joychris wrote:
the IBIS doesn't work with MF glass doesn't exactly scream great video camera. My current crop of Rokkors are on the FS100 about 1/2 the time I'm shooting, so I can't take advantage of the IBIS if I'm not using a m43 lens.
is that true only for video, or also for photography? THAT would be really disappointing.
That's a very bold move - to sell off everything for the Olympus. I am leaning towards a dual platform i.e. m4/3 and FF DSLR ... until I am totally convinced that it can do 90% of what a DSLR can do. Can't wait for you to tell us what you think of the E-M5 ... and the 75-300 lens for sports or wildlife.
Anyone has any experience with the Voigtlander 25/0.95 Nokton or Leica 25/1.4 Summilux?
traveler wrote:
I just sold off my entire Sony NEX and Nikon systems and am throwing my hat in the ring tomorrow with an order for a M5. My style of shooting will do fine with the kit 12-50 lens along with the Zuiko M 75-300 and that new fantastic 45mm f1.8 along with their FL-600R for flash. I think I"m going to really enjoy the lower size and weight to deal with. also not having it overheat in video mode. I'll be sure to post examples when I finally get one and have a chance to ring it out good.
bobbytan wrote:
Anyone has any experience with the Voigtlander 25/0.95 Nokton or Leica 25/1.4 Summilux?
I've got the PANASONIC (I don't think just because it says Leica its a true Leica anymore than putting a red dot on a panasonic point and shoot makes it a Leica camera) m4/3 25mm f1.4 "Summilux" and its a fantastic lens for $550 (assuming you can find one in stock right now) Its a little big for a m4/3 lens, and I'll admit at times I do prefer my 20mm f1.7 as its so compact, but the 25mm focuses much faster and has a bit of a more pleasing color and of course is slightly faster. Both are very sharp though, I guess you could say the 20mm is a little more sterile, 25m shots just have a little more pleasing rendering, but it really depends on the image.
I'd say more than anything it depends if you want a normal 50mm FoV or if you more prefer closer to a 35mm Fov as your standard lens. I really like 35mmm more than 50, so I actually tended to use the 20m f1.7 more for walk around, and the 25mm just for when I really wanted the fastest lens possible.
No experience with the 25mm VC, but no interest either. Much to big and heavy and pricey compared to all the excellent native AF glass m4/3 offers. Also given the exceptional AF performance of m4/3 cameras, I'd have little desire to MF on them.
There is no support for focus peaking either, and trying to focus a f0.95 lens would be so hit or miss for me. Some are better at it than others, but I much prefer to use the camera's AF, with the eye detect option enabled which allows the camera to specifically focus on the eye of my choice. It nails the focus in the blink of an eye (sorry for that lame pun) lol
Believe me this decision didn't come easily nor hastily either. I too am quite convinced for prints at or below 22x17 that system will meet all of my needs. I will especially come in handy when traveling or heading to the mountains. The less bulk the better. The focus speed really hooked me as well. That has always been one of my biggest complaints about any camera, is it's ability to nail focus without waiting on moving subjects. Can't wait to unleash it on some birds
cyra wrote:
is that true only for video, or also for photography? THAT would be really disappointing.
Only true for video, MF adapted lenses work great in stills. At present it isn't clear why the adapted glass won't IBIS in video, whether there is some reason or it is just a firmware bug. Interestingly, someone managed to take a 4/3rds "dandelion" chip and hack it onto a legacy adapter for m43. Using that they got IBIS to work in video with their legacy lens. I think they thread on that was on DPR, but I don't remember for sure.
Hopefully we'll get a FW update that gets IBIS going on video with legacy lenses. There are even a bunch of lenses with m43 mounts that don't communicated with the camera intended for video and would seem silly they don't take advantage of IBIS. My vote is on "bug" that will eventually be corrected, but I'm only guessing of course.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Regarding the Olympus OM-D 5 way IBIS, I thought that only worked in 5 axis mode for stills and video used a 2 axis mode, no?
I recall seeing that said someplace, but not with any reference or substantiation. I really don't know the answer.
What I can say, is that two of the five axes are almost never used.
Pitch and yaw rotation IBIS are the standard two axes in every IBIS and OIS system and in general the most important. It only requires knowledge of the focal length to work. If there was a 2 axis limit to video these would be the ones used.
Roll rotation IBIS is rarely implemented, and can not be implemented in OIS, but still can be useful especially for removing shutter press roll. I don't know enough about video IS, but it seems like it'd be useful for shooting while walking. It requires no knowledge of the lens at all. It requires a different actuator design than a solely pitch/yaw design so it takes effort and cost to implement (probably why it rarely is).
Vertical and horizontal shift IBIS is also rarely implemented, there are OIS solutions (Canon 100 macro is an example). It really is only of any relevance in macro shooting and it would appear in those cases a fair bit of knowledge about the lens attached and the focus distance is required for it to be useful. Likely this mode is effectively disabled with all but a few lenses (presumably the 12-50 in macro does use it). This can use the same actuators as pitch/yaw rotation IBIS but requires more software, knowledge of the optics attached and accelerometers instead of just gyros (but accelerometers are ridiculously cheap so it is very low hardware cost).
So, if indeed video mode only uses two-axis you won't be missing much. Though I still think rotation would probably be useful.
I did look at the reviews on B&H and apparently the Nokton is hard focus and not good value ... but the Summilux has some great reviews. It's nice that the m4/3 OM-D has so many great fast prime lenses to choose from.
millsart wrote:
I've got the PANASONIC (I don't think just because it says Leica its a true Leica anymore than putting a red dot on a panasonic point and shoot makes it a Leica camera) m4/3 25mm f1.4 "Summilux" and its a fantastic lens for $550 (assuming you can find one in stock right now) Its a little big for a m4/3 lens, and I'll admit at times I do prefer my 20mm f1.7 as its so compact, but the 25mm focuses much faster and has a bit of a more pleasing color and of course is slightly faster. Both are very sharp though, I guess you could say the 20mm is a little more sterile, 25m shots just have a little more pleasing rendering, but it really depends on the image.
I'd say more than anything it depends if you want a normal 50mm FoV or if you more prefer closer to a 35mm Fov as your standard lens. I really like 35mmm more than 50, so I actually tended to use the 20m f1.7 more for walk around, and the 25mm just for when I really wanted the fastest lens possible.
No experience with the 25mm VC, but no interest either. Much to big and heavy and pricey compared to all the excellent native AF glass m4/3 offers. Also given the exceptional AF performance of m4/3 cameras, I'd have little desire to MF on them.
There is no support for focus peaking either, and trying to focus a f0.95 lens would be so hit or miss for me. Some are better at it than others, but I much prefer to use the camera's AF, with the eye detect option enabled which allows the camera to specifically focus on the eye of my choice. It nails the focus in the blink of an eye (sorry for that lame pun) lol ...Show more →
@bobbytan: I've got the 25/1.4 and it is a wonderful lens. I also have the 20/1.7. I think millsart nit the nail on the head comparing the two. I'd add the 25 bokeh is "creamier/smoother" and the 20 bokeh more "energetic" (it pains me as an engineer to use such words like a golden ear audiophile would, but I just don't know a better description and think anything other than a subjective aesthetic evaluation would fail).
It will be awhile before I really have enough experience with either lens to say much more. My primary portrait subject currently can only be imaged with ultrasound (and might I say low contrast, horrible grain, lots of distortion and a really odd tonal range).
kwalsh wrote:
Vertical and horizontal shift IBIS is also rarely implemented, there are OIS solutions (Canon 100 macro is an example). It really is only of any relevance in macro shooting and it would appear in those cases a fair bit of knowledge about the lens attached and the focus distance is required for it to be useful. Likely this mode is effectively disabled with all but a few lenses (presumably the 12-50 in macro does use it). This can use the same actuators as pitch/yaw rotation IBIS but requires more software, knowledge of the optics attached and accelerometers instead of just gyros (but accelerometers are ridiculously cheap so it is very low hardware cost).
Thanks Ke,n for the details, this sounds reassuring. Maybe the vertical and horizontal shift would also help with long lenses? In this thread it has been said that the IBIS is very useful for long lenses up to 300mm (600 mm efective)
Can you dial in the focal lenght of legacy lenses, or how does the camera know about them?
I wonder if the OM-D will be good for Leica R APO 180 or the 280/4 Telyt. Certainly those lenses are best on FF, but m4/3 would extend the reach a lot. The IBIS would be very helpful.
I've done some research. And it seems like a bug or a FW fix, because in the manual it never states it "doesn't" allow adapted/mf lenses to be used. The manual actually states to use adapted/legacy lenses, you must enter/input the correct fov to work properly (though i asked around, and it only works on stills still, after inputting the fov).
The Dandelion chip seems to work..but only half-assed and is buggy. I assume because these are old/current chips that aren't fully updated or compatible with the new OMD yet. I am sure they will have a new one/program, post-OMD-release, sooner or later.
Yeah, I feel you guys on MF/Adapted lenses...i use ONLY MF /adapted lenses, and trying to avoid even having to resort to buying the newer AF m43 lenses...but I may have to if there are no FW or fixes...since the IBIS is THAT attractive to me
But I am sure Olympus will FW fix it. Afterall, it doesn't make sense to not, in a marketing standpoint. Look at the camera for godsakes! Lol. It obviously looks vintage, and will attract MF/Adapted lens users. And if their intention is to not implement MF IBIS to improve sales of their own m43 lenses, it doesn't make sense, since it will at the same time detract OMD sales from so many MF users..and last time I checked, the OMD body alone costs much much more than any m43 lens.
So it can go either way in marketing/sales:
1. Don't implement MF lens IBIS in video mode, which will detract body sales from many MF lens users.
2. Implement MF lens IBIS in video mode, which will maybe at the most slightly detract lens sales (and make it even possible for new OMD MF lens users to buy m43 lenses, since they now have the body).
From a sales standpoint, option 2 sounds much better..bodies are more expensive, and even if being an MF lens user, you still have the option for going modern AF m43 lens if you wanted to.
"it does look like the OMD is on a steadicam. I modded a $150 Steadicam Smoothie to handle the weight of the Nex and the OMD footage is very similar, its very impressive."
This is very very nice to hear.. especially coming from a video-producer! )
"The real drawback for the OMD is the video functionality is pretty basic. The lack of framerates (1080/30 is all you get), low bitrate (17mbps)"
I hear ya. 24p is important to me...but IBIS is much more important to me now ...afterall, 30p can always be converted to 24p in compressor (albeit with a slight jitter from the missing frame once in a while from conversion); whereas, shaky footage can't be converted
Hopefully, there will be a hack for this for high-bitrate, and will make it a 5d2 killer, like all the panasonic hacks
Took a few test shots around the office and noticed a few things.
1) ISO sensitivity seems the same as my GH2. It METERS 2/3 stop 'slower' than the GH2, but the images are also 2/3 stop more exposed, so just a difference in metering calibration here.
2) When shot at same exposure/ISO, the E-M5 is SIGNIFICANTLY better at all ISOs than the GH2. Might not be quite a stop, but I have a feeling it is. Will, of course, have to do more thorough tests. However, ISO 25,600 is a step too far. Files are usable at 12,800, but fall apart at 25,600.
3) The IBIS is frickin awesome. Sharp shots at 1/5 sec with the 25/1.4, 1/20sec at 150mm with the 40-150 and sharp at 0.4 sec with the 12/2. That's absolutely amazing for an IBIS system to my eye. It's also wonderful to have a stabilized viewfinder with an IBIS system. This is unreal.
4) The menu system sucks. I don't know why Olympus can't group needed functions in easy to see areas, but it took me forever to find a few well needed functions. The good thing is that everything is customizable...the downside is that I'm going to need to spend a week diving in and out of options before I figure out where anything is.
5) First impressions overall are very good, though, and while the buttons are a bit squishy, I like the overall feel of the camera, and the images look fantastic so far. Can't wait to give it a proper workout over the next few days. ...Show more →
Edgardo - the OMD video is smooth, but to clarify, its not as smooth as the Nex/Smoothie combo and only marginally smoother than Sony's OSS lenses - which do a great job of taking out a lot of small shakes. And with MF lenses, OMD IBIS is a no-go. IBIS and MF glass does work for stills, but I'm not overly optimistic that Olympus will do much in regards to improving the video on the OMD. Like Fuji, it just doesn't seem to be a priority, more like its there because you'll get endlessly ridiculed if you choose to omit that functionality.
In the end - the OMD video is ok, but nothing special. I would only use it in a production if I had absolutely nothing else available. Even then I'd convert it to a less compressed codec in hopes of extracting more information. I prefer the GH2 and Nex video, higher bitrates + more framerates = better video to edit and color correct. The difference is more apparent when you watch it on a 42" TV as opposed to a ipad or computer monitor.
joychris wrote:
I'm not overly optimistic that Olympus will do much in regards to improving the video on the OMD. Like Fuji, it just doesn't seem to be a priority, more like its there because you'll get endlessly ridiculed if you choose to omit that functionality.
Imo, I really don't think this is the case anymore. Yes, I agree, that with Fuji, video is just an "afterthought"...but I wouldn't even say this about Olympus, at least not anymore.
The first/past m43 Olympus cameras were only 2nd to Panasonic's, and Olympus needed to catch up; especialy being a Classic and Old-School company, like Canon, Leica, etc (there were never even Sony nor Panasonic cameras 20+ years ago). Olympus seems always at the forefront with the newest technological advances, being a more inexpensive company (compared to Canon and Leica) and needing to offer that extra "edge" to compete and be at the same level with the big boys (canon, and leica, whom build reputation and integrity based more on classic-high quality, rather than new and hi-tech-advances like Oly)
And, many people complained and asked to improve the video to stack up to the Panasonics - iso, IQ, jello, DR.... And they did
Comparison of Video IQ: OMD vs XPro: You can clearly see that OMD was made and meant to put out high quality video, and that Fuji is just an afterthought (and not the OMD). The quality of the OMD's videos' internal compression/processing is quite breathtaking in this, and even makes me scratch my head and makes me think that it just might be even better than my 5N. Afterall, HD video are just 3mp images super-compressed from all these huge Mp sensros..so HDSLR video has all got to do with the internal compression and processing (which I have a big feeling, Olympus put in a lot of time and thought into making the OMD shoot amazing video:
I've been trying to find video IQ comparisons for the OMD vs really good apsc cameras, like the Nex. I've only found these...
These two videos are meant to really show and test the IBIS...but if you take you attention away from the IBIS for a moment, lol..and concentrate on video IQ (view both videos at non-HD, to make it even/fair)...is it me, or does the OMD video look better than the Nex 7
Notice the trash can bag wrinkles (they are visible on the OMD, and not the Nex which are smoothed out and detail-less). Now, look at the AC vents (the OMD still make out the slits, whereas the Nex-7 just blurs it out and it smooth/solid). Lastly, look at the blinds (the OMD maintains DR better and you can still see color and a pattern in the blinds, whereas the Nex-7 is nothing but a smudge).
Wouldn't be that surprising. Micro 4/3 is really not at much of a disadvantage when it comes to video. In fact, the GH2 has routinely been shown to have better video quality in all but the poorest light vs even the 5D Mark III.
I've found the E-M5 video (what little I've taken of it) to be quite good from a detail standpoint. The only downside is that compression artifacts can sometimes appear in large blocks of out of focus color.
While Olympus improved the OMD's video over crappy Pen video - its not better than the 5n at any 1080p setting, put it on a big set and you'll see there's more detail overall, things like leaves and grass are more defined rather than just green mush, and there's more detail in the shadows and highlights with the 5n. Steve Huff's video suck, I've seen better examples. I really don't care about the Fuji video, I just used that as an example. I'd like Olympus to prove me wrong and improve the OMD's video, but with the camera still white hot, its not likely anytime soon.
I've shot them with the same lenses, some incredibly sharp Rokkors, and there is a lot more fine detail in Nex video at 24p, 30p and even 60p. I hate to burst your bubble, but at 17mbs the OMD's video is nothing more than OK, easily bested by any stock GH2 or a Nex 5n/7. I own all but the 5n, and I have friends with the 5n. I've shot with all of them, simply download raw video files and put them through some color correction and then watch it on a big TV. My set is a basic 1080p 120hz 42" LED, the difference is pretty obvious and with any subject. Put it on a projector and a 8-foot wide screen (my office has a 8' screen for presentations that I use to screen finished projects) and its even more obvious.
I love my OMD, but I'd never call the video amazing. Its better than some, but not better than what the Nex or GH2 can produce. Its fine for Youtube videos - which is what most will use it for anyway.
I think "good" video is a relative term. I used to have a hacked GH2 and while a bit of a video novice, I will admit that the quality of the footage it could record when viewed on my 50" Plasma looked nothing short of amazing.
However, without using proper technique, steadycam etc, the clips I would record at the zoo and places handheld didn't overall look very professional due to camera shake. They looked basically like your average crappy youtube clips that are hard to watch rather than "Planet Earth" on BluRay disc so to speak lol
Now, the EM-5 may not be the end all video camera, with the best bit rates, most framerate options, best compression etc. Its not going to be a tool that serious filmmakers are all going to be drawn to, much better options out there for that. BUT...... for the hobbyist who shoots crappy youtube like video's of birthday parties, trips to the beach etc, the IBIS really will give a much more fluid and watchable footage than other cameras.
When you go with 2 kids to the beach and are hauling beach bags, umbrellas, diaper bags etc, your simply not going to also take a good tripod and fluid head. For 99% of parents/hobbyist photographers that is just not going to happen. They are simply going to shoot handheld with whatever camera they have. Luckily if its the Em-5 its going to produce some pretty good footage.
"Good" in that its not going to make you sick, which really is about half the battle as far as home video type shooting goes. Other 45% is if they can resist the sickening urge to zoom in and out all the time, and then 5% for the actual quality of footage viewed on a large monitor, which in itself is doubtful because that would mean gathering everyone together rather than posting a scaled down version on FB, which sadly seems to be how most family interact these days
]joychris wrote:
I love my OMD, but I'd never call the video amazing. Its better than some, but not better than what the Nex or GH2 can produce. Its fine for Youtube videos - which is what most will use it for anyway.
Silver looks much better IMHO, especially if you plan to get the Olympus primes like the 45mm or the new 75mm 1.8's which match the silver camera body.
The faux leather grip also looks a little less slippery than the more modern black grip material, not to mention the "retro" style looks a little more fitting in silver as well.
SIlver body with black lenses look pretty good as well so while its purely aesthetics given its a $1000 camera, one should go with the color the will be happy with longterm
HOWEVER, since silver is next to impossible to come by it seems, many people go for the black ones as they don't want to wait. Its a choice of getting a black one last month or waiting til June maybe longer for silver.
I will mention though that with the add on grip, the black might have an edge as it matches better. Silver body with black grip isn't bad but does have some lines of alternating color which look a little odd.
bobbytan wrote:
I am curious as to why you opted for a black body and a silver lens instead of all-black or all-silver which I assume most people would do?
Other than just looks or cosmetics, are there any good arguments to choose the black over the silver or vice versa?
millsart wrote:
Now, the EM-5 may not be the end all video camera, with the best bit rates, most framerate options, best compression etc. Its not going to be a tool that serious filmmakers are all going to be drawn to, much better options out there for that. BUT...... for the hobbyist who shoots crappy youtube like video's of birthday parties, trips to the beach etc, the IBIS really will give a much more fluid and watchable footage than other cameras.
I agree 100%, IBIS will do wonders to the dearth of impossible to watch vacation/family videos that most seem to post.
)