Robin Wong (Click here) just published the third part of his Olympus E-M5 review. Part one can be found here and part two here. In this third part he tested the Macro Photography, the 5 axis stabilization, manual focusing with the electronic viewfinder and the handling of the camera.
I have to say that there is one point were I don’t agree with him. When he says that focus peaking from the NEX isn’t that impressing as many do say. I have to disagree. I extensively used the [shoplink 26379]NEX-5n[/shoplink] with the [shoplink 29666 ebay]Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4[/shoplink] manual focus lens and focus peaking is damn useful! I wish Olympus and Panasonic could add that feature via firmware upgrade soon.
—
E-M5 is within the most sold mirrorless camera rankings at Amazon US (Click here), Amazon UK (Click here), Amazon DE (Click here), and Amazon JP (Click here).
E-M5 preorders (Click on the names of the stores to see the product page):
Black E-M5 body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, J&R, Warehouse UK, Redcoon Germany and Amazon Japan.
Silver E-M5 body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, J&R, Warehouse UK, Redcoon Germany, and Amazon Japan.
Black E-M5 body with 14-42mm lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and J&R.
Black E-M5 body with 12-50mm lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, J&R, Jessops, Redcoon Deutschland, Amazon UK, Amazon Deutschland and Amazon Japan.
Silver E-M5 body with 12-50mm lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, J&R, Jessops, Amazon UK, Amazon Deutschland and Amazon Japan.
160 Responses
He is quite a creative person, and versatile too
If lovin’ you is Wong,
I don’t wanna be wight. 😀
I seriously got the feeling that mister Wong is pay’d by Olympus. I am gonna wait for some real reviews.
I disagree. Robin is a serious, unabashed fanboy, but he is not “paid by Olympus.” Read the rest of his site before you pass judgement, he has been critical of Oly where criticism is due, including in this very review. And aren’t we all fanboys of a sort? Why are you on THIS site? Anyway, Robin is doing something that no-one else does – writing a true camera enthusiast’s review. Appreciate it for what it is.
I disagree.
Wong is very very very exited about the em5 and only highlights the positive points. That could be but for example Oly forgot focus peaking and now Oly try to tell us thru Wong that we don’t need it because it isn’t that good. That is a big joke. Its plain and simple to see for every one who is not blinded by the light that this is a commercial instead of a real review. Just my 2 cents.
But why are you on this site……..
Cuz I’m a 4/3 format fanboy 🙂
There are quite a lot of people in different forums – among them numerous NEX users – who claim that focus peaking isn’t too useful with fast lenses as it isn’t exactly what you would call precise. I can’t make an assessment as I never used a NEX – but couldn’t it be that this technology ist just a hype as the allegedly great C-AF of the Nikon 1 cameras?
In that article, Robin’s opinion on focus peaking was specifically related to macro photography. He may actually have a point because for macro photography, I would prefer a magnified view to confirm my focus instead of focus peaking. Focus peaking has its advantages and uses but IMO (and I think Robins), its not for macro shooting.
Besides, everyone is entitled to an opinion. You seem to be pushing focus peaking. Does that make you a paid Sony troll?
+100
Very true, I’ve used FocusPeaking (in the mean time for an extensive period) first when I rented a Nex for a litlle over a week and recently again.
I most say I stay with my earlier findings.FocusPeaking to be fine for quick manual zone focussing, but critical focus is nowhere near as usefull as with MagnifiedView.
I think the combination of the two technologies supporting each other in a camera would really be the killer feature for manual focus.
Quick Zonefocussing to get in then button press MagnifiedView to finish it of for critical focus.
This issue has been brought up time and time again and Robin has addressed it on his site. I’m grateful for the hands-on experience and detailed reports he gives us and don’t question his motivations as an enthusiastic photographer.
But if you still have reason to doubt him, just focus on the images themselves and ignore his writing. I mean, you’re not going to try and argue that somehow the images look better than they really are, right?
I think whether he is paid by Olympus or not, is irrelevant if he is a big fanboy. That alone taints the opinion and any objectivity on that end. Look at the superlative descriptions of DR and look at the E-5 review back then and tell me if that type of user review can be really taken seriously on those descriptions.
I think it is nice he includes shots and walks through useful stuff, but there’s a bit of superlative stuff written that really needs to be filtered out to get the more down to earth part. Just IMHO of course.
PS: Getting free cameras from Olympus is effectively a form of payment. One reason it raises conflict of interest questions even if he has the best of intentions.
Raist, how many times do you have to sing the same song? Forget it already, everyone knows what you are trying to say, and repeating yourself again and again is getting everyone annoyed.
The lunatic has arrived. Will someone notify the authorities and get him sectioned.
Raist said:
> PS: Getting free cameras from Olympus is effectively a form of payment. One reason it raises conflict of interest questions even if he has the best of intentions.
No free cameras. Robin (and presumably his weekend buddy) just got the E-M5’s as weekend ers.
I stand corrected of that’s the case with the em5 but do keep in mind his e-5 started as a review er that ended up as a gift. That’s both a payment and a conflict of interest in taking his opinion at face value (note that I am not saying illicit or illegal).
It is not a payment. It is a reward. There is a lot of difference. Personally I believe that Robin deserves more rewards as he produces results that are interpretable by every one and can be related to in real world use.
Unlike the pixel peepers who have a gallery of charts on their walls and sideboards, with comments like “I nearly bought this one. But….see that in the bottom left corner 3 pixels giving a …….”
Yes Robin is real and if Oly give him a reward that’s fine with me. I just hate subsidising the US market.
A “reward’ as you put it, is a payment. You are trading goods instead of cash.
You are saying he’s serious an objective, but he says that the Pen5/EM5 sensor is as good as best APS-C which is false. Completely false. There’s something called conflict of interest- look it up. Even if you mean the best, and you get offered free cameras (E-5 was given to him by Olympus) it’s just human nature that it will predispose you even if you mean well (and I do think overall he means well).
Look also at all the praise and “non issues” he mentioned on DR of the E-5 only to then praise the extra DR of the EM-5. Doesn’t strike you as strange? He has some nice photos, but that doesn’t make him automatically immune to bias.
I doubt that is the case, but even so, the images speak for themselves, the rest is in the spec sheet.
Yes, these reviews read more like commercials. What started my doubts was that in the videos that were apparently shot by an E-M5 Mr. Wong appeared with an E-M5. So, there were two E-M5’s involved, while Mr. Wong only mentioned that Olympus lent him one. My impression is that a whole camera crew, including lighting guy, was with Mr. Wong during his “testing” of the E-M5.
Robin clearly mentioned that he was working with his friend, another videographer, and even posted the link to his blog/site. He also clearly mentioned that the other videographer has another E-M5.
I don’t see anything unusual here. Why can’t they have two units? care to explain?
As Robin Wong clearly states in his 3 reviews and a preview post , the videos were shot by his friend Sanjit of fullcirclepix.com. Sanjit apparently was ALSO given an EM5 to test. Check out his site and he even has a short “making of” video. No conspiracies, except that Oly is giving out demo units like candy to the better-known bloggers and Oly-oriented photogs. That’s called good marketing….
“That’s called good marketing”-> which in turn goes with “Yes, these reviews read more like commercials.”
That said, I don’t agree it’s a photo crew doing the review. But yes, the point that the review does read like a commercial in some ways, I think it’s valid.
Too much conspiracy talk I guess. I don’t think Olympus Malaysia just gave out E-M5 to just one professional photographer in the country. Obviously some other people have it too, and they happened to know each other and decided to do the test altogether. Why not?
He has been very forthcoming about the fact that the videos have been shot by a fellow blogger who is also using another ed E-M5. Robin has stated several times that he does not have much experience with video, but Sanjit at fullcirclepix.com does. In fact, the videographer appears in the background of at least one of the featured photos in part 2 of the review. Sanjit has been posting video results at http://fullcirclepix.com/blog.
There is no mention of a “lighting guy” or other crew.
From part 1 of his review: “I have had my hands on the initial production unit of the E-M5”. Nowhere does he specify that he received only one unit.
Further on: “I am working very closely with a great photographer/videographer friend of mine, Sanjitpaal Singh”, who evidently is doing the video work.
Last, if you look at the Part 1 review video “Advanced testing – Part 01”, you can clearly see two E-M5 units at 2:12 (a black held by Robin, and a silver resting on the table).
Robin has freely admitted elsewhere that he is a big Olympus fanboy, so no doubt the positive review. Whether or not he is paid by Olympus is anyone’s guess, but that’s just speculation.
Well, Ferdinand, for someone claiming that the review “reads like a commercial”, you surely didn’t read much.
It looks like I stepped on quite a few toes. 🙂
I admit that I did not catch the sentences about a second unit being involved. Rather than spelling out all text, I may have been too much focused on the pics posted by Mr. Wong, which are truly wonderful.
The reason that I find the review read more like a commercial is that Mr. Wong repeats some of the talking points of Olympus. Of course, he has the right to do so, but it comes across as biased to me, and I have the right to think so.
Now, do not get me wrong: I find the E-M5 a marvelous camera. It has the potential to become a classic, and it will have a very positive influence on Micro Four Thirds as a whole, in my opinion.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, you don’t have to worry.
Robin is really over-enthusiastic at times. Everyone agrees on that.
There ave very flew unbiased reviews of cameras. Magazines conduct reviews what they think their advertisers and readers want, in that order; then edit accordingly. So even if the reviewer was unbiased what they are reviewing and how it is edited and published will generally not be.
Additionally it is hard to review a camera in an unbiased way, as we have are personal preferences on the interface. If a camera fits my hands nice changes are it will not fit most other hands the same way. There are exceptional designed items that fit various types of hands the same but they are an exception. One it comes to software most tend to like what they are familiar with in how the menus work etc. If there is one key element that you use a lot if it is missing in a camera you are disappointed; even though the camera may have some features that you are more beneficial to you.
Then there is the “fan boy” issue. We put to much effort in justifying our purchases etc.
Depending on what type of shooter we fancy are self being or need to be, we also have real different demands.
You may be correct, about Robin working for Olympus.( I have no idea why every one would be so “touchy” about that????). Maybe Oly throws him equipment for free. In the US ALL of our politicians are bought by big business, so I am used to this. 🙂 In all of the reviews he only uses Oly products in the reviews. Oly external Flash, Lenses: 12mm OLY, 45mm Oly and this Oly 50mm Macro Lens. Nothing Panasonic. The presentation is kindof suspect.
Although, he does great reviews!!!!!! Very informative with WAY better photography than most.
If you have followed Robin’s blog, you will see how he experimented with macro photography starting from just E-520 and the kits lenses. Then he added flash and macro lens along the way. The Fl36R and the macro lens belong to him. He shoots most of his macro work with that, and has refined his technique of single handed handling the camera. I don’t see why he would do anything different for the review.
In this blog videocast (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QB_JpqDk0Tw&feature=related), Robin seems very upfront that he got the camera directly from Olympus Malaysia. However, at the closing, his friend puts him on the spot about being an Olympus “ambassador” (I think was the term). Robin corrects him to note that he is NOT an ambassador for Olympus, just a fan of Olympus.
So Robin seems honest and pretty full disclosure — at least he doesn’t hide his fanboy affection. Also, he does criticize his camera by mentioning some fogging in the viewfinder and makes the connection that he does not believe that should be possible in a weather-sealed camera. So he’s not 100% fanboy.
To me, Robin seems credible while pleasantly upbeat and informative. I also note that he really puts a lot of effort into expressing himself with some emotion — and I think that effort pays off to make his blog videos seem so engaging and personal.
Like I said…it any event I love his reviews and his photography!
You might work for the CIA.
no…you have the look for that…me….I am just using a Kodak Brownie?
Ferdinand:
Apology accepted. I feel that Robin Wong – his views, opinions, style, and most of all photograhy- are a great asset to the Photography community. Hate to see his passion cheapened or unfairly criticized, so my apologies for being so “defensive.” As he writes many a time – lets all just get out there and make some great images!
How can you invent a story about some sort of paid commercial with a crew for lightning, based on two cameras? That beats me. I can think of several simpler and more likely explanations.
+1
Why wait for some one to be paid to come up with what Robin gives you for nothing. At least his opinions are honest. Not all reviewers are honest in terms of being biased or unbiased.
He is not paid by Olympus like other who writes blog or blogger had a chance to used it first that it nothing more it’s for the passion and beliefs Of The product of Olympus… Like digital rev they are not paid by the company like Nikon and canon but they enjoy it letting people learn a bit more with the passion and believe of the product…
He is not paid by Olympus like other who writes blog or blogger had a chance to used it first that it nothing more it’s for the passion and beliefs Of The product of Olympus… Like digital rev they are not paid by the company like Nikon and canon but they enjoy it letting people learn a bit more with the passion and believe of the product…
@ Admin
have to disagree about focus peaking, magnified view is more versatile, easier to use and exact, anyways….
more E-M5 macro shots here by Dennis Tan http://www.flickr.com/groups/om-d_user/ also some C-AF + Tracking samples by him too..
And I will have to disagree with you. Magnification can be useful but disorienting for framing. Panasonic has the lower level magnification so it is picture in picture which can be useful. Full magnification with moving objects is a real pain. With the Sony you get your choice of one or the other or both together.
The other option should be Partial Magnification, which only the desired portion of the image is magnified. Both focus peaking and partial magnification are very useful, especially when taking snapshot or shooting video.
@Terry, what you describe is zone focussing and FocusPeaking is ideal for that. But if you need to have a certain part critically in focus then you’re left wanting. MagnifiedView is then much much more useful.
I’ve said it many timethe two technologies should be combined, THAT would be useful. In my area of photography I use AF for anything moving and statically items are better done with MagnifiedView at the moment.
To be honest the E-M5 is not particularly suitable for macro photography. Insects require a sharp, long lens (preferably at least 150mm EFL) and a ring flash, both still missing in m4/3. The viewable stabilization would be helpful for focusing and longer exposures, but that is common to many mounts (although there aren’t many stabilized macro lenses out there). I agree that peaking is a better solution than magnification in this specific genre (unless the subject is completely static). As to the camera, bulk is a virtue for macro. The E-3 / E-5 are better suited to this application.
Actually you can get a ring flash for m43, but honestly its not very good.. I do tons of macro with insects and my favorite lens is 35mm with extension tubes, or Leica R 100mm. I just use my GH2 flash with home made diffuser, works pretty dam good!
Got my vote for adding focus peaking to Panasonic Though, use lots of manual focus lenses.
What do you mean by 150mm effective focal length?
My understanding is: Whenever someone mentions EFL they mean what the lens would be on a 35mm/Full-Frame DSLR. In the example above he is mentioning having a macro lens on a MFT camera that would be the equivalent of a 150mm on a FF camera. In this case he is talking about MFT so that would be a 75mm lens made with MFT mount (or its equivalent). I am old school…and the equivalent reference alway helps me. I grew up with 35mm cameras and know them like the back of my hand. There are soooooooo many different camera formats now with all of the point & shoots, MFT, all the DSLR crop factors, etc. that 35mm/FF has been the standard to compare to so that evdrybody has an understanding of the perspective of a lens. …because if you tell me you are shooting with a 10mm S lens on a Canon 7D…the first thing I am going to ask you is what is the “equivalent” focal length of the lens, as with the info you have given me so far I have no idea what the lens perspective is that you are using. When you then tell me 16mm equivalent, I immediately know your field of view, etc. because of my experience with 35mm that is familiar to me.
I would imagine for someone young who did not grow up with 35mm…and who has no experience, this would be VERY confusing, to say the least! LOL.
So Full-Frame is the Standard that everything else is compared to.
Does that make sense?
Thank you. That is what I thought he meant, in which case, I have no hesitation in saying he is talking out of his nether sphincter.
The Olympus OM system was renowned for it’s macro lenses and accessories. Not surprising given Olympus’ expertise with endoscopes.
The longest focal length macro lens in the OM range was 135mm. Most of the macro lenses were in the 50-90mm range (4 of them). I have two of them, the 80mm f4 and 90mm f2. I also have the T8 ringflash and can say that for photographing insects, it is usually more a hindrance than a help due to the size of the reflector getting in the way or disturbing the habitat the insects occupy. The T28 twin head flash would be the more preferred choice for insect macro work or a hand held off the camera T32 as per Robin’s methodology.
All of the OM system cameras like my OM4-Ti, were about the size and weight of the E-M5, half that of the E3 and E5. They were well suited to macro work. The extra weight and bulk of the E3 and E5 would be a hindrance, not an advantage.
Makes absolute sense.
I did not grow up with analog film cameras, however. Still this info is most important. Without it comparing competing camera systems and focal lenghts, or different FOVs for different applications, is all but impossible.
So, yeah… I totally second your statement!
Ring flash makes Macro photography easier but doesn’t make Macro photos lively or exceptional because ring flash just gives you only one direction of light.
To use flash wisely and creatively with Macro photography, you have to use wireless flash. For M4/3, wireless trigger is an excellent example.
Aye, you’re right about off camera flash adding dimension to the subject. I was thinking in the lines of scientific applications, where you want to minimize shadows.
@Sneye: Isn’t there other uses of macro photography than to take insect pictures? Two popular Nikon macros have effective focus lengths of 60mm and 105mm. Robin used a 100mm effective focus length, and by the end of the summer, there will be a 120mm (2x60mm). I’m not into macro pics myself, but I’m sure the E-M5 can be excellent for many types of macro photography.
You’re absolutely right. I was referring to Mr. Wong’s report. I’m sure the camera in question can be used for handheld macro work quite comfortably, but it doesn’t offer particular advantages over most of its competitors.
My point was that the type of shooting used in the review does little to demonstrate the camera’s handling, manual focusing and stabilization mechanism. Actually, the review is perhaps more about the photographer than it is about the gear.
While I appreciated learning about Robin’s style of macro photography (with flash in one hand) and Oly wireless flash use, I was also bothered that the IBIS 5-way wasn’t really being worked hard (if at all). The flash seems to counteract the need for steady shooting (which is great when desired).
I too wanted to see the camera + IBIS do the work, not so much the flash.
Actually, it was funny. I think the video footage OF Robin taking the pictures was likely a better demonstration of the E-M5 and IBIS. It was pretty steady. So if the video of Robin was handheld by Robin’s friend with the other Malaysia E-M5, then the video was pretty good demonstration. (But the video didn’t showcase the video, or even claim it is by E-M5.)
One thing about Robin, I think, is he does not like to compromise his technique for the purpose of reviews. I suggest that because he was so adamant about not shooting high ISO just for the sake of high ISO (in the E-M5 ISO review he did). He waited for an indoor bar setting and night shooting for his review. So, while he seems very easygoing, he seems pretty hard-nosed about giving his technique priority over contrived testing. (Just based on what little I’ve seen of his video blogs.)
While I learned from his macro blog, I did not feel as satisfied this time as I did from his earlier E-M5 review blogs.
You should take a course at comprehensive reading.
All you complain about was stated in the review.
The place he went to is forbidden for tripods so everything is out of hand. The video is done by a friend blogger also with the e-m5.
And he sounds like a REAL photographer, trusting on his technique and wanting HQ piccies iso of compromised ones using HI ISO just for the sake of using HI ISO. Going away from your technique will change your result and thus the review will not be a fair view of the camera.
ALL the review sites work like that. They have their own technique they consistently use.
This is not E-M5 so is problem by macro, but we need a 100mm macro lens and maybe a X15/X20 extension tube also.
As a very experienced macro photographer who was taking macro photographs with the OM system 30 years ago I have to disagree. Firstly some of the best insect photographers in the world use the Canon MP-E 65mm. Yes long macro lenses have their uses and my second favourite macro lenses to the MP-E 65mm, is the Sigma 150mm macro. Camera bulk can have advantages and disadvantages. After a few hours of handheld macro photography you wish the whole set up was a lot lighter. Also I would say that a ring flash is probably not that good for macro photography, and you can get much better macro flash shots with a small normal flashgun with good diffusion than with a ring flash. Ring flashes are best suited to medical photography, and actually a dental photographer reported that my concave diffuser was much better than a ring flash, and resulted in much less blown highlights.
I was not kidding when I said I could design a macro flashgun for Olympus that would simply blow all other macro flashes away. I have spent a long time working out how flash works in the macro region. If you look at the work of Kurt who also hails from the same part of the world as Robin, you can see what can be achieved with this diffusion. And I have more advanced ideas for creating a single easy to use purpose designed flashgun, and diffuser.
http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/
Thank you for your response. You seem very experienced and knowledgeable.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but IMO the MP-E65 is so popular due to its extreme magnification and despite its short focal length.
What you say about the use of flash for macro work is all new to me and very interesting. I’ve been using off camera flash for insects, much in the same manner as described by Mr. Wong. For scientific applications which require high levels of detail and minimum shadows, I have been using ring flash for years with satisfactory results.
Yes you are right that the MP-E 65mm tends to be used because it is the only macro lens currently available that goes greater than 1:1 natively. Although I did specifically get a Sigma 70mm f2.8 macro because it has a similar working distance and focal length, and does infinity to 1:1. I have changed my attitude in recent years. I used to be of the opinion that longer focal lengths were better, but I have started to appreciate shorter focal lengths. Although you have to know what you are doing to get that close to a free live insect, but it can be done.
Ring flashes do provide very consistent lighting and you don’t have to bother too much about direction. However aesthetically you can get much nicer lighting. My own diffusion techniques aim to mimic natural light under and overcast sky. Whilst initially the lighting looks quite flat, a levels adjust gets you all the contrast you want, and if you look closely you can see the lighting is directional. Here are a few examples. These are some of the shiniest insects around.
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6189/6043618893_ab41e4c8f6_o.jpg
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4051/4582559038_abfbdfbec2_o.jpg
This comparison is from the same image, but with different processing. You can see there are still micro shadows with this lighting and how you can make this softer lighting look more contrasty and punchy by simply adjusting the levels and microcontrast. Incidentally, the last comparison was a crop from the low resolution images to show what the lower resolution images look like under magnification, and the full resolution image contains far more detail.
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4026/4543870381_a58378cf98_o.jpg
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4037/4545555766_b64b9bb2f8_o.jpg
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4058/4544922993_10fe85fef1_o.jpg
Great pictures! I’ve always been interested in macro photography and had a few attempts with the FL36R. I had a big problem though, in that the light from one direction caused too many shadows. I couldn’t hold another flash or reflector because my hands were full, so do you have any tips on how to add dimension while keeping the shadows soft?
http://gakuranman.com/kanabun-drone-beetle-macro-with-the-e-p3/
Hi Michael
The simplest way to provide good diffusion and lighting is my end of lens concave light tent. Originally I just used a white plastic vending machine cup, although I now use vellum paper. My good internet fried Kurt uses white foam, and I will use pages from his blog to illustrate this. I like the simplicity of his set ups.
http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/2010/10/mt24ex-concave-diffuser-quick-update.html
http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/2011/05/270ex-for-macro-improved-version.html
http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/2011/05/270ex-for-macro.html
As you can see this very simple method produces beautifully diffuse lighting. There is a very simple means of making one of the front mounted brackets. Use a cokin type square filter holder with the correct adapter ring, and then put on one of the modualar hoods backwards, so it goes around the end of the lens, rather than projecting forwards. You will then need to mount a plate or bracket on that square hood, by gluing or bolting it.
You could of course just hold the flash, but this makes my other trick difficult. To prevent a black background I try and hold a piece of leaf behind the subject. Keep it just far enough away so it blurs, but close enough so the flash still lights it.
For extra fill in below dark beetles I sometimes use an extra little reflector. Just small pieces of flat plastic cut from packing, with aluminum tape stuck to it. Mine attaches to my flash bracket, but you can just lay them on ground in front of the beetle. They provide that extra fill in because some beetles are very black underneath, and you will need local adjustments in post processing to bring out the detail here without the fill in.
love the very diffuse lighting, great shots.
“E-M5 is not particularly suitable for macro photography.”
IBIS 5-way? I can hardly wait to get my E-M5 and take macro with it. At least for handheld, it seems like it could be godsend. Even the new kit lens says “macro.”
I also eagerly await Oly’s new oversized 60mm macro lens. Why is it so big? I hope the optics are even better than the legendary 4/3 50mm, and I suspect the focus will be really fast (3-way focus limiter + E-M5 + IBIS 5-way).
I actually suspect the E-M5 will be very good (if not exceptional) for macro and am eager to see how good.
Very nice pics 🙂 Homepage?
I also use focus peaking extensively on my Nex5N. I would say it’s useful but not entirely reliable. I always have to use magnification for precise focusing. Using weak setting would improve the precision though.
The best focus assist is still Nikon’s 2-1-0 system. When it comes to 0, you know you are on the sharpest focus.
Maybe so, but the fact that you can choose to use either focus peaking OR magnified view gives you more flexibility.
There are many situations where I could see using focus peaking rather than magnified focus assist with my manual lenses and GH2.
I agree it depends on the kind of photography wether peaking or magnifying is the better choice. But for critical focusing, magnifying is superior to peaking method imo.
Robin Wong will be in love with focus peaking once it is implemented in an Olympus camera 🙂
Well, he is not condemning the focus peaking, he is merely stating that for macro photography, it may not work effectively. But ok for general use.
“For general manual focusing, it works, but for macro photography where high magnification is prioritized, the focus peaking does not really deliver. Those who shoot REAL extreme in manual focusing, such as full magnification in macro, would know that the focus peaking is actually useless, and will NOT work accurately at all.”
Rather than going conspiracy theory, I would say that it depends on the type of shooting and gear you are using. Hence for Wong the focus peaking isn’t of much use.
2-1-0, yes but what is in focus? It only measures where the camera focus point is.
Peaking, tells you where the focus in is on parts around the selected focus point.
It is not perfect but the only thing that works if you want to avoid focus than recompose.
Even old split screens and modern magnification works only i the middle of the frame.
So nobody wins at the end… Thats why we have touchscreen and AF, now! ;-P
Put the 2 1 0 at several various places of the frame (with some different patterns, user chooses pattern).
I have been helping with a class for young people taught using the 5n, one week the use of manual focus was taught the students that used the peak focusing pictures were not quite as sharp as the ones that used other methods. With this and maybe my sometimes dislike of video, I feel peak focusing is nice to have, but needs only to be used when appropriate.
Has anyone used an auto focus confirmed adapter with legacy lens? I see the glue on chip and was considering getting one to try.
You can magnify any chosen area of the frame (at least with the Olympus implementation).
Rarely do I focus on ANYthing dead-center in the frame, auto-focus OR manual focus. When I focus with either AF or manual lenses, I shift the focus point and then magnify. It only takes a few seconds. The GH2 touch screen works for that with any lens.
I suppose some people only focus in the center and “compose” with the crop tool later.
Hasselblad has only one focus point, in the middle.
+100!
It’s funny how camera “humps” have suddenly become lovely things, so, I’d suspect the same thing with focus peaking.
Faux humps have a functional reason. They help steady the camera, adding a third “anchor” to the grip. Some like them, some don’t. Personally I’d rather have the viewfinder near the corner so I can shoot with both eyes open, but it’s not a deal breaker. Never was.
Personally, I would have preferred a humpless camera. But I tend to accept the arguments for designing the E-M5 with the hump. And it makes the pill easier to swallow that the E-M5 is considerably lower than the E-P3 with EVF. The new IS and built-in EVF are important.
Regarding peak focusing, I like the idea! It would certainly be nice if the E-M5 had this feature. I suspect it is difficult to make it accurate — I don’t know how the focus iso-levels, or whatever it is, are computed.
Why do you even bother with a fanboy site?
I ll wait for real life testing, then i will consider dxo and dpreview tests too
DoX is a waste of time they tell you that you use a bottle base for all lenses that are real world prices. DPreview was one of the original hate anything 4/3 sites, though they have improved. BUT DoX! you need real help!
Listen and watch Robin you will learn more.
i found DP Review and DXO Mark kind of boring to read and sees the sample image.,.just not my taste of reading,.I like review from a photographer perspective not a scientific point of view,. Robin,.Steve ,Pekka,.are the real example,.
I’ve own a sony nex5n for 3 months and i never find focus peaking a game changer…I mean, if you want to be sure that focus area is focused well you have to magify…that’s the reason i never used it.
I’m not defending Wong, but as he says…He is not paid by Olympus, doesn’t do his reviews as a “professional” photographer but as a user & as always: the images speak for themselves.
Back to the review: He does a great job in my eyes & many other users.
Wow Robin has Superman on his side. Cool !!
+1
+2
Robin wong is a known supporter of Olympus. He gets ers from Olympus Malaysia and he blogs about it. Is he impartial? You decide. But I think the photos speak for themselves.
The mush that EM-5 spits out is quite remarkable. Where is the GH-3?
Mush? Please share.
Take a look at the high ISO part. Quite a mush, even when the NR is OFF.
I don’t mind following your suggestion, but please do not leave me guessing.
URL? If you are referring to one of Robin’s videos, please indicate a timecode where I find the image to which you refer. Thx.
This one (among the others shown): https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-c0of6dBzPbA/T1dKRYUAN4I/AAAAAAAAPpo/CmxgOO4i898/s1024/P1010144%2520%25282%2529.jpg
From here: http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2012/03/olympus-om-d-e-m5-review-bukit-bintang.html
Thank you.
Yup, I think I’m seeing what you’re seeing. Those do not seem the most flattering photos, even though they’re impressive for the size sensor (which I think is what Robin was impressed by). And I still liked the overall tone of the photograph.
What actually bothered me more than some pixel mush was how flat such vibrant subjects look. There’s not much pop, yet there seems to be plenty in the photo that could or should pop. While I’m excited by the E-M5, these photos left me wanting something more, and I’m not sure why they turned out the way they did.
The ISO 2000 photo later on (image sample 2) did not seem to solve the ISO 4000 photo problems either, so I’m not sure it’s the ISO. Maybe the lighting?
Quite possibly it is the lighting and that Robin Wong may not be experienced in photographing such subjects. Yes.
It is worth noting that Mr. Wong (and his video associate) only had the cameras in their possession for a weekend. Most of the shooting they were doing was unplanned, so it unlikely they had any time to do any proper lighting setup or maximize the camera’s settings to best capture every scene on the fly. I think their goal was more volume than quality, they wanted to cover as much ground in as many different environments as possible with the short time at their disposal. Judging by the terrific exposures in other parts of these reviews, I would say the examples you’ve pointed out could have been nicer had the situation been less haphazard. You are correct that those particular shots are underwhelming. I am won over more by the overall impressions rather than the few less appealing representations, especially realizing that he had so little time in which to get all these shots taken.
Good reminder.
It is easy to forget that while Robin’s blog posts span a week or more, Robin and friend packed the various shoots all into one weekend. Robin and friend are very generous to share the fruits of their labor (not to mention the time afterwards to put together all these blog entries!).
Another interesting note about Robin and the E-M5 is from his first video blog on the E-M5. Robin’s colleague asked him whether he would buy an E-M5, and Robin said: no, he is going to wait for the E-7! Then Robin hemmed and hawed about “if there’s an E-7,” but I would be surprised if Robin does not already know something(s) about the E-7. 🙂
I wait for E-7 also 😛
Have you read Robin’s text? “We are talking about shooting handheld all the way, with no flash and fully available light only.” He has used only available light; no flash, no additional rigging of lights.
It’s a M4/3 sensor, what were you expecting? I like to pixel peep but this is ridiculous. I use it for reference only as the final images won’t be viewed at 100%.
I come from the NEX side of things and I find this rather impressive.
I posted links. It awaits moderation (don’t know why?!). Simply they are from the same Robin Wong, part 1 or 2.
The only mush is your brain. Nice try at spreading FUD.
Panasonic has a check in the mail.
Wow! The rumor sites have become populated with very cultured people!
You still haven’t even answered Occam’s very reasonable question. If you’re just polluting the comments yourself, don’t get upset when you get called out for it.
From Occam’s post earlier it was obvious that he is aware of Robin Wong’s earlier parts showing the mush at high ISO. Those calling names appear to be of a cultured nature. The Olympus corporate culture that is. 😉
@ Vivek: To be fair- your original “mush” comment comes off as very trollish when presented without example of what you feel is “mush” (I am aware you later clarified your position). Not the best way to introduce intelligent discourse. The reaction is natural.
Even when something very negative is posted, before assuming the poster to be a “troll” and calling names, those brand worshipers ought to have been aware of what was already available as examples. Mush when presented so clearly can only be called mush.
If a few folks are going to be going to be that passionate about a brand and a company it shows that they are not that serious about photography.
Good luck to them! 🙂
These are interesting times and the choices are plenty. I have the right to choose the best that is available for my purposes based solely on merit and not based on a brand or even a format. 😉
Would I be posting what I think anymore? I doubt it!
Don’t worry Vivek, I see it too, I just didn’t want to post about it because I knew I (like you) would be attacked.
Please keep posting what you think!
I agree that Robin may have been caught with poor light etc, but that’s what happens, isn’t it. I’m happy he posted these examples, for a while it looked like Oly had one out of the hat.
So we’re back to waiting for a better sensor. Oly clearly has the camera for it, can’t wait for m43 sensor tech to leap ahead!
What kind of quality is to be expected at iso 4000? I see that the quality isn’t perfect, but it sure is much much better than iso 4000 on my EP2. And other cameras don’t look that good at iso4000 either. For instance i just checked some Nikon D700 shots. They seem to be of comparable quality (I am no expert in this things, just my casual observation), although that is a older camera, the sensor is much larger.
I guess everyone is expecting perfection. A little noise and that is driving them up the wall.
Oh, please don’t play games:
“The mush that EM-5 spits out is quite remarkable. Where is the GH-3?”
That isn’t provocative? Don’t you think you are enjoying just a bit of a bait and switch? 😉
Although I admit, the reactions of some must only serve to encourage such tactics…
Pretty sure Wong stated that Focus Peaking works, just not in when shooting macro and/or extreme manual focus situations:
“For general manual focusing, it works, but for macro photography where high magnification is prioritized, the focus peaking does not really deliver.”
I also think FOCUS PEAKING is vital for the system.
over time it would also be improved for macro shooting
-100
Debatable, have tried it with a friends & and was disappointed, more out of focus results than in, will stick to my E-P2 and OM lenses.
Why shoot a leaf under fountain ? ‘caus you can.
Wong is a photographer, while the people at Dpreview are more kind of pixelologists. both are interesting to read.
I don’t understand how difficult for Panny and Oly to add peaking function to be able to turn on or off and stiill have magnification for users to choose! This will be extremely friendly features for 3rd partly lens users!
There may be intellectual property issues. Also, Mr. Terada has so far been unimpressed by focus peaking, so it may be a while before we it in an Olympus camera.
I must say that I’m surprised that Panasonic hasn’t incorporated it, though, with their strong video background.
I think that is quite likely. It is well known that Olympus is loathe to tread in areas with potential IP complications. I find this need to have every known feature contained within any given camera (or even brand) quite odd. Its as if, in the mind of these photographers (?), there can be no compromises, when clearly there must be compromises here, just as there are elsewhere….However, I am fairly certain of this: insecurity is an obstacle to photography, at least as I know it and much art is born out of limitation and compromise.
Of course we want every known feature in a single camera?
Do you want, camera A that lacks features A,B,C,D
or
Camera B that lacks nothing (although it might have a big menu system and complex setup).
Easy; for most of us hear we would all take camera B 🙂
Here is a on hand view of Robin on the camera
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QB_JpqDk0Tw&feature=related
It doesn’t bother me whether Robin is just an Olympus enthusiast or is being paid well by Olympus, it’s results that count. I’m a big boy and can filter out any hyperbole and hype.
Having said that, whilst the macro footage in the video pretty much sold the E-M5 to me I think Robin could improve his macro technique and I was not so impressed with it. The flash is much better used on a bracket and should generally be directly above the end of the lens and pointing downwards. Yes Robin got some nice macro shots, and he has a good eye for an image. However, with just a few pointers his macro photography could improve a lot and be even more enjoyable to do. Holding the flash in your hand is awkward. Sometimes I do it for a bit of fill-in with a tripod mounted camera. In the past I have tried it for handheld macro flash photography, and it just makes things unnecessarily difficult.
SteB,
If you have followed Robin’s older posts on macro, you would understand why he chose to shoot the way he did.
The wireless flash is good for hard to reach places. Flash being mounted on camera, or even on bracket, is not flexible, you have no control of the direction. If the insect was hiding underneath the leaves, as he has shown in many of his shots, having the flash off the camera solves the problem instantaneously.
A good example would be this:
http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2009/08/diffused-bee.html
I agree, his macro technique is not the best, and is far from perfection. But he clearly demonstrated that wireless TTL flash is a versatile and powerful tool. If used wisely, can be very practical and helpful in macro photography, opening up possibilities for other more restrictive methods.
Having that function built in the E-M5 is his main highlight.
Yes I have seen Robin’s older blog posts. However, different angles of macro flash are greatly overrated. After lots of experimentation and field experience I am pretty certain that flash from directly above the subject and pointing downwards is the most reliable position. I have tried holding the flash method and have got a Canon MT24EX twin flash, where you can put the flash heads into all sorts of positions, but only one position gives reliable results. Also the bracket on my MT24EX and a much cheaper one I have designed are easily turned up side down with a quick twist for under leaf shots.
Have a look at what a good macro photographer can do with my flash diffusion techniques, and I think Kurt lives in the same area of Malayasia as Robin.
http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/
Look at the results you can achieve with a simple front mount bracket mounted flash, and a simple adaptation of my diffusion methods. I really like Kurt’s adaptation because of its simplicity.
http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/2011/12/wireless-macro-rig.html
http://orionmystery.blogspot.com/2011/05/270ex-for-macro-improved-version.html
You can make a very simple FMMB by simply using a Cokin type square filter holder and attaching a modular square hood in the reverse position. You can then use this square modular hood as a base on which you can mount a plate or bracket to. These rotate under pressure, and with a simple small flashgun, you can get great light and rotate the flash direction to anyway you want. It is much better than holding the flash.
SteB,
You may rave on and on and on about your “perfect” technique, but it is clear, your “perfect” lighting will never go into the flower, or underneath the leaf. Why restrict yourself like that?
If anyone is to be so concerned about the “perfect” flash diffusion technique, why not just capture the insect and bring home into a mini studio setup?
Sometimes, photography is not about technical perfection, it is about being able to shoot, and being practical.
You still have not answered how your “flash from top of lens” can go into the flower or under the leaf. Until you can solve these restrictions, the wireless TTL flash as demnstrated by Robin Wong still holds water.
Another example would be this. The final few shots of the bee inside the white orchid.
http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2011/07/orchid-garden.html#more
Why I remember these entries, is because they clearly demonstrated the creative use of wireless flash, where ordinary methods would fail. Presented those situations, would you have better solutions?
I want the focus peaking, too.
Ricoh GXR A12 unit also has the feature.
I found the GXR peaking lacking precision
Yes, please focus peaking together with magnification. It’s only software.
Is not point by focus peaking, that you not need magnification for see where focus is.!
I predict K5 sensor performance for the EM5. Haters need to swallow that
“For the first time in camera history, the effect of the in body-based Image stabilization can be seen through the viewfinder or the camera live view screen”
Am I the only one that uses IS button during live-view. My E-3 does the same real time IBIS live view. Why its now claimed to be a first time seen feature?
Come on!, hold IS button during LV and see how image stabilization works. Where is the real NEW stuff? IMHO it has just been re-assigned to the proper button.
On the E3, you don’t see the effect of IS through the optical viewfinder. When you are using live view, you press the IS button to see the effect, but cannot do so, when you are doing focusing.
On the E-M5, when you half press the shutter release, you immediately see the IS at work while you are doing autofocus. Very useful when you are shooting with long focal length lenses.
Hallelulja!
Every evaluation needs a critical mass – if not it is worthless.
We is few so have use E-M5 now, so we can not be critical when we not can say what we know. 😉
This portion of the review is more about the excellent quality of the Oly 50/f2 Macro lens then it is about the capabilities of the OM-D EM5? These pictures using this 4/3 lens would probably look very good taken on any m4/3 camera. I wish that the new kit zoom lens had been used instead as that would have been a better reflection of what prospective buyers could expect as few likely to buy the 4/3 lens.
I am puzzled by two of the pictures which show hexagonal figures in the out of focus areas? I thought these were the domain of mirror lenses with their halos?
FWIW, If you read the comments, he says (if I recall correctly) he considered using it, but feared criticism that the test was undermined by the use of a comparatively inferior (for macro) lens.
This leads torwards another idea: when will there be more weather proof lenses to match this body? Surely this kit lens is insufficient?
Also, I suspect that the E-M5, unlike the lower level models, is expected to be adopted by users who already do, or will, own a number of m4/3 lenses. I am in this category, having ordered the body only….
If you look on Robin Wong’s website, he has a review of the 12-50 lens on an E-P3 where it used it just for macro of insects. I thought the pictures looked pretty darn good in that review also.
You’re right: I had missed that one, thanks. Although I would be surprised if this zoom could equal the 50mm ZD’s sharpness, I am not equipped to compare critically at the moment, here on my cellphone/computer….:)
This is not hexagonal it is heptagonal, so the is maybe a 50mm F2 lens also.
admin, I think Robin’s point on peaking is reasonable given he emphasized it is rather useless in macro shooting.
I personally find peaking not useful while macro-shooting with some camcorders.
on general scenes, peaking can be handy though.
Talks like he have a clue but shoots the flash through this tiny riddicolous diffuser, I’m sorry, but I just cant take him seriously…
You gotta be kidding me, right?
Ok, it may not be to the point that I cant listen to him because of the good-for-nothing cap-diffuser, but something inside me dies everytime ppl using those…
Why? just because it did not cost a fortune? Grow up. Get a life.
It has nothing to do with the price, I love cheap solutions that work.
The thing with those flash diffuser cap is that they do absolutely nothing but drain the battery of the flash faster. To diffuse light you have to increase the size of the light source, which those dont do.
So please, before running screaming troll and telling me to grow up, when you dont have a clue (apperently) what I’m talking about, please ask a bit friendlier next time.
Thank you for a great review! So refreshing to see the camera in a real world scenario than being stuck in a boring studio space (almost every ‘professional’ review site!). Good style as well, hope Olympus are paying you well with lots of free goodies as well as you simply show what the camera can do without praising it like a ‘blind fanboy’. Keep up the good work Robin and thanks for sharing this admin!
If Olympus gives Robin any more stuff I think Raist3D might just cry his soul out and commit suicide.
I think Robin is as enthusiastic about Olympus as Raist3D is about Pentax K5!
@MikePL How nasty is that comment?
You should be in the sin bin for that.
“I wish Olympus and Panasonic could add focus peaking via firmware upgrade soon.”
Absolutely agree.
Focus Peaking is nowhere as good as magnification. It is innacurate. The only good thingabout it is that it is fast for video.
It’s good to have a choice of what kind of MF aid to use and they’re not giving us that choice.
great share and thanks. i love robin reviews, but i am gonna read the tests and think it over for myself, before i commit to anything. generally speaking tho the e-m5 seems like a little nice camera already. the only thing i am still not so sure about is the value of money. for not being a real professional it sure seems alittle bit on the expensive side.
if only there were more weatherproof 4/3 cameras.
I think its safe to say that the next Panasonic camera would be a weatherproof body as well.