E-M1 Or Pen-F

[Kevin Gallagher]

 Hi all, I've been happily shooting the E-M1 for a couple of years since deciding my Nikon gear was just getting TOO heavy. A friend is looking into the E-M1 (the current version of course) and has asked me my thoughts on the PEN-F model as well. Since I've no experience with it, it seems a good idea to put the question to the LULA denizens about the advantages/disadvantages of each. I can see the PEN has a 20MP sensor compared to 16MP on the M1 but beyond that I'm clueless. He does like to shoot landscapes and other general types of shooting but is not inclined to be going off into the wilds to find subjects. Truthfully, I'd also be most interested to hear opinions about the differences between the two.

Thanks,

 Kevin in CT

[Mousecop]

I own both. Either will do the job, it's hard to go wrong.

16mp vs 20mp sensor makes no difference. I use them interchangeably, I don't notice any difference. You can make a slightly bigger print... big whoop

E-M1 is weather-sealed, has a built-in grip, excellent ergonomics, slightly better C-AF. It's better for larger lenses, tilt screen. There may still be superb deal on the E-M1 + 12-40mm ($1200), I don't expect that to last. If he's looking at zooms, that alone makes E-M1 a no-brainer.

The Pen-F is a bit more about style rather than substance. If you like the retro style, it's insanely great, the build quality is stupendous, the feel of the dials is superb. The EVF is smaller, I prefer it because that makes it a tad crisper. It has a FAS.

Pen-F JPEG dial, well... It can be simple if you just want to turn one dial and get punchy B&W JPEGs or the Art Filters. You can also tune the dial settings if you're a total nerd and can figure out the interface, but it's still not as versatile as RAW.

The only other thing the Pen-F has that E-M1 does not is high-res mode. Since you need to use a solid tripod and a totally static subject, it is highly unlikely he'd really use it.

I normally use the E-M1 with the battery grip for landscapes. The Pen-F is for casual use, city stuff, the rare occasion when I opt for high-res, and as a backup body.

[TonyVentourisPhotography]

Between the E-M1 or the Pen-F...I honestly believe there is no question... the E-M1.  In fact...i'de even pick the E-M5mkII over the Pen F.

The Pen F has a beautiful sensor.  Great color, and 20mp does give a little more detail than 16mp.  Not huge, and I wouldn't make my decision on that.  However...

The Pen F is unusable with gloves.  The buttons are smaller and have less feel than the E-M1.  Dials are great...but the button layout is also a nightmare compared to the E-M1. 
The memory card is impossible to remove quickly or easily from the Pen F.  If you have gloves on, large fingers, or in a hurry...hope you don't have to change memory cards.  The E-M1 has the card on the side and it pops out great with its own large access door.  The Pen F is underneath the camera squeezed behind the battery...on the DOOR side.  No room to "grab" it from the flat sides.

You will need either the Olympus arca grip for the Pen F, or an RRS plate if you want to use it on a tripod with the pro Lenses.  The tripod hole is too close to the lens, so a typical manfrotto QR or other screw on QR plate will actually prevent large lenses from mounting on the Pen F. 

I personally don't like the placement of the creative wheel or the frontal body custom button.  They are in the way of proper hand holding of this shape camera.  Might not bother others though. 

Honestly, if tripod use is rare, and smaller lenses will generally be used, the Pen F is great.  The buttons are not to my liking...but its a fun camera. 
The E-M1 is one of the most wonderful cameras to use.  I personally love it.  My favorite camera.  I found the E-M1 disappears completely and lets me shoot without thinking about tech.  The Pen F always left me fumbling and fighting the layout.  Again, just me...but I would choose based on handling of the camera.  That is the only real difference between them. 

[Paulo Bizarro]

I shot the EM1 for a while, nice camera, but the noise was too much for long exposures. Have since moved to Sony A7.

The new sensor in the Pen F is reportedly less noisy, should be the same sensor on the EM1 MKII. All in all, different cameras that will provide different user experience and ergonomics.

[Kevin Gallagher]

 Guys, thanks for all of your thoughtful replies, just looking at specs I couldn't see much difference but for the sensor. I also think that perhaps the PEN may appeal to those folks looking for a really classic or retro look for their equipment. If I'm honest, I really like the look of the PEN myself 

 Thanks Again,

 Kevin in CT

[Camerajim]

I have both, but have been favoring the Pen F for most of my shooting since getting it a few months ago. I jumped at it when there was a great deal on refurbished models. I didn't think it would replace my E-M1, but it has won me over for everything but shooting action. That is its Achilles heel, as it uses only contrast detect autofocus, which is just terrible, compared to the E-M1.

As for handling, I guess it's a personal matter, but I like the control layout and size of the Pen F. It handles very nicely with a wrist strap. I've also used the hi-res mode successfully. Though limited, it is amazing when you have the right subject and a little patience.

I'm typically a RAW shooter, but I've been shooting RAW+jpeg with the Pen F and very often I like how the jpeg came out and just use that.

I would not recommend it as a person's only camera, but it's a great adjunct to the system.

[Kevin Gallagher]

 Hi Jim and welcome to the gang!! I hadn't realized that the AF systems were different on the two, thanks for that!!


  Kevin in CT

[TonyVentourisPhotography]

I do have to agree as well...the high res mode at 80mp RAW is pretty fantastic.  I shot an artwork reproduction project with one last week.  I shot side by side with a Phase One and I ended up using the Pen F for the project. (with a 40-150 2.8 mounted)  Having shot an Xrite color chart and turning into a color profile in lightroom... it was amazing...  The high res file color was sooooo much closer to accurate as of the color chart than any other camera i've used.  It must be due to sampling the colors for every pixels.  No moire, insanely accurate color, detail for days, and 10,000 pixels to the long end.  The files are also much cleaner and smoother at every ISO than the standard shot.  You just need to sharpen them a lot more on input than the standard shots as well.  Very different sharpening than a standard shot was needed.  Regardless, it's a great feature to have if you need it.

[solhashemi]

As Tony wrote, the High Res mode really is something. I use it all the time on the EM5 Mk II but I am planning on getting the Pen F eventually for the increase in resolution and the ability to mount a Kipon Tilt-Shift Adapter onto the camera to use with a Laowa 12mm lens. That adapter can't mount to the EM1 which is why I would personally go Pen F.

[fike]

I have an EM-1.  I have rented the Pen-F for a combined 8 days.  I found the focus performance on the Pen-F to be very inferior to the EM-1. I found the wheels on the Pen-F to be too small. The dedicated exposure compensation wheel is a great idea, but it is too hard to rotate easily. If you use any of the slightly larger lenses (like 7-14 or 40-150), the Pen F is unbalanced.

[BobDavid]

I'm holding out for the E-M5 III. I still use my EPL-5, which uses the same sensor as the E-M1. I mostly shoot with the E-M5 II. The high-res mode is excellent for fine art repro, especially with the 12-40 Pro lens. I would have never expected such a high level of quality from such a modest setup. Back in the day when I ran an art repro business, I used a 39MP Hasselblad multishot camera. The Oly surpasses the output both in dynamic range and color science. The Hasselblad probably out resolves the E-M5 II, but the gap isn't significant.

[HSakols]

I own a E-M5 I and an EPL5.  I bought the E-M5 to put in an underwater housing.  Mostly I grab the EPL5 with a compact prime (17 or 45).

[TonyVentourisPhotography]

Is the E-PL5 the same sensor as the E-M1?  Similar yes...but something is for sure different in the E-PL5.  A lot of people get MUCH better results from the E-PL5 for hardcore astrophotography.  For day to day however, its probably negligible. 

I'm holding out for the E-M5 III. I still use my EPL-5, which uses the same sensor as the E-M1. I mostly shoot with the E-M5 II. The high-res mode is excellent for fine art repro, especially with the 12-40 Pro lens. I would have never expected such a high level of quality from such a modest setup. Back in the day when I ran an art repro business, I used a 39MP Hasselblad multishot camera. The Oly surpasses the output both in dynamic range and color science. The Hasselblad probably out resolves the E-M5 II, but the gap isn't significant.

[Mousecop]

Is the E-PL5 the same sensor as the E-M1?  Similar yes...but something is for sure different in the E-PL5.  A lot of people get MUCH better results from the E-PL5 for hardcore astrophotography.  For day to day however, its probably negligible.

The E-M1 sensor lacks an AA filter and apparently uses software to fix moire. Both are 16mp sensors. In terms of basic image quality, they are very close.

I haven't heard anything specifically about the E-PL5 being optimized for astro. The real hardcore types are doing full spectrum sensor replacement mods anyway, yes?

[TonyVentourisPhotography]

Yes they are using some amazing tech.  I know several people using the epl5 or a modded version with amazing results though.  Someone had done some measurements on current or something, don't remember... and the epl5 actually came up better than the m5 or m1.  It was interesting, but way over my head.  I  Dabble in Astro...but no where near some people get.