Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: E-M5 iii  (Read 2633 times)

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4527
    • Photos
E-M5 iii
« on: October 18, 2019, 09:59:24 am »

E-M5 iii

Practically a baby E-M1 ii with a little less weight and a little less money. More compact too but the second generation was already quite compact to the point of impairing the handling.
Problem is E-M1 ii already has plenty of years behind. It could make sense if you have to have a compact mirroless m43 but I don't see enough reasons to upgrade. I don't think it's that competitive with the current APS-C, not at that price. I already thought that for my shooting the E-M1 ii was overpriced, this should be the current price for it.

Anybody interested in buying it?

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13484
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #1 on: October 18, 2019, 10:28:57 am »

Sounds like a nice camera!

Cheers,
Bernard

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4527
    • Photos
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2019, 02:40:29 pm »

Well, it makes the Nikon Z50 look cheap.

A Fuji X-T30 is 300$ cheaper or the same with the 18-55 lens. A Fuji X-T3 is currently only 100$ more. DPReview has also a comparison on prices and features.

The world didn't stay still since the E-M1 ii was released 3 years ago. I just don't think it's competitive enough unless you are already invested in the system.

DP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 661
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #3 on: October 18, 2019, 06:55:00 pm »

I just don't think it's competitive enough unless you are already invested in the system.

neither is low level cropped sensor consumer body Z50 w/o IBIS, with slowpoke shutter 1/4000, 1/200 xsync and w/o multishot ...
Logged

John Camp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1807
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2019, 06:58:13 pm »

I was somewhat mystified by the III. M4/3 has to move beyond 20mp if it's going to survive. I thought this would be 24 or 30, and the would become the new M4/3 standard.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #5 on: October 18, 2019, 07:42:03 pm »

The OM-D E-M5 Mk III is almost(*) the perfect second body for me (my original E-M5 is not retiring anytime soon) but I plan to wait for the street price to drop, as it seems to do with Olympus in particular. The addition of PDAF is itself almost enough, as it should make my mix of MFT and Four Thirds SLR legacy lenses more agile, and the weight advantage over the E-M1 Mk II is an advantage, especially with the plan of sometimes carrying two bodies so as to have two lenses rapidly available.

I am not sure why anyone thinks that a jump up from 20MP is much of a priority for this category of camera, and with APS-C and 35mm format still offering new models at only slightly higher 24MP (or even 21MP in the case of the Z50) multiple major camera makers seem to agree with me. I would expect that the great majority of photographers using a small, lightweight system are not particularly into displaying images at much beyond "normal" size; that is, viewing images on-screen or on-print from a distance significantly less than the image's width. So I am still of the old school that for all but a tiny niche of huge print-makers,
"more than 12MP is for cropping and loose framing of moving subjects,
more than 16MP is for heavy cropping, like when none of your lenses is long enough, or you can't get close enough".

And for that pushing of telephoto/macro extremes, it is no use at all to have more but bigger pixels in a larger format and then cropping away a larger portion of them. I'd put my money into a longer lens and/or a TC before going for a bigger sensor and bulkier system.

But I will not make any claims for the 50MP tripod-only sensor-shift mode; most of my subjects are not static enough, even when they are flowers.

(*) To avoid sounding too much of a blind fan, my perfect bespoke camera would have a bigger battery in a deeper hand-grip, since that would still not protrude as far as any of my lenses, so would not have any real adverse effect on bulk. And maybe a bigger EVF magnification ó but I zoom in on the EVF for critical inspection anyway, so that is not much of an issue for me.
Logged

bassman51

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #6 on: October 18, 2019, 09:22:22 pm »

The E-M5 series has shown a lot of improvements across each generation.  I had the original one, which hooked me on m43 in the first place. But the button UI was mediocre, especially for BBF.  When the E-M1 came out, I jumped immediately.  The E-M5-ii was a big improvement over the original, with a significantly upgraded body layout, but I held out and added an E-M1-ii when it was released.

The 5-iii is tempting as a second or backup body to my E-M1-ii. While the different battery is annoying, the in-body charging means I wouldnít need to carry a second (or third) charger when traveling.  As it is, my backups today are either an E-M1 or a GX9, both of which use different batteries.  The GX9 does offer in-body charging, at least, but is actually a bit heavier than the 5-iii. The 5-iii would also offer the same menu structure and similar button/dial UI to the 1-ii.  The GX9, of course, is quite different. 

But $1199 is a lot of money for a backup, so Iíll probably stick with my two choices right now.  The GX9 will join the E-M1-ii on our next trip.
Logged
Life is what happens when you're busy making other plans.

TonyVentourisPhotography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 388
    • Unlocking Olympus
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2019, 08:05:09 am »

Iím not the target market for this new one...I much prefer their pro body and use the em1x daily.  However....
-excellent stabilization
-feather weight and small space footprint depending on lens choices
-excellent video
-PB based usb charging
-ipx1 weather rating
-excellent focus system
-dozens of useful features for actually making images in the field like focus stacking, live bulb, high res, fisheye correction, etc, in body keystone and shift correction, give some interesting options
-a quick and decent means of editing in camera and getting images to a phone
-a fully customizable camera that allows for configurations that no other camera manufacturer on the market offers

Yes, lots of people know it has these features.  These things add up in use to create a totally different image making experience though.  People would be good to try living with one for a week.  I shoot high end commercial work and no client has ever questioned files from the 20mp sensor.  Quality is great, especially if you expose well and understand how to maximize the sensors strengths. If you think you need more, thatís great...there are plenty of options.  However, for a lot of people the Olympus cameras are extremely liberating while allowing a much more robust shooting experience. 

And not everyone wants more than 20-24mp. Everyoneís needs are different.  This is an excellent redefining of the middle ground camera for Olympus.  Itís the size and handling of an em10 with the punch and features of the em1.2.  Iím fairly sure the next em1 will further differentiate upwards in terms of specialty features like the em1x.
Logged
Tony
Unlockingolympus.com (ebooks & blog on getting the most from your OMD & Pen)
tonyventourisphotography.com (Commercial Photography)

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1465
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2019, 08:25:32 am »

I have a friend who is a commercial photographer and switched from Nikon to Olympus 2 years ago. Looks like a nice system. He called on Friday to rave about the iii after testing it for a few days.

He has also never had a client question his file sizes. I think those days are mostly done except for fairly rare specific requirements.
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4527
    • Photos
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2019, 01:18:00 pm »

I'm ok with 20MP, just hoped for a even better sensor. A better high resolution would have been nice, what the mark ii has is not really usable.
 Changing the battery to a smaller one is stupid, after they finally added charging in camera. Olympus giveth, Olympus taketh.

John Camp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1807
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #10 on: October 19, 2019, 11:00:38 pm »

I didn't suggest 24mp or 30mp would be better because more pixels are necessarily better -- M4/3 is fine for most uses, though not all -- but because as is, the M4/3 system gives the impression of having stalled with out-of-date technology. I have two GX8s and a large collection of glass, and I am generally satisfied with what I get. But if I were looking at the system anew, right now, and was told that the sensors date back to the first half of those decade (the GX8 was released in 2015), then I might hesitate to buy into it, simply on the grounds that the system doesn't seem to be keeping up with rival offerings. I want the system to at least *seem* to be moving ahead, so it remains healthy and looks like a real alternative to other offerings. (Like the Z50, which, if you buy the S glass, offers the possibility of a large step upward if it turns out that you actually like to do sophisticated photography, and decide to move to a Z6 or Z7.) Within a couple of years, I expect the standard even in relatively inexpensive FF cameras to be around 60mp. M4/3 needs that sense of movement.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8486
    • Flicker photos
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #11 on: October 19, 2019, 11:17:10 pm »

Wouldn't going to higher resolution sacrifice the dynamic range?  After all, APS starts with larger footprint therefore larger pixel sensor so they can add more pixels and still keep the DR.  So Olympus traded one against the other and decided on 20mb to keep the DR people expect. 

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #12 on: October 19, 2019, 11:53:43 pm »

I didn't suggest 24mp or 30mp would be better because more pixels are necessarily better -- M4/3 is fine for most uses, though not all -- but because as is, the M4/3 system gives the impression of having stalled with out-of-date technology.
That makes more senseóso long as one avoids the idea that technological progress is inextricably tied to having more, smaller photosites. In this, I am cautious optimistic that Nikon has made a wise choice in equipping the Z50 with a sensor of a "mere" 21MP, for the sake of other virtues, as shown by its close cousin in the D500. The E-M5 Mk III gets what is AFAIK the best available sensor in its format for now, but I do hope for a next generation sensor soon; maybe for an E-M1 Mk III. And what I would wish for most is dual gain, for better low light handling, not either more pixels or even the currently fashionable BSI (though this might be needed in order to implement dual gain well.)

What makes even more sense to me these days is a slower cadence of sensor updates and more emphasis on improving other aspects of the camera, like IBIS, C-AF, and higher frame rates (in particular for high resolution video.)

Also, there are some performance trade-offs with higher pixel counts. Dynamic range is one (as Alan Klein mentions), though not as much as the per-pixel DR measures suggest, because downsampling or NR processing can improve DR in the process of reducing resolution to that of a lower MP sensor.

Another is frame rate, particularly for video where 60fps and 120 fps have their attractions, and a surfeit of pixels can do more harm than good for that usage.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8486
    • Flicker photos
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #13 on: October 20, 2019, 12:09:00 am »

That makes more senseóso long as one avoids the idea that technological progress is inextricably tied to having more, smaller photosites. In this, I am cautious optimistic that Nikon has made a wise choice in equipping the Z50 with a sensor of a "mere" 21MP, for the sake of other virtues, as shown by its close cousin in the D500. The E-M5 Mk III gets what is AFAIK the best available sensor in its format for now, but I do hope for a next generation sensor soon; maybe for an E-M1 Mk III. And what I would wish for most is dual gain, for better low light handling, not either more pixels or even the currently fashionable BSI (though this might be needed in order to implement dual gain well.)

What makes even more sense to me these days is a slower cadence of sensor updates and more emphasis on improving other aspects of the camera, like IBIS, C-AF, and higher frame rates (in particular for high resolution video.)

Also, there are some performance trade-offs with higher pixel counts. Dynamic range is one (as Alan Klein mentions), though not as much as the per-pixel DR measures suggest, because downsampling or NR processing can improve DR in the process of reducing resolution to that of a lower MP sensor.

Another is frame rate, particularly for video where 60fps and 120 fps have their attractions, and a surfeit of pixels can do more harm than good for that usage.

Good point.  My Sony RX100iv (1" sensor) has 19mb, more than enough for my purposes.  I use it for slide shows on a 4K UDHTV which mean only 8mb are required to fill the screen.  So at 19mb, I have plenty of zoom room.  When I put them on FLickr, I need even less resolution.  Unless you're printing pretty big, what are you going to do with all those pixels.  Most people who are looking at small cameras either 1" or micro 4/3 are looking at just that - the size of the camera.  Something they can stick in their pocket or throw in their purse yet get very good pictures out of a zoom camera.   The cameras are saving a lot of backs.  Including mine.  I don't want to carry a big camera case any longer. 

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1465
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #14 on: October 20, 2019, 01:02:43 am »

I largely agree with the points made above. APSC and M4/3 is not concerning as a format because of MP limitations but because of the slow roll out of top quality lenses specific to the format and in some cases a rather slow roll out of quality bodies featuring things like dual card slots and so on. These concerns are not specific to Olympus of course.

I have never owned an Olympus but have admired the brand since the original OM1 was launched
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

Jonathan Cross

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 309
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2019, 03:07:54 am »

I don't agree about APSC lenses, Martin.  Look at Fuji X lenses. There have been plenty of good comments.

Best wishes,

Jonathan
Logged
Jonathan in UK

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1465
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2019, 03:37:24 am »

I don't agree about APSC lenses, Martin.  Look at Fuji X lenses. There have been plenty of good comments.

Best wishes,

Jonathan

I believe you are correct in this. I guess my point of view reflects my frustration with the very slow roll out of pro lenses for the Sony system that I was initially enthusiastic about. Now Iím out the system I see they are starting to produce some better quality lenses.

I resorted to buying full frame lenses for my A6500 and when a really good deal came up for a full frame Sony I bought it and ended up abandoning APSC. I
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
E-M5 III; the sensor might not be the same as in the E-M1 Mk II
« Reply #17 on: October 20, 2019, 03:24:32 pm »

Though the sensor in the OM-D E-M5 Mk III is clearly not radically new (no dual pixel AF or BSI) it seems to be at least slightly different from the one in the E-M1 II; maybe it is the same variant as in the E-M1X.

I conclude this because the current Sony sensor product list https://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/e/products/IS/camera/product.html has two 20MP 4/3" sensors and neither fits the E-M1 Mk II.
- The IMX272 seems to be from 2018: it is marked as new on this 2018 page, and its product information sheet is version 1.0 and copyright 2018, too late for the E-M1 Mk II which is from 2016.
- The IMX269 does not fit either as it does not support the 60FPS mode that the E-M1 Mk II has.

Or it could just be that the IMX272 was only put in the product catalog in 2018, after a period of Olympus exclusivity. (Note that Sony had an investment in Olympus at that time, though it has sold it since for a nice profit.)
« Last Edit: October 20, 2019, 03:34:12 pm by BJL »
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #18 on: October 20, 2019, 03:33:33 pm »

... APSC and M4/3 is not concerning as a format because of MP limitations but because of the slow roll out of top quality lenses specific to the format ...
This seems to have been clarified later; I would say that camera systems in those smaller formats which share a lens mount with a larger (35mm) format system get short-shrift on higher quality lenses, with the makers expecting that gap to be filled buy using lenses designed primarily for the larger format. Fortunately, Olympus and Fujifilm are not playing that game.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13484
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: E-M5 iii
« Reply #19 on: October 20, 2019, 04:38:36 pm »

I was once again amazed yesterday by the marketshare of Olympus among Japanese hikers. They like the weight, good weather sealing, great stabilization and high quality lenses.

People looked very surprised to see my GFX100, couple of large lenses and tripod... ;)

This raises the question though, why not go with a Z7? It appears to be ofering a great compromise overall. Granted at a higher cost, but who will really ever need more?

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: October 20, 2019, 04:41:44 pm by BernardLanguillier »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up