How many GH3 owners considering OMD EM1

[MPA1]

Nikon D700 wrote:

For thoes of you that own the Panasonic GH3, I'm curious to know how many of you are considering purchasing the OMD EM1 and why?

I'm considering purchasing 2 EM 1's and getting rid of 2 Nikon D3s bodies and a GH3.

Why? Because there is now, I suspect, much further to climb up the Tree Of Diminishing Returns before I could honestly say that the advantages of the others outweighed the disadvantages of the EM1.

Obviously so far this is theoretical - there are no EM1's in NZ (although I have approached the Olympus agent to discuss this and am waiting to hear from him) so I cannot base this on more than all the initial reviews etc.

However the availability of both excellent M43 lenses AND the much better AF of the excellent Olympus 4/3 lenses make this body a definite possibility when combined with IBIS, weight and bulk savings, lower replacement costs and insurance premiums and easier transport internationally. To be able to properly use the 7-14 f4 for example makes it a more useful professional option to me as it provides a possible alternative to the Nikkor 14-24 2.8 - although I wish the Olympus option was f2.8 as well.

Yes, IQ will be better in some ways on larger sensors and yes, high ISO would be MUCH better on a D4 or EOS 1 Dx. But just look at the cost of a system based on two of those: It would cost me NZ$16,000 to buy two D4 bodies weighing in at around 2.5 kg with no lenses on board. A couple of pro grade 2.8 zooms will easily double that. Adding the Holy Trinity of 2,8 pro zooms, batteries, flashes, chargers etc etc will get closer to 10Kg of kit and a $30,000 investment. A very comprehensive EM 1 kit would cost less half that or less and weigh a lot less, as well as having a lot less bulk.

The GH3 was my initial foray into M43 and whilst I liked most of it, it is too video oriented for my personal taste, the buttons are too easy to press accidentally, making it awkward in the fast paced shooting I like because I miss shots as the camera is suddenly in menu mode or AF selection mode or something, the card door closure is hopeless and needs gaffer tape to keep it shut, it lacks the mode dial lock of the EM1 which is more useful than many will give credit for - the GH3 was often in a different mode when pulled from the bag than it was left in when I put it away simply because the dial caught on something going into or coming out of the bag which, like the non-locking buttons, results in delay and lost shots as you realise you just videod something instead of shooting stills of it etc etc.

For a still shooter, the EM-1 looks to be a better designed body, with an IQ and design bias towards stills which suits me better.

 

[drtmw]

Good points and my view as well.

 

[yslee1]

Canadianguy wrote:

Why the question?

The GH3 is targeted to people who value video above stills in their camera.

The EM1 is not targeted to the samel crowd.

Different cameras for different market segments.

Gah, this thing needs to die. The GH3 is a very capable stills camera.

If that's not enough for you: I bought the GH3 over the E-M5 to replace a Nikon DX system. In a photography business.

Now, would I consider the E-M1?

It does have a lot of nice features, including controls that I'd very much prefer, and while everyone moans about the Olympus menus, I still prefer them over the Panasonic.

As a business however, I have to manage costs, and the extras of the E-M1 are probably not worth that money. I have better things to spend on.

If I get a few big jobs from now till the end of the year, that could change, but I will probably see what the GH5 brings first (past history suggests there won't be a GH4).

 

[Bob Meyer]

Canadianguy wrote:

Why the question?

The GH3 is targeted to people who value video above stills in their camera.

I'm so tired of reading this cr*p from people who have no clue. Stills from the the GH3 are excellent. 99.9% of the time photographs would be indistinguishable from those taken with an OM-D.

The difference is that the GH3 does excellent stills and video, the Oly cameras are pretty much a non-starter if you need high quality video.

 

[Bob Meyer]

Interesting. I'm not a pro, but I shoot quite a bit, and the only times I've accidentally pressed buttons is when I pressed the button on purpose, but hit the wrong one because I'm still learning the camera, and what functions I've assigned to what button. I don't think I've ever hit a button completely by accident on this camera. I used to do it all the time on the GH2.

And, of course, until you get your hands on an EM-1 you don't really know if it will be better or worse than the GH3 in this respect.

 

[SirSeth]

I don't own either, but would consider them both to be the top of the Micro4/3rds food chain, so I don't see why the original question isn't worth discussing.

To be purely academic, here are some things that might persuade some to spend extra on a E-M1--especially if video isn't the main gig:

1. Top shutter speed of 1/8000 as opposed to 1/4000.

2. Deeper buffer (I hear 60 RAW. GH3 is 30-40 RAW before a slow down I hear--depending on card).

3. Better weather sealing.

4. Super-sonic wave filter.

5. 5-axis Image Stabilization good for all lenses, including legacy and macro lenses.

6. Dual AF with more advanced AF-tracking with all lenses than previous mirrorless.

7. Better IQ (remains to be seen, but initial tests look extremely good).

8. Suddenly gaining access to a beautiful set of amazing Zuiko zooms that are very nicely priced right now thanks to a 4/3rds price depression in the wake of abandonment of traditional SLR designs.

9. Higher max ISO (if that matters to ya).

10. Focus Peaking. (GH3 might get this in firmware... maybe).

11. Much higher resolution LCD and viewfinder on E-M1.

12. 10fps vs. 6fps at full resolution.

13. Physically the EM1 is a bit smaller than the GH3.

My only disappointments with what I see with the EM1 so far is the underdeveloped video specs. They could have gone bigger with that aspect. I greatly desire dual card slots and neither of these cameras do that. And lastly the EM1 needs a better battery--I don't know for sure, but it appears that the vertical grip only adds one extra battery. It should be double slotted. I want 1000 shots here.

The GH3 wins in some respects for sure.

a. Video options and quality.

b. Tilt-swivel LCD vs. just tilt.

c. Better battery and a vertical grip with two battery slots.

d. Flash on-board if that matters to you.

Since many of you do shoot a lot of video, maybe you can tell me. What sucks about the video of the EM1. We haven't seen the quality yet right? Previous Olympus cameras had no mic out, so that is remedied. I get that that is a must. Is it simply frame rates? I know people seem to love 25/24fps because it's cinema standards, but does that mean you can't get good video with the EM1 frame rates?

Personally, the EM1 has a much higher attraction for me because own 4/3rds Zuiko lenses that I really like. Access to 4/3rds zooms + micro primes + legacy glass is very powerful to my way of thinking. But I also think there are significant pluses in the list above that make the EM1 quite an attractive package and they are not much different in price. $200ish.

Best,

Seth

 

[MPA1]

Bob Meyer wrote:

Interesting. I'm not a pro, but I shoot quite a bit, and the only times I've accidentally pressed buttons is when I pressed the button on purpose, but hit the wrong one because I'm still learning the camera, and what functions I've assigned to what button. I don't think I've ever hit a button completely by accident on this camera. I used to do it all the time on the GH2.

And, of course, until you get your hands on an EM-1 you don't really know if it will be better or worse than the GH3 in this respect.

Indeed but since it has LESS buttons, one can surmise that it is likely to have less of an issue.

I have big hands and the buttons on the GH3 are easily pressed - the Disp button for example is often pressed under the base of my right thumb entirely by accident. Ditto the wheel and the menu/set button which is where my hand wants to be!

Fn2 and Fn3 are also often inadvertently under my thumb. Good if I want to use them. Not so much if I don't!

It would be less of a problem if I could initiate a two button press lock, but I can't.

 

[John.Laninga]

The only feature EM1 has that I would like is IBIS. However, I have all Lumix lenses, so all have OIS. So I can use the money for other things.

 

[Mike Ronesia]

Nikon D700 wrote:

For thoes of you that own the Panasonic GH3, I'm curious to know how many of you are considering purchasing the OMD EM1 and why?

There are a couple of reasons I would consider it. IQ is not one of them because they are both about the same and close enough for anyone that is more interested in taking pictures then comparing cameras. Video is also not an issue as I bought the GH3 because it was the best Stills M4/3's camera available when it came out. (This may be debatable for some, but for me the EM5 is not what I wanted for my type of photography.

Things I like about the EM1 that the GH3 doesn't have.

One touch WB (I'd use this all the time, I must have set WB 20 times last night)

Possibly better weather sealing (can't have too much of this where I live)

1/8000 (Really like this)

1/340 (Really like this)

IBIS (It's not important, but it is there)

Things that hold me back

Screen doesn't flip out and fold inwards

No built in flash

Oly menu system

Price ( Not that it's unreasonable, Just too much to justify the differences.)

Small battery

My take is, unless you have money to burn there is nothing worthy of changing for.

 

[agachart]

+ 1000

i agree ,today may smartphone include 4k record why hybrid (dslr/dslm) can not do it.

may be shame

 

[JesseC]

Nope not me either

 

[robonrome]

Canadianguy wrote:

Why the question?

The GH3 is targeted to people who value video above stills in their camera.

The EM1 is not targeted to the samel crowd.

Different cameras for different market segments.

well I have the GH3 and for stills over video... still prefer what I have to the EM1 or can see no compelling reason for such a switch when the GH3 is just so right and so useable.

 

[Jolly Oly]

SirSeth wrote:

I don't own either, but would consider them both to be the top of the Micro4/3rds food chain, so I don't see why the original question isn't worth discussing.

To be purely academic, here are some things that might persuade some to spend extra on a E-M1--especially if video isn't the main gig:

1. Top shutter speed of 1/8000 as opposed to 1/4000.

2. Deeper buffer (I hear 60 RAW. GH3 is 30-40 RAW before a slow down I hear--depending on card).

3. Better weather sealing.

4. Super-sonic wave filter.

5. 5-axis Image Stabilization good for all lenses, including legacy and macro lenses.

6. Dual AF with more advanced AF-tracking with all lenses than previous mirrorless.

7. Better IQ (remains to be seen, but initial tests look extremely good).

8. Suddenly gaining access to a beautiful set of amazing Zuiko zooms that are very nicely priced right now thanks to a 4/3rds price depression in the wake of abandonment of traditional SLR designs.

9. Higher max ISO (if that matters to ya).

10. Focus Peaking. (GH3 might get this in firmware... maybe).

11. Much higher resolution LCD and viewfinder on E-M1.

12. 10fps vs. 6fps at full resolution.

13. Physically the EM1 is a bit smaller than the GH3.

My only disappointments with what I see with the EM1 so far is the underdeveloped video specs. They could have gone bigger with that aspect. I greatly desire dual card slots and neither of these cameras do that. And lastly the EM1 needs a better battery--I don't know for sure, but it appears that the vertical grip only adds one extra battery. It should be double slotted. I want 1000 shots here.

The GH3 wins in some respects for sure.

a. Video options and quality.

b. Tilt-swivel LCD vs. just tilt.

c. Better battery and a vertical grip with two battery slots.

d. Flash on-board if that matters to you.

Since many of you do shoot a lot of video, maybe you can tell me. What sucks about the video of the EM1. We haven't seen the quality yet right? Previous Olympus cameras had no mic out, so that is remedied. I get that that is a must. Is it simply frame rates? I know people seem to love 25/24fps because it's cinema standards, but does that mean you can't get good video with the EM1 frame rates?

Personally, the EM1 has a much higher attraction for me because own 4/3rds Zuiko lenses that I really like. Access to 4/3rds zooms + micro primes + legacy glass is very powerful to my way of thinking. But I also think there are significant pluses in the list above that make the EM1 quite an attractive package and they are not much different in price. $200ish.

 

[Nikon D700]

Are you serious! The only thing silly about this situation is the reaction to a very simple question. I have the GH3 and it's a great camera. I was curious to know if anyone that owed the GH3 was considering adding the OMD EM1 to their M4/3 kit, either as a backup or replacement. I understand the EM1 lacks the video options of the GH3, but as a still camera, it may be a better option for some.

For those of you that didn't find my question confusing, silly, and or complicated, thanks for responding. I enjoy my GH3 and your feedback. For the rest of you over-thinkers, God bless you and relax!

 

[Nikon D700]

MPA1 wrote:

Nikon D700 wrote:

For thoes of you that own the Panasonic GH3, I'm curious to know how many of you are considering purchasing the OMD EM1 and why?

I'm considering purchasing 2 EM 1's and getting rid of 2 Nikon D3s bodies and a GH3.

Why? Because there is now, I suspect, much further to climb up the Tree Of Diminishing Returns before I could honestly say that the advantages of the others outweighed the disadvantages of the EM1.

Obviously so far this is theoretical - there are no EM1's in NZ (although I have approached the Olympus agent to discuss this and am waiting to hear from him) so I cannot base this on more than all the initial reviews etc.

However the availability of both excellent M43 lenses AND the much better AF of the excellent Olympus 4/3 lenses make this body a definite possibility when combined with IBIS, weight and bulk savings, lower replacement costs and insurance premiums and easier transport internationally. To be able to properly use the 7-14 f4 for example makes it a more useful professional option to me as it provides a possible alternative to the Nikkor 14-24 2.8 - although I wish the Olympus option was f2.8 as well.

Yes, IQ will be better in some ways on larger sensors and yes, high ISO would be MUCH better on a D4 or EOS 1 Dx. But just look at the cost of a system based on two of those: It would cost me NZ$16,000 to buy two D4 bodies weighing in at around 2.5 kg with no lenses on board. A couple of pro grade 2.8 zooms will easily double that. Adding the Holy Trinity of 2,8 pro zooms, batteries, flashes, chargers etc etc will get closer to 10Kg of kit and a $30,000 investment. A very comprehensive EM 1 kit would cost less half that or less and weigh a lot less, as well as having a lot less bulk.

The GH3 was my initial foray into M43 and whilst I liked most of it, it is too video oriented for my personal taste, the buttons are too easy to press accidentally, making it awkward in the fast paced shooting I like because I miss shots as the camera is suddenly in menu mode or AF selection mode or something, the card door closure is hopeless and needs gaffer tape to keep it shut, it lacks the mode dial lock of the EM1 which is more useful than many will give credit for - the GH3 was often in a different mode when pulled from the bag than it was left in when I put it away simply because the dial caught on something going into or coming out of the bag which, like the non-locking buttons, results in delay and lost shots as you realise you just videod something instead of shooting stills of it etc etc.

For a still shooter, the EM-1 looks to be a better designed body, with an IQ and design bias towards stills which suits me better.

Thanks for the replying. I've been a huge Nikon fan a shooter for years, but have now fallen in love with my GH3 and GX1. I haven't experienced many accidental button changes, but I am concern about the durability of the flip out screen. I'm very interested in the AF system of the EM1, so I can't wait for the reviews to come. I was afraid I'd miss my Nikon D700, but it's just collecting dust. I find this all very exciting and interesting.

 

[Martin.au]

Nikon D700 wrote:

MPA1 wrote:

Nikon D700 wrote:

For thoes of you that own the Panasonic GH3, I'm curious to know how many of you are considering purchasing the OMD EM1 and why?

I'm considering purchasing 2 EM 1's and getting rid of 2 Nikon D3s bodies and a GH3.

Why? Because there is now, I suspect, much further to climb up the Tree Of Diminishing Returns before I could honestly say that the advantages of the others outweighed the disadvantages of the EM1.

Obviously so far this is theoretical - there are no EM1's in NZ (although I have approached the Olympus agent to discuss this and am waiting to hear from him) so I cannot base this on more than all the initial reviews etc.

However the availability of both excellent M43 lenses AND the much better AF of the excellent Olympus 4/3 lenses make this body a definite possibility when combined with IBIS, weight and bulk savings, lower replacement costs and insurance premiums and easier transport internationally. To be able to properly use the 7-14 f4 for example makes it a more useful professional option to me as it provides a possible alternative to the Nikkor 14-24 2.8 - although I wish the Olympus option was f2.8 as well.

Yes, IQ will be better in some ways on larger sensors and yes, high ISO would be MUCH better on a D4 or EOS 1 Dx. But just look at the cost of a system based on two of those: It would cost me NZ$16,000 to buy two D4 bodies weighing in at around 2.5 kg with no lenses on board. A couple of pro grade 2.8 zooms will easily double that. Adding the Holy Trinity of 2,8 pro zooms, batteries, flashes, chargers etc etc will get closer to 10Kg of kit and a $30,000 investment. A very comprehensive EM 1 kit would cost less half that or less and weigh a lot less, as well as having a lot less bulk.

The GH3 was my initial foray into M43 and whilst I liked most of it, it is too video oriented for my personal taste, the buttons are too easy to press accidentally, making it awkward in the fast paced shooting I like because I miss shots as the camera is suddenly in menu mode or AF selection mode or something, the card door closure is hopeless and needs gaffer tape to keep it shut, it lacks the mode dial lock of the EM1 which is more useful than many will give credit for - the GH3 was often in a different mode when pulled from the bag than it was left in when I put it away simply because the dial caught on something going into or coming out of the bag which, like the non-locking buttons, results in delay and lost shots as you realise you just videod something instead of shooting stills of it etc etc.

For a still shooter, the EM-1 looks to be a better designed body, with an IQ and design bias towards stills which suits me better.

Thanks for the replying. I've been a huge Nikon fan a shooter for years, but have now fallen in love with my GH3 and GX1. I haven't experienced many accidental button changes, but I am concern about the durability of the flip out screen. I'm very interested in the AF system of the EM1, so I can't wait for the reviews to come. I was afraid I'd miss my Nikon D700, but it's just collecting dust. I find this all very exciting and interesting.

You'll have to change your name.

 

[SirSeth]

Mike Ronesia wrote:

Nikon D700 wrote:

For thoes of you that own the Panasonic GH3, I'm curious to know how many of you are considering purchasing the OMD EM1 and why?

There are a couple of reasons I would consider it. IQ is not one of them because they are both about the same and close enough for anyone that is more interested in taking pictures then comparing cameras. Video is also not an issue as I bought the GH3 because it was the best Stills M4/3's camera available when it came out. (This may be debatable for some, but for me the EM5 is not what I wanted for my type of photography.

Things I like about the EM1 that the GH3 doesn't have.

One touch WB (I'd use this all the time, I must have set WB 20 times last night)

Possibly better weather sealing (can't have too much of this where I live)

1/8000 (Really like this)

1/340 (Really like this)

IBIS (It's not important, but it is there)

Things that hold me back

Screen doesn't flip out and fold inwards

No built in flash

Oly menu system

Price ( Not that it's unreasonable, Just too much to justify the differences.)

Small battery

My take is, unless you have money to burn there is nothing worthy of changing for.

That or have 4/3rds lenses.

While I agree that changing from GH3 to E-M1 may not be compelling due the already solid package you've got, it's totally different for folks upgrading from something older.

Cheers,

Seth

 

[jim stirling]

Nikon D700 wrote:

For thoes of you that own the Panasonic GH3, I'm curious to know how many of you are considering purchasing the OMD EM1 and why?

I have per-ordered the E-M1 for a number of reasons to do with its feature set .Looking at the RAW files from the E-M1 there is no jump in image quality but it is an impressive machine in almost every way. I was intending to replace my GH3 with it but the E-M1 looks to be less effective for video meaning the GX7 will be on my list

.After a bit of toing and froing I will be selling off a some of my mFT kit ,GH3/E-M5 /12-35mm,/100-300mm and probably the 50-200swd {though i am waiting to see how it AF works on the EM1} which I may replace with the 150mm when it comes along.

I will be rationalising my kit, I hope to end up with an E-M1 and a GX7 { which I will use for video and with primes for a small go to kit} lens wise the 12-40,35-100 ,14,25,75 and 60 macro with either the 50-200 or 150mm.That covers all my bases .This make for me an excellent mFT set up and I do not see myself upgrading for a long time till there is a significant development in sensor tech .

 

[rusticus]

it would be a step backwards in terms of video - and the photo is the GH3 not worse than E-M1

 

[Fredrik Glckner]

I'm liking the PDAF feature, but would like to see how well it does with AF during video before shelling out the cash.

http://m43photo.blogspot.com/