Upgrade from OMD EM10 Mark II: new lens or new camera?

Konstantinospapag wrote:

inlawbiker wrote:

Konstantinospapag wrote:

Hello everyone,

I have been using my em10 mark II for 2 years, started with the pancake kit 14-42 and soon replaced it with the enjoyable prime 17mm 1.8. I am happy using MFT cameras and shoot during travel, mostly landscapes, city architecture and street life (not portraits).

I too am an e-M10 II fan! I used one for 2+ years then I sold it because I wanted some new features. Here's what I found.

There is no photo quality difference with the newer cameras. I mean none I can meaningfully measure. The photos are pretty much the same.

What I got is weather sealing and dual-IBIS (some lenses combine stabilization powers for even more effective stabiliziation.) Plus an extra button or two which is always nice.

With the E-M1 mark II, and the upcoming E-M5 III you also get much better autofocus. I found the E-M10 II AF to be pretty good for AF-S on static subjects, which isn't that hard of course. When things start moving around i was pretty unhappy with the autofocus.

In other words if none of the above things matters to you, keep that E-M10 II.

For lenses, I use the Panasonic 12-35 2.8 because it's smaller than the Olympus 12-40. The 45mm 1.8 Olympus lens is also fantastic, so are most of the 25mm primes.

Greg.

Thanks Greg, this is insightful! I also saw that the Panasonic 12-35 is smaller than the 12-40 but I am afraid that it might not be as suited on my em10 as the Oly 12-40 is (same brand). What do you think?

I will second the thought of considering the P 12-35/2.8.  For me, weight and size were important factors and that lens is a great alternative to the O 12-40 if those are issues for you. Panny lenses work great on Oly cameras!  I've used both of the P 2.8's on the EM5.2 and EP5 for several years and haven't seen any compatibility issues.  Of course the reach on the 12-35 is more limited than the 12-40, but from your post this doesn't sound like it's much of an issue for you.  Also, Ben Hermann's suggestion of the P 12-60 is a good one - a nice wide zoom range but a little slow.  I'm considering going up to the   PL 12-60/2.8-4.0 for the convenience of that zoom range.  It's not much different from the O 12-40 in terms of size/weight/price.

Like some others, I don't see the need to upgrade the cam unless you truly don't like the handling characteristics with the bigger lens.  Perhaps you can get on down to the camera shop and put one on the front to see how it feels ...

Konstantinospapag wrote:

Thanks Greg, this is insightful! I also saw that the Panasonic 12-35 is smaller than the 12-40 but I am afraid that it might not be as suited on my em10 as the Oly 12-40 is (same brand). What do you think?

Agreeing with the other opinion, there is no problem at all putting a Panasonic lens on the Olympus camera. I own mostly Panasonic lenses, they all work great.

Greg.

G Dickson wrote:

stateit wrote:

Konstantinospapag wrote:

2nd question: How much added value and capabilities would the em5 markIII with the 17mm I own and the 12-40mm 2.8 PRO bring for me? If not, could you recommend a comparable Fujifilm system?

I spend time shooting people events on contract with my EM5ii and EM1ii.

Assuming the EM5ii and EM10ii sensors are the same (I believe they are), in good light they have a similar 'good output' with the 12-40.

But that 'good light' is rare , and I have to work more in post processing for that 'money shot' with the older and smaller sensor. I'd say the EM5iii, with the same sensor as the EM1ii, will give you a noticeable boost.

I can't compare with Fuji. I can say a month ago a Canon 7D (APS-C) with an L-series lens was tossed into the mix on one event, and there was negligible difference (plus or minus) with the EM1ii with respect to IQ and output.

To be fair here the 7D is a 10 year old sensor. I have one and a smattering of L glass. The 7D is capable of great results in great light (like just about any fairly modern camera) but compared to more modern stuff the high ISO is not that great. I am no pixel peeper but I reckon it is fairly similar to my em10 - same conclusions as yourself.

When the light starts to go the larger/slightly more modern canon sensors like in my 6Dii simply smoke my em10ii. But again, to be fair I have better quality canon glass than I have m4/3 glass, but still...

But to the OP: glass, glass glass. Get the 12-40 f2.8 or as has been mentioned the lumix 12-60 (which I have on my em10ii a lot). The 12-40 will however be a lot better in more challenging lighting situations.

As for being unbalanced, well I don't really get the whole unbalanced thing. I used to own a sigma 120-300 f2.8. That doesn't balance with ANY body! Including a 1d series...

Just get a cheap photodiox (or similar) $20 gripped L-Plate to add to your em10ii to make it more fitting with a larger lens like the 12-40.

I am also tempted by a body upgrade, but for reasons like PDAF, mic input etc rather than incremental image quality gains.

I agree, add a grip to the E-M10 II, and the 12-40 is no problem.

Rich K wrote:

Konstantinospapag wrote:

inlawbiker wrote:

Konstantinospapag wrote:

Hello everyone,

I have been using my em10 mark II for 2 years, started with the pancake kit 14-42 and soon replaced it with the enjoyable prime 17mm 1.8. I am happy using MFT cameras and shoot during travel, mostly landscapes, city architecture and street life (not portraits).

I too am an e-M10 II fan! I used one for 2+ years then I sold it because I wanted some new features. Here's what I found.

There is no photo quality difference with the newer cameras. I mean none I can meaningfully measure. The photos are pretty much the same.

What I got is weather sealing and dual-IBIS (some lenses combine stabilization powers for even more effective stabiliziation.) Plus an extra button or two which is always nice.

With the E-M1 mark II, and the upcoming E-M5 III you also get much better autofocus. I found the E-M10 II AF to be pretty good for AF-S on static subjects, which isn't that hard of course. When things start moving around i was pretty unhappy with the autofocus.

In other words if none of the above things matters to you, keep that E-M10 II.

For lenses, I use the Panasonic 12-35 2.8 because it's smaller than the Olympus 12-40. The 45mm 1.8 Olympus lens is also fantastic, so are most of the 25mm primes.

Greg.

Thanks Greg, this is insightful! I also saw that the Panasonic 12-35 is smaller than the 12-40 but I am afraid that it might not be as suited on my em10 as the Oly 12-40 is (same brand). What do you think?

I will second the thought of considering the P 12-35/2.8. For me, weight and size were important factors and that lens is a great alternative to the O 12-40 if those are issues for you. Panny lenses work great on Oly cameras! I've used both of the P 2.8's on the EM5.2 and EP5 for several years and haven't seen any compatibility issues. Of course the reach on the 12-35 is more limited than the 12-40, but from your post this doesn't sound like it's much of an issue for you. Also, Ben Hermann's suggestion of the P 12-60 is a good one - a nice wide zoom range but a little slow. I'm considering going up to the PL 12-60/2.8-4.0 for the convenience of that zoom range. It's not much different from the O 12-40 in terms of size/weight/price.

Like some others, I don't see the need to upgrade the cam unless you truly don't like the handling characteristics with the bigger lens. Perhaps you can get on down to the camera shop and put one on the front to see how it feels ...

ok 12/35 pana is a good and lightweight zoom BUT the 12/40 is a better optic WIDE OPEN and at 12mm, is unbeatable  ( in other side, pany is better stopped down)….and if i remember correctly, have a less minimal focus distance and add the FN option for Oly users ( i use it for direct access to isos and white balance)… m4/3 have many choices… i've choosing the best as possible for me….

My advice – don’t buy any more bodies until you own the 12-40 Pro. I have two E-M10’s (Mk i and ii), and despite having around nine Oly lenses, the 12-40 lives on my Mkii and is almost all I use.

It’s never felt unbalanced on the small body to me (heck, I even shoot the E-M10 handheld with a 40-150 Pro). Combo feels great in the hands and is a very versatile lens.

I bought the 17mm 1.8 early on but don’t really use it anymore. Occasionally use the 25mm and 45mm 1.8’s for dark venues like a concert (or when I want a smaller camera footprint).

The other body (which my son mostly uses now) lives with the Oly 14-150 f4/5.6 Mkii on it. Less quality but nice do-it-all outdoor lens.

After reading this, I must have been lucky - to have 3 superb copies of this (purchased one right after another from the same outlet on eBay).  Goes to show you that with kit lenses (from any brand) copy-to-copy variations do exist because of the sheer numbers of these types of lenses being produced.

To improve IQ I would get a faster lens such as Panasonic 15mm f/1.4. Going to a camera with larger sensor such as Fujifilm will help, too.

EdoOwned wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

When I added the Olympus 12-100 to my lens mix, my 12-40 f/2.8 found a home on my E-M10 II.....what a great fit. I took the E-M10/12-40 as a backup kit to my E-M1 II on a trip to Rocky Mountain National Park last year and ended up shooting most of my images with it. It seems particularly suited to the 16mpx sensor in my E-M10 II. I would get that little OEM add on grip for about $60 and the 12-40 will match up just fine. My opinion? Keep the E-M10 II, buy the lens.

Here’s a few images from the RMNP trip with the E-M10 II and the 12-40 Pro

Great images, I like them a lot..... Been saving for that lens for mine m10 II. Are those images captured raw and which editor did you used?

I normally shoot with Large Superfine JPEGS + Raw and I suspect these were from the Raw files. I always use Olympus Workspace to only do the raw conversions (cleaner results than with Adobe Camera Raw) and do all my post processing in Lightroom and Photoshop.