OM-D to replace FF?

[Rens]

This is a civilised forum, but a bit quiet.

So I'm putting forward a (possibly controversial) view I've been mulling over for a week or so.

Several posters in different M 4/3 forums say they're selling their FF systems and going entirely OM-D plus lenses.

As someone who loves using his OMD, I feel compelled to say I don't get this. I take the OMD with me just about everywhere I go, it fits in one jacket pocket and another lens goes in the other pocket. It's a pleasure to use and gives lovely images. But compared with FF (Nikon in my case), it has several downsides.

I'm not usually bothered about shallow DOF, so this isn't an issue. But getting exposure right is critical. With Nikon FF and even Nikon APS-C I can under-expose to preserve highlights and push shadows in PP, but with the OMD I can do very little shadow lifting without losing significant IQ. So to avoid clipping highlights, I have to live with dark shadows whether I like it or not. Though in a way, this is a good discipline. But I still end up clipping highlights (usually bits of sky) more often than I'm used to doing.

The other downside to the OMD is high ISOs. I've read that ISO 3200 on the OMD is similar to ISO 6400 on the Nikon D700, but this just isn't my experience. Fortunately the excellent OMD IBIS makes longer exposures possible in many situations, partly negating the high ISO limitations.

The the much discussed poor AF on moving targets seems to be a problem for some, but it doesn't affect my landscape images.

So while I use the OM-D most of the time, I have no plans to part with my Nikon FF camera and lenses, and should I experience hard times, I'm not sure which system I'd sell. My guess is that it would be the OM-D, though with great regret.

Just my thoughts. Best wishes for 2013 to all, Rens

[David M]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

What's the word for fishing by trailing a baited line behind a boat.

[Graham_of_Rainham]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

This is a civilised forum, but a bit quiet.
<snip>Rens

May I ask a question, that may consentrate the discussion...

What is the final product of your photography, is it prints or displayed media

[Rens]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

May I ask a question, that may consentrate the discussion...

What is the final product of your photography, is it prints or displayed media

I print, but not usually larger than A4.

Rens

PS I also put photos of the instruments I build onto my website.

[David Morison]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

Never used a digital FF and have used a 4/3rds (or smaller) for years, but since I bought an APS-C I have a hankering for one. Not for willdife/birds though as the tele lenses would be too big/expensive. I just fancy trying one for landscapes as some FFs are not any bigger than APS, but whether I will or not....... (If only they made a digital TLR!)

David

[Rens]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

Never used a digital FF and have used a 4/3rds (or smaller) for years, but since I bought an APS-C I have a hankering for one. Not for willdife/birds though as the tele lenses would be too big/expensive. I just fancy trying one for landscapes as some FFs are not any bigger than APS, but whether I will or not....... (If only they made a digital TLR!)

David

It's very likely that had I bought the OMD first, I'd never have justified the expense of a FF Nikon plus lenses. But since I have them, I intend to hang on to them, though I'll certainly not buy more FF lenses now.

[Alpha1]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

Well, I have tried FF,APS-c and MFT. Suffice to say, the FF has gone together with a host of FF lenses, I still have the APS-c but it will be going soon. I have two OM_D bodies with five lenses and I hope for more to follow. I also have the FL600R flash.

I don't change camera systems easily.....it is too expensive but for my sort of photography, natural history and travel, the OM-D ticks just about all the boxes.

It enables me to print to club exhibition size, ie 14"x9" on a 500x400mm mount and more than adequate digital projection images. I need no more!

[Ian]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

Full frame has its place. But the advantages are eroding and the disadvantages mounting.

By the way, you don't really have to under-expose as much as you might think in order to preserve highlights, especially with an E-M5. Highlights are surprisingly recoverable with digital and there is a school of thought that you should keep the hiistogram to the right of centre although be careful not to push it so far that extreme highlights are clipped.

Full frame advantages - yes, there is more dynamic range (although the E-M5 is close to some popular FF models from just a few years ago), more resolution with some models, bigger brighter opetical TTL finder.

Full frame disadvantages - size and weight of both bodies and lenses, for some, a lack of EVF (most FF models) and articulating finder, noticeable difference in corner image quality to centre of frame. Cost.

I'm sure I could add to both advantages and disadvantages.

Ian

[Bikie John]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

As with most things in life, it's all a compromise. Some equipment will do some things better than others, and other things less well. Some stuff is more expensive, some stuff is bigger/heavier, some stuff performs less well in low light, allows less enlargement or whatever. If I'm deciding whether something is worth getting there are 2 things to remember:

- if it's good enough, it's good enough. Better is always nice but maybe not necessary.

- if you leave it at home it's about as much use as a chocolate fireguard. Or even less because you can't eat it.

As for your comments about highlights - I have found that E-M5 raw files allow an astonishing degree of highlight recovery. I haven't used Nikon 35mm format bodies so can't compare directly, but there seems to much more at the top end of the files than any other cameras that I have used (other Oly, Panasonic, Ricoh and Leica). The generated JPEG files don't reflect this, and Oly viewer does not do a good job at getting the detail out. But Photoshop or Lightroom will find some amazing stuff in E-M5 raw files.

Ciao ... John

[Jim Ford]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

What's the word for fishing by trailing a baited line behind a boat.

'Trailing' - but in America it's called 'trolling'! In the U.K. 'trolling' was a fishing term used for simply lowering and raising a lure in the water. I believe it was mainly used when fishing for grayling ('grasshopper lure' springs to mind).

Jim

[Graham_of_Rainham]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

I print, but not usually larger than A4.

Rens

PS I also put photos of the instruments I build onto my website.

The sensor resolution of the OM-D easily provides for A4 prints @ 300dpi with ample room for crops, alignment, etc..

As soon as re-size down for web use is required, virtually all cameras provide adequate resolution.

In reality there are so many stages of transformation from the point where light from the subject falling on the sensor, makes its way electronically to the eyes viewing the image. Considering any picture as having qualities related to the camera is highly tenuous if there has been any processing, let alone RAW image data that has passed through multiple post process manipulations.

With slide film we were very close to being able to see for ourself the real variations in quality of cameras. Now while there is DxO and others that can analyse all these things for us, the end result really only ever matters to us as individuals and our opinions, tastes and personal choices.

Of course the debate will never end, and perhaps that too is a good thing. For me the end product (in the same way as food ) is all that matters.

However: I've always gained a great deal of enjoyment and satisfaction in using cameras to achieve an end product. Having had the advantage and opportunity to use some of the most sophisticated image producing equipment in the world, when it came to my personal kit I, tried all sorts of makes and formats and simply never found any that worked better for me than that produced by Olympus.

[Alpha1]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

'Trailing' - but in America it's called 'trolling'! In the U.K. 'trolling' was a fishing term used for simply lowering and raising a lure in the water. I believe it was mainly used when fishing for grayling ('grasshopper lure' springs to mind).

Jim

I thought that a Troll was a Norwegian folklore figure!

[Jim Ford]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

I thought that a Troll was a Norwegian folklore figure!

It is, but when used on the internet the term is used for someone posting a controversial topic as 'bait' for a heated discussion, but many people think it refers to the mythical creature.

Strictly speaking, 'a troll' is the name of a mythical creature and therefore a noun. Whereas 'trolling' is a fishing activity and therefore a verb. So therefore on the internet, a person baiting the community should be described as 'trolling', rather than as 'a troll'.

Jim

[Guest]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

'Trailing' - but in America it's called 'trolling'! In the U.K. 'trolling' was a fishing term used for simply lowering and raising a lure in the water. I believe it was mainly used when fishing for grayling ('grasshopper lure' springs to mind).

Jim

I thought trolling was the habit of towing a dead goat in the water in the hope of attracting Moby Dick.

Actually I suspect it has longer origins in the UK than Jim gives it credence for. Trolling certainly has usage in sea fishing back into the 19'th century and almost certainly earlier. Back in the 15'th century it was the name given to a fishing reel. And as a word it seems to have both german and french roots in meaning to 'wander about'.

Which goes to show that the meaning of words change, one wonders what will be called Full Frame in the 22'nd century, when Cinema film will just be a folklore memory.

Nick

[Jim Ford]

Re: OM-D to replace FF?

Actually I suspect it has longer origins in the UK than Jim gives it credence for. Trolling certainly has usage in sea fishing back into the 19'th century and almost certainly earlier.

My knowledge of the term comes from 19th Century angling books that I used to have many years ago when I fished.

Jim