Mike99999

Joined on Feb 7, 2012

Comments

Total: 491, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 comments in total)
In reply to:

gLOWx: M43/43 key element are "lenses".
You can use most of them fully open, and get sharpness you would get closed by 1 stop, or even 2, on FF/APS-C.
And so, you need less ISO bump.
It may sound strange at first, but until you really need very thin DOF or very high ISO, there is less need for bigger sensor.
I see many ppl with FF almost always stopping their lenses, to get more sharpness/DOF. Even with portraits, where FF lenses are supposed to be wide open.
And what happen to the 2 stops ISO FF advantage, when you need to close by 1 stop to be sharp ? It is now only 1 stop ;) And even less on APS-C.

43/M43 lenses are the key. Sharpness wide open, giving you enough DOF and light. And the new 25mm (50mm FOV equivalent) f1.2 is going to prove it, again :D

On my side, i will keep my mk1...and buy more 43 legacy phase detect lenses :D

Sorry to burst your bubble as a crop sensor apologist, but lenses are exactly the weak point of M43. Because of (lack of) economy of scales, M43 are much more expensive than comparable APS-C or full frame lenses.

The 25/1.2 is a prime example. You can get a tack sharp 55mm from Sony for $650. Why is the Olympus twice the price? Please don't tell me because it's an f/1.2 because it isn't.

Many of the smaller M43 lenses are painfully soft in the corners. The Olympus 12/2, Olympus 17/1.8, Pansonic 20/1.7 are all soft lenses.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2016 at 09:12 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 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.

...and M43 will soon be as dead as 43.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 14:19 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 comments in total)
In reply to:

Full Stop: You can see it like this:
mFT sensors lag behind APS-C by 4 years and behind FF by 8 years.
(a loooong time in electronics, btw)
In 2008 we had pro-level "twins" like 1DsMk3 & 1DMk3
or the Nikon D3x & D3s. One for high res, one for speed.
These Canons and Nikons were used for many many important
pictures worldwide. Nobody called them bad in 2008 and in 2016
these pictures are still great.
Now in 2016 you get their "high" res and high speed in ONE body.
And this body is half the size/weight of one of them with twice the
options.
Of course you can also have it in ONE body with a 2016 FF sensor:
just go and buy a Nikon D5.

If you are one of these sensor-tech fanboys:
How would you call the IQ of the Nikon D810?
How will you call that IQ in 2024 in a mFT camera?

The ISO noise performance of the 2007 Nikon D3 is 2.5 stops better than this E-M1 II. Please don't spew this nonsense.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 14:18 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 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 ?).

+1

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 14:06 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 comments in total)
In reply to:

ChrisH37: It may be just me but I've attempted to switch to M4/3 twice now (once from Nikon FF, once from Fuji X), as much as I love the size and the fantastic range of glass, the images just feel very flat and 'digital', much closer to a basic compact than an APS-C camera, oddly.

I'm as far removed from a pixel peeper as it's possible to be, and have absolutely no allegiance to any system (Pentax aside I've owned them all!), I really, really wanted to make the switch (E-M1, 12-40mm, 75mm 1.8 etc) but just couldn't get on board.

I liked the look I was getting from my 12 mpix PEN E-P2.

Ever since the E-M5/E-P5 I've been disappointed. Files look flat and digital, like from a compact camera.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 14:05 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 comments in total)
In reply to:

Petar Veliki: Skywalkers will buy FF, APS-C is closing down due to μ4/3. Colors and new technology is part of μ4/3. Especially for colors Canon, Nikon, Sony didnt show something interesting - wonder how come Canon still exist. μ4/3 is more at Sigma, Fuji level.

Now you have "Foveon" with Olympus, even at smaller PEN-F. And Post-focus on Panasonic. With Focus bracketing on all. And not over yet, GH5 is comming.

"APS-C is closing down due to μ4/3"

LOL talk about wishful thinking.

"Now you have "Foveon" with Olympus"

LOL!

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 14:03 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 comments in total)
In reply to:

PanchoVilla: Bar none, the E-M1 mark II is camera of the year! What an amazing photographic precision instrument. It makes cameras like the A6500 and X-T2 look like mere toys in comparison! Bravo Olympus for creating a timeless masterpiece!

Perhaps if you are a feature geek, especially if you mention the X-T2 and A6500 in the same sentence.

All features and no substance. Even ISO 200 pictures look bad.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 09:49 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sigma82: It's funny how the ff maniacs all come to comments every m43 camera news,. We got it, tiny sensor, overpriced, bad iq blah blah blah. We really got it. Now please go enjoy ur cameras and leave us m43 users with our pieces of crap. Thank you ;)

I am a long time Olympus user and I don't like the direction Olympus is headed.

Don't blame it on full frame users.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 09:47 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 comments in total)
In reply to:

photo_rb: How I wish when the 4/3 format was being developed, they would have made the sensor a teeny bit bigger...say APS-Cish.

@Interestingness: one can take award winning, income earning, magazine worthy, big print compatible photos with an iPhone. That still doesn't mean this camera is 2 grand well spent. Not when there are so many better options.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 15:34 UTC
On article Ultimate OM-D: Olympus E-M1 Mark II Review (1234 comments in total)

No thanks, Olympus.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 15:31 UTC as 261st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

FuhTeng: I'm looking forward to the D500 to EM1 II comparison tests. And comparing the EM1 II to the XT2 and GH5 and a6500, but mainly, the D500 versus EM1 II.

Since the Nikon 300/4 weighs 750 grams, and the Olympus 300/4 1500 grams, the decision is already made for me: I'll go with the Nikon D500.

Nikon also offers an excellent 200-500/5.6 which Olympus does not. The Nikon has a stop better ISO performance to boot. Sounds like a no-brainer to me.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 16:06 UTC
In reply to:

YetiYeti: Scrolling down this list of comments, and even DPreview - how costly E-M1II is. All over the web these days.

E-M1 II is kind of Canon 1DX. Some E-M1 features are better (speed, weight), some worse (hi ISO) than 1Ds, for some we are still to find out (CAF).

If you don't need all these new E-M1II features, here is E-M5 instead, much cheaper.
Same as with Canon.
If you don't need all those 1DX features, here is 5D instead, much cheaper.

Price difference between both Canons is similar as between both Olympuses.
Performance difference between both Canons is similar as between both Olympuses.
Even naming scheme is same with both manufacturers.

What's not to understand?
Go bug Canon that 1DX is too costly.

"E-M1 II is kind of Canon 1DX"

Yeah, Nikon did a crop version of their D5 and it is over 3 times cheaper. The D500 is a D5 with APS-C sensor and it costs $1,800 instead of $6,500.

The E-M1 has an even smaller crop, so, if you ask me, it should be half of $1,800, more like $900. The problem is M43 does not offer economy of scales, while APS-C does. You pay a premium for using a niche product.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 16:02 UTC
In reply to:

jl_smith: A little exercise:

Get your favorite camera and compile a list of lenses you like to use by focal length. Put them in a camera bag.

Do a similar exercise for m43.

There are always tradeoffs--m43's main advantage is size. Why gripe about 'small sensor'? News flash -- this is a smaller sensor camera, but still capable of great images.

I had an EM1, 35-100/2.8 Panasonic, 7-14/4 Panasonic, 45/1.8, 14/2.5 and 20/1.7 all fit in a tiny Retro 5 messenger bag, with probably room to spare. Try this with literally any other non-m43 system (besides Nikon 1).

I do this exercise quite regularly as I own both Olympus/Panasonic and Sony FE.

Lately, Sony wins for me as the 35/2.8 and the Loxia lenses are quite small. Instead of traveling with 5 mediocre lenses I prefer to take 2-3 excellent ones, e.g. Loxia 21 and Loxia 50.

The only lens I can't seem to replace is the Olympus 75/1.8. I'd buy a small + modern full frame 150/4 in a heartbeat.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 14:24 UTC
In reply to:

Mike99999: Tiny sensors are so 2012.

I have never seen so many disgruntled M43 users. $500 more expensive than the A7 Mark II? No thanks...

Nikon tried to play the framerate card with the Nikon 1 and look how that worked out for them.

@Sigma82: because I've been an Olympus user since the PEN E-P2. What us M43 users want to see is a bump in sensor performance, not a bump in price pushing it beyond the cost of full frame.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 14:08 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: GET OVER IT!
M43 has more "professional" options than any other format out there now. From low end to high end, large to small. It's available and yet people complain.
I hope you realize these features you have been asking for--and Oly delivering--costs money. Those saying m43 is not a real system/sensor/camera/ whatever do not realize there are many who make money without a problem in the system.
Professional is defined by the person making money and the work they produce, not the tools used to get there.
M43 has matured significantly in the last couple years and have done a great job filling all gaps in the line.

Please back up your claims with statistics. I, for one, have never seen a "professional" using Olympus. I only see Canon, Nikon, and on rare occasions a Sony.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 14:03 UTC
In reply to:

fotopizza: I don`t understand all those complaints, for example, regarding sensor size. Sure you can increase it- and then you will hear people complaining "what a bad camera, now it`s not as small as a MFT anymore...". If you really travel a lot: air travel, small planes, some train in western china, or a canoe on an african river, a small SYSTEM comes in handy. And a system consists of camera body AND lenses, and lens size and weight goes up rapidly. A camera with these performance specs in terms of speed is unknown to the APS-C DSLR world, and even if there a cam, the system (!) size and weight would be much higher. So you turn to full frame, like a D5 for speed, performance and sturdiness. Sure, you get around 2 stops better noise performance- which isn`t such an advantage when your average print size is A3. But look at the system (!) size and weight- a nice FF 600mm lens (or 800mm) is just huge and heavy. MFT is a great compromise: A fast, portable, sturdy (travel) system with acceptable IQ.

Crop is not reach.

Stop perpetuating this myth. You can use a Nikon 300/4 and crop the image in half just the same.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 14:02 UTC
In reply to:

D200_4me: Some day they'll get there, but for now it's just a shame that high ISO quality and resolution is a fair bit behind APS-C and full frame 35mm. Those are the only two 'cons' in my opinion. The price is fine, were it not for the two cons I mentioned (for me anyway). Just my personal thoughts/choice/preference. Well, there might be one other con. I can beat my FF Nikon files to death (D750) in post-processing and they still show very, very little to no degradation but my Olympus m4/3 files need a gentle touch in post (raw files) or they'll fall apart quickly.

@razadaz: the size/weight/price difference between the D750 and E-M1 II is too insignificant to warrant such a hit in image quality.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 12:43 UTC

Tiny sensors are so 2012.

I have never seen so many disgruntled M43 users. $500 more expensive than the A7 Mark II? No thanks...

Nikon tried to play the framerate card with the Nikon 1 and look how that worked out for them.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2016 at 12:39 UTC as 84th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

MeganV: As E-M1.2 information rolls in, I'm having deja vu with reviews of the E-5 in late 2010.

Outstanding lenses . . . but a flagship sensor that's just a notch behind everyone else in a package that isn't much smaller and isn't any less expensive.

Unfortunately, we all know how that played out.

Exactly this.

Four Thirds' death sentence was signed when Nikon switched from DX to FX in 2007 with the D3 and D700.

Micro Four Thirds' death sentence was signed when Sony switched from E to FE in 2013 with the A7 and A7R.

Olympus is just repeating its DSLR mistakes in mirrorless. I cannot believe Olympus passed on a full frame OM-D.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 09:32 UTC
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: EM1-2 image detail looksvery much as good as the APS-C images, at least up to ISO 1600. Olympus has done a nice job.

I disagree. Olympus has made the wrong choice relying on Sony sensors. Sony has made sure this sensor does not pose any competitive threats to any of their own cameras.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 09:25 UTC
Total: 491, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »