# EDIT. I really like OLY OMD cameras as well as my Canon gear.



## Cryhavoc (Oct 9, 2019)

because if you start playing around with them, you will end up with a couple of them, some pro and premium lenses, and start to get rid of your much larger DLSR hardware.

I now own the OMD-EM1 MK1 with grip, OMD-EM5 MKII with grip, and the OMD-EM1 MKII
as well as a couple pro line lenses and the 25mm F1.8 premium lens.

Bought the older EM1 MK1 and EM5-MKII with grips dirt cheap at a local cam store, and then after a few weeks of using them, I decided to purchase the EM1 MKII as well.

I have come to the conclusion that for every day shooting, I will be an Oly user, but will keep my EOS R for astro use.

traded in my 80D, 1D MKIV and my 7D and will keep the Eos R

IF you love your big Canon's and Nikon's and large lenses, you might not after giving m4/3rds an honest try out.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 9, 2019)

Cryhavoc said:


> because if you start playing around with them, you will end up with a couple of them, some pro and premium lenses, and start to get rid of your much larger DLSR hardware.
> 
> I now own the OMD-EM1 MK1 with grip, OMD-EM5 MKII with grip, and the OMD-EM1 MKII
> as well as a couple pro line lenses and the 25mm F1.8 premium lens.
> ...


Got both. Like both. Different tools for different jobs.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Oct 9, 2019)

Same here - EPL9, EM5-MKI, EM5-MKII and Panasonic G9. G9 w/Oly f2.8 PRO zooms is my go to event kit now. Still love and use my Canon gear, but M4/3 is great for lighter weight, smaller size.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 10, 2019)

I own the E-M5 Mark II and the 12-40 f/2.8 Pro lens. It's just too small for me and does not do well in low light. My wife loves it, but she's a tiny girl under 5' and always shoots on auto. It does ok in good light. She won't however, allow me to buy the longer zoom. The build on the body and lens seem robust, but the ergonomics are terrible in my hands. I am very impressed with the lens build quality... all metal I think.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 10, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I own the E-M5 Mark II and the 12-40 f/2.8 Pro lens. It's just too small for me and does not do well in low light. My wife loves it, but she's a tiny girl under 5' and always shoots on auto. It does ok in good light. She won't however, allow me to buy the longer zoom. The build on the body and lens seem robust, but the ergonomics are terrible in my hands. I am very impressed with the lens build quality... all metal I think.



So to get an M5 mark II I need to buy an Olympus?


----------



## Cryhavoc (Oct 10, 2019)

SteveC said:


> So to get an M5 mark II I need to buy an Olympus?



lol, pretty sure he was referring to the OMD EM5-MKII


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 10, 2019)

Cryhavoc said:


> lol, pretty sure he was referring to the OMD EM5-MKII


Yup. Saying OMD would be like saying EOS at each mention of a Canon camera.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 10, 2019)

Cryhavoc said:


> lol, pretty sure he was referring to the OMD EM5-MKII


He absolutely was, and I knew it, but it's quite a coincidence in model names.  No way I was going to resist the smart-ass question.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Oct 10, 2019)

CFB - I fully appreciate the concern about 'too small.' At times I feel the same way, hence I have add-on grips for most of my M4/3 bodies. Buttons can be small and close together as well. If I know I'll need to work fast but wear gloves I'll more likely use my Canon gear. As to low light performance -- yup, it is a smaller sensor so there is that; but, I find up to ISO 3200 (on the G9) acceptable for most situations. (My stuff usually gets reproduced fairly small or used on-line.)


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 10, 2019)

old-pr-pix said:


> CFB - I fully appreciate the concern about 'too small.' At times I feel the same way, hence I have add-on grips for most of my M4/3 bodies. Buttons can be small and close together as well. If I know I'll need to work fast but wear gloves I'll more likely use my Canon gear. As to low light performance -- yup, it is a smaller sensor so there is that; but, I find up to ISO 3200 (on the G9) acceptable for most situations. (My stuff usually gets reproduced fairly small or used on-line.)


Too tiny for me.  No grip known to man is gonna fix that.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 11, 2019)

Had one, used it, hated it, sold it.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 11, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Had one, used it, hated it, sold it.
> 
> View attachment 187051



Our camera club went through a bit of an Oly fad. Sparked mostly by one person. He passed away, may he rest in peace, and the members who had bought the Oly gear mostly sold it all within six months. Realized what great images they were getting from cropped dSLR's, that with the right lenses the gear wasn't too burdensome, and went back to their Canons and Nikons. I think one woman in her early 70's with a bad shoulder kept the Oly, but has been using her iPhone much more than the 4/3 camera.

Furthermore, it's my opinion that the cropped sensors on the Canon M bodies probably far outshine the 4/3 sensor in any body. But that's just superstition, I suppose.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 11, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Furthermore, it's my opinion that the cropped sensors on the Canon M bodies probably far outshine the 4/3 sensor in any body. But that's just superstition, I suppose.



I completely agree. I went original Canon M to Olympus OM, was shocked at how mediocre the IQ was in any kind of low light, to Canon M5 with the 22 and the 18-150. If they bring out an M5 II I would be an early adopter.

In my opinion M4/3 is a non starter and the Canon M line of APS-C cameras the perfect combination of system size to IQ.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 11, 2019)

Rumblings from a paranoid online shopper always alert for paid influencers.

Plan for influencing.

1) Remember to be patient to establish trust.
2) Open an account on a forum focused on a competitor's products.
3) Claim to be a user/owner of competitor's products.
4) Prove it with a flickr page.
5) After a few months, have an epiphany, a "woke" moment, and discover the truth about your secret sponsor's gear.
6) Post a gushing little advertisement with a click-baity subject line, and suggestions such as "IF you love your big Canon's and Nikon's and large lenses, you might not after giving m4/3rds an honest try out." Be sure to use a little awkward phrasing to sound more authentic!

No offense intended to the original OP, but see what I'm getting at here?

An alternate narrative might be that a photographer was approached by Olympus in the past few months to start promoting their gear in various online forums. 

And another narrative? We have a typical, innocent photographer who had a genuine conversion experience and has felt compelled to share with others.

Everywhere we turn, as shoppers, voters, etc., we have to sort out narratives!!!


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 11, 2019)

Yes there are a few 'influencers' who have been conspicuous in their system changes and total disingenuousness about simple laws of physics that annoy the hell out of me. The two most egregious that spring to mind are Andy Rouse and Art Morris, bt so many people follow them and base purchasing decisions on what they and the like say, I find it very sad.


----------



## Del Paso (Oct 11, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Rumblings from a paranoid online shopper always alert for paid influencers.
> 
> Plan for influencing.
> 
> ...



Well said!


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Oct 11, 2019)

Cryhavoc said:


> because if you start playing around with them, you will end up with a couple of them, some pro and premium lenses, and start to get rid of your much larger DLSR hardware.
> 
> I now own the OMD-EM1 MK1 with grip, OMD-EM5 MKII with grip, and the OMD-EM1 MKII
> as well as a couple pro line lenses and the 25mm F1.8 premium lens.
> ...


If I love my big Canon's and Nikon's what? It doesn't make sense.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 11, 2019)

Let me be clear--my above post is pure conjecture. If I were running an ad agency's social-media department, I'd be looking at ways to influence in forums where people clearly have an interest in the type of product being marketed--and indicate having enough income to buy stuff. The older, ham-fisted approaches aren't working well anymore (if they ever did), so, subtlety and patience are more important now.

Really, this could be a genuine conversion experience being shared here by somebody who loves ALL kinds of camera gear, with a kind of bewildering obliviousness involved in being on a largely Canon user site while boasting an impressive list of Oly gear in the profile blurb under the avatar. I'm not saying, please believe me, that this is a "Canon fans only" site. Just wondering what kind of discussion might be expected about a brand--and a format--that is mentioned so little here.

Truly, this is conjecture on my part, something I do when I have too much time on my hands or I am procrastinating painting, and not meant to be an attack on integrity. Just throwing it out there so the OP understands how his/her sudden shift in posting topics can be perceived as odd.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 11, 2019)

I still want to know how he got hold of an M5-II

[Kidding of course.]


----------



## Kit. (Oct 11, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Rumblings from a paranoid online shopper always alert for paid influencers.
> 
> Plan for influencing.
> 
> ...


Too much work for too little effect.

More likely, it's just our fellow forumite that got way too excited with their new toy right after the purchase. Give them time to do some low-light work and to realize that until Adobe comes up with content-aware noise correction, there is no replacement for displacement.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 11, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Too much work for too little effect.
> 
> More likely, it's just our fellow forumite that got way too excited with their new toy right after the purchase. Give them time to do some low-light work and to realize that until Adobe comes up with content-aware noise correction, there is no replacement for displacement.


His previous record shows no trace of being a troll and I too think he is simply excited about his new kit. However, Adobe should simply come up with decent noise suppression. I am a DxO devotee as it is far better. As it is not yet compatible with the D90 I have bought a licence for PhotoNinja, which can take an Adobe .dng output and make it much better than Adobe.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Oct 11, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Rumblings from a paranoid online shopper always alert for paid influencers.
> 
> Plan for influencing.
> 
> ...



Another alternative is that I no longer wished to carry a lowepro Tactical 450II on vacation with me loaded with massive lenses, and I found a screaming deal on a used EM1-MK1 at kenmore camera for $369, and also a used Oly 12-40mm pro for $450 and found the combination of features and size for daytime shooting seems to be the right fit for me over carrying a 1D, 80 or Eos R and all the gear associated.

Like I mentioned, I am keeping the EOS R for astro and low light use AND that it was a gift from my wife before our Christmas vacation last year..to replace the T2i she bought me as a gift back in 2010, so I "can't" trade it in for other gear. 

For me, smaller bodies like the Oly OMD and Panasonic GX line fit my needs more than a full size DLSR, for day to day daytime shooting.

So you can speculate all you wish, I have no issues with that, but sometimes, a post is just a post from an enthusiast sharing information, and nothing more.

The used EM1 MKI sparked an interest in me with Oly gear, so I bought the used EM5 MKII for cheap, and then traded in the 80D for the EM1 MKII.

I still have and love my EOS R with the RF 24-105 F4, the Sigma 20mm Art, Sigma 35mm Art and a Sigma 100-400 lens...I just simply do not plan to carry it around as much as I did.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 11, 2019)

Cryhavoc said:


> Another alternative is that I no longer wished to carry a lowepro Tactical 450II on vacation with me loaded with massive lenses, and I found a screaming deal on a used EM1-MK1 at kenmore camera for $369, and also a used Oly 12-40mm pro for $450 and found the combination of features and size for daytime shooting seems to be the right fit for me over carrying a 1D, 80 or Eos R and all the gear associated.


Why not a fixed-lens camera then? Why not a 1"?

I bought a Panasonic FZ1000 for 400 Euro (with two batteries and a CPL filter) as a backup to my 100-400L II for Kruger. An OK-ish camera for daytime shooting.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Oct 12, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Why not a fixed-lens camera then? Why not a 1"?
> 
> I bought a Panasonic FZ1000 for 400 Euro (with two batteries and a CPL filter) as a backup to my 100-400L II for Kruger. An OK-ish camera for daytime shooting.



sure why not.

Was looking at a Sony RX1R for $600 but decided against it. Was looking at a couple of Fuji's XT100's.
Ultimately I bought what I bought and am happy with them. 
I also wanted a smaller ILC over a fixed lens system, so I passed on the RX1R. Sony, to this day, has never produced a firmware upgrade for it.

Doesn't mean I won't try out another brand camera to broaden my experience level.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 12, 2019)

Cryhavoc said:


> sure why not.
> 
> Was looking at a Sony RX1R for $600 but decided against it. Was looking at a couple of Fuji's XT100's.
> Ultimately I bought what I bought and am happy with them.
> ...


I agree. I’m looking at the Fujifilm GFX 100 with the 45mm, it has five times the megapixels and well over 2 stops more DR than my 1DX MkII and is smaller and lighter as well. I’ll still keep and use an EOS M5 with the 22mm for when it is much more appropriate.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Oct 12, 2019)

BTW, someone said the title was click baity, and he was right..so I edited it because I hate click bait.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Oct 12, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Rumblings from a paranoid online shopper always alert for paid influencers.
> 
> Plan for influencing.
> 
> ...


Fun speculation, yet not applicable here... I've been making photographs for nearly six decades - sometimes for money, sometimes for scientific reasons, sometimes for fun & family but never compensated by any camera manufacturer or retailer. For years I shot medium and large format and disparaged 35mm as too small, not able to hold detail, etc. But as films improved, and my needs changed, I gave 35mm a second chance. When the Canon A-1 came out I switched. I added a T-90 and F-1n. Eventually transitioned into EOS-EF with multiple bodies.

A few years back weight & kit size become a significant factor for me to continue to enjoy shooting. At the time I compared Oly OMD with then current Canon crop bodies. I found the 7D had too strong an AA filter so the OMD was actually sharper. The EOS-M was a slug to focus. So I bought into the m4/3 system. Were I to do the same evaluations today I might make different choices. But at this point I have significant investment in both Canon and m4/3 with multiple bodies and several lenses for each system. And, I enjoy each for their own capabilities. YMMV.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 12, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Why not a fixed-lens camera then? Why not a 1"?
> 
> I bought a Panasonic FZ1000 for 400 Euro (with two batteries and a CPL filter) as a backup to my 100-400L II for Kruger. An OK-ish camera for daytime shooting.


I use a Sony RX10 IV for similar reasons. It's actually brilliant for AF and IQ, and the deep dof can be a real advantage in photographing groups of animals or birds. But it's 4-5x the price, and worth it.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 12, 2019)

As a Canon user, with both FF and crop cameras, and with a pair of Olys at work, I like to think that I have a fairly balanced perspective.

as far as size goes, Oly is hard to beat. There are lots of lenses for the system, everything from kit to high end. It is a much more complete system than the M

as far as ergonomics go, any Canon FF camera, the 7 series, and the XXD series beats Oly hollow for ergonomic. Even the Rebels beat it. The M series are about the same as Oly for ergonomics. 

Image quality? FF beats crop. Period! As to which is better between Canon crop and Oly, it really depends on what lens you are using.

Features? Up until lately there have been 4 big areas where Oly beat the pants off of M. With the M6 II we can remove burst rate and “pro capture” from that list. The remaining two are multiple shot stitching into super hi res photos, and image stabilization. The M has optical stabilization, the Olys have IBIS and a few lenses with optical stabilization. For those few lenses and the newest bodies, Oly wins the stabilization contest, for everything else it is too close to call 

ultimately, we vote with our wallets. I have stayed away from the M series because, for me, they just were not worth it as Oly was so much better...... but the M6 II makes the race a lot closer. That said, there is an M6 II in my future


----------



## Cryhavoc (Oct 13, 2019)

One thing that absolutely sold me on Oly gear are the bracketing features. Being able to set a large number of focus brackets and have the camera automatically take the pics and stitch it all together is awesome. My R does not do that and we paid $3399 for it with the 24-105mm in November. I know the RP can focus bracket, but I don't have one of those and the oly's were cheaper 

Also, the 40mp shot on the M5 mkII and the 50mp shooting mode on the EM1 MKII are really cool features. Yes I know its not all that great for moving subjects, but for wide angle landscape shots on a tripod, it works wonderfully.

Also, going back to one of my earlier posts, I mentioned that I use the Lowepro 450 AW II tactical bag for my full frame gear.
Well I just received my Lowepro FastPack BP150 AWII and was able to fit two of my Oly's, chargers, grips, batteries and my surface tablet and it weighs 1/3'rd of what the fully loaded 450 does. That means alot to me since i had heart surgery a few weeks ago and the reduced weight will go a long way to easing the strain when we are doing the tourist things in tropical environments like my wife likes to drag me to.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 22, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Rumblings from a paranoid online shopper always alert for paid influencers.
> 
> Plan for influencing.
> 
> ...


I have an Olympus. No comparison to full frame. My wife loves it. Conclusion: It's for girly girls taking snapshots.

I may do a shoot with it one day, but so far... no desire to do so. The ergonomics and menus are terrible, but has a cool classic look. It is compatible with all my existing Flashpoint R2 stobes.

Third photo is of the Olympus M=EM-5 Mark II adapted to the venerable EF 35mm f/1.4L II and then the 5D Mark III with the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II. If adapting EF glass... there is absolutely no size advantage. The Olympus becomes a disadvantage ergonomically. The 35mm and 24-70mm are similar in size.

One note on the Olympus weather sealing: It is very good. We were at a splash pad with the grandson the other day and it took a direct hit and soaking from one of the big fountains. No problems. Just shoot it off and it kept working with no problems. Just trying to give some balance.

If you need to crop much? Forget it.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Oct 22, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I have an Olympus. No comparison to full frame. My wife loves it. Conclusion: It's for girly girls taking snapshots.
> 
> I may do a shoot with it one day, but so far... no desire to do so. The ergonomics and menus are terrible, but has a cool classic look. It is compatible with all my existing Flashpoint R2 stobes.
> 
> ...


We get it, you've got big hands so an Olympus isn't the camera for you. But, much like Sony, Olympus is good for the industry as they bring forward technology that others eventually copy. Their stabilization is industry leading. Things like higher frame rates (60 fps full RAW), fully processed in-camera focus bracketing, high-res. mode, and then hand-held high-res. are challenging all other manufacturers to move forward. Sure it's a smaller sensor with 16/20 MB resolution, and maybe that helps with the processing to make some of these technological advancements possible, but Olympus is pushing some of the AI and computational photography techniques that smart phones are so successfully using to kill off lesser 'real' cameras. Not all their cameras are small either. The E-M1X is just like a slightly scaled down 1DX only much lighter.

As to your E-M5II v. 5DIII shot - of course with an adapted lens the length is going to be similar - it has to be for the lens to focus right. Put a native 17mm lens on the E-M5II then do the comparison. And, check out all the other dimensions and the weight while you are at it. Sometimes a few of us 'girly girl' shooters actually use Oly cameras (or Panasonic) to do our jobs; but, I will admit to using the add-on grip on occasion.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 22, 2019)

If we are lucky, we will all eventually become old and feeble. (It beats the alternative!) I'm glad Oly has a camera waiting for us. 

It would also be comforting if Canon got on the ball and produced bodies with IBIS! But at this rate, they might be just as likely to retrofit the new Rf primes with IS...

Seriously, the aging photographers don't feel like they have time to wait for the next M6 that might have IBIS.  If IBIS isn't a big issue for you, just wait, someday it will be. Good photographers facing health and strength issues still want to take photos, and they are willing to deal with the big shortcomings of micro 4/3 to have a small camera with IBIS.

Another thing: I haven't checked it out myself, but a decades long Canon fanatic, one of my best friends, and a wonderful landscape photographer, is now making the switch, and he claims Oly has the equivalent of CPS. How good? I have no idea.

It doesn't matter who makes the best camera. If that camera is perceived as too heavy and not meeting the needs of a market segment that is growing year by year, it won't sell to that market segment.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 22, 2019)

old-pr-pix said:


> We get it, you've got big hands so an Olympus isn't the camera for you. But, much like Sony, Olympus is good for the industry as they bring forward technology that others eventually copy. Their stabilization is industry leading. Things like higher frame rates (60 fps full RAW), fully processed in-camera focus bracketing, high-res. mode, and then hand-held high-res. are challenging all other manufacturers to move forward. Sure it's a smaller sensor with 16/20 MB resolution, and maybe that helps with the processing to make some of these technological advancements possible, but Olympus is pushing some of the AI and computational photography techniques that smart phones are so successfully using to kill off lesser 'real' cameras. Not all their cameras are small either. The E-M1X is just like a slightly scaled down 1DX only much lighter.
> 
> As to your E-M5II v. 5DIII shot - of course with an adapted lens the length is going to be similar - it has to be for the lens to focus right. Put a native 17mm lens on the E-M5II then do the comparison. And, check out all the other dimensions and the weight while you are at it. Sometimes a few of us 'girly girl' shooters actually use Oly cameras (or Panasonic) to do our jobs; but, I will admit to using the add-on grip on occasion.


Girly girl was a joke.  Because my wife loves it. She's 4' 11" and always shoots in iAuto. But let us not forget that many who buy the Olympus will adapt their EF glass just like they do to the R due to the expense of switching or maintaining two different systems. Also, the FF RP is similar in size and weight and the price is also comparable. The Olympus takes very sharp pics with the one lens I have. I have no complaint there.

But Olympus lenses are not cheap either, and as a wise person once pointed out to me, the bokeh on a FF camera with a FF f/1.4 FF lens is very different from that of a 2x crop. And like I said... in low light and if cropping is needed much then they really do suck, IBIS or not. Noise is just awful. The R eye AF and face recognition puts it to shame.

Also, high burst rate is not something most people care about. That is very niche'. Frankly, 60fps takes up a lot of card and HD storage space. So for me, the Olympus doesn't cut it.

The Olympus has it's positives, I think I listed some, but it also carries a lot of negatives... including expensive fast native glass with a 2x crop, horrible menus, and terrible ergonomics.  The OLY slow glass is very inexpensive. Adapting my vintage glass is also a nogo because of the 2X crop. And RP or R makes much better sense. A LOT of people bought into M4/3 for that and failed to take the 2x crop into consideration... me included.

*Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f/4 IS PRO Zoom Lens for Micro Four Thirds System = $1,149
Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F2.8 Pro Lens = $1,349
Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 7-14mm f2.8 Pro Lens = $1,299
Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 45mm f/1.2 Pro Lens = $1,149
Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F/4.0 IS Pro = $2,499
Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 25mm f/1.2 PRO Lens = $1,249

All with a 2x crop. So with those prices... adapting what one already has makes sense for some. The adaptation saves zero size and negligible weight. I cannot ever adapt my R glass to it.

If somebody can live with that... more power to them. Not for me. However, please don't take this as a personal attack on your choices. It isn't. Like I said, I may try a model shoot with one soon.*

'Professional Sponsored YouTubers (Joe Eddleman comes to mind, with his Olympus arm tattoo) saying it is a one to one replacement for FF are simply liars.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 22, 2019)

AlanF said:


> His previous record shows no trace of being a troll and I too think he is simply excited about his new kit. However, Adobe should simply come up with decent noise suppression. I am a DxO devotee as it is far better. As it is not yet compatible with the D90 I have bought a licence for PhotoNinja, which can take an Adobe .dng output and make it much better than Adobe.


He is definitely not a troll, I agree.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 22, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> He is definitely not a troll, I agree.


I'm on the fence. If excitement becomes promoting, we can reassess.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 22, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> I'm on the fence. If excitement becomes promoting, we can reassess.


I was playing with the Olympus this morning with flash. The colors just are not there. He lists an R in his sig. Not even close to each other. I wish I had an RP to compare.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Oct 23, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> ... The Olympus has it's positives, I think I listed some, but it also carries a lot of negatives... including expensive fast native glass with a 2x crop, horrible menus, and terrible ergonomics.  The OLY slow glass is very inexpensive. Adapting my vintage glass is also a nogo because of the 2X crop. And RP or R makes much better sense. A LOT of people bought into M4/3 for that and failed to take the 2x crop into consideration... me included.
> 
> *Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f/4 IS PRO Zoom Lens for Micro Four Thirds System = $1,149
> Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F2.8 Pro Lens = $1,349
> ...


I prefer Canon for wide angle stuff for two reasons: 1) 3:2 aspect ratio seems more natural for wide angle shots compared with 4:3 ratio of m4/3 and 2) higher resolutions are available w/o using tripod (I don't have the EM1X which does 80 MB hand held high res.) For telephoto the game changes. The 2X crop is a definite advantage for those of us with more limited budgets. The Oly 40-150 f2.8 is equal in focal length and exposure value to an 80-300 f2.8 in FF terms. (Yes, I know it does not have the same shallow DOF, but frequently for event photography having more DOF is a very real advantage.) To get 300mm f2.8 L you are looking at over $6000. The Oly 300 f4 matches a 600 f4 L for reach and it is $2500 vs. $13,000 for a Canon equal. (Sure you can use a 300 f4L on a 5DSr and crop in but then you are spending the same amount for the lens and 3-4X for the body.) Again, my stuff is published in newsletters, etc. never over a two page spread or is used on-line. Is m4/3 equal to FF -- NO! Is it good enough for most of what I do -- YES. Of course, YMMV.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 23, 2019)

old-pr-pix said:


> I prefer Canon for wide angle stuff for two reasons: 1) 3:2 aspect ratio seems more natural for wide angle shots compared with 4:3 ratio of m4/3 and 2) higher resolutions are available w/o using tripod (I don't have the EM1X which does 80 MB hand held high res.) For telephoto the game changes. The 2X crop is a definite advantage for those of us with more limited budgets. The Oly 40-150 f2.8 is equal in focal length and exposure value to an 80-300 f2.8 in FF terms. (Yes, I know it does not have the same shallow DOF, but frequently for event photography having more DOF is a very real advantage.) To get 300mm f2.8 L you are looking at over $6000. The Oly 300 f4 matches a 600 f4 L for reach and it is $2500 vs. $13,000 for a Canon equal. (Sure you can use a 300 f4L on a 5DSr and crop in but then you are spending the same amount for the lens and 3-4X for the body.) Again, my stuff is published in newsletters, etc. never over a two page spread or is used on-line. Is m4/3 equal to FF -- NO! Is it good enough for most of what I do -- YES. Of course, YMMV.


Actually, the E-M5 Mark II allows one to select the following aspect ratios: 4:3, 16:9, 3:2, 1:1, and 3:4. So there are 5 choices in the one camera.

As far as a M4/3 Olympus 300mm f/4 matching the Canon 600 f/4L... no it doesn't. Not in low light it doesn't. Not even close. The light gathering ability of the two sensors is worlds apart. The same goes for all the other "equivalent" focal lengths in low light targets.

I shoot in my dark little apartment a lot. I can set my Olympus 17-40 Pro to 25mm and f/2.8 to take a photo without flash. Then I can take a Canon EF, Takumar, Mamiya, etc 50mm set at f/2.8 on FF and take the same photo without flash. The noise difference is astounding. So in that way, at the very least, they are not equivalent.

Either way, your needs, my needs, and the needs of others are all different. Always choose what is best for you. I hang my stuff on the wall at home. Newsletters and many magazines don't have as high a resolution standard. Newspapers absolutely don't.


----------



## pauhana (Oct 23, 2019)

Just tried out an Oly M1 mk ii for a few days. first couple of days was not happy. Then started to figure out settings and was pleased with results in particular bif. am Thinking of adding one to my kit. Since i primarily shoot birds the light weight is great. Hiking with my 7D ii and 100-400ii gets heavy Yes low light performance was poor for OMD. I just wish Canon would decided what the plan is.....getting tired of waiting for 7Dii replacement (Not 90D). One of the reasons I have started looking at other manufacturers.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 23, 2019)

pauhana said:


> Just tried out an Oly M1 mk ii for a few days. first couple of days was not happy. Then started to figure out settings and was pleased with results in particular bif. am Thinking of adding one to my kit. Since i primarily shoot birds the light weight is great. Hiking with my 7D ii and 100-400ii gets heavy Yes low light performance was poor for OMD. I just wish Canon would decided what the plan is.....getting tired of waiting for 7Dii replacement (Not 90D). One of the reasons I have started looking at other manufacturers.


I've been through thinking about lightweight travel gear loads of times, and always end up sticking with my DSLR and 100-400mm II because they beat everything else for a combination of weight and quality. A problem with the Oly is the choice of telephoto lenses. The 300/4 is excellent, but it is still heavy and I like a zoom. The long m4/3 zoom is the Pana-Leica 100-400mm, and it is not in the top class.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 23, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I've been through thinking about lightweight travel gear loads of times, and always end up sticking with my DSLR and 100-400mm II because they beat everything else for a combination of weight and quality. A problem with the Oly is the choice of telephoto lenses. The 300/4 is excellent, but it is still heavy and I like a zoom. The long m4/3 zoom is the Pana-Leica 100-400mm, and it is not in the top class.


Yes.... there are few options with Oly to go long....


----------



## Cryhavoc (Oct 24, 2019)

Not a troll. Just not afraid to be seen with a girly girl camera kit 

Yes I have an R, the battery grip, the kit 24-105 R lens, and the adapter to which i use it with a sigma 100-400, a sigma art 35 and art 20mm.

Love the camera and it feels great holding it.

I just dont love hauling around full size gear all day every day. Tis why I sold off the 80d and the 1d mkv and gave away the T2i.

Bought into Olympus via the used market and have expanded my Oly inventory primarily for use during the day and its overal native light weight. I have no plans to adapt eos mount lenses to it. The 17mm 1.8, the 45 1.2 pro and the 12-40mm pro lenses I have are suitable to my tourist needs. Everything except the EM1 mkII were purchased well over 50% off retail via the used case at the local camera shop.

Our trip to the big island will bring many days of long walks and some hiking. I plan to pack lighter than I did for our Kauai trip in July.

When we take the observatory tours at dusk and dawn, the Eos R with the Sigma Arts will be used.

When we are walking around during daytime, the Oly gear will be used.

Different tools for different needs.

Tomorrow I am heading to the camera shop to have a look at possibly purchasing the M6 MK II kit with evf before that bundle deal is no more.

Canon is and will always be my favorite brand, but i do keep a very open mind to what the other guys offer.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Oct 24, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> Yes.... there are few options with Oly to go long....


Agreed. Waiting for Oly to finally release their own 'big white' the pending 150-400 f4.5 w/integral 1.25 TC. 

Only other options are some of the previous generation 4/3 lenses adapted to m4/3. Excellent glass, but unlikely they would be up to BIF focusing duty.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 24, 2019)

old-pr-pix said:


> Agreed. Waiting for Oly to finally release their own 'big white' the pending 150-400 f4.5 w/integral 1.25 TC.
> 
> Only other options are some of the previous generation 4/3 lenses adapted to m4/3. Excellent glass, but unlikely they would be up to BIF focusing duty.


It's a particularly huge and heavy lens, which defeats the goal of being small and light, if that's your aim. It's likely to be cheaper and much lighter to buy a Canon APS-C + 100-400mm. But, if you are sold on Olympus, that's your choice.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 24, 2019)

old-pr-pix said:


> Agreed. Waiting for Oly to finally release their own 'big white' the pending 150-400 f4.5 w/integral 1.25 TC.
> 
> Only other options are some of the previous generation 4/3 lenses adapted to m4/3. Excellent glass, but unlikely they would be up to BIF focusing duty.


I have some of the old 4/3 lenses.... they do not AF anywhere near as fast as the micro 4/3 lenses..... but the quality of the glass is top notch!


----------



## old-pr-pix (Oct 24, 2019)

AlanF said:


> It's a particularly huge and heavy lens, which defeats the goal of being small and light, if that's your aim. It's likely to be cheaper and much lighter to buy a Canon APS-C + 100-400mm. But, if you are sold on Olympus, that's your choice.


Not sold, just curious at this point. I already have an 80D and 100-400 L (mark 1). In my unscientific testing my Pany G9 + Oly 300mm seems 'sharper' than my 80D/100-400M1 combo. However, based on your comments in other threads I'm tempted to upgrade to 90D and 100-400 L MII. We should know soon, but you could be right 90D+100/400II may be less expensive than Oly 150-400. Of course, the Oly @ 400mm w/integral 1.25 TC is equal to FF 1000mm - likely longer than I would ever want need.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Feb 14, 2020)

I've been having a serious flirtation (an affair, really) with the Olympus E-M1X, along (mainly) with the M.Zuiko 300mm f.4 Pro lens and converters.

I'd developed a chronic shoulder problem - impingement syndrome - which seriously compromised the strength and mobility of my left arm, and bringing with it an eye-watering amount of pain when I move the arm even slightly beyond where it wants to be.

Waving my 500mm f/4 and 1D-x around (I only ever shoot hand-held) got to being out of the question, and although I have lighter, smaller Canon gear, my curiosity about mirrorless had been peaked by my recent purchase of a Canon M6 Mk II, so I thought "_what the hell..._" and shelled out for the Oly set-up.

Despite initial promise, the end-point of my dalliance with Olympus can be read here: http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/reports/that-didnt-last-long

*Canon 1, Olympus 0.*

Interestingly, picking up my 100-400mm Mk II on my gripped 7D Mk II for the first time since using the Oly gear, felt like picking up a _car.._.

But my shoulder seems to be on the mend, so I'm sure I'll be back to old ways before long.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Feb 15, 2020)

so if I read your post on that page right, you used a 300mm F4 with a teleconverter on the EM1x?
Given that the 300mm is a 600mm on Oly systems, how much farther did you need with the teleconverter?

I do agree that Oly needs to use more modern sensors in their camera's, but if you operate within their limits, I still find them completely suitable for most of my day to day casual shooting. I would not expect a m4/3 sensor to operate properly using a 300mm with a tele that results in f 5.6 or higher and expect focusing to work well in low light or low contrast situations. 

If I plan to shoot in low light situations, I use my full frame Canon, but if I am walking about during the day, the Oly gear is my go to simply for the reduced weight and size of bag I need to lug around. I hated carrying my Eos R, battery grip, 35mm Art, 100-400 Contemporary, tablet and 50mm Art in the camera backpack for more than an hour. I regretted walking the Bloedel reserve in July with this setup, but enjoyed walking around Kilauea in November with the EM1 MK2 and the EM5 MKII with grip, a couple pro lenses and spare batteries. The backpack is considerably lighter and smaller. 

I have the EM1 MKII so I am going to skip the MKIII since there really isn't a big difference between them. Rather disappointed that Oly didn't put a new sensor in it but perhaps a future body will and I'll take a look then.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 15, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> so if I read your post on that page right, you used a 300mm F4 with a teleconverter on the EM1x?
> Given that the 300mm is a 600mm on Oly systems, how much farther did you need with the teleconverter?
> 
> I do agree that Oly needs to use more modern sensors in their camera's, but if you operate within their limits, I still find them completely suitable for most of my day to day casual shooting. I would not expect a m4/3 sensor to operate properly using a 300mm with a tele that results in f 5.6 or higher and expect focusing to work well in low light or low contrast situations.
> ...


300mm on an Olympus is equivalent to 600mm on FF for field of view but not for resolution. Resolution depends on pixel size, the smaller the better. The EM1x has slightly larger pixels than on a 90D so a 300mm on the Oly is like 300mm on the crop. The 300mm on the Oly is equivalent to a 372mm on a 5DSR in terms of resolution. I have never considered using m4/3 for resolution for those reasons. The Oly shooters I know with the 300/f4 use extenders.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Feb 15, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> so if I read your post on that page right, you used a 300mm F4 with a teleconverter on the EM1x?
> Given that the 300mm is a 600mm on Oly systems, how much farther did you need with the teleconverter?


I'm guessing you're not a bird photographer, right?


> I do agree that Oly needs to use more modern sensors in their cameras


I didn't actually say that. The noise from M43 is down to sensor _size_, not the sensor's position in the State Of the Art.


> but if you operate within their limits, I still find them completely suitable for most of my day to day casual shooting.


Given that I was using Oly's flagship "pro" body and lens combo. marketed explicitly at photographers who don't expect limits of the kind I experienced (and don't shoot "casually"), that's not how it's supposed to be _at all_.


> I would not expect a m4/3 sensor to operate properly using a 300mm with a tele that results in f 5.6 or higher and expect focusing to work well in low light or low contrast situations.


I would.

Olympus does.

And my buddy's Canon 600mm f/4 is just fine with a 2x on - as is my 500mm f/4.

There's no excuse for Olympus' failure here - the camera/lens/TC combo worked fine in good light, but I wasn't in _bad_ light when it went tits-up.


----------



## slclick (Feb 15, 2020)

I experimented with OLY. Too tiny (M5 was better for my hands and grip, still sold that as well) also the EVF was atrocious. The Pro M. Zuiko glass was nice but the menus were so poorly designed and the button layout made zero sense, I was more frustrated than anything. Small isn't always an answer and it sure isn''t THE reason to go mirrorless.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Feb 15, 2020)

I didn't actually mind the EVF in the E-M1X - you don't dwell on it too much when you're trying to shoot fast-moving, small birds - and I really liked the promise of small size/huge reach (although obviously, the E-M1X is the _biggest_ "small" camera out there - the ergonomics and feature set were fantastic, even with my sausage fingers).

It just didn't deliver, and I gave it every chance - I _wanted_ it to work out, and I legitimately expected that it would. You don't throw UK £4k+ at a complete wildlife set-up (I also bought an M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8) on a whim...

Speaking of "legitimate expectations", this (click on it) is with my 7D Mk II and 500mm f/4 Mk II, with the Canon 2x between them:







1/640, *10,000* ISO, *1,000mm* (that's a hand-held *1,600mm* in FF equivalent terms - more than the Oly 300mm and 2x on the E-M1X) - it was like a cave (although I admit that I'd accidentally stopped the camera down more than I would have wanted) - and the Canon kit could do this _all day long_.

This critter - a European Bank vole - is barely four inches long _including its tail_. That's why bird and wildlife photographers sometimes need all the reach they can get...

Olympus positions the E-M1X and 300mm F/4 Pro as competition for the best that the rest have to offer, yet it is roundly out-performed by a modest 7D mk II.

It may be that unlike most cameras - certainly DSLRs - the Oly _doesn't_ meter/AF wide open, before stopping down and taking the shot. If that's the case (I did find an online reference suggesting it) then it's simply not fit for purpose, given that _slightly low light_ is hardly a novel scenario for bird photographers to find themselves in.


----------



## Mikehit (Feb 15, 2020)

I agree with you all the way, Keith. I have the Oly kit for those days I want to go light but for things like birds they need to (a) be in decent light and (b) be large in the frame. If the bird is barely larger than the focus square in the VF, the Canon nails it (7D2, 5DIV, 1Dx2) but the Oly can hunt even in decent light. Shooting seabirds at Bempton, I did find that if the bird was out of the immediate focus area, the Oly could pick it up better than Canon but again it needed good light/contrast. 

And given the 300f4 and the PanaLeica 100-400 are not much smaller than the Canon 100-400 (I am still a fit 60 year old so the difference does not really matter), if the new R5 has the focus capability of the 5DIV but with higher frame rate I may go fully back to Canon for birds, but keep the smaller Oly/Pana for city walks.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 15, 2020)

I once bought an Olympus PL soandso, as an EDC camera.
Used it several times, disliked the low-light pictures, absolutely hated the tiny controls, hated even more the ridiculous menu, and stopped using it.
The build quality, yet, is top, but to appreciate it, one needs baby-hands, and mine, according to my relatives, are yeti-like...
But a Leica Q2...


----------



## Cryhavoc (Feb 16, 2020)

I suppose I will have to rent and play around with one of the larger Oly lenses like the 300mm and see how it performs in the situations I use my Oly's in. I have used my 12-40 f2.8 taking pics and video's in very dark situations and it works great with the EM1 MKII as does the 7-14mm F2.8 but that particular very low light event was not something I do often. Grand daughter's elementary school dance with a DJ and laser's. Focus was very good and it didn't hunt. I did have it on single point focus though. Maybe that makes a difference? 

Anyhoo, for me, I use the Oly's during the day when I wish to pack light.
I use the Eos R with a Sigma 20mm F1.4 Art for Astro. I plan to try out the EM1 MKII with the 7-14 in July to see how well it does astro.

One thing I wish Canon had in the R was the focus stacking that the Oly's have. Awesome when shooting complex flowers up close.

Seriously considering putting in a pre order for the R5 when it opens up for pre orders..if I can have it by mid July.


----------



## slclick (Feb 16, 2020)

All of that 'work' sounds as hard and long as some of Olympus' model naming schemes.


----------

