On 12/5/2013 4:41 PM, usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
> PK writes:
>>>> The E-M5 viewfinder lag is an issue.
> Hmmm, EM-1 EVF lag advertised as 29ms ,IIRC, --should be plenty fast
> enough for many purposes and much less than human
> rxn time if anti vibe mode not engaged.
I had forgotten about the higher refresh rate option Frank mentioned. Perhaps
that will solve one of Peter's problems.
> ...
>
> I have disappointingly not seen any formal comparsion of SS on the EM-1
> vs E-M5. SS depends on many variables including the cam mass,
> lenses used with resonant frequencies, etc. Checking MTF of various
> lenses at different shutter speeds seems a good way to do it. Some
> lenses seem especially prone to it especially if have OIS elements than
> can shake or light/long ones.
I think you have just shown why comparisons haven't shown up yet. One needs
both cameras, several lenses and quite a lot
of time do do it.
> I emailed Castleman on a lark (see below
> ) to see if he had tested the EM-5 but no luck with a response. The
> testing sites need to pay more attention to this issue. An EFC that
> takes 1/10 sec to clear the data is not a perfect answer either. Moose
> hasn't given the GX-7 an official MSOA yet, but it seems close.
Well, I'm keeping it. :-) The ergonomics are OK - remember, I'm not as fussy as
many. The power switch is much better
located than on the E-M5 and the AF/MF switch is nice. The Q Menu still baffles
me. I can get what I want, but am not
sure how or why. Possibly a personal brain anomaly.
The electronic shutter really does work well for most of my subjects so far. No
worries about shutter shock or a delay.
The far left placement of the EVF turns out not to be a problem for me,
although I've not yet learned to use both eyes.
The image files are interesting. At first, noise seems much the same up through
ISO 3200. But as I've processed more
files, I've found that the noise is different than the E-M5 (, P5, PL5 and
PM2). It simply requires lower settings in
NeatImage and modest raising of shadows doesn't seem to have much noise
penalty. I like these files.
I have yet to try any serious IS comparisons, and may not. It's a tricky
business. I've also not shot enough in
situations where a difference would tend to show up. IS so far has been good.
There's a pinpoint focus mode. (Yet another thing reviewers don't mention.) It
brings up a magnified area from the focus
point for a somewhat controllable few moments. What isn't clear is what area it
uses to focus before showing what it has
done. There really are a lot of functions and settings, mentioned, more than
explained, in the manual. I just don't see
where it's less complicated than the Olys.
The twin control wheels are well situated for my finger and thumb. Truth is,
though, that I seldom need both. The push
in the rear wheel to set EV is slick, and obviates my usual use for the front
dial in Av mode. I haven't used the flash
yet, no surprise. I did just slide the little button, and it popped up with
alacrity. :-)
Oh yeah, the AE/AF button can't be set to just one or the other.
> http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/pz14-42/index.htm
>
> As you can see the PZ 14-42 is quite good on the OMZ and had a bad rap
> due to shutter shock on the Panny bodies. Moose was able to snare one
> for a good price.
And happen to have used it for a shot I posted a few minutes ago.
He's a lot tougher on the PZ than others. SLRGear finds it better than the
14-45 and Ming Thein quite liked it
optically. Taste, prejudice, sample variations, who knows.
> Shocked about no SS analysis, Mike
Patience, grasshopper. :-)
Various Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|