OM-D E-M5 vs E-5 (build quality)

Started May 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP philosomatographer Contributing Member • Posts: 539
I strongly disagree

windsprite wrote:

I don't know much about Canon, Sony, etc., but the general consensus from people who have actually owned both versions of Oly SHG and high-end Nikon "holy trinity" lenses seems to be:

- the 24-70/2.8 is the better workhorse lens than the 14-35/2 (faster AF, wider zoom range, more DOF control, etc.), while the 14-35 is better optically.

- the 35-100/2 is excellent, but the 70-200/2.8 VRII is better

- the 7-14/4 and 14-24/2.8 have different strengths and weaknesses, which balance out to make these two lenses about equal

The boring truth is that the high-end Olympus glass doesn't trounce that of the big boys in every possible way; on average it's probably only in about the same excellent class.

Ho hum!


I am sorry to burst your bubble, but your assumptions above are incorrect. The Olympus SHG lenses are not in "the same excellent class" - they are much better than comparable Canon/Nikon or off-brand lenses, with the exception of the Nikkor 14-24mm - which indeeds matches the 7-14mm except for distortion control.

You force me to post another full-size example (below) - an uncropped image from the 16MP OM-D (I don't own one, I just tried one out). This is the 14-35mm f/2.0 at the wide end (14mm) at f/2.8. f/2.8!! Please show my any full-frame lens that can do this across the frame at 28mm and f/2.8:

Even if you desperately cling to equivalence, I'd like you to show me the full-frame lens at 28mm and f/5.6 that can do this, right into the corners. Seriously, I will shut up about the superiority of these lenses when I see them matched in a sample image, across the frame - otherwise, I will maintain that all the posts that attack my claims are just trolling):

Quick example of the ZD 14-35 at f/2.8 on the OM-D

The fact of the matter is, as we get access to higher-resolution sensors, the SHG lenses show undeniable optical superiority over the best that Nikon, Canon, and Zeiss/Sony have produces thus far. That's why they are so expensive, that's why they are so large in relation to the sensor, and that's why we put up with the limited, small sensors of this system.

BTW - Sergey - note the complete lack of visible light falloff. The Tamron you've been promoting as being "equally good on full-frame" has 2.7EV light falloff in the corners at this aperture (2.8) - despite the modest "1 stop" you claim (see e.g. the LensTip tests), and comes nowhere near this ability to resolve small details in difficult light with this level of perfection. If you don't see it, you are ill-equipped to be commenting on these matters.

 philosomatographer's gear list:philosomatographer's gear list
Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200mm f/2G ED-IF VR Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow