Camera Labs

Hi Joris,



You know the sad thing is that I came very close to doing exactly that so thank goodness I realised the issues the NEX-7 sensor has with those wide FoV lenses. Whether it's lens design (symmetrical versus retrofocus) or sensor microlens design, or some unholy combination of the two, that is the cause of the border softness is way above my pay grade but for the sort of photography I enjoy, even at my very amateurish "happy snapper" level, the end result is "No Sale" as the old fashioned shop tills used to say if you pressed the right lever!

Back to WestCoast's point, I'll agree that I probably do get far too much fun out of the techie bits but in the end I do know how to compromise and in this thread I'm sharing the journey. I am concious that there is a risk in doing so as we've had members over the years who've done similar hand-wringing with multiple posts in multiple threads and it can get irritating. Hopefully by keeping my thoughts in a single thread and by staying focussed on a particular requirement (downsizing but not compromising on optical quality) I'm avoiding being too annoying. I'd love to think that others on a similar journey might even find my ramblings useful but maybe that's a step too far!

I've spent a deal of time today looking further into the Olympus OM-D E-M5. Funny how you can miss things when cameras are first released. One of the attractions of the NEX-7 was the configurable twin control wheels and I've only now realised that the E-M5 has the same feature.

Will I always be "waiting for the improved evolution of what is available today" as WestCoast suggests? In answer to that I can point to my astrophotgraphy kit listed in my Signature below. That was a similar journey which started off very differently (at one stage I had an Astrophysics mount ordered and was considering a large Celestron reflector and a totally different camera) but over a period of a couple of years I finally refined my choices and ended up with the kit that actually is perfect for me. It will be the same in my search for a CSC. Selling old kit is far too aggravating so it is worth my taking my time and at the very least choosing the right system. When I invested so heavily in my Canon kit CSCs weren't even an option but now they are and with the steady improvement in sensor technology that has also taken place I really believe that DSLRs are about as appropriate to my needs as owning a Ferrari would be if all one did was use it to go shopping!

@Thomas I can't begin to guess why you haven't already done so!

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

Words from the wise (a.k.a. Ken Rockwell): "Real shooters shoot LEICAs because of their simplicity and fantastic optics, but the LEICA M9 could be so much better than it is. After shooting the ergonomically superior X-Pro1 all weekend, I do not look forward to the clunky M9 with its inaccurate viewfinder, since I get the same or better images faster from the X-Pro1 with a lot less work."
(with "Real shooters" he means film-shooters)
No comment on his comment because I have no idea about one or the other camera. But usually I find nuggets of knowledge hidden in his ramblings. Perhaps he is onto something that one could learn from his Fuji-review (still under construction).

_________________
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews, My Pictures, My Photography Blog
D800+assorted lenses

I wouldn't look too hard, it's mostly ramblings.

Although I'm biased toward m4/3 and Panasonic, I feel compelled to note that Pany has used software/firmware lens correction in the past, so a Pany lens on an Oly body may not give you the same results as a Pany lens on a Pany body. Not that I've heard this about Pany's new 14-42mm lens specifically, tho.

Just sayin' - Mark

Hi Mark,

You are, of course, absolutely right and I spent some time yesterday double checking that fact. As I shoot exclusively in RAW lens corrections can be applied in software, something I routinely did using Canon's DPP converter when I owned a 5D Mark II, so it isn't a deal breaker but you have reminded me to check out the current state of play with the various RAW converters, both manufacturer supplied and third party.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

Hi folks,

Not having had a chance to handle various CSCs side by side I thought I'd see if Photoshop could help me get a feel (sic) for the various sizes. Here's the result:

These are the various models I've considered over the past few weeks. Of course the Olympus OM-D E-M5 doesn't ship with the Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH Power OIS lens but that would be my walk-around choice so I've done my best to graft the two together at the right scale. Barring mistakes the sizes of the four cameras can be directly compared accurately enough for my intended purpose. While the first three cameras have zooms giving fields of view usual for walk-around kit lenses the X-Pro1 has been shown with the 35mm f/1.4 as the kit zoom has yet to be released.

The X-Pro1, which is a similar size to the Leica M9, doesn't surprise but the svelte NEX-7 is anything but when fitted with the kit lens. As a result I can rule them out on size grounds alone although both the X-Pro1 and NEX-7 have other issues which also make them not fit for purpose so far as I'm concerned but I won't rehash those arguments again!

The GX1 plus its kit lens is certainly the most pocketable but, as those who've had the patience to follow this thread will know, I'm really warming to the E-M5 as the moment and I think the extra size is a good trade-off for the extra control wheels and EVF. The surprise is that it really isn't as big as one would think but I guess the mind plays tricks because of it's classic DSLR profile. Still no decision yet but with the IQ that the early reviews are suggesting the E-M5 can offer together with weather sealing (particularly if used with the bundled 12-50mm lens - yes I would buy both the 14-42 and the 12-50) and with access to a pretty good selection of native zooms and primes the E-M5 is the clear leader at the moment.

Bob.

P.S. The cameras and lenses above weren't chosen for any other reason than they are what I have been considering. Other choices may do better (or worse) size wise but size has only been one consideration, albeit an important one provided I can get good IQ as well.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

Hi folks,
I've just pulled the trigger and ordered an Olympus OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 EZ kit lens in black from Park Cameras.

I would have used Amazon (via Gordon's support me page) but they indicate they can't ship until June and that takes them out of the equation as the free grip promotion from Olympus requires the paperwork to be submitted by May 31st. Incidentally, it was the free grip promotion that pushed me into ordering now as I've seen enough reviews to know that the E-M5 is a very capable camera, Canon are too late to the party and although I'm sure whatever Leica has planned will be very special the cold wind of reality has blown in from a budgetary direction so far as they are concerned.

With the camera still a few weeks away I've now got to start shopping for lenses but that discussion will have to continue in the Olympus section here.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

So, still no DSLR, then. j/k

Congrats, and welcome to m4/3 - Mark