WELCOME This site is for anyone interested in Olympus and OM System system cameras. First time visit? Check out our FAQ. You need to REGISTER before you can post. After registration and two posts, forum ads will disappear.
* Registered members don't see ads on the forum after two posts - sign up for free *
** We are aware that image uploading is currently not working properly and we're working on it. We're very sorry for the inconvenience and hope we can return to normal ASAP. **
as expected loads of silly sometimes false answers from the ostriches on the other side of the pond and one from this side who only has to ask me how I do it ? .. for the penultimate answer look at Joe Edelmans reply who shoots them all down in flames 🤣🤣
I note he picks up on lightness and portability. I remember Chris Bonington was a great Olympus fan as were many climbers, me included because it was lighter and smaller. He brought the brand great exposure with the climbing on Everest 45 years ago. Nothing new.
Having used Nikon professionally, yes there were things it could do that my Olympus couldn't but now I would say its the other way round.
I do get fed up in my camera club with the 'Canikon' wars. One thought might be that as they are generally older and getting more so, they may be struggling to lug it all about and if, like me, they have invested heavily in a system it is likely to be a mental and financial strain to change. I certainly would but I reckon what I've got I am happy with and I don't foresee me spending too much more ( I know you don't believe me) and what I have will do me for at least 10 years.
By far, most prints are produced at a size less than 20” x 16”. Why, because thousands of members of photography clubs produce their competition pictures within the rules of the PAGB. The maximum size includes the mount, so most are printed on A3 printers. Then there’s the projected images, which are again limited by the PAGB rules and most clubs project at 1600 x 1200.
Then there’s the vast majority of pictures that never get printed and only ever make it onto social media, and we all know the limitations of that…
At home, many people will look at their pictures on a TV at 4K or HD, while some will make “coffee table” books, with a tiny number of pictures ending up on a wall.
So what is the absolute minimum image quality that’s needed. For certain it’s nothing to do with the camera, as we see time and time again from many different people who are producing stunning pictures with all sorts of kit.
For me it’s a bit like asking a famous author what laptop and word processing software they used….
Graham's point about the output media is absolutely spot on. IQ alone is not a good reason to choose between any of the main camera systems. Some say that larger formats give better "tonality" but I think this is mostly a case of confirmation bias since blind comparisons don't bear this out. So if you don't chose formats on IQ, what might be a better reason to choose FF or bigger? It seems to me that the following are reasonable cases:
- Shallow DOF with wider FOV - e.g. for "environmental portraits". And the bigger the sensor the better the effect. But then again, computational techniques can already achieve similar results now in phone cameras and I suspect this will improve and spread to "traditional" cameras. I found this image which demonstrates the effect perfectly. I assume it's taken with medium format, but it could be done computationally.
- Excellent high ISO performance - e.g. for indoor sports, BIF, etc. Larger sensors mean better high ISO, but OTOH, the lenses get bigger. There's a sweet spot and FF is probably there at the moment, but it's not necessarily the case that it will always be so. A m43 sensor with improved high ISO would actually be a better choice for most people shooting these subjects.
- Access to legacy 35mm lenses - important for some, perhaps as a second camera, especially speciality things like old Leica lenses etc.
Anything I've missed? There might be other non-sensor-size reasons for going with a particular system of course - e.g. excellent flash support (Nikon), exotic tele lenses (Canon, Nikon), desire for non-Bayer CFAs (Fuji), in-built star trackers (Pentax), ...
Interesting discussion, I think there are non-sensor related features which make other systems attractive.
I watch the YouTube channel of wildlife photographer Mike Lane. He is an Olympus user but last year he got a Sony A1 and 200-600mm lens and he gets very good results with it for stills and video and it has been interesting to see his experience comparing it to the OMDS gear. Two things he talks about is much better AF performance and that there is no EVF blackout when taking stills and the video quality he gets is outstanding. He has some incredible pictures of Swifts in flight. Also the Sony camera appears to have a way to close the shutter when changing lenses so the sensor is protected - our Olympus cameras have very good sensor dust avoidance measures but I would still really like a feature like this when swapping lenses and TCs in the great outdoors.
His down to earth review of the Sony A1 and comparison to his Olympus gear might be worth a watch here:
He doesn’t differentiate on image IQ at all from my viewing, it is other features and he hangs on to his OMDS gear hoping for a body update. Having seen all this I wouldn’t ditch my current OMDS/Olympus gear for a Sony system - if I was going to drop over £6k on more gear I would get the 150-400mm lens, I really love the Olympus lenses and cameras I currently have. Hopefully a new OMDS body will come at some stage.
I have actually considered getting a FF camera body with an adaptor to use my old OM Zuiko lenses from film days - perhaps an older model Sony second hand FF body. It is way down the gear acquisition wish list though!
I have suggested that to Oly but their answer is, the Shutter is very delicate and it's will not be use that way to block any dust. I doubt that new management will allow that. And they mention it's cheaper to clean the sensor than to replace that shutter.
A fried of mine switch from Canon to Sony. Within 4 months, he already accumulated a whole lot of dust on the sensor. So maybe that closing of the shutter does not help either.
I often mull over the gear departed files , my most successful time was with canon 1Dmkiii bodies coupled with a canon 400mm f5.6 lens , use to love that combo ,even though only 10mp .. I have also thought about going Sony FF with a A9 and 200-600 lens ,more m.p lightning fast AF and good I.q but the extra KG of weight would annoy me and the extra cost is also offsetting .. then I think would I get any real improvement in the results I get now ,and come back down to earth with a bump .
As far as sensor protection goes I see that Nikon Z9 has a curtain come down when the camera is turned off so when changing lenses the sensor is protected. This is a much tougher curtain than a mechanical shutter curtain (the Z9 does not have a mechanical shutter) and is made specifically for the protection of the sensor.
I notice that Mike Lane in one of his videos said that he is forever having to have his Sony's sensor cleaned while he has no trouble with dust on his Olympus sensor.
Personally .I am very much hoping that the mythical "Wow" camera will have really good bird/animal eye detect with superb follow focus, an improved BSI stacked sensor with global or near enough global shutter and a much better EVF with no blackout. If that happens I will order one immediately and FF would not even tempt me.
All the technology is out there already so is it too much to hope for? So come on OM-Systems, this really is a make or break camera for the future of the company.
The Z9 curtain sounds interesting - I wonder where the dust goes that lands on the curtain? Mike Lane talks about the dust problems he has in that video I linked. It bothers him with video capture as you cannot easily dust spot every single video frame in post, pretty annoying. In the video he shows how he cleans the sensor with a sensor cleaning loupe device and a lens pen, I winced a bit when I watched..the cost of the camera if you make it worse! I have never cleaned my Olympus sensors - I had it done on a camera at the photography show once on the Olympus stand when they did the free check and clean service. It would be nice if OMDS had a UK service centre that could turn around sensor cleaning quickly.
Since I don't do BIF or sports etc, neither fancy CAF nor zero blackout EVF interest me at all. But I can see why many members here would see it as important, and given OMDS's apparent attention to the genre, I think it's an area they have to improve - especially since I've read too many opinions from people who seem to know what they're talking about saying the Olympus cameras are not best-of-breed in this area. What's interesting to me is that I suspect it all comes down to software. The basics of on-sensor PDAF are the same over all brands, and I can't believe that the lens AF actuation systems on Oly cameras are any worse than any other - there's certainly no issue with speed or accuracy on single-time AF. So, the challenge must be in predictive C-AF capabilities. I recall talking to someone who ditched his EM1.2 for the Nikon D500. He showed me examples from both cameras taking shots at a basketball game. The Nikon was clearly far better at getting the focus point to where the player would be by the time the shutter fired. The Oly consistently would be behind the curve time-wise.
An improved sensor is also absolutely essential if m43 wants to be seen as a continuing force in the market. It's not that I absolutely need it, but it would send all the wrong signals to the market if a camera launched in 2022 came with the same sensor that arrived in the EM1.2 in 2016. However, I may not need it, but I sure want a better sensor. I have a concern though that although a new sensor will arrive with the "wow camera", it won't be helping me as a landscape photographer - it'll probably be a stacked device that delivers higher readout speed rather than improved DR or resolution. In other words, it's for better video and better electronic shutter (think Z9 / A1). Maybe OMDS will use the faster frame rates it'll deliver to add more computational stuff (e.g. HDR modes), but who knows?
I'd also be shocked (and more than a little disappointed) if the new camera doesn't have a much better EVF and ideally rear screen. Hopefully OMDS will be sensible and up the size/resolution of the embedded JPEGs in the raws so that we can check sharpness with these new displays!
as a virtually pure wildlife user and specialising in birds ,I have endeavoured from the start to get my gear performing to the optimum . yes the sensor can be noisy if pushed in low light or excess cropping is needed (97.5%) of the time . but in the 2020's this can easily be overcome by learning how to p/p properly . so yes a new sensor would help ,as would better a/f in multi modes .... but if I had to keep using my present gear for the foreseeable future I can find no problem there . as for the magical dynamic range I also find that not to be a problem and thats coming from having used both canon and nikon top end bodies in the past ....its getting akin to the VAX & ANTI-VAX arguments on Facebook and often to me seems to stem from people with a private agenda .
lets be real here it takes time to tune up a olympus menu system to suit your needs /wants a day spent appraising one and making a u.tube video about it is a waste of time
Hmmm - not sure how the DR question relates at all to anti-vax conspiracy theory stuff, but whatever! It’s definitely true that DR improves as format size increases (given similar sensor tech). The bigger question is whether the improvement is enough to allow a single, non-bracketed shot to be done. When I ran a Z7 last year, I found that despite its improved IQ over the EM1.2, I still had to resort to bracketing on many shots. 17/18 stops of DR in the scene is still a lot more than even FF will handle.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of web browser cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, and to analyse site activity. No banner advertising is shown to members logged in to the site. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
And the argument in favour of Micro Four Thirds
with the climbing on Everest 45 years ago. Nothing new.
Comment