Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

I own a Nikon D500, which I think is a brilliant camera,and use it to shoot wildlife. I also own an Olympus EM1 mark II and use it to shoot wildlife side by side with my D500. Which of my two cameras do I think is the best for wildlife? The EM1 mark II - handsdown: and my Zuiko PRO lenses are as good as my Nikkor lenses.

pesfls Loc: Oregon, USA

I think Gene51 summed it up succinctly. I say this from having both an Oly and a ff Nikon. I would not use the Oly in low light where one needs high ISO's, say even 1600. In daylight street shooting the Oly shines for convenience & weight and image quality is just fine particularly with the Pro lenses. I do not like however that the Oly's in body anti keystone setting negates shooting in mono. That seems dumb to me but I'm no software engineer, so, so be it. I hope they can fix that. Subjects like long exposure Milky Way shots are great with the Nikon. Different tools for different jobs is all. They are both fine devices in my book.

frjack Loc: Boston, MA

I switched from Olympus E-5 DSLR to the OMD EM1 ii less than a year ago. The reason for the switch was Olympus discontinuing DSLRs. I'd purchased the E-5 used from KEH. Loved it, didn't mind the weight, but realized someday I would have to switch. Over the years of using Olympus exclusively I acquired two good Zuiko lenses f 2.8-4 12-60 (my walk around) and f 2.8-4 50-200, and a Lumix f 1.4 25 mm (this one finds light where there is none). Reviews indicated that the MMF-3 adapter for 4/3 to m4/3 was excellent with minimal to no loss of autofocus etc. I purchased the f 1.8 45 mm lens for m4/3. The weight with the m4/3 designed lens is very light. The heavier 4/3 lenses bring the weight close to what it was with the E-5. Not a problem. The only time I kvetch about weight is when traveling with the camera equipment in my backpack as carry-on. Add a computer and a bunch of charging cords and now life is a burden.

The camera is complex with more menus than I will ever need. As I never shoot video that is one grouping I ignore. It is taking a bit of time to get adapted to the EVF though one can switch to a simulated OVF if desired. All in all I am very happy with what I am using. I've no plan to replace the older Zuiko lenses with m4/3 versions in part because I can't afford to do so. I recently used both E-5 and the EM1ii to shoot the Boston Marathon photos I recently posted here. The built-in IS is fantastic. I've taken many night photos at BC handheld at absurdly slow shutter speed. They've come out beautifully. Higher ISO performance is much better compared with the E-5. (I loved the E-5 and, because there were a still available, considered purchasing a new one. The price for a new E-5 was about the same as the price of the EM1ii body. Logic took over and I went with the EM1ii.)

I suspect this is the last camera body I will ever purchase. With a lens selection covering 12 to 200 mm (24-400 equivalent) I need nothing more. My only minor complaint is that as the body is smaller the buttons and dials are a bit close together. I've inadvertently changed the focus point many times as a result. One of the reasons I did not get the original EM1 was the lack of a decent hand-grip. That has been corrected in the EM1ii. It is comfortable and easy to carry in the hand.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

If you haven't done so already...try adding a Really Right Stuff Camera Plate.

MDicnMan

While I love my m43, I cannot say that landscape is where it shines. In fact, I am thinking seriously about changing to Sony or Fuji mirrorless to get away from the 2x crop factor.

moonhawk Loc: Land of Enchantment

The IS also helps obviate the need for high ISOs, which helps overcome the minor shortcomings in low light.

The increased depth of field means you can shoot at larger apertures, which also helps in low light with a higher shutter speed.

JFCoupe Loc: Kent, Washington

In the April 2018 issue of Outdoor Photographer, Melissa Groo wrote an extensive column on her experience using the Olympus OM D EM 1 MK II and compares it to her go to Canon 1D x II. While she decides to stay with the 1Dx II at this time, she has many favorable comments about the EM 1 MK II.

Below is a link to the article.
https://www.outdoorphotographer.com/photography-gear/cameras/olympus-om-d-system-lighter-better/

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

Yes. We forget about progress and evolution. We also forget these are also tools.
The landscape guy can argue with the portrait guy and the wedding girl, and the Mom who just wants to shoot the kids in the low light living room at Christmas. I used to disparage 35mm when I used my Ikontas. Then I did a wedding with a largish 6mp Canon, took 100s of shots, and was able to give all the women a photo album the next day. These days we're looking at our stacks of older system cameras and accessories, and wondering if it's too late to change over without too big a loss.
Now this Oly can make 50mp HiRes shots and 4k video. 16fps AF gives amazing HDR and panorama opportunities. In the next few years the 4/3 sensor will get more pixels with better ISO, the cameras will get better built in systems, and Photoshop will get smoother. I'm kinda envisioning a faster better efficient 35mp Oly upgrade from the Mark2, but as a very good bridge type super zoom camera. If the picture quality beats that D850, we can ditch the backpacks. I'll probably still be shooting film, but I'll have me that Oly also.
How much did the Hassleblad full wedding/ reception kit cost (and weigh!) in 1999? And the film purchase and processing costs? Anybody want to call dibs on my full kitted d7100 after 2020?

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

The 12-100 f4 is an impressive lens. An eleven day bus tour across Germany with a single change out for three shots (3 total) of a door in a narrow hallway that the 12mm could not quite cover. Two and four second shots, handheld, were easy.

MDicnMan

Hard to argue with that.

jsandersen

I have used the OM 4/3 system on a daily basis since its inception (E-1, 2003) - first digital camera was D-620L in 1998. Currently use the EM-1 (original version (2013) with HLD-7 Battery,Pro 12-40mm/2.8 and Nissin i60A flash) in my practice as a plastic surgeon. 99% is flash for medical documentation purposes. The images have been used in presentations at national meetings and in medical journal publications. This equipment has proved to be flawless in this environment - frequently moved about with the OR setting without any case. The unit tolerates blood spatter, various other liquids, glove powder and frequent external cleaning. My external Olympus Flash worked well, but the plastic shoe attachment plate broke quickly - as did its replacement. Don't ever buy a flash with any plastic in the attachment points. The lens is bright and focuses easily with the camera, but does not tolerate being dropped from waste level (some of the internals are plastic and the lens breaks in half), but the camera continues to work perfectly. I do not need to alter the my custom settings very much on a day to day basis - other than the f-stop to control depth of field. Using flash produces consistent color that remains comparable when images are displayed side by side that are taken years apart. When properly set up, anyone can turn the camera and flash on and take a perfect image - having no knowledge of the equipment - despite having many external buttons and knobs, the camera is not subject to inadvertent setting changes in routine use. I have other longer lenses that are excellent in the field and for astrophotography. Olympus does not offer any extraordinarily fast long lenses - but the image stabilization seems to obviate the need for anything wider than f/4 in the telephoto range. As these images are a vital part of medical documentation in plastic surgical practice, I always carry a small back up pocket camera - but have never had to use it.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Also consider the Panasonic Lumix G9, and GH5. Both are rugged, reliable, pro-quality machines. The G9 is best for stills, but does a good job with video. The GH5 (and low light champ, GH5s) is best for video, but also does a great job with stills.

Many folks find the Lumix menus and physical controls among the best available on any cameras. Olympus has the best IBIS on the planet.

Over 95 lenses are available for Micro 4/3, from Olympus, Panasonic and Panasonic Leica, and several third parties.

Pro wildlife photographer, Daniel J. Cox, has lots of magazine covers and stories to his credit, including work for National Geographic. He has quit using Nikons. Check out his stories on the blog:

http://naturalexposures.com/corkboard/

I personally gave up Nikons and Canons for the Lumix GH4 a few years ago. It’s all I need for the work I do (equal parts stills and video).

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Interesting story...thanks for sharing.
Olympus needs to change their spec from weather-sealed to weather and bodily fluid sealed.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Hardly pagan. I still shoot 4x5, Rapid Omega, Hasselbald, Nikon F and F5, and a Leica IIIf (which I like for street work). I also have a few twin lens reflex cameras, as well. Love 'em all. Along with the rest of the family, meaning my D700 and D800e.
--Bob

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

For still life work in the studio, and landscape work on a day with no wind, the OM-D E-M1 Mark II and the Lumix G9 do a grand job of creating 80MP files. Just don't expect any movement in the scene to be rendered naturally. Of course, you do need a tripod.

I've seen some excellent results with high resolution work from both of these bodies. Most of it has been product photography, but a couple of landscapes from Death Valley looked awesome.