Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Cameras, lenses and system accessories > Camera conference > Micro Four Thirds > Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II The second Micro Four Thirds camera that offers phase detect focusing so you can use Four Thirds DSLR lenses normally as well a Micro Four Thirds lenses.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 10th October 2017
Rocknroll59 Rocknroll59 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Ipswich
Posts: 1,130
Thanks: 2
Thanked 139 Times in 123 Posts
Likes: 5
Liked 297 Times in 143 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

Well I thought it would open a whole can of worms and differing opinions..

Justifying the outlay is the thing...i've had the Mk1 since Feb 14 and i've been very pleased with it. I may not sell it but use it as a 2nd body if I need to be somewhere where I need a quick change of lens...if I value it out over the nearly 4 years i've had it, it works out at 325 pa...which is a lot less than some golf club membership so I take that as good value for money, the lenses are a different issue having now got 2 of the pro lenses I will not change those, the other 2 lenses I also would not part with, the little 45mm and 17mm are as good as you can get anywhere for the money.....so taking all the techie stuff that separates the dingles from the dangles it may be a step up for me when I take pictures at music venues, and the street pics....Paul if I can get close to your landscapes then I feel I may have cracked it..!! and many of the others that post on the forum (pics taken) and I want to get close to those if I can, but it takes practice and it is down the the photographer and not always the camera and whilst i'm not a big fan of post processing (a pic taken is a snippet of time and history) but understand that it is now part and parcel of digital photography, so is it worth it? Probably so I may just bite the bullet and get it, your only here on this journey once and hey that's the beauty of this forum people are so helpful and friendly and that's just as important...

Peter
__________________
OMD-EM1, 40-150. f2.8Pro, MC-14 converter, 7-14mm 2.8, 17mm 1.8, 45mm 1.8G, OM50mm 1.8, OM 28mm F2.8, OM 200mm F4 Giottos Silk Road YTL8384Tripod Giottos MH5011 head FL36 and other bits and bobs...
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
www.flickr.com/photos/141996687@N02/
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
Johnheatingman (10th October 2017)
  #17  
Old 10th October 2017
Bikie John's Avatar
Bikie John Bikie John is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Wessex
Posts: 3,387
Thanks: 167
Thanked 554 Times in 489 Posts
Likes: 311
Liked 538 Times in 369 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

Another thing that may tilt you towards it - related to the battery gauge.

With all the earlier bodies I found that because the battery display was such a lottery, using a grip was pretty much essential for event photography. I really didn't want it to die at an unexpected moment. With the Mark II I haven't felt the need for the grip at all, as the percentage display lets me manage it pretty well. This has saved money (the cost of the grip) and the Mark II without (edited - sorry - originally had "with" which was pretty daft!) grip is smaller and handles more nicely than the Mark I with it.

For going out with just one camera, the Mark II is definitely first choice now. Not for any single big reason, but for an accumulation of fairly small ones.

John

Last edited by Bikie John; 11th October 2017 at 09:09 AM. Reason: Ty[o
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10th October 2017
pdk42's Avatar
pdk42 pdk42 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Leamington Spa
Posts: 4,083
Thanks: 344
Thanked 886 Times in 673 Posts
Likes: 71
Liked 3,779 Times in 1,272 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham_of_Rainham View Post
Hard to know what to believe... this is Bill Claff's chart - quite different:



Personally, I find highlights are handled better on the mkii and there is little, if any, penalty in shadow noise so I'm more persuaded by Bill's graph than DxO's. This review by Matthieu at Mirrorlessons reflects my own views on DR:

https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/oly...e-and-metering
__________________
Paul
E-M1ii, Pen-F and too many lenses
flickr
Portfolio Site
Instagram
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10th October 2017
Graham_of_Rainham's Avatar
Graham_of_Rainham Graham_of_Rainham is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Rainham
Posts: 6,989
Thanks: 559
Thanked 831 Times in 628 Posts
Likes: 1,836
Liked 1,149 Times in 682 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

A quick trawl has results between 12.5 and 13.2 This ties in with DxO results, which are respected by many as a good bench mark.
__________________
Graham

We often repeat the mistakes we most enjoy...
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11th October 2017
Nawty Nawty is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 192
Thanks: 6
Thanked 32 Times in 30 Posts
Likes: 25
Liked 59 Times in 38 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricoh View Post
The Mk1 has a 16MP sensor and the MK2 a 20MP, right(?), I'd want to know if there's an improved dynamic range. The photosites have to be smaller if there's 20/16 rammed into the same area. Smaller photosites generally mean less photon capacity between full and empty. I'm interested in the answer to this.
That assumes the same generation of technology, which these aren't.

My experience mirrors Pauls, the sensor is better and I also find slightly better colour retention in shadows on the mk2.

But, for me it isn't so much the headline features (20mp, better AF) that make the mk2 better, it's all the little things such as the e-shutter, better battery life, more control (focus limiter), deeper buffer, faster write speed etc that makes it a much nicer camera to use.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11th October 2017
Ricoh Ricoh is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 4,223
Thanks: 453
Thanked 328 Times in 294 Posts
Likes: 523
Liked 1,175 Times in 714 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

I'm happy to learn the EM5 Mk1 is not too dissimilar, having a DR of 12 at ISO 200. That will do me.
__________________
Steve

on flickr
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11th October 2017
Nawty Nawty is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 192
Thanks: 6
Thanked 32 Times in 30 Posts
Likes: 25
Liked 59 Times in 38 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

The venerable Nikon D700 was 'only' 12.2 and that was lauded as the best sensor for a loooong time. It's funny, I remember at the time of getting a D700 it truly was amazing and my memories of it are just as that, however if I go back and compare images to the recent 16mp m43 sensor there isn't really anything in it.

Hoorah for progress!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
griffljg (11th October 2017)
  #23  
Old 27th November 2017
MikeOxon MikeOxon is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: oxford
Posts: 69
Thanks: 16
Thanked 12 Times in 12 Posts
Likes: 14
Liked 26 Times in 17 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

I've just made the change to Mk ii and am very pleased with the improvement in tracking-AF. For me, that was the greatest failing in the M1, when compared with the Nikon D300s that I used before. Now, I can start tackling birds-in-flight again

BIF1_2017.jpg

That aspect is important to me but may mean nothing to many people, so think about what you want from a camera.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg BIF1_2017.jpg (64.2 KB, 23 views)
__________________
Mike
visit my Natural History Photos website:
http://home.btconnect.com/mike.flemming/
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 28th November 2017
Ross the fiddler's Avatar
Ross the fiddler Ross the fiddler is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Blue Mtns, NSW Australia
Posts: 11,735
Thanks: 1,816
Thanked 1,116 Times in 882 Posts
Likes: 4,209
Liked 1,345 Times in 818 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricoh View Post
I'm happy to learn the EM5 Mk1 is not too dissimilar, having a DR of 12 at ISO 200. That will do me.
I've picked up my E-M5 to take the occasional shot with it etc & it is 'positively' sluggish compared to the E-M1 Mk II.
__________________
Ross
I fiddle with violins (when I'm not fiddling with a camera).
Cameras: OM-D E-M1 & Mk II, Olympus Stylus 1, OM-D E-M5.
Lenses: M.ZD12-40mm f2.8 PRO Lens, M.ZD40-150mm f2.8 PRO Lens with MC-14, M.ZD12-50, M.ZD60 Macro, M.ZD75-300 Mk II, MMF-3, ZD14-54 II, Sigma 150mm F2.8 APO Macro DG HSM.
Flashes: FL36R X2, FL50R, FL50.
Software: Capture One Pro 10 (& Olympus Viewer 3).
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 28th November 2017
drmarkf's Avatar
drmarkf drmarkf is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 3,451
Thanks: 220
Thanked 324 Times in 275 Posts
Likes: 988
Liked 816 Times in 451 Posts
Re: EM1 Mk1 vs Mk2

The real game changers for my usage compared to the mki relate to the CAF capabilities plus the speed of throughput. My 4 main uses are street, birding, sports and landscape, and the mkii allows me to do things in the first three that I simply couldn’t do before (or, at least, hadn’t been able to do since I sold my D300 Nikon gear around 4 years ago.

For street I can now reliably get and hold focus at full aperture with the Pan-Leica 15 on a subject walking briskly past me on the pavement. There’s no way the mki would do that, so I had to zone focus at narrower aperture with resulting confusing backgrounds.

Birding we’ve heard about: with the 300 plus practice and decent light you get focusing performance as good as the average ‘serious amateur’ DSLR (but the critical sharpness hit rate for birds in flight isn’t as good as a D500, D5 or 1D mkii - but what else is?).

The main improvement for me with field sports like rugby is with the greatly reduced viewfinder blackout and never-ending buffer. I found the CAF perfectly adequate with the mki, but you could only shoot in relatively short bursts and very often some interesting action developed after a set piece just as it ground to a crawl.

There is noticeably better highlight recovery with the mkii at 200ASA with Capture One, but that’s about it for landscape. I tend now to expose further to the right than I used to. I do wonder if the photonstopixels/dxo differences are down to the way the test images are taken and handled, with the former perhaps testing exposure-independent ultimate DR while the latter tests it at some averaged exposure? Just a guess.

Subjectively I’d say there is around 2/3 stop more latitude with the mkii at 200ASA if you expose to the right, and I definitely need to do much less HDR and exposure blending than I used to (although I still quite commonly take HDR bursts of 3 or 5 at 2 stops). There is much less over-exposure latitude at 64ASA, by the way, and quite commonly I underexpose by 1/3 stop at that.
__________________
Regards,
Mark

------------------------------
http://www.microcontrast.com
Olympus E-M1ii x2: 7-14, 12-100, 40-150, 45, 60, 75, 300, 1.4tc.
Panasonic 12-35, 15. Samyang 7.5 fisheye.
Assorted legacy lenses, plus a Fuji X70.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:21 AM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2017, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger