jhinkey wrote:
Nice, I have this lens, but sold the EM-1 that was able to use it so well with PDAF. Likely to get the EM-1 MKII when it comes out so I can use this lens for indoor volleyball . . .
I'm still using it with an E-M5! Never bothered with the M1. I'm planning on picking the original up used after the mkii is released.
Trying some long exposures in order to compare the E-M1 with a recently purchased Sony A7 (that I might return even though it was very cheap, can't decide, money better spend on m43 really).
Looks like the E-M1 really craps out as far as very long exposures go though
Both shots with ND 1000 (10 stop) filter.
First images is well controlled as far a noise goes (only a 2 second long exposure).
The second one was four minutes (and I had tortured the sensor prior to that so that might have a hand in it). The color noise is quite terrible when viewed at 100%. I wounder if the A7 is any better?
Thank you, Rasmus! I've never owned the A7 (couldn't stand the clunky/noisy shutter and other quirks) but I have no doubts that the files will be cleaner or more superior to the E-M1. The E-M1 files can be noisy even at base ISO when the light level drops. I hope the E-M1 II is better in this regard.
Wilbus wrote:
Your tree frog images are simply superb Bobby!
Nice shot Listera! ISO?
Trying some long exposures in order to compare the E-M1 with a recently purchased Sony A7 (that I might return even though it was very cheap, can't decide, money better spend on m43 really).
Looks like the E-M1 really craps out as far as very long exposures go though
Both shots with ND 1000 (10 stop) filter.
First images is well controlled as far a noise goes (only a 2 second long exposure).
The second one was four minutes (and I had tortured the sensor prior to that so that might have a hand in it). The color noise is quite terrible when viewed at 100%. I wounder if the A7 is any better?
Thanks. Yes, variety of colors is generally the main point of my interest in photographing dancing contests, even though m43 is not the most suitable toolset for events like them.
Trying some long exposures in order to compare the E-M1 with a recently purchased Sony A7 (that I might return even though it was very cheap, can't decide, money better spend on m43 really).
Looks like the E-M1 really craps out as far as very long exposures go though
...
Thanks. ISO 800. Highest sensitivity I push with m43. Due to low availability of light and unpredictable/rapid movements of dancers, it was still not enough but higher up I would lose more than I could bear.
As for A7, I have a A7II and it serves much better in landscapes and at low light. But my main problem with m43 was large DOF which drove me crazy in floral/insect photos or portraits. On the other hand for Sony system if you do not have manual lenses you have to invest on generally expensive glass, which I luckilty avoided thanx to old legacy lenses of mine.
A set of m43 and Sony FF can serve you well and bring versatility (maybe you can return A7 and wait for A7II which allows you autofocus with legacy lenses using Techpro AF -possibly other mfg.s will also follow- adapter). In trekking where macroes/closeups meet wide angle photos, I have enjoyed that so far.
The clunky noise is what has kept me away from it for a long time as well. I couldn't resist the 750 dollar price including the kit lens though (even though I will try to sell the lens if I keep the camera, I really don't like it).
Other quirks, it's got plenty and the camera feel plastic and empty compared to the E-M1 though.
Yesterdays first try with very long exposures and the E-M1 got me thinking though. The 4 minute exposure is very noisy at full resolution.
I started searching for comparison test between the A7 and E-M1 and found some but decided why not just test it my self?
Tested an almost 5 minute exposure (accidentally cut it short at 294 seconds rather then 300) with both cameras.
ISO 200 on both which is a step up from base ISO on the A7 but base ISO of the E-M1.
I was very surprised, very very surprised actually. I thought the A7 was gonna be pretty bad as well, after what I have read but it isn't. It's really very good at least in these test conditions.
Tested by hand holding the camera and pressing the shutter in bulb mode. Camera cap on (no lens). ISO 200. 294 seconds.
The Sony really destroys the E-M1
100% crop from the center of the frame (it looks the same all across the frame).
RAW files imported in to Lightroom with default noise reduction at 0 and Color noise reduction at 25 for both (also default).
Edit: Added one from an Olympus E-M5 Mark II that a friend sent to me, test performed in the same way.
The A7's noise performance was not a surprise to me. The E-M5 II was a very big surprise indeed. I was expecting it to perform as badly as the E-M1. Turns out that it's just as good (looking at it on my cell phone) as the A7 except for that one hot spot. This means that the E-M1 II's new and revolutionary Olympus-designed geomembrane sensor is looking extremely promising!
Edit: Just looked at it in the full size, and No ... the E-M5 II's sensor is not as clean - but it's significantly cleaner than the E-M1 and I think it will clean up easily with some NR.
With the FT5 rumor of the three new Olympus lenses being announced on the 19:th, it got me thinking of all three of course but the new 30mm macro has a text on it that is not on the older 60mm.
Look at this picture, it's probably just some new way of them to write out the magnification of the lens but it's not on the 60mm
It looks like it says 1.25x
What exactly would that mean in this case? It's also rumored before on 43rumors under the specs 1:1,25 magnification compared to the 60mm that gives 1:1?
I am so lost at macro work that I could use a nice explanation
