showmeyourpics

Lives in United States New Rochelle, NY, United States
Works as a instructor
Joined on Aug 29, 2011
About me:

taking better pics

Comments

Total: 173, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

AleMat496: I have OM-D E-M1 (which I love) and was waiting for Mark II. Now, given it's high price vs limited improvements, I'm looking at other options including, but not limited to GH5, or even D500...

Hi AleMat496, the excellent D500 is often mentioned as an alternative to the M43 flagships. It has an edge on image quality but the M43 has the size/weight advantage. I work with two E-M5II. The D500 is 2.9 times larger and 1.8 times heavier. This carries over to the lenses. The E-M1II has less of an advantage, it over-engineered for most non-pro photographers and has the penalty of its steep price. To be honest, the improvements over the E-M1 are not limited but could very well be for the kind of photography you do.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 03:27 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

soundknight21: I love my Panasonic but the OMD is turning up the heat a little. The JPEGs have gotten a lot better on this one but like the Fuji-XT2 the RAWs are a little underwhelming.

I like the ergonomics, and the fact that you can get a battery grip is really awesome. I hope panasonic gets more into battery grips (like the new G80)

Hi soundknight21, Raw files being a little underwhelming is very vague. Do they show poor detail and/or dynamic range after you (properly) process them? So far, the sensors in the Oly and Pana cameras have not shown that much of a difference. As pdelux has written, it is your prerogative to "want" the E-M1II but that does not mean that you "must". This camera is a jewel but is over-engineered for most mortals and with the difference from $2,000 you can get some awesome lens ...

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2016 at 03:17 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cultured Vulture: Isn't it time for DPR to stop giving mirror less cameras points for having great AF "for a mirrorless". Just as it has past time for DSLR's to be given a pass for poor video or live view focus. The camera either performs or it doesn't. It either produces great images or it doesn't. If you want to make comparisons, base it on price for a given performance. The Mark II is expensive, does it perform to its price or doesn't it? I'm not saying one way or another but that's the way I would be looking at it no matter what camera was being reviewed.

If you are happy with your system God bless you and happy shooting. But let's be rational, there is no way for any APS-C system with equivalent equipment to compare favorably against M43 in terms of size and weight also considering that when the shoot is critical (ephemeral subjects, expensive travel, etc) you want to have with you your basic system plus redundancy (i.e.: 2 bodies). Case in point, when I want to travel very light I have available to me the E-M10II and lenses such as the Pana 12-32mm f/3.5-5.6 and 35-100 f/4-5.6. I must live with lower brightness but the lenses are minuscule and the IQ is there.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 16:57 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cultured Vulture: Isn't it time for DPR to stop giving mirror less cameras points for having great AF "for a mirrorless". Just as it has past time for DSLR's to be given a pass for poor video or live view focus. The camera either performs or it doesn't. It either produces great images or it doesn't. If you want to make comparisons, base it on price for a given performance. The Mark II is expensive, does it perform to its price or doesn't it? I'm not saying one way or another but that's the way I would be looking at it no matter what camera was being reviewed.

Hi, I am an OMD user who scaled down from 4x5", 2 1/4", and 35mm film, and 27lb tripods. I am not interested in comparisons with larger sensor systems because, like many amateurs and pros, my choosing M43 gear was due to the desire to travel light. I carry a relatively small and quite comfortable sling bag which contains two E-M5II bodies with 9-18mm, 12-40mm, 35-100mm and 100-300mm lenses (double for equivalent angle of view), spare batteries and memory cards, phone, wallet and keys. Out of my E-M5II's I get enough IQ for publications and making impeccable prints up to 24x36". I can walk and shoot for a whole day concentrating on creativity because my gear is out of my way. Hence, I am truly interested in developments within the M43 system but have no more than a general curiosity about anything else which is bigger and heavier. I trust Olympus because none of its 13 cameras I have owned over the years has ever failed me.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2016 at 03:45 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)

BTW, today only the Olympus outlet has the refurbished EM5II for $540.00.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 19:01 UTC as 31st comment | 1 reply
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

SeeRoy: I got caught by the EM5. It did me one favour, forever stopping me generating any enthusiasm for the constant "churn" of the latest, greatest product of the camera industry. That camera has the most abominable ergonomics and general interface design (both firmware and hardware) of almost any consumer electronic device I've ever had the misfortune to own.
It goes on . Olympus managed to destroy the camera (twice) after I asked them to remove the fingerprint from the sensor with which it came.
Every time the latest "must-have" variant emerges I wonder if they've managed to redesign this series of cameras so that they're actually enjoyable to use. The EM5 is almost permanently in some unwanted mode. It's actually amazing that a mal-executed product like that could ever get to market. Actually, on second thoughts, it's not that unusual.

OMG, I can't resist: are you sure you have human anatomy and central nervous system? (sorry gents!)

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 18:51 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)

Hi, I had an interesting and enjoyable discussion with "entoman" about the current role of camera technology in the photographic process. My 2c on this subject are as follows. Technology surely is a great enabler. In today's cameras though it has reached a point where any "serious" model you buy is going to be very competent and give you great IQ even with poster size prints (follow "Fun 4 all" links). I am not the only one I know who takes advantage of the launch of a new camera to buy the deeply discounted previous model. Also, you can keep the camera you have much longer and spend money on upgrading your lenses and improving your technique by, for example, attending reputable workshops. There is no perfect camera system and different sensor size ones should be judged independently. I am a fine art, part-time pro and what this review has shown me is that, while I drool on it, I don't "need" the E-M1II because my E-M5II is already capable of elegantly handling anything I throw at it.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 16:08 UTC as 36th comment | 2 replies
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

neverendinglight: So do I buy 2 G85's with the decent kit lenses or one EM1 ii body? Serious question. I get that it depends on my uses, but I'm an enthusiast that likes to shoot all sorts of types, including video. Currently shooting EM5ii and GX8. IQ seems to be about the same, but I seem to get better results from the GX8 which makes complete sense because I absolutely love the EM5 design/looks/ergonomics and the opposite is true of the GX8 (ugh!). Decisions decisions.

Hi neverendinglight, very few people truly "need" the E-M1II. When you get serious about your photography two camera bodies make a lot of sense for redundancy and not having to change lenses in challenging environments. You could do better than the kit lens though. I work with two OMD bodies. When I want max portability (long hikes, snow, ice) I mount on each camera the Pana 12-32mm f/3.5-5.6 and 35-100mm f/4-5.6. The lenses are not that bright but they are affordable, minuscule and the IQ is surprisingly high for the price. In more comfortable situations, I replace them with the Oly 12-40mm F/2.8 and the Pana 35-100mm f/2.8 with are stellar lenses but also much larger and much more expensive.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 14:44 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fun 4 all: We've had numerous respected pros (not the ones paid by Olympus or another company) mention that they have 24-30 inch prints from M43 and FF cameras hanging in their studios, and they all say the same thing - no one can tell which were shot with a larger or smaller sensor.

And how many other cameras could have survived that Iceland junket that all the reviewers went on, where they were shooting in the rain and mist for several days. Every reviewer commented that their camera got covered with dirt and water and not one reported and issue.

Hi, the whole argument is about your statement that photographers need? want? the best gear ever. This can be true for some amateurs but not for most pro's who focus on a balance between relative IQ, feature set and budget. Pro's choices should be taken into consideration because they are typically very concrete. The idea that the absolute best gear is paramount for good photography leads to a bunch of (disparaging) comments on these forums that are truly maniacal. There are fields of photography where smaller sensor cameras, with all their limitations, are still the best choice at least because of their portability and anonymity. This is why I invite objectivity especially when comparing different sensor size gear. Case in point, this review has shown me that I don't need an E-M1II because my E-M5II can already do all I need very well. I can spend my money on awesome lenses instead. Anyway, it looks like no-one is following this discussion so we should stop here. Happy shooting.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 14:27 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fun 4 all: We've had numerous respected pros (not the ones paid by Olympus or another company) mention that they have 24-30 inch prints from M43 and FF cameras hanging in their studios, and they all say the same thing - no one can tell which were shot with a larger or smaller sensor.

And how many other cameras could have survived that Iceland junket that all the reviewers went on, where they were shooting in the rain and mist for several days. Every reviewer commented that their camera got covered with dirt and water and not one reported and issue.

(continued) I gave up my 4x5" and then 4 1/4" systems because with their size, weight and complex setup they began to annoy me and take away the fun. Today, when I am leaving home for normal chores and don't plan to photograph, I always take with me my Nikon P7800 (is it inverted snobbery? No, I think it is practicality). its limitations notwithstanding, I regularly bring home some unpredictable, awesome pictures. The pictures are, and they are good, because I had the camera with me and I know how to get the best out of it.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 00:55 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fun 4 all: We've had numerous respected pros (not the ones paid by Olympus or another company) mention that they have 24-30 inch prints from M43 and FF cameras hanging in their studios, and they all say the same thing - no one can tell which were shot with a larger or smaller sensor.

And how many other cameras could have survived that Iceland junket that all the reviewers went on, where they were shooting in the rain and mist for several days. Every reviewer commented that their camera got covered with dirt and water and not one reported and issue.

Hi, it was the best technology at AA's time. He did not need the current technology to make his timeless masterpieces (and most of his magic happened in the darkroom). What I am saying, and you know it, is that it is still the photographer who makes the picture. Let's be honest, technology is systematically overestimated and current gear is way more competent than most amateur photographers. Ever more pro's are adding M43 to their larger size sensor equipment (and they are happy with the results) and National Geo has no qualms accepting photos taken with this system. This should say something. When I talk at photo clubs and art societies and they ask me about how to allocate one's photo budget, I recommend people to get themselves some good gear but dedicate time and money joining the local photo club, visiting museums and photo exhibits, read books such as John Szarkowski's series, and attend reputable workshops focusing on developing an ever stronger technique. (continued)

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 00:31 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fun 4 all: We've had numerous respected pros (not the ones paid by Olympus or another company) mention that they have 24-30 inch prints from M43 and FF cameras hanging in their studios, and they all say the same thing - no one can tell which were shot with a larger or smaller sensor.

And how many other cameras could have survived that Iceland junket that all the reviewers went on, where they were shooting in the rain and mist for several days. Every reviewer commented that their camera got covered with dirt and water and not one reported and issue.

No entoman, if the output is what defines your photographic process what you truly need is "to be there" and the ability to see compelling subjects and light, and compose, expose, process and print appropriately. The best gear cannot replace this. John Paul Caponigro said it right: if what drives you is the process and not the output, then you are a technician, not an artist. This is the reason why, after so many years of gear evolution, works by Ansel Adams and Cartier-Bresson still knock everyone's socks off. Gear is almost always overestimated. When I began selling digital prints at art festivals in 2004 I was using an 8Mp Olympus C8080. I had to tell my clients that I was working with a much more illustrious camera otherwise they would not have taken me seriously. I am still selling those pictures printed up to 16x20".

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2016 at 22:54 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fun 4 all: We've had numerous respected pros (not the ones paid by Olympus or another company) mention that they have 24-30 inch prints from M43 and FF cameras hanging in their studios, and they all say the same thing - no one can tell which were shot with a larger or smaller sensor.

And how many other cameras could have survived that Iceland junket that all the reviewers went on, where they were shooting in the rain and mist for several days. Every reviewer commented that their camera got covered with dirt and water and not one reported and issue.

Hi, it is true that practically any digital camera today from at least advanced compact up provides more information than most outputs can show. The limitations of smaller M43 sensors show up with prints larger than 30x40" because of lower pixel count and higher noise at higher ISO settings. I attended a number of Epson's Print Academy events and had the chance to talk with their experts. They do agree with these facts. Comparing printing performance as perceived by "normal" viewers is even more complex. I am a part-time fine art pro and my typical client reacts MUCH more strongly to a compelling subject and beautiful light than to any other, more technical factors.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 23:52 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rssrsvp: The Oly menu system is often attacked as evidenced by these statements in the review.
Customization options can be overwhelming
Menu system is a step back from previous models

"Menus are a mixed bag. The Super Control Panel is here, of course, and the camera's touch interface makes it easy to navigate. As with other Olympus ILCs, the main menu is confusing and changes to the already dense custom settings submenu have taken usability a step backward."

Frankly when coming over to Olympus their menus do have a learning curve like switching from a Windows PC to a Mac. However IMO once you get used to the menus you will see that they are well laid out and totally logical. Also just because you can program so many dials and buttons doesn't mean you have to use all of them. You simply customize the camera to your needs.

Therefore I wonder how many points were deducted from the final 85% score because of the menus which to me is non issue?

Hi, since I switched completely to digital in 2004, I have worked with Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji and Minolta cameras. It does not take me more than one pass to have a good idea of how a camera menu works without consulting the manual. Menu design has never been a memorable issue for me. I can believe that some menu systems could be tougher than others for beginners but a certain amount of complexity is inevitable due to the shear number of features and the level of customization of modern cameras. It's the positioning of the external controls that can make a significant difference. Manufacturers claim that most of these cameras are OK for anybody but this is not true. If less expert buyers don't read the manual cover to cover they are bound to get lost no matter how good the menu system is.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 23:30 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tactical Falcon: I LIke this camera. Not for $2000.00. I can get allot camera for the same or less money. The Fujifilm XT-2. Nikon D500. I could go full frame with Black Friday, and all. This is the best camera I have seen from Olympus, I'll never buy. At this money a smaller camera isn't the only consideration especially when it is as good as all, finally, but costs more. An offer I don't understand.

Hi Tactical Falcon, this camera has some state-of-the-art features and was designed for pro photographers who would recover its cost quite quickly. If you don't need them then there is no reason to buy it independently from the (steep) price. I do part-time fine art work and I am not going to buy it because my E-M5II can elegantly handle everything I through at it. Instead, I am going to sell my E-M10II and buy a second E-M5II so that I have two bodies with all controls in the same place.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 22:45 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

PRohmer: Gold award?! Really? I don't even see the point of this camera at this price point.
How can this favorably compare to X-t2, X-pro2, M5 or even G85?

Hi PRohmer, you state: "I wasn't happy with E-m1 at half that price. The IQ is just not there". What do you photograph and what are your outputs that brought you to this conclusion?

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 05:47 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

PedroMZ: The fundamental issue for anybody who has MFT cameras(including myself) is that they are well aware that ultimate IQ is to be found elsewhere. However many people who have this format probably have at least 3 ,possibly four, lenses. Most MFT lenses are of good quality and not cheap. If one changes to APS/FF you are offered little in part exchange and are then faced with the cost of replacing all these lenses. For better IQ above ISO 800 and not much else . That is for many, too higher price to pay. Given that,this camera is relevant to those who have invested in MFT up to the present time.

Hi, most complaints about M43 are like Microsoft, technically correct but practically useless. This format excels in photographic fields demanding the highest portability. Cameras like the OMD's and their lenses are masterpieces in this respect but sacrifices due the smaller sensor are inevitable and must be accepted. If you need a car that you can park in very little space, the Fiat 500 is a great choice but if you do a lot of highway driving it's not. If these cameras don't match your needs just look elsewhere, your complaints about their shortcomings are futile. The E-M1II was designed for professional use and, as a part-time pro, it would take me a few weeks to recover the investment (I would not argue against a lower price though).

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 05:37 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

BostonC: DPR uses $200 45mm 1.8 on EM1ii vs. $900 56mm R f.2 on XT2 for the comparison tests. The cheapo lens is ok but far from the best of the system.
Not a fair comp.

@Wu Jiaqiu, if you want to avoid misunderstandings and complaints, it just makes senses to run theses tests with gear of comparable grade. Otherwise, most readers would justifiably react like BostonC.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 05:17 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: Back when the original EM5 was reviewed, DPR may have confused a lot of users when they said that IQ was, more or less as good as APS-C, and that you needed to go to FF to see a dramatic improvement in IQ. Yeah, well no. I've been shooting with the EM10 for the last few months to see what all the fuss is about, and it's a good shooter, but honestly IQ really doesn't compete well with my D7100 or the Fujifilm cameras I've owned. FF isn't even part of the discussion, I'm not sure why forums are filled with some many comparisons threads. Sure you can make great images with the Olympus and Panasonic cameras, but for subjects like landscape where you want low ISO RAW files to have as little noise and as much DR and bold colors as possible, other systems have a clear advantage. That said, for people already invested in m43, this camera should make a lot of people happy.

Hi, let's be pragmatic. In additional to my 24Mp APS-C system, I currently use E-M10II and E-M5II cameras. Your comments are relevant if I want to enlarge more than 30x40" or print large at high ISO. I am a part-time fine art pro and in most situations what these cameras capture in terms of noise, detail and DR is well beyond what my 24x36" enlargements can reproduce. This requires good exposures and processing but this should not be rocket science for a demanding photographer. In the publishing market, National Geo is all-right with captures from these cameras too. Regarding colors, OMD cameras have particularly high accuracy which is better than arbitrary boldness. BTW, If I want larger pixel counts, with very simple 2-frame landscapes I get 26Mp files or use the 50Mp high res mode with the E-M5II (if you know what you're doing, high res is much more versatile than generally assumed). In the lab larger sensors have a definitive advantage but this is not always relevant in the field.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 18:13 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1230 comments in total)
In reply to:

iamatrix: I know there is some arguing here, but people should not get upset when people make comments about Olympus IQ. In fact people should get onboard to push Olympus to be more competitive. My problem with Olympus is they keep rebranding the same technologies into new packages and continue to sell them at higher prices every year (sounds like they went to Canon's marketing school) Let's face the music, today's Olympus camera save for a few minor tweaks is just an EM5 with new skin. A cheap Nikon D3300 for $350 blows these cameras away in terms of sensor performance. I get it they have IBS and touch screens and other cool tricks up their sleeves, but that tech has been around for years and is now and it's time to focus on areas where m43rds is no longer competitive: sensor . The EM1 is a very fast camera, but it's also hitting a very niche market where sensor performance is just as important as AF. Case in point: If your shooting sports you most likely are shooing in low light / difficult lighting where sensor performance is incredibly important (try indoor soccer with m43rds). If your shooting BIF, you might be cropping or requiring class leading dynamic range (ever shoot a bird against a bright sky ?).

HI, we can argue the fine points till we are blue in the face but I'll contain my comment to three facts. Firstly, the leading photo web sites are truly in love with this camera and its innovations. Secondly, ever more pro's are adding M43 to their gear set and some are switching to it completely. Thirdly, as a part-time pro I have also been using 4/3 and M4/3 for a bunch of years and have watched the system improve constantly with every new camera. The E-M1II especially is at the cutting edge of technology in many aspects.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 17:44 UTC
Total: 173, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »