So... I finally come to a decision to go with the OM-D... Is there any big hand users out there?

Started Mar 13, 2013 | Questions
Randell Tober
OP Randell Tober Regular Member • Posts: 248
Re: +1

Hmmm... I guess I kind of looked at 4/3 as the future... I kind of saw the dslr's fading away with time and tech... I guess I picked up the wrong idea. Thanks

 Randell Tober's gear list:Randell Tober's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD4000 IS Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +2 more
PAUL TILL
PAUL TILL Veteran Member • Posts: 9,286
Re: Caveat: I haven't read the other posts

RealPancho wrote:

My hands are not really big, but they are long. I'm 6'4" (193cm) tall.

I did feel a little cramped for the first week or so, but I got things worked out. Of course, my first SLR back in 1976 was an OM-1, so maybe I was predisposed to small cameras.

In any case, I don't think its size should stop you. You'll probably ultimately find it a tremendous benefit.

Your hand looks about the same size as mine and I would call mine small.

-- hide signature --

The 10% Rule:
You Must Be 10% Smarter Than The Equipment You're Operating

NZ Scott
NZ Scott Veteran Member • Posts: 4,790
Re: It sounds like you are better off with a dslr.

Randell Tober wrote:

Thanks... So loving the versatility- features for say the OM-D, wanting a reasonably priced good assortment of glass in the 2.8 or so range, which dslr/dslr's would you be looking at? Low light and speed is what I'm after? Thanks again

You're in the wrong forum for that, mate.

I'd suggest you pop over to the Canon and Nikon APS-C forums, although Sony is worth a look too.

-- hide signature --
 NZ Scott's gear list:NZ Scott's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Panasonic G85 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +12 more
Randell Tober
OP Randell Tober Regular Member • Posts: 248
Re: It sounds like you are better off with a dslr.

Hi,

The post was in response to comments regarding my interest in 4/3’s being misguided- off course. For whatever reason came to the conclusion that 4/3 was the future and the impression that quality and price- within reason within 4/3 was a better alternative to dslr. Hence, came the suggestion I go back to dslr. So, just looking for follow-up on direction. Thanks

-

 Randell Tober's gear list:Randell Tober's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD4000 IS Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +2 more
NZ Scott
NZ Scott Veteran Member • Posts: 4,790
Re: It sounds like you are better off with a dslr.
1

Randell Tober wrote:

Hi,

The post was in response to comments regarding my interest in 4/3’s being misguided- off course. For whatever reason came to the conclusion that 4/3 was the future and the impression that quality and price- within reason within 4/3 was a better alternative to dslr. Hence, came the suggestion I go back to dslr. So, just looking for follow-up on direction. Thanks

-

Sure, no problem.

There are some great DSLRs available these days at good prices. I used to shoot Nikon and I've heard that the D3200 and D5100 are great cameras but, like most other people in this forum, I no longer shoot DSLR and can't give you decent advice.

That's why I'm suggesting that you go to the Nikon/Sony/Canon forums. You'll get much better advice about entry-level and mid-range DSLRs there than you will in an m43 forum.

As a starting point, I would suggest you research prices for a Nikon D3200 with kit lens and adding a cheap prime such as a 50mm f1.8 for low-light.

This will offer you a very cheap and versatile option with great image quality.

Good luck.

-- hide signature --
 NZ Scott's gear list:NZ Scott's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Panasonic G85 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +12 more
Cane Veteran Member • Posts: 6,900
Re: So... I finally come to a decision to go with the OM-D... Is there any big hand users out there?

Hi, my nickname is Meathook, and I think it's too small. You see, I am know for having sausage fingers, and well, it's a problem.

Randell Tober
OP Randell Tober Regular Member • Posts: 248
Re: It sounds like you are better off with a dslr.

I wanted to add… So it appears to me the OM-D/ GH3 have top end function, IQ etc… for a reasonable price.  So I’m being steered back towards DSLR since size isn’t an issue. But, one of the reasons I went down the 4/3 road was quality and cost in comparison to dslr’s. Doesn’t one have to go to say a D600 or 6D to get the same level of function- quality? Both are nearly twice the price of the Oly or Pana. Or am I missing something? Thanks

 Randell Tober's gear list:Randell Tober's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD4000 IS Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +2 more
NZ Scott
NZ Scott Veteran Member • Posts: 4,790
Nikon D3200
2

Randell Tober wrote:

I wanted to add… So it appears to me the OM-D/ GH3 have top end function, IQ etc… for a reasonable price. So I’m being steered back towards DSLR since size isn’t an issue. But, one of the reasons I went down the 4/3 road was quality and cost in comparison to dslr’s. Doesn’t one have to go to say a D600 or 6D to get the same level of function- quality? Both are nearly twice the price of the Oly or Pana. Or am I missing something? Thanks

Any of the latest models of DSLRs should give you image quality as good as an m43 camera.

I don't know much about European prices, but in the United States a Nikon D3200 with kit lens is only $400 and a Nikon 50/1.8 prime lens for low-light situations is only $110. Those lenses will be fine for most situations. Some of my best photos have been taken with a cheap Nikon DSLR and kit lens.

The main advantages of Micro Four Thirds are that they offer DSLR quality at a much smaller size and weight. They achieve those goals very well. But they are not "better" cameras than DSLRs. In fact, DSLRs have some advantages over Micro Four Thirds cameras, such as better handling and bigger lenses that allow you to blur the background more.

I chose to invest in Micro Four Thirds because I got sick of carrying a big DSLR around with me, but if value for money and image quality are your main concerns then I would say go for a DSLR.

-- hide signature --
 NZ Scott's gear list:NZ Scott's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Panasonic G85 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +12 more
JamieTux Veteran Member • Posts: 4,079
Re: So... I finally come to a decision to go with the OM-D... Is there any big hand users out there?
1

Randell Tober wrote:

Thanks... So I understand that no manner which 4/3 I select, it will be trailing behind all dslr's in the auto focusing/tracking category? The size of the camera doesn’t make much of a difference to me. I’m going more for the IQ. Options and affordability vs. DSLR with $2k glass. I sometimes wonder if I’m making a mistake turning away from the dslr’s. Even though I can’t- won’t spend $2k on a lense again, maybe I should consider lesser options. Canon 2.8 glass spoiled me Thank God I didn’t try out the 2.0!

Thanks again to all- for all of the advice and… Very interesting, sometimes amusing and… but enjoying it all.

Correct, no m4/3 tracks in continuous AF as well as a decent dSLR does.

If it's purely IQ and size isn't an issue I'd strongly suggest you stay with dSLRs - for me the gap is close enough that I don't mind (and in some ways the OM-D exceeds my Canons that are now sold).  If you go for the f4 sets in CaNikon you'll get very good IQ without the price penalty of the f2.8s (and less weight too).

I guess the other question to ask is what type of photography you enjoy and what your style is?  I was out with a wedding photographer this week who switched to the Fuji X series then quickly switched back out when he realised that he couldn't get the DOF control that he was expecting and his photos were losing a bit of that personality.  He's gone back to a FF dSLR with 2 lenses and that's it!

 JamieTux's gear list:JamieTux's gear list
Nikon 1 J5 Fujifilm X-E3 Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 PD-Zoom Nikon 1 Nikkor 18.5mm f/1.8 Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR +6 more
JamieTux Veteran Member • Posts: 4,079
Re: +1

Randell Tober wrote:

Hmmm... I guess I kind of looked at 4/3 as the future... I kind of saw the dslr's fading away with time and tech... I guess I picked up the wrong idea. Thanks

I agree with this idea - but it's not the future yet   Also if you look at the cost of m43 lenses, the quality releases keep pushing the price envelope up, look at 43 (instead of m43) the lenses are no cheaper than the dSLR equivalents so I think that Price might be a bad thing to bet on.
I would suggest looking at a Nikon D5200 or 7100 or a Canon 60D or up if you can, or if you want to be a bit different - Pentax, something like their K30 has quick AF, is weather sealed, has great IQ etc - it doesn't have a swivel screen though.

 JamieTux's gear list:JamieTux's gear list
Nikon 1 J5 Fujifilm X-E3 Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 PD-Zoom Nikon 1 Nikkor 18.5mm f/1.8 Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR +6 more
jalywol
jalywol Veteran Member • Posts: 9,671
Randell, here is a summary for you:
1

Randell Tober wrote:

I wanted to add… So it appears to me the OM-D/ GH3 have top end function, IQ etc… for a reasonable price. So I’m being steered back towards DSLR since size isn’t an issue. But, one of the reasons I went down the 4/3 road was quality and cost in comparison to dslr’s. Doesn’t one have to go to say a D600 or 6D to get the same level of function- quality? Both are nearly twice the price of the Oly or Pana. Or am I missing something? Thanks

The reason you are being steered in a couple of different directions is because your stated concerns are areas that are not M43s greatest strengths.

Here's the short analysis of pluses and minuses:

I agree that mirrorless is the future of much of photography.

1) As technology continues to advance, at some point the fast action tracking will reach an equivalent to current DSLR ability in that area.  It's gotten a LOT closer over the years already, and eventually will get there.  However, if you want to use continuous AF on very fast moving objects routinely, then it is not the right format right now.  It IS possible to get fast action shots with M43, but it requires more work and planning than with the better DSLRs at this point.  IF you plan to do occasional fast action work, and are willing to put in the effort, the results can be quite good, but it's not effortless as the DSLR CAF can be.

2) Much of the reason to go with M43 is the reduction in size and weight of the system (camera and lenses) that you get over comparable DSLRs.  If you find the size of the M43 cameras too diminutive for your grip, than that advantage loses its appeal.  Only you can make this judgement for yourself.

3) EVF vs OVF, and live view.  This is a more difficult area to compare.  One of the very nicest things about mirrorless cameras is the implementation of live view in the rear LCD.  Most DSLRs can do it at this point, but it is not as simple or as well done as on the M43s.  On the other hand, a number of people prefer DSLR optical viewfinders to the electronic viewfinders in the M43s cameras.  There is one caveat to this, however, and that is that the OVFs in entry level DSLRs are usually pentamirror type, and are fairly small and tunnel-like to look through.  You have to go up to a higher level DSLR to get a bigger and brighter viewfinder that compares in size to the ones in the M43s cameras.  Once you get used to being able to switch back and forth from LCD to EVF without effort, it's hard to go back to the DSLR way of doing things, IMO...

4) Weather sealing.  Both the OMD and the GH3 are weather sealed, and none of the entry level DSLRs are.  You are correct in saying that you have to go up to the more expensive mid-level (at least) bodies in DSLRs before you can get that feature.

5) Functionality:  You are also correct in saying that you have to go up a couple of step in DSLRs to get the level of functionality that the top of the line M43s have.  Both the OMD and the GH3 have multiple button and dial controls and significant layout programmability.  This puts them well above the entry level DSLRs, and enables significant customization for your purposes.

6) Lens selection:  There is a pretty good selection of native M43 lenses at this point, PLUS you have the added advantage of being able to use a generation's worth of MF legacy lenses with very cheap adapters.  You simply can't do that on a DSLR.

7) Sensor performance: With the GH3 and OMD, the performance of M43s moved into direct competition with APS-C cameras.  To really get significant improvments in sensor behavior, you would need to go to a FF camera.  Yes, there are smaller improvments in APS-C vs M43 sensor noise and DR, but things are really pretty close in most situations at this point.  Personally, if I was going to look at a DSLR at this point, I would be evaluating FF cameras and not APS-C...M43 performance meets my needs at the APS-C level.

8) Those of us who have chosen M43, in large part have gotten here because carrying around a larger system simply lost its appeal.  The bonus is that M43 has finally gotten to a point where the compromises in IQ that were made at the introduction of the format are no longer an issue, and people who have switched into the system seem to rarely go back.  (This does not mean that there are not more than a few here who have both FF and M43s, still, but for single format users, M43 is now a truly viable high quality option).

So, what should you do?  I would make a list of the factors that are most important to you.  If a match to M43's features are on the top of the list, then you should buy one and enjoy it.  If more DSLR features are on the top, then you should look to that format for the best results given your particular shooting parameters.

(PS...I moved completely to M43 from a Nikon APS-C (D90) system a year and a half ago and I would NEVER go back. If I had a lot of spare $, I would try a FF D800 for some specialty shooting for the heck of it, but I know I would never use that for day-to-day shooting due to the size and weight of the kit...and M43 would still be my primary system).

Hope this helps....

-J

Jack Hogan Veteran Member • Posts: 6,982
Tex, you are missing the point

texinwien wrote:

scott_mcleod wrote:

Some of what you are seeing in the superiority of the Oly is an artifact of the E-M5 under-rating its ISO by about a full stop across the range (i.e. ISO 1600 on the camera is actually only 782)

Hi Scott, that's an oft-repeated mantra, but it is a misconception - one that DPReview have been very specific in countering - I will include some links to official DPReview statements at the end of this post.

The ISO 12232:2006 standard (Exposure Index Standard) only applies to the sRGB output of a camera (practically, the out of camera JPEGs). It says nothing about the RAW files, and the 'under-rating' you mention here is only seen in the RAW files. As such, that 'under-rating' is allowed by the ISO standard. Meaning, in effect, that it's not an under-rating at all.

The E-M5 is standards-compliant in regards to ISO 12232:2006.

Hi Tex,

Thanks for referring me to this thread.  I think your comment above misses the point.  Nobody is saying that ISO 12232 doesn't allow a manufacturer to call ISO whatever they like (it does and they do), and who cares whether Olympus is underrating on purpose or not (we'll never know).

The issue is that if you take in-camera ISOs at face value you end up comparing apples to oranges, especially with the EM5 which is a relative outlier in its ISO interpretation, as Scott says.  Here is one more example, EM5 vs a G3 .

Jack

Randell Tober
OP Randell Tober Regular Member • Posts: 248
Re: Randell, here is a summary for you:

Gee, you hope this helps… You knocked it out of the park! Outstanding … Great information and hitting on all cylinders.  You’ve put me at ease with some of my previous thoughts and helped me to clarify uncertainties. Much thanks…  M43 is where I was going and M43 is where I’ll stay.  I’m still a little up in the air with the OM-D /GH3 decision, but might give it a couple more weeks for review and new release info but feel I would be happy with either one. I’m interested to see what the update brings that Panasonic has coming. I’m intending to pick up a 75 1.8 and one other lens for starts. Which would you take as another if I may ask? I don’t plan on buying one with the camera- I wouldn't be happy with it. I was a bit spoiled with the Canon 2.8’s of the past, so I know to stay with upper end glass. Thanks Again! And have a great weekend.

 Randell Tober's gear list:Randell Tober's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD4000 IS Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +2 more
Randell Tober
OP Randell Tober Regular Member • Posts: 248
Re: So... I finally come to a decision to go with the OM-D... Is there any big hand users out there?

Thanks...

A lot of good information from a lot of good people. Thanks to all

I'm understanding where you’re coming from, however have decided to go the M43 route. Certain now.

If nothing else I'll be buying glass that I can use for future releases as tech continues to improve with time

I had a Canon 10D for several years along with a 28x70/2.8 and 70x200/2.8. I later upgraded to a 30D (mistake IMO) I would've been just as happy with the 10. When I had a major change of income, I decided to part with the glass and grab the 70x200 F4. I was fairly happy with that until I started going after some of the occasional indoor- sporting event type situations. I of course also noticed a difference in other low light shots. A few months back I sold everything. Going back in time I would’ve chose something else to part with other than the 2.8’s

Thanks again, Randy

 Randell Tober's gear list:Randell Tober's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD4000 IS Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +2 more
jalywol
jalywol Veteran Member • Posts: 9,671
Re: Randell, here is a summary for you:

Randell Tober wrote:

Gee, you hope this helps… You knocked it out of the park! Outstanding … Great information and hitting on all cylinders. You’ve put me at ease with some of my previous thoughts and helped me to clarify uncertainties. Much thanks… M43 is where I was going and M43 is where I’ll stay. I’m still a little up in the air with the OM-D /GH3 decision, but might give it a couple more weeks for review and new release info but feel I would be happy with either one. I’m interested to see what the update brings that Panasonic has coming. I’m intending to pick up a 75 1.8 and one other lens for starts. Which would you take as another if I may ask? I don’t plan on buying one with the camera- I wouldn't be happy with it. I was a bit spoiled with the Canon 2.8’s of the past, so I know to stay with upper end glass. Thanks Again! And have a great weekend.

Glad I could help you clarify things

Well, the lens you pick up really depends on your uses.  For me, I never shoot at 75mm, so that lens, even though it is supposed to be really excellent, would not be useful for me.  What are the kind of subjects you usually shoot?

I do primarily three categories of photography.  In town (architectural mostly), macro, and landscape.  I don't do people portraits frequently, but I do have some fun taking animal photos, which tend to be in pretty low indoor light, so over time, I have evolved a set of lenses that work for me:

For my fastest indoor lens, I have the 25mm f1.4.  I think this lens is a prize in many ways.  It is a very useful focal length, and it has just a beautiful quality to the images it produces.  This would probably be my recommendation for your second prime.

If you do more landscape work, or in-town, I think the 14mm f2.5 is a true bargain of a lens, espeically if you can get one of the de-kitted ones on ebay for about $170.  I have a lot of fun using this lens around town and for some landscape work.

For macro, I have a vintage Nikon 55mm f3.5 which works really well for me.  I tried the 60mm Oly macro last Fall, and it was a very nice, very sharp lens, but I didn't see that it was a $500 step up from my vintage lens, and I don't care about autofocus in macro, so I returned it.

I have not yet tried the 12-35mm Panny, but I would like to.  Unfortunately, it is not in the budget at the moment, but I could see where that woudl be a really useful lens.  Other people who have it think it is a great lens, and the images I have seen from it seem to bear this out.

I DO have the Oly 12mm f2.0, and I think that might be tied with the 25mm for my most favorite lens in terms of what the output actually looks like.  It's a liitle bit too wide for how I like to do in-town work (I use the 14mm for that) but for landscape type work it is just a great lens, with terrific color renditon and microcontrast.  Photos from it just look GOOD.

I've also got the Oly 45mm f 1.8.  This is an extremely sharp lens wide open, and a very, very good value.  I find, however, that I don't use it that much, as usually in that focal range I have the macro on and am working with it instead (or a legacy 50mm that I like as much). Where I find it most useful is in lower light shooting, since it is very sharp even wide open, and the AF is handy in those situations, too.

My other most used lens, however, is the 14-140mm zoom. I don't think its IQ overall is quite as good as the primes, and it's a slow lens, but for a walkaround lens when you don't want to be constantly swapping out lenses (like when you are on a hike), it is a really  great option to have. It produces very respectable images as long as you have decent light to work with its slower apertures.

I know this probably doesn't narrow things down nearly enough, but look at it this way...it shows there is a lot of good stuff in the M43's system to choose from

-J

Mal_In_Oz Regular Member • Posts: 425
I am going to regret this, but...

Anders W wrote:

I don't think you did. "Should be" implies a norm that the manufacturer are obliged to follow. There is no such thing when it comes to the DxOMark "measured ISOs". The only norm the manufacturers are obliged to follow concern OOC jpegs, not RAWs.

Anders, this type of argument about comparable ISO has been pervading the forum for ages, and it would be really useful for everyone to come to some agreement about what it means. I doubt my questions will solve the battle but I am going to give it a try.

1. What do you think is a better way to compare these cameras, by using the same ISO or by using the same aperture and shutter speed? I use the word "better" in this question but you could interpret it to mean "fairer" for the purpose of establishing which camera produces the best image quality in the same conditions. I also wish to note that the comparison between the GH3 and the EM5 are a rare opportunity to remove the lens from the equation because both cameras are tested with the same 50mm F2 lens on the DPReview tests, so my question in the first instance relates specifically to a comparison between the GH3 and the EM5, but you could add comments about a more general comparison too.

2. Do you think there is a "normal" response (with required aperture and shutter settings) from cameras to achieve a given ISO?  If you took all the current manufactured cameras (or a suitable subset) and produced a table of ISO to aperture and shutter speed for one specific condition of lighting and scene, could we establish a normal response with which to compare all cameras?

Thanks.

(apologies in advance for possible slow response).

 Mal_In_Oz's gear list:Mal_In_Oz's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:1.8 +5 more
texinwien Veteran Member • Posts: 3,326
on the contrary

I am several steps ahead of you, in that I understand the error in logic you're making that brings you to your erroneous conclusion - the very misconception of yours that I mentioned in the previous thread.

Jack Hogan wrote:

texinwien wrote:

scott_mcleod wrote:

Some of what you are seeing in the superiority of the Oly is an artifact of the E-M5 under-rating its ISO by about a full stop across the range (i.e. ISO 1600 on the camera is actually only 782)

Hi Scott, that's an oft-repeated mantra, but it is a misconception - one that DPReview have been very specific in countering - I will include some links to official DPReview statements at the end of this post.

The ISO 12232:2006 standard (Exposure Index Standard) only applies to the sRGB output of a camera (practically, the out of camera JPEGs). It says nothing about the RAW files, and the 'under-rating' you mention here is only seen in the RAW files. As such, that 'under-rating' is allowed by the ISO standard. Meaning, in effect, that it's not an under-rating at all.

The E-M5 is standards-compliant in regards to ISO 12232:2006.

Hi Tex,

Thanks for referring me to this thread. I think your comment above misses the point. Nobody is saying that ISO 12232 doesn't allow a manufacturer to call ISO whatever they like (it does and they do), and who cares whether Olympus is underrating on purpose or not (we'll never know).

It seems you haven't read all of the posts I linked for you. As DPReview says, there is no overrating or underrating going on.

The issue is that if you take in-camera ISOs at face value you end up comparing apples to oranges, especially with the EM5 which is a relative outlier in its ISO interpretation, as Scott says. Here is one more example, EM5 vs a G3 .

And this is your misconception. It is, first and foremost, apples to apples. Secondarily, it wouldn't matter if it were apples to oranges, instead.

I'll answer your misconception in the other thread. You've linked to the exact post of yours there to which I referred earlier.

Jack

 texinwien's gear list:texinwien's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 OnePlus One Canon EOS 300D +20 more
TrapperJohn Forum Pro • Posts: 16,488
The EM5 will work fine for you
1

I don't have particularly thick fingers, but they are long.

Won't say that the EM5 has the best ergonomics on a camera that I've used, that honor probably falls to the old Olympus E1.

But, it is quite useable. You learn to adapt to the smaller buttons. They could be easier to use, but they are useable, though I could see a problem if one wore large gloves. The very small size of the EM5 does pose some challenges, but it pays off in a lot of other ways.

You have to take forum chatter with a bit of skepticism. Some times, critique for critique's sake can blow a minor quibble into what sounds like a fatal flaw.

Jack Hogan Veteran Member • Posts: 6,982
It's my fault, I admit it

texinwien wrote:

I am several steps ahead of you, in that I understand the error in logic you're making that brings you to your erroneous conclusion - the very misconception of yours that I mentioned in the previous thread.

Jack Hogan wrote:

texinwien wrote:

scott_mcleod wrote:

Some of what you are seeing in the superiority of the Oly is an artifact of the E-M5 under-rating its ISO by about a full stop across the range (i.e. ISO 1600 on the camera is actually only 782)

Hi Scott, that's an oft-repeated mantra, but it is a misconception - one that DPReview have been very specific in countering - I will include some links to official DPReview statements at the end of this post.

The ISO 12232:2006 standard (Exposure Index Standard) only applies to the sRGB output of a camera (practically, the out of camera JPEGs). It says nothing about the RAW files, and the 'under-rating' you mention here is only seen in the RAW files. As such, that 'under-rating' is allowed by the ISO standard. Meaning, in effect, that it's not an under-rating at all.

The E-M5 is standards-compliant in regards to ISO 12232:2006.

Hi Tex,

Thanks for referring me to this thread. I think your comment above misses the point. Nobody is saying that ISO 12232 doesn't allow a manufacturer to call ISO whatever they like (it does and they do), and who cares whether Olympus is underrating on purpose or not (we'll never know).

It seems you haven't read all of the posts I linked for you. As DPReview says, there is no overrating or underrating going on.

The issue is that if you take in-camera ISOs at face value you end up comparing apples to oranges, especially with the EM5 which is a relative outlier in its ISO interpretation, as Scott says. Here is one more example, EM5 vs a G3 .

And this is your misconception. It is, first and foremost, apples to apples. Secondarily, it wouldn't matter if it were apples to oranges, instead.

I'll answer your misconception in the other thread. You've linked to the exact post of yours there to which I referred earlier.

Jack

Duck, duck, duck.  All I can say is that when people run out of arguments they shoot the messenger. You may be fine with comparing apples to oranges when deciding to outlay a fair amount of cash.  I presume most other people are not.  Here is another example to drive the point home.

Jack out.

MrPhotoBob
MrPhotoBob Senior Member • Posts: 2,962
Re: So... I finally come to a decision to go with the OM-D... Is there any big hand users out there?
1

Randell Tober wrote:

In all the comparables the OM-D wins at least in my opinion, but being I can't handle one prior to purchase I'm a little concerned. I've ran into several mentions to the camera not being for big hands I thought about going with the gh3, but when put up against the OMD...it looks weak to me. I like the 4/3's as well as not having to spend as much on glass- vs SLR. right? Thouhts? Thanks

Randell, as for big hands, I am blessed with a pair of them.  I love shooting with the EM-5, but I would not even thinking of using it if I did not have the HLD-6 grip that Olympus offers to go with it.  My hand and fingers is just too big to try and hold that little camera without it.  Even with the grip on it, my little finger use to have a problem some time wondering just what I was going to do with it when I was holding my EM-5.  I have learned how to engage the little dials on the camera, which did take some working with to get use to it.  If I had to make the purchase all over again, I would do it.  With the rebates going on right now, a person could save up to $600 with buying a camera, grip, flash and three lenses.  It is a great system, and with all of the gear that I just mentioned, I can easily pick it up with just a few fingers.

 MrPhotoBob's gear list:MrPhotoBob's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M1X Olympus 17mm F1.2 Pro Olympus 12-40mm F2.8
selected answer This post was selected as the answer by the original poster.
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads