I got my RRS base plate for OM-1 on Friday (I pre-ordered when it was announced). I ordered just the base plate; I don't care for most L-plates because they interfere with the flip-out LCDs and cables, and they make the cameras wider and I'm already at the limit on many of my camera bags.
It fits nicely, and does allow the battery door to open for access to the battery.
I am not fond of the ledge that they put at the bottom of the grip; it sticks out a bit too much. I'll get used to it, but if it were half the depth I would never notice it. It is there due to the QD socket that RRS added just below the grip. I'll never use it, because it is the worst location for a QD socket as it maximizes the leverage on the tripod screw. I would bet this design would rip the tripod socket right out of an E-M5iii, and probably an OM-5 as well. Typical RRS overengineering.
I also bought the Cambuddy (Olympus OM-1Camera Bracket), a 3D-printed L-bracket from SchillerDesignsLLC. I got the glass impregnated Nylon12 version, which is stronger, but quite a bit more expensive and no longer offered. The design was interesting, as the L-plate is offset to the front allowing unrestricted access to cable slots and rotation of the LCD. And the L-plate can be removed easily. But it isn't stiff enough (it has some serious bounce that takes time to damp out). And it is gray, so it looks out of place. From what I've heard, the regular Nylon12 bracket is black, but I worry about the strength.
If the Chinese ever produce an L-bracket for the OM-1, I'll probably buy it and sell off the others. My requirements for a bracket are smooth extension of the grip, access to the battery, and solid anti-rotation mount. The RRS doesn't have a completely smooth extension of the grip due to the ledge, which is required for integrity due to the location of the QD socket.
hoodlum90 wrote:
That is great to hear regarding the pinky. Mine is shipping to Canada so I won’t have it until next week.
The C$425 price tag for the RRS modular L-bracket was a bit too much for me - hopefully one of the other companies will bring out a more sensibly priced product.
molson wrote:
The C$425 price tag for the RRS modular L-bracket was a bit too much for me - hopefully one of the other companies will bring out a more sensibly priced product.
It was about half that for the base plate. UPS is the absolutely worst for shipping costs to Canada. I wish they would use USPS for Canada shipments. Maybe BHPhoto will sell them. That is where I bought the RRS E-M1ii base plate but I didn’t want to wait in case RRS sold out quickly. I would check with BHPhoto to see if they will carry it.
hoodlum90 wrote:
It was about half that for the base plate. UPS is the absolutely worst for shipping costs to Canada. I wish they would use USPS for Canada shipments. Maybe BHPhoto will sell them. That is where I bought the RRS E-M1ii base plate but I didn’t want to wait in case RRS sold out quickly. I would check with BHPhoto to see if they will carry it.
I probably won't be keeping the OM-1, so it's a moot point.
dcisive wrote:
So in what way is the OM-1 not meeting your needs?
A few things - lack of a tilting LCD screen for low-level tripod-mounted shooting, and limited high ISO performance, dynamic range, colour bit depth, and quality of wide-angle lenses for landscape shooting compared to my Sony cameras.
hoodlum90 wrote:
It was about half that for the base plate. UPS is the absolutely worst for shipping costs to Canada. I wish they would use USPS for Canada shipments. Maybe BHPhoto will sell them. That is where I bought the RRS E-M1ii base plate but I didn’t want to wait in case RRS sold out quickly. I would check with BHPhoto to see if they will carry it.
I see that BH Photo has it on their web site now and will ship once stock arrives. BH Photo is usually cheaper for international shipments.
A few things - lack of a tilting LCD screen for low-level tripod-mounted shooting, and limited high ISO performance, dynamic range, colour bit depth, and quality of wide-angle lenses for landscape shooting compared to my Sony cameras.
That, and my tripods were feeling neglected...
I can certainly say I've not yet seen a comment like this that couldn't be further from MY reality having owned several top FF cameras and lenses from Canon and Sony. First of all I find the ability to take shots right up to ISO12,800 with superb results on the OM-1 is NO issue. My R5 wasn't any better which was no slouch and certainly NOT behind any Sony in that regard. Dynamic Range has been also NO issue whatsoever. No blown highlight nor issues bringing up shadow so I have no idea what your comment there is either. Lastly the one that really blows my mind is your comment on "Color Depth". The colors rendered from my current OM-1 actually won me over when being tested OVER my former R5 which I thought was the bees knees, certainly above anything Sony has out there. Finally my 8-25 f4 Pro (eq: 16-50mm FF) suprised the heck out of me with it's corner to corner sharpness, lack of distortion and build. So enjoy your Sony stuff but I have to say the other brands I've worked with (and I've worked with them ALL) bring nothing to the table I can't accomplish with the OM-1 and their Pro glass.
dcisive wrote:
I can certainly say I've not yet seen a comment like this that couldn't be further from MY reality having owned several top FF cameras and lenses from Canon and Sony. First of all I find the ability to take shots right up to ISO12,800 with superb results on the OM-1 is NO issue. My R5 wasn't any better which was no slouch and certainly NOT behind any Sony in that regard. Dynamic Range has been also NO issue whatsoever. No blown highlight nor issues bringing up shadow so I have no idea what your comment there is either. Lastly the one that really blows my mind is your comment on "Color Depth". The colors rendered from my current OM-1 actually won me over when being tested OVER my former R5 which I thought was the bees knees, certainly above anything Sony has out there. Finally my 8-25 f4 Pro (eq: 16-50mm FF) suprised the heck out of me with it's corner to corner sharpness, lack of distortion and build. So enjoy your Sony stuff but I have to say the other brands I've worked with (and I've worked with them ALL) bring nothing to the table I can't accomplish with the OM-1 and their Pro glass.
I have no experience with the Canon R5, and in fact I can't really fathom why so many people buy them. I was comparing my m4/3 gear to the higher end Sony A7R IVa and A1, which handily outperform the Canon cameras.
Is m4/3 good enough for most applications? Yes,, of course it is, and that's why I own it, despite its limitations. Are the Sony pro-level cameras better? Absolutely, without question they are.
molson wrote:
Frankly after my recent A7R5 usage testing I did last week, all I can say is that for MY usage the Sony didn't bring anything to the table that would cause me to want to keep it. As for the A1 and A7R5, their megapixel count I found was NO reason to want it. I tested as I say against it and my style of shooting wouldn't present any compelling reason to need that.
As for their fast tracking sure, they have a slight (not huge) edge in tracking a flying bird or sports and such. Since I don't shoot those I suppose as usual there's no compelling reason to want one. For shear picture quaiity, color depth and ease of use I'll take the OM-1 all day long over them.
