On another note, last night I watched TN's D850 review. He compared it to the a7r2, d810, 5dsr? And the EM1 mark 2. In high resolution. You should watch his conclusion. He also mentioned that for product photography and landscape (when applicable) his go to camera is the EM1 mark 2.
I think a 100-200 f4 with Sync IS would the perfect complement to the 12-100 f4 lens.
mitesh wrote:
This is a well-thought out post, James! As much as I love my Big KaHuna (ZD 90-250/2.8), a more portable, native m4/3 version like the 75-250/2.8-4 you have suggested sounds like a great idea! Still would like to see an Oly 100-400/4.5-5.6 with Sync IS .
Improve shutter speed from E-M1 Mark II's 1/60 s to match or exceed Sony's A9 of 1/150 s.
For comparison, mechanical shutter speed is 1/300 s.
That's what's needed for a truly global electronic shutter. The sooner the better.
Question for you E-M1.2 users regarding autofocus speed and accuracy in low light.
I had another wedding shoot this weekend, did most of it with the E-M1 and the old E-M5 as a backup with 2.8 PRO lenses, 12-40 and 40-150.
The E-M1 struggled from time to time in the church, sometimes hunting and sometimes missing, not a huge concern as it didn't happen often and it was mostly back lit portraits.
But how has the E-M1.2 changed from this? Is it a noticeable difference? Or is it mostly the C-AF that has changed?
I still have my E-M1 so I will try and test the low-light AF against the E-M1.2 when I have a minute.
Wilbus wrote:
Question for you E-M1.2 users regarding autofocus speed and accuracy in low light.
I had another wedding shoot this weekend, did most of it with the E-M1 and the old E-M5 as a backup with 2.8 PRO lenses, 12-40 and 40-150.
The E-M1 struggled from time to time in the church, sometimes hunting and sometimes missing, not a huge concern as it didn't happen often and it was mostly back lit portraits.
But how has the E-M1.2 changed from this? Is it a noticeable difference? Or is it mostly the C-AF that has changed?
I did a quick low-light AF test and did notice a difference between the E-M1 and E-M1.2. The E-M1.2 is little better - the difference is not night and day.
Looks like a great lens Bobby but too slow for me too. I am considering it as a "do-it-all-wedding-lens" but really, I am already having trouble with low light in churches and there is no chance at all that I can take away another stop of light, even though it is convenient to have 24-200 FOV in one lens.
Will be adding an E-M1.2 in the future instead and roll with 12-40 and 40-150 that I am used to. Or possible try and go the "prime" way with a 25 F1.4 or 1.2 and a 45 1.2 in the future. Not sure if I would limit my self too much with that though as far as the ceremoni goes?
Pavel wrote:
Olympus needs reminding that there is this idea of "balance" and that most were sold on the concept of m43 by the size and weight savings.
The 12-100 balances well on the E-M1 - both literally and figuratively. It still is a significant savings in weight and size compared to APS-C and full frame equivalents.
