I have been an on and off Olympus shooter for many years but mostly have shot Sony (currently an A7RV). I shoot a lot of portraits and street scenes. I am dipping my feet into M 4/3 again with a recently purchased Om-3 and some used lenses. The 12-45, 17 1.8 and 45 1.8. It's too soon to give a real solid opinion but I bought the Olympus primarily for travel.. For shorter focal lengths I disagree about the size comparison. The Olympus is much more carryable. Understand I have an extensive Sony system and plan to keep it as my primary camera but that doesn't mean the OM-3 does not have a place. I printed a 13x19 print to see how it came out and had no issues with print quality. ISO was definitely worse on the Om-3 but Adobe noise reduction cleared up much of that and you certainly can not crop as much but it all depends on what you shoot.
The attached shows a comparison of the A7Rv and and the OM-3. Anyone can argue that my lens choices are unfair, however they are as equivalent as I could make them and represent what i might use for a casual walkaround shoot. The second shot is a portrait test shot I did with the Olympus. It would not really be my portrait choice but it performed very reasonably.
Aug 03, 2025 at 10:17 AM
Previous versions of jmmaher's message #16863591 « Sony Full-Frame vs. Olympus OM1 II? »
