PDA

View Full Version : Olympus OM-D E-M5 real world RAW and JPEG samples to download


Four Thirds User
1st April 2012, 09:40 PM
Four Thirds User (Fourthirds-user.com (http://fourthirds-user.com)) is a sibling site to the e-group.

Yes, we have more Olympus OM-D E-M5 sample images (RAW and JPEG) for you to download - this time a selection of 66 every day real life shots rather than 'test' shots.

More... (http://fourthirds-user.com/2012/04/olympus_omd_em5_real_world_raw_and_jpeg_samples_to _download.php)

Ian
1st April 2012, 09:53 PM
I will be adding image captions with info about which lens was used, etc., tomorrow.

Ian

Ian
2nd April 2012, 07:47 AM
Morning all! I am just going through the 66 images and noting which lenses were used for each shot. Overall I used a wide selection: ZD 300mm f/2.8, m.Zuiko 75-300, m.Zuiko 12-50, m.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8, m.Zuiko 12mm f/2.0, ZD 50-200, ZD 50mm f/2.0 Macro, and the ZD 12-60 :)

Ian

David Morison
2nd April 2012, 08:15 AM
Very impressive especially the high ISO jpegs. Slowly getting closer to signing up for an EM-5 but still need more info on lenses used and your opinion on focussing issues with 300mm f2.8 and 50-200mm. Thanks for all your hard work Ian, if I can't make an informed decision after all this then I never will.

Regards

David

Ian
2nd April 2012, 08:27 AM
OK - the lens type annotations and some other information has now been added to the gallery thumbnails:

http://fourthirds-user.com/2012/04/olympus_omd_em5_real_world_raw_and_jpeg_samples_to _download.php

Ian

Ian
2nd April 2012, 08:46 AM
Very impressive especially the high ISO jpegs. Slowly getting closer to signing up for an EM-5 but still need more info on lenses used and your opinion on focussing issues with 300mm f2.8 and 50-200mm. Thanks for all your hard work Ian, if I can't make an informed decision after all this then I never will.

Regards

David

Personally, I'm pleased with the m.Zuiko 75-300. It clearly works well wide open at 300mm although that is only f/6.7. That is knocking on the door of diffraction softening, so I would say you would probably stick to 6.7 at the 300mm end. The bokeh is nice too.

The shooting details were

Shutter Speed: 1/1000 sec
Aperture: f 6.7
ISO: 200

I reckon it's almost a stop under exposed, say 2/3rds stop, so the shutter speed should have been 1/640th. That's still a usable shutter speed hand held at 300mm in my view. I confess that I shot a burst of about 5 frames and this was the sharpes. At 10fps (I measured 10 rather than the stated 9 fps) this is a handy way of being able to select the sharpest shot.

I think this is positive - you should be able to up the ISO with confidence and still get good results - even to ISO 800 - in conditions like this.

I found that the Four Thirds lenses focused quite well. But you need to be vigilant, especially with the SWD lenses, for a focus confirmation but in reality the focus is visibly off in the viewfinder. Olympus does need to address this. It only happens occasionally, but you do need to watch out for it.

In the end I decided it was better to focus manually on the 300 2.8, especially when the target was moving around, as the Moorhens, ducks and geese were. The 300 can AF on a static subject, but you need to keep the lens from wandering about when the focus action is in progress.

In my latest E-M5 sample gallery just uploaded (http://fourthirds-user.com/2012/04/olympus_omd_em5_real_world_raw_and_jpeg_samples_to _download.php), there is a shot of a Moorhen on the canal bank stretching its legs. It's a shady spot so the 75-300 shot at ISO 1000 and 1/200th second and I think it's a keeper - what do you think?

(very big file:) http://fourthirds-user.com/sample_images/377/P4013584.jpg

The E-M5 can't do action AF with Four Thirds lenses - that's what we need Olympus to solve and I believe they can using semi-silvered mirror solution in an adapter like Sony have done, although that could lose a third of a stop in brightness. We'll just have to wait and see.

Ian

Bikie John
2nd April 2012, 09:16 AM
The E-M5 can't do action AF with Four Thirds lenses - that's what we need Olympus to solve and I believe they can using semi-silvered mirror solution in an adapter like Sony have done, although that could lose a third of a stop in brightness. We'll just have to wait and see.

This is a real problem. Any solution which loses light or compromises quality is not a solution at all - the reason for lashing out the thousands for the lovely fast lenses is to get you speed (aperture) and quality. If I wanted slower lenses I could have saved an awful lot of beer vouchers *chr

It's a shame. Of course we can still use the older bodies, and with big monster glass the smaller body is not much of an advantage. But it means that looking at m43 as a system, long fast glass is an area that it simply doesn't do. And simple economics means that even if we do see a proper m43 300/2.8, 90-250/2.8 or even 50-200 SWD equivalent I'm not in any position to lash out the readies for them.

Ciao ... John

Ian
2nd April 2012, 10:03 AM
Here is that Moorhen taken with the 75-300 at ISO 1000:

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/511/P4013584-2.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/44723)

This was exported from Olympus Viewer 2 from the RAW file as a TIFF and imported to Lightroom 4 and post processed there. I did a fair amount of work on this, including some use of the adjustment brush and graduated filter in LR. But I think it has turned out well and shows what the E-M5 can do with the 75-300. This was a hand held shot at ISO 1000, 1/200th shutter speed, f/6.7 (wide open) - the Moorhen was on a shaded area of the canal bank. About 42% of the original frame has been cropped off, leaving about 9.5 megapixels to work with.

Ian

David Morison
2nd April 2012, 10:45 AM
Personally, I'm pleased with the m.Zuiko 75-300. It clearly works well wide open at 300mm although that is only f/6.7. That is knocking on the door of diffraction softening, so I would say you would probably stick to 6.7 at the 300mm end. The bokeh is nice too.

The shooting details were

Shutter Speed: 1/1000 sec
Aperture: f 6.7
ISO: 200

I reckon it's almost a stop under exposed, say 2/3rds stop, so the shutter speed should have been 1/640th. That's still a usable shutter speed hand held at 300mm in my view. I confess that I shot a burst of about 5 frames and this was the sharpes. At 10fps (I measured 10 rather than the stated 9 fps) this is a handy way of being able to select the sharpest shot.

I think this is positive - you should be able to up the ISO with confidence and still get good results - even to ISO 800 - in conditions like this.

I found that the Four Thirds lenses focused quite well. But you need to be vigilant, especially with the SWD lenses, for a focus confirmation but in reality the focus is visibly off in the viewfinder. Olympus does need to address this. It only happens occasionally, but you do need to watch out for it.

In the end I decided it was better to focus manually on the 300 2.8, especially when the target was moving around, as the Moorhens, ducks and geese were. The 300 can AF on a static subject, but you need to keep the lens from wandering about when the focus action is in progress.

In my latest E-M5 sample gallery just uploaded (http://fourthirds-user.com/2012/04/olympus_omd_em5_real_world_raw_and_jpeg_samples_to _download.php), there is a shot of a Moorhen on the canal bank stretching its legs. It's a shady spot so the 75-300 shot at ISO 1000 and 1/200th second and I think it's a keeper - what do you think?

(very big file:) http://fourthirds-user.com/sample_images/377/P4013584.jpg

The E-M5 can't do action AF with Four Thirds lenses - that's what we need Olympus to solve and I believe they can using semi-silvered mirror solution in an adapter like Sony have done, although that could lose a third of a stop in brightness. We'll just have to wait and see.

Ian

Thank you Ian.
Focusing with the 300mm f2.8 using small single-point AF on the E5 is a little unreliable handheld anyhow as it is difficult to keep the point on a small object like a bird's eye and the keeper rate is not as good as I'd like. This is less of a problem with the 50-200mm SWD + EC14 presumably as my weak old arms have more control with the lighter weight. This combination at f4.9 is however somewhat slower to focus than the 300mm perhaps because of the smaller aperture but it appears that the m75-300 does not suffer in this way.

I think that I am going to take a risk and order the EM-5 on the basis that if it works as I hope (and you have demonstrated) with the 75-300mm the sale of my 50-200mm and E30 will help towards the cost. Who knows I might even consider selling the 300mm and then I'd be quids in!

Regards

David

mige0
2nd April 2012, 08:46 PM
...................

mige0
2nd April 2012, 08:49 PM
The E-M5 can't do action AF with Four Thirds lenses - that's what we need Olympus to solve and I believe they can using semi-silvered mirror solution in an adapter like Sony have done, although that could lose a third of a stop in brightness. We'll just have to wait and see.

Ian

This is a real problem. Any solution which loses light or compromises quality is not a solution at all - the reason for lashing out the thousands for the lovely fast lenses is to get you speed (aperture) and quality. If I wanted slower lenses I could have saved an awful lot of beer vouchers *chr

It's a shame. Of course we can still use the older bodies, and with big monster glass the smaller body is not much of an advantage. But it means that looking at m43 as a system, long fast glass is an area that it simply doesn't do. And simple economics means that even if we do see a proper m43 300/2.8, 90-250/2.8 or even 50-200 SWD equivalent I'm not in any position to lash out the readies for them.

Ciao ... John


For quite some while I would have refused to use the Sony approach adapted by Olympus to solve the FT / mFT dilemma - but as it seems that over the years no "clean" merging solution finds its way towards us - its possibly better to have such a half/ half solution than non.

At least, once properly adjusted to avoid front/ back focus, it might not de-align by wear out.
Also the coloring from the semi mirror seems to be way less than what the new sensor already brings along.

The main drawback - as I see it - is not so much the loss in brightness (no change in DOF though) but the ghost images from the tilted semi mirror surface, mainly seen with bright spots like street lamps or highlight reflections in polished surfaces for example.

As logically as it would have been to introduce such an AF adapter like the Sony LA-EA2

http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&partNumber=LAEA2

together with the OM-D_5 for all the FT lens lovers, I'm confident we will get it after the big shareholders PowPow in April , alongside with the revealing of what sensor actually is in the E-M5

StephenL
3rd April 2012, 12:00 PM
Thanks for those Ian. I downloaded 2 of the raw files - P4013376 and P4013387, as these were at base ISO, nice colourful contrasty subjects, using either end of the 12-50. Typical of my use.

I converted them to 16 bit tiffs in Viewer 2, then imported them into Lightroom 4, without making any adjustments at all in either process. I then printed them through LR onto A3+ glossy, full size. I must say that both the camera and the lens impressed me. Good clean sharp images.

I realise that this was by no means a good demonstration of the full capabilities of the camera, but it's given me confidence that I've made the right decision in pre-ordering.

Ian
3rd April 2012, 05:54 PM
I recommend setting Noise Filter to OFF and sharpening to -2, and Adobe RGB when converting E-M5 RAW files in Viewer 2 before exporting to Lightroom. I'm finding that even then the E-M5 RAW results look a bit over-processed in Lightroom.

Ian

StephenL
3rd April 2012, 06:24 PM
With a bit of luck Adobe won't be long before they update their raw processor.