Lukabulla

Recently got an OMD-EM1 mk1 with 14-150 4.5 Zuiko .

Where do I start ?
The menu is a nightmare !
Focusing is sluggish
Battery life in lousy
image quality with Raw is more or less JPEG quality , just not ' punchy enough '
Feels like a Toy
Difficult to re start after Sleep is activated .

I also shoot with a D300s so I'm comparing with that .
The Omd was given excellent reviews when it came out as a Truly professional camera
cant see it myself ..

amersfoort

I presume you realise that this camera is 9 years old. Good when it came out but pretty dated now.

Fully agree about the menu though.

Lukabulla

Yes true ... But is the Mark 111 any better ?

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

The new OM1 by all reviews is as good as a Z7II or perhaps a Z9.

banjoboy Loc: Austin, TX

Significantly, except for the menu. They finally improved the menu with the OM1.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

My personal opinion is that you are comparing apples to pears when you compare the D300 with the Olympus OM-1 original version. Sensors are different to begin with. The OM-1, original version, was an excellent professional tool for its time. I never found the menu a nightmare, I never had a sluggish AF experience, it never looked as a toy to me. It was and still is a very capable camera with technologies that were added with updates to the software not present in top dSLR cameras. It was not a camera for big hands, that I can tell.

Image quality with quality lenses was top notch. RAW files were of excellent quality and colors were outstanding when I compared them with my other cameras. Yes, battery life was lousy which required carrying extra batteries. Yes, the OM-1 Mk III is a far superior camera with a totally different AF and more modern technologies. For the new OM-1 no matter where I look, I only see rave reviews. In my humble opinion Olympus optics are among the best optics I have ever used in my more than 55 years photographing. I have a couple of old Olympus bodies, the Pen EP-5 and the EM-10 Mk II, both are considered antiques but I love to travel and shoot with them. For my needs 16 Mp. are more than enough. Noise, that you did not mention is a problem. I do not shoot at high ISO very often, not very often beyond ISO 800 but if I do I use a denoise program and my results keep me happy, as happy as when photographers were using Tri-X at ISO 1600.

The original OM-1 was a great tool at the time and still it satisfies the need of many photographers.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

"image quality with Raw is more or less JPEG quality, just not 'punchy enough'" - please explain this complaint. Raw files are meant to be edited, including adding all the punch you want. Are you used to JPEGs which have their punch already applied in-camera?

Lukabulla

I havent shot jpeg for a long time .
Always raw .. which on my 300s usually requires only very little adjustment ..
and one can instantly tell with the finished images that it was shot on Raw.

I've not found this on the OMD EM1 so far ..
Though little adjustment was required ..
With the finished image one would find it hard to know if it was shot in Raw or jpeg.

Ive attached some recent shots .. Though shot at 2pm with Blazing sunlight which didnt help.
just tried but will only let me do only one .

(Download)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Perhaps your raw editor is applying a preset of basic edits specific to the 300 that isn't available for your EM1?

I'm curious to know more since I have only used the raw editors of PS Elements and Affinity.

I'm also curious how one can "instantly" tell a photo originated as raw. Are you referring to the detail in a high-dynamic range exposure?

Lukabulla

Yes Dynamic range and the ' Crispness ' of the image

User ID

I very briefly used the early stablemate of the EM1, the orriginal EM. Imaging and AF xcellent. The menu was no problem. I just could not accommodate the very miniature controls. Im verrrry happy with the Mark II generation.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Crispness = sharpness? Easily applied in the raw editor? Please forgive all my questions, but I'm trying to glean a little education here

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

I don't care about the camera menu or controls. Since you quote-replied me, do you have any input on my specific questions re some of the OP's specific comments? Trying to glean a little education here

User ID

Ooooopz ... I quoted the wrong post.
Acoarst I do mean what I wrote but it doesnt apply to your specific post that concerns the raw files :-(

But it does apply to the OPs comments. Broadly, Im agreeing with him about the early OMDs as to toy like handling, but not about the AF or the imaging. The handling and controls were the only reason I didnt keep the early camera.