SteveG Loc: Norh Carolina

I'm pondering if I should go with a Sony A7II with use with a few primes, or the Olympus OMD EM5 Mark II with the highly rated 12-40mm f2.8 as my main every day shooter. Will add a telephoto zoom later and a prime to the Oly. I already have the Sony A7II buy only with a kit lens and a Canon FD 105mm f4 macro. I welcome all thoughts and input! Thanks to all in advance!!

Steve

Hip Coyote

Steve, I have the Oly OMD em 5Mii with the 12/100 Pro lens. I also have a few primes such as a 12 mm which is tiny. It is a wonderful camera and setup. That being said, the Oly is due for a replacement / upgrade sometime soon. Further, you have to ask yourself what exactly you are going to be doing with the camera. In my case, I travel quite a bit and hike often. Sometimes weight is a real concern in that extended hikes at high altitudes can be exhausting. So the Oly works for me. If weight were not an issue, or if I needed low light capability (not a strong suit for the Oly) I’d stick with the Sony. I can also say that the startup time and focus tracking of the Oly is not superb.

For what it is worth I can enlarge photos quite a bit and not have issues. The pixel peepers and equipment wonks May disagree...and on occasion I purposely use noise in my shots for effect. So...long story, don’t switch for the sake of switching. It has to be done for a purpose. Happy shooting

SteveG Loc: Norh Carolina

Thanks for that! I love my A7II and ny msin concerns were lens choices and secondly, lightening up a little. The dynamic range and low light capabilities on the Sony are superb but the Olympus ain't no shabby itself. I can always pick up dome small, light legacy glass too. What do you hear on a new Olympus replacement for the Olympics EM5 MARK II? THAT may be worth the wait?

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Both are great. I believe Sony has the edge on introducing new products and their R&D department is great.

Mncarpenter

EM5 MKIII is due this fall. I have the E-M10 MKII ,12-40 2.8 and 40-150 2.8. Awesome little camera, good ergonomics with the accessory grip. Glass is superb. New 2x teleconverter is out for use with the 40-150, 300, and the new 150-400 coming out.Availability of the 2x is tough right now, some users have gotten one already, B&H doesn’t have them yet. The EM5 is weather sealed, and Olympus does an outstanding job with that. A like new or excellent EM1MkII can be had from KEH or MPB, B&H for around 1100..the 12-40 2.8 can be bought for under 500, and even less than 400 if you’re watching EBay close. I got mine for 430. An outstanding bargain as its a true pro lens. I’m going to “upgrade “ to the E-M1MkII, unless the MKIII comes out by next March or so at a price under 2k.
I find ETTR with lower ISO works well for keeping noise to a minimum, obviously have to deal with longer shutter speeds but for static subjects does well.

mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

Supposedly, the m5 III is coming in August or September. More megapixels and I’m betting on pro-capture because Oly added that feature to its new point and shoot Tough TG6. I have the m5 II and adore it! I didn’t get the 12-40 but the 14-150 II as my first lens (also weathersealed). I’ve since gotten other lenses but the 14-150 remains my go-to.

Low Budget Dave

It also depends on your style of shooting. If you are more slow and deliberate, and you shoot a lot of portraits, the Sony will give you a better apparent sharpness, and usable picture quality. Even though MFT has made progress, the shallow depth of field that you get from a full-frame and a prime is still better than almost anything in MFT. The only drawback is that the autofocus on an A7II can be annoying if you are in a hurry.

If you need the faster autofocus, or you "run and gun" and adjust your style and perspective a lot, then then Olympus is the way to go. The autofocus is much faster, and the additional depth of field at F2.8 gives you some abilities that full frame cameras do not. (Even though the background is not as blurry, there are certain times that you don't want it to be quite that freaking blurry.)

scubadoc Loc: Sarasota, FL

I ordered the Oly 2x teleconverter from B&H about a month ago. I just received the shipping notification today. They probably have a large back order to clear before shipping new orders, but a check on their website will clarify availability. They close from Friday sunset until Sunday

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The Sony has better dynamic range and low light performance. But it is very heavy, compared to the Olympus setup you describe. Images from Sony are 24 MP and from Oly 16MP. But Sony is 3:2 aspect ratio, so a larger area of the sensor is cropped to standard sizes.

Olympus lenses are 1/3 to 1/4 the size, weight, and bulk.

For my needs, the Oly would be my choice of those two. But both cameras have really crappy menu systems, so I'd buy the Panasonic Lumix G85 and 12-35 f/2.8 Lumix Pro zoom instead. It's an extremely well-rounded camera. I can vouch for the lens... I own one.

SteveG Loc: Norh Carolina

I have really gotten used to Sony's menu especially since the Nex 6, but I had an Olympus OM-D EM10 Mark II from my daughter and that is a big reason I'm not anxious about it. I'd have to get all new lenses and I have pretty much what I want with the A7II. My main reason on switching is going from the 28-70mm kit, which is poorly rated but is really not as bad as it's reviewed, to going to the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 as my everyday. I compared images from my daughter's camera, albeit a kit lens to the Sony a7II with its kit and there's definitely a dynamic range difference and just an added "punch" to the full frame. Is that 12-40 really going to give me image quality that I won't miss that A7II? Not to mention that menu system?

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

43RUMORS indicates the new E-M5mkIII will have the same sensor as the present E-M1mkII along with a new processor to run it. That means fast dual focus instead of just contrast focus. That also means 20mp instead of 16mp. For most print formats, because of sensor ratio and cropping, it more like a 24mp to 26mp full frame camera from pixel stand point of view. There will be a trade in ISO and DOF, but in my travel photography it has not been an issue. And it will travel much easier than either fullframe and APS-C. Both the 12-40 f2.8 Pro and the 12-100 f4 Pro IS lenses are some of the very best travel lenses in the photographic world. My personal preference would be the 12-100. Both lenses and either of the three cameras (E-M5mkII, E-M5mkIII, and E-M1mkII) will save you size and weight over any comparable full frame or APS-C camera/lens combination.

SteveG Loc: Norh Carolina

Robert's has an Olympus OM-D EM5 MARK II refurbished with a 14-150mm. Thoughts???

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The 12-40 is Olympus' Pro glass. It is very sharp and well-corrected. It's probably as good as anything near its Micro 4/3 zoom range, with the possible exception of the new Panasonic Leica 10-50mm f/1.7 (which fits Olympus, too, but costs $1800!).

As both lenses and bodies contribute to image quality, it is really hard to say whether YOU will be satisfied or not. I worried like crazy when I switched from a Canon 50D and 5D II and Canon GL2 video cameras to my Lumix GH4. Yes, the dynamic range is a little less. Yes, the low light performance only reaches to two stops slower than full frame sensors, and about 2/3 stop slower than APS-C Canon.

That said, what contributed most to my switch was the hybrid nature of what I do. The GH4 was a HUGE step up for video performance. It was a minor step down in absolute still image performance, but there is no perceivable change in quality FOR WHAT I DO (training content development — writing, photography, narration, and videography, all of which is delivered on the Internet or Intranets as linked video and PDF downloads. In my case, portability, ease of use, and speed of use are key.

I print very little. But I have made a few 40x30" prints that look fantastic from their normal 50 to 75 inch viewing range of 1 to 1.5 times the print diagonal. I would buy the new Sony A7 Mark IV in a minute if I were a landscape photographer, though.

Here are two lists of Micro 4/3 lenses you should be aware of:

http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

http://wrotniak.net/photo/m43/lenses.html

Micro 4/3 is a godsend for travel... I have a complete audio, video, and stills kit that slides under an airline seat. I used to travel with two big Pelican cases in checked baggage!

Since you're looking at the Micro 4/3 platform, you really owe it to yourself to look at the same-class offerings from Panasonic. The G85 I mentioned above is similar to the EM5 II. The Lumix G95 is a major update of that, just announced.

Check these reviews:

Olympus: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m5-ii

Lumix G85: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-g85-g80

Lumix G95: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dc-g95-g90-review-in-progress

sergiohm

I've had both, I'd go with the OMD-E5 MII, it Is cheaper and you can get better lens at a cheaper price.

Sony has great glass but it is at least 2x more expensive and bulkier.

However if you shoot in low light frequently get the Sony instead. Bokeh is also better in the Sony.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

That combination is another good travel option if you would not like to wait. Not quite as sharp as the Pro lenses, but covers a great range and is as weatherproof as the Pro lenses. Several UHHs are quite happy with that combo.