For you Olympus guys out there: Getting back from the Galapagos, my wife realized that she wanted something more camera wise that the point and shoot she took. She definitely needs...

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

Getting back from the Galapagos, my wife realized that she wanted something more camera wise that the point and shoot she took. She definitely needs lite gear, but I wanted her to get something that she can grow with her as her skills improve. We chose the Olympus OMD-E-M5 Mark II. The camera I believe will be fine for relatively stationary subjects, but I have concerns about its application with action, like birds in flight for example. After learning more about the M5, I began comparing it to the OMD EM-1 Mark II. More expensive yes, but it seems to have a better AF system and therefore might be better suited for action photography than the M5. Although she claims action photography is not a priority I'm assuming that down the road, considering my main focus is birds, she is going to want something with a fast AF system.

Appreciate thoughts from you Olympus guys and anyone who might be knowledgable about these two cameras.

Stevieboy Loc: West Palm Beach, Florida

Glad to offer my opinion. I have had both cameras. The reasons I switched over to the em1 2....don't need to use the grip on the e m5 mk2 anymore. Needed the grip because without it had a problem holding the camera and every time the battery had to be changed ( which was often) had to take the grip off.
The em 1 mark 2 has excellent tracking for birds in flight the em 5 2 is severely lacking in that area. The battery life is excellent on the 2m 1 2. The em1 2 feels like a small dlrs whereas the em5 feels somewhat like a toy. Big difference. There is a big difference in price.......but, it is worth it.

The em5 is a good camera and is capable of taking very good pics. The em1 2 is that much better in every regard. Hope this helps.

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

Thx for your advice. swapped the camera out today for the EM1 mk ii. In the long run I am sure she will be happier.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

She will love the EM1 mark2

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

What lenses are you considering?

rayr

I shot birds in flight and wildlife with a Nikon D750 and a Tamron 150-600 G2 for a couple of years and 3 or 4 months ago switched to an Olympus EM1 Mark ll and absolutely love it. I don't come home with a back ache now from packing the 6 pound rig around all day. For birds and wildlife the EM1 Markll and the Panasonic/Leica 100-400 is a great combo.

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

Nalu wrote:

Getting back from the Galapagos, my wife realized ... (show quote)

I have an EM1 mark II + Olympus 300mm f4 Pro + 1.4 TC for capturing birds in flight as well as perched birds and wildlife in general. I used to own an Olympus 40 - 150mm f2.8 Pro, together with the afore mentioned 1.4 TC and a PanaLeica 100 - 400mm. Prior to owning the EM1.2 I owned 2 x EM1 bodies. The EM1.2 is far superior to the EM1 for birds in flight - especially with the 300mm f4 or PanaLeica 100 - 400mm. The 100 - 400mm is the lighter and cheaper option, but it is not quite as sharp as the 300mm. I also own a Nikon D500 + Nikkor 300mm f4 PF VR + TC14EIII and it may come as a surprise to learn that the Nikon kit weighs less than my EM1.2 + 300mm f4 + 1.4 TC. Additionally, it is (in my hands) far, far better for capturing birds in flight, or anything else for that matter. I generally only use my EM1.2 for birds in flight when I have a macro lens fitted to my D500. I almost forgot: The Nikon kit mentioned above is considerably cheaper than an EM1.2 + 300mm f4 + 1.4 TC (I would personally recommend the 300mm over the 100 - 400mm).

Jeffcs Loc: Myrtle Beach South Carolina

Jerrin1 wrote:

I have an EM1 mark II + Olympus 300mm f4 Pro + 1.4... (show quote)

I'm also a Nikon shooter with the D500 mounted 200-500 Nikkor and an Olympus em1-2 was wondering about , considering pana 100-400 or the oly 300 with the 1.4 tc and was swaying towards the pana 100-400 for 3 reason 1- zoom 2-price 3-needed 1.4tc to be 420 mm lens
On an odd note thought about a M43/Nikon adaptor
I'd love to here from you on your personal reasons

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

If you can carry it (and afford it)...I'd go for the big tuna...300mm f2.8 EC-20, EC-14 and mmf-3. You can then add the little tuna (150mm f2) at a later date.

HallowedHill Loc: Chattanooga, TN

rayr wrote:

I shot birds in flight and wildlife with a Nikon D750 and a Tamron 150-600 G2 for a couple of years and 3 or 4 months ago switched to an Olympus EM1 Mark ll and absolutely love it. I don't come home with a back ache now from packing the 6 pound rig around all day. For birds and wildlife the EM1 Markll and the Panasonic/Leica 100-400 is a great combo.

I recently made the same switch and bought the same lens and added an Olympus Pro 12-100. Not cheap, but it it is a GREAT system and I couldn't be happier. I do find with the 100-400 I need a monopod to steady it, even with the in camera stabilization. As others have noted it likely isn't as tack sharp at the longer end as the Oly 300, but I hate changing lens and that factored into my choice. Hope this helps.

wrangler5 Loc: Missouri

Cdouthitt wrote:

If you can carry it (and afford it)...I'd go for the big tuna...300mm f2.8 EC-20, EC-14 and mmf-3. You can then add the little tuna (150mm f2) at a later date.

Pay attention to the "carry it" element of that advice. Back in my film days I rented a Nikon 300/2.8 for a weekend of horse shows. When I took it back on Monday I asked 'em why they didn't give me the wheel set for it. Even though it lived on a monopod most of the time, that sucker got HEAVY. And the Olympus lens weighs even more.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

wrangler5 wrote:

Pay attention to the "carry it" element of that advice. Back in my film days I rented a Nikon 300/2.8 for a weekend of horse shows. When I took it back on Monday I asked 'em why they didn't give me the wheel set for it. Even though it lived on a monopod most of the time, that sucker got HEAVY. And the Olympus lens weighs even more.

yep! I'll own one some day to go with my 150 f2. The IQ from those two lenses is legendary. Even with the telextenders.

Ed Chu Loc: Las Vegas NV

I think we are on the same page; I have Lumix G85 and Lumix Gx7, 100-300 mZuiko ( probably will go to the 100-400 Leica ); turning 71 and trying to lighten my load when I travel; will probably keep my D600 for travel to cities, Europe, etc. there are severe luggage weight restrictions when travel to say Churchill CA, or go in-country to Africa, so turning to M 4/3 is a viable option

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Nalu wrote:

Getting back from the Galapagos, my wife realized ... (show quote)

If you are seriously considering bird-in-flight, fast moving kids and grandkids, and possible sports, the E-M1 mrII will suit you better. But if there is a chance that there will be very little of that, stick with the E-M5 mrII. One way to improve the action shooting with either of them is to buy the EE-1 eyesight and learn to use it well.

The E-M5 mrII is a very good camera, but the E-M1 mrII is a pro camera in the hands of a knowledgeable photographer. The E-M1 mrII has a learning curve to it, but the rewards from making through that learning curve are almost unbelievable. You will have one of the world's finest cameras in your hands.

Also, both cameras are splashproof. You can go shoot in the rain, no extra gear required! You may need a piece of soft car chamois to dry the front lense element, but that is it. Salt spray from the ocean rinses right off under the faucet. Just towel dry when done giving it a shower.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

wdross wrote:

If you are seriously considering bird-in-flight, f... (show quote)

WD you might be lucky so far, but "splash proof" does NOT mean water proof. Regardless of it being splash proof, it is NOT a good idea to put your camera under the stream of a water faucet. Even A tiny bit of water inside will start to corrode the circuitry, and this can result in a failure at a later date. So please everybody do not put your camera under the stream of a water faucet.