After spending several days looking at DPReview and a dozen other
review/comparison sites, my brain is actually leaking out my ears.
I'm leaning towards the G95, but something about the E-M1 mkII keeps
tugging at me...
One thing I find disappointing is that the G95 gets 60 shots less per
battery than the Oly does. But I can always pick up a couple of extras and
just swap. The video features are nifty, but I don't shoot much video, so
that's not my primary ....errrr.... focus.
I do want to play in the B&W realm more, and Schnozz's comments about the
Panny's B&W compatibility are a push in that direction.
The E-M1 ii has both contrast and phase detection, which is sweet. Also, a
whole lot more focus points.
Both cameras use the same lenses/flashes, so that's a wash.
However, with both cameras being reeeeealllllly close, the fact that the
E-M1 ii body-only is $300 more than the G-95 with a lens may ultimately be
the deciding factor. If money weren't much of a factor, and I had the
opportunity to make decent revenue off of it, I wouldn't worry about the
$300. But for me, especially now, that $300 will buy the battery grip and
an extra battery or two.
I think I'll have the cash together by the middle of October, so I still
have a few weeks to agonize.
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 1:08 PM Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have taken a close look at the G95. I think the camera is probably
> one of the most underrated AND overrated cameras on the market. I
> really like it. But I will say that there is something about the OM-D
> E-M1 Mk II that just seems "better". There's an intangible that makes
> it fall to hand and eye easier to me. That said, I am actually quite
> enamored with the E-M1X, but that ain't happening.
>
> The dual-mode (IBIS plus OIS) stabilization of the Panasonic is a
> perceived advantage. Honestly, I don't think it's quite the advantage
> as it's made out to be because the combination of the two can result
> in corner vignetting. From video perspective, I think there certainly
> is an advantage, but not for stills.
>
> If a person were to have ONLY ONE m43 body and was doing any form of
> beyond-basic video, I think the G95 is the one to get. But for stills,
> I think the E-M1 Mk II is a better photographer's camera. It's a
> nuance thing, but Panasonic is better suited for video.
>
> <<snippity>>
>
> But it does come down to one specific issue where I think the
> Panasonics are far better than the Olympus cameras. B&W conversions.
> For whatever mysterious reasons, the Panasonic image files naturally
> convert to B&W better than pretty much any camera I've ever tried.
> This is an area where Canons are absolutely horrid. Beyond horrid. Way
> beyond despicable. Olympus and SONY are usually acceptable, but
> Fujifilm, Leica, and Panasonic are MUCH better. And in my personal
> experience, the Panasonics rule in this regard. I can get a really
> nice B&W conversion without even trying. Forget SilverEfex Pro, just
> do a straight conversion in Lightroom and crank a couple of sliders
> around and Bob's your uncle.
>
> AK Schnozz
> --
> __
>
--
Paul Braun WD9GCO
Anchor, Amateur Radio Newsline
www.ARnewsline.org <http://www.arnewsline.org>
Certified Music Junkie
"Music washes from the soul the dust of everyday life." -- Berthold Auerbach
"The Fountain of Youth is a state of mind" -- The Ides of March, "Age
Before Beauty"
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|