Just Posted: Olympus OM-D E-M5 review

Out of pure curiosity, what sort of design for you fits for '2012' ? No trolling here genuinely curious.

Add the Nikon D800. It shows the same effect. Right now, I consider the D800 the 'gold standard', so, the Oly EM5 sees the same effect as the "gold standard". Something has happened to the label.

Good eye! WOW! Interestingly, The New Canon 5D Mark iii does nor show this. Looks like the noise reduction in the Canon smoothed it over. Though the Canon makes the image look better it does not show the true view of the bottle... This little camera is very impressive as are the details in this review!

I noticed that when they first posted the E-M5 samples. It is a ripple in the label that for whatever reason does not stick out on others photos for some reason. If you can honestly and truly judge from DPreviews samples, the E-M5 is up there with the best on IQ, no doubt about it.

I tend to believe that this is a function of the lighting? I don't believe that this indicates that the u43 Oly EM5 is 'out resolving' the Canon 5D Mk III. I think it randomly shows up for differently cameras depending on the light striking the bottle's label? For example, if you choose Nikon D800, Canon 5D Mk III, and Canon G1 X, you'll see that the G1 X also shows the 'discoloration'. Does anyone really believe that the G1X out resolves the 5D Mk III? It must be that DPReview, despite their best effrots, can't always get the illumination consistent on the scene? That's my take anyway?

But, it is certainly *not* an indication of a flaw in the Oly EM5 which looks like it is quite a gem. Oly may be the 'comeback player of the year' if they keep introducing such fine products?

FL-600R has a unique ability to be able to act as a flash commander, too. But the bundled flash works for this purpose as well, though with less flexibility regarding line of sight for the remotely controlled flash guns.

Sorry...12-50mm. I have the 14mm/20mm they are high quality lenses and happen to be very small and light. The 45mm is my favorite. This is coming from a person that has owned the Canon 50mm 1.2L, 85mm 1.2l and other great lenses....Olympus 45mm f1.8 is still my favorite.

I'm a Nikon DX user new to M4/3, but have found the lens selection pretty amazing, especially considering the size. I opted for the Pana-Leica 25mm f/1.4 as a 'normal prime' and have been simply blown away by the quality. It is larger than the pancakes, but for me at least not too big.

I have the lesser EPL-2, with the twin lens kit and whilst I'm pretty happy with those lens' quality and (relative) size, a longish zoom like the 12-50mm would probably be more usable than changing. I see it as a M4/3 equivalent to the 18-105mm DX I use so much when travelling.

or just wait for pany f2,8er zooms

For macro shots and milder nature close-ups like flowers, the issue in 4/3" format is still struggling with painfully thin DOF unless you stop way down, not getting "too much" DOF. I am never close to wide-open for such shots in 4/3 format.

Enthusiast DSLR's (with APS-C sensors) struggle a bit in the lens department, so there's no obvious choice that's going to get you appreciably more bokeh than is available with the OM-D E-M5 (Panasonic 25mm f/1.4, Olympus 45mm f/1.8 and soon to be released Olympus 75mm f/1.7). You'll be able to slightly better the bokeh at some focal lengths with an APS-C camera, but not at others. And you'll end up carrying full-frame lenses (which are unnecessarily heavy and expensive) because of the lack of bright APS-C specific lenses...

Bokeh on the OM- D? You bet!
See for yourself in the article/photos at stevehuffphoto.com, click on the link to the article entitled, "1st Quick Look at the Voigtlander 17 and 25 f/0.95 on the OM-D".
You will certainly be surprised, maybe even stunned. I'm new to this site so I don't know if links are allowed, but here's the link to the article itself: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/05/01/1st-quick-look-at-the-voigtlander-17-and-25-f0-95-on-the-om-d/

@spectacle99

Check out Robin Wongs Macro shots with an OMD = 4/3adapterd 50m F2.

http://robinwong.blogspot.com.au/2012/03/olympus-om-d-e-m5-review-butterfly-park.html

Based on the Robin Wong piece, I’d score the OM-D at 92%. As far as I’m concerned, the IBIS puts the OM-D at the head of the pack. The detail of the level of customization and the range of the lens selection might bump it up to 94%. Wonderful.

go for the 4/3 50mm F2 Macro. Can't go wrong with that lens, unless you want Fast AF. It's really really slow in m4/3. But its the sharpest lens in 4/3 land and it produces some nice blur.

and since you're shooting macro.. you dont have to worry about the bokeh: Although 4/3 has already even more DoF than FF or APS-C, you would even want to stop down for more DoF for your subjects.

the lesns is also weather-sealed.. so you can pair it with the new mmf-3 adapter and you have a nice beach portrait kit as well.

Shooting raw it just slows down to about 1 fps and continues taking photos at this rate. If you take your finger off the shutter for a couple of seconds while the buffer is draining, then you'll get another few shots at 4 fps, before it goes back to about 1 fps.

@aliquis

They actually aren't, and lenses for APS-C are quite much bigger. There's not many APS-C optimised fast prime lenses available, and those that exist carry usually a very high price.

Sony NEX seem to often suffer from mediocre corner sharpness.

@aliquis: Let me know if you can take out an APS-C Camera (mirrorless or otherwise) plus a couple of primes and NO Bags. With m4/3, you could even swap lenses on one go. The bodies might not be that far off but the lenses are.

Personally, I think (control over) DoF is the only practical advantage that APS-C has. And some would even argue that they'd want more DoF rather than less. And if DoF is really an issue then people should just go FF or bigger.

Bubububut the small sensor!!!!

Ooooh the small sensor is giving me nightmares

latifron, you need to work on your testing, I think.

Besides, the question isn't as much whether the OM-D /beats/ the current generation APS-sized sensors, but whether the difference is negligible. Rule of thumb gives APS a theoretical two thirds of a stop better noise performance than the four thirds. If the OM-D is within this margin (and it seems to be) that's an excellent result.

Don't forget that the smaller sensor is an advantage as well as an disadvantage, making the system including lenses, smaller and more portable than its APS or 135 counterparts.

But don't worry, I'm fairly sure that the Fujifilm X-Pro 1 will score even higher than the OM-D, despite sluggish auto-focus, as the sensor, build and general ergonomics seems amazingly good on that camera. It's also a bit more expensive than the OM-D, of course, and of yet lack a lot of the options that the micro four thirds system gives the OM-D.

I've been hearing the "small-sensor" excuse for years, and early on when the first Digital Photography cameras came along, a bigger sensor did make a significant difference in the quality of images, but the same can't be said for modern equipment.

Not all cellphones take horrible photos anymore, and that wasn't true a few years ago. Not all small-engine cars perform significantly worse than large ones, and the same can be said for large car's fuel economy.

As technology evolves, the gaps between portability, affordability and economy narrow down, until the next significant leap of quality. Cameras are no different in that, and neglecting anything that narrows a performance gap is, quite honestly silly and stupid.

This isn't a witch-hunt, it's a small technology breakthrough. If you're so convinced of the opposite, and you enjoy your full-frame camera, by all means, go out and shoot and enjoy yourself. But don't try to stop us from doing the same, just because we choose differently.

Technology improves so of course there's ways. Over time / at the same technology generation I would expect a bigger sensor to perform better than a smaller one though.

My biggest issue with four thirds is the DOF not the image quality though.

@ ybizzle
IF IQ is your only criteria for selecting a camera then you would be correct. However many other people would take in any number of factors... such as build quality, native lenses, IBIS, controls, weather sealing, size, customisation ... If you measure it all up there may not be many others in this class.

ybizzle, three cameras I've been considering this year are D800, XPro and OM-D. D800 res is excellent (I borrowed one) but a menace to lump around with lenses (been there with a D3), XPro has wonderful control layout but lousy AF and no lenses yet, OM-D is a generally good camera within a good system.

Nex 5n was never on my list, I'm sure it suits many people but not me.

People cross shop over all sorts of solutions. The big question for me now is whether I'll get the D800 as well to go with my remaining Nikkors, or a second hand D700, or sell the lot and stick entirely with MFT. We shall see.

In the meantime the OM-D is here, and shoots fast and confidently, just like my old D3, but without the crippling camera bag to hump around. Only big gripe so far, where the **** is the bracketing button? Idiots... I can live with that though.

The OM-D is meant to compete against the NEX-7 which is ,body for body, 200$ more expensive than the OM-D. Both cameras are magnesium alloy with built in EVF. OM-D is weather sealed and has IBIS to boot. No built in flash though.

Soon, Olympus will likely release an update to its E-PL3 which will be a closer competitor to the NEX-5N again being cheaper.

Actually, the NEX-3C and NX-200 are cheaper still. If cheap APS-C mirrorless is what you need, then go for those.
If you want a mirrorless with EVF (NEX-5N and K-01 doesn't have it), standard hotshoe (not on NEX-5N), weather sealing (none from the 3 you mentioned), IBIS (only K-01 has it but not 5-axis), etc., the E-M5 is the only option. Smaller sensor, yes, but still great image quality, which is on par with the 5N and probably better than the NX-20 (if the NX-200 is any indication).
As for price, don't know how much the NX-20 is but it will certainly be closer $1000 (since it's £900). The K-01 is $900 with the lens and you want that lens because it is the only CDAF optimized K-mount lens; others will have slower AF. Also, add the optional EVF to the 5N, and it'll cost as much as an E-M5, if not more.

APS-C cameras don't offer the range of small, fast primes that work with the E-M5. The lenses for APS-C cameras are generally considerably larger (much larger in the case of NEX) for equally bright primes. But more often than not, APS-C systems provide only slower lenses. In fact, if you look at fast (faster than f/2.8) lenses for APS-C cameras from Canon, Nikon and Sony NEX and exclude the heavier and bulkier than needed full-frame lenses, you find:
Canon: 0
Nikon: 1 (35mm f/1.8)
Sony NEX: 2 (24mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.8)
E-M5: 6+1 (12mm f/2.0, 17.5mm f0.95, 20mm f/1.7, 25mm f/1.4, 25mm f/0.95, 45mm f/1.8, 75mm f/1.7 announced)

But even more than the availability of fast lenses, is their size; the lenses for the OM-D are mostly very small and many of them of superb optical quality.

It seems a good camera but at 1300 euros the price is simply too high. For around the same price, you could get a Pentax K5 body and some good glass. The size of the K5 is bigger, but then it offers better purchase when using longer zooms. Image quality is noticeably better (ooooh yes it is!), you can crop APS-C output to 66% and still have very useable results (at high ISO). AND manual focus using a pentaprism viewfinder is far easier than with an EVF. I also have to say that mirrorless systems sometimes freeze up (both my G1 and NEX5n do it), metering is inferior to my D90 (plugged shadows on both) and focus is far slower. Battery life is awful too.

The OMD5 may be the best mirrorless to date (and I believe it), but - call me a Luddite if you dare - I reckon a DSLR offers a better user experience all said and done.

@Chris - " I reckon a DSLR offers a better user experience all said and done"

Depends on the user I guess. You may enjoy carrying a large camera with heavy lenses, but plenty others don't.

Enjoy taking your heavy gear Hiking, camping or travelling/walking around cities.

And enjoy being the guy taking a massive camera and set of lenses to a Birthday party, or dinner party or friendly gathering. How silly would you look then?

Cameras are shot at the aperture required to offer similar depths of field.

....and at the shutter speed necessary to provide correct exposure. Thus they all had the "right" amount of light.

Wow the Oly 45 1.8 is both Cheap and Dreamy.....
Amazing lens!

As mentioned in the forums. The old 4/3 14-54mm F2.8-3.5 mk 2 might be The dream lens right now. It's sharp and it's CDAF optimized so it will AF pretty quickly on m4/3. It also fills the fast zoom gap in the m4/3 line-up. And although it's relatively big, it will pair well with th e-m5 with the grips. And did i mention its weather-sealed? $600 though..

I should have bought the GF1 back then for its 20mm. Now, it's an expensive to lens to buy.

I have the Panasonic 14mm, Pani-Leica 25mm, Olympus 45mm, Olympus 9-18mm and Olympus 12-50mm. All of them are excellent lenses but they still can't touch my M42 Zeiss 50mm F1.4 when it comes to both image and build quality. The E-M5 combined with a $20 lens adaptor makes using M42 lenses easy and fun for my style of photography, probably because of the way that the EVF helps with the stop-down metering and manual focus.

The one thing that M42 lenses have highlighted is how plasticky and flimsy feeling all of my MFT lenses are, worst of which is the (otherwise excellent) Olympus 9-18mm. The cheap prices of M42 lenses means that my dream kit has changed a lot since I got my E-M5.

Good comparison. I'm still amazed at the quality of the Oly. I just ordered one to back up my K5...

Nawknai, you hit it on the nail.

I, a long time ago, cancelled all of my photo mag subscriptions for the very reasons that I am recently seeing displayed on this site.

Rather than leave I hope my comments on this issue will help keep this site great in the right direction.

Simon, please note: no one on this reply complained about reviews being too long.
We are complaining about a 'Con' list created so as not to 'offend' other manufactureres or camera owners.

Placing Tracking AF as a Con is like saing 'The lake is nice and wet but you can't build a fire on it'.

To solve this problem, change the rating to 90% and keep your con list as is.

P.S. Thanks for a great site.

Guys. Maybe your points are really made in a good manner.

But.

DPR reviewers can't do good enough it seems.
Even when they post thorough good reviews, we're at it again.

Poster-bashing is a different ballpark.

Think of them as chefs in a restaurant. Would you like saliva with that soup?

There's a feature called tracking AF and it doesn't work very well. That's a con, sorry - it just is. For some people that will be very important.

The NEX-7 should have been hit with the same (C-AF) con but for some reason there was no comment in the DPREVIEW conclusion. But perhaps we expect more (too much?) from the E-M5 or any other new contrast focussing camera.

@Simon and Barney: Yes, what you said is likely true, but (poor) AF tracking hasn't been highlighted as a "Con" this prominently in other reviews. Lots of cameras have poor AF tracking, including DSLRs, and yet when its observed on these other DSLR and other ILCs, it doesn't get so much mention.

It appears to me that if you find a camera with 5-6 minor flaws, the AF-tracking gets a minor mention, but in this case, you couldn't find much else, so you're picking on AF-tracking.

If the reviews were written more evenly across DPR, the AF-tracking performance would get just as much focus in this review as it does in every other review, regardless of how good or bad the camera is.

Biggest con = video output is 30p only.

Makes this cam pretty much unusable for any serious videomaking in PAL & SECAM area.

Ever tried to film with 180 degree shutter at 30p (1/60th of a second) in a country which uses 50 hz mains electricity? ( AKA PAL & SECAM)

You end up with very nasty flickering due to the incompatible shutter speed.

I hope sincerely that Olympus realises how important 25p is for the majority of videographers in the world.

@ChrisP7

I was being completely sarcastic. Re: K-5 - OM-D, Don't expect miracles.

I was replying to the original post, not you, but I get your point.:-)

This is getting pointless..
I'm tired to watch marike6's bashing the EM5 or how's the DPR guys reviewed this thing in every single new message here. Any admin here that actually can give him time to cool down (ban him for 2 weeks) ?

@marike6: Noone expected anything else from you. But you're even funnier when you explain your comments to people who just don't care about them.

@Jolly Oly: Sometimes it is good to have trolls on the forum to kick around. It makes everything more lively :D.

I agree with marike6. Rationally (photographically) thinking there is nothing special about this oly but size (and the high price). I like it (because it is cute) but there are better investments. Who is trolling here? Consider the man in the mirror.

Well, IBIS alone is special, even larger camera doesn't have such kind of sophisticated system. The problem with Marike6, if you followed this long enough, is that he tried to bash EM-5 with unsupported or made up facts. Check the stuffs down below.

Ban me for expressing my opinion? I have a GH2 and a GX1, so I have just as much right to post here as anyone. When the D800 Studio Samples where posted, how many Canon users were posting much worse stuff than me. I'm just trying to find out how a camera with slightly better high ISO performance than the G3/GX1 is all of the sudden as good as the best APS-C. Why does that bother you so much?

They can't say this camera is great? What does "This is without question the best M43 camera we've yet seen" mean to you?

There is no fan, it is the new IS from what I have read and from people I know who own it say it is not an issue and you do not hear it in the video.

The nosie is barely noticable when I tried it. In the ambient environment of the store (with people talking at normal volumes), I couldnt hear it even with my ear pressed up against it. You can hear it if you're alone (or nearly) in a small quiet room, though. Big deal.

I have only heard the noise of the IBIS 2 times- once in practical usage.

1) When I put my ear up to it to see if I could hear it.
2) In an empty cabin in the woods.

It's a non-issue over-exaggerated and doesn't pick up during video recording.

As an owner, I agree that those two buttons could be improved upon. They are small and less responsive, and the Fn1 is shielded by the thumb rest. However, they are still perfectly usable, and as Andy Crowe noted, if you prefer some of the other programmable buttons, you can usually move the function there (there are some exceptions).

Overall the ergonomics of the camera is good. Especially the two dials and the top plate controls work beautifully. The rear controls are functional, but less good, and personally I would have traded a smaller screen for a bit more real estate and better button placement.

The only place where I think Olympus has made a mistake in the ergonomics is the lack of custom modes on the mode dial. To select the custom modes you need to select them in the menu. They are right at the front of the menus, but even so...

actually it's probably the best design between all mirrorless cameras....lovely vintage!

I guess your first camera was a Casio P&S.