Back to size and weight for the E-M5

Started Jun 14, 2012 | Discussions
Louis_Dobson
Louis_Dobson Forum Pro • Posts: 27,361
Back to size and weight for the E-M5

For a brief period there, you'd buy an MFT camera even if size and weight were not an issue.

D600 with the equivalent of a 12-42 f1.7-f2.4 going to be 2K.

Interesting times. About the same price and performance as an E-M5 with 12-35 f2.8 (although getting through to thick people that FF has the same IQ as MFT seems to be a bit of an uphill struggle).

The E-M5 will be a lot more compact, and considerably lighter.

On the other hand, with the D600, you can take off the 12-42 Nikkor and put on a 12-35 f1.4, or I could use my 52mm f1.0

So that will be the choice - size and weight versus flexibility for DoF and low light (with other, expensive, lenses).

I'll be sticking with the E-M5. I hate carrying stuff, and also I hate looking like a tourist.

[all the FF lenses above have been converted to MFT effective focal lengths f ratios.]
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

 Louis_Dobson's gear list:Louis_Dobson's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Leica D Summilux Asph 25mm F1.4 +7 more
Nikon D600
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
tt321 Forum Pro • Posts: 10,499
12-42 Nikkor

According to their own MTF plots, the quality at 12 mm is a bit dire...

That and 50% heavier probably explains the 50% cheaper price point.

Steen Bay Veteran Member • Posts: 6,974
Re: Back to size and weight for the E-M5

Louis_Dobson wrote:

For a brief period there, you'd buy an MFT camera even if size and weight were not an issue.

D600 with the equivalent of a 12-42 f1.7-f2.4 going to be 2K.

Interesting times. About the same price and performance as an E-M5 with 12-35 f2.8 (although getting through to thick people that FF has the same IQ as MFT seems to be a bit of an uphill struggle).

The E-M5 will be a lot more compact, and considerably lighter.

The size/weight of the 24-85/3.5-4.5 VR is 'only' 78x82mm/465g, and the D600 looks relatively compact too. Maybe I'll find it difficult to resist if the the kit price is 'just' $2k.

Louis_Dobson
OP Louis_Dobson Forum Pro • Posts: 27,361
Re: 12-42 Nikkor

What's it like stopped down to f5.6?

tt321 wrote:

According to their own MTF plots, the quality at 12 mm is a bit dire...

That and 50% heavier probably explains the 50% cheaper price point.

 Louis_Dobson's gear list:Louis_Dobson's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Leica D Summilux Asph 25mm F1.4 +7 more
Marla2008
Marla2008 Senior Member • Posts: 2,419
Re: 12-42 Nikkor

From the first leaked pictures on Sonyalpharumors the D600 looks very smallish for FF. Of course it still is completely humoungus compared to E-M5. But the Nikon ease of use, great feature set and FF sensor, I know for a fact I'll be wanting one.

For some people (ME !) DOF control is the major thing. Yes, CONTROL, meaning I can also chose to stop down if I wish, but I WANT that ability to have razor thin DOF.

I also know I'll be maintaining two systems because I absolutely love the portability of m4/3, and the lenses are very good.

Until someones comes up with mirrorless FF (will happen in some years, for sure) and decent lenses to go with it.

Marla.

Paul De Bra
Paul De Bra Forum Pro • Posts: 12,386
Well said! Size and weight is what sells m43.

Regarding image quality I was very happy with my Canon dslr and lenses. But regarding size and weight I was not. I tend to travel with just a backpack as carry-on and the camera and lenses (couldn't even bring all) would be close to half of my luggage.

The E-M5 has really changed that. With the 20mm f/1.7 it fits in a coat pocket. And I do realize that my 12-50 and 75-300 are slow lenses but they are just so small and light and the image quality is good (12-50) or even excellent (75-300). Couldn't be happier to get rid of the dslr bulk.

-- hide signature --

Slowly learning to use the Olympus OM-D E-M5.
Public pictures at http://debra.zenfolio.com/ .

 Paul De Bra's gear list:Paul De Bra's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +3 more
Jogger
Jogger Veteran Member • Posts: 8,441
Re: Back to size and weight for the E-M5

I think Canon should be more worried than Oly, they have hit a sweet spot with the EM5 in terms of form factor, image quality, lenses, etc.

Louis_Dobson wrote:

For a brief period there, you'd buy an MFT camera even if size and weight were not an issue.

D600 with the equivalent of a 12-42 f1.7-f2.4 going to be 2K.

Interesting times. About the same price and performance as an E-M5 with 12-35 f2.8 (although getting through to thick people that FF has the same IQ as MFT seems to be a bit of an uphill struggle).

The E-M5 will be a lot more compact, and considerably lighter.

On the other hand, with the D600, you can take off the 12-42 Nikkor and put on a 12-35 f1.4, or I could use my 52mm f1.0

So that will be the choice - size and weight versus flexibility for DoF and low light (with other, expensive, lenses).

I'll be sticking with the E-M5. I hate carrying stuff, and also I hate looking like a tourist.

[all the FF lenses above have been converted to MFT effective focal lengths f ratios.]
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

 Jogger's gear list:Jogger's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D700 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
AV Janus Senior Member • Posts: 1,994
Re: Back to size and weight for the E-M5

Are we sure we are talking only $2k for the kit?
I would expect $500 more...

I want it of course... But it remains to big for me, and that is the reason I switched.

That and the retro looks of the OMD. It gets noticed less as an expensive camera.
Thats a plus when you are in a crowd, but a minus for a paying job I guess...
--
Rick Halle wrote:

" Keep in mind that tall buildings sway back and forth so they require faster shutter speeds."

 AV Janus's gear list:AV Janus's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
tt321 Forum Pro • Posts: 10,499
Re: 12-42 Nikkor

It's heavier than this one:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2485afs.htm

So probably just added VR and kept otherwise as same as possible?

Anyway very attractive kit, if the D600 is very similar to the D7000 as the pictures purport to show.

However, any M4/3 plus the 12-35/2.8 can be totally contained within this kit like a driver being contained inside a car (OK not that extreme).

Louis_Dobson wrote:
What's it like stopped down to f5.6?

tt321 wrote:

According to their own MTF plots, the quality at 12 mm is a bit dire...

That and 50% heavier probably explains the 50% cheaper price point.

SaltLakeGuy
SaltLakeGuy Forum Pro • Posts: 13,584
I hear ya

I threw the towel in after much serious thought regarding the weight and bulk issues. Not to mention I find myself now responsible for doing the videos of praise dances at our congregation. The OMD is doing a fine job. The kit lens is better than reported by many who seem to feel it is such a compromise. I don't feel that way at all. But then I"m not shooting in near darkness much and not shooting sports either. So it fits my bill nicely. The 45mm f1.8 will do well for my portrait work and the 75-300 is blowing me away with it's sharpness. Even better than my D7000 and 70-300vr was at it's best. Needless to say a LOT less to carry and manipulate. I'm even enjoying that small FL-600R which is quite versatile to say the least. When the grip arrives I may use if a fair amount as I like the extra meat it provides without still matching the physical weight or dimensions of a full DSLR. Either way it was the right decision for me to sell out of the NEX and the Nikon body I had before. For some maybe not so much, but there simply isn't any compelling reason for me to hand on to that stuff so it's gone. So far I"m having way to much fun to notice......and the IQ hasn't been a compromise.

 SaltLakeGuy's gear list:SaltLakeGuy's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Epson Stylus Pro 3880 +8 more
millsart Senior Member • Posts: 2,771
Good reason to own BOTH

All good reasons to own BOTH systems.

Who says that a photographer must only own and enjoy 1 system if they shoot m4/3 ?

Its like saying if a guitarist likes Fender guitars then they can't own enjoy those big, heavy Les Pauls at the same time.

Why not own multiple guitars and enjoy playing different styles of music ?

I love the sound of my strat with just a clean amp, its so pure and beautiful, but darn if I don't also enjoy strapping on my Les Paul, cranking up the distortion and rocking out some old Steve Jones riffs.

Why can't one enjoy a m4/3 camera and a DSLR at the same time ? Obviously in life we sometimes have to make choices due to limited means and other obligations such as family, mortgage etc but just because we might not have both does that mean we wouldn't like to have both ?

I can't really afford or justify a big upright bass guitar, but darn if I wouldn't love to have one and try to learn to play some old rockabilly Lee Rocker type songs on it.

While I'm at it, I'd love to have a piano and drum kit and a host of other instruments all in a little converted basement studio.

Not going to happen right now, but hardly a reason for me to act like only guitar is the instrument worth owning.

Likewise, just because shoots, say a m4/3 or FF camera, doesn't mean they can't still want and enjoy a bunch of different camera types.

Again, I don't have unlimited means, but I'd love to have everything from an iPhone 4s to a Sony RX100 to a EM-5, to a D4 and D800 and also a Phaseone 65meg MFDB.

Simply no need to have brand wars or the mindset if youv'e got and enjoy one format you can't also love another.

Adventsam Veteran Member • Posts: 4,983
Re: Good reason to own BOTH, not really.

It's just lots of decisions and lots of unfamiliarity.

Guitarists change guitars like a photographer changes a lens its as simple as that, and m43 has lots of lens options now and getting bigger.

Louis_Dobson
OP Louis_Dobson Forum Pro • Posts: 27,361
Both formats, fine.

A D600 and an OM-D, I'd be less convinced.

D700 and OM-D (which I might do) gives a cheap camera for shallow D0F shots (assuming the D600 trashes D700 values), with still perfectly adequate IQ.

D4 and OM-D gives two cameras offering similar IQ but one works in no light and has great C-AF, and the other is portable.

D800 and OM-D - OM-D is a great general purpose camera, but stick a D800 on a tripod and you have an MF camera.

D600 and OM-D, can't really see the point.

millsart wrote:

All good reasons to own BOTH systems.

Who says that a photographer must only own and enjoy 1 system if they shoot m4/3 ?

Its like saying if a guitarist likes Fender guitars then they can't own enjoy those big, heavy Les Pauls at the same time.

Why not own multiple guitars and enjoy playing different styles of music ?

I love the sound of my strat with just a clean amp, its so pure and beautiful, but darn if I don't also enjoy strapping on my Les Paul, cranking up the distortion and rocking out some old Steve Jones riffs.

Why can't one enjoy a m4/3 camera and a DSLR at the same time ? Obviously in life we sometimes have to make choices due to limited means and other obligations such as family, mortgage etc but just because we might not have both does that mean we wouldn't like to have both ?

I can't really afford or justify a big upright bass guitar, but darn if I wouldn't love to have one and try to learn to play some old rockabilly Lee Rocker type songs on it.

While I'm at it, I'd love to have a piano and drum kit and a host of other instruments all in a little converted basement studio.

Not going to happen right now, but hardly a reason for me to act like only guitar is the instrument worth owning.

Likewise, just because shoots, say a m4/3 or FF camera, doesn't mean they can't still want and enjoy a bunch of different camera types.

Again, I don't have unlimited means, but I'd love to have everything from an iPhone 4s to a Sony RX100 to a EM-5, to a D4 and D800 and also a Phaseone 65meg MFDB.

Simply no need to have brand wars or the mindset if youv'e got and enjoy one format you can't also love another.

 Louis_Dobson's gear list:Louis_Dobson's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Leica D Summilux Asph 25mm F1.4 +7 more
Bob Meyer Veteran Member • Posts: 5,375
Re: Both formats, fine.

I guess it depends a lot on the performance of the D600. It's still likely to do C-AF far better than any current MILC. I've said before, no one camera system can do it all. They all entail compromise. I have yet to give up my DSLR, as there are simply some things is does better than my m43. I don't use it very often, but it'll definitely come out to shoot he US Grand Prix in November.

Louis_Dobson wrote:
D600 and OM-D, can't really see the point.

millsart wrote:

All good reasons to own BOTH systems.

Who says that a photographer must only own and enjoy 1 system if they shoot m4/3 ?

-- hide signature --

Bokeh is the aesthetic quality of the blur in out-of-focus areas of an image, or the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light. Bokeh is not the same as depth of field (DOF).

 Bob Meyer's gear list:Bob Meyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 +6 more
coroander Regular Member • Posts: 237
Re: Back to size and weight for the E-M5

size and weight are THE issue.

Optical1
Optical1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,096
Re: Both formats, fine.

Louis,

I thought you would be in the D600 camp. I'll be interested to see what the sensor has to offer for low light. I would think that the pixel size being roughly 6x larger than the E-M5 it might surprise given the relatively low cost. It's the first FF camera to catch my attention in awhile. Plus I thought you were loving Sony's sensor tech, what am I missing?

Louis_Dobson wrote:
A D600 and an OM-D, I'd be less convinced.

D700 and OM-D (which I might do) gives a cheap camera for shallow D0F shots (assuming the D600 trashes D700 values), with still perfectly adequate IQ.

D4 and OM-D gives two cameras offering similar IQ but one works in no light and has great C-AF, and the other is portable.

D800 and OM-D - OM-D is a great general purpose camera, but stick a D800 on a tripod and you have an MF camera.

D600 and OM-D, can't really see the point.

millsart wrote:

All good reasons to own BOTH systems.

Who says that a photographer must only own and enjoy 1 system if they shoot m4/3 ?

Its like saying if a guitarist likes Fender guitars then they can't own enjoy those big, heavy Les Pauls at the same time.

Why not own multiple guitars and enjoy playing different styles of music ?

I love the sound of my strat with just a clean amp, its so pure and beautiful, but darn if I don't also enjoy strapping on my Les Paul, cranking up the distortion and rocking out some old Steve Jones riffs.

Why can't one enjoy a m4/3 camera and a DSLR at the same time ? Obviously in life we sometimes have to make choices due to limited means and other obligations such as family, mortgage etc but just because we might not have both does that mean we wouldn't like to have both ?

I can't really afford or justify a big upright bass guitar, but darn if I wouldn't love to have one and try to learn to play some old rockabilly Lee Rocker type songs on it.

While I'm at it, I'd love to have a piano and drum kit and a host of other instruments all in a little converted basement studio.

Not going to happen right now, but hardly a reason for me to act like only guitar is the instrument worth owning.

Likewise, just because shoots, say a m4/3 or FF camera, doesn't mean they can't still want and enjoy a bunch of different camera types.

Again, I don't have unlimited means, but I'd love to have everything from an iPhone 4s to a Sony RX100 to a EM-5, to a D4 and D800 and also a Phaseone 65meg MFDB.

Simply no need to have brand wars or the mindset if youv'e got and enjoy one format you can't also love another.

 Optical1's gear list:Optical1's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony RX100 Ricoh GR Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PM1 +18 more
peevee1 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,247
Re: Both formats, fine.

Optical1 wrote:

Louis,

I thought you would be in the D600 camp. I'll be interested to see what the sensor has to offer for low light. I would think that the pixel size being roughly 6x larger than the E-M5

6x? How did you calculate that? 24 mpix vs 16 mpix in an area 3.8 times larger comes down to pixels 2.5 times larger.

Optical1
Optical1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,096
Re: Both formats, fine.

peevee1 wrote:

Optical1 wrote:

Louis,

I thought you would be in the D600 camp. I'll be interested to see what the sensor has to offer for low light. I would think that the pixel size being roughly 6x larger than the E-M5

6x? How did you calculate that? 24 mpix vs 16 mpix in an area 3.8 times larger comes down to pixels 2.5 times larger.

Blast! I stand corrected. Damn late night math. I squared the 2.5 factor for area...mistakenly resulting in 6.25. Thanks for the correction.

 Optical1's gear list:Optical1's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony RX100 Ricoh GR Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PM1 +18 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads