OM-D & PEN Images
/forum/topic/1127925/124

1       2       3              124      
125
       126              266       267       end

juju1958
Registered: Apr 27, 2009
Total Posts: 689
Country: United Kingdom

IDURITA The reflection of the guy in the bottom right window pane, is superb.

.

Abstract Detail by JuliandeCourcy, on Flickr



Savas K
Registered: Feb 01, 2006
Total Posts: 4254
Country: United States

So, I hollered out to some goats that I had a new 75mm on the body.

That elicited some attention.



tol1l1yboy
Registered: Apr 13, 2006
Total Posts: 150
Country: United States

Three more from my trip to Turkey. Still going through all the pictures but Ill keep posting my favorites (all taken with the PL7-14mm)

Medusa Head in the Basilica Cistern in Istanbul:

Medusa by =Tom=, on Flickr

This was the first time I have ever had issues getting the EM5 to focus. Granted it was dark and the subject matter lacked contrast because of it but it was frustrating...you know when the xe-1 has no problem acquiring focus fast there is something wrong haha.

Blue Mosque:

Ceiling of the Blue Mosque by =Tom=, on Flickr


Pillar by =Tom=, on Flickr

The Blue Mosque was one of the most beautiful places Ive ever been too!



ZoranC
Registered: Feb 11, 2009
Total Posts: 238
Country: United States

Jochenb wrote:
I've been testing the OM-D some more and the sensor is a disappointment. It feels old. Pushing shadows in Lightroom looks awful. The dynamic range of Fuji X is vastly superior. Even the smaller sensor in my (ex-) RX100 could handle PP a lot better.
Even when only slightly pushing the shadows, a lot of noise pops up and you get funky colors. This already at base ISO 200.

I kept having a feeling that files from my OMD "fall apart" too fast in the post-processing, I felt faster than ones from NEX, but never had enough time to do analysis. Do you happen to have something that would better illustrate this?



juju1958
Registered: Apr 27, 2009
Total Posts: 689
Country: United Kingdom

ZoranC wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
I've been testing the OM-D some more and the sensor is a disappointment. It feels old. Pushing shadows in Lightroom looks awful. The dynamic range of Fuji X is vastly superior. Even the smaller sensor in my (ex-) RX100 could handle PP a lot better.
Even when only slightly pushing the shadows, a lot of noise pops up and you get funky colors. This already at base ISO 200.

I kept having a feeling that files from my OMD "fall apart" too fast in the post-processing, I felt faster than ones from NEX, but never had enough time to do analysis. Do you happen to have something that would better illustrate this?



I have had a very similar experience and have come to my personal conclusion which is familiarity. When I return to the 5DMK2 files now, I get a sense that the files are not as robust. Yet a few hours later after working with them and having got back into familiar territory they are not lacking. It was myself that was lacking. Same with the ARW files of the Sony Nex. When first receiving the OM-D I imagined the files were not as robust, that was until I learnt their strengths and weaknesses which every maker has.
My conclusion is based on Raw files which I am guessing you are? As I could never imagine using jpeg's to post process as they are not designed for post processing in mind, as they are already processed, a bit akin to frying a medium stake, expecting it to come out rare?



pr4photos
Registered: Sep 17, 2008
Total Posts: 1080
Country: United Kingdom

Its the same with my GX1 files. Initial impression is very good, and they are still very good if you leave the shadows alone, as they get very noisy when pushed, but I don't anything like the flexibility I do out of my D700.
But, having said that, if you learn the camera you can get some fantastic images and I am selling images taken on my GX1 to a stock agency



ultrapix
Registered: Feb 03, 2010
Total Posts: 656
Country: Italy

I guess that these days many of us tend to work too much with those poor files



juju1958
Registered: Apr 27, 2009
Total Posts: 689
Country: United Kingdom

ultrapix wrote:
I guess that these days many of us tend to work too much with those poor files



Indeed, hard times



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 1775
Country: Belgium

juju1958 wrote:
I have had a very similar experience and have come to my personal conclusion which is familiarity. When I return to the 5DMK2 files now, I get a sense that the files are not as robust. Yet a few hours later after working with them and having got back into familiar territory they are not lacking. It was myself that was lacking. Same with the ARW files of the Sony Nex. When first receiving the OM-D I imagined the files were not as robust, that was until I learnt their strengths and weaknesses which every maker has.
My conclusion is based on Raw files which I am guessing you are? As I could never imagine using jpeg's to post process as they are not designed for post processing in mind, as they are already processed, a bit akin to frying a medium stake, expecting it to come out rare?


I'm indeed talking about the RAW files. I don't want to bash the OM-D, but it's just something I noticed right away when editing photos. I guess it's because I'm spoiled by the more robust files my other recent cameras produce (and that's not imagination ).
BTW, I was reading old posts in this thread and I saw other members also mentioning it. Makten for example.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the camera very much. I'll learn to work with the 'limitations'. I even ordered the panasonic 25/1.4 today.



bobbytan
Registered: Feb 03, 2004
Total Posts: 7465
Country: United States

Jochenb wrote:
juju1958 wrote:
I have had a very similar experience and have come to my personal conclusion which is familiarity. When I return to the 5DMK2 files now, I get a sense that the files are not as robust. Yet a few hours later after working with them and having got back into familiar territory they are not lacking. It was myself that was lacking. Same with the ARW files of the Sony Nex. When first receiving the OM-D I imagined the files were not as robust, that was until I learnt their strengths and weaknesses which every maker has.
My conclusion is based on Raw files which I am guessing you are? As I could never imagine using jpeg's to post process as they are not designed for post processing in mind, as they are already processed, a bit akin to frying a medium stake, expecting it to come out rare?


I'm indeed talking about the RAW files. I don't want to bash the OM-D, but it's just something I noticed right away when editing photos. I guess it's because I'm spoiled by the more robust files my other recent cameras produce (and that's not imagination ).
BTW, I was reading old posts in this thread and I saw other members also mentioning it. Makten for example.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the camera very much. I'll learn to work with the 'limitations'. I even ordered the panasonic 25/1.4 today.


I have to respect your opinion since you own and use the OM-D, but I don't quite agree that the OM-D files are not robust. Maybe they are not as good as the newer Fuji's but sensor technology just in the past one year has advanced dramatically. I expect the next iteration of the OM-D ... or the upcoming hybrid E5/E-M5 will have a sensor that is equal to or better than the new Fuji cameras, and I am really looking forward to that because there are some real kick-ass MFT lenses.



ZoranC
Registered: Feb 11, 2009
Total Posts: 238
Country: United States

juju1958 wrote:
ZoranC wrote:
Jochenb wrote:
I've been testing the OM-D some more and the sensor is a disappointment. It feels old. Pushing shadows in Lightroom looks awful. The dynamic range of Fuji X is vastly superior. Even the smaller sensor in my (ex-) RX100 could handle PP a lot better.
Even when only slightly pushing the shadows, a lot of noise pops up and you get funky colors. This already at base ISO 200.

I kept having a feeling that files from my OMD "fall apart" too fast in the post-processing, I felt faster than ones from NEX, but never had enough time to do analysis. Do you happen to have something that would better illustrate this?



I have had a very similar experience and have come to my personal conclusion which is familiarity. When I return to the 5DMK2 files now, I get a sense that the files are not as robust. Yet a few hours later after working with them and having got back into familiar territory they are not lacking. It was myself that was lacking. Same with the ARW files of the Sony Nex. When first receiving the OM-D I imagined the files were not as robust, that was until I learnt their strengths and weaknesses which every maker has.

I'm afraid that I don't understand what you are saying. Could you please be more specific in how it was you that was lacking and what "strengths and weaknesses which every maker has" you are referring to and how exactly that was different and what had to be changed?

juju1958 wroteMy conclusion is based on Raw files which I am guessing you are?
Yes, I am talking RAW files.



ZoranC
Registered: Feb 11, 2009
Total Posts: 238
Country: United States

bobbytan wrote:
I have to respect your opinion since you own and use the OM-D, but I don't quite agree that the OM-D files are not robust.

What is _your_ experience when processing OM-D RAW files?



ultrapix
Registered: Feb 03, 2010
Total Posts: 656
Country: Italy

I can only say that generally the most "robust" files look quite dull to me; I don't care to be able to push + 10 stops the shadows (to do what?) when the price for that is a less tasty picture; I hate Nikon colors and image structure since D3/D700 times, for instance; I have to admit that Fuji colors are pleasant, though I didn't realize all that "robustness" when I used to shoot with the X100. BTW, just like on film, not always "easier" means "better" or more "beautiful"; coming back to OMD, it's so far the camera that asked less PP to me: It's probably for that reason that I didn't realize its weakness
Strictly IMHO, of course.



bobbytan
Registered: Feb 03, 2004
Total Posts: 7465
Country: United States

ZoranC wrote:
bobbytan wrote:
I have to respect your opinion since you own and use the OM-D, but I don't quite agree that the OM-D files are not robust.

What is _your_ experience when processing OM-D RAW files?


I only shoot RAW so I was speaking from a RAW standpoint.



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 1775
Country: Belgium

It's the OM-D thread. I should've been more careful with my words.
Don't blow this up please. Some of you are talking like I said this is a crap camera with bad IQ, which is far from true.
There's nothing wrong with putting a camera into perspective. I shoudn't have included the 5DII, but the other ones are all with a newer generation Sony sensor. Just saying that. Nothing more, nothing less.
I'm sure the next OM-D will catch up.



bobbytan
Registered: Feb 03, 2004
Total Posts: 7465
Country: United States

No worries man! I would be the first one to admit that the OM-D is not the best compact mirrorless camera out there, but it is certainly one of the better ones. Along with the GH3, the OM-D is the closest thing to a DSLR if a DSLR-type camera is more important to you than a rangefinder-type camera.

Jochenb wrote:
It's the OM-D thread. I should've been more careful with my words.
Don't blow this up please. Some of you are talking like I said this is a crap camera with bad IQ, which is far from true.
There's nothing wrong with putting a camera into perspective. I shoudn't have included the 5DII, but the other ones are all with a newer generation Sony sensor. Just saying that. Nothing more, nothing less.
I'm sure the next OM-D will catch up.




juju1958
Registered: Apr 27, 2009
Total Posts: 689
Country: United Kingdom

Jochenb wrote:
juju1958 wrote:
I have had a very similar experience and have come to my personal conclusion which is familiarity. When I return to the 5DMK2 files now, I get a sense that the files are not as robust. Yet a few hours later after working with them and having got back into familiar territory they are not lacking. It was myself that was lacking. Same with the ARW files of the Sony Nex. When first receiving the OM-D I imagined the files were not as robust, that was until I learnt their strengths and weaknesses which every maker has.
My conclusion is based on Raw files which I am guessing you are? As I could never imagine using jpeg's to post process as they are not designed for post processing in mind, as they are already processed, a bit akin to frying a medium stake, expecting it to come out rare?


I'm indeed talking about the RAW files. I don't want to bash the OM-D, but it's just something I noticed right away when editing photos. I guess it's because I'm spoiled by the more robust files my other recent cameras produce (and that's not imagination ).
BTW, I was reading old posts in this thread and I saw other members also mentioning it. Makten for example.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the camera very much. I'll learn to work with the 'limitations'. I even ordered the panasonic 25/1.4 today.


No problem bash away at anything that you wish.
My experience is all I can go by, not what others say. Your Flickr does not appear to have any OM-D images, I was hoping to see what you had accomplished with the Olympus so far and am looking forward to seeing some from your new lens.
Like to say you have some very good images on your flickr.



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 1775
Country: Belgium

juju1958 wrote:
No problem bash away at anything that you wish.
My experience is all I can go by, not what others say. Your Flickr does not appear to have any OM-D images, I was hoping to see what you had accomplished with the Olympus so far and am looking forward to seeing some from your new lens.
Like to say you have some very good images on your flickr.


Thank you. I'm exactly the same. I form my own opinions by actually using the gear instead of only reading about it. That's why I have so many cameras right now, exploring the mirrorless world.
Let's get back to photos here. I'll post some myself soon (when I've shot something decent).

Edit: to really get back on topic I might as well just post my standard first test shot when getting a new camera/lens. Backyard snapshot of my dog with the 45/1.8:



Because it's so black, a lot of cameras struggle to get the focus on the eyes. The OM-D does amazingly well.



ZoranC
Registered: Feb 11, 2009
Total Posts: 238
Country: United States

bobbytan wrote:
ZoranC wrote:
bobbytan wrote:
I have to respect your opinion since you own and use the OM-D, but I don't quite agree that the OM-D files are not robust.

What is _your_ experience when processing OM-D RAW files?


I only shoot RAW so I was speaking from a RAW standpoint.

I was inquiring about your experience with OM-D's RAW files in particular as your post was implying you don't own/use OM-D.



dukenukem
Registered: Oct 04, 2012
Total Posts: 303
Country: Spain


La Cueva por _dUkEnUkEm_, en Flickr
M.Zuiko 9-18 . f/9.0 . ISO 200 . 9 mm



1       2       3              124      
125
       126              266       267       end