daylight level and gym level are interesting, especially the latter). Not just some bird or some bike in some unique circumstances which would never be exactly repeated to compare with other cameras.

1 upvote
Brian Wadie

Can't argue with that peeve,

however, I put the pics up in response to this plea:

" It would be good if DPR or someone out there can shoot a bird flying across the frame or a motorbike zooming across"

so it wasn't there to satisfy your requirements (its over to DPR or some other outfit that cares to do that for you :) )

0 upvotes
Timbukto

IMO a bit dissapointed to see that the continuous AF section of the review is completely pulled from an Olympus press event shooting white riders on top of white horses. Would have liked to see the extra effort towards continuous AF. I mean its an Olympus press even showcasing the EM-1...in a way the shooting environment is controlled by Olympus.

7 upvotes
thx1138

"True, you can switch out a heavy zoom for a lightweight prime on a DSLR and get something of the same feeling, but the DSLR doesn't transition into the role of a take-me-anywhere camera quite like a Micro Four Thirds body does"

And yet somehow we do manage to take our DSLRs everywhere with us and certainly to the same places we'd take the almost-as-large as Canon SL1 E-M1. SL1 and 40mm pancake is actually lighter by 70g than E-M1 + 17 f1.8/20f1.7.

What you said might be true for the smaller PEN style bodies but E-M1 is getting seriously large and straying away from the small and compact concept. It's larger and heavier than Sony A7(R) twins!

Certainly wouldn't upgrade from my E-M5 for this one.

5 upvotes
Impulses

The body is still only a third of the equation... A 10x super zoom on MFT is the size of a 3x kit zoom on a DSLR. Similarly, there's no comparison between f/2.8 zooms... If you're sticking with primes it might not matter much, but for a lot of others there's still a very tangible difference even with a body as large as the EM1...

It's not my preference either, though if I was made of money I'd certainly grab one. There's something appealing about a system that can scale from a GM1 to an EM1! I'm fairly new to it so I only have the one body at the moment, but I could seemyself with two in the future.

2 upvotes
JBurnett

It's all about finding your own PERSONAL blend of size, weight, usability, IQ, etc. I have a friend (enthusiast, NOT professional) who takes two Canon bodies (1-full-frame, 1-APS), and a whole raft of L-lenses from 16mm to 400mm in a giant backpack wherever he goes. I take a Panny G3, two small zooms and a fast prime in a tiny shoulder bag to the same locations. Am I jealous of his equipment or his pictures? Absolutely not. I very much respect his ability as a photographer, but it has nothing to do with his equipment.

0 upvotes
Olymore

Well, when the SL1 has weather sealing and a viewfinder as big as a Canon 1DX and can use four thirds lenses then I'll consider it. In the meantime....

2 upvotes
Plastek

Why would you want to use 4/3 lenses instead of Canon glass?!

To counter your point: I guess I would consider EM1 if it'd offer APS-C or larger sensor and an optical viewfinder.

1 upvote
Chez Wimpy

Because its the Canon *glass* that weighs my backpack down, not the body(s).

0 upvotes
Jon Ragnarsson

Yes, if only you could find smaller/lighter m43 cameras to choose from if weight was your concern...

0 upvotes
ericnats73

Olympus had outdone itself again. For micro 4/3 users, this is the best camera available right now. APSC and Full-Frame users need not to worry coz their IQ and DR would always be better due to their sensor size. I got this camera coz of its compatibility with the old 4/3 lenses I have and it's light weight and weather-sealed.

Kudos olympus for a job well done!

6 upvotes
Olymore

Not if your APSC camera is a Canon.

2 upvotes
alatchin

Greater OOC JPEG control, greater connectivity and greater lens selection.

I can now use my growing set of m43rds primes, or my family of superb 43rds optics on the same camera. Brilliant.

What gets me is the connectivity and creative control in camera, the personalization of colour allowed in camera, the ability for me to fine tune, tweak and perfect my very own look from tone control to hue to saturation... in camera.

Why is the in camera so important to me... Because I sit in front of a computer all day for my work... the less I have to do for my photography the better.

Superb.

5 upvotes
IZO100

This review before the Canon 70D ? Why ?

What is the market share of this toy again ??

8 upvotes
Light Bender

Oh dear, well you won't like how this 'toy' outperforms the 70D sensor in all areas except high ISO according to DXO...

I'm pretty sure it outperforms the 70D in most other areas too...darn 'toys'...

26 upvotes
RichRMA

A line-up of cookie-cutter black DSLRs is beginning to look like those old shots of the Soviet Politburo octogenarians.

8 upvotes
photo nuts

@RichRMA:
After all these years, DSLRs STILL outsell MILCs by a ratio of 4:1. Market share for MILCs has remained stagnant in the last few years.

5 upvotes
Richard Butler

The Canon EOS 70D has been conducted in tandem with the E-M1 - it's just that the Olympus review got finished a fraction earlier. The 70D will follow shortly.

8 upvotes
DaddyG

It would be interesting for DPR to segregate such reviews into performance by photographic subject, e.g. sports/wedding/landscape/macro (etc) performance compared to competition. Comparing MILC v APS-C would be interesting in this format.

2 upvotes
flipmac

@photo nuts:
Family sedans outsells sporty coupés, so what's your point?

4 upvotes
Olymore

And Ford and GM outsell BMW and Mercedes. It always amazes me when people look at the sales figures as proof that something is better. I suppose it makes them feel 'safe' that they went with the same as everyone else instead of evaluating what is best for their needs.

2 upvotes
Plastek

flipmac - only here m4/3 is like a Sedan and DSLRs are like Sport cars. So in did - that's an achievement worth a note.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
sanchil

I guess dpr follows the dictum "quality first and then quantity"

0 upvotes
sanchil

@plastek ... dSLR's are more like pickup trucks ... bigger ... n better .... depending upon how u choose to live ur life ...

3 upvotes
wansai

Anyone who considers the EM1 a toy is just not a photographer. At all. How's that medium format working for you when you carry it around your neck to an event shoot?

I'd rather take the toy, thank you very much.

2 upvotes
sadwitch

Handled one briefly and must say the EVF is definitely a step up, FF vf sized with more fluid response than the GX7 or fuji's Xe. Continuous FPS is really fast too with a very light flutter and shutter sound seem even more damped compared to EM5. AF is blazingly fast which DPR failed to list in their pros. Its a camera or system that needs to be experienced as a whole to see it's benefits. For those who can't see pass its 'small' sensor size, your depth of view are as narrow as your FF or MF or LF systems.

4 upvotes
inorogNL

"depth of view"I have to remember this one :) brilliant ! wishing for this omd like a little kid waiting for that one birthday present, could not care less for depth of view debate :P

1 upvote
steven_k

I would have stuck with Olympus, but even with the new EM-1 at base ISO do a comparison RAW ISO 200 to the Fuji X-Pro then hover the blue square on the color checker chart. Olympus has very visible noise where as the Fuji has none.
Even at ISO 100 which basically giving the Oly one more stop of light there is still noise. What's up with that?

Don't get me wrong the Olyqmpus is an amazing over all camera, but for me a base ISO shooter, like to shot landscapes at F8, the Fuji produces a noise free image.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Brett Goodhew

I have owned the x-pro for more than a year and love it. But the autofocus, write speeds and evf (when I need it) are all horrible. Image quality is sublime, imo.
A few days ago, I bought the Olympus EM1 with the 12-40mm. That lens is fantastic. But I have obviously been spoilt by the Fuji's IQ because the Olympus IQ is disappointing. I'd be reluctant to use this camera beyond iso400. I cannot for the life of me see how dpr can say that the EM1's image quality is pretty much the same as the X-Pro. The EM-1 has a lot of things going for it, but great image quality isn't one of them. The autofocus, write speeds and evf easily trump the x-pro. (yes, I know the x-pro has an ovf. but sometimes you need the evf!) I'll keep both and use them for different applications.

5 upvotes
CharlesTokyo

How do you compare image quality? I look at my final prints and there isn't a difference between the E-M1/5 or a Fuji body. Maybe at a specific size barrier or specific ISO one might have a noticeable difference, but it's just getting used to your camera. Often I have to add noise to my prints to get them to look more natural as it is. The ultra clean Fuji files aren't exactly an advantage for me.

1 upvote
steven_k

Charles, I print my own images on my HPZ3200 24" printer.
I printed numerous 16x20 from my now sold Oly EM-5 and for landscapes my Fuji produces a mush cleaner looking print.

Believe me I am no Fuji Fanboy, As Brett pointed out! the EVF sucks IMHO on the X-E1 but for static subjects it does the job.

I will repeat, the Oly is for sure a better al around camera yet to me does not excel at anything, it's just good at everything, which fork 99% of us is good enough.

For what I shoot I am still saving up for a used Leica M9

2 upvotes
wansai

@Brett,

Sounds like you're spoiled by the X-Pro. You have to understand that camera IQ pretty much trounces everything in its class; but its overall performance is pretty abysmal for pro use.

I think Steve Huff said it best; There's no camera makers making bad cameras nowadays; it's just a matter of what you want and what you need it for.

I shoot events so the absolute performance gain of the OMD's are of a much higher priority for me considering that all cameras now produce good IQ.

0 upvotes
DougVaughn

Some have posted below that image quality isn't up to full frame standards, and I will agree my 5DIII with L lenses can beat the OMD when pixel peeping. I purchased the E-M5 for the combination of size/weight/quality and have upgraded to the E-M1 for the same reason. At 49, the weight of the FF DSLR and lenses hurts my back after a couple hours, but I can walk all day with the Olympus and a lens or two.

By the way, my E-M1 arrived on Friday, and I took it out shooting for the first time on Saturday. It produced my favorite image of the year, and when it gets right down to it, what I want from a camera is something that gets the job done in real world shooting as opposed to tests in a lab.

11 upvotes
Plastek

Image quality of this camera isn't even up to current generation of APS-C sensors found in DSLRs for half the price of EM1. If you care mostly about image quality - EM1 is not a camera for you.

3 upvotes
david vella

Simply not true Plastek , let us see your images that prove your statement in any meaningful, real world photographic situation.

Total tosh in fact , look at the work of Neil Buchan-Grant and then compare it with your efforts using APS-C at any price. Please let us see if your statement is actually fact, or merely biased opinion.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
wansai

@plastek,

pretty much every professional review and end-user review of the OMD EM5 and now the EM1, states there is no appreciable difference between what you get out of the OMD sensors and what you get out of the APSC sensors except depth of field differences.

I've used a bunch of midrange DSLR and the OMD EM5 IQ trounces them in absolute IQ. It's competitive with higher end APSC. I also used to own a Nex7 with Zeiss - that produced lovely images in good light but the IQ difference was neglible with the Nex 7 obviously showing more detail for its 24mp sensor, but in all other ways, they were effectively neck & neck even at base ISO.

You are the ONLY person I've ever heard say the OMD performs at low end APSC. That's simply not true. Even against the very best APSC sensor/camera, the OMD would only lose out by maybe 1/3 a stop - and frankly, you're not paying 1/2 price for that.

2 upvotes
budi0251

Where is Olympus Pen F with 1/2 frame sensor a.k.a. APS-C sized?

They did it back around 40 years ago, now technology has advanced tremendously, so where is it today?

2 upvotes
caver3d

It was NOT a sensor back then. Sheesh! And the half frame is NOT the size of APS-C.

1 upvote
rfsIII

Half frame was around 24x18mm, APS-C is slightly smaller at 23.6x15.7, micro 4/3rds sensors are about 17x13.

As to whether a strip of acetate coated with a light-sensitive emulsion can be called a sensor, that's a bar discussion.

2 upvotes
jkrumm

You mean, where is the completely new lens system for a new mount not much larger?

1 upvote
david vella

Have you seen the work of Neil Buchan Grant or Steve Huff taken with the EM5,EM1/EP5 and various M4/3s lenses?

Neil's pictures in particular are spectacular, and really show what these 'small sensor' system cameras are really capable of in the right creative hands. Forget sensor size and look at the images and their content.

The M4/3s system as a whole from EM1 to GM1 has most bases covered , other than the extremes, and is more than 99.9 % of posters on this forum need in the real world of worthwhile image making.

If OTOH measurebators want to photograph brick walls and pixel peep all day long ,well jolly good luck and enjoy your strange pastime, but it has nothing to do with photography .

2 upvotes
Plastek

"not much larger" - lol

0 upvotes
u43

I don't understand why dpreview complains of a "lack of detail resolution" in the E-M1's video footage. I can read street signs and car license plates just fine in dpreviews own E-M1 video sample: https://vimeo.com/76649713 And I see no glaring moire or artifacts and just a hint of focus hunting. So I don't understand why reviewers are continually knocking the E-M1's video output.

6 upvotes
caver3d

They have to have something nonsensical to complain about. After all, it is a great camera, but they just can't admit it. And the video features of the E-M1 are what 99.5% of us would use and be happy with. The other 0.5% are actual videographers who will need to figure out if it is good enough for them.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
CharlesTokyo

I agree with both of you. For serious people the E-M1 may lack some features they require, but for the rest of us the video quality is quite good. I love IBIS more than any special frame rate options or higher bit rates.

4 upvotes
Darrell500

What I like is you can use the 4/3 lenses with this body and for those that don't already know they are some of the best lenses ever made for any format. When I travel I can remove the grip and adapter and mount a mZuiko 14-150 and maybe throw a macro in the bag and I'm ready to go.

Want narrow depth of field for shooting a wedding attach, a 35-100 f2 (70-200 FOV) on one body and a 14-35 f2 on another and your in narrow depth of field heaven, with sharpness that will rival and exceed most any other camera.

So hats off to all of you that are so good that this sensor size holds you back, please provide a link so that I may view these wonderful photos that the EM-1 or any 4/3rds camera isn't capable of.

4 upvotes
caver3d

I shot with my E-5 and 43 lenses (12-60 and 50-200 SWD) 10 months ago in Antarctica. Now I can use the E-M1 in similar environments with those same GREAT lenses.

3 upvotes
BJN

You have to find two stops to match the creative DOF control of full-frame at equivalent crops. f/2.0 vs. f/2.8 is far from DOF equivalence, let alone "heaven". But go ahead and work closer so you can pretend. BTW, I have a full MFT system and an FX system. Horses for courses.

1 upvote
olypan

You have to find two stops to match the creative DOF control of full-frame at equivalent crops. f/2.0 vs. f/2.8 is far from DOF equivalence, let alone "heaven". But go ahead and work closer so you can pretend. BTW, I have a full MFT system and an FX system. Horses for courses.

So do I, and you are talking nonsense. My D600 is a HUGE disappointment !

1 upvote
photo nuts

Wow, it's been a long while since DPReview reviews a camera so soon after launch. The last time this happened was during the Canon 350D-400D era. :)

9 upvotes
Johnsonj

Yawn. Too much of an "in-betweener." Give me a $2K full frame, 35mm equiv. RXxx something or other. Point and shoots are the way to go. Interchangeable lenses are so unnecessary. LMAO!

1 upvote
Gesture

What is shutter shock?

2 upvotes
FreedomLover

The shutter used here is a small lid, opening and closing typically within a fraction of a second to get the exact moment you want to capture. This curtain's fast action can shake the camera, capturing an object at different locations in the same image, producing a small effect of seeing double images :-)

0 upvotes
Gesture

Thanks. Hard to believe Olympus couldn't damper it somehow.

1 upvote
Iskender

Everything points to there being an effective anti-shake technology available: it's called a "heavy camera". Unfortunately it's not always possible to use this technology with mirrorless cameras. =)

Sony have solved this problem with an electronic first shutter curtain (basically having the mechanical shutter do less work), but Olympus/Panasonic do not have this technology. Or at least they haven't used it yet.

2 upvotes
Gesture

I think the EOS-M has the electronic first shutter curtain, also. Wonder what Samsung and Fuji have.

0 upvotes
SirSeth

To my eyes, this looks like a very good camera for a lot of folks. For those wanting a very high quality carry everywhere camera as a companion to a FF system, it would be great. For those looking for their first enthusiast system camera--also great. For those that value a robust sealed system without the Pro price, or a tilt LCD and large VF that entry level DSLRs lack, good news. Better set of lenses than any other mirrorless camera too. The IQ is competitive to any APS-C camera in real world shooting. Adding excellent 5-axis IS for all lenses (even legacy and macro) may actually mean using lower ISOs than needed on other cameras. It's a much smaller as a system, with small lighter body and lenses without sacrificing ergonomics or control options. No it's not for everyone, but my bet is that for most people who are not wanting the cost, size, and weight of a FF DSLR, this is a serious contender.

7 upvotes
Plastek

"without the Pro price" - seriously? You just said it under EM1 review? Forgot how much this thing costs? Add 200$ and you have a FULL FRAME camera with TWICE THE SENSOR SIZE.

1 upvote
Andrew Elliott

FOUR TIMES THE SENSOR SIZE.

0 upvotes
RStyga

So, which Olympus cameras produce blurred images at relatively slow (1/50-1/200 or so) shutter speeds?

1 upvote
linux99

The ones with owners who have bad technique. Same as the DSLRs which get mirror slap.

2 upvotes
FreedomLover

The shuttershock sample picture in this review was shot by a professional, linux99.

0 upvotes
Sergey Borachev

I see a lot of reaction from DSLR users.

Especially for all those who keep pointing out the small M43 sensor, I wonder why they bother to read this review at all, and why they then feel the need to post what we all know - that M43 cameras have a smaller sensor, no good, blah blah.

Shouldn't they be happy about what they use, the bigger sensor and cameras etc, and not feel so threatened?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
14 upvotes
yabokkie

it's not the sensor but the lenses.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW

Canikon users should fear good Olympus optics. Should fear: PanaLeica, Samsung NX, Fuji X too lenses too.

Right say a Nikon D610 is easy to use at ISO 6400, this Olympus is useable there but starting to have trouble.

Comment edited 48 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
jorg14

For years I had Nikon DSLR's and Canon G series. The Nikon stayed in the closet most of the time. Then I switched to the Sony Nex7. How nice that light weight was and I do a lot more with it. For years also, I entertained getting a FF. But on my last trip abroad I shot 1800 pictures, and with a 27" monitor couldn't tell my Nikon P7700 1.7 sensor from my APS-C. If I ever give up the Nex 7, it will probably be for a smaller sensor yet like the 4/3 or 1" R10. People often forget it's the light, subject matter and composition that make a picture. Not size of sensor. I have no desire to carry a 5 lb camera, print up a 4'X6' picture and look at it with a magnifying glass.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
caver3d

Not everybody is foolish enough to spend thousands of dollars to support a FF habit, when you can get the same IQ and satisfactory shooting experience with a 43 camera for over 95% of one's photography. Even landscape shooting with an excellent 43 camera looks great. I know. I've done it.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
flipmac

@Henry M. Hertz: last time I checked you can still buy an m43 camera w/ lens for less than $500, like the E-PM2. How much is a 6D/D600 + lens, and how much bigger and heavier is it? As for those EVFs that suck battery, the newest FF bodies (A7/A7r) has 'em.

1 upvote
Plastek

caver3d - the same IQ? Interesting, because somehow I don't see it. Shots start to loose details from ISO200 and as soon as on ISO400 you can easily see how it looses in IQ to even an entry level DSLR (either Sony/Nikon or Pentax).

2 upvotes
yabokkie

I love the two dials. they were designed for space saving and they are easier to operate, too.

0 upvotes
pelicaneng

The E-M1 may not be a DSLR sport shooter but it is the best mirrorless sport shooter so far. I have had very good success shooting sports with the E-M1 and the 50-200 4/3 lens.

3 upvotes
Gazeomon

Surely a very good camera, but I'll wait for more info on the Pentax K3 which is not much larger than the EM-1 but has a new sensor. I also miss the top panel display on the Olympus to which I got so used to on my DSLR's (all the important info's at a glance). But there is a lot to like on the EM-1.

1 upvote
flipmac

The EVF has all the info you need and it shows you what the sensor "sees". Plus you get other info like live histogram, grid, level, etc.

2 upvotes
ThorstenMUC

From what you read in the previews K-3 has the same sensor as the Nikon D7100 - so IQ should be compareable.

Of course Pentax does the trick with the moire-filter simulation and I agree - K-3 is a very interesting new camera in the same category as E-M1 and D7100 - even cheaper than the E-M1.

I personally just don't warm to the Pentax lens-lineup... some are really old designs and/or really expensive (Limited).

0 upvotes
Digitall

Why people continue to make ridiculous comparisons. Of different league with totally different cameras, with different purposes, it seems that they stand in time and your stubbornness, can only observe life with the perspective of telephoto lens, forgetting to use a large and open more algular your field of view.
I have a formula one car, which costs millions and walks faster than a rally car, can I walk on gravel and win the race with slick tires? The world is funny...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie

are you saying that Olympic games are ridiculous?

0 upvotes
YuYen

Is this the fastest ever review from dpreview? E-M1 is not even available in either US or UK.

0 upvotes
Tapper123

It's been available already in the USA -- a number of people on the forums have one.

1 upvote
pelicaneng

That was my first thought too.

0 upvotes
sgoldswo

I've had one for two weeks in the UK...

0 upvotes
DLBlack

I have the E-M1 for three plus weeks and have shot over a 1,000 shots with it so far. I previously owned the E-M5. Anyhow, I have to basically agree with the DPR review. Still surprising how quick the review was done.

0 upvotes
agray88

Making up for the E-M5 review which took *forever*.

3 upvotes
Paul JM

Funny camera to place. I have owned the OMD original now for about a year. I like it, but I hardly use it.
Great camera, but for me it is neither here nor there. Not small enough to put in the pocket, but for me the sensor is just too small to act as my everyday serious camera.
When travelling now, I take the Fuji XE1. In low light, in combination with the wonderful Fuji lenses for me it is a league ahead of the OMD
For serious work, I still use the 5D mk2
If I want something casual to put in my pocket I take the RX100
So, for me, I am struggling to find a role for the Olympus. Great piece of kit, but I see it as being caught in the middle now. This body looks and sounds great, but it is still bridled with that tiny sensor

Comment edited 48 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
Tapper123

I hear you. I currently have cut my kit down to just my RX100M2, which is my pocket/anywhere/anytime camera.

I'm now in the difficult process of choosing a system for more serious shooting, travel, nature/macro etc. The EM-1 is arguably the best overall package out there if you want a rich feature set, good lens selection and smaller size/weight. BUT the IQ is definitely no match for good APS-C or FF systems.

If Fuji had a similarly weather sealed body with tilt screen, I'd go Fuji for sure. But weather seals and tilt screen are key features for me. As for NEX, and Sony in general -- don't trust them to build a good system. Beyond that there are DSLR's like the Canon 70D, which hasn't even got much better IQ than the OMD's from what I've read and looked at, despite having an APS-C sized sensor. *sigh*

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
nikoninmybag

OMD, XE1, 5D mk2 & RX100? Sigh, its obvious now that I live in poverty.

12 upvotes
Antonio Rojilla

@nikoninmybag You are here wasting your time in the internets... you don't have a clue what poverty is.

1 upvote
FreedomLover

Rojilla, it sounds like you are trying to win a competition.

0 upvotes
Chez Wimpy

>I like it, but I hardly use it.

Sounds like you need a proper bag. I keep mine in a small canvas "purse" with foam inserts that secures the EM5, 7-14, 14-45, and 45-175 with one pocket to spare (usually the GH2 as backup). Since the camera is (in my car, travels) with me everyday, the system gets a lot of use where my DSLRs sit at home. Over 15k since January, and many of those are in print now. Focus accuracy in single shot is so good, the only times I use DSLRs anymore are 5D2 low-low light (with primes), and tripod work with liveview for landscapes. Handheld landscapes are all m43 now.

1 upvote
SirSeth

If we could all collect the whole set, why not, but consider the person who can't afford an expensive FF system and a premium compact as you can. This is less cost and weight than a FF system, yet offers some compelling enthusiast features (like sealed body, dual controls, customizable interface, large viewfinder...) in a very small package. Might be hard to place for you unless you saw a specific use or simply wanted a system camera smaller than your FF setup. No problem if you don't, but I can see why someone might.

1 upvote
Paul JM

Thanks Seth. Perhaps the moral of my story is that if I were to purchase again now, and looking for the 'smaller' system, I would clearly go for the Fuji X system. That is what I use most of the time now. To be frank, the difference in IQ in print, between the XE1 and the 5DMk 2, even in low light, is so small that it hardly matters

1 upvote
gotompoes

Depends on your way of shooting. For me it complements my Leica FF set and i need high AF speed for street work. Tried the Fuji XE 1 but that did not work for me, AF far too slow and i did not connect to the camera. Simply did not like the build quality. For me the EM 1 with 12-40 and some of the best primes is a fantastic kit. The EM 1 with the Panasonic Leica 25 mm 1.4 works very well in low light situations. I bought is for AF speed.

1 upvote
FreedomLover

Well done review, beautiful sample pictures, thank you. Also many comments offer valuable insights from a broad range of experiences.

Unfortunately shuttershock is haunting this generation of mirrorless cameras, EM1 and A7r included. Manufacturers think they can save money by not offering a global shutter. I guess most don't mind, but it looks impossible to get clean images hand-held between 1/60s and 1/200s at 60mm and up.
Look at the central flower:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/2732672/p9160794?inalbum=olympus-om-d-em-1-final-review-samples

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake

There's no evidence whatsoever for shutter shock in the image you've linked.

10 upvotes
PerL

(Withdrawn)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
m87501

Nonsense. I've shot over a thousand shots now with my EP5 and not one single instance of it with a total of 8 different lenses now, including 4 heavy adapted AI-S Nikons....not one shot has this "shutter shock" myth.

1 upvote
FreedomLover

It is best visible in sharp high contrast areas like the well defined upper edges of the top pink petals and the horizontal (stalk) leaf just above them, a faint double outline and coloured shadow typically reaching some 3 pixels directly above the object.

0 upvotes
m87501

I never said "all others must be wrong", just to clarify. (Looks like a comment was removed).

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Andy Westlake

@FreedomLover - here you're misinterpreting slight out-of-focus blur as movement (this was shot close-up at 150mm F5.6, with the cheap 40-150mm R). You need to look at the unequivocally sharp, in-focus areas of the image instead, which show no evidence of blur at all.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
m87501

I should apologize to anyone offended with my use of the word "myth". I spent a lot of money on this camera and tried to re-create the issue within the return window over the past month; while there have only been a few examples shown with the ghosting issue caused by the shutter. I don't think for one-sixtieth of a second that some cameras did/do not have this issue, like all camera models have a few bad apples in the mix and I feel bad for anyone who had to return one because of it, because it's such a terrific camera. There is another camera of another make/brand with a real issue with hundreds/thousands examples posted online.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover

There is a horizontal green leaf in focus pointing just below the heart of the central flower. Look at the white line hovering just above its tip, with a dark shadow following in between. it's a double take of the leaf edge's exact features.

Also look at the little lilac flowers directly above the central pink flower. They have a ghost image directly above them. And that double image has the exact same detailed outlines, it's obviously not blur.

m87501, I'm glad it does not bother you and you are happy with your camera :-)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
panduru

@FreedomLover At 1/50s, this could well be caused by wind. I think shutter shock should be evaluated on static objects.

0 upvotes
llkkmm

I agree that it is hard to know whether this is shutter shock, given that the objects are not static. Furthermore, wouldn't shutter shock be expected to yield this type of blurring in more than just a few isolated spots in a photo? Concerning none-the-less, especially as I have an A7r on preorder which has no electronic first curtain...

0 upvotes
Alessandro63

There is indeed a feeble hint of double image here and there (visible over the the crisper horizontal borders). Where it's visible it always shows the same amplitude, it can't be caused by the wind. It is so feeble not to represent a problem at all in this image; for sure this stuff will be indagated deeply. Those not seeing/not feeling the problem are perhaps less prone to the pixel peeping illness. I would propose to separate the issues: extreme pixel peeping is bad and unuseful in the end, but the technical limit is there. Photo n.24 is another example: 1/60 plus stabilization at 14mm, what for. It's blurry, it's the typical example of the misteriously bad shots this system may give sometimes.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover

Panduru, it could but it isn't. Wind isn't always exactly vertical.

Llkkmm, you will find it in practically all samples at the mentioned conditions, which unfortunately are frequently met. The "isolated spots" are those with high contrast in focus. Faces have such "spots" around the eyes, for example, and typical focal lengths for portraits are in the range of moderate tele primes and normal zooms.
To illustrate, this one was taken with a Pen EP5 at 45mm:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/2620248/p7020351?inAlbum=olympus-pen-e-p5-preview-samples

As you can see in the sample from this review, the EM1 has the same problem.

Alessandro, those not "prone to the pixel peeping illness" (looking for high image quality) are likely to use smartphones or cheaper cameras to take pictures.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover

Don't forget what is shown here is the best the cameras can do, the samples were taken by professionals at best matching conditions to showcase their quality. Defects you see here will be in your pictures.

0 upvotes
Alessandro63

@FreedomLover: as you see, I acknowledge the problem. Sorry for the strong wording, didn't think it could be misunderstood, perhaps my pidgin english should be addressed. Sometimes in this forum there is an apparently manic attitude towards pixel level analisys, and on the other side an uninformed denial. Indeed, I would not always connect pixel peeping with the search for quality (or let say it depends on what we mean with "quality")... But in the end I still agree that the linked image is showing some hints of the dreaded shutter shock issue, in the form of some vertical doubling which can be seen in different points.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 2065
12345