jeffryscott
2006 Rally Course Champion: Expedition Trophy
I have always been a big fan of small and light for camera gear. I migrated toward Leica M's after I first used a friends, then moved to Contax G's. Both those cameras traveled the world with me leaving the SLR gear at home, or in the hotel if I had to take it. Recently I sold my Canon 5d kit and received an Olympus OM-D black kit with the 14-42 lens two days later.
As a former rangefinder guy and owner of both the EP-1 and EP-2 Olympus pens, I found myself smitten by the weather sealing, build quality, size and apparent image quality of the OM-D. I also started my professional career as an OM shooter and have used Olympus gear at various times over the last 25 years. However, as it is a new camera, I was too impatient to wait for a kit with the equally weather sealed 12-50 opting for immediate gratification instead.
Going from full frame, the holy grail of digital, to m4/3, a sensor half the size, is probably a bit contrarian to popular thought. However, the perceived tradeoffs, for me, were worth the risk. I did and do have concerns about making the switch. Would I be happy with the smaller sensor (I knew the quality would be quite satisfactory from my previous experience with m43, but would this modern marvel compete with the 7-year-old 5d? And would it be viable for the few professional jobs I still do?)
I had many questions about the camera. Electronic viewfinder vs. optical. Ergonomics, etc ... Well, the first impression when I unpacked the camera was how small it is. Even after having owned two previous m43 cameras, this felt and looked small (especially after having just sold a Canon 5d). It feels solid, but not solid like a brick like the OM-1 it is reminiscent of.
So, onto the camera. It is small, did I say that? But it packs a punch. Nine frames a second in bursts, instant AF and in extremely limited testing with the images, I find the camera more than useable up to ISO 6400. RAW is not yet supported in either Aperture or Lightroom so I really don't know just how well the images will hold up, but initial impressions are quite positive.
I can't wait to get some real pictures with the camera, I think it's going to be a fantastic machine.
The first attached image is a quick shot of my daughter at ISO 6400. No post processing , straight from the camera except resized in photoshop. Obviously WB is off, but I was pretty pleased. EDIT 5/9/12: quickly processed same shot in LR (raw) and resized to 1024 pixels in PS.
As a former rangefinder guy and owner of both the EP-1 and EP-2 Olympus pens, I found myself smitten by the weather sealing, build quality, size and apparent image quality of the OM-D. I also started my professional career as an OM shooter and have used Olympus gear at various times over the last 25 years. However, as it is a new camera, I was too impatient to wait for a kit with the equally weather sealed 12-50 opting for immediate gratification instead.
Going from full frame, the holy grail of digital, to m4/3, a sensor half the size, is probably a bit contrarian to popular thought. However, the perceived tradeoffs, for me, were worth the risk. I did and do have concerns about making the switch. Would I be happy with the smaller sensor (I knew the quality would be quite satisfactory from my previous experience with m43, but would this modern marvel compete with the 7-year-old 5d? And would it be viable for the few professional jobs I still do?)
I had many questions about the camera. Electronic viewfinder vs. optical. Ergonomics, etc ... Well, the first impression when I unpacked the camera was how small it is. Even after having owned two previous m43 cameras, this felt and looked small (especially after having just sold a Canon 5d). It feels solid, but not solid like a brick like the OM-1 it is reminiscent of.
So, onto the camera. It is small, did I say that? But it packs a punch. Nine frames a second in bursts, instant AF and in extremely limited testing with the images, I find the camera more than useable up to ISO 6400. RAW is not yet supported in either Aperture or Lightroom so I really don't know just how well the images will hold up, but initial impressions are quite positive.
I can't wait to get some real pictures with the camera, I think it's going to be a fantastic machine.
The first attached image is a quick shot of my daughter at ISO 6400. No post processing , straight from the camera except resized in photoshop. Obviously WB is off, but I was pretty pleased. EDIT 5/9/12: quickly processed same shot in LR (raw) and resized to 1024 pixels in PS.
Attachments
Last edited:
