Reading mode: Light Dark

EM-5 owner thoughts on the EM5-II

Go to last post
For me-the articulating touchscreen LCD is a major step forward. I don't like the tilting screens though relative to fixed screens they are better than nothing.

Like the 40MP shift idea though not sure I would use it much since I shoot mostly handheld.

Question for this group-does the on-sensor PD allow for all features in the PRO lenses for af that to date only the EM1 was able to access? If so-that coould be a reason to get this camera.
 
Gakuranman said:
After reading some reviews and viewing samples however, I'm left feeling like the E-M5-II is not quite there for me as an advanced user. Several points stand out as being significant 'deal breakers'.

Video: While it's obvious Olympus is now finally taking this seriously with a variety of video framerates and other pro features, the video processing and final image quality still pales in comparison to the GH-4. The difference can be seen clearly on dpreview's sample preview: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympus-om-d-e-m5-ii/5

Sensor-jump: The magnificent image stabilisation that I've come to depend on so much, while apparently improved and offering 'steadicam'-like stabilisation for video, leaves much to be desired in actual use. Robin Wong's video shows horrible jumping around of the image, in contrast to what should be smooth transitions if we're comparing it to a steadicam. Undoubtedly, that the 5-axis technology can even stabilise the video this much is a huge feat, but as an end user I can't see myself using it with the sensor-jump problem. Perhaps Robin is just really bad at making smooth transitions? I find that hard to imagine...
Click to expand...
If you want to shoot video more than stills then yes the GH4 will likely be a more satisfying camera, depending on what you're after. It has more resolution as a 4K instead of 1920 video camera (thus the difference you're seeing with the DP examples I suspect) and obviously Panasonic have been doing video for a lot longer than Olympus have.

That said, I was very impressed with what Oly have delivered, even though it's "only" 1920. The IBIS is simply amazing and the clip I shot is all handheld aside from a handful of gimbal shots.

Id invite you to take a look.


The sensor jump tends to happen on wider focal lengths where the IBIS will tend to over-correct> I actually deliberately left a few of these in the Behind the scenes / making of video. There's a really big one in there ;-)

I honestly think this is probably more of a tuning of their algorithm more than anything. I found I was able to work around the issue by manually overriding the focal length set by the IBIS.

Of more concern is what I call "sensor float" where you're trying to deliberately pan a shot say and the camera isn't initially sure if your move is accidental or deliberate. I think they can improve this by feathering the starts and stops.

I've also suggested to Olympus that they make it possible to momentarily de-activate an axis os IS while you hold in a Fn button, so you can deactivate the pan axis by holding the button, pan your shot, then release the button to re-activate.

I'm confident this will only improve with firmware as they get more video shooting experience and feedback from users.

The video is significantly better than anything Olympus has done till now. it's not quite up to what Panny have with the GH cameras, but it does some things better in my opinion and I think they've closed that gap significantly.

jb
 
honeyiscool said:
You've completely lost me, dude.
Click to expand...
You've completely lost yourself in a fit of lack of understand of what I was saying and come up with your own interpretation. Some of Tarantino's early work was shot on 16mm film.The Hurt Lock was shot on Super 16 recently using an Aarton Super 16 camera. Scarface, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Lock Stock Two Smoking Barrels were shot on 16mm film stock, Where did I say anything you've suggested.

Most of the TV studios around the world up until the 1990s were still using Super 16 cameras, and only fairly recently has the TV standard gone up from that in the late 90s. The last 20 odd years we've seen more 35mm stock being used and digital, but, 16mm is just as a relevant as it was in the 1970s.

There are a lot of lenses available for C mount, and entire industry was born off 16mm even in the film days. Not just cheap cameras. Going wider than 12mm becomes increasingly problematic with four thirds lenses where there is an abundance of C mount lenses right down even to 4.5mm.

You seem to have a contrived understanding you've picked up about 16mm film that you've picked up out of backyard or low budget film cameras at some point without understanding the full intricacies of the format or what its used for other than just cheap film cameras.

I'm not harping on about PL mount lenses, I'm just saying that Micro Four Thirds allows for the digital equivalence of a 16mm camera and there are lots of cheap and decent quality lenses if you are so interested to look for the GH4 but that you don't have the option for the OM-D because it can't do the sensor scaling trick of the GH4.

If you don't understand that then you've lost yourself.
 
Last edited:
M43 Dude said:
Sure I don't get the instant gratification of sensor shift, but the instant gratification of sensor shift can be put next to the instant gratification of sweep panorama, where both will deliver inferior results vs. learning how to stack images and stitch images.
  • I can still put together a larger photo by stitching images rather than one photo that is much of the same.
  • I can create a canvas with photo stitching that you could never imagine with this 40megapixel trick.
  • The limit of this stitching technique is one photo, the limit of stitching in software is a canvas as big as you like if you have enough computer hardware to render a file as you so wish.
Click to expand...
M43 Dude

I have been experimenting a bit with different programs and techniques to achieve what you are referring to above. I was also following some discussions with Anders regarding stacking and the techniques used. I am just curious what you are using for software and technique.

Silver
 
Silverback46 said:
M43 Dude said:
Sure I don't get the instant gratification of sensor shift, but the instant gratification of sensor shift can be put next to the instant gratification of sweep panorama, where both will deliver inferior results vs. learning how to stack images and stitch images.
  • I can still put together a larger photo by stitching images rather than one photo that is much of the same.
  • I can create a canvas with photo stitching that you could never imagine with this 40megapixel trick.
  • The limit of this stitching technique is one photo, the limit of stitching in software is a canvas as big as you like if you have enough computer hardware to render a file as you so wish.
Click to expand...
M43 Dude

I have been experimenting a bit with different programs and techniques to achieve what you are referring to above. I was also following some discussions with Anders regarding stacking and the techniques used. I am just curious what you are using for software and technique.

Silver
Click to expand...
I use Photoshop you can also do it in Photoshop Elements.
 
Last edited:
M43 Dude

Thanks for replying. I have been pretty successful with Elements. I have also tried Hugin and then Combine Zm for focus stacking. I find I can create large images of pretty good quality. Just wanted to see if I was missing a program or technique. I think it is an often overlooked advantage of digital photography when used in the right situations.

Silver
 
John Brawley said:
Gakuranman said:
After reading some reviews and viewing samples however, I'm left feeling like the E-M5-II is not quite there for me as an advanced user. Several points stand out as being significant 'deal breakers'.

Video: While it's obvious Olympus is now finally taking this seriously with a variety of video framerates and other pro features, the video processing and final image quality still pales in comparison to the GH-4. The difference can be seen clearly on dpreview's sample preview: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympus-om-d-e-m5-ii/5

Sensor-jump: The magnificent image stabilisation that I've come to depend on so much, while apparently improved and offering 'steadicam'-like stabilisation for video, leaves much to be desired in actual use. Robin Wong's video shows horrible jumping around of the image, in contrast to what should be smooth transitions if we're comparing it to a steadicam. Undoubtedly, that the 5-axis technology can even stabilise the video this much is a huge feat, but as an end user I can't see myself using it with the sensor-jump problem. Perhaps Robin is just really bad at making smooth transitions? I find that hard to imagine...
Click to expand...
If you want to shoot video more than stills then yes the GH4 will likely be a more satisfying camera, depending on what you're after. It has more resolution as a 4K instead of 1920 video camera (thus the difference you're seeing with the DP examples I suspect) and obviously Panasonic have been doing video for a lot longer than Olympus have.

That said, I was very impressed with what Oly have delivered, even though it's "only" 1920. The IBIS is simply amazing and the clip I shot is all handheld aside from a handful of gimbal shots.

Id invite you to take a look.


The sensor jump tends to happen on wider focal lengths where the IBIS will tend to over-correct> I actually deliberately left a few of these in the Behind the scenes / making of video. There's a really big one in there ;-)

I honestly think this is probably more of a tuning of their algorithm more than anything. I found I was able to work around the issue by manually overriding the focal length set by the IBIS.

Of more concern is what I call "sensor float" where you're trying to deliberately pan a shot say and the camera isn't initially sure if your move is accidental or deliberate. I think they can improve this by feathering the starts and stops.

I've also suggested to Olympus that they make it possible to momentarily de-activate an axis os IS while you hold in a Fn button, so you can deactivate the pan axis by holding the button, pan your shot, then release the button to re-activate.

I'm confident this will only improve with firmware as they get more video shooting experience and feedback from users.

The video is significantly better than anything Olympus has done till now. it's not quite up to what Panny have with the GH cameras, but it does some things better in my opinion and I think they've closed that gap significantly.

jb
Click to expand...
 
Gakuranman said:
Hi John,

I watched your video yesterday. It's a great example of what is possible despite the limitations, and I'm pleased to hear that you've made some progress into avoiding the sensor-shift/jump problems. I think you made be right that it's something Olympus could improve in firmware and adding the option to disable IS on a particular axis makes a lot of sense.

I'm curious to hear more about your experience with a gimbal and the IS though. Using a type of steadicam has and continues to be the only way to get smooth movements (ruling out professional equipment like dollys and jibs). My hope it that the IBIS gets to a point where a steadicam and other heavy equipment is not needed, but in your review you say that gimbals and other professional equipment are still necessary and that the main advantage of the IBIS is for stationary shots.

My question is, if a filmmaker has all that equipment with him, why would he even need to use the IBIS for stationary shots? Surely he has a tripod? Did you see any advantage to using the IBIS in conjunction with the gimbal (or did it actually conflict)?
Click to expand...
I don't see IBIS as a replacement for a dolly or a steadicam. it's not as good as either of those.

IBIS is good at making hand held shots better. Handheld, like tripod shots, dolly shots and steadicam shots are part of our visual vocabulary.

IBIS in my opinion, doesn't supersede those, though many will try to get away with doing just that.

I have some shots (which i din't use in the final edit) where I walked with the camera and it does look very steadicam like, much nicer if I do say than the work of the other you tube clip you posted where he claims to be liek a steadicam, but I can still see the IBIS working every now and then.

IBIS means i can do shots I could not do otherwise though. I couldn't hand hold a 150 mm shot of ash on the rocks at the beach like I did in the opening. Just wouldn't have happened. Would have been a tripod shot.

The fact that I could do that and do it very quickly (which is what hand held can give you) means it's an advantage.

IBIS in my opinion, will never replace a dolly, or steadicam or gimbal.

They are different tools that all yield slightly different results.

IBIS makes unusable handheld shots more usable. it doesn't turn handheld shots into dolly shots, or if it does, only in certain circumstances will you get away with this...

Byt the way, I've used a gimbal, and the feel of a gimbal is very different to a Steadicam. I'd argue that the G2 Defy gimbal I used is very easy to set up and can be carried in one hand. It's about the same weight as a tripod. How is that any more fuss and "heavy equipment" than not using one ?

JB

--
John Brawley
Cinematographer
Sydney Australia
www.johnbrawley.com
http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the reply.

I was under the impression that most steadicams incorporate some sort of gimbal, so I was using the terms interchangeably. The 'heavy equipment' I was referring to were the dollys and jibs, although these pieces of equipment can perhaps be substituted with a steadicam/gimbal for many shots.

The big thing for me is that carrying a steadicam/gimbal in addition to the tripod and camera kit is another thing to lug around. If IBIS were to get to a point where it could substitute these other tools, it would be ideal. Or if that's not possible, then a very simple steadicam/gimbal that folds away and is light. In my experience though, good steadicams aren't light or compact, and most certainly aren't affordable...

Have you any recommendations for good steadicams/gimbals out of interest? There's a wide range of them and it's increasingly difficult to know what really works well in the market.
 
Gakuranman said:
Thanks for the reply.

I was under the impression that most steadicams incorporate some sort of gimbal, so I was using the terms interchangeably.
Click to expand...
Ahh OK, I see. Yes most Steadicam's do work on a gimbal, but they are "passive". The idea is that you have something balanced with it's center of gravity below the point of balance that is ever so slightly bottom heavy. Being on a gimbal then makes it easier to move and steer, but it's not intrinsic to the balance.

It's like trying to balance a bowl on your finger tip...you probably can't do it. but if you invert the bowl and have it upside down you put the centre of gravity below the balance point (your finger tip) and there you go. Change the finger tip for a gimbal and you have something that's more easily moved and pointed...

Steadicam by the way is a brand name, but there are many stablising rigs that replicate what a Steadicam does and also get called genericlly, Steadicam.

Recently, Gimbals as terminology refers to actively stabilised 3 axis camera rigs with motors. Turn the battery off and the rig won't work.
Gakuranman said:
The 'heavy equipment' I was referring to were the dollys and jibs, although these pieces of equipment can perhaps be substituted with a steadicam/gimbal for many shots.
Click to expand...
No not really... This was my point. A steadicam and also mostly a gimbal can be used where you could never go on a dolly....up stairs for example.

A dolly can do things a steadicam can never do for example. Track with precision and repeatability on longer lenses. for example.

The sweet spot for Steadicam and Gimbals is to track on a subject in close range (3-12') and with complex coreography, say lots of people crossing frame or moving though complex and busy environments.

Something like THIS shot could never be done with a dolly or hand held. It gets on and off escalators for example...

http://www.steadishots.org/shots_detail.cfm?shotID=121

Whereas the handheld of a clip like THIS one from the City Of God wouldn't be posisble with a steadicam nor would it feel the same and invoke the same energy. In fact, shock horror, it probbaly wouldnt feel the same at all if it was "stabilised"


The point I make again. IBIS isn't a replacement for other narrative storytelling devices like Dolly shots, steadicams and even hand held.

It's an adjunct to these, mainly when you want hand held to NOT look handheld.
Gakuranman said:
The big thing for me is that carrying a steadicam/gimbal in addition to the tripod and camera kit is another thing to lug around. If IBIS were to get to a point where it could substitute these other tools, it would be ideal. Or if that's not possible, then a very simple steadicam/gimbal that folds away and is light. In my experience though, good steadicams aren't light or compact, and most certainly aren't affordable...
Click to expand...
I've resisted gimbals lately, because I find them overly complex to set up and a bit limited. Focus for example is a big problem unless you have a remote focus motor. I got away with using a gimbal on this because I had a 12mm lens set F5.6 at 6" which pretty much holds focus through the shot size range.

Now I can't always do that, especially if I was on an interior for example and I'd have to start making choices about focus.

The Defy G2 gimbal was actually really simple to use comparatively and works very well. I recommend it, and I've used their more expensive competition, the Freefly Movi.

They've just released a new version the G2X, which looks to address a major problem I have with gimbals...you can't just put them down !!!! You have to hang them on a stand...The G2X has a built in stand sort of. I haven't used one yet, but I'm keen based on my couple of days with the G2.

I go back again to Curiosity. I didn't use a tripod ever.

I used a gimbal on 7 shots.

Myself, the director and the camera assistant I had with me carried three bodies, a set of cinema primes (not small !), both Pro Olympus Zooms, the 40-150 and the 12-40, plus i carried the 60mm macro, the 45mm, the 25mm, the 75mm and the 12mm, plus 10 batteries and the G2.

Between us we could pick it all up and move in one, and that's how I wanted to test this way of shooting because this is exactly the kind of reason I would shoot with this style of camera.

JB

--
John Brawley
Cinematographer
Sydney Australia
www.johnbrawley.com
http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top