Olympus E-M1 II review: flawed gem

Aberaeron wrote:

This makes me think that the problem you are experience started first in V3.2 where they played around with the EVF Auto Switch ???

And it makes me hesitant to do a FW update at this time.

You do not need to update sequentially. Just update directly to the latest version V3.5. It is a complete operating system install and incorporates all previous improvements. Works perfectly on my camera and I suspect on all others. You do need the Olympus Workspace app to update this camera’s firmware.

I went to the Olympus Workspace and was able to see V3.5 available for the EM1ii.  But I still wonder about the problem Henry Richardson is reporting.  Haven't gotten the courage to dive in yet.

Cafe Racer wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

I set mine up so that when the rear lever is set to 1 then I get the default behavior where pressing the shutter button also performs AF. When it is set to 2 though I have mine set to use back-button AF using the button inside the lever control. In addition, what that means is that switching to 2 means I also instantly switch to MF with focus peaking. Although I mostly use 1 it is very nice to sometimes very easily be able to change to 2.

The many external controls are nice to have so it means less often needing to use the SCP for some changes. And, of course, the buttons and controls are larger and easier to use than on the smaller models.

For the last 5 years I have seen many posts from people expressing disappointment in the E-M1 II EVF, but no one investigated and went into detail like I did about what was wrong and narrowed it down like I did. Certainly the EVF is still very usable and the camera has many other great things going for it, but that just makes this Olympus blunder even more annoying.

Some reviews mention the EVF being low contrast and other things too. None of them really looked into it though and just assumed that the E-M1 II EVF was just not quite up to some of the others. But, until I decided to delve into it, no one seems to have investigated what the issue was.

Whilst I'm not familiar with the issue you have it reminded me of the issue I saw with Panasonic G9 EVF. It wasn't mentioned in reviews and I hadn't heard it mentioned on this forum but in all the copies I tried the EVF had excessively warped borders.

I would not call it excessive. I think your excessively is excessive  but in any case , it is solved immediately by choosing the lower magnification on the EVF

so not really an issue

Harold

Trolleyman wrote:

Cafe Racer wrote:

Whilst I'm not familiar with the issue you have it reminded me of the issue I saw with Panasonic G9 EVF. It wasn't mentioned in reviews and I hadn't heard it mentioned on this forum but in all the copies I tried the EVF had excessively warped borders. I felt this was unacceptable for a flagship camera so I can understand your frustration, particularly if the viewfinder is an important aspect of the camera for you. I hope you can resolve it.

I thought the G9 pincushion effect in the evf was very well documented.

It is now, but wasn't at the time. I think I may have been the first one to mention it on this forum.

Mine has it to a certain degree, but again like the E-m1 ii its fine for composition purposes

Harold66 wrote:

Cafe Racer wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

I set mine up so that when the rear lever is set to 1 then I get the default behavior where pressing the shutter button also performs AF. When it is set to 2 though I have mine set to use back-button AF using the button inside the lever control. In addition, what that means is that switching to 2 means I also instantly switch to MF with focus peaking. Although I mostly use 1 it is very nice to sometimes very easily be able to change to 2.

The many external controls are nice to have so it means less often needing to use the SCP for some changes. And, of course, the buttons and controls are larger and easier to use than on the smaller models.

For the last 5 years I have seen many posts from people expressing disappointment in the E-M1 II EVF, but no one investigated and went into detail like I did about what was wrong and narrowed it down like I did. Certainly the EVF is still very usable and the camera has many other great things going for it, but that just makes this Olympus blunder even more annoying.

Some reviews mention the EVF being low contrast and other things too. None of them really looked into it though and just assumed that the E-M1 II EVF was just not quite up to some of the others. But, until I decided to delve into it, no one seems to have investigated what the issue was.

Whilst I'm not familiar with the issue you have it reminded me of the issue I saw with Panasonic G9 EVF. It wasn't mentioned in reviews and I hadn't heard it mentioned on this forum but in all the copies I tried the EVF had excessively warped borders.

I would not call it excessive. I think your excessively is excessive but in any case , it is solved immediately by choosing the lower magnification on the EVF

The ones I tried I consider to be excessive to the extent that it was the first thing I noticed when I put the camera to my eye, and I had never heard of the issue at the time. It looked more pronounced when switched to the lower magnification.

so not really an issue

Harold

Aberaeron wrote:

JimH123 wrote:

Aberaeron wrote:

This makes me think that the problem you are experience started first in V3.2 where they played around with the EVF Auto Switch ???

And it makes me hesitant to do a FW update at this time.

You do not need to update sequentially. Just update directly to the latest version V3.5. It is a complete operating system install and incorporates all previous improvements. Works perfectly on my camera and I suspect on all others. You do need the Olympus Workspace app to update this camera’s firmware.

I went to the Olympus Workspace and was able to see V3.5 available for the EM1ii. But I still wonder about the problem Henry Richardson is reporting. Haven't gotten the courage to dive in yet.

It seems obvious from your two posts that you, like the overwhelming majority of users of this camera model, do not have the issue that Henry Richardson assumes to be fairly, if not totally universal. He does not mention that it happened after any particular update as far as I can see.

He has an issue either with his particular camera or, probably more likely in my opinion, has some user setting that inhibits his EVF from reflecting the true exposure that might result. The EVF has many customisations that are possible. The main ‘Live view Boost’ should be set to off. There are separate auto luminance settings if I remember correctly and also EV compensation and colour temperature. I almost never have auto illuminance switched on and have the ‘EV Adjust’ set for -1 exposure value [this is exclusively for the EVF view not for a resultant recorded picture] and +1 EVF colour temperature. Also have ’S-OVF’ set to off.

Another possible setting maladjustment could be ‘LV Close Up Mode’ or more specifically the item beneath it which is another Live View Boost setting which is best set to off.

There is yet another option at the bottom of D2 under ‘Settings’ , which is yet another ‘Live view Boost’ option I set to off.

OK, it is done.  I updated to V3.5 from V3.1.  Camera seems fine.  All my settings were retained.  I cannot tell any difference in the EVF and the LCD.

Cafe Racer wrote:

It looked more pronounced when switched to the lower magnification.

That does NOT make any sense . how could that be ?

how long did you have the G9 ?

H

1. Harold66 wrote:

Cafe Racer wrote:

It looked more pronounced when switched to the lower magnification.

That does NOT make any sense . how could that be ?

Well, that's how it appeared to me.

how long did you have the G9 ?

I didn't buy the G9 because I didn't like the viewfinder.

H

-- hide signature --

FOLLOW me on IG @ledaylightstudio.
thedemandingtraveler.org
www.haroldglit.com
IG :thedemandingtraveler

I see , so you made up your mind in a few minutes in a store , is that it ?

Harold

Harold66 wrote:

I see , so you made up your mind in a few minutes in a store , is that it ?

No that's not it. I don't buy a camera based on handling it for a few minutes. I tried the G9 in 3 different camera shops on separate occasions in order to determine if it was an isolated issue. All 3 cameras I tried exhibited the same EVF issue.

Cafe Racer wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

I see , so you made up your mind in a few minutes in a store , is that it ?

No that's not it. I don't buy a camera based on handling it for a few minutes. I tried the G9 in 3 different camera shops on separate occasions in order to determine if it was an isolated issue. All 3 cameras I tried exhibited the same EVF issue.

Ok then 

Harold

I've seen some of these threads bouncing around for a while, but never bothered to check what mine was set to. My E-M1 II is set to Auto illuminance on, and doesn't display the over-brightened effect described. Both the LCD and EVF look pretty similar.

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

The E-M1 II is as good or better in almost every way compared to my other Olympus bodies. It is a pleasure to use except for the poor EVF. If you can live with an EVF that is in some real day-to-day usage ways that is not as good as the E-M10 II, etc. EVFs and you don't mind or want a bigger/heavier/weather-sealed body then this is a good one to get.

For people who always use the rear screen and not the EVF then the E-M1 II is great, I suspect. I almost always use the EVF though so it is just an educated guess that using the rear screen will work just fine, like it does for most cameras.

I have seen youtube video reviews, etc. with people using FF mirrorless cameras with a 70-200mm f2.8 and other lenses holding the camera out in front of them using the rear screen rather than the EVF so it seems lots of people just don't use a viewfinder these days.

I suppose in m4/3 land some people may use the E-M1X + 150-400mm f4.5 and hold it out in front of them and compose using the rear screen.

This may be a clue why Olympus felt having a really good, well working EVF is not a priority anymore. At least for the flagship camera. The lower level cameras have good, well working EVFs.

This morning I saw a young man, maybe about 25, with what appeared to be a Fuji X-T4 + big lens + big lens hood. I am pretty sure it was the Fuji 50-140mm f2.8. He was with a very attractive young woman, about 21, wearing a kimono and it appeared she was his girlfriend. It is o-shogatsu (New Year) time so not unusual. He was taking photos of her, sometimes directing her to turn one way or the other, etc. I watched for a few minutes and he never once used the viewfinder on his rather big rig. He held the camera and big lens out in front of him like a smartphone and took a bunch of photos that way. Nothing wrong with that. It is what he and many people prefer these days. For them an EVF is just an annoyance and an unneeded, unused extra expense and adds that unattractive hump. But actually, the hump may be part of the charm since it makes the camera look more like a traditional SLR camera even if it is just a bit of decoration for many people now.

So much harder to hold a camera with a big lens steady out in front of you rather than using the EVF which in turn uses your head as a anchor point to hold it steadier. I wonder if his results turned out as good as he had hoped for?

But you are right. When I see the tourist spots, the majority hold the camera way out in front and use the LCD. Those not doing that use the long camera sticks that hold the camera (usually cell phone) way out in front so they can take pictures of themself standing in front of something interesting. On a trip to Shanghai, my very last business trip before retiring, almost every young person was doing this.

And we wonder why camera sales are down?

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

The E-M1 II is as good or better in almost every way compared to my other Olympus bodies. It is a pleasure to use except for the poor EVF. If you can live with an EVF that is in some real day-to-day usage ways that is not as good as the E-M10 II, etc. EVFs and you don't mind or want a bigger/heavier/weather-sealed body then this is a good one to get.

For people who always use the rear screen and not the EVF then the E-M1 II is great, I suspect. I almost always use the EVF though so it is just an educated guess that using the rear screen will work just fine, like it does for most cameras.

I have seen youtube video reviews, etc. with people using FF mirrorless cameras with a 70-200mm f2.8 and other lenses holding the camera out in front of them using the rear screen rather than the EVF so it seems lots of people just don't use a viewfinder these days.

I suppose in m4/3 land some people may use the E-M1X + 150-400mm f4.5 and hold it out in front of them and compose using the rear screen.

This may be a clue why Olympus felt having a really good, well working EVF is not a priority anymore. At least for the flagship camera. The lower level cameras have good, well working EVFs.

This morning I saw a young man, maybe about 25, with what appeared to be a Fuji X-T4 + big lens + big lens hood. I am pretty sure it was the Fuji 50-140mm f2.8. He was with a very attractive young woman, about 21, wearing a kimono and it appeared she was his girlfriend. It is o-shogatsu (New Year) time so not unusual. He was taking photos of her, sometimes directing her to turn one way or the other, etc. I watched for a few minutes and he never once used the viewfinder on his rather big rig. He held the camera and big lens out in front of him like a smartphone and took a bunch of photos that way. Nothing wrong with that. It is what he and many people prefer these days. For them an EVF is just an annoyance and an unneeded, unused extra expense and adds that unattractive hump. But actually, the hump may be part of the charm since it makes the camera look more like a traditional SLR camera even if it is just a bit of decoration for many people now.

Although I use the viewfinder 99% of the time, if critical framing is important I prefer the rear LCD (only with short wide lenses though!).

I am not sure why, but for me viewfinders do not create a 'frame' in the same way which the rear screen achieves so easily.

Could it be because they are trying to achieve viewfinders which are effectively an extension of the eye.

With a viewfinder I need to scan the picture to Frame it. Not so with the rear screen.

What do others think ?

Adrian Harris wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

The E-M1 II is as good or better in almost every way compared to my other Olympus bodies. It is a pleasure to use except for the poor EVF. If you can live with an EVF that is in some real day-to-day usage ways that is not as good as the E-M10 II, etc. EVFs and you don't mind or want a bigger/heavier/weather-sealed body then this is a good one to get.

For people who always use the rear screen and not the EVF then the E-M1 II is great, I suspect. I almost always use the EVF though so it is just an educated guess that using the rear screen will work just fine, like it does for most cameras.

I have seen youtube video reviews, etc. with people using FF mirrorless cameras with a 70-200mm f2.8 and other lenses holding the camera out in front of them using the rear screen rather than the EVF so it seems lots of people just don't use a viewfinder these days.

I suppose in m4/3 land some people may use the E-M1X + 150-400mm f4.5 and hold it out in front of them and compose using the rear screen.

This may be a clue why Olympus felt having a really good, well working EVF is not a priority anymore. At least for the flagship camera. The lower level cameras have good, well working EVFs.

This morning I saw a young man, maybe about 25, with what appeared to be a Fuji X-T4 + big lens + big lens hood. I am pretty sure it was the Fuji 50-140mm f2.8. He was with a very attractive young woman, about 21, wearing a kimono and it appeared she was his girlfriend. It is o-shogatsu (New Year) time so not unusual. He was taking photos of her, sometimes directing her to turn one way or the other, etc. I watched for a few minutes and he never once used the viewfinder on his rather big rig. He held the camera and big lens out in front of him like a smartphone and took a bunch of photos that way. Nothing wrong with that. It is what he and many people prefer these days. For them an EVF is just an annoyance and an unneeded, unused extra expense and adds that unattractive hump. But actually, the hump may be part of the charm since it makes the camera look more like a traditional SLR camera even if it is just a bit of decoration for many people now.

Although I use the viewfinder 99% of the time, if critical framing is important I prefer the rear LCD (only with short wide lenses though!).

I am not sure why, but for me viewfinders do not create a 'frame' in the same way which the rear screen achieves so easily.

Could it be because they are trying to achieve viewfinders which are effectively an extension of the eye.

With a viewfinder I need to scan the picture to Frame it. Not so with the rear screen.

What do others think ?

I have no problem framing the picture when using the EVF and see no advantage to using the LCD.  But I will use the LCD if the camera is in a place that makes using the EVF hard to do.