Not quite satisfied with E-PM2

MinAZ wrote:

I've been using the Olympus E-PM2 as my primary travel/casual camera for several months. I like the size/weight of the E-PM2 combined with it's decent autofocus and image quality. I've spent a fair bit on purchasing MFT lenses, but refrained from getting the top-of-the-line glass.

I have come to the realization however, that I am just not quite satisfied with the camera for some reason. I'm not sure what it is. The whole point of getting the camera was that it had a good combination of light weight, good image quality, IS, and the same sensor as the OM-D series without paying the OM-D price.

But in the end, I feel that there is something missing from the experience when I shoot with this camera. I wish I could explain it better, but today, I took an old film camera out (cost me $50 plus a cheap lens) and I just found everything "felt" better. Maybe it is the way the camera fit in my hands, the large optical viewfinder (I did not purchase the viewfinder accessory for the E-PM2 yet), or the layout of the menu system. Ironically, I am actually beginning to feel maybe the camera is a bit too small! That sounds insane considering the reason I bought it in the first place was its compact size. Perhaps I could trade up for the OM-D series, but of course that would mean shelling out at least another $500 (minus what I get for the E-PM2 used, not much!).

I haven't tried getting the electronic viewfinder (or grip, if one exists). I would consider doing that, but for a bit more, I would be able to get an OM-D (-5 or -10, used).

Or I could just keep using it and live with the awkwardness. It still takes good pictures. I feel that the the limitations are not with the camera but rather my awkwardness with it.

Has anyone used both the E-PM2 and an OM-D (-5/10) and can comment on both cameras with regards to ergonomics? Also besides the obvious differences in viewfinder, grip, size, and dials/knobs, are there any other usability differences between the E-PM2 and OM-D (i.e. menu system, ease-of-use, etc...)? I know that the image quality is going to be the same since they use the exact same sensor/processor and of course the same lens.

I sympathize with the feeling. I am happiest shooting the E-PM2 with the 14/2.5 on it; part of it is that the lens feels right on the camera (i.e. doesnt drag the camera forward), part of it is the feeling of being free to move the camera about into many unusual angles. Fun to experiment with then. It works ok with the VF-2 but I tend to avoid it for some reason--thought I|d use it more. Recently bought the 25/1.8 -- nice lens and usable with the E-PM2 but a little front heavy. The 40-150 . . . again, I like the lens and it is usale on the E-PM2, but is a little awkward with the small camera.

You cant compare digital to film; no way. there's nothing like classic flm cameras. I shoot a leica IIIf much of the time, but digital has some advantages besids the obvious one of convenience.