E-M5 Mark III feature discussion

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
daleeight Senior Member • Posts: 2,348
Battery a feature?

Is the battery a feature?

I agree that Olympus was wise to try to consolidate the different batteries, but not sure they needed to make the E-M5mkIII one smaller to match the E-M10 series.

Then again, not sure they could make the body bigger to get the E-M1mkII/X series in there. Yeah, the E-M5mkIII can take the 300 or so shots that the E-M5mkII could, but that is a ho hum note. More shots is better, and this should have been more towards 400.

I've seen a few early review videos today (not seen Robin Wong yet) and none of them have the E-M5mkIII with a neck strap, or any strap. None mention the lug locations down the body, so that is either something they didn't notice or something they were warned to not talk about, despite them saying they aren't under any orders. Since they announce and go to great lengths when they become Ambassadors or Visionary's, I find that hard to believe that they are completely honest in negatives.

Feature for Feature it is a good side-kick or backup for the E-M1mkII (even the X maybe) but now you have 2 different batteries, so that could be big. You can charge the E-M5mkIII with USB which isa good... however, you now have to pack a USB power bank, or pack 1 or 2 backup batteries with the E-M5mkIII so is that package now smaller than putting another E-M1mkII in the same bag. I think not. So I don't think it is great backup, but a good alternate option when you want to carry one camera on a trip instead of the bigger E-M1mkII...

-- hide signature --

Dale

 daleeight's gear list:daleeight's gear list
Olympus PEN-F Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm F2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 +7 more
Oboyle
Oboyle Regular Member • Posts: 189
Re: E-M5 Mark III feature discussion

Cheers I appreciate the clarification. I do wish there was more clarity around this subject coming from the manufacturers

 Oboyle's gear list:Oboyle's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica D Summilux Asph 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 +2 more
gary0319
gary0319 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,943
Re: E-M5 Mark III feature discussion
2

RedDog Steve wrote:

dibe wrote:

Even though many here seem quite underwhelmed about this camera, I am very interested. I have the Mark II and the higher resolution, the much better AF and 4K video are exactly what I am looking for. So I am interested in information on this camera.

However, currently is very hard to find the really (for me) interesting comments among all the threats complaining about all the things this camera is not and all the mistakes Olympus is making.

So I am hoping to start a thread on what this camera can do with people that are interested rather than what this camera can not do with those that are not interested. For example: Looking for pointers to interesting reviews, discussion on known features and how usefull they might be. Maybe also some comments and experience from E-M1 users as the E-M5 III seems to inherrit many features from it.

I think you know if this thread is for you or not. And if not, move along, nothing to see here (note the smily, no offence meant!)

As I said, for me the higher resolution, the new AF and the 4K video are some of the interesting parts. Has anyone see a good review of the 4K video capabilities yet?

All the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the hand-held high-res mode aside, I don't even care all that much about the "tripod" high-res.
I might have been interested in moving up to 20mpx.

The lack of a built-in flash on the E-M5 mkIII, for me, is what allows me to remain content with the E-M10 mkII (and its lowly 16mpx).

At my local Olympus dealer, I compared the E-M5 III side by side today with my E-M 10 II (with grip) and the 5.3 is both smaller and lighter. The guts of this little charger being the same (almost) as my E-M1 II means I now will have a small weather sealed companion to my E-M1 II for trips to the Bush, or to the street festival.

 gary0319's gear list:gary0319's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus PEN-F Olympus E-M1 II Olympus E-M5 III +9 more
gary0319
gary0319 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,943
Re: E-M5 Mark III feature discussion
1

inlawbiker wrote:

dibe wrote:

As I said, for me the higher resolution, the new AF and the 4K video are some of the interesting parts. Has anyone see a good review of the 4K video capabilities yet?

Overall I still think it sits alone among its peers. You cannot find this combination of lenses, size, IBIS, weather-sealing, and quality elsewhere.

I say this with irritation because rewarding Olympus at this price is somewhat affronting for a camera that should have come out a year+ ago and cost less. But I still admit it's probably the best choice for me. Price it at $999 sure, I'd probably buy it. $1799 with the 14-150, seriously? Did they mean to say the 12-200 Pro?

I am very pleased they added PDAF. I can imagine there must have been some arguing over it in the Olympus planning meetings but looking at the competition Olympus had no choice, and it's still lagging behind Sony and Nikon.

I would like to think the price will fall quickly but that doesn't tend to happen with Olympus. I suppose that's the price we pay for supporting a niche brand.

Actually, I have come to a similar conclusion..... if I want to shoot Olympus (and I do) than I am going to have to pay a bit more for the opportunity.

However, when earlier this year they upgraded the firmware in my E-M1 II to version 3.1, and in effect gave me a performance boost that I would have gladly paid $2,000 for in a new model camera.....and did it for free, I got more than my money’s worth for paying a bit more up front.

 gary0319's gear list:gary0319's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus PEN-F Olympus E-M1 II Olympus E-M5 III +9 more
gary0319
gary0319 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,943
Re: E-M5 Mark III feature discussion
1

Skeeterbytes wrote:

20MP with PDAF focusing drag the E-M5 into parity with the best Oly models and both are overdue. It's accurate to note the new camera will make images on par with even its much larger brother, the E-M1X, and focus response should be on par with both E-M1 models.

For those who prefer its diminutive dimensions it's an important offering. I think it will make a fine platform for the various primes and smaller zooms. For larger glass, the M1s will probably make more sense. I think it hits a sweet spot as a full-featured travel camera.

Agree, this will make one dandy travel camera.

So far as I understand the M5iii doesn't bring any unique new features to the line, which is perhaps my largest surprise. Past models have showcased many important innovations.

Cheers,

Rick

 gary0319's gear list:gary0319's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus PEN-F Olympus E-M1 II Olympus E-M5 III +9 more
RedDog Steve
RedDog Steve Senior Member • Posts: 1,819
Re: Phase detect auto-focus

dibe wrote:

Chris R-UK wrote:

dibe wrote:

Chris R-UK wrote:

Brent Lossing wrote:

. . .
@Brent. I understand the Mark III will have improved noise control so that ISO 6400 is now like ISO 1600 in the Mark II.

Where did you get that information from? A 2 stop improvement is high ISO noise would be sensational and would be headlines in the news section. The sensor is the same as the E-M1.2 and that certainly is nowhere near 2 stops better than the E-M5ii.

Maybe you are referring to the improvement in IS, and particularly Sync IS with suitable lenses. That is probably a 2 stop improvement over the E-M5ii.

The review here (ephotozine ) has this statement:

Olympus says that the ISO performance has been improved by 2 stops, and ISO6400 is as good as ISO1600 on the E-M5 II, according to Olympus. We’ll have to test this to find out. This also means that Auto ISO can use higher ISO speeds without as much worry about noise.

So, still to be confirmed. But any improvement is of course always welcome.

OK, to keep this within your narrowly defined topic -
<ISO performance is a feature, correct ?>

If that ISO improvement is anywhere near true, I will change my mind and be seriously interested.
I will be watching closely for DXO's ratings and the DPR studio scene low-light comparison.

-- hide signature --

I'm not a perfectionist, I'm a precisionist.
rd

 RedDog Steve's gear list:RedDog Steve's gear list
Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Leica Nocticron 42.5mm Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Leica DG Summilux 12mm F1.4 ASPH +18 more
bluevellet Veteran Member • Posts: 3,038
Re: Phase detect auto-focus
2

RedDog Steve wrote:

dibe wrote:

Chris R-UK wrote:

dibe wrote:

Chris R-UK wrote:

Brent Lossing wrote:

. . .
@Brent. I understand the Mark III will have improved noise control so that ISO 6400 is now like ISO 1600 in the Mark II.

Where did you get that information from? A 2 stop improvement is high ISO noise would be sensational and would be headlines in the news section. The sensor is the same as the E-M1.2 and that certainly is nowhere near 2 stops better than the E-M5ii.

Maybe you are referring to the improvement in IS, and particularly Sync IS with suitable lenses. That is probably a 2 stop improvement over the E-M5ii.

The review here (ephotozine ) has this statement:

Olympus says that the ISO performance has been improved by 2 stops, and ISO6400 is as good as ISO1600 on the E-M5 II, according to Olympus. We’ll have to test this to find out. This also means that Auto ISO can use higher ISO speeds without as much worry about noise.

So, still to be confirmed. But any improvement is of course always welcome.

OK, to keep this within your narrowly defined topic -
<ISO performance is a feature, correct ?>

If that ISO improvement is anywhere near true, I will change my mind and be seriously interested.
I will be watching closely for DXO's ratings and the DPR studio scene low-light comparison.

If the sensor and processor are the same as the EM1ii, just use the image comparison tool at DPR and assume the EM1ii is like EM5iii...

Photographic evidence suggests it's not true.

 bluevellet's gear list:bluevellet's gear list
Nikon Z6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Olympus 8mm F1.8 Fisheye Pro Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 +18 more
Brent Lossing Forum Pro • Posts: 10,460
Re: Phase detect auto-focus

Skeeterbytes wrote:

Brent Lossing wrote:

Donald B wrote:

Chris R-UK wrote:

Brent Lossing wrote:

The big thing missing for me from the previous versions of the EM5 is the ability to shoot in near dark in the wilderness. Night shooting in the city is no problem because of street lights. The 4/3 E3 I had could shoot wonderfully 2 hours before sunrise. With the EM5-I/II I have had to wait until 30-45 minutes before. It is really a big difference when shooting.

All of the other features of the E5II I already am very satisfied with - if I want more resolution I shoot panorama, if I want more dynamic range I shoot in burst +/I evf. I use a tripod 70% of the time so handholding is not a big deal.

Can OSPDAF focus in lower light than CDAF? I thought that Panasonic’s DfD system had the best low light focusing.

Note that on the E-M1.2 (and I assume the E-M1X) PDAF is only used for C-AF. S-AF uses CDAF.

I thought the same and olympus had confirmed that with me when i phoned them, but someone last week showed me that saf uses hybrid its apparently on one of their advertising pages.

Don

Thanks Chris and Don. I do know the E3 could focus a lot better in the dark then the E5II

This seems so odd. I had opportunities to use the E-5 and E-M5 for evening and nighttime shoots and it was the E-5 that always went into the bag while the E-M5 kept going.

Horses for courses, I guess.

Hello Rick-

By any chance were you shooting where there were streetlights?  CDF works great there - it was when the contrast was poor that the em5 just could not get focus (a manual lens works great, of course with either).

Cheers,

Rick

-- hide signature --
Bassam Guy Senior Member • Posts: 1,093
Re: various thoughts

larsbc wrote:

  • Placement of the AF-E / AF-L button looks to be much better. The Mk2 had its button far too close to the EVF, making it awkward and uncomfortable to press and hold frequently. Mk3 looks to have a decent amount of space between that button and EVF.

Re-assign it. Mine is on the Mk2's HDR button.

  • Losing two of the top plate func buttons is unfortunate.

They've moved to the left atop the faux rewind button. Add the ISO button on the right, and  you get one additional button.

 Bassam Guy's gear list:Bassam Guy's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II Olympus E-M5 III Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 +5 more
Henry Richardson Forum Pro • Posts: 17,007
wakeup/startup finally speeded up?
3

0.5 seconds are so rather than 1.5-2.5 seconds. I hope.

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

cameron2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,591
Re: Phase detect auto-focus
1

RedDog Steve wrote:

dibe wrote:

The review here (ephotozine ) has this statement:

Olympus says that the ISO performance has been improved by 2 stops, and ISO6400 is as good as ISO1600 on the E-M5 II, according to Olympus. We’ll have to test this to find out. This also means that Auto ISO can use higher ISO speeds without as much worry about noise.

OK, to keep this within your narrowly defined topic -
<ISO performance is a feature, correct ?>

If that ISO improvement is anywhere near true, I will change my mind and be seriously interested.
I will be watching closely for DXO's ratings and the DPR studio scene low-light comparison.

It's a lie. The ISO performance can not be improved by even one stop, because physics. The QE of the sensors are already over 50%, so a 2-stop improvement would put their QE at over 200%, on a scale of 0-100%. That is what we call "impossible".

 cameron2's gear list:cameron2's gear list
Sony RX100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Hasselblad X1D
daleeight Senior Member • Posts: 2,348
Re: Phase detect auto-focus
1

cameron2 wrote:

RedDog Steve wrote:

dibe wrote:

The review here (ephotozine ) has this statement:

Olympus says that the ISO performance has been improved by 2 stops, and ISO6400 is as good as ISO1600 on the E-M5 II, according to Olympus. We’ll have to test this to find out. This also means that Auto ISO can use higher ISO speeds without as much worry about noise.

OK, to keep this within your narrowly defined topic -
<ISO performance is a feature, correct ?>

If that ISO improvement is anywhere near true, I will change my mind and be seriously interested.
I will be watching closely for DXO's ratings and the DPR studio scene low-light comparison.

It's a lie. The ISO performance can not be improved by even one stop, because physics. The QE of the sensors are already over 50%, so a 2-stop improvement would put their QE at over 200%, on a scale of 0-100%. That is what we call "impossible".

I think the statement is a 2 stop advantage over the E-M5mkII....

Still might not be possible in your head, or other physicists, but I think I agree with RedDog Steve and waiting for real numbers is a better idea than claiming it is a lie.

-- hide signature --

Dale

 daleeight's gear list:daleeight's gear list
Olympus PEN-F Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm F2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 +7 more
Jeff Veteran Member • Posts: 6,157
Re: Phase detect auto-focus

cameron2 wrote:

RedDog Steve wrote:

dibe wrote:

The review here (ephotozine ) has this statement:

Olympus says that the ISO performance has been improved by 2 stops, and ISO6400 is as good as ISO1600 on the E-M5 II, according to Olympus. We’ll have to test this to find out. This also means that Auto ISO can use higher ISO speeds without as much worry about noise.

OK, to keep this within your narrowly defined topic -
<ISO performance is a feature, correct ?>

If that ISO improvement is anywhere near true, I will change my mind and be seriously interested.
I will be watching closely for DXO's ratings and the DPR studio scene low-light comparison.

It's a lie. The ISO performance can not be improved by even one stop, because physics. The QE of the sensors are already over 50%, so a 2-stop improvement would put their QE at over 200%, on a scale of 0-100%. That is what we call "impossible".

While a two-stop advantage does seem like a lot, don't you think it might be worth waiting for actual measurements and experience with the camera before calling it a lie?

There are a number of things that could contribute to improved high ISO performance ... it's a new sensor ... perhaps more active area, perhaps different design of microlenses, perhaps the new quad core processor allows for more image processing. We'll see soon enough.

 Jeff's gear list:Jeff's gear list
Olympus 45mm F1.2 Pro Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M1X Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 150mm 1:2.0 +9 more
cameron2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,591
Re: Phase detect auto-focus
1

daleeight wrote:

cameron2 wrote:

It's a lie. The ISO performance can not be improved by even one stop, because physics. The QE of the sensors are already over 50%, so a 2-stop improvement would put their QE at over 200%, on a scale of 0-100%. That is what we call "impossible".

I think the statement is a 2 stop advantage over the E-M5mkII....

Still might not be possible in your head, or other physicists, but I think I agree with RedDog Steve and waiting for real numbers is a better idea than claiming it is a lie.

Look, every camera that Pany and Oly have ever released has had a 1-2 stop improvement over the previous model. By now, if you add all those stops up, the EM5iii and GH6 should have 99 stops of DR, and see in the absolute dark.

I'm just calling it a lie because it's been a lie almost every time that they've made the silly claim. (The original EM5 was a noticeable jump forward, so that one probably wasn't a lie. That was the switch from the Pany 12mp sensor to the Sony 16mp sensor.)

Sure, we can put this discussion on pause for a couple months until the camera comes out and doesn't magically match a 35mm sensor camera (which is what 2 stops would give it). Then you can come back here and say "yeah, it was a lie".

I'm just saving you some time, because I already know that it's a lie.

p.s. I think that the camera looks to be a great camera. I don't need them to lie to make it good; just be honest about what it can do, because that list of non-lies seems impressive enough without adding obviously nonsensical claims.

 cameron2's gear list:cameron2's gear list
Sony RX100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Hasselblad X1D
Astrotripper Veteran Member • Posts: 7,377
Re: Phase detect auto-focus

Jeff wrote:

cameron2 wrote:

RedDog Steve wrote:

dibe wrote:

The review here (ephotozine ) has this statement:

Olympus says that the ISO performance has been improved by 2 stops, and ISO6400 is as good as ISO1600 on the E-M5 II, according to Olympus.

If that ISO improvement is anywhere near true, I will change my mind and be seriously interested.

It's a lie. The ISO performance can not be improved by even one stop, because physics. [...]

While a two-stop advantage does seem like a lot, don't you think it might be worth waiting for actual measurements and experience with the camera before calling it a lie?

No need to wait. What Olympus says is about OOC JPEGs. So it's basically about improved noise reduction.

Sensor wise, we know exactly what the performance is, since it's the same sensor as in E-M1 Mark II and E-M1X and the only difference might be a result of how it is "configured" (for example, ISO shift on E-M1X was different than on E-M1 II).

 Astrotripper's gear list:Astrotripper's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Olympus PEN E-PL1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 +14 more
nigelbb Contributing Member • Posts: 644
Re: Phase detect auto-focus

I owned a couple of original OM-D E-M5s & thought that it was a great little camera. It was the first camera I used with IBIS & was just amazed at how good it was so was prepared to put up with soft & mushy video. I picked up a used OM-D E-M1 II for £800 a few months ago when the Mk 3.0 firmware was released. It's a really great camera especially for video. I loved the compact size of the original OM-D E-M5 but I use an RX100M6 for much of my photography nowadays which is pocket sized so I really don't have the need for a smaller OM-D E-M1 II.

The new camera is a smaller form factor OM-D E-M1 II but if I were in the market for another camera Wex have a mint OM-D E-M1 II with 12 month warranty for under £1000 which I think is a better buy than £1099 for a OM-D E-M5 III

https://www.wexphotovideo.com/olympus-om-d-e-m1-mark-ii-digital-camera-body-used-1719187/

 nigelbb's gear list:nigelbb's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Nikon D810 Olympus E-M1 II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G +3 more
Henry Richardson Forum Pro • Posts: 17,007
full physics mathematics

cameron2 wrote:

It's a lie. The ISO performance can not be improved by even one stop, because physics. The QE of the sensors are already over 50%, so a 2-stop improvement would put their QE at over 200%, on a scale of 0-100%. That is what we call "impossible".

Would you please provide the full physics mathematics so we can all see the proof?  Thanks.

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Astrotripper Veteran Member • Posts: 7,377
Re: full physics mathematics
2

Henry Richardson wrote:

cameron2 wrote:

It's a lie. The ISO performance can not be improved by even one stop, because physics. The QE of the sensors are already over 50%, so a 2-stop improvement would put their QE at over 200%, on a scale of 0-100%. That is what we call "impossible".

Would you please provide the full physics mathematics so we can all see the proof?

You need a lecture in theoretical physics and semiconductor engineering just to accept the fact that quantum efficiency of an image sensor cannot go above 100%?

I guess that's a nice strategy to win any argument.

Makes you look a bit silly, though.

 Astrotripper's gear list:Astrotripper's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Olympus PEN E-PL1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 +14 more
Henry Richardson Forum Pro • Posts: 17,007
Re: full physics mathematics

Astrotripper wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

cameron2 wrote:

It's a lie. The ISO performance can not be improved by even one stop, because physics. The QE of the sensors are already over 50%, so a 2-stop improvement would put their QE at over 200%, on a scale of 0-100%. That is what we call "impossible".

Would you please provide the full physics mathematics so we can all see the proof?

You need a lecture in theoretical physics and semiconductor engineering just to accept the fact that quantum efficiency of an image sensor cannot go above 100%?

I guess that's a nice strategy to win any argument.

Makes you look a bit silly, though.

What argument?  You sure seem defensive about a simple question.  Time for you to take a moment for some self-reflection?

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Henry Richardson Forum Pro • Posts: 17,007
Re: full physics mathematics

Henry Richardson wrote:

Astrotripper wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

cameron2 wrote:

It's a lie. The ISO performance can not be improved by even one stop, because physics. The QE of the sensors are already over 50%, so a 2-stop improvement would put their QE at over 200%, on a scale of 0-100%. That is what we call "impossible".

Would you please provide the full physics mathematics so we can all see the proof?

You need a lecture in theoretical physics and semiconductor engineering just to accept the fact that quantum efficiency of an image sensor cannot go above 100%?

I guess that's a nice strategy to win any argument.

Makes you look a bit silly, though.

What argument? You sure seem defensive about a simple question. Time for you to take a moment for some self-reflection?

And I just noticed that you are not even the person I was replying to.  Clearly you are just stepping into the middle of other people's posts and trying to start arguments.  Yeah, definitely you could use some self-reflection time.

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads