Hi Mike, welcome back!
> Up until 2008 I was using my beloved OM2ns and my, almost as much
> loved, OM4. I had been keen to go digital, as long as I could still
> use my large collection of OM mount lenses. However, when I looked at
> the newly released E1 in 2003 it was a great disappointment
Yea, me too. I reluctantly went with the E-3, mainly so I could use my OM
Zuikos easily. I was unhappy with the size and weight, and found myself
gradually shooting less and less.
> So the first question is, "what to buy?"... Searching online for "best DSLR
> viewfinder", up pops the OM-D E-5 II.
I have not tried the E5.2, but this spring, I spent my first two Social
Security cheques on an OMD1.2, and could not be happier!
It supports my OM Zuikos splendidly, allowing me to program in their name and
aperture (as well as focal length) into a list that I select from one of the
front buttons. I then use the other front button to turn on "focus peaking,"
which outlines in-focus areas. This has made all my old manual-focus lenses
even more enjoyable!
My only gripe with the support for legacy lenses is the in-camera list is only
ten items long. I fill the first nine with my most-used lenses, then go to the
trouble of re-programming the tenth slot for anything odd I may use.
The main reason for sticking with Olympus (besides legacy glass) is the superb
image stabilization -- which is the main reason for bothering to tell the
camera what focal length you are using. As a film shooter, you're probably
thinking, "No thanks; I know how to use a tripod." But it has really
revolutionized the way I take pictures. I find it especially useful for macro,
which I would not have even considered without a tripod before.
Another feature I'm finding useful that I thought I'd never use is sequential
shooting. When shooting macro without a tripod, I'll often set it to
sequential, press the shutter, and move through the focus range, in effect
doing "manual focus stacking." It is especially useful for moving critters.
Then go through your shots and keep the ones with the best focus.
I only have two OMD lenses, and only because they are truly special. I found a
lovely 14-45 "pancake" zoom on evilBay for just $150. It makes the E1.2 truly a
pocket camera, assuming you have fairly large pockets. :-) I often slap that on
when I'm not planning to take photos, just in case...
The other OMD lens I have gets used A LOT! It's the incomparable 7-14/2.8
superwide zoom. I can't say to many good things about this lens! I had the OM
15 fish, 18/3.5, and 21/2. I loved them all, but reluctantly sold them when I
went into the E-System, knowing the "crop factor" would destroy their
usefulness. I sprung for the E-System 7-14/4, and loved it, shooting several
magazine covers with it.
When I got into the OMD System, I wondered whether I should just adapt the
7-14/4, but it was so big and clunky, and there's that extra stop, so I emptied
the piggy bank on a used 7-14/2.8.
No, I lied about two lenses. I also have the 9mm f8 "body cap" fisheye. It's
not really a good body cap -- the lever that opens it keeps getting bumped in
the bag -- and it's barely a lens. But it can be fun now and then if you want
the fisheye effect without spending a bundle. It also makes a great "grab shot"
lens for when you want a pocket camera, but was only a bit less than the 14-45
pancake zoom, which is a REAL lens. And with no electrical contacts, it takes
up one of your ten manual focus slots in the camera menu.
My favourite adapted lenses these days are the 90/2 macro, the 135/4.5 macro,
and the 600/8 mirror. All work exceptionally well with the E1.2. I've also had
fun with the 55/1.2, although it is as soft on OMD as it was on OM. :-( Using
the electronic shutter, I can coax sharp images out for the 600/6.5, which I've
never been able to do, with either E-System or OM System! Even with
mirror-lock-up on the OM-1, the shutter motion would whip that lens into a
frenzy, but the vibrationless electronic shutter on the E1.2 does the trick.
Adapters vary greatly in quality, but you can find good ones for cheap. I have
two brands (which I can't recall now): one is very tight and has a decent
infinity focus, but the rotation screw is missing, which means you can turn it
too far when taking lenses off. The other has the right stop-screw, but is
longer and focuses FAR past infinity. It also feels a bit sloppier. Both were
under $10 on evilBay; don't know how a $150 Olympus one could be a whole lot
better. I have one for every OM mount lens I own (except the bellows macro
lenses, for which I'm adapting a Nikon PB-4 tilt-shift bellows).
I also have an 8-degree tilt adaptor that was under $30 on evilBay. The OMs all
have a wider image circle, so you can tilt them and experiment with Sheimpflug
Effect for off-focal-plane depth-of-field. The large image circle also allows
focal reducers (speed boosters). The first one I tried (~$80) was a dog, and it
went back. (Amazon has yet to reimburse me, after three months!) The second was
the Kipon Baveyes, which I find acceptable, and which cost about $150. The
Metabones ones are supposed to be supurb, but at $600+ are too rich for my
blood.
> I tended to travel with two bodies and 21, 28, 50 and 100mm
> lenses.
Remember, these are going to crop on micro four thirds, so they'll be
equivalent of 42, 56, 100, and 200. I'd keep the 50 and 100, and replace the
wides with perhaps the 9-18 zoom (equiv 18-36, handling your wide end needs) or
for some real excitement, either of the 7-14 zooms. (The adapted f4 version can
be had fairly cheaply these days.)
The OMD "kit lenses" seem to be quite good and inexpensive, especially used, as
people upgrade. You might consider picking up a 14-40 to cover the "normal"
focal lengths. I'm lusting after the 14-150 II for use as a lightweight,
compact "do everything" travel lens.
> So is the OM-D E-5 II a good choice, or can you suggest something better?
Budget notwithstanding, the OM-D E1 II is a better choice. :-) But I'm sure the
5.2 is still pretty damn good.
> One alternative is the digital Pen-F
I've been considering one as a "back up" second body, but have not even laid
hands on one so far. They seem to be quite inexpensive used. Might be a decent
"try-out" point, after which you could get most of your money back, or keep it
as a backup to the eventual "grown up" camera.
> Finally, this might not all work out. I might find that I am still
> frustrated with not being able to imagine the end result using the
> wrong eye. Rather than reach that conclusion after a month or so with
> a perhaps a thousand or more Euro down the drain, I would like to buy
> a fairly cheap DSLR or mirrorless camera to experiment with. Any
> suggestions?
You just aren't going to get a DSLR that will make you happy, if your standard
is the OM System. Everyone seems to make their DSLRs "macho big," for fools who
think a big camera automagically guarantees big results. For one thing, the
physics of a larger sensor means that in-body image stabilization isn't going
to be as good as with a smaller sensor.
So I think you should go for a used EVIL (Electronic Viewfirder,
Interchangeable Lens) camera, and not even consider DSLR. The EV on the OMD
E1.2 is good enough that I am often surprised when I haul it up to my eye
before turning the camera on, and am surprised that it is dark.
You might try the 5.1 version first (or even the 10.1), which can be had used
for a lot less than the 5.2. Then, if you don't like it, you can get most of
your money back on the used market.
Best of luck, and I don't think you can go wrong with an Olympus mirrorless
these days! The build quality is superb, features are amazing, and size and
weight are reminiscent of the OM System.
Jan
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|