It’s Sunday morning here in Eruope and if you want something new to play with click over at the new Olympus E-M1 and Lens Matcher simulation: http://cameras.olympus.com/en-us/omd/lenses.
For German readers: 200 Euro off on the E-M5 kit (See dealsrunner).
P.S.: play with that one too: http://guesstheformat.com/photo
44 Responses
OMG! look at the 90 – 250 mm f2.8 😀 well… 45mm f1.8 is the best 😉
SHOOTING LANDSCAPE WITH A PORTRAIT LENS – OLYMPUS 45MM F/1.8:
http://www.samudranil.in/blog/?id=69252778574
Awesome and inspiring!
The limit is your eye! 😉
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcosartoriphoto/8293186293/in/photostream
I took this above with 75mm and it’s a landscape.
Lately I’m having fun using 45mm on the streets: it’s a good way to train the eye and mind too look further away.
Thats a nice picture, and yes I see now my lens is panasonic but it does fit olympus cameras too
Of course, they share the same mount. 🙂 A lot of people here think it’s some kind of “holy war” between Olympus and Panasonic, and they don’t see that it’s one of the strenghts of m43 system, that of offering a lot of lenses with different characteristics that can be switched without problem from Oly to Pana cameras.
That shot while lovely shows the real weakness of mFT for landscape use the shadow noise is very disappointing for a 250ISO shot.That is where the best APS does better than the DXO gap might suggest at low ISO under say 400 The shadow noise from the likes of the D7100 has a significant advantage over the best mFT.
I saw mFT as my perfect replacement for heavy DSLR gear especially when trekking about the mountains, but I am certainly not too happy with the results. As such I am considering other options,all the chat goes on about better DR, better high ISO and better DOF control of larger format but I have found that the largest advantage is at low ISO. Shadow noise is an often critical component of many many types of shot.
Please go and stick your head in an oven and turn the gas on! Over 1000 views, 40 favourites, and 16 positive comments and you come along and start spurting some made up nonsense about noise!! The only noise here is the hot air escaping from you, you wouldn’t know art if it smacked you in the head!!! If you want to slag off like camera formats to make yourself feel good then go ahead but don’t do it at the expense of people’s creative work you insensitive oaf!!!!
No, it doesn’t. It shows perhaps the weakness of that one shot, it shows that PP could have been done better, settings could have been different; it shows a number of things, but not the weakness of the system.
And landscapes aren’t always shot in low light.
Please try knowing what you’re talking about before actually talking.
noise? well… i guess u r a DSLR fanboy 😛
watch those images at http://www.samudranil.in/portfolio/
i think no one can tell that they aren’t from a fullframe 😉
“That shot while lovely shows the real weakness of mFT for landscape use the shadow noise is very disappointing for a 250ISO shot.”
Shadow noise? It’s called haze in any real photographer’s language. Have you never taken a telephoto landscape before?
You’re serious?
The D7100 is accepted despite the fact that it has more noise than the D7000 or D300s, simply because people were crying for more pixels. Its sensor’s pixel density is similar to that of a 16 MP (micro) Four-Thirds sensor.
@sunlight I posted this shot just to show that you can take a landscape photo even with an “odd” focal lenght as 75mm, or 45mm as in the nice link the reader wrote above my comment.
For my landscapes, taken by passion, m43 is enough. I took that picture while driving: I stopped the car, opened the window and shot the sunset. A naive shot, I agree, but I loved the blue and orange combination.
As far as other kinds of photos, m43 is enough also for my customers.
Noise can be a plus certain times
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcosartoriphoto/9415709824/sizes/o/in/photostream/
One thing is sure to me: I have never been to an exhibition and started to pixel peeping photos. I had portraits printed 1 meter width, Franco Nero (actor) looked at them from 3-4 meters away and I got his congratulations.
Having said so, I have friends using MF Hasselblads, when needed, but guess what, they never smile while shooting..
I’m happy with m43 gears, Steve Huff (you may like him or not) wrote one of the most banal and underestimated things when choosing his best camera of the year: it’s the one you want to have with you the whole day. If m43 is such a failure for you, you can use a smartphone, a DSLR, a MF or a Polaroid, and be happy with it. For sure I won’t judge your choice. 😉
Great shot!
Nice!
Well, it beats reading the Sunday paper! 🙂
lol!
+1 🙂
+2 🙂
Thank you, admin, for the interesting toy! Strangely at first thought, larger lenses fit the E-M1 MUCH better visually – and the small ones appear laughable. A mFT body ought to be small. This one falsely pretends to give you the best of two worlds and beats the purpose of being useful for FT glass. If it had been a DSLR – the way it looks to be one, its ISO performance would have been much better. Now it sacrifices low-light shooting for the quality (highly questionable) of being hybrid, i.e., contrast-detect AND phase-detect. They should have simply made a DSLR – plus another one, a true mirrorless, and would have had commercial success, IMHO.
lol! i love how olympus comes out with a camera being just a bit bigger than the previous models and all of a sudden it’s the end of the world as if olympus will not go back to smaller bodies. news flash! they produce other bodies you know, give it time and they will have PDAF also. aside from slightly bigger base and grip molded to the body its a hair bigger than a em5
“This one falsely pretends to give you the best of two worlds and beats the purpose of being useful for FT glass.”
Well, each to his own, but having actual experience using one with 4/3 glass, I can say it works totally fine and indeed gives the best of 2 worlds, whereas you are speaking out of ignorance.
“If it had been a DSLR – the way it looks to be one, its ISO performance would have been much better.”
Slightly less then 1/4 stop if we go by the numbers you have been quoting. Come back when you actually know what that means.
“Now it sacrifices low-light shooting for the quality (highly questionable) of being hybrid, i.e., contrast-detect AND phase-detect.”
No, its not highly questionable, it is something you are utterly failing to understand, and has been explained so often to you that I won’t bother anymore.
But I will note that it is curious how in all your ranting, you totally ignore the 2/3 stop dynamic range improvement it has over the E-M5 for example. Obviously, you are also not understanding enough about this to realize that that also means you can achieve a better S/N ratio with the E-M1 (compared to the E-M5) despite it having an ever so slightly higher noise floor.
Doesn’t mean you have to like the camera, or buy it, and its totally valid to want something different, but stop making a fool of yourself by screaming without having the slightest clue what the things you are screaming about mean. Stop acting like a small child not getting his way and pick a camera of your liking instead.
E-M1: 1600 Euros with 14-42. E-PM2: 400 Euros with 14-42.
E-M1: 757 ISO. E-PM2: 932 ISO. 🙂 LOL.
E-M1: large and heavy, goes well with large 43 lenses, for a decade badly in need of a powerful sensor for low light.
E-PM2: small and light, goes well with small and fast lenses.
E-M1: the odd man out. 🙂 LOL.
Ever heard about ergonomics?
Know what dynamic range is?
Know how well a 45/1.8, 25/1.4, future 42.5/1.2, 12-35, 35-100, 14-150, 75-300, 100-300 and many more m4/3 lenses go with an e-m1?
Doesn’t mean wanting an e-pm2 instead can be totally valid for you, but your ‘argument’ isn’t about your personal choice, and is so extremely focussed on things you evidently don’t understand or are outright wrong that it makes you look like a fool, especially in the light of how often those things have been pointed out to you.
Now go buy that k-30 and go take pictures of your black cat in the coal cellar.
Jankoff, I needed a second m43 body for my work, I’m not bound to any brand since i’m simply a photography fanboy. I was in Venice, saw an Em1 in a shop and entered to try it.
The day after I bought in my fav shop.
(I have an Em5 with grip, I suggest you to try Em1 before saying it’s big)
“A mFT body ought to be small”. WTF? Agter you just said it looks better with large lenses. Your nickname Jankoff is playing on the word Jerk-off right?
How about this instead: ” A mFT body is yours to choose”. I’ve been using an E-PL1 for years. At the time, it was the smallest choice on the market. I’ve always used it with a VF2.
Guess what Jerkoff? My E-PL1 wearing the VF2 is BIGGER than an E-M1. Whoops, how did that happen? Maybe I should throw all the E-PL1 images away, taken on a too-big mFT camera…..bloody Olympus, telling me I was getting a “micro” camera.
I myself have E-PM2 with VF-3: a formidable combination with the Leica 25mm. But the VF-3 is a nuisance. The VF-4 is very good but for a little more cash (30%) you get a Pentax K-30 that IQ-wise blows Oly’s fanboys’ socks off. And has a great optical viewfinder. And for almost the same money (the price for the VF-4 only) you get an identical camera IQ-wise, Pentax K-01, indeed without a viewfinder but with a good fast lens (40mm 2.8). Olympus are trying very hard to rip somebody off. But who is it? Surely, not me! 🙂
So your choice of camera is valid, but not anyone else’s? Uh-huh.
Let’s compare apples with apples shall we?
“And for almost the same money (the price for the VF-4 only) you get an identical camera IQ-wise, Pentax K-01, indeed without a viewfinder but with a good fast lens (40mm 2.8).”
Here’s your Pentax compared with the m43 compact m43 versions (you were complaining about size):
http://camerasize.com/compact/#285,387.373,491.30,ha,t
I had a same feeling when I saw some 4/3 lenses how nicely they match the EM1
@jackoff
Sorry, did I miss the rumour that said every single other MFT camera was being replaced with the E-M1?
Stop whining for no good reason, you epitomise the selfish whining mentality that pervades the western world, why don’t you grow a pair and find something more meaningful to cry about.
“Stop whining for no good reason, you epitomise the selfish whining mentality that pervades the western world”
Why should I be whining when I am a happy man, shooting with the two best mFT instruments, E-PM2 and Leica 20 1.4. Having some very good FT cameras and lenses apart from that. This isn’t whining, this is devastating criticism, completely justified. And let’s see who will be whining … 🙂 When I get the K-30 … 🙂
“This isn’t whining,”
Yes it totally is.
“this is devastating criticism,”
ridiculous arguments that have been shown to be either irrelevant or just plain wrong you mean.
“completely justified.”
You’d first have to understand the things you are talking about before being able to say they are completely justified.
As it is, you clearly show you do not understand what you are talking about. You simply ignore being pointed at flaws in your logic, incorrect math, incorrect facts, and just keep repeating the same crap.
So no, that is not completely justified criticism, that is ridiculous whining.
“And let’s see who will be whining … 🙂 When I get the K-30 … :-)”
Not me, and not megolin and not any of the other people who responded to you. Whatever camera you buy affects you, not us, so the only one who might end up whining as a result would be you.
What you don’t seem to understand here is that this all has totally zero to do with what camera you (don’t) buy but with the totally ridiculous and childish way in which you respond on any mentioning of the e-m1, as if it was specifically created to piss off Jankoff.
Now please go buy a k-30 or whatever other camera your heart desires, and go make some pictures.
Who is whining?
Whining – because the E-M1 is a failure. DSLR-like but not quite. mFT but not small at all. Big, heavy, infuriatingly expensive and with a lower ISO capacity than a camera costing four times less.
Whining – because the 12-40 is also a failure. Declared a “pro” lens, made of plastic exactly where it shouldn’t be, this causing mass criticism and discontent: http://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=56256. A “pro” lens crumbling easily while costing the earth and claiming to feature an “all metallic construction”: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3587554.
Who is whining?
You ask, “whining?” who me?
Then give us another paragraph of your whining!
You have some sort of reality distortion field floating around your head. Wake up and look at you personality!
Hmmm yes, mass criticism…
Like..
“I have used the best quality equipment in the world all my working life and I can guarantee that no metal Nikon, Leica or Hasselblad lens would have survived that drop in working condition. I know, because I’ve been there and done it.
If anyone wishes the 12-40 was made of metal, I would quote the Chinese proverb. Be very careful what you wish for – it might come true.”
Just one quote from the DPR thread, there are many similar ones on the mu-43 thread.
There obviously are also people unhappy with that, and understandingly so, but calling that mass criticism, and actually using it to substantiate a totally different and unrelated ‘argument’ (and one that has been shown wrong repeatedly for that matter)…
Words like absurd, ridiculous, insane are what are coming to mind here.
Sorry Jankoff, why do you insist on making yourself look like a total idiot when it comes to this subject? Its sad and actually a bit frustrating, because when it comes to other subjects you show you aren’t an idiot at all, rather the opposite, you tend to have somewhat unorthodox but interesting point of views, as long as you don’t get stuck in blind rage.
Jankoff, your leica lens has an identity crisis. It does not know if its a 20mm or a 25mm? Or possibly, even if it exists.
Lol poor lens!
Today: E-M5 for 799.- with 14-42 lens at Amazon Germany…
I bet that it´s an returned item and not brand new.
It’s a fun web site, and I saw some lenses I didn’t even realise were in the catalogue, particularly four thirds. But wouldn’t it have made sense to have a direct link on the page to that lens? You hit shop all lenses or you hit buy now but neither take you to the lens you are drooling over. Anyway, I did enjoy the site. 300mm f2.8 shots of the moon could be fun.
They seem to be missing some lenses where is my great favourite 20mm f1.7 !
There are only lenses made by Olympus..
I think this is already online since 1 or 2 months.
Yeah I remember seeing it at time of E-M1 launch. It’s nice anyway.
I have discovered that people who don’t like m4/3 are often Vietnam veterans or even Pro-Apartheid guerrillas. Don’t believe me? See here:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3587817?page=3
For them their 4/3 camera must really be the substitute of their precious gun,they must still be shell shocked.
Wonder of what photographic neurosis are going to suffer next the our trolls/NSA warriors, who spy our every second
Total Sony recall? Send us to Guantanamo if we buy m4/3?