Lives in Sweden Sweden
Joined on May 11, 2004


Total: 108, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1227 comments in total)
In reply to:

waldauf: Can I ask DPreview what is your experience with battery life? In the article seems to me that you sometimes used battery grip and sometimes you didn't.

It's in the text, they did "like" the battery capacity/battery life. With or without grip is not very relevant since it does only one thing for capacity: doubles it up. Thus, say, 400 shots w one battery will be 800 with two batteries/grip mounted. If I remember correctly DPR said they at best could get around 1000 shots, if not chimping etc. (Maybe I read that figure somewhere else, sorry if I did, don't intend to mislead anybody!)

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 10:14 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1227 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mateus1: I think Oly brought M1mk2 too late, in 2017 with that sensor that does not improve IQ over mk1 and other m4/3 means you stay with it for next 4 years while competition made and makes bigger progress. I see IQ improvement in Fui X-Pro2 vs X-Pro1, X-T1 vs X-T2, which I hardly see in M1mk2 vs M1mk1. I am affraid Oly will always be 1-2 years behing the competition in IQ improvement. And they ask for "old" sensor more then others with newer and bigger sensor. If M1mk2 will be $1400 late next year ( I rather doubt it) then X-T2 will be $400-500 less I think, so M1mk2 is not going to tempt me anytime... as does not now with $2000.

Relative to FF or/and APS-C, m4/3 will of course be somewhat less perfect, if technoloy all else being equal will move forward as it has done in years past.

The REAL question for people actually doing photography with their machines is this:
"Does it provide IQ at a level that is sufficient or maybe surpasses what I DO NEED for the way the images will be used/seen/viewed???"

ANY camera that will be able to perform to make "YES" the answer to that qwest will be a good choice!

Add to that the availability of lenses, price & size of those and suddenly a LOT of people would benefit by at LEAST taking a literal "hands on" look at the E-M1 mk2 before going elsewhere.

As long as a camera do give what its owner wants and needs it is a viable choice, EVEN if other cameras, and there will always be a fair number of them, are "better" in the strictly "numbers game" IQ department.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 18:02 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1227 comments in total)
In reply to:

dharma108: Yes, the price is up there--but here is a perspective to consider. I paid $1799 US dollars for an Oly E5 (body only) six years ago and the E-M1 Mark II far surpasses it on all levels. A $200 price increase from six years ago for a far superior camera.
At the time I bought the E5 there was nary a complaint about it being too expensive. I am still shooting the E5 and it's still creating great images, but E-M1 Mark II will soon be in my camera bag.


E-M1 mk2 hase many things "to do" with E-5. The E-M1 mk2 is one of so far TWO current cameras that can handle the older Zuko Digital lenses with both speed and accuracy in AF. The mk2 possibly notably better than E-M1 mk1, but that will show as folks out there start buying the mk2.

Many folks tempted by the E-M1 mk2 are people who maybe have the mk1 or another m4/3 body, or who have a 4/3 body like the E-5 or older. All these people will benefit more or less by getting the E-M1 mk2, infrom few or or from the whole wide spectre of enhancements that the new camera brings..all depending on their shooting habits and needs.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 17:49 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1227 comments in total)
In reply to:

Saurat: Interesting, according to DPR's own compare-mode, Raw image-quality is less good than the original EM1. It is also less good than many entry-level cameras, such as the Canon 1100D and Nikon D3200. How accurate these algorithms are I don't know, but for $2000 I'd like at least token IQ improvement.

@Brian Wadie:

The text references is one thing, as you say DPR refers to current standard when comparing performance/IQ etc before giving their "%-value" to the camera tested at the moment.

But I believe that Saurat did mean to refer to the image comparator tool of DPR, and what he did see when viewing the images from the cameras there.
You don't think DPR makes manipulations of the comparator tool, do you?

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 10:47 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1227 comments in total)
In reply to:

aramgrg: Just a quick comparison. When E-m5 was announced in 2011, it was $1300 with 12-50 and it was a huge step up in the mirrorless market. Now E-m1 is not an update in IQ part(vs 2011!), but little improvements over e-m5, that costs twice more. Most of us cares more about image quality, rather than 60fps of crap.


I own the E-M5 mk1, and the E-M1 mk1. Must say the E-M1 mk2 is WAY better to handle and hold than the E-M5, and markedly better than the E-M1 mk1.
The E-M1 mk1 is better handling than the E-M5, too, and since getting the E-M1 I haven't used the E-M5 that much. I still like it, though, it has merits of its own, as in extremely compact etc.
The much better grip and ability to AF much faster w the couple of older zuiko lenses I own, made me use the E-M1 this much more, even though IQ is 99% the same.

But the E-M1 mk2 is about a whole series of smaller and some bigger improvements, which, IQ aside, makes it just that much better as a whole, and makes the system in itself a fair bit more attractive for more people still outside the m4/3 world.

As I see it.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 10:31 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1227 comments in total)
In reply to:

nokinonacynos: Looks like an amazing cam. However, I think MFT will continue to struggle. Once the cam is not pocketable, size becomes less of an advantage. People are realizing that a certain size is required for comfort and ergonomics. With a Pro lens, the package is similar to APC. So no advantage. In fact, the 25mm 1.2 is bigger, heavier and much more expensive than a 35mm f/2 for APC let alone a 50mm f/1.8 for FF.

This camera will have to sell on inherent qualities rather than size and weight.


Have you had the E-M1 mk2 in your hands??

I have, and at the same occasion I handled a Nikon D500 a couple of minutes.
Owning the mk1 E-M1 myself, I find the mk2 a VERY good upgrade, not only for its better technology, but it's just that perfect bit better in shape & size that had I the money I would get it in a heartbeat!!!

Don't need all of the new tech, but nice it is, and I still do like the shape/size of my mk1. Still, the new grip is so much better. AND the E-M1 mk2 is quite a bit nicer to hold and handle than the Nikon D500. The D500 is of course a VERY potent machine, better tha most APS-C or less cameras in many respects, and overall nice to hold. But to the E-M1 mk2 there is no contest, shape and size wise. For me, that is!

In that comparison I also count the size of most lenses w comparable FOV. (no, I don't rate DOF as much, that's another comparison factor)

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 10:14 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1227 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jon Schick: I really struggle with the price.

Currently the Pentax K-1 costs less than the E-M1 in the UK, and kills it for photo quality. The Fuji XT2 is a compelling buy for less than the E-M1 and also offers better image quality (and good video which is not a Pentax strength).

So if I wanted (and could afford) to spend that kind of money on a weatherproof camera for stills photography, unless the difference in size was a big issue (and the K-1 isn't too much of a beast anyway) I know what I'd buy - the Pentax. If size and/or video were more important then it would be the Fuji.

The E-M1 mark ii looks like a very capable machine and good upgrade from the original (which I really liked) but I think the price is very ambitious given that ultimately its image quality can't compete with the best of the competition (some of which is considerably cheaper).

"Dear Olympus: Please never produce a camera w most every feature there is to think of, and absolutely do NOT give it the outer limit of performance in its class, in a near indestructible shell....making it costly. Oh, as long as it is a m4/3 camera, that is, since then it HAS to be somewhat, if only by a small margin, less perfect sensor wise than the APS-C competitors...and thus of NO interest to me"


Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 04:23 UTC
In reply to:

Frank C.: Held the OMD in my hands once, nice...very nice, then removed the lens to take a look inside, after seeing the size of the sensor I sadly put the camera back down again. That was my sole encounter with the OMD.

@Frank C:
Did you actually have to take a look at the sensor, just to then determine it's not adequate??? By a look at it? A good "eye measure" you do have, haha.
Seriously: didn't you even know something about that "crucial part" of the m4/3 system? Strange...

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 20:39 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Salvas: Price is relative to what you want and can get from a camera. For me, m43 and Olympus hit the sweet spot, as I have been using the system successfully for three years in part-time professional work and for personal images. I sometimes exhibit my images and enter competitions. The payoff for me has been tremendous and an extra few hundred dollars tacked onto a new, advanced body isn't going to keep me away from upgrading.

Besides, the system cost, in both weight and dollars are more important to me than the cost of the body. Since everyone is comparing this Olympus unfavorably to the D500 (before the full reviews of the this new model), let's do a comparison. Since these are action-oriented cameras, you want a fast, moderate tele lens. For the E-M1 II, mount the 40-150/2.8 PRO. For the D500, the new 70-200/2.8E lens. The Olympus weighs 1,324g and costs $3,500. The Nikon weighs 2,290g and costs $4,600. Which can produce good photos, more often, in your hands?


You said:
"I am not saying that the Oly may have some advantage to you".

Well, HE (bluevellet) did say that m4/3 had advantages, so noone expected you to say it.. Strange sentence in the context of the discussion.

Now, the equiv thing. By relating the Oly combo M1 mk2/40-150/2,8 to a Nikon FF with a 70-200/2,8 is in context, the rest of bluevellet´s writings, not to "bring in FF", as he did NOT say a word about shallower/deeper DOF. "DOF" wasn't meant to be of significance in the comparision (as I did read his writings)
It could have been, and some do include it, but nothing(!) says it HAS TO BE included. Some characteristics of a system are more important for some people, some other are not.
For those who DO value the FF characteristics of FF to be "better" than the same of m4/3, welcome. But ALL do not put that high emphasis on it.

We who DO use m4/3 KNOW what we "lose" and we also know what we gain, exactly in what way depend solely of each person's own priorities.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 20:10 UTC
On article 2016 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $900-1200 (347 comments in total)
In reply to:

kolyy: Interesting, to me the GX85 is more of a clear winner in the $500-900 category (over the D5500 and A6000) than the G85 in this one, but it does not even get mentioned in the conclusion. The cited reasons could be very similar.

So you have had the E-M1 Mk2 in your hands, and shot away some, in order to seriously assess it in relation to its price??
I´ll tell you: it´s worth it, though sadly I can´t afford it (yet)

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2016 at 05:23 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Well, I would never pay in 2016/17 for camera with tiny 1/4 size sensor (of FF) and paying mad $2000 body that is also heavier and bigger then most APS-C (including X-T2) which cost $300-600 less and offer similar features (X-T2, A6500) or better (D500), including FF cameras (K1, A7II, 6D, D750) that all are also cheaper. Why should I buy M1mk2 for landscape (and have to use crop 3:2 that worsen IQ) if all new Fuji, Sony APS-C and a few FF are better and cheaper? For pro sport shooting or BIF? Really? D500 will eat M1mk2 and it's also cheaper. Even X-T2 would be better option. For street, wedding? Cheaper Fujis with bigger sensor and smaller/same size bodies with apertures on lenses can't be bitten by pricely M1mk2. Studio? Give me a brake. M1mk2 could tempt me only if the price is no higher then $1200. No way in 2017 with tiny 1/4 size sensor and such amazing competition on the market with lower prices. I think Oly counts I am blind or unreasonable.

At 1200 it would still be a bad choice for YOU, if this assessment of yours is to be considered what you actually do think/believe about the Mk2...
Have you had it in your hand and shot away a few images, just to get a hunch of how it handles?
I have, and yes it´s not the ABSOLUTE first choice for landscapes. Nobody have said it is, by the way.
But as a general, VERY highly performing camera in most all respects, it is something extra!!! Include the superb lens choice and well many would get it, if they just had the chance to handle it. It´s THAT good in your hand...

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 15:37 UTC
In reply to:

XeroJay: He's got a point; most pros use CF cards or even Cfast nowadays. It's consumer cameras using solely SD. My laptop has an SD slot, and yet I still have to use an external CF card reader.

Many pros use a vast array of cameras, large and small, and many of those do, surprise, actually only have the SD-slot.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 18:32 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: Is there anybody here who buy M1mkII for landscape and is paying $2000 for body? Do you use 3:2 ratio for landscape too with this tiny 4/3 sensor? K1 that is not much bigger is FF 36MP and costs $1800 only!!!! Do you buy M1mkII for sports? Why, when you have best of the best D500 for same or lover price? Or even more cheaper X-T2, A6500? What is the reason to pay this mad $2000 Oly's price for M1mkII with smalish 4/3 sensor? Street shooting? The body is not smaller then APS-C and FF. Oly Pro lenses are also big and expensive. Any 4/3 cam over $1300 is overpriced in my view.

@Mateus :

(Almost) any lens(!) in the Oly lineup is SHARP, even the cheap ones! THAT is one of a number of reasons to live in the m4/3 world. The same could be said about Panasonic´s lens line up too; very very few of them are not at the top.

Other reasons are there, but this is in my view one of the more importanat ones...

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 18:34 UTC
In reply to:

KrisAK: Will Olympus's older m43 lenses still work on this new full-frame camera? I mean, is the image circle large enough to cover the new, much larger sensor?

(This is a full-frame camera, right?)

A silly and stupid comment. As you very well do know it is a full m4/3 frame!

This system is what it is, dimension wise! Now, the E-M1 mk2 made the system even better, addressing most of the shortcimongs it have had since its inception.
E-M offers Better noise characteristics ,much, MUCH higher speed in several important respects, and tops those with offering refinements all over the place vs the E-M1 mk1.

If the basic characteristics of the system, as such, isn´t for you, ok, nothing more nothing less than that. Just keep,on caring less about the E-M1 mk2...
Other very good cameras (and systems) do exist, as we all know...and new even better cameras withinj those systems will keep on arriving, for sure!

But at the moment NO camera fills precisely the spot of this one!

Isn´t that fine? Even with you?

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 18:26 UTC
In reply to:

albert2014: i was interested in upgrading my olympus mark 1, but not anymore. The price of this camera felt like a punch in the gut. As good as this camera could be this is way outside the range of most consumers. Seriously there are a lot of other options out there for that kind of money. There are many other ways i can improve the quality of my images if i spend that kind of cash on other things like getting a better flash. I will not upgrade my camera. I have a new found appreciation the equipment i already have. I would rather olympus invest in improved picture quality rather than a high speed picture taking. i do not need 18 frames per second or whatever for shooting landscapes.

If you don´t need the extras of the E-M1 mk2, why not just get a mk1? (or keep on using the one you may already have...)

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2016 at 18:15 UTC

All you negative posters, who diss the russian cameras:
Where on earth are tose really good, exclusive and well performing american (for example, as most people here seem to be americans) cameras???

(not including some possible speciality items, just was thinking of normal consumer grade and the level above it)

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2016 at 08:41 UTC as 3rd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Johnnew Archibald - SMGJohn: and people question why the death penalty must be brought back...

??? Death, for stealing CAMERAS, just for their expected high economic value? Get real...
(or were you just ironic maybe?)

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2016 at 08:33 UTC
In reply to:

mjc1: The thing I never seem mentioned enough as everyone compares and tries to justify their equipment and its quality and how good is good enough is that yes, some of the new pro lenses from Olympus are pretty big and heavy and weather sealed and size / weight are pushing the overall rig closer and closer to FF or cropped rigs. I accept that, and in fact, when the job requires I myself pop on my Oly 12-40 f/2.8, use it, wish it were a little smaller, but grateful it is so good and when I don't need it or any big/heavy mFT lens, I pop them off and put back on my tiny fast primes and work with those and the difference between the size and weight comparison widens again. Personally I applaud Olympus, they have given us their best performing, no compromise lenses for those who find that important, always or from time to time (and they do charge you for that option!) and when you don't want that, you have your small fast lenses, who can complain about options?

*like* !!, of course!

Still, those (rather) expensive and "big" Zuiko PRO lenses are relatively small, and at least not as expensive as, most "f-length comparable" lenses in APS-C & 24x36mm land...which in itself is a nicety for any mFT user/prospective user.

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 20:43 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Olympus E-M1 Mark II overview video (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

vin 13: Just saw the size comparison posted here. It's bigger as my old Canon 350D! However if it's as good as Olympus are boosting and is priced sensibly I'll still be very interested.

I did own the EOS 350D, and it was nice but its grip is way worse shape/size wise, and quite a bit less nice to hold than the grip of the E-M1 I now have. The EOS 350D grip is too small, even though notably better than fex the diminutive "grip" of the Olympus E-600...

When shooting with the 70-200/4L I had, the 350D felt not wholly perfect, although a good camera at its price level at the time it was sold.,..

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 20:57 UTC
On article Photokina 2016: Olympus E-M1 Mark II overview video (295 comments in total)
In reply to:

String: Whats with all of these (I assume?) DSLR users telling us how "big" the E-M1 is? Seriously folks, I can only ask if you have ever even used an E-M1/12-40 combo and a D810/24-70 combo?

I did own a E-5 and THAT was a large camera. Compared to it, the E-M1 (which I now own) and the new E-M1 mk2 is really to be looked upon as compact, even though they are a bit larger than the two E-M5 versions. The grip make them perhaps look a bit larger than they actually feel in ones hand (not having held the Mk2 E-M1, ok)
The grip was a big good thing!
In part it was what made me get the E-M;, feels much better to handle than the E-M5 with it´s add on grip!!!

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2016 at 20:50 UTC
Total: 108, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »