vaihingen8

Can't speak to the E-M1 mkII but I recently gave up my Canon DSLR and went with the E M5 Mk II and have been more than pleased. The Olympus 75-300 lens was the second one I purchased. It's on my camera as I type. I use it primarily for marine and wildlife photography, where I find it to be a joy. The lightness of the system in general is fabulous and the images that the lens is capable of capturing are really quite remarkable. The only niggle I encounter is that it may tend search for focus in low light and confusing image compositions. For further input check out user reviews in either B&H or Adorama. Bottom line...I'm really happy with it!

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Micro Four Thirds is an awesome platform. Olympus and Panasonic make cameras that share the lens mount. Over 90 lenses are available from about six manufacturers.

This lens list is a bit old, updated 12/23/2016: http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

The two camera companies each make bodies in several different categories.

Panasonic GH_ is a hybrid, stills + professional video camera.
Olympus OM-D EM-1 (I and II) cameras are pro-grade, with emphasis on stills, but they record video.

Panasonic GX_ is rangefinder style. It comes in two levels.
Olympus' Pen-F is a retro look, stylish, most capable rangefinder *style* camera.

Panasonic G_ is mainstream dSLR look and feel.
Olympus OM-D EM-5 (I and II) cameras are a step down from their EM-1 line. OM-D EM-10 cameras are the entry level dSLR style bodies.

Panasonic GF_ is a fashionable line for casual use.
Olympus' Pen E-PL7 is their mid-line rangefinder style camera. The Pen E-PL8 is their entry level rangefinder style camera.

You can read exhaustive reviews of most of these at http://www.dpreview.com

I'm a Panasonic user, since I do about equal amounts of still and video work. The GH4 was the best available tool for the money when I bought it. The GH5 comes out this month, and I'm drooling already.

http://www.personal-view.com/downloads/GH5_Presentation.pdf

My take on Oly vs. Panny is that it really comes down to the mix of features that you need. Advertisers, corporate trainers, TV stations, and independent filmmakers will grab the GH5, just as we did the GH4. If you want that wonderful ability to combine several quick snaps into one HUGE file with amazing resolution, the EM-1 Mark II is the ticket. You can go back and forth contrasting the features of the two brands, dissecting their capabilities and weighing the values of them. In the end, both are professional grade tools with different audiences. Both have access to a great selection of excellent lenses, and a wider range of merely good lenses, and a MUCH wider array of adaptable lenses.

The key things you need to know about Micro 4/3 as a format:

The gear is about 1/4 the size, bulk, and weight of an equivalent full frame system (body and "professional's holy trinity" of zoom lenses).
The gear is about 1/3 the size, bulk, and weight of an equivalent APS-C system (body and "professional's holy trinity" of zoom lenses).

On average, Micro 4/3 sensors are two stops noisier than full frame sensors.
On average, Micro 4/3 sensors are one stop noisier than APS-C sensors.

For a given *field of view*, Micro 4/3 will have two stops greater depth of field than a full frame camera.
For a given *field of view*, Micro 4/3 will have one stop greater depth of field than an APS-C camera.

With Micro 4/3, there is a 2X crop factor for full frame lenses. A 25mm lens is normal on M4/3. A 50mm lens is normal on FF. A 35mm lens is normal on APS-C.
In reality, there is no crop when using native M4/3 lenses, but you can think there is, just to understand the look you will get.
In reality, using a FF lens on M4/3 will reduce its performance, but make the reduced performance more consistent across the frame.
MetaBones SpeedBoosters can be used to greatest advantage in mounting Canon EF lenses on M4/3 cameras. They reduce the focal length and intensify the light by 1 to 1.33 stop.
Most other lenses can be adapted and "SpeedBoosted", but with loss of some or all automatic features.

Electronic viewfinder lag is mostly made up for by the high speed shutters of the latest cameras. The latest high-end models have extremely fast processors and shutters, in some cases faster than premium dSLRs.

For fast-moving sports, birds, and wildlife, you may want to borrow or *rent* the OM-D EM-1 Mark II and a Leica 100-400mm f/4-f/6.3 zoom (or a GH5 and the same lens) and try them before you spend about $3800.

Check out Daniel J. Cox' take on the system at http://naturalexposures.com/olympus-om-d-em-1-mark-ll-leica-100-400mm/

His blog home page is here: http://naturalexposures.com/corkboard/

banjoboy Loc: Austin, TX

I just picked up the 75-300mm for use with my EM1 MkII and have only done a little shooting with it so far. It looks great to me at least at this time, and good value for the price. And it's easily packable - fits in my Lowepro Slingshot AW2 bag standing in one of the lens slots. I can't say much more than that until I've had a chance to use it more. It is not weather sealed like my 12-40mm Pro, which is my favorite lens so far.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

I'll see if I can find a better 300mm shot...in the meantime here's an uncropped handheld at 300mm f5.6 1/640s 640ISO (using the 150mm and EC20). Light editing in LR.

(Download)

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

FYI, if you are going to go with the 75-300...massdrop has a deal on them (and the 60mm macro)

https://www.massdrop.com/buy/olympus-m-zuiko-ed-75-300mm-f4-8-6-7-ii?referer=Z6STAQ

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

I think the OM-D E-M1 Mark 2 is often a good option for handheld wildlife photos, but not for wildlife images taken using a tripod or photos that must be taken at a high shutter speed to avoid blur caused by movement of the subject .

There is a tradeoff between ISO and image stabilization that is relevant to handheld photography. Noise is a function of ISO. Higher ISO means more noise. The Micro 4/3 cameras are at a two stop noise disadvantage with respect to full frame cameras at the same ISO. But if you are handholding, the excellent image stabilization of the E-M1 Mark 2 (5-6 stops) for many situations allows you to shoot at lower ISOs--offsetting the ISO advantage of a full frame camera.

Example: If you have a full frame camera with a 600mm lens and are shooting handheld with an aperture of f/11, shutter speed of 1/600 sec, and ISO1600, you can get the same exposure and noise level with the E-M1 Mark 2 with a 300mm lens at aperture f/11 by shooting at 1/125 sec with ISO 400. You could even shoot at 1/60 sec with ISO 200 and get less noise than the full frame option. However, this only applies when your ISO must be raised to achieve proper exposure with some combination of small apertures and long focal lengths that require increased shutter speeds. It is less likely to apply if you need high shutter speed to freeze subject motion (for example: shutter speed of 1/2000 sec for birds in flight).

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

From reviews I have read, the GH5 is a superior camera for video, but the E-M1 Mark 2 has a better stabilization system and a superior autofocus system (more frames in focus) for photographing moving subjects.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Keep in mind that if you shoot something at f2.8 on M4/3, it's going to look more like f4 on FF. m4/3 lenses are notoriously sharp wide open thus do I rarely need to stop down, and if I do chances are it's not going to be more than f8 thus allowing me to use a lower iso or a faster speed. It sounds odd, but it works for me.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

You can always reference this thread for users of the EM1ii
https://www.mu-43.com/threads/olympus-om-d-e-m1-mark-ii-image-thread.87944/

or join the public facebook group for EM1ii enthusiasts
https://www.facebook.com/groups/906125629491407/

Plenty of action and wildlife shots in both threads.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Micro 4/3 lenses perform best near their WIDEST apertures. By f/11, most are losing sharpness due to diffraction. Use that 300mm at f/5.6, and you have the same depth of field as the full frame 600 at f/11. And you just gained back those two stops of ISO performance.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

M4/3 @ f/2.8 looks like f/5.6 on FF or f/4 on DX APS-C for the same field of view. I work wide open all the time, rarely using anything smaller than f/5.6. My neutral density filters are well-used outdoors!

It's not odd. It's physics.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The GH5 has yet to be reviewed with the official release firmware. Any tests to date were made with beta code.

Give it a month or two "in the wild," and we should see some accurate reviews.

Of course, like the GH4, the GH5 will get quite a few FREE improvements via firmware updates during its manufacturing run. Two have been pre-announced already. Like iPhones, these things get better with age!

Dan De Lion Loc: Montana

-----

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't Olympus recently discontinue its 4/3 lens line? If so, how long before their 4/3 bodies follow?

-----

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

4/3 lenses and bodies are discontinued
m4/3 is alive and going strong.

n3eg Loc: West coast USA

I have one, and it is known for being a little bit soft due to diffraction at the far end. Diffraction starts above f/5.6, and this lens is f/6.7 at 300mm. Still useable at 300 though, and up to f/8 isn't too bad. Of course, I'm after maximum sharpness all the time, and your results may be acceptable at f/16.

Other than that, it's like any other m4/3 lens. Fast autofocus, smooth zooming, and it's the size of a soda can.