stealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5551 posts, RR: 47 Posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4819 times:
Has anyone looked into using the OM-D for Av Photography.
I have heard glowing praise of this new entry into the "DSLR" field but am not convinced at this time.
Lack of a genuine optical viewfinder is one concern, IMO the viewfinder is a cynical attempt to turn present an Interchangeable Lens Compact as a DSLR.
Has anyone had(or perceived) any other issues.
**Full disclaimer** I was a huge fan of the OM system, owning an OM-1, OM-2n, OM-4(OM-4# and OM-4ti) alomg with a full range of accessories, A system I loved and used from the mid '70s thru the late'90s
# had 2 of those!
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 660 posts, RR: 17 Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4799 times:
I'm a big micro 4/3 fan. I've only briefly played with an OM-D, and it looks pretty impressive. OK image quality is not up to the latest wonder cameras (esp. at high ISO), but probably at least comparable to DSLR's of 3-5 year vintage - and we got on with those OK!
Quoting stealthz (Thread starter): Lack of a genuine optical viewfinder is one concern, IMO the viewfinder is a cynical attempt to turn present an Interchangeable Lens Compact as a DSLR.
I think that's a bit harsh
a) you can't have an optical reflex viewfinder on a mirrorless compact
b) there are times when a viewfinder is a must
So an EVF is really the only solution. Its not as good (in some respects) as a bright optical viewfinder, but it does have some unique advantages in that it can put a lot more info into the viewfinder and give a more accurate representation of what is being recorded (eg blown highlights).
Is an EVF as good as an optical? In my opinion, no. Is it good enough? Yes.
More of a concern for me is speed and accuracy of AF and overall responsiveness of the camera. My mico 4/3 (GF1) isn't really up to fast action, but the OM-D may just be.
On the positive side, with the use of adaptors, you can use pretty much any lens ever made for a DSLR/SLR which opens up some interesting possibilities, esp. if you can live with manual focus.
HOWEVER, for anyone that's a Canon user, I would hang on a bit. Canon will be announcing a mirrorless model later this year, but apart from that, details are sparse - particularly when it comes to the lens mount. One would think that coming late to the game with mirrorless, Canon will have to produce something pretty special. Will it use a standard EF mount? Big Canon lenses won't make a lot of sense on a compact size camera, but the release of the 40mm pancake may be a sign - there's not a lot of reason to put such a tiny lens on a big 5D or 1D.
Personally I'd like it to be micro 4/3 - becuase I have some lenses but also it would really establish the format.
Worst scenario - and perhaps most likely - is another proprietry lens mount
MD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8475 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4664 times:
My dad recently bought an OM-D and I love using it. It's really much better (for me, at least), with the additional grip. I don't put the full bottom grip on, but the base plate and additional front grip make it much more pleasant to hold. The AF is fast and works well, but still isn't quite as good as a good DSLR. What actually impressed me most was the video--it's fantastic. The camera also feels really nice in the hand and has a sweet shutter sound.
Quoting ckw (Reply 1): Big Canon lenses won't make a lot of sense on a compact size camera, but the release of the 40mm pancake may be a sign - there's not a lot of reason to put such a tiny lens on a big 5D or 1D.