ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 768 posts, RR: 16 Posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4322 times:
Just got the above camera as a replacement for my Canon 7D (which got damaged beyond economic repair).
This is a really impressive little camera and can do pretty much anything a DSLR can do (and some things they can't).
The weak points are lack of an optical viewfinder - the EVF is good, and certainly very usable, but I could see this may be a deal breaker for some. The other problem, particularly for aviation photographers, is that continuous focus is slower and less reliable than you might expect from a DSLR. Single shot, on the other hand, is lightning fast.
Image quality is the big surprise - though the lowest ISO is 200, image quality easily beats the 7D at 100 ISO. I thought this was perhaps me looking at the results through 'new owners' eyes, but recently released DX0 ratings would seem to back this impression. It uses a Sony sensor, so perhaps not such a surprise.
Anyway, if one can live with the obvious continuous focus limitation, this little camera packs quite a punch, and has a lot to offer. It certainly raises the m43 format to the point where it is a viable alternative to crop sensor cameras.
ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 768 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4309 times:
I should say I still have my 5D3 - but the way I see it, FF is the 'new' medium format while mirrorless cameras are the new 35mm. In fact the OM-D is not much off the size and weight of the 35mm film OM-1/OM-2. It's quite remarkable how large (d)slrs have become since the 70s
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4859 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4256 times:
What do you think of the colors produced by the OM-D? I'm noticing something consistent across all shots I have seen from friends using this camera. The colors are very warm and saturated. Now I realize this has a lot to do with ones processing techniques, but these are photos from people who also shoot with 5Ds and I have never notice it before from them. It's getting to the point that I can look at a photo and tell immediately it was taken with the OM-D before seeing the EXIF.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
I switched from Olympus to Canon back in 2009 and I still have a hard time adjusting to the lack of saturation in the shots I get from Canon. I much preferred the vibrance and warmth of my Olympus cameras. So you're definitely right to notice this.
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
To be honest I haven't had time to take a sufficient variety of pics yet to form a strong view on this, but my initial impression is the images look a bit more 'film like' - specifically Fuji Provia - than those from my 5D. Maybe a little warmer - or at least oranges and reds seem more vibrant, but I'll need to do some portraits to really get a feel for this. What did stand out immediately was that blue skies are very nicely rendered.
But its early days - after many years shooting Canon and having tuned my post processing to get the results I want, I'm pretty sure that this won't get the best from the Oly - that will take some time to work out.