OM-D iBIS testing.

[Louis_Dobson]

There you go, IS is finally useful. I can blur the water and keep the background sharp without a tripod. I'd call that sharp, telegraph poles in the distance are fine. I hate IS for normal lengths, it makes useless shots not good enough. This time, I'd say it works. What I hoped for from the E3 in 2007 and did not get. This was not held steady - I was standing in the sea, in a rush, in a temper, working against time, with Eva shouting and demanding things juts behind me.

Also, this shot was a the overexposed one of a three bracket set. So full marks to the Oly for two things - firstly, I should not have been in that situation. I've got used to the GH2 strolling alone, the OM-D, like the D3, will catch that prefect wave moment for you at 9fps, which is what I should have been using, and then I would not have been rescuing an over-exposed shot. Secondly, the rescue was a doddle. There's no CSx work here, just a quick grad in PS. Contrast curve has been whacked to X, ground brought up two stops, sky down 1. Not perfect, but I could and will use this and probably make money. Next time I'll get the exposure right in the first place (at 9fps).

Below the main shot is the E3 IS attempt at the same thing. OM-D wins by miles (and the e3 had a 12mm).









--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

 

[nxp3]

Very nice photos. After you've got used to it can you tell us what you're buttons preferences are. How you set up your camera...mysets, fn button, movie button, and directional buttons
--
-bokehmokehshmokeh-

 

[jkrumm]

So number 2 is E3 clearly at iso 100, and the rocks look a little blurred to me. Love the tones in the water and the sky in the EM5 shot. Good to hear about the IS. I like the IS in my E5, use it a lot, but not at those speeds.

--
John Krumm
Juneau, AK

 

[Adventsam]

The ratio is bad for this image? 4:3 looks out of time for 2012 Louis?

 

[Nocturnalist]

Outstanding work as always. I continue to be impressed by your images. I think you've shown just how capable IBIS really is.

 

[richarddd]

Do you find the IS better on the OM-D than the GH2?

Are you saying the OM-D has a higher burst rate, so the entire bracket would have been taken quickly (and would include the decisive moment), while the GH2 would be slower?

Any other notable differences from the GH2?

Very nice shots

Also, this shot was a the overexposed one of a three bracket set. So full marks to the Oly for two things - firstly, I should not have been in that situation. I've got used to the GH2 strolling alone, the OM-D, like the D3, will catch that prefect wave moment for you at 9fps, which is what I should have been using, and then I would not have been rescuing an over-exposed shot.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

--
http://fruminousbandersnatch.blogspot.com/

 

[Louis_Dobson]

1/5th 12mm not sharp on E3, 1/6th 25mm E-M5/OM-D, critically sharp (see lamp post in far distance top left).

This is what I thought IS was for , and for me it is now useful (which it was not before).

Very pleased.

So number 2 is E3 clearly at iso 100, and the rocks look a little blurred to me. Love the tones in the water and the sky in the EM5 shot. Good to hear about the IS. I like the IS in my E5, use it a lot, but not at those speeds.

--
John Krumm
Juneau, AK

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

 

[muddyfunster]

awesome shot, you need to ask Oly for commission, you just managed to sell me one
--
the night is dark.....and full of terriers

 

[Louis_Dobson]

Matter of taste. I like 4:3, generally prefer 1:1.

The ratio is bad for this image? 4:3 looks out of time for 2012 Louis?

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

 

[P S]

like to continue to hear your experience with the E-M5. I will get mine on Monday.
--
PS

 

[Bigbob Irwin]

Very nice and good example of IS use instead of the normal thought that it is useful on long lenses

 

[ZackOJones]

That first shot is outstanding. If I had taken it I would be printing and framing a copy of it.
--
You never fail you only produce results; learn from them --
anonymous.

 

[Tim F 101]

On the one hand, we have this so-called photo of yours. On the other hand I wrote a theoretical model of every possible variable that could affect 5-axis IBIS, including phases of the moon and potential extra axis dimensions that Olympus might have folded into the sensor's space-time without telling us, ported it into Matlab and iterated it on a six-year old Mac Mini until its motherboard made a grinding noise and started smoking. According to these results, which I copied quickly from the screen before my computer melted, it is inconceivable that you can silk water and yet keep critical focus without a weighted tripod.

And thus I will not feel compelled to replace my new GH2 that my wife only barely did not divorce me over buying, thank you very much.

 

[TrapperJohn]

As the E3 was my last good 4/3 body, that's what I compare the EM5 to.

And there it is - the EM5 freezes camera movement where the E3 did not. And the E3 is a larger and much heavier body, too. It's not just obsoleting OIS, in my case it's obsoleting the tripod, to a degree.

Especially prevalent with a longer lens like the ZD 50-200. On the E3, I'd get motion blur when I didn't expect it. On the EM5... at least a hundred shots at 200mm handheld, down to 1/60 shutter speed, and so far, not even a hint of motion blur.

Impressive - this is what IS should have been all along. This is genuinely useful.

 

[gulffish]

Both terrific shots, the IS does really work well. Thanks for posting.
--
Kirk

 

[Louis_Dobson]

OK, thanks, but the second is E3 and not sharp - which is the point.

The OM-D IBIS does critically sharp at shortish lengths with no effort - yay!

Both terrific shots, the IS does really work well. Thanks for posting.
--
Kirk

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

 

[Raffael Cavallaro]

Gorgeous work, and the pair are definitive proof of the real world superiority of the omd ibis. Brilliant!

 

[jl123]

the DR that Louis has so often hoped would be well improved over the GH-2? Louis have you done the deed yet just how much better is DR on the EM5? j

 

[bgalb]

For scenic images, time and fashion are irrelevant. Also, this image is, in IMHO, composed perfectly for 4:3 and would probably not have looked nearly as nice in a wider format. Some scenes beg for wide and some don't.

 

[Louis_Dobson]

Yes, much better.

If I'd shot at 9fps I would have had a three by three matrix to choose from, and I'd have had the right moment and the right exposure. At 3fps (which is sort of GH2 speed) I had three shots, and none of them was "the" shot.

Are you saying the OM-D has a higher burst rate, so the entire bracket would have been taken quickly (and would include the decisive moment), while the GH2 would be slower?

Any other notable differences from the GH2?

Very nice shots

Also, this shot was a the overexposed one of a three bracket set. So full marks to the Oly for two things - firstly, I should not have been in that situation. I've got used to the GH2 strolling alone, the OM-D, like the D3, will catch that prefect wave moment for you at 9fps, which is what I should have been using, and then I would not have been rescuing an over-exposed shot.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

--
http://fruminousbandersnatch.blogspot.com/

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com