Olympus OM-D EM-1 / EM-5 “Live Time” Long Exposure Demonstration by Kevin (doesn’t show any issue)
Long exposure issues on the E-M1:
As discussed on Flickr (Click here) and MU43 (Click here) the E-M1 seems to have a fairly worse long expsoure performance than the E-M5. Don’t know if the mentioned issues can be solved via firmware upgrade. One of the commenters said that he received an email From Olympus:
“They had sent my samples off to Germany/Japan and now had an answer. They’re just telling me that unfortunately there will be no fix for the long exposure noise. The advice from Olympus is to make sure NR is enabled or left on AUTO at all times”
And our reader Knut shared his HLD-7 grip impression review:
“Took some pictures of it with different lenses, and added a set on Flickr;
http://www.flickr.com/photos/knutivars/sets/72157637489250755/
My thoughts are:
Grip is VERY good. It’s not small, but it’s meant to provide a good grip for use with all the different lenses – which it does perfectly. Used it on a studio-shoot today, and it was lovely to use. It makes the camera kinda huge and will match sufficiently with the FL-50R. The E-M1 can be a small and anonymous camera when you’re out and about – e.g at a restaurant, but It can also be made into a tank of a camera – providing pro features in a compact body. That’s one reason why I love it. The improvements over E-M5 are also welcome – and not only feature-vise like the faster shutter, low-iso and focus-peaking, but things like button-layout and response of the camera when using dials and buttons.
Secondly – I hope there will be a firmware up soon; The C-AF and continuous tracking could use a fine-tune, along with a few other features;
* WiFi app for PC – Allowing tethering.
* Same exposure on different aperature-settings when zooming with a not-constant aperature zoom, like the 14-54, 50-200, 40-150, etc..; by ISO compensation.
* Exposure compensation in manual mode with Auto-ISO.
* 25fps video (again).
Olympus have to remember – this is a pro camera with a longer time at market – and any updates are welcome by the users.”
—-
E-M1 Store Links:
Olympus E-M1 body at Amazon, Adorama and BHphoto, Amazon DE (via DL), Amazon UK (via DL), Amazon ES (via DL), WexUK, Topshot FI, CameraWorldUK.
Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO Lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, AmazonDE (viaDL), Amazon ES (via DL).
Olympus E-M1 with 12-40mm Lens kit at Amazon DE (via DL), WexUK and CameraWorldUK, Amazon UK (via DL), Amazon ES (via DL).
Olympus E-M1 with 12-50mm Lens kit at Amazon DE (via DL), WexUK, CameraWorldUK, Amazon UK (via DL), Amazon ES (via DL).
Olympus EP-13 Eyecup for E-M1 at Adorama and BHphoto.
Olympus HLD-7 Battery Grip for E-M1 at Amazon, Adorama and BHphoto.
Olympus LC-62D Metal Front Lens Cap for 12-40mm at Adorama and BHphoto.
Olympus LH-66 Lens Hood for 12-40mm at Adorama and BHphoto.
60 Responses
Concerning the grip discussed here, there is hardly anything remarkable about it, it is just a grip. Concerning the E-M1 native grip, the Olympus officials said they had made a larger one compared to E-M5 because users wanted it that way. No, no, FT users wanted not a large grip on a mirrorless body, they wanted a DSLR with a better grip, like the one on the E-520/E-30/E-5, and not E-620. So why was the E-M1 produced with a larger grip? NOT because FT and mFT users wanted it but simply because while the use of ALL lenses is inconvenient with small bodies, the use of FT lenses on a small body is a torture!
Still not over the “FourThirds going Micro” thingie?
And no, it is far from torture to use heavy FourThirds lenses on the E-M1. The grip makes it sit well in my hands (which, infact, are quite large). Just look at this setup; http://www.flickr.com/photos/knutivars/10764785065/in/set-72157637489250755/ If you feel it’s torture…, well… go buy a 1Dx or D4 or somehting.
And no – it isn’t just a grip. It got buttons and curves too… 😉
My point is: it is extremely inconvenient to use FT lenses on all prior mirroress Olympus cameras, that is why they made the E-M1 with a larger grip. The problem is, while the E-M1 does have a decent grip, it has a rather lower ISO capacity compared to the E-PM2 (757:932). What is more, with its ISO score of 548 the E-520 is surpassed by the E-M1 in the same way as the E-M1 is surpassed by the E-PM2. These three scores with a 25% difference are NOT the result of sample variation, as some people here would like to have me convinced, a circumstance proved by the bare 1% (one percent) sample variation between Pentax K-30, K-01, K-50 and K-500 (see DXoMark)!!! The E-PM2, blowing the E-M1 out of the water in the ISO parameter, costs FOUR times less (!) than the great new gadget raved every day around the world. And the E-520 can today be had for TEN (!) times less like new. Having both E-520 and E-PM2, I see absolutely no reason why I should buy the E-M1. My E-PM2 – Leica 25mm 1.4 combination is a killer for low light, while the E-520 auto-focuses perfectly (in contrast to the E-M1) all FT lenses. Long live the E-PM2 and the E-series! 🙂 And Olympus better listen!
“The problem is, while the E-M1 does have a decent grip, it has a rather lower ISO capacity compared to the E-PM2 (757:932).”
The first problem is that you don’t understand at all what this means. Even the source of your data, dxo, says that a difference like this has hardly any meaning in practice.
“What is more, with its ISO score of 548 the E-520 is surpassed by the E-M1 in the same way as the E-M1 is surpassed by the E-PM2.”
Going from 757 to 932 is a difference of 175, which is 23.11%
However, going from 932 to 757, is the same 175, but is a reduction of 18.7%.
Looking at the E-520 case, going from 548 to 757 is a difference of 209, or 38%.
That you round 23.11% up to 25%.. well, ok, but the other way around isn’t 25%, its 20% at best.
If you think 23% and 31% improvement is just the same thing, ok…
Its just telling how you round things to favor your argument, ignoring that you introduce pretty significant errors.
You also seem to simply not understand that this scale isn’t linear, so gaining over 200 points while starting at a low value is much much more significant then gaining 175 points while starting at a significantly higher value.
So not only is the source slightly suspect (only testing one camera of each type) and are the differences you are talking about irrelevant (according to the source from which you got your data), you also simply fail to understand the meaning of the data you quote, and don’t understand basic math either.
You should not invest too much credibility in the dXomark sensor scores.
Actually E-M1 has better Hi ISO performance. Look at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m1/16
Wahwahwahwahwah I want a DSLR wahwahwahwah
Know what Jankoff, I’m also a 4/3 user, and unlike your consumer E-520, I happen to have an E-3. No, I don’t want a new DSLR when there is a better solution. It has been explained a gazillion times to you why it is a better solution, and while you don’t have to agree due to personal preferences and priorities, that isn’t exactly representative for anything other then your own desires.
Stop the moronic talking for everyone bullshit, start talking for yourself, and actually make an argument if you want to discuss things.
All you do is cry.
I had a weird issue with my em1 while shooting with the 35-100 2.0 the shutter locks up and the camera humms then about 3 seconds later it takes the picture. It only happens on about 1 out of 20 shots. Anybody had this problem?
Could you work out what tune it was humming? 😉 😀
Agree about making Windows PC tethering software.
With all the media fuss about iThis and iThat, companies seem to lose track that the majority of people still have laptops running Windows, this hasn’t changed and isn’t likely to change in the near to medium term.
It’s a sign of directionless fad chasing, not considered and thoughtful response to actual customer need.
I would so much more appreciate tether via usb. It is so much faster.
I’d really like to have PC based tethering as well, but the currently available ‘smartphone tethering’ isn’t a fad, its actually very useful.
The first thing to realize is that many people always have a smartphone on them, but not a laptop. That simply means many people will have a device totally capable of functioning as a remote control always at hand.
Its no good reason for not having PC based tethering, but both have their place, and are useful in their own right.
The next wish would be for a Win8 app for it & then at least the later PC’s could use it.
I have to say, that is a nice setup:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/knutivars/10764784265/in/set-72157637489250755/
I really think that Olympus should make a 200/2.8 m43 lens.
Thanx! 🙂
Well… if you want 200/2.8 – why not get a Zuiko Digital 150/2 and put a 1.4x TC at the back of it? Would be more versatile.
… but maybe we could ask Olympus for some TCs for microFourthirds. Maybe also an MMF with built in TC? That’d be cool.
Panasonic will come with a 150/2.8 and Oly is comming with a 40-150/2.8. Maybe a 200/2.8 isn’t really needed? Guess there are more users looking for a more compact 300/2.8 than the one that exist for “regular” FourThirds.
A native micro-4/3 200mm f/2.8 would be great! Olympus would need to come up with micro-4/3 teleconverters. Add a 1.4 teleconverter (without need of m4/3 adapter) for 560mm f/4. Or maybe a 2.0 teleconverter for 400mm f/5.6? Would need to have excellent AF.
Looks big and heavy despite MFT sensor inside. And looks like the lens is manual focus only. Not sure what is nice about that, but maybe I am missing the point.
I found the long exposure noise on the E-M1 to be very low. In fact, when my review is completed later this week, I’ll be including an 82 second exposure that is very clean, even at the pixel level.
Do you have NR set to auto? (default setting).
From observation with my E-M1, raws are nicely clean as long as NR is set to auto (which essentially means it uses a dark-frame), but far less so when setting NR to off.
I haven’t done any scientific comparisions, but I did get the same impression when going from E-P1 to E-M5, turn off dark-frame subtraction, and the raws of the older camera are actually a bit cleaner, which to me suggests this is a heat related issue.
Do you mean with or without the in-camera dark frame subtraction (which for certain applications is no option, neither does its result say anything about noise level)?
NR (noise reduction) is Olympus lingo for dark frame subtraction, and that was also what I was talking about.
Olympus cameras also have a setting called ‘noise filter’, most people would call this noise reduction, so the Olympus lingo is a bit confusing.
So.. yes, it was about dark frame subtraction where my e-p1 shows less ‘noise’ then either my e-m5 or e-m1 when its turned off, while both e-m5 and e-m1 show cleaner results when its turned on.
With regards to using dark frame subtraction, many stacking applications have support for this as well, but you’ll have to create your own dark frames.
Admin – why would you post that the EM1 has long exposure issues when the link you provided gives the solution? NR was turned off for that fellow. Its not an issue with the EM1 at all, and this was figured out in the comments section of the link you provided. You should read about the issue a bit more before posting this as “news”.
… but the weird thing is that if you have long exposure NR set to OFF – It will give significantly MORE noise than the E-M5 would. … for no apparent reason. Removal of AA-filter perharps?
Higher dark counts could be due to higher sensor temperature, which in turn could be due to the PDAF reading parts of the sensor all the time. But anyway dark counts are not equal to dark noise. Most subtracts out. I guess it may mean you now HAVE to include one dark frame in your stacking.
As shown by some of the samples in the links the “solution” (NR on) has poor results compared to the E-M5. Further, many long exposures cannot be done practically with NR on because of the processing delay between exposures.
ahh… good points
The noise issue is also a real problem if you have sequential shooting (vs. single frame) turned on — Oly cameras automatically turn off Noise Reduction for either low-rate or high-rate sequential shooting. I think this is also the case for the new built-in HDR mode.
I’ve done some comparison shots (E-1 vs. E-5) with and without NR — the difference is night-and-day, I’ll get them up on my website tonight (North America time zones).
Dr. Poop, try to stack 60 or more 60″ star shots taken with NR on and you’ll see the issue (huge gaps in startrails) or try to shoot fireworks and you’ll notice that your camera has been loosing half of the session doing nothing. With E-M5 I’ve managed to create great stacked circumpolars and let me tell you that it performed very well with NR off. So the issue is: Why a “new” 1500$ “Pro” camera performs worst than an older and inferior “amateur” one?
Do you need NR when shooting RAW? or is it only for JPEG long exposures?
I only shoot in RAW. NR is a must when shooting long exposures in order to get rid of hot pixels. You can enable camera NR feature or soot several dark frames at the end of session and apply them in post processing. But, what if my original RAW file seems like a rice dish full of grains compared with EM-5’s in same conditions?
But is that the case? Is there really increased NOISE, or just a greater offset? Normally I would think the noise should increase with the square root of the dark counts (offset), so, not good, but not as bad as it might seem.
At the begining of this year I wanted to change my cameras (D60 and D90) with a D600. Then read about the spot issue. I read alot about other cameras like the 6D and E-M5 and I liked better the E-M5 as an all around camera. However I heard the rumors about this new E-M1 which for me seems to be the perfect camera. But now it has those problems regarding long exposures…
Olympus says (read mu-43.com forums) that they will not offer a solution. Should I wait for the E-M2 next year (if they will take the Nikon path with the D600/D610) or buy the E-M1?
P.S.
I shot long exposures quite a lot (in the 5s-60s interval)
I shoot with my EM-5 a lot using long exposure and I have not any particular problem. Use the NR on long exposure (even in RAW) and everything is ok, and the live view using B speed is absolutely delicious
The dark noise characteristics of the new sensor are very disappointing. Olympus did something to the sensor or processing or both that accentuates the noise in a way that is evidently unrecoverable–or Olympus does not want to devote the resources to fixing it. Hard to believe that they did not know about it before releasing the camera. For those of us who take long exposures this is a major letdown.
The Dark noise characteristic of the E-M5 wasn’t great either at base ISO, if anyone cared to peep at the shadow noise in high contrast scenes.
Even in dark grey clouds there is much noise with the E-M5, something that I don’t like about this camera. Maybe better buy a Fuji equipment…
Apart from the lower (than would be normal and expected) ISO rating – probably due to the mixed PDAF-CDAF auto-focusing, another very serious infelicity with the E-M1 is the following. The E-M1 is, Olympus officials are saying, a micro Four Thirds camera. All right, you get one for a lot of money, hook a great micro Four Thirds lens to it and …. And the E-M1 is also, Olympus officials are saying, a Four Thirds camera. All right, you get another one for a lot of money and hook a great Four Thirds lens to it. I hope you see my point.
Owning one, no, I totally fail to see your point.
I can mount a 4/3 lens, actually, so far I’m using my 14-54mk2 more then any other lens.
And now comes the magic bit…
I can unmount it, and then mount a m4/3 lens, ON THE SAME CAMERA!
Why should I get 2 of them unless I specifically want a 2 camera setup?
No Jankoff, that issue that you describe would only exist if Olympus actually did what you have been crying about for a while now, make an E-7, and a high-end OM-D. You’d indeed have to buy 2 cameras if you want to use both m4/3 and 4/3 lenses.
“Why should I get 2 of them unless I specifically want a 2 camera setup?”
For about 5 years I have invariably been using at least two or, usually, three cameras when on holiday – several times a year, 40 days at the average, going on foot, shooting a lot and NEVER EVER changing lenses. I used to do this with my two E-520s and my E-600, now I do it with two FT cameras plus the E-PM2 with the Leica 25mm. The 12-60 and the 70-300 with the E-series DSLRs give me a great range, and now the E-PM2-Leica provides a very special bonus by turning out extremely sharp and beautiful images without any distortions at a useful focal range. Although the E-PM2-Leica 25mm is a good carry-everywhere combination, I find that it is far from enough, unless on short walks. I am not young, I am not an athlete and I have never been. And I have no difficulty carrying around the three cameras plus the lenses just described, plus batteries and a big bag. I am simply at a loss why people use one body only and change lenses, especially now that there are tiny mirrorless cameras for not much money. I often joke with fellow tourists when I see them changing lenses, asking them: “Where is your camera for the second lens?” If on holiday you are approached in this manner by someone, it will be me. 🙂
Well, I can quite see the point of a 2 or even 3 camera setup, and I use this myself quite a bit.
But, and that was the point here, that is something you decided to use (with reason obviously), and that has a price.
Yes, right now it means buying 2 E-M1s if you want to use 2 4/3 lenses and don’t want to swap lenses on a single camera.
Again, that is a consequence of your decision to use more then one camera, it is not in any way an issue caused by the E-M1 and its hybrid setup.
I’ll again say that Olympus should (and likely will) release a camera with similar AF capabilities for a price that is much more in the range of the E-520 or E-620. Maybe skip the weather sealing or some other parts, make it affordable and make it a good alternative for people looking to upgrade their E-xxx cameras without wanting to give up their lenses, and while thinking an E-M1 is outside their budget or at least too expensive for what it does for them.
Now imagine having 2 such cameras, and your 70-300 breaking at some point, you now have the option of replacing it with a m4/3 100-300 or 75-300, instead of being stuck with a camera for which you can’t buy new lenses easily anymore.
The fact is that I, along with many others around the world, waited for years for Olympus to make a DSLR or at least a 43-compatible body. They made a compatible one only, with a great delay, and are selling it at an outrageously high price. Meanwhile it proved definitely worse in ISO terms than a product from the same company costing FOUR times less. A Pentax K-30, two years older, having identical technical features and much higher ISO capacity, costs three times less. As shown by cameralabs dot com, the E-M5 is identical IQ-wise to the first similar product, E-M5, also two years older. I’ve been reading posts today by many people who bought the E-M1 and who admit that for mFT lenses it is not at all better than the E-M5. I did a very good thing by not investing in E-M5 and I am doing the right thing now evading the E-M1. Surely, Olympus are not obliged to make a DSLR. I, too, am not obliged to follow today’s raving crowds. My obligation of a customer is to offer opinion, including negative. And my warning remains: I am migrating to Pentax or Sony FF, should Olympus continue their wrong behavior.
We know your story, please go buy a K-30 if that makes you happy. Repeating it over and over, with total disregard for anything not confirming your story is not in any way offering a useful opinion, it is behaving like a small brat not getting his way.
I’ve pointed out before, and again somewhat higher up in this discussion, that you are misrepresenting things, make rather significant rounding errors in the numbers you present, and actually present numbers of which you yourself can easily verify they are suspect. If you want to stick to that, be our guest, just do yourself the favor of following your desires instead of bothering us again and again and again and again and again and again and again at nausum.
Don’t like an opinion, don’t read it. As simple as that. My opinion is not for
yaa personally. Most importantly, you have not been (and cannot be) authorized to talk on behalf of the happy part of the Olympus community.
I’m sure you don’t like your misrepresentations and spoiled brat behavior being pointed out, but the solution to that is really simple, stop doing those things.
Its not the only problem for the EM1!
That’s a very thoughtful contribution. Thank you!
And to think that I always thought you’re just a paid troll.
Can’t imagine anyone paying him though…
http://photolisticlife.com/2013/11/14/em1-long-exposure-noise-problem/
If you shot RAW, with NR OFF, Olympus Viewer 3 does not correct the noise? Anybody tested?
I’m not rushing out to buy an E-M1, it’s made me more content with my E-M5. Thanks Olmypus you’ve found a cure for GAS.
If, as said by Oly the noise is caused by the pdaf sites. The solution seems possibly to disable PDAF on long exposures. After all it is not being used at that time. If they can be deactivated it should fix the problem. If that is the problem.
For anybody that’s interested, I did a head-to-head comparison of E-M5 and E-M1 dark frames (with and without Noise Reduction) in an attempt to characterize this issue a bit better. Check it out:
http://www.seldomscenephotography.com/2013/11/14/the-olympus-e-m1-and-long-exposures/
Nicely written and demonstrated! 🙂
I recommend all of you to contact Oly on this issue to make them come up with a proper statement on this.
I also included my wishes for a firmware up… 🙂
Could it be that under the hood, turning off NR on the e-m5 does not totally turn off NR?
Hi Eric, one comment.
For short exposures (iirc shorter then 2 seconds), the default setting (NR set to auto) will not apply NR either. This makes it unlikely that a difference due to NR shows up in handheld sequential shooting with ‘normal’ exposure times.
If you are into Night photography, use my advice-dont buy this camera. I just spend a lot to buy this camera and Everything is nice, but the long exposures (45 sec) are disaster. Completely not to be used in any way. I run photography gallery and many of my works are done by night.The amount of dots that appear in the dark fragments of the night shots without exaggerating, looks more than 50%- meaning there is more noise than the right pixels. Very disappointed with that.
http://www.otravistagallery.com
I sent a e-mail to olympus JP and try to ask about this issue .They mention it cannot fix with the firmware. About the e-mail
“We unfortunately can not refer to the external site out of our
local network. We also try not to comment to any post for any
issue in external site.
As you recognized, camera parts such as CMOS is different from
each other. The difference might create the different result
of your pictures. The results of the picture are also affected by
the setting of exposure and finishing.
If you try to take a still picture with E-M1 by long exposure
without Noise Reduction, E-M5 and PEN E-P5 are good at this for
sure.
However, E-M1 with the newest image processing engine creates
the best depiction for taking still pictures comprehensively.
If you only prefer taking still pictures as you mentioned
“fireworks and Astronomy type photo,” without Noise Reduction,
E-M1 might not fit for your usage.
This result is a physical feature for each camera and we do
not believe that firmware changes it.
We are sorry that we can not be more helpful to this matter.
We hope that above explanation will be of some help.
Thank you for taking time to write us, and we are
looking forward to having your continued support.
Best regards,
T. Katagiri
Customer Support Center
OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP. Tokyo, Japan
I tested one minute exposures E-M5 vs. E-M1.
With Noise Reduction turned on, low iso images are clean with both cameras.
But at high ISO the E-M1 images are far worse unfortunately. So the problem can not be solved simply by turning NR on.
Damn, so I just ordered a defective product. Olympus certainly knew of this problem. They are basically telling you to have another OMD camera for long exposures even though the E-M1 has the capability to do very long exposures. I have just ordered one, what to do.
Hey guys, just wanted to add my 2 cents to the conversation:
The long exposure problem is really not a big deal for me as I don’t do night photography, but I have to agree with the guys that do so, it is kind of disappointing, all I can say is use NR.
As far as the grip goes, it is just an accessory and accessories are made for ease or help in specific situations. It is that simple, use it if you need it, don’t use it if you don’t. I like it because my hands are kind of big and my pinky finger is hanging in the air, but I still use it only inside, when I am out in the field I don’t.
The camera is awesome though, I love it.