EM1.2 owners, would you buy it again?

Moti said:

Photo Pete said:

kangarooinoz said:

Hi guys

Just wondering if those of you who bought this camera would make the same choice over again. i.e does its performance and output for you justify its high retail price..

Cheers

Click to expand...

Yes. Without hesitation.

Just one clarification though... I don't think its retail price is high for the feature set it offers.

Click to expand...

Not sure I can agree to that when I compare it to a camera such as The X-T2, which together with an excellent 18-55mm f/2.8-4.0, still costs 20% less than an E-M1-2 body only.

Moti

--

http://www.musicalpix.com

Click to expand...

JudyN said:

phil from seattle said:

IBIS - somewhat, not compelling by itself

Click to expand...

To me, this is the MOST compelling feature of this camera. It is a game changer for people who hate tripods and like to photograph in the evening/night and indoors. I can do things with this camera I couldn't dream of with my previous cameras, which yes, did have IS.

I also got the 12-100mm which adds even more to the IS.

Clearly whether this camera is "worth the money" depends on the kind of shooting you do and your budget.

Click to expand...

JudyN said:

nebulla said:

I am quite aware of the advantages that the new camera brings, but it is only of greater benefit if your photography relies on action,

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. I love it for its fantastic image stabilization. Especially along with the 12-100mm lens, it is a real game changer for hand-held images indoors and in low light light evening and night. I have a whole collection of new photographs that I could not do with my previous cameras.

Click to expand...

keepfocused said:

Is the 12-100 comparable to the 12-40 in evening low light? I'm looking to get the E-M1 II but can't decide between the two. I can't draw myself away from the fact that the f2.8 against the f4 is more versatile. With the longer shutter speeds possible with the 12-100 is it only good for still compositions.

Click to expand...

Keith57 said:

keepfocused said:

Is the 12-100 comparable to the 12-40 in evening low light? I'm looking to get the E-M1 II but can't decide between the two. I can't draw myself away from the fact that the f2.8 against the f4 is more versatile. With the longer shutter speeds possible with the 12-100 is it only good for still compositions.

Click to expand...

Just get both! I use the 12-40 when out and about with a few other lenses in a bag.

I use the 12-100 when I'm travelling light (usually, but not always, have the Olympus 7-14 with me as well)

--

http://www.fachwen.org

Click to expand...

Mark B UK said:

JudyN said:

phil from seattle said:

IBIS - somewhat, not compelling by itself

Click to expand...

To me, this is the MOST compelling feature of this camera. It is a game changer for people who hate tripods and like to photograph in the evening/night and indoors. I can do things with this camera I couldn't dream of with my previous cameras, which yes, did have IS.

I also got the 12-100mm which adds even more to the IS.

Clearly whether this camera is "worth the money" depends on the kind of shooting you do and your budget.

--
Judy

Click to expand...

Agreed. As a travel photographer I *hate* tripods. With the E-M1 Mk2 and 12-100 I've shot wideangle dusk seascapes with motion-blurred water at 1sec and telephoto shots of details in dimly-lit ceilings at 1/8sec, all pin-sharp. I don't believe there's any other combination at any price that could achieve this with the same hit rate.

Also, from my earlier list of reasons why I bought the Mk2 (and would do so again) despite having posted here in support of the thread saying I thought the price too high when it was first announced, I'd like to add another point. Pro Capture. That's a brilliant feature for portraits.

Click to expand...

abe4652 said:

i kept the mark 1 as a backup only, in case the mark 2 breaks.

Recently I picked up the old camera by mistake for a short trip.

Lets just say it was a painful experience, one I will try hard not to repeat.

Click to expand...

keepfocused said:

Keith57 said:

keepfocused said:

Is the 12-100 comparable to the 12-40 in evening low light? I'm looking to get the E-M1 II but can't decide between the two. I can't draw myself away from the fact that the f2.8 against the f4 is more versatile. With the longer shutter speeds possible with the 12-100 is it only good for still compositions.

Click to expand...

Just get both! I use the 12-40 when out and about with a few other lenses in a bag.

I use the 12-100 when I'm travelling light (usually, but not always, have the Olympus 7-14 with me as well)

--

http://www.fachwen.org

Click to expand...

I'll put that past my better half - ha, ha. I wonder what she will say !?

Would be nice though. I think if I could afford both I would go for a pair up with the 25 f1.2 and one of the zooms first. May have to sell the Nocticron to fund it though. I think the 25 would be used more.

Click to expand...

nebulla said:

gary0319 said:

nebulla said:

I do not see why I would want to sell such a capable camera as the E-M1 for $700? and pay another $1300 for a camera that is not far ahead in technology.

Click to expand...

If you don't see the need for the features of the E-M1 II over the E-M1 I, than you are absolutely right not to spend the additional money. Me.......I sold the E-M1.1 and spent the extra money. Knowing what I know know now after owning the E-M1 II for the past 5-6 months, I would gladly do it again, even if it cost more money

Click to expand...

Good for you. Enjoy

I am not knocking others for doing what they think is a justifiable expense, and if you make money taking pictures, then any price will offset your expenses. It is a hobby for me, and as I have been around the block a few times, I know that the camera does not make the photographer. It is a tool, like any other tool which helps to do the job easier. I am not targeting Olympus either. All camera manufacturers are guilty of overcharging for their products

Click to expand...

nebulla said:

and they get away with it because of our impulsiveness, and it is hard to understand why the price of the camera which I just purchased 6 months ago, is worth less than 1/2 the cost of the original purchase price. This is a what some manufactures do. Release a new camera as soon as they have sold enough of the older model, leaving the consumer high and dry. Thank goodness that I can say that this does NOT apply to Olympus. Anyway, you do what you do, and I will do what I do. I am just ranting.

Click to expand...

kangarooinoz said:

One thing I wondered. Full frame sensors are generally better in low light. However with this crazy olympus IBIS you'd in theory rarely have to use high ISOs right? So does this mean that this camera shouldn't be too far behind FF cameras for low light work?

Click to expand...

kangarooinoz said:

One thing I wondered. Full frame sensors are generally better in low light. However with this crazy olympus IBIS you'd in theory rarely have to use high ISOs right? So does this mean that this camera shouldn't be too far behind FF cameras for low light work?

Click to expand...

kangarooinoz said:

One thing I wondered. Full frame sensors are generally better in low light. However with this crazy olympus IBIS you'd in theory rarely have to use high ISOs right? So does this mean that this camera shouldn't be too far behind FF cameras for low light work?

Click to expand...

LearningForeverIHope said:

kangarooinoz said:

One thing I wondered. Full frame sensors are generally better in low light. However with this crazy olympus IBIS you'd in theory rarely have to use high ISOs right? So does this mean that this camera shouldn't be too far behind FF cameras for low light work?

Click to expand...

For scenes where there is no motion or scenes where motion blur is expected yes.

Click to expand...