Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New olympus body coming up question  (Read 13401 times)
Brian Hirschfeld
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 797



WWW
« on: August 06, 2013, 08:06:28 PM »
ReplyReply

does anyone know if it will have a mirror? a la slr or will it be another evf?
Logged

www.brianhirschfeldphotography.com / www.flickr.com/brianhirschfeldphotography
---------------------------------------------------------------
Leica / Nikon / Hasselblad / Mamiya ~ Proud IQ180 owner
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5163


« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2013, 08:44:53 AM »
ReplyReply

does anyone know if it will have a mirror? a la slr or will it be another evf?
As far as I can tell, nobody outside of Olympus HQ really knows yet, but all the signs point towards it being usable with both Micro Four Thirds and Four Thirds SLR lenses ... and the first half of that means no room for a mirror and optical viewfinder. If you will permit some speculation: since the new partnership between Olympus and Sony does involve some joint efforts on photography (even if the main purpose is the far more profitable medical equipment sector), I am betting on Olympus adopting a Sony sensor with in-sensor PDAF in order to better support Four Thirds SLR lenses.

If it also gets a built-in EVF on a par with the latest accessory VF-3 and/or the next generation of Sony EVF's, I think that most Four Thirds SLR users will be willing to leave the OVF behind: the smaller 4/3" format hampers the performance of OVF's significantly compared to 36x24 format, and Four Thirds SLR's were never particularly competitive for fast action photography, so any slight residual EVF lag should be less of a worry than if Canon or Nikon dropped the OVF from their high-end cameras.
Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1161


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2013, 11:42:58 AM »
ReplyReply

does anyone know if it will have a mirror? a la slr or will it be another evf?

I hope it does have an evf and I hope it has better video capabilities, ala the gh3.  72mbs intra file, please give us a 10 bit video and keep it in a .mov wrapper.

My omd is a strange bird, not near as functional as my gh3's, sometimes not as pretty a file, (though sharper), but a very interesting little camera.

I understand the "pro" version might be slightly larger and be able to really use all of that lovely oly regular 4/3 glass which would be great (but costly).

The things  I hope for is sound monitoring, using their current in body I.S., a larger viewfinder and please, please, please, make a menu system that doesn't have 86 (seriously 86?) sub menus.

Take away crazy stuff like off with I.S. is really on and put normal functions on a button that is marked as a button someting like the gh3, where wb, iso, exposure comp are all in one area and are hard buttons marked as such.

Also little things like making the dial functions rotate the way you want.  Today with the OMD they are counter intuitive.  Left to make the F stops wider (brighter), right on the second dial to make the shutter brighter (longer).  It may make technical sense, but not in your brain.  Left or right should be brighter, the opposite way darker.

Last but not least set the auto sensitivity where if your shooting horizontal your at 3:2, then automatically go to 4:3 when shooting vertical.  I rarely shoot a 4:3 horizontal without some thoght, same with a 2:3 vertical.

This is all probably a mute point as the cameras are probably being made as I write this.

Still, I really love (I don't know why) the OMD.   

I just hope they take it one step (ok make that 10 steps) further and 5% larger.

But if there is any image quality benefit, I'll probably buy anyway. 



IMO

BC
Logged

Brian Hirschfeld
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 797



WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2013, 09:25:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the replies, prob getting into OMD with the FT tele's and it sounds like this new body will be a welcome addition.
Logged

www.brianhirschfeldphotography.com / www.flickr.com/brianhirschfeldphotography
---------------------------------------------------------------
Leica / Nikon / Hasselblad / Mamiya ~ Proud IQ180 owner
MoreOrLess
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2013, 04:14:37 AM »
ReplyReply

I wonder how they would deal with the differences in flange distance without an adapter? maybe have a movable mount that can shift backwards and forwards?
Logged
SZRitter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2013, 08:22:29 AM »
ReplyReply

The mount is an interesting concept. It either has to be an adapter or some sort of collar that extends out.

If it's true, it will be a great way to get some decent zooms other than shelling out for the Panasonic 2.8s. Not to mention, phase AF is going to be huge if it works well.

My only complaint on the EM-5 is that I would like a mic input. 3.5mm would be just fine. There really is no excuse not to add one, and if you want anyone to take your video at least halfway serious, you should have one. The hotshoe mount just doesn't work.
Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1161


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2013, 01:24:08 PM »
ReplyReply

The mount is an interesting concept. It either has to be an adapter or some sort of collar that extends out.

If it's true, it will be a great way to get some decent zooms other than shelling out for the Panasonic 2.8s. Not to mention, phase AF is going to be huge if it works well.

My only complaint on the EM-5 is that I would like a mic input. 3.5mm would be just fine. There really is no excuse not to add one, and if you want anyone to take your video at least halfway serious, you should have one. The hotshoe mount just doesn't work.

They probably will have a better adapter, though they are coming out with 2.8 zooms like panasonic, though not the 2.0's of FT size.  The only problem of the original FT lenses is they are not that small, in fact they're pretty big in comparison to the body, though the oly lenses like the 200 f2 are fine optics and build.

Having both the gh3 and the omd, I can tell you the gh3 is a much better video camera, actually much better camera overall, the omd feels better, shoots a 10% better still file and is more endearing and that last word is hard to say because the omd is also maddening.

The menu is insane.  It's like 14 main items with 86 sub menus, or something crazy.  I spent 45minutes a night, when time permitted, for two weeks, went through 14 or so websites just to find out how to set wysiwyg in the ovf.    

I did it and set it on a special myset function and still don't don't what the combination is to do it, I just know I did it.  

That's crazy.

So is the no output for 3.5 mm headphone jacks.   Makes no sense, on any camera that shoots video, even if you run to a separate recorder.

The OMD video thing is just goofy because the i.s. in the body is so very good.  Why they don't match panasonic in video function has to be some kind of back door handshake deal with Sony that nobody can make sense of it.

With all it's issues and as crazy as the omd is to work at times, it feels like a jewel, well like a leica and one of the few cameras that you throw over your shoulder and everyone says, "wow" that's a beautiful camera.

I personally love working with micro 4/3's for lifestyle advertising.  The cameras are just perfect in size, you can throw two or three on your shoulder, go to video in an instant, (good video . . . real good video) and then flick a switch and if you know how to process well, you can produce a great still.  

I also like the idea of a blackmagic 4/3's camera for a 16mm look, as long as it works.  I've gone through some of the teething pains of the RED and can't do it again in production, so if the small blackmagic 4/3's works I'll be there.

I find both the gh3 and the omd to shoot a very strange but pretty file.  It seems that no matter what you do they come out kind of green, almost identical to RED One files (so it's something I'm use to), but with some correction they look what I consider film like and a lot of people have a different view on what film like is.  Some think it's the smoothness of a 5dIII but to me film like is kind of grainy, kind of textured and looks like well . . . film and that's what I see when I use the OMD.   

The only thing needed is for Olympus to wake up.   I know the Iphone has killed the market for small cameras,  but the pen series, the omd are stunning cameras in look and feel, but they need more function, a little better higher iso . . . not a lot a little and some logic with the menu.  

Olympus needs more consistency in their mft lenses.  Some like the 75mm rival lecia in build quality some look good, but feel like plastic and very light, though all the oly lenses are amazing sharp actually as sharp as my zeiss contax where are the sharpest real world lenses I've ever used.  Much sharper than my leica lenses.

Actually, in the world of digital I think sensor size matters less than usability.  At least in what I do.  I like these smaller cameras, because regular dslrs are huge.  It's not a life or weight issue, it's just dslrs all look the same (black) and all look like plastic and a camera like the omd is different and a joy to hold and use.  Maybe the new blackmagic will be the same.  I hope so, but I really wish I could pick and choose the video capabilities of the gh3, the file quality (hopefully) of the black magic, the file codec (prorezz) of the black magic and the look, feel and build of the OMD. 

But........ the omd menu is truly painful.

IMO

BC

« Last Edit: August 08, 2013, 01:46:42 PM by bcooter » Logged

SZRitter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2013, 01:44:31 PM »
ReplyReply

But........ the omd menu is truly painful.

Yep. But I had an E-PM1 prior, so I knew how awful they were. That said, bracketing is the only reason I access them on a regular basis, most things are done from the quick menu (or SCP, or whatever they call it).

The reason I went m43 over Fuji X was the more rounded system. The Panasonic bodies for video and Oly for photos (and now BM for video) seemed like a killer combo. Not to mention, yes, the Oly 45mm feels like plastic, but it is a fine, fine lens worthy of almost any shooters bag. And it served me well when I had one. I don't need the best video, just competent looking ones, which the EM-5 can provide. Audio is captured on a Zoom H1, then synced in post. Annoying, as my D7000 at least I could run it out of and into the camera.
Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1161


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 08, 2013, 02:17:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Yep. But I had an E-PM1 prior, so I knew how awful they were. That said, bracketing is the only reason I access them on a regular basis, most things are done from the quick menu (or SCP, or whatever they call it).

The reason I went m43 over Fuji X was the more rounded system. The Panasonic bodies for video and Oly for photos (and now BM for video) seemed like a killer combo. Not to mention, yes, the Oly 45mm feels like plastic, but it is a fine, fine lens worthy of almost any shooters bag. And it served me well when I had one. I don't need the best video, just competent looking ones, which the EM-5 can provide. Audio is captured on a Zoom H1, then synced in post. Annoying, as my D7000 at least I could run it out of and into the camera.

Yes, but really, how hard is it to make a two channel mic in and head phone out jack?

Really, it's like somebody said, ok we make the sensor so, you do the stills, we'll do the video, but the video can only be 8 bit, the stills can only be 12 bit and  . . .

Some of these workarounds are goofy and really affect workflow.

I know the traditional ways of having a separate sound recording is normal, a scratch sound on camera is standard and using plural eyes, or fcp's syncing is a way to work, but it's a lot more work when you have a shoot with 200 clips.

I just don't understand why camera makers are so far behind on what the professional market wants.  Every client is asking for video and not just crappy, shake around video, but in focus, cinematic looking video and they want it  . . . NOW.  They are also asking for animated gifs, faster retouching, beautiful coloured video.

I get a request a day for video and stills from our ongoing and past projects.  I just got one yesterday for 13 clips and a burned in logo, primary and secondary colour.

To the outsider it seems like a slam dunk.  Just process out 13 clips and stick a logo on in the NLE, right?  But when you add up the numbers, find the files, process out in cinex (RED cameras), or if it's a gh3, transcode to pro rezz, find the sound files, sync them up, prep an eps logo, find the size, send out screen shots for approval, get the ok, burn out the clip with secondary color, transcode in three or four flavors, the estimate is high (not in my terms, but client terms), but when you add up the time it's a 8 hour marathon . . . minimum, regardless of the system, computer, nle, camera you work with.

And off topic btw:   I've been running the latest (silver) mac desktops for our video in three stations.  12 cores, a fiber optic drive base  and since I use fcp 7 I didn't think any new computer would speed it up.  Anyway, I just bought a new 3 point something Imac as one of our Imacs went down and for grins loaded up fcp7. 

I am shocked how fast it blows through fcp 7.  It's virtually real time.  Renders that were 5 to 10 minutes are seconds.   Crazy that a 3 grand computer does this.

Then you see something like flixel which are animated gifs and you realize if the camera makers really want to sell more cameras, they need to integrate to programs like this.  wi-fi shouldn't be semi good it should be push a button standard.

Actually the camera makers could completely integrate a whole package.  A camera, lenses, in camera stabilization, wireless mics, that actually go to multiple cameras and integration with apps that do color, animated gifs, things that the market wants in a way where you open the case, pull out the cameras shoot, download and work.

Now to do what I just mentioned takes many multiple makers, many multiple apps and machines.

Things are changing.

IMO

BC
Logged

OldRoy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 433


WWW
« Reply #9 on: August 09, 2013, 12:10:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Also little things like making the dial functions rotate the way you want. 
BC
Maybe I don't understand P87 of the manual. But there again, I'm not a Mac user.
Roy
Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1161


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #10 on: August 09, 2013, 01:18:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Maybe I don't understand P87 of the manual. But there again, I'm not a Mac user.
Roy

Unless your seeing something I'm not, when you go into the menu functions of dial selection and direction, it's a visual trick.

When you go to those settings and make changes it looks like the direction of the dials change, but what changes is the dial function and each dial goes a different direction for settings so you see the dial direction arrow change and you think ah-ha that's how you change dial direction, but instead all you've done is change the dial function from shutter to f stop, or f stop to shutter (in manual mode).

If I'm wrong, (I hope I'm wrong), please enlighten me.

The thing is and the achilles heel of the omd is the bloody menu.  If one dial did f stops, one dial did shutter and the mode dial did manual to aperture priority, etc. it would be easy.  Especially if the dials went in the proper direction and maybe it's me, but it seems to me that if I want a scene brighter, I want both dials to move in a direction that makes a scene brighter, not be opposed.

I've never gotten use to it and I've shot a lot with this little camera.

They also need to be more clear on the focus point settings, in camera stabilization, (which has to be set in the menu as off, to actually be on).

I dig this camera, for the look of the file, the build quality, the feel of the camera, but it's like my newest car.   To change a radio station takes a touch screen lcd and two to three functions.  To do that analog takes one tactile knob and you never take your eyes off the road.

I looked at the Fuji EX1 and Fuji x pro whatever and except for the autofocus and the rangefinder aspect of the camera (which I find a little out of place and not that attractive) the real f stops on a lens, the real shutter dial is just so simple it's crazy.

But I've said this 1000 times.  Who thought wheels rather than f stops on lenses and dials for shutter were a better option on a camera.

In fact go into any store that sells olympus and ask the sales person to set the menu up.    They can't and before and after I bought this camera, every city I travel to, London, Paris, NY, Dallas and LA I went to a camera store played around with the omd and asked the salesperson how to set _____fill in the blanks________.

When I left they we're still thumbing through menus and sub menus.

But honestly if you have a solution I'd love to hear it.

Thanks

BC

P.S.

I think the reason I'm almost obsessed with this camera is it has style.  It's the first digital camera I've owned that didn't look like a thick Ipad with a lens.  The Canon 1 series is a good camera, but they've always just been this big smooth black hunk with a piece of glass stuck in the middle.

They look more like a medical device than a camera.

The Nikons (and my pana gh3's) look like the guy that designed those futuristic sony boom boxes was rehired.

It's not the weight of the camera I mind, it's just the size of modern dslrs.  They're not really unique enough to be that big, not really distinctive enough to be that special looking.

The one exception is Leica and the almost Leica Fuji.  The Fuji I did and have hopes for but the weird thing about the x1 pro is it feels empty.  Like those fake hollywood boulders that look like they weight 200 lbs but weight 2 lbs.  Everytime I pick up the fuji I think it's an empty demo.

« Last Edit: August 09, 2013, 01:29:15 PM by bcooter » Logged

OldRoy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 433


WWW
« Reply #11 on: August 09, 2013, 02:18:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I'll take your word for it! I can't say that this ever really caused me any problems. Or maybe it's more the case that I have so many competing problems that this one just gets lost in the crowd...
Roy
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 868



« Reply #12 on: August 09, 2013, 02:25:19 PM »
ReplyReply

They also need to be more clear on the focus point settings, in camera stabilization, (which has to be set in the menu as off, to actually be on).

You lost me here re. IBIS. If you're not using the OM-D's Super Control Panel, I highly recommend it. Much faster than digging into the full menu system. IBIS is one of the functions you can control. It's either IS Off, IS1 Auto (on), IS2 Vertical or IS3 Horizontal. The latter two are intended for use when panning. The IS1 setting is definitely on, and IS Off is definitely off.

Focus points...the manual is not at all thorough there.

-Dave-
Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 639


« Reply #13 on: August 09, 2013, 02:45:12 PM »
ReplyReply

The one exception is Leica and the almost Leica Fuji.  The Fuji I did and have hopes for ..

BC

I can understand your quasi-obsession with the OMD, in fact any camera that just feels 'right'

But Fuji … think Leica with autofocus, especially since their last two firmware upgrades. Now you've got good autofocus AND focus peaking. I agree about the X-pro, never 'felt' right , but then again I'm not religiously fanatic about OVF's.

The X-E1 with high res EVF feels good in hand (to me at least). I've never had to open the manual (perhaps once) and find the x-trans sensor produces excellent files. Admittedly I don't do video, so after the M8 this was the first camera I took to without any hesitation.

I just set the ISO to the [Fn] button and the front selector to manual focus, and was set to go. If I want autofocus just press the top rhs AF-L  button and it locks on, the minute you twist the focusing ring, focus peaking comes on and is usually just confirmation.

Now waiting for feedback on the new zeiss lenses. The fujinon 35 f1.4 is a good lens, but your comments about leica lenses on the OMD sent me back to review my tests on the x-trans.

Sure OOC, the fuji lenses seem sharper than the leicas. But with a modest amount of PP ( mainly local contrast enhancement) the leicas come up wonderfully.  Tested both the latest 75 apo-summicron and a 1986 vintage 50 summicron.  They draw differently, obviously, and the 75 needs the least amount of PP, but they both produce excellent files. Haven't found any CA issues that others report – yet.

Intending, time permitting, to do further tests later this month – and you got me so worried that I'm going to have to add an eye test to the schedule as well...

In the meantime, just love the simplicity of the x-

All best
M
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #14 on: August 09, 2013, 03:40:37 PM »
ReplyReply

find the x-trans sensor produces excellent files.
and so does sony sensor and w/o a x-trans CFA mess which negate all AA filter removal pluses.
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 868



« Reply #15 on: August 09, 2013, 04:43:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't blame Fuji for 3rd party vendors having some trouble with the X CFA. Decoding of the Bayer matrix c. 2003 wasn't so great either compared with current results. And I'm most emphatically not a proponent of the What We've Got Now Is Good Enough school, so I'm glad Fuji is pushing things with an alternate CF matrix...even if it takes awhile for the various RAW converters to get the best out of it.

As for using Leitz/Leica lenses on the X-E1...that's precisely why I own one. I use it with 21mm Elmarits (both pre- and ASPH versions), 35, 40, 50 & 75mm 'Crons and a 90mm Tele-Elmarit (the small version). All perform very well with no significant CA. I would like a wider option, though...maybe Fuji's 14mm or the wider of the two Zeiss offerings. I've used the Voigtländer 15mm a bit but the results are decidedly meh.

As for the next Olympus...smaller default focus rectangles in AF mode, no un(der)documented features, a tidier menu system, 24fps video, sensor-based PD-AF for FourThirds lenses, proper focus peaking (you can kludge it now via an art filter), a sensor with greater dynamic range and more stuff I currently can't remember.   Wink

-Dave-
Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 639


« Reply #16 on: August 09, 2013, 06:14:59 PM »
ReplyReply

and so does sony sensor

agreed

w/o a x-trans CFA mess which negate all AA filter removal pluses.

broad statement, care to expand ?
both C1, iridient and now even LR are producing, to my eyes, excellent results
Logged
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 275


« Reply #17 on: August 09, 2013, 10:46:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Bcooter,

If I have it right, the dial controls settings you want are Gears-> (B)Button/Dial. When you select Button/Dial there are three choices: Button Function (programmable buttons fn etc), Dial Function (sets which dial does what-f stop and aperture), and Dial Direction (the direction of rotation for change).

Dial direction is not clearly explained and is confusing. I have no idea what the second line in the description means, that is what is probably confusing you. It does not change the Dial Function, only the rotation direction. I have mine set to Dial2 so that when I pull the dial away from the center of the camera it increases exposure. In other words the rear dial is set to f stop and rotating counter clockwise decreases the f stop (2.8->2.0); the front dial is shutter speed and rotating clockwise decreases shutter speed (100->80).

In other words, if I put my finger on the front dial and pull away from the pentaprism, the exposure is increased. If I put my thumb on the rear of the rear dial and pull away from the pentaprism, again the exposure is increased. Logical to me. I don't turn the back dial from the front with my trigger finger - it would screw me up - different directions for same exposure change. I don't change aperture much. GH3 set the same way.

Larry
Logged
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #18 on: August 09, 2013, 11:06:11 PM »
ReplyReply

both C1, iridient and now even LR are producing, to my eyes, excellent results

placebo effect.
Logged
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 275


« Reply #19 on: August 09, 2013, 11:11:28 PM »
ReplyReply

The thing I would like most for a new EM-5 is a focus overhaul. Make it behave like the GH3.

1. Back button focus. On the EM-5 if you have a button set to back button focus there is no quick way to switch to half press focus. You must dedicate another button to make the switch. On GH3 it is simplicity itself. If you press the back button focus it focuses and the focus rectangle turns green. Press it again and the green goes away and you can now half press focus. Press it again and it is focused back button.

2. Of course, as everybody mentions, a smaller focus rectangle.

3. Do away with the squares matrix for focus rectangle location. Make it moveable to any screen position. It is this way if you set the small focus option but then you loose the exposure highlight clipping indicators. Make the focus settings independent of any other settings. This is really dumb.

4. Allow touch screen focus positioning when your eye is at the EVF. GH3 has this and I find it useful. I can use my right thumb to move the focus rectangle to an approximate position and then do a slight focus and recompose or fine tune it with the arrow pad.

5. Make focus rectangle adjustments with the arrow pad less skitterish. Press and arrow key and the focus usually shoots all the way across the screen. You have to be very careful to make fine adjustmens.

The above is why I much prefer to work with the GH3

Larry
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad