Olympus: Looking at an Olympus OM10 II with a 24-42 lens & 42-150 lens (all used/ex. condition) for a small, light weight walk-around camera. Priced at about $450. I know a Nikon z50...

whatdat Loc: Del Valle, Tx.

Looking at an Olympus OM10 II with a 24-42 lens & 42-150 lens (all used/ex. condition) for a small, light weight walk-around camera. Priced at about $450. I know a Nikon z50 would fill that niche nicely, but out of budget quite a bit. Any thoughts on the Oly, please?

nikon_jon Loc: Northeast Arkansas

While my preference is Nikon, I have an Olympus OM Em-5. I like it a lot. In my opinion, Oly and Nikon are the two optics champions with both having over 100 years of building fine optical instruments. Nikon started in 1917 building high quality spotting scopes for the Japanese military and Oly has a long history of building high quality medical optics. Both camera companies build kit lenses that are, in my opinion, superior to other brands. My only annoyance with the Olympus is that many of its functions are menu driven, where as the NiKon has many of its functions that can be accessed with buttons on the camera. Being the old-schooler that I am, quality of results is not a bad trade-off for the inconvenience of access. I think you would be happy with the Oly for the purpose you have in mind for it.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

whatdat wrote:

Looking at an Olympus OM10 II with a 24-42 lens & 42-150 lens (all used/ex. condition) for a small, light weight walk-around camera. Priced at about $450. I know a Nikon z50 would fill that niche nicely, but out of budget quite a bit. Any thoughts on the Oly, please?

It is an excellent camera for your stated purpose and the price looks very good.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

nikon_jon wrote:

While my preference is Nikon, I have an Olympus OM... (show quote)

Ps the Nikon Z50 is very menu driven compared to the om 10 ii which has far more physical controls than new Nikons.

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

whatdat wrote:

Looking at an Olympus OM10 II with a 24-42 lens & 42-150 lens (all used/ex. condition) for a small, light weight walk-around camera. Priced at about $450. I know a Nikon z50 would fill that niche nicely, but out of budget quite a bit. Any thoughts on the Oly, please?

It looks like the body is retailing used for around 300.00 and each of the lenses around 100.00 each. 450.00 is a decent price but no super bargain. It is only a 16.5 megapixel on a sensor smaller than a crop sensor Nikon, Canon, or Sony. You may do better by looking at a Sony a6000 with a couple of lenses. It is 24 megapixels and could be purchased for within 100.00 of the kit you name. I had the 6000 and found it to be a terrific little camera. If you check eBay you will find the Sony kits selling for 529.00 to 540.00. The camera is highly rated and very fun to use. I found the two kit lenses that often accompany the 6000 to be very sharp, especially the 55-210 zoom.

yorkiebyte Loc: Scottsdale, AZ/Bandon by the Sea, OR

My OM-D 10 II is my go-to body now. Luv the 5-axis body stabilization - noticeably better than my OM-D 10.1 - 3-axis, and the 2-axis GX7 Lumix! And, since I shoot mainly JPEG images, this II body is easier to manipulate settings in the menus. The 14-42 lens is freaky sharp and very light. My Sigma Art lenses also seem to work a tad better with this II body.
Plus, my adapted Minolta lenses seem easier to use - thinkin' that's jus' my magination', tho!!

Winner, winner ... Chikin' Dinner!!

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

yorkiebyte wrote:

My OM-D 10 II is my go-to body now. Luv the 5-axis body stabilization - noticeably better than my OM-D 10.1 - 3-axis, and the 2-axis GX7 Lumix! And, since I shoot mainly JPEG images, this II body is easier to manipulate settings in the menus.
Plus, my adapted Minolta lenses seem easier to use - thinkin' that's jus' my magination', tho!!

Winner, winner ... Chikin' Dinner!!

banjoboy Loc: Austin, TX

Excellent camera and lens and a good price given the listed condition. I had one for a while as a backup and really liked it.

ELNikkor

Olympus is fine, but if 24mm is the widest that outfit will go, bear in mind that is only like 48mm FF equivalent. My son has the GH-4, and his standard zoom is 12-35 2.8, which translates to 24-70 FF equivalent; much more useful for general photography.

Chadp Loc: Virginia Beach

yorkiebyte wrote:

My OM-D 10 II is my go-to body now. Luv the 5-axis... (show quote)

I had an EM10-II when it first came out. Sold it and bought an EM10-III. Didn’t like the III. Sold it and tried various Other mirrorless cameras from Fuji, Sony, Panasonic. Ended up going back to the EM10-II about a year ago as my travel camera. It’s a little gem for cheap.

banjoboy Loc: Austin, TX

Most likely he meant 14-42 as that is a kit lens for the E-M10

RJW Loc: Oregon

The OMD EM10 Mark II is a wonderful camera. The 14-42 lens and 40-150 are very sharp with pleasing contrast and a background bokeh. I use vintage lenses a lot and this camera adapts to many brands of lenses. My computer is a Mac Air M1 with 8 mb memory and 250 gig storage so size matters. 16 megapixel renders beautiful images, can be enlarged with good results. A have a 24x36 canvas of a deer that looks great. Having good software support provided incredible sharpness and increased resolution to make up for the smaller sensor. Here are some recent shots I've taken in the last week. I am very happy with this camera and MFT system. It is small, lightweight and very capable.
The hummingbird shot was with the 14-42 lens. The deer an M.Series 75-300mm and the flower a Sigma 30mm lens. RJW

(Download)

yorkiebyte Loc: Scottsdale, AZ/Bandon by the Sea, OR

ELNikkor wrote:

Olympus is fine, but if 24mm is the widest that outfit will go, bear in mind that is only like 48mm FF equivalent. My son has the GH-4, and his standard zoom is 12-35 2.8, which translates to 24-70 FF equivalent; much more useful for general photography.

Yeah, I get what yer saying,...... 28-84 equivalency. Works for general shooting for me - though most of the time my 19mm or 30mm primes get way more use for my style of shooting. In reality, I find I would like (and keeping my eye open for) an 8 - 9mm at least, 16-18mm equivalent in a Prime lens.

yorkiebyte Loc: Scottsdale, AZ/Bandon by the Sea, OR

RJW wrote:

The OMD EM10 Mark II is a wonderful camera. The 14... (show quote)

That's the ticket, right there!!

Nice showcase images also!!

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

ELNikkor wrote:

Olympus is fine, but if 24mm is the widest that outfit will go, bear in mind that is only like 48mm FF equivalent. My son has the GH-4, and his standard zoom is 12-35 2.8, which translates to 24-70 FF equivalent; much more useful for general photography.

Typo... The older standard Micro 4/3 kit lens is a 14-42mm or a 14-45mm. The pro upgrade is a 12-35mm or a 12-40mm. There is no 24-42mm optic for Micro 4/3.