Iq option f
Just a manual pull the leaver and the whole thing moves forward would have been soo much better. The funny seatbelt helper I think was also a turn off form as long term you felt it would let you down. I do like the short cut buttons on the iDrive but it is a frustrating that this version as you said was like a stopgap version as the F services iDrive was so much better. I understand that depending on the tune you get, you are able to turn traction control off when you hit the M button.
However it was included that way to fit various markets that require traction control to be more difficult to turn off not easy. I also understand the traction control can also be tuned to suit supercharged engines. I was told that the local to me Harrop supercharger allows for this. However I would rather stick to an engine and transmission tune and just enjoy the wonderful s65 engine revving to 8000 RPM as it was intended too. Windows down of course.
Thanks for uploading it s always great to hear from owners of the only V8 M3. Dude worst vid ever on the M3, you completely miss the purpose of this car, not smart. Well sorry if I sound hash but you are wrong BMW made M3 as fast car so the mean thing is to reduce the weight of the car made it has less features.
clearly you can find those options in the 7 series. You can t compare the M3 iq option f Dodge Ram they are completely different thing. 7 can be fixed with very simple coding. Chris Thomas. 5 months ago. B Scrip was just about to type this comment. BMW had Motorsport in mind when they designed and built the E92 M3. To try to keep an already slightly bloated 1650kg in check, an extensive weight saving programme has been followed here.
Plastic reinforced carbon fibre roof, aluminium suspension, 15kg lighter v8 over the previous 6 cyl etc. So for BMW to add unnecessary items plus all associated wiring and electrics would tip the E92 M3 s weight far too far over the scales for it to be competitive with RS4 and C63. The ford mustang does have more power but think about it the e92 has longer gears revs higher so in reality the mustang isn t faster by all means.
My friend has an e92 m3 stock and has raced 2018 and 2019 ford mustang gt and they really neck on neck or either one gets the start are the other gets the start. Oka ur comparing a truck to a car duh I truck needs one cuz it s bigger then the bmw. 7 29 wtf is that. the angle eyes are warmer color for Fog.
My best guess anyway. the LED bulbs are too bright blue off the fog. too much scatter. Rear seats arm rest wtf. BMW cutting corners in these Beast cars. Really pathetic. Cup holders shoulda been in the list. Get the F outta here with all the cheap trickery. 70k plus better have solid cup holders, back up camera, simple one push on off buttons, HUD for speed, and nicer stock rims or Comp rims as stock. Agree with the cup holders they are really pathetic and usually break anyway Fail there BMW.
Camera and HUD were options in our market area and we paid 157k in Australia for the privilege of not having those options as standard. My Car is a Complete Pak so does have the wheels and some other nice inclusions. Check myn out at kinkilga on instagram im doing a free canon camera give away aswel. This video made me want an E92 even more. I hate when people complain about parking camera. SENSORS ARE MORE THAN ENOUGH, AND IF YOU THINK OTHERWISE YOU SHOULD GO PRACTICE YOUR PARKING FIRST.
It s got front and rear parking sensors. Is that not enough. Actually the US models only got rears. He got the 4th bit RIGHT. to obtain power in these cars you need to sell your testicles. Claudio Patino nice black M3. Replace Number 8 on your list with. Hating the fact that you didn t replace the exhaust muffler and Cats Yet. Bruh Your car is way to quiet. My 2011 E93 with a VF 650 kit An Exhaust work Sound glorious. Maurice Brodie. Full catless x-pipe and Active Autowerke signature exhaust.
You have 92 likes and I can t make myself change that. Sounds killer on the outside. Lav mic on the inside doesn iq option f do it justice. You are complaining that BMW m3 was optimized to its maximum potential, that tactile buttons that make it easier to interact without looking at it is bad, that spending 11K didnt get you what you wanted regarding wheel horsepower. Do you realize how crazy you sound. Dwayne Crawford. Sounds like he should have bought a completely different car.
M3 E92 le top du top. East Coast M3. Yes, I agree pretty much with your 8 gripes. Cup holders are useless. I agree with everything. I retrofitted an aftermarket backup camera but it s not the same as OEM. I was an option from 2010 in the Australian delivered cars. you own an M3 and are complaining about not having a backup camera. you do know you have three mirrors and shocking to learn your head turns so you can see behind you, come on cooled seats really lol.
stubbk3 it s the fact that a fully optioned M3 didn t even have the option. My M3 is better than my Acura TSX in every single possible way yet the TSX has a back up camera. They are the same year too. It just makes life easier such as backing into a smaller garage. I can dsc off with my m button 2012 m3. NorCal Rider. boostedM You can reprogram what settings are activated with the M button. Jonathan Zucco. boostedM Yea I can in my 2010 as well.
wonder why they would change it for just one model year. All e92 M3 has V8s. hobie thegreat oh really. thanks for correcting me mate. Hobie Arnder. Bryan Mendez He said generation. How about the peeling plastic on the interior of the bmw m3. Had it on my e46 M3 but nothing yet on my MY11 model. I never had that issue on either of mine, but I ve seen a few that have. My 2011 335is has LED angel eyes.
I always wondered why BMW never carried the front facelift through to the M3 model with all of the other 3 series. Remote start on an S65 would be a horrible idea. Not good to idle a cold e9x. There are a number of conflicting points of view on the cold start. Most engine tunes allow you to remove Cold Start and most BMW Specialist garages suggest you remove it.
The feature out of the factory had more to do with pollution etc than anything mechanical. As one person noted after approx 60 seconds the engine changes tone and you can drive it. Before that it just does not like being driven. Using the lighter oil that most of us use this heats up quite quickly so driving away after initial heat up is OK. But that is not an invitation to rev or push hard till you see that oil temp gauge rise.
I find it interesting that once the dreaded Rod End Bearing issues raised its head that BMW did not do a SW update to change the Cold Start as it used to scare the hell out of me given tolerances are Sooo tight. I have done 31,000Ks so have not done the Rod Bearings as yet. Munzir Rafik. Lee Holtom thx for explaination. is it ok if normally i will start and let it warn until 75celcius. it takes me 12minute. It s more to do with oil pressure than the cold oil, you shouldn t start any car and leave it idling to warm up, just start up and drive keep the revs low till the oil temp is up.
Well the transmission and drivetrain won t be effected while the car is idling as the car is staying still and none of those component are moving if anything the transmission an diff would be warmed up a bit by the exhaust running next to them. Again, I hear a lot of people claiming this on the internet but have yet to see any proof or research. I almost always keep my rpms below 2.
5k until I hit 165F, then keep it below 3-3. 5k until I hit 200F. When doing so I probably probably average around 2100 rpm or so which is 3 times that of idling, and my car certainly does not warm up 3 times faster when driving it to make up for that difference. In 40F or below, it usually takes 15-20 minutes for my car to hit 200F when I drive it right away while it takes about 25 minutes to hit 200F while idling.
Maybe the M3 is different or my M5 is a freak but I just don t see how applying several times the load at 3 times the rate will lead to less wear with that little of a difference in oil warm up time. At the very least it shouldn t be excessively harmful compared to letting the oil cool to single-digit sub-zero temperatures. pjbadgersuw26 You do more wear to the engine letting in sit at idle.
By driving right away the engine, gearbox, drivetrain is allowed to warm up more rapidly. That minimizes engine wear. ALL BMWs now use variable pressure oil pumps. So idling with no power applied with result in very low oil pressure. Easy driving and light use of the gas will protect the cold engine while promoting proper lubrication throughout the engine.
The proper way Start it up, wait for cold cycle to end mines maybe 60 secondsdrive away keeping rpms low most agree under 3K until fully warm operating temp. Ed Teach ha well I don t even have a garage and my e46 has a tape deck let alone any camera of any sort. It seems appropriate to follow the previous revisitation of the very first E-1 by revisiting the E-M5.
Of all the cameras that I ve reviewed in the past, the Olympus OM-D E-M5 will always have a special place in my heart. The E-M5 was a game-changer for the mirrorless interchangeable camera world, pushing the boundaries for capabilities and setting high standards for other mirrorless manufacturers to follow. It s been 6 years since the release of the E-M5 and I want to explore the significance of the E-M5 s role in changing the perception towards mirrorless cameras as a serious tool.
I spent a day with the E-M5 for my shutter therapy and all the images shown are fresh out of the trusty, old E-M5. MT also reviewed the original E-M5 some time back, here, and wrote about how it was a game changer for him professionally at the time, here. Rewinding time back to the birth of mirrorless cameras we find that feedback from users was slow and unreliable AF, inferior image quality in comparison to DSLRsbad ergonomics, and laggy electronic viewfinder or LCD screen.
While the mirrorless iq option f were much smaller and lighter than DSLRs, they were in no way equivalent or close to what similarly priced DSLRs could do. Sony came along with over-simplified camera controls and a layout that required deep dives into the menu to change even exposure settings. Fuji followed closely with their nearly unusable autofocus. The mirrorless vs DSLR was a one-sided war or massacre rather until the unexpected Olympus OM-D E-M5 came along.
What did Olympus do with the E-M5 that changed the mirrorless game. Firstly, there was the nearly lag-free, built-in electronic viewfinder. The EVF allowed photographers coming from a DSLR to feel right at home and helped stability while shooting. The AF was so fast, even Canon 1D series shooters were impressed. The camera was built to take a beating with a magnesium alloy body and full weather-sealing. Then there was the first introduction of the 5-Axis image stabilization that no one saw coming.
The benefits of powerful IS was a welcomed with wide open arms. The new 16MP Micro Four Thirds image sensor, as tiny as it was, managed to show a huge step up in image quality. The image quality was so good, it nearly matched the best APS-C cameras at that time, such as Canon 60D and Nikon D7000 in terms of high ISO performance and dynamic range.
The APS-C DSLR cameras had a slight advantage but the gap was small and dismissable. Finally the fact that you had all this available in such a small and compact body made the E-M5 an instant hit for Olympus. It was the miracle camera they needed after the financial crisis from the huge accounting scandal in 2011. As great as the E-M5 was, it was not perfect. I was the first to complain about the inconsistent color and contrast between the EVF and LCD screen.
I also questioned the weather-sealing capability as the EVF fogged up while I was testing it in the rain. I was not entirely convinced by the EVF on the E-M5, and I recall that at the time I still preferred an actual optical viewfinder. A blast from the past II revisiting the Olympus OM-D E-M5. The buttons on the camera were too small and grouped close together an accidental press and unwanted settings happened too often.
Also the buttons felt too stiff, due to rubber-sealing. Despite the flaws which were mostly addressed and fixed in the E-M1 the E-M5 remained my favourite Olympus camera over the years. There is just something about the E-M5, perhaps it s all the memories. My blog rose to popularity after the rigorous E-M5 reviews and even Ming Thein told me that he took notice and got into Micro Four Thirds after reading my review. Recalling the sales figures which I used to have access to when I was an Olympus employee, E-M5 sales were a record high but Olympus did not really successfully win over or convert DSLR users to mirrorless.
Instead, a huge chunk of the E-M5 sales went to DSLR users who wanted another small camera to use alongside their DSLR system. The reign of E-M5 was short-lived, as other camera makers took note and improved their products. Sony kept pushing their image quality and even dared to go full frame with their A7 series which has proven to be successful. A little late to the game, Canon also upped their game with the M5. Things are getting really exciting this year Canon and Nikon are rumored to be releasing a full frame mirrorless system.
Panasonic has been at the forefront alongside Sony in pushing high-quality video 1080p first and now 4K. The announcement is expected to be close to or during Photokina. One clear advantage that the Micro Four Thirds system has is a mature range of lenses, but that is easily overcome in a matter of 2-3 years, especially by Canon and Nikon. If these full frame mirrorless cameras have super fast AF, good image stabilization, are built to be tough and have the latest EVF, things may not look too good for the Micro Four Thirds system.
It is difficult to predict where the future lies. As someone who has just exited the camera retail business, it was a breath of fresh air to not worry about camera sales trends. My focus is now on shooting more and developing my skills as a photographer. I would be thrilled to be able to review new cameras now and then, but what truly matters to me is going out there and shooting regardless of the camera in hand. Even if that camera is the old OM-D E-M5, which remains perfectly capable of producing beautiful images even today.
Do you still have your old E-M5 in your camera bag. Do you still actively shoot with an E-M5. I have since moved on to E-M10 Mark II and E-P5 while shooting on the street. For paid assignments I use the E-M1 and E-M1 Mark II. But I will always have the E-M5 stored safely in the drybox and occasionally take it out for a spin. I have too many fond memories with the E-M5 to let it go. Knowledge is for sharing. Still using mine turned out to be a keeper.
Yet the sales of camera and imaging products in total continues its sharp decline each year. I am new to this chat and I just want to get some feedbacks from our fellow OMD users. I own the OMD EM5 Mk1 since 2013. I am a amateur photographer using the camera for mainly for travel shots and street photography. My first disappointment with the EM5 i was that the shutter got stucked close within a year of purchase.
It was later fixed by Olympus Singapore for a price as it was out of warranty. To date, the shutter count is pretty low, less than 4000. The camera broke down a 2nd time with the same shutter problem one month ago. All the while I thought the EM5 Mk1 should be able to withstand shutter rating of at least 100,000 shutter count. All I can say is that the camera has a shutter manufacturing defect right from the beginning.
I browsed the forum and got a lot of help. Unlike professional photographers, I do not use my EM5 as vigorously as them. Seems like it s not an uncommon issue with the Mk 1 E-M5. After replacing the shutter and underwent a vigorous test they informed that the fault still happen intermittently which they suspect may be the motherboard issue. Got the camera serviced by Olympus Singapore. Just to find out if our fellow EM5 i owners have this problem. Fuji was slow to fix their AF even the X-Pro 1 and X-T1 were really sluggishbut they eventually got there.
Mine was stuck and subsequently replaced around 50k shutter count. what a great post. Thanks to your blog i bought my Olympus omd in a first place and was really happy with the choice. just dropped my Olympus Omd em10 and it broke and was wondering should i get second hand M5 for a 200eur or just invest in newer version Olympus range.
I have 3, tried and true and a Pen F the point where I felt there was enough to upgrade. I still go to old ones when travelling and shooting street, leaving the Pen for highest res or silent images electronic shutter. After 300k images from them, I am now curious to see how far they will go. Silent probably indefinitely as there aren t any mechanical parts moving at that point; otherwise, I d be curious, too. Still shooting with my EM5.
Still getting great shots out of it after all these years. Wasn t super sold on the MKII, so I didn t upgrade. Better handling of high ISO, low-light and improved focus tracking would definitely sway me, as my kids are getting older and I prefer always to shoot with available light. Great retrospect piece. In fact, it was your original post about the EM5 that sold me and convinced me that it was the right camera to move to from my previous DSLR kit.
We ll see if the eventual MKIII will be able to entice me enough to upgrade. Trovo che la gestione dei colori sia ancora un punto di riferimento. La utilizzo come secondo corpo o per i viaggi ma la qualità e l equilibrio dei suoi file sono ancora eccellenti. Might still be using it if I didn t lose it on my way to the airport four years ago. Packed litle camera with features so nice.
5 axis IBIS, weather sealing, fast AF. Miss this camera especially during the recent trip. Have good memories and good images with it. I own the E-M5. It is a great camera size, functionality, performance, colour etc. Coming from the film days, I like the fact it doesn t automate every aspect of the shot. I still have to use my composition, exposure and tracking skills. If it was good enough to be groundbreaking in its day, it s still a great camera.
I won t upgrade until it breaks. I ve always thought the EM5 has the richest colours of all the Olympus cameras, much better than the EM1 which I find muddy and flat. Your images above leap of the screen. Hi Robin, I came across your wander down memory lane and couldn t help do the same as I had also published a small E-M5 report back in the day. 128453-Olympus-OM-D-E-M5-User-Report It remains one of my most fond purchases and I thoroughly enjoyed owning the E-M5 even though I have since moved on.
Glad to know another guy from Kuching. Coming events. I checked out your blog and saw that you re off to Kuching atm but I m now residing in Sg actually. I ll sure come say hello one day if our paths cross. I still have the E-M5 in my camera bag, and use it quite frequently. Hope to see you soon in one of the coming events.
On a recent trip to USA, I took with me my Pen F and my E-M5 and left home my E-M1. The E-M5 is just the camera that encourages you to pick it up and shoot, isn t it. I ended up using the E-M5 much more than the Pen F, although I really love the Pen F. I still come back to my E-M5 from time to time. First, i apologies for my very bad english i m French. Yes, i still have my old E-M5, and have shot thousands of images with it with great pleasure.
Coincidentally I m also from Kuching too Cheers. I think you ll find that we share a lot of similar opinions about the model. Nevertheless, i m looking for buying an E-M1 II or à Pana G9, because i think that sensor s technology had made huge improvements since the E-M5 release. Well, my true question is in another matter i follow with a great pleasure your reviews, mostly for the hight quality of your sample images.
Thousand times i tried to obtain this image rendition so perfect with is yours, and never i succeeded. Its always disturbing asking somebody about its processing secrets, but, please, Robin, can you give me à little clue about your post processing, just not to avoid me to die idiot and desperate. And thank you for your great and commendable work. EVF have made huge improvement too, and, connectivity, and so on But, i ill also keep a love for this small revolutionary device. There are no secrets actually to my post-processing, I currently use Capture One Pro, and I do not edit my images extensively.
White Balance tweaking is important, then followed by a bit of exposure contrast boosting to the get the look that I want. Hi Robin, looking to upgrade my E-M10 to a body with 5 Axis IS. Would you recommend the E-M5 Mk ii or the E-M10 Mk ii. They are similar price second hand in my local area. Whether to get an E-M5 Mark II or E-M10 Mark II, you have to ask yourself if you need weather sealing and a more capable video shooting.
If yes to both, then get the E-M5 Mark II. If you can live without both, then E-M10 Mark II is a good choice. I still remember my old OM-1. The lenses also, they were smooth and buttery. That was a fine camera I wish had held onto. Mine wasn t top shelf, but I cut my teeth on an OM-2000 in my high school PJ class in the late 90 s. Still have the negatives around here somewhere.
it really is a great camera. It was the E-M5 that got me into mirrorless. At the time I was all envious. The pictures coming out of it were easily compared to full frame of the year before. It was sharp and the pictures were on DPReview s site when it was still in London and so the pictures looked great compared to sad Seattle. It was the camera that I started doing paid work with. Oh dear, I have not been to Seattle, how sad can a place be.
Glad to know that you loved the E-M5, and that it has earned you some good cash. My first m4 3 camera was the EM-5, twas a darling to me. Bought the EM-5 along with its battery grip when it first came out. IMO the Grip was an essential piece of gear that made the handling amazing. It had some quirks, it was a very sexy body and I had it paired with the PanaLeica 25mm f1.
Unfortunately I sold it just over a year ago when I got my EM-1, I just wished the EM-1 had the handsomeness of the EM-5. Sad to see it go. I just wish the EM-5 MK3 ll have all the bells and whistles of the EM-1 MK2 or even MK1 like the EVF, fast AF, chunkier dials, 4K video, the handsome design of the EM5 MK2. I wish I have inside info on the E-M5 Mark III. Unfortunately I have left Olympus, so no more special info available to me now.
I do wish it has all the items you have described too. I agree about the handsomeness of the E-M5. Looks fantastic in silver trim. E-M1 in silver on the other hand, SMH plus a chuckle. Quite a capable and handsome camera. Your images a proof of that. Unfortunately the ergonomics were so bad for my hands that I decided not buy it back then. I was a little sad about that. There is no one camera that fits all hands, just like shoes. But the fact that they managed to make it that small, is the true testament to the advantage of Micro Four Thirds system.
Hi Robin, great retrospective on the E-M5. The E-M5 was the first digital camera I called my own. You can always add on the beefier grips to add comfort and improve handling. I discovered your blog and mingthein. com because of your respective E-M5 reviews. The great photos you got out of them needed very little additional commentary. I am so thankful you guys veered me away from getting a NEX-series Sony, I tried one recently and getting anything done beyond Auto is a nightmare.
Unfortunately, I took their claims of weather sealing too seriously and broke it more than 2 years ago. My caffeine-addled hands loved the E-M5 s revolutionary IS. I m left with my backup E-PM2 with the inferior IS but I m always thinking of getting a new OM-D so I don t have to lug a tripod around when shooting. Hah, there is only a limit on what the weather sealing is capable of. Sorry to hear about your camera not surviving the weather.
But yes, for caffeine addicts like us, the 5-Axis IS is Godsent. Hi Robin, Reviewing the past is always a pleasant activity. It reassure us that we are progressing. Yes I totally agree that the Olympus OM-D E-M5 was a major step for the acceptation of the MFT format by the many prosumers and even some courageous professionals at the time.
I was part of that trend since I have migrated from an Olympus EP-3 which was a giant improvement. For sure the release of the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II have addressed some major specific flaws present into the first original version and this is why I consider this newest itineration to be more practical and reliable. The big advantage of the E-M5 original or Mark II is their ability to be a discrete unit or a very powerful combination with the added grip and the vertical power unit depending of your different requirements.
Somehow Olympus is now due to present a new Mark III declination with the 20MP image sensor. No worries, Daniel, I too am a fan of the E-M5 series, and am eagerly waiting for the 3rd iteration. I agree that having the smallest form factor possible, with the possibility of adding on vertical and horizontal grips when necessary is a good move. Thanks again for bringing us these good memories, Daniel M.
I personally keep the size of the cameras and lens choices as small and light as possible when I am on the move street shooting, travel, etc but I need the better handling for long hour shooting paid gigs, etc. Thank you David Babsky. Your reading skills and memory leave nothing to be desired. You re correct on all points, save one I did consider, but didn t mention, as that particular aspect has nothing to do with the point I tried to make apparently in vain.
One good turn deserves another. David, There were two things that did not sit well with me. 1 Michiel953 claimed that all Micro Four Thirds photos, including mine shown in this article, have nearly unlimited depth of field. That was simply false. I have just as many shallow depth of field shots using M43. When questioned if he has considered if I was intentionally using more depth of field in my shots, he then. 2 Falsely assumed that your choice of gear camera system dictates your style and approach in photography.
Another point I disagree completely with. The photographer decides what he shoots, and chooses what gear he wants to shoot with. It would have been soooooo much simpler if he just said Micro Four Thids could not render the shallow depth of field effect I needed for my own shooting. I found full frame to deliver this. That should be the end of it, without dragging all photos taken with M43or assuming how everyone else is doing their photography like the way he imagined it to be.
You both made assumptions. Michiel appears to assume that your photos were to some extent confined to deep d-o-f as a result of using m4 3 lenses and an m4 3 sensor. He made a general remark about the m4 3 format, and you assumed that he was thus criticising, and being disparaging of, your photos. You, Robin, assumed that Michiel was being critical of your photos, and then assumed that he generally doesn t like m4 3.
Michael said in his initial comment that there s. you said, assuming it to be true, You do not like Micro Four Thirds. always that nagging feeling you re restricted in the way you shootbut perhaps there was a misinterpretation of. you re restricted in the way you shoot. to mean YOU, ROBIN, are restricted in the way you shoot. but he probably meant. one any person is restricted in the way one anyone shoots.
I think that he just meant anyone. I don t think it was a comment aimed at YOU, even though Michiel used the word you. Perhaps it would have been clearer in some other language, like German, say. The conversation turned into guesses about each person s preferences, and then the conversation turned into accusations, and then somebody else became more personal and accusatory with the phrase.
a jitterbug troll. at which point I thought I should speak up on Michiel s behalf as he had done for me, some years ago. Misinterpretations all round I d say Michiel may have thought that you were willingly accepting some restrictions of the m4 3 format by using deep d-o-f. perhaps without his realising that it was your specific intention to use that as your own artistic choice. And you may have misinterpreted. that nagging feeling you re restricted in the way you shoot.
to be referring to you personallyrather than meaning the world in general. It happens in blog comments. And we re all possessive about our own pictures, as they re something which we ve put our own choice and effort into. Many years ago when I saw some of your first pictures taken with the Oly 45mm f1. 8 I was astounded by the shallow d-o-f you d got with that, and I promptly went out and bought an m4 3 camera and the 45mm.
I agree; the 45mm f1. 8 and 75mm f1. 8 give stunning results. I also agree that it would have been soooooo much simpler if Michiel had said m4 3 generally delivers deep d-o-f. and if perhaps you hadn t assumed what Michiel prefers, as in You prefer to shoot with shallower depth of field. I get it You do not like Micro Four Thirds. But I wouldn t have written a word if somebody else hadn t described Michiel as.
a jitterbug trolland diminished the conversation to insults. Misunderstandings all round. Hopefully now resolved. To Robin, David and Terry I ve been wondering whether I should respond to all this, or let it pass; so much water under the bridge. Being weak, here goes. One not you, haha, which of course was meant as a plural should never assume I m not fully aware of what I write. Maybe it takes careful reading, and putting aside a possibly fragile ego, to interpret a comment as it was meant. In this case, my initial comment was meant as a general observation only on the constraints of a format, which, like it or not, influence the type of image captured.
Vide my rangefinder example. Another example would be that I feel limited to a certain extent by the spread of the reliable AF points in my camera an 850as I like off centre subjects, in focus. Having near limitless depth of field at your disposal solves that problem, obviously. Thank you David and Terry. Signing off now. as I like off centre subjects, in focus. Michiel, I rather think you d have some fun with Canon s old Eos 5 film camera. I don t know if you ve heard of it, it s getting on a bit now, but it has eye focus.
It has an array of five focus points aligned left to right across the centre of the viewfinder. You need to set it up for your eyes but, thereafter, simply looking at a focus point causes the camera to focus on the subject covered by that point. Obviously, with only five focus points, it is fairly limited, but it is fun to use, when it works. I no longer use it, but I still play with now and again. Its a brilliant concept but one which Canon never developed.
Modern digital cameras can move their focus point by command, but I don t think this is as elegant a solution. Thanks Terry. I heard of it, and sounds like a great concept. The joystick on the 850 works quite well, investing in a Canon camera Too many old Nioon cameras already. Tbh an oldfashioned slr like my F2AS, or FM3a or FM2n has a focusing screen that allows for reliable manual focusing right into the corners; unlike a modern dslr, where the focusing screen has different proporties.
Anil Mistry has written about his personal experience with his FM3a over at 35mmc. I m sorry, but I think your comments are somewhat condescending, as this last one you wrote. Perhaps you are not as aware of what you write as you think. Clearly others have interpreted things differently from what you, apparently, meant. Could that be because of the way others read, or maybe because of the way you write. Yes, I particularly like this part Maybe it takes careful reading, and putting aside a possibly fragile ego, to interpret a comment as it was meant.
Given how any treatment of Micro Four Thirds on various Web sites seems to be accompanied, without fail, by sensor size trolling and pronouncements by the equivalence police, all for a format that is supposedly far inferior to whatever those people are using, one has to wonder why they feel so threatened by its existence. I d certainly get annoyed if I had to read any of that nonsense in response to any of my writing, let alone on every single occasion. Thanks for the article Robin.
Still, the spread of AF points is what would be most important to me. 4, it s a great light weight kit that I can carry around in a backpack as an everyday camera. The weather sealing I found to be very good, mine ended up in a creek and the repairer who fixed the broken LCD screen said there was no sign of internal water damage. I also suspect that the AA filter is quite weak which helps with the resolution but don t have any information to verify this apart from my own use, do you know if this is the case.
In reading the above comments, I totally agree that the choice of tool is a consideration of the photographer based on the images they want to create and that any style would be due to the conscious decisions made. This however has got me thinking though about those learning the craft, how much of a developing photographers work could be associated to the limited equipment choices that they have available.
Mark, I revisited DPReview s original review of 2012 and whilst they do make reference to an AA filter it is only with reference to moire; they don t mention what sort the E-M5 incorporates. As they have always seemed to mention if a camera does have a weak, or no AA filter, such as in the Panasonic LC10 dslr and the Olympus EPL-1, I m guessing it is standard. Reading the review, I was impressed by the E-M5 s performance overall.
Terry, Olympus never specifically mentioned no AA filter for the E-M5, I think there was one. They did claim that for E-M1, there was no AA used. Confirms my view from the DPR review that their not mentioning the E-M5 having a weak or no AA filter must mean it had one. If it didn t I m sure Olympus would have touted the benefits sharpness that having no AA filter, or a weak one, brings to the ball park. Thanks for the kind words, Mark.
As a learning and developing photographer, if you have found some restrictions imposed by your cameras and lenses, then you either find alternatives or solutions to break through the limitations plenty of ways to go about something or you end up getting the more suitable tool for the job. At the end of the day, once you know what you are iq option f, you know what you need to have to get the job done.
Canon and Nikon are rumored to be releasing a full frame mirrorless system. The not so mature range of DX lenses is what drove me away from Nikon to Olympus OM-D. I wanted small and light, but Nikon did not offer that in DX. Not even now does Nikon have a mature DX lens range. I doubt they will take a different approach when they introduce a mirrorless camera, seeing what they did with the Nikon 1. I still have and use my E-M5 with the pana-leica 25mm 1. That, and more people looking to smaller and lighter cameras is where MFT has, and will keep, a clear advantage.
In my photoclub many are amazed by the small size an light weig of my EM-10 and the image quality it offers, which can match a FF DSLR in all but the most demanding low light scenarios. However, it is too early at this stage to tell how large or how heavy the lenses for the rumored Canon and Nikon Mirrorless Full Frames will be. Size advantage is a big considering factor when people choose mirrorless camera systems.
We all assume that no thanks to Sony these lenses will be unbearably huge. What if, they were not that huge and made within the size that is tolerable. Robin, I can t see this. The professional market wants pro lenses and that doesn t include f3. 6 bit is very important in keeping kit zooms so small, even for FF. Pro lenses with faster apertures will always by much larger, and heavier. No way to beat the laws of optics. The only way I can see this happening smaller aperture, but high quality optics is if, and when, sensors operating at up to 25,600 ISO, say, have absolutely no noise penalty over base ISO.
The E-M5 is my main camera, so I revisit it every time I go and take some pictures. And even though I arrived late to the party, buying mine in 2014, I have been largely happy with its output, even more so after getting the 45mm f 1. As for the buttons, I managed to operate some of them more or less without problems while wearing mittens yesterday, so I suppose it is a question of knowing where they are and having the confidence that you re pressing the right spot on the camera body.
Thanks for the kind words, I like the pedestrian bridge image too. You are right, it is crucial to know the camera well, spend enough time with it and know how to operate it efficiently. It is interesting to me, having moved up from a compact, how the E-M5 supports rather different shooting styles. So when I started out in 2014, I used P mode and a fair amount of exposure compensation. On a holiday that took me via KL, by the way.
Nice illustrative photos as always, particularly the one of the bridge walkway. But now, I use M mode, perhaps to try and be more ambitious, to control the parameters more, to take advantage of the effects of different apertures, and so on. It was interesting when, the other week, I took my old compact out and shot some scenes in the snow. For one thing, I found myself not zooming at all and just settling for the default wide angle view. Then I realised that I could have been zooming but had become so used to wandering round with the 45mm lens on the E-M5 that I had almost forgotten about the compact s zoom control.
That said, to avoid inviting trouble with the weather, plus difficulties operating the zoom control with mittens on, I decided to keep it simple and stick with the default focal length. It is amazing that something that was once second nature has now become so foreign. Never owned the original EM-5 but when they brought out the EM-5 Mark II, I got one with the 12-40 F2. Love it still. Good size and weight and the image quality is amazing.
Took a shot with it, leaning out a hotel window, with arms outstretched at sunset over the city of Makati Philippines. 1 2 second and it was sharp as a tack. Every now and then I ll pop on the 9mm Body Cap lens for a different point of view. my EM5-II is my goto camera for a grab and go. It always delivers. If they hadn t brought out the II version though I would have gotten the original.
I wish they would find a way to simplify their menus, but other then that, the system is pretty awesome. Thanks for sharing your experience with the Iq option f Mark II. Glad that you have found the joy of using the fisheye body cap lens. And I agree with you that the menu is not easy to use, even myself, who worked for years as a product specialist for Olympus Malaysia found that the menu was difficult to navigate. Hello Robin.
Yes, i also use my old E-M5 since today. Especially for the street photography. On my Blog there are am many photos shot with the Olympus E-M5. at street-photography-in-wien-jaennerfebruar2017 Greetings from Vienna, Christian. Owh Vienna looks like such a beautiful place for street photography. You got my hands itchy there. Why is it I wonder, that almost all images of mft cameras posted on the web, including here, have almost unlimited depth of field.
No prizes for guessing; there s almost no other way. As good as these images may be in other departments as some commenter said colours, contrast and sharpnessteher s always that nagging feeling you re restricted in the way you shoot. Btw, my most used not necessarily favourite lens on ff is 35mm, my most used aperture is f4.
Are you saying that these images shown in this article are bad because they have unlimited depth of field. Have you considered that it was a conscious choice to stop down the aperture to F5. 6-F8 to achieve everything in focus except the food shot. I was doing environmental portraits. I want to see the environment surrounding the people I shoot. Is that a bad thing just because the images have no shallow depth of field effect.
I shoot mostly micro four thirds. I have lost count how many times people tell me my shots have too shallow depth of field when I use 45mm F1. 8 for portrait shots and I have learned from years and years of shooting experience that there is a very clear line between blurring everything into nothingness unnecessarily and having the right amount of zone in focus to tell a better story.
I choose the later. Please read carefully Robin, I did not use the word bad. Everything in focus does not have any specific creative merit neither does the opposite. I was merely commenting on the limitations of the format, that drive people towards a certain style, which they then justify. A bit like rangefinder users that center their subjects, if you know what I mean. I prefer choices. Was that not obvious you were referring specifically to my images, that they were, how did you put it, nagging feeling being restricted.
That sounds VERY bad indeed, especially commenting on someone s images. So I was merely questioning, have you considered that it was a conscious decision to have MORE depth of field. Why do you keep misinterpreting my comment. There was no misinterpretation here. You prefer to shoot with shallower depth of field. You could have just said that. However, you used my images to demonstrate that there was unlimited depth of field. That was uncalled for. I demonstrated that the limitations of the format you probably don t like that wording leads one to to a certain style of photography.
Not really something to be offended by. I disagree with this completely. A photographer develops his style, vision and execution over time and experience, regardless of his choice of gear. He then chooses the selection of tools that works best for his specific shooting purposes and needs. Not the other way around. The format system does not dictate the style of photography. It is the conscious creative direction of the photographer that makes photographs. You do not like Micro Four Thirds.
That is perfectly fine. Go for whatever format that works for you. Robin I m surprised that you got sucked in by a jitterbug troll who thinks shallow depth of field is a requisite to a good photograph. He obviously doesn t get it and wasn t taught proper manners or communication skills. It s amazing the lengths some people will go to justify their choice of brand or format even to the point of being rude or vulgar.
This is a wonderful article about an extremely influential camera. Great set of photos too. Once upon a time Michiel stepped into an online discussion about 3 years ago. and said some good words on my behalf in the middle of some knockabout discussion, or argument. oh, wait a minute I think it was on this very website.
So let me say that in my opinion, anyway I don t think, Robin, that Michiel made any QUALITATIVE pronouncements. he didn t say that the pictures. almost unlimited depth of field. was a BAD thing. nor that it was a GOOD thing. Just that it was there to see. He didn t give any opinion as to whether that was good or bad. not meaning, I think, that Robin can t shoot any other way.
but meaning iq option f with the smaller-than-full-frame size of m4 3 sensors, any photographer gets twice the d-o-f at any identical aperture compared with using that same aperture on a full-frame sensor. Michiel didn t say that greater d-o-f was a good or a bad thing, but that it s a characteristic of using m4 3 compared with full-frame 36mmx24mm. You re right, Robin; my guess is that maybe Michiel didn t think whether or not you d purposely CHOSEN great d-o-f as your preferred way of shooting; I think he was simply saying that greater d-o-f was inevitable when using, say, a 25mm f2 lens on m4 3, compared with using a 50mm f2 lens on full-frame.
they both give the same angle-of-viewor look to the picture, but the 25mm f2 on m4 3 gives unavoidably greater d-o-f. But Robin, you seemed to take as a personal insult Michiel s comments about greater d-o-f.
Coments:09.04.2020 : 09:25 Talkree:
Similarly, you cannot use BitTorrent over Tor.