OM-D compared to GH2 -- my thoughts (LONG)

For the past three weeks I’ve been shooting primarily with an OM-D, coupled to a Panasonic 14-45, 7-14, and a Rokinon fisheye. Previously, most of my m43 shooting has been with a GH2. While I haven’t really done a direct, side-by-side comparison, I’m plenty familiar with the GH2, and have gotten familiar enough with the OM-D to reach some judgments. Understand, though, that this is my opinion, based on how I use the cameras. You may feel differently, and that’s fine. What works for me might not work for you, and vice versa. If you want to argue about my opinions, I’d suggest you go yell at the mirror, because I don’t really care. I post this in the hopes it will be useful for those still trying to make up their minds whether to buy one or the other camera, and interesting for others. (And, of course, because posting one’s opinion what forums like this are all about.)

Let’s start off by looking at some of the things many people feel are the major advantages of the OM-D.

Build Quality: Yes, it a nice piece of kit. It’s surprisingly heavy for its size, and has a more robust feel than the GH2. But I think it really is more to do with feel than actual quality. I’m not convinced that, in the end, it’s significantly more robust than the GH2. Under the plastic skin, the GH2 has a metal chassis, too, and I’ve seen plastic skinned DSLRs bounce off the ground with nothing more than some scratches, and all-metal bodies come away dented. If you want to use your camera to pound tent states, you’d better use one of Nikon’s or Canon’s pro bodies, and not any m43. Advantage: Tie

“Weatherproofing”: Frankly, I’m not convinced this is much more than a marketing claim. The weatherproofing apparently is dependent on several removable, and easily lost, seals. That’s a far cry from cameras like the Nikon D3 or D4 and the Canon 1D series, or even the 7D. And even with the seals, it’s rated only IPX1, which means “Protection against vertically falling drops of water e.g. condensation.” It’s not even IPX2, which means “Protected against direct sprays of water up to 15o from the vertical.” So maybe a very light drizzle is safe, but maybe not a heavy fog. Don’t even think about using it in a storm, or in the surf to shoot surf boarding. This is not weatherproof. Not even close. I shoot in the rain very infrequently, and the various aftermarket solutions work well enough for me, so this isn’t a big deal either way. Advantage: OM-D, I suppose, but just barely.

Size: Yes, it’s smaller than the GH2. But with the lenses I commonly use, the effective size with lens mounted really isn’t all that different. All of my lenses (except the 20mm) protrude well beyond the grip on the GH2, so the real depth of the body/lens combo is pretty much the same. Yes, the EVF protrudes more on the GH2, but I think that’s actually an advantage, as it leaves more “nose clearance” than the OM-D’s EVF. In any case, I don’t find the OM-D enough smaller in actual use that it’s a significant benefit. If how it fits in your bag without a lens is important, then the OM-D has the advantage. That’s not important to me. In some cases, the smaller size is actually a problem for me. See “ergonomics,” below. Advantage: Tie

Sensor: Some still want to argue the point, but the sensor in the OM-D is better, in at least 2 respects, than the one in the GH2. It is less noisy at high ISO, and it does have better DR. I haven’t done a bunch of side-by-side comparisons, because I’m more interested in taking photographs than pixel peeping. Many other people have done so. But I did take one set of bracketed exposures, on each camera, of a very high contrast scene (under an overpass, in the evening, deep shadows and bright street and traffic lights). Neither could really recover the shadows without noise, and both blew the highlights. Based on what I’ve seen and read on the webz, I think the OM-d has about a 1 stop advantage in DR and high ISO noise. For the vast majority of what I shoot I have no complaints about the GH2’s noise and DR.

And I really do miss one feature of the GH2 sensor when I’m shooting with the OM-D, and that’s the multi-aspect capability. I was shooting with the 7-14 one evening, and decided I wanted a wider FOV than I was seeing in the EVF, so I switched to 16:9. Oops. On the OM-D, that doesn’t actually make the captured image wider, like it does on the GH2. I think the GH2 is a better wide angle tool because of this capability. Advantage: Tie (If the Oly had a multi-aspect sensor, I’d give it the win.)

Continued in next post ==>

IBIS (vs OIS): OK, I think everyone understands the advantage IBIS has in stabilizing all lenses, including legacy lenses. I honestly don’t find myself shooting very slow shutter speeds with wide-angles very often, but I can see that it will be useful sometimes. I didn’t do any comparisons of OIS vs. IBIS, but there are enough people who have to convince me that they are very comparable. Some tests show OIS a bit better, some show IBIS a bit better, but they seem very close. The difference may be due to each individual’s particular form of shake, but I also get the feeling (and it’s nothing more than that) that IBIS might be a tiny bit better with wider lenses, OIS with longer ones. Given that IBIS doesn’t take anything away, I have to give the Oly the advantage here. Advantage: Oly

9 fps: This is cool, without question. I don’t shoot a lot of sports these days, but it’s real nice for hand-held AEB. Of course, it’s handicapped by not providing AF after the first shot, but if I shot more sports I might consider this a bigger advantage. Given my typical subject matter, though, it’s not that much of a factor for me. Advantage: Oly, but only marginally for me.
I’m not sure this got a lot of coverage, compared to the features above, but:

EVF: I was surprised. It is quite a bit better than the one in the GH2. It seems crisper and clearer, even in the higher refresh rate mode. And it does a better job of showing me what the actual exposure is going to look like. It’s also better in handling rapid subject or camera movement in really dim light. And I think finder “blackout” in high speed mode is much better than in the GH2. This is slightly offset by the smaller magnification, but overall I’m very impressed. For me, this might be the biggest advantage of the OM-D. Advantage: Oly
But I’m not as happy with the OM-D in some other respects.

The flash” I rarely shoot with flash, which means I probably wouldn’t carry the separate OM-D flash a lot of the time. But occasionally I find it handy to be able to add a little fill, or find myself in a dark restaurant with friends and want to snap a couple of pics. With the GH2 I always have a flash. With the OM-D I’d probably not have one.
The biggest drawback to me, and pretty close do a deal breaker:

AEB: The contortions necessary to turn AEB on and off are ridiculous. This is perhaps the worst example of how NOT to implement camera controls I’ve ever seen. It literally takes a dozen button pushes or more to turn AEB on, and the same to turn it off again. Unlike Panasonic, which separates the selection of AEB options (e.g. 5 frames at 1 stop intervals) from turning it on and off, Oly combines them into the same menu tree, forcing you to navigate to, and through, the options selection even if all you want to do is turn the previously selected option on or off. (Yes, I know you can set AEB to a myset, but unfortunately that doesn’t affect only AEB, it affects nearly every camera setting, potentially overriding your current shooting options. That’s just not a good option.) I frankly can’t believe the UI got through Oly testing this way. And, since I use AEB quite often, this is a major issue for me. Advantage: Panasonic

Continued ==>

Ergonomics: Although nothing else is as dumbfoundingly bad as AEB, there are a number of other UI problems that I find annoying at best, and interfere with my use of the camera at worst. Starting with maybe the least significant, the touch screen interface is half-a$$ed. The SCP is a great feature (mostly), but why do I have to touch an option on the screen and then press the OK button. If I’ve tapped the ISO button, why can’t the camera understand it’s because I want to change the ISO and go directly to the setting menu for that? Having to repeatedly touch the screen and then push a button, is pretty silly. Panasonic implements the touch screen much more elegantly. Other foibles:

-- The SCP is nice, but why can’t I customize what features appear? The similar Panasonic feature is customizable. Why is color space, which most people will set once and never change, on the SCP, while the bracketing options are buried multiple levels into the menus. Oh, and setting ISO via the SCP is a pain, with all the ISOs arranged in a row. If you want to switch from auto to ISO 3200 you need to push buttons repeatedly. On the GH2, the numbers are arranged in a grid, and you can just touch the value you want. Even if you don’t use the touch screen, you can still choose most ISOs with fewer button pushes.

-- Dual control wheels are nice, and I’d prefer to have a second wheel on the GH2. But I much prefer the location of the rear wheel on the GH2. The rear dial on the OM-D is harder for me to reach over there by the hump than the more outside location on the GH2. But because of Oly’s emphasis on making the body tiny, there’s simply no way to position it to the outside.

-- Eye sensor for switching between the EVF and the rear screen is a nice feature, and both cameras have it. But Oly didn’t quite think it through. If you’re carrying the camera around your neck or over your shoulder, the eye sensor will keep the camera from going into sleep mode. So you need to turn off the eye sensor, or turn off the camera. The GH2 doesn’t let the eye sensor prevent sleep mode. A much better implementation.

-- The rear screen itself is a toss up. I don’t see a huge advantage in IQ for either, for my use. I rarely compose on the screen, though, so I might not really notice. But I much prefer the articulated design of the GH2, both because it’s more useful for vertical shots and over your head shots, and because it allows the screen to be turned around facing the camera. I’m also not thrilled with the capacitive screen on the OM-D, since in cool to cold weather I wear gloves a lot.

-- The controls in general of the GH2 are better, IMO. Changing drive mode (single vs. burst), choosing AEB or self-timer, and AF modes can all be done (on the GH2) with a simple flick of a switch. On the OM-D they require diving into the SCP and/or menus. I don’t change focus modes frequently, but I do switch between single, burst and AEB a lot, and that’s simply much, much, much easier on the GH2.

-- The grip on the GH2 is simply much, much better, for me. It just makes the camera that much easier to hold and use, and the more forward mounted shutter release is more comfortable. Yes, a grip is available for the OM-D, and if I could get just the horizontal portion for about $50 I might call this close to even, but even that would pretty much eliminate any size advantage the OM-D can claim. And $300 is just way too much.

So for me, the GH2 is just better ergonomically in almost every way. A little bit better in some respects, a lot better in others. Advantage: GH2

Two things that I’ve seen others complain about are the location of the on-off switch and the “mushy” buttons. Oddly, neither bothers me at all. The on-off switch on the GH2 is in a better position, but the OM-D switch isn’t a problem for me.

So, on balance, the things about the OM-D that I really prefer are IBIS and the EVF. In pretty much every other respect, I prefer the GH2. And I just can’t get over how poorly implemented AEB is on the Oly. I find myself using exposure compensation instead of AEB, but that really slows down the ability to take multiple shots rapidly. The Oly is a very capable camera handicapped by a poor UI and ergonomics that are compromised by Oly’s focus on tiny size. If I hadn’t used better, I’d probably be satisfied with the OM-D. Unfortunately, I’m not. Are IBIS and a better EVF enough to overcome the other issues? Not for me. Advantage: GH2.

Long, but well written, informative and a nice personal view on those two cams.

I have the Gh2 and I am very happy with it. The Oly shots look better though on this forum, but not good enoough to switch. Besides, the videomode of the GH2 is much better wehn it comes to IQ. I do that more and more. The mutiaspect is something I use often. And LR4.x has given me extra DR and better NR settings.

Thanks again, also for the effort.

i can agree with the menu issue

i cant agree with the touch screen as it's disabled on mine. i use only the evf unless i'm doing movies. the first thing i did was disable the auto switching between evf and lcd.

i have fn1 set to ae+spot, fn2 set to iso and the movie record button set to magnify for a smaller focus point. on the grip i have fn-1 set to dof preview. i will flip on the grip and hit fn-1 on it when i need dof preview

i can't agree with the grip and you shouldn't either until you hold an e-m5 with just the first piece of the hdl-6. all of the m43 cameras are too small for my hands and exacerbate my carpal tunnel - all that is except the e-m5 with both grip pieces on.

i agree that after getting used to modern slr's and dslr's its hard to not have a control dial on the back of the camera. i swapped from nikon to medium format in the mid 90's then swapped to canon when the d30 was released in 2001. 10 years with that familiar format of a dial near the shutter and another on the back for your thumb was very natural, but the size of the lcd leaves no room for a decently sized control wheel on the back of the e-m5. you would have something tiny like on the gf5 and that my friend is far, far worse than just having two control dials up top. they are configurable as well - the front dial is aperture in pam and exposure compensation in Shutter priority for me. since i only ever use A and M it has not been too difficult of an adjustment.

the weather sealing is actually pretty important and i wish more lenses were featuring it. condensation is a camera killer. there is a caving thread around here from a few weeks ago

This is a very interesting viewpoint, somewhat refreshing in some ways because it seems everyone just LOVES the OMD and disses every other MFT camera. The OMD IS a very nice camera, beguiling, though I have only handled it briefly in the camera store.

I immediately missed the GH grip (I only have a GH1, but still I think it is a very comfortable camera to hold and use all day), and found the OMD more difficult to hold in right hand only... And I cannot believe the description on AEB and the EVF implementation for sleep mode...wow...

Panasonic makes sort of boring cameras that work easily for me, and I do love that multi-aspect sensor for wider, wideangle shots... Stylistically, the G and GH series are nothing to write home about...boring...but they just seem to work well (although I do not like the G3 for lack of a grip...call me old fashioned). By work well, it seems that I can get to major controls several different ways, and not just being forced to march through menus as described.

However, the OMD is a darling piece...even my wife seemed attracted to it because it was highly reminiscent of her long gone OM film camera...until she heard the price...I told she did not have to get the 12-50 lens...

Thanks for the personal view. I'm still debating on which direction to go when I pick up a current-gen body. The true multi-aspect ratio sensor of the GH series has always had a lot of appeal. On the other hand, I often find I am pushing the dynamic range envelope pretty hard, so any respite there is welcome.

Ultimately, I'm not yet at the point that I need a new body. I probably will be in the next 6 months or so, which makes waiting until after Photokina to see if a GH3 materializes or not my current step. Maybe if I can get my hands on an EM5 in store that will sway me, but so far not many are staying on the shelves.
--
A photograph is a creative interpretation of reality.

You keep saying things like...

Bob Meyer said:

has a more robust feel than the GH2... I’m not convinced

Click to expand...

Several times you mention how the OMD is better but then write off because you are "not convinced". Sure the OMD is weather proof and you can pour a bucket of water on it with no worries, but for some reason you need more "convincing".

Anyway, I do agree with most of what you say, but you made it clear which way your bias leans.

...
--
--Mike

The em5 is a secondary camera to my e5 at the present. Obviously the e5 is much more ergonomically friendly for large zooms and pro work. But the em5 is really awesome at being a second camera I can throw a nice prime on and supplement my e5 work.

So for travel and secondary work it's phenomenal. The sensor is just so very nice that in my mind it trumps anything else. At the end of the day the colors, dr, and noise trump everything else to me. And Sony makes a fine sensor for sure.

So what I'm saying is the the em5 would really compliment your gh2, and not necessarily replace it for everything. Different tools for different jobs.

FYI the weather sealing is the real deal. Shot on the beach in Mexico, got drenched with sand and water and no issues at all.

. . . There's nothing wrong with you preferring your GH2 but the battle has been lost against the E-M5 which is a run away success in comparison to the GH2. And there are plenty of ex-GH2 users who helped make it happen.

Advantage E-M5

Since I don't even own a MFT system and am trying to work out whether it should be a Panasonic Vs an Olympus body... my first thought is to straight off go and buy the OMD because your use of language sounds... well...

Advantage: OM-D, I suppose, but just barely.
Advantage: Oly But I’m not as happy with the OM-D in some other respects.

Given that IBIS doesn’t take anything away, I "have to" give the Oly the advantage here. Advantage: Oly

...like pure fanboyism.

--
El

Gear. 2 Omd, all the lenses, Ep3, Ep2, Ep1 infrared, Fuji X100, Fuji x pro 1, all the Fuji lenses, Voigtlander 15,21,28,50,75,90,180. Nikon 55 macro, 200 macro and Zeiss 100mm macro, Induro Tripods and heads, etc. Ricoh GXR and modules including Leica M

Like I said I don't have a dog in this fight, and the only two lenses I am certain I would get right off the bat when I buy into MFT for my Christmas present (want to see what the GH3 will be as well) are made by Panasonic, not Olympus.

Well Bob, I don't share your opinions in most areas, but as you said, you don't want to discuss this. Fonine for me as everything about the numerous advantages of the E-M5 has been said a thousand times.
But in your assemssments below you made two mistakes:

Bob Meyer said:

Ergonomics: Although nothing else is as dumbfoundingly bad as AEB, there are a number of other UI problems that I find annoying at best, and interfere with my use of the camera at worst. Starting with maybe the least significant, the touch screen interface is half-a$$ed. The SCP is a great feature (mostly), but why do I have to touch an option on the screen and then press the OK button. If I’ve tapped the ISO button, why can’t the camera understand it’s because I want to change the ISO and go directly to the setting menu for that? Having to repeatedly touch the screen and then push a button, is pretty silly. Panasonic implements the touch screen much more elegantly.

Click to expand...

You don't have to press the okay button after having selected an option on the SCP. Just turn the front control wheel to change the respective settings. It couldn't be easier. Don't blame a tool if you didn't read the manual.

Bob Meyer said:

Other foibles:

... Oh, and setting ISO via the SCP is a pain, with all the ISOs arranged in a row. If you want to switch from auto to ISO 3200 you need to push buttons repeatedly. On the GH2, the numbers are arranged in a grid, and you can just touch the value you want. Even if you don’t use the touch screen, you can still choose most ISOs with fewer button pushes.

Click to expand...

As I said above. Read the f*cking manual. What could be easier than turning a wheel?

--



Why not - if there's enough space on the sofa...

I'm a HOlygan

Thanks Bob!

As an Oly user and E-M5 owner I find your opinions well founded and well backed.

I appreciate your time and effort.
--
Dan

DonParrot said:

Well Bob, I don't share your opinions in most areas, but as you said, you don't want to discuss this. Fonine for me as everything about the numerous advantages of the E-M5 has been said a thousand times.
But in your assemssments below you made two mistakes:

Bob Meyer wrote:

You don't have to press the okay button after having selected an option on the SCP. Just turn the front control wheel to change the respective settings. It couldn't be easier. Don't blame a tool if you didn't read the manual.

Click to expand...

I have read the manual. If it wasn't such a poorly organized piece of crap, I might have caught that. Neither Olympus nor Panasonic have a clue about documentation. Even so, the touch screen interface is half-a$$ed. Simply touching the screen should bring up the options, rather than just staging for another control. Panasonic simply does this better.

DonParrot said:

DonParrot said:

Other foibles:

... Oh, and setting ISO via the SCP is a pain, with all the ISOs arranged in a row. If you want to switch from auto to ISO 3200 you need to push buttons repeatedly. On the GH2, the numbers are arranged in a grid, and you can just touch the value you want. Even if you don’t use the touch screen, you can still choose most ISOs with fewer button pushes.

Click to expand...

As I said above. Read the f*cking manual. What could be easier than turning a wheel?

Click to expand...

Either way, you've still got to scroll through every ISO in between the one you're at and the one you want. Panasonic's direct selection is still much faster and simpler. Panasonic simply gets user interfaces better than Oly, which is my broader point.

DonParrot said:

--



Why not - if there's enough space on the sofa...

I'm a HOlygan

Click to expand...

--

I've told myself to stop using "equivalent" focal lengths on m43. 25mm is what it is, and what it might be similar to on some other format doesn't matter to me any more. We need to learn what to expect from our current equipment, not keep mapping it to the old. No one refers to their 50mm FF lens as "equivalent to 80mm on MF."

True, but that could change when the GH3 is released. And, regardless of one's brand preference, that's a good thing for those of us who only care about having the camera that we enjoy using the most.

As someone who used the OM-1 exclusively for 30 years, I have a huge soft spot for Oly, which probably has something to do with the fact that I recently bought the E-M5 even though I've been very happy with the GH2.

I share several of Bob's concerns, but haven't owned the E-M5 long enough to decide which camera I prefer. If I were to do a comparison similar to his, my evaluation would be somewhat different because our preferences aren't the same. For example, I've shot a lot of video now that I have two grandsons, which might make one think that I would prefer the GH2's superior video capabilities. However, for the amateur level of video that I shoot, I prefer the E-M5's better hand held stabilization.

Nevertheless, I must say that while I really like the E-M5, there are several things about the GH2 that I prefer, so I don't have any problems with Bob's assessment.

Fool, of course it's subjective. It's my OPINION, just as how you feel about the camera is your opinion. But biased? Not at all. If I had already decided Panasonic was better I would have never spent the money on the OM-d in the first place. Having used both, the GH2 simply works better for me.

--

I've told myself to stop using "equivalent" focal lengths on m43. 25mm is what it is, and what it might be similar to on some other format doesn't matter to me any more. We need to learn what to expect from our current equipment, not keep mapping it to the old. No one refers to their 50mm FF lens as "equivalent to 80mm on MF."

Really? You've got real sales statistics for both cameras over their lifetimes? And statistics on how many GH2 users have switched? Didn't think so. Has the Oly really sold more than the GH2 has over it's entire life span? I don't know, and neither do you. Will it continue to be the sales and hype darling next year? Maybe, maybe not.

Aside from that, this has nothing to do with which camera sells better. The EOS Rebel outsells both, so I supposed it's a better camera than either?

Tim in upstate NY said:

. . . There's nothing wrong with you preferring your GH2 but the battle has been lost against the E-M5 which is a run away success in comparison to the GH2. And there are plenty of ex-GH2 users who helped make it happen.

Advantage E-M5

Click to expand...

--

I've told myself to stop using "equivalent" focal lengths on m43. 25mm is what it is, and what it might be similar to on some other format doesn't matter to me any more. We need to learn what to expect from our current equipment, not keep mapping it to the old. No one refers to their 50mm FF lens as "equivalent to 80mm on MF."