Other 4/3 users out there?

[Viperman500]

Hello, I still happily own an E-5 and (an E-500 that I don't really use anymore). I was quite torn this week as there was a 20% discount on a refurbished EM-1 on the Olympus site.

Also, I am seeing good deals on 4/3 glass to complete my kit which consists of a 12-60, 50 macro and 40-150. I am tempted as lenses would potentially good for micro 4/3.

I do realize the E-5 is not the best at iso 1600 and more ( I can see that when I use my wife's EM-10). But I like the low iso image quality, the handling of the E-5, the optical viewfinder and long battery life.

So my question : is there still people using 4/3 kits?? Is it logical to still invest in 4/3 glass? Thanks for your input!

[Godfrey]

I still occasionally use my E-1. The buddy I sold my E-5 to in 2011 uses it every day for his photo assignments. (Yes, he's considering buying an E-M1 too.)

When I bought the E-M1 in 2013, I went back and re-acquired the ZD 50-200mm lens, EC-14, and EX-25. I still had my 35 Macro and 11-22. I reacquired these lenses because I can use them with the E-M1 too, despite the likely truth that the new M.Z Pro 40-150/2.8 is at least the equal of the 50-200.

Whether you want to "invest" further is completely up to you to decide, however. I like my E-1, and 11-22/35/50-200+EC14 constitutes a complete lens kit for my uses; I can use it until it dies, then just switch the lenses to the E-M1.

G

[snap]

I use my E-M5 for night/low-light photography and vintage MF lenses; however, I still primarily shoot 4/3 with my E-1, E-500, E-450, and E-620. Each one of those is plenty camera for me. I don't print anything larger than 8x10 and rarely ever bigger than 5x7, so the megapixel war is irrelevant to me. The 4/3 HG/SHG zooms are second to no glass and the older I get, the more I appreciate not having to zoom with my feet. Ergonomically, the E-1 one of the top two best feeling cameras I've ever owned (the other being my Canon T90) and shooting with it is kinda joyous. I think the 620 was a very under-rated camera that meets any daytime need I usually have.

Given the price that you can get 4/3 gear for these days, I think it makes perfect sense to invest in. The 4/3 CDAF lenses work great on my E-M5 and produce outstanding images so it has a future even when the 4/3 cameras have passed away. I actually prefer the 14-54ii to the µ 12-40 and the 50-200 is at least as good as the 40-150PRO with a much more unique and pleasant-to-me rendering as well as more reach. You can buy both of the 4/3 lenses for $800-900 in mint condition (or less if you watch the auctions carefully) whereas the µ4/3 pair that I don't like nearly as much will cost somewhere around $2300. For anybody looking to get into real photography, I'd recommend 4/3 as a great low-cost way to do it. $100 for a great condition E-1 and $120 for an original 14-54 makes for a pretty cheap professional shooting experience.

Long live 4/3 !!

[zippski]

I have no intention of moving on to m4/3. My E-5 is all the camera I need, and 4/3 glass is the best deal on the used market on a $$$/quality standpoint. That being said, however, if I was expanding my glass colection, I would ONLY be looking at SHG 4/3 glass (other than some specialty stuff the 8mm FE and 50MM etc.) I suppose the 14-54mmI (which will mount the 4/3 ring and twin flash kits), is also a candidate to purchase, as it is dirt cheap.

None of the m4/3 glass can match the 4/3 SHGs optically. You cannot design optical telecentricity into the latter, which was one of the biggest engineering reasons behind the original design. Software correction in the m4/3 lenses is not a replacement (although Olympus is now trying its best to consign/conceal that design concept into the annals of history).

Leigh
zippski

[JBC]

E-5, 12-60 and 50-200 kit fufills most of my needs just fine. I am shopping for a smaller compact camera for climbing, but m4/3 don't fit the bill for me on that count.

[Big Greg]

I have an E-M1, but kept my e-3 and e-30 also. The E-M1 is definitely a big leap forward from either of those bodies, but they are still great for a lot of things and I want to make sure I have backup. I recently picked up an e-1 for about $55. I don't plan to buy much m4/3 glass, so far the only m4/3 lens I own is the 75MM 1.8 (fantastic!). I probably won't buy any new 4/3 lenses either, unless I can find a deal on a Sigma 150MM f2.8 macro. I owned one and sold it and kind of regret it.

[Rick_D]

I'm at the point where the E-M1 does well enough with 4/3 lenses I'd ditch my E-bodies and get a second if it made financial sense. I frequently shoot the M1 and E-5 together and the M1 files are just easier to work with, as well as the added image detail.

Cheers,

Rick

[double s]

Still using my 4/3 gear. Suits me just fine. Not in any hurry to go anywhere else.

[Steven R]

I'm still using mainly my 4/3 equipment. Almost all of my shooting is done with my E-3 and 12-60mm and 50-200mm. I like the handling of the E-3. I like what I see in the E-M1, but I would be hard pressed to financially justify it's purchase at the present time.

[wigpro]

I am still 100% 4/3 and no intention of changing....I went from the E-500 (which I still have) to the E-510 to the E-30 (which I still have although it has focus issues and needs repaired) moved up to the E-5 this past summer and love it, more than adequate for what I do.

I have a full stable of 4/3 glass - 14-54 is my primary, 50 macro, 50-200, 9-18, original 40-150 and recently got the SHG 150, what a magnificent piece of glass, I also have the EC-14 and EC-20....

I have no interest in going smaller - my kit serves my purpose just fine....

Jim

[RogerMac]

I still use my E5 even though I bought a Canon 6D to supplement it. I find it particularly useful with the 70-300 mm mounted as I could not carry, let alone afford, a Canon 600 mm stablized lens. Also I have the 50 mm f2 and the combination of that and the teles mean that I will never drop the E5

[Declan79]

i'm not alone still shooting both 43&M43 and even don't have a single m43 lens....PL2+MMF2+ZD1454MKII is everyday all around combo....ZD 50200 ED, work great on E3&M5 handling slightly better than PL2...i think it's depend on your road map plans

[RAH]

I still use my E-520 and 14-54I lens on occasion, usually when shooting something where I can use a low ISO and don't care too much about the megapixels (i.e. my 60D is better at higher ISOs and is 18mp instead of 10).

If I had an E-620 instead of an E-520, I think I'd use it more because the 620 is lighter, if I remember correctly. Unfortunately, the 520 is markedly heavier than my Canon SL1 (even with a lens mounted, if the lens is a Canon 18-55 kit, the new 10-18, or the new 24 pancake).

[wclavey]

I still have and use my 4:3 kit (E-30, 9-18, 14-54, 50-200) but not as much for "walking around" - - I use the E-M5 kit for that. But when I go on a photo expedition I take both and use them equally... the E-30 with the 14-54 and 50-200 is a great combination - - especially the 50-200. I do use these lenses on the E-M5 as well, with the converter, but clearly not when autofocus is needed. I see them as 2 kits, with a few lenses that swap between them... and they both have a place in my shooting.

But in that same vein, I think the E-30 is either going to need an overhaul or replacing - - it is exhibiting too much flaky behavior.

[Steven R]

.......
.......................
But in that same vein, I think the E-30 is either going to need an overhaul or replacing - - it is exhibiting too much flaky behavior.

Just an FYI: If the E-30 continues to give you problems, Olympus America has a flat rate repair cost of only $153 to repair it.

[findramon]

I skipped upgrading my e-5 to the OMD EM5 for 2 reasons- poor AF using lens adapter and Oly verified that the OMD EM5 was _not_ a pro body. That all went away when the em1 came out. I've sold the E5 & some my 4/3 glass (12-60, 50-100, 14-54) and kept the f/2 glass (14-35, 35-100, 50 macro). Great system upgrade. Very portable too.

[808SeattleBear]

I bought the EM1 but kept my E30. I love the EM1 but take the E30 when the environment is not camera friendly. OK, sounds stupid since the EM1 is sealed etc., but the E30 is surprising rugged. Rain, cold, and curious dogs have not damaged it. Depending upon the lens mounted, the E30 can be lighter than the EM1 because I don't feel secure holding the EM1 without the attached battery grip. That said, the EM1 is more comfortable to hold. I got over not having the top read out that the E30 and other E's have.

I generally keep 4/3 glass on my E30, and use my EM1 with m4/3 glass or legacy lenses. Ooc pics from the EM1 appear richer but I think that is more attributable to the processing engine than megapixels. Megapixels can be nice but somewhat misleading when taken out of context on how a photo is to be viewed or the printed medium. Like many have said, you can't tell in real life. My E-510 did prints up to 30" and my E30 has done 50". Quality was high enough that FF shooters could not tell.

[Viperman500]

Thanks everyone for your input! For me, Lightroom changed my photography about 2 years ago. With RAW files, I could get details in the shadows and remove noise, even with my old E-500. With my E-5, it seems logical to continue shooting with it. Like a few said, the grip is great, and paired with the 12-60, the low iso image quality is breathtaking! For me, the images look more natural than the new m4/3 bodies, where everything looks a bit more smoothed out... But I think thats a personal thing.

I do enjoy borrowing my wife's EM-10, and I am really impressed with it's high iso performance. Eventually I guess I will switch me too to m4/3, making sure I can still use my 4/3 lenses with the adapter. But for my shortcoming plans (trip to Italy/Croatia), I feel I will be better served with my E-5's long battery life and ruggedness!

Have a good day!

[jnicklin]

I still have and use my old e3 and my granddaughter uses my old e500. The e3 is still a good camera and makes a good second to my 5DIII. Never did get any urge to dabble in the micro stuff although I can see why others would. For me it just didn't fit what I wanted, hence the move to a new system.

[Godfrey]

Thanks everyone for your input! For me, Lightroom changed my photography about 2 years ago. With RAW files, I could get details in the shadows and remove noise, even with my old E-500. With my E-5, it seems logical to continue shooting with it. Like a few said, the grip is great, and paired with the 12-60, the low iso image quality is breathtaking! For me, the images look more natural than the new m4/3 bodies, where everything looks a bit more smoothed out... But I think thats a personal thing.

I do enjoy borrowing my wife's EM-10, and I am really impressed with it's high iso performance. Eventually I guess I will switch me too to m4/3, making sure I can still use my 4/3 lenses with the adapter. But for my shortcoming plans (trip to Italy/Croatia), I feel I will be better served with my E-5's long battery life and ruggedness!

Have a good day!

I haven't found much rendering difference between E-5 raw and E-M1 raw files. Aside from the higher resolution and more sensitivity/lower noise with the E-M1 sensor, they're both sensors without AA filter and provide an additional nick of micro-contrast and rendering acutance as a result. If I use the same lens on the E-M1 as I did on the E-5 and shoot the same scene, the E-M1 image nets a small but noticeable improvement in detailing and pop.

The big difference to my eye is between the E-1 and the E-M1 raw files. Not only the hugely greater resolution and sensitivity, but the difference between the E-1's heavy AA filtering (necessary due to the lower resolution). That and the Kodak sensor's different response curve nets a very different drawing of the scene, even when I create matching camera calibration profiles based on the Xrite Color Checker a difference it there.

Better or worse? ... Hmm, neither, just different: a different aesthetic and feel to the images they produce. E-1 raw files, processed with Lightroom 5.7.1 and then uprezzed to 10Mpixels, produce very nice prints, even up to pretty large sizes.

G

[srf4real]

I hope my E-5 lasts another decade or two. With the weather-sealed lenses in my kit I expect them also to have great longevity.. I will use until Photoshop doesn't process the ORFs they make anymore. Or just stay in CS5 forever..

As time goes by, hopefully I will come across a great deal for the 300mm / 2.8 from a µ4/3 adopter..

[BobT]

I'm totally 4/3 but hopefully not much longer. However, I'll keep the E-450 + 25mm f2.8 + inverted lens hood. Such a great little walk about outfit with an angle of view of the familiar nifty 50's.

[jnicklin]

I will use until Photoshop doesn't process the ORFs they make anymore. Or just stay in CS5 forever.. .

And when your version of PS stops processing the newest ORFs, you can just get the free DNG converter and carry on from there.

[hestamm]

I do not own any of the mini-oly cameras. My main body is E5 with grip--it's my walkaround camera, landscape camera, portrait camera, etc. In the last year I have been able to acquire 2 F2 lenses--the 14-35 and 35-100--and I just had the E5 repaired for a shutter failure. When the next iteration of the minis emerges, I may consider purchasing one, but only if the budget and the comptroller of the budget in my family agrees that it's time to acquire new equipment. The comptroller uses my old E3 with the 9-18 lens. We also have 50-200swd, the 12-60, and an OM 500mm f8 available for us.

[Rick_D]

They're tricky, those comptrollers. I try to tie in each new purchase with added ability to document the kid's activities (sports: highly recommended) but the household comptroller also isn't a photog, so the rationales are easier to craft.

When you do make the jump, you'll be pleasantly surprised at how many ways the E-5 has been improved upon.

Cheers,
Rick