Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] OM-D EM-5 review at dpreview

Subject: Re: [OM] OM-D EM-5 review at dpreview
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 10:13:12 -0400
Does dynamic range exceeding Leica M8, Canon 5D II and Nikon D3S help?
<http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/leicam8/14>
<http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/25>
<http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3s/19>
<http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/18>

DPR doesn't have a table of DR numbers for the OM-D as they do for the 
other cameras but from the graph I read about 11 stops in the "gradation 
auto" mode.  Even the "gradation normal" curve shows about 9.5 stops 
which equals or exceeds the other cameras.

I'd have included the 5D III and Nikon D3200 too but DPR hasn't gotten 
past the preview stage on these cameras yet.  One would hope those are 
better but I think unlikely to blow the OM-D out of the water.

Chuck Norcutt


On 5/6/2012 5:48 PM, Peter Klein wrote:
> This OM-D thingie has me seriously tempted. I just saw an ISO 3200 photo
> on getdpi, taken by Jono Slack in a dimly-lit pub. It's sharp, and at
> 100% the image looks like it has Kodachrome 25 grain. 1/100 at f/1.8 ISO
> 3200, which would be 1/30 at f/1.4 on Tri-X. Such shots are not doing my
> sales resistance any good at all.
>
> Here's the thread I'm referring to:
> <http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/4-3rds-cameras/36866-fun-olympus-omd-2.html>
>
> My main camera is a Leica M8. My long lens camera is an Oly E-30. My
> "good enough" generalist camera is the original Panny G1. Up until now,
> the only reason to upgrade from the G1 was maybe the GH2. But the OMD
> looks like it is playing in the same field as the K-5 and D7000. And
> it's small and light, so I'd probably reach for it more often than
> either the E-30 (size/weight) or the G1 (IQ and high ISO limitations).
>
> I'm not a pro, so unlike AG and Mrs. AG, I can put convenience and fun
> factor higher than what monetary return on investment I'm going to get
> (forgive me for assuming Ken, but I have a feeling that this was a major
> factor in The Discussion). Nor do I feel I *must* support my old OM
> lenses full-frame. It would be nice, but its a secondary consideration,
> and if they end up seeming twice as long as they were back in the day,
> I'll live.
>
> This OM-D and a 45/1.8 could probably replace the Leica for classical
> concert shooting--it has three stop advantage vs. the M8 at 800 and a 90
> Summicron. It's a leap ahead of the G1 as a generalist camera. I could
> still use OM Zuikos and Leica lenses on it for special purposes.
>
> I suspect the Leica M8 would still be a better decisive-moment camera,
> and its low-to-medium IQ is probably still better. With fast lenses, the
> ISO 640 (really 800) quality limit is often enough for where I play. I
> really like the E-30, the controls make it feel like a "real" camera,
> but I usually don't take it out unless I know I'm going to be shooting
> long. Like the G1, it is not really an available-light camera.
> Unfortunately, my original 40-150 f/3.5-4.5 DigiZuiko is (which I love
> on the E-30) doesn't do contrast autofocus, so I believe would be manual
> focus on the OM-D. And it would be awfully big.
>
> Still To Be Determined: Shutter/autofocus lag and dynamic range. Both
> would need to be good enough *for me* before I'd leap. But I gotta tell
> ya, an OM-D with a 45/1.8, combined with the 20/1.7 and the original
> Panny 14-45 kit zoom--is sounding like a very sweet "go-everywhere do
> most things well" outfit.
>
> So, fellow Zuiks, am I making sense, or do you feel compelled to inform
> me of the error of my ways?
>
> --Peter
>
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz