One Week With The E-M1 Mark II

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II, m.Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro

So I've now had a working E-M1 Mark II for a week, as well as the 12-40 Pro. I've gotten out for a few walks and one moderate hike and shot a little over 750 images during that week. 

I've noted that after years of rarely shooting too seriously with any body, I've put a lot of mileage on pretty much every body I've used seriously in 2019 and 2020. That's more from the fact that I've simply found my motivation than anything else. 

I think I may need to update my 3 stages of camera ownership soon, because either just about everything I've had except the A6300 or X-E2 has made it past the equivocation stage. I think that's part motivation getting my shooting rate up and part choosing cameras better. 

I've commented in the past that I think that selling my original X-T1 and buying back into m43 may have been a mistake. Selling the m43 kit to go FF again was an even bigger one. While I did do a lot of good work with my D750, I never gelled with any of the FF gear to the level I did with either the Fuji or m43 kits. The one bit of good news is that I never had much in the way of valuable lenses the last time through, only my 9-18 was actually valuable. This time around I am focusing on higher-end glass to get around some of the limitations I had with my m43 kit last time, specifically getting the 12-40 f2.8 Pro and 40-150 f2.8 Pro instead of the 12-50 f3.5-6.3 EZ and 40-150 f4-5.6 R. It's more carry weight, but much more flexibility at the same time, especially since the 40-150 Pro is TC compatible and is known to play well with the 1.4x TC in particular. 

I've really found the E-M1 Mark II to be extremely easy to get used to, it was almost seamless to start using, even more so than the X-T2 and I took to that body almost immediately. It's so nice to have easily located buttons even when shooting with my heavy gloves. If the A7II was noticeably better than the Fuji's when gloved, the Olympus is pretty much on par with the D300 for gloved handling, it might actually be even better than the D300 simply due to how raised the top buttons are compared to the D300's. There's also grip/lens clearance almost on par with the D300, and much better than the Sony. The Fuji's ergonomics are quite good in terms of lens/finger clearance, but that's due to the small front grip extensions, even with the add-on grips.

AF is notably better than the X-T2, the key thing is that it does much better in the woods with a longer lens than the X-T2+55-200 was. That lens had two frustrations for me, one was the relatively mediocre close focus performance, I'd been spoiled by the better close focus performance of the Olympus lenses, and the other was the tendency of the AF system to get confused in busy conditions, the E-M1 Mark II suffers far less from that than the X-T2.

 

 

E-M1 Mark II - Second Try

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II, m.Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro

I picked up the replacement E-M1 Mark II body on Friday afternoon. It did cost me extra over the previous body I returned as non-functional, but I think I got a lot of value out of the upcharge, getting all the accessories instead of just strap & charger, including the box, and also going from a high mileage body (95k) to one with less than 1000 shots on the clock. I was surprised this body was not rated 9, given the mint condition and extremely low mileage (881 shots when I got it)

 With a properly working body now I'm very impressed. The handling is very much the E-M1's handling, improved. The grip is a little bigger and fills the hand better, the buttons are a little better positioned and the firmware is a fair bit more capable.

One very nice thing is there is a neat Quick Sleep mode, this sleeps in 10 seconds when using the body in EVF-only mode. Now that does mean you need to manually switch in and out of LV mode on the rear LCD, but the battery life is improved immensely. I've shot over 300 images and not dropped below 60% charge. That's seriously impressive battery life for any mirrorless body, and especially for the BLH-1 which is of the smaller 'big' batteries in the mirrorless world.

The gloved handling of the body is excellent. MUCH better than the Fuji's, with nice large and easy to find buttons and easier to activate control dials. I was surprised with how much nicer the dials are than the X-T1 or 2. Still love the Fuji's classic layout for basic controls, especially when using manual primes, but the Olympus beats it hands down for AF/Zoom handling

Capability-wise, it's very impressive. That said, it's very complex as well. Lots of neat functions but lots of menu options to configure them, and very lousy explanations, especially for stuff that's iconography. 

The real surprise for me has been the m.Zuiko 12-40mm f2.8 Pro. I've looked at this lens several times in the past and always chosen to go with the less expensive 12-50 EZ, which is quite a solid lens, but much slower. There's a couple things that makes me wish I'd bought this lens long ago. It's very well built, quite small and the close focus performance is very impressive, at 0.2m for all focal lengths. That's much easier to work with than the macro mode on the 12-50. Plus of course it's f2.8 and extremely high performance optically. I'm extremely happy with the lens so far, great range, fast, close focusing and optically excellent.

One Body Leaves, One Body Enters. Sort-Of

 

Olympus E-M1, m.Zuiko 12-50mm f3.5-6.3 EZ

So my D300 has pretty much shuffled off its mortal coil. Control dial failure on the front control dial is the cause. This is the body I've owned the longest of any digital body, at about 4 years ownership at this point. Not bad at all. I only shot about 1500 shots with this body, as it was my backup Nikon body for most of that time. With D300's in general I've shot almost 20,000 frames over 3 bodies. 

I traded in 3 lenses Wednesday, the Fuji XF 55-200 and XC 16-50 along with my Nikkor 20/2.8 AF to get an E-M1 mk II. Sadly, this body is going back due to failure, it has major lockup issues. I will be coming home with another one though, as I was impressed with what I got when the body wasn't locking up. Acceptably sharp shots at 1s handheld and 105mm actual focal length (210mm FF equivalent) is outstanding. The IQ in quick tests was significantly better at higher ISO's than the 16MP E-M1 & E-M5II. Only real issues I had was I couldn't figure out how to set the Fn level to select AF/MF and focus peaking required a button press and couldn't be tied to MF mode. 

EVF is not on par with the X-T1/2, but better than the A7II and closer to the Fuji's than the Sony. Grip ergonomics are excellent as is button layout. I don't like the on/off location but can live with it. Battery is much larger, but suffers from the fact it can be inserted backwards, although it won't seat. That's something I dislike on every body without shape-keyed batteries (Fuji's equally guilty, the NP-126 has the same issue)

The menu is the usual messy and overly complex Olympus menu system with excessive iconography. I still don't know the difference between one fish and three fish, or what functionality that setting relates to. But unless you use all sorts of oddball functions regularly, once setup you really don't have to menu-dive for much more than card formatting. 

I've arranged a body exchange for tomorrow, so I should be up and running one that's done. 

I've still got my Fuji bodies, and all my primes for them. We'll see how things play out long term, but I see the Fuji's getting used with manual lenses in the city and the Oly gear being my hiking & backcountry setup with occasional crossovers to stretch things out. 

Postscript: One Fish/Three Fish is apparently a function that when assigned to a button toggles powerzoom lenses between the widest and longest zoom positions, it's for underwater housing use where you can't easily control the zoom. Totally makes sense in context, but as usual for Oly, there's absolutely no context in the menu system for their iconography. At least there are no Invalid Operation buttons.

Taking a Look Back - My Time with the E-M1 + E-M5 II kit

Olympus E-M1, m.Zuiko 9-18

I did a review of the images I've posted from my period shooting Olympus in 2019, as a result of the conversation that triggered my last post.

This made several things clear.

1. I prefer Olympus colour to Fuji colour for landscape work, by a fair margin. In the city it's a wash, but for landscape Olympus simply delivers the blue tones I can never quite get with any other system except Nikon.

2. I miss shooting 4:3 aspect ratio. I simply like it better than 3:2. This is not really news, I've liked squarer formats ever since I was introduced to them.

3. I do miss Olympus IBIS performance. It remains the only IBIS system I've shot that I've really found effective.

4. Fuji's LCD setup remains better. Dual-tilt beats flip/twist beats single tilt beats fixed, at least from a photographer's perspective. 

5. I'm less convinced now that the extra malleability of the Fuji files are winning me anything, since I have to push them more to get close to what I want as compared to the Olympus files. Full Frame is still better, but not by that much. I've never been sold on X-Trans anyways.

6. I'm unconvinced I would be happy with 16MP as a primary body in either Fuji or Olympus.

7. E-M1 II prices are now down to a level that I consider very reasonable. And they're USB-C but not USB Power/Charge, X-T2 is USB Micro-B 3.0, but does do power/charge. The 20MP m43 sensor is supposed to be a real improvement.

8. E-M1 II handling is MUCH better gloved than the X-T2, even with the bracket and marginally better ungloved.

9. m43 lenses are getting cheap.

What does this mean? Probably another system switch for me, and possibly something of a draw-down in my overall setup. Notionally I'd ditch the X-T2 and the 3 AF lenses, but keep the X-T1 and all my manual lenses. That would get me into the E-M1 II, another 12-50 and maybe either a 25/1.7 or a 40-150 R, rounding out my personal favourite cheap yet decent kit for m43.

I'd sell my Laowa 15mm f4 to fund a proper UWA (9-18 or a 7.5-10mm prime) and possibly sell off some Nikkors, keeping the 55/3.5 (a gift from my Aunt) and probably the 105/2.5 as well (such a good lens) long-term. Then troll the used market to add a 45/1.8, 17/1.8 and a 12-40 or 12-45and wait for the rumoured 45-200/4 Pro that's supposed to match the 12-45/4 (maybe a matching UWA zoom too?)

I'd keep the X-T1 around with the 12/18/25 primes and probably add a 35 and 55 for fun. That's just a great street shooting kit and cheap but fun. Eventually I'd want a compact body for m43 to share lenses, but that can wait. And if I sold off most of the Nikkors I'd be less tempted by another FX body.

 

Some Thoughts on Micro-4/3rds

 

Olympus E-M1, m.Zuiko 12-50 f3.5-6.3 EZ

A friend asked me today for some advice on camera gear for serious adverse weather shooting after having their older DSLR quite literally freeze up solid while shooting Aurora images in -50C weather. 

I immediately recommended an Olympus E-M1 II with the m.Zuiko 12-40/2.8 Pro as just about the best option for that sort of work for the dollar due to the absolutely outstanding sealing and the electronic shutter (allowing the camera to take images without moving the probably frozen shutter).

Now I left Olympus in 2019 because I thought I needed a more capable sensor than I could get in that system for the sort of work I do, but I continue to think they are by far the best option for severe-condition work. OM Digital Solutions seems to agree with me as their marketing is shifting rapidly in that direction compared to the more general marketing Olympus did.

Looking back at the system, I honestly think I jumped too quickly. I don't regret where I ended up, but I think that if I'd upgraded to an E-M1 II with the newer 20MP sensor I probably would have been OK, especially with the improved multi shot capabilities the E-M1 II has as well as the improvements of the 20MP sensor over the 16MP sensor I used on the E-M5II, E-M1 and E-M5.

I do miss a lot from m43. The absolutely amazing IBIS performance, which is unmatched on any other system, although Canon RF comes close until you get down to >1s exposures, the build quality, the colour (Yes, I do like it better than Fuji colour) and that little gem of a 9-18mm lens. 

I think there is a real niche out there for OM Digital Solutions, the new successor to Olympus Imaging. That niche is severe conditions/backcountry photography. OM cameras are small, tough and can do certain things handheld that require a tripod in all other systems (live ND mode on the E-M1 III and E-M1X especially). The lenses are outstanding as well. That's perfect for situations where you're size/weight limited, operating in all conditions and cannot miss the shot. 

They do need to do some work to get there, mostly on the lens line. All of their mid-range lenses need to be sealed. The f1.8/2 primes and the 9-18 most notably. Oly should only have 2 unsealed lenses in the lineup, and that's the 14-42 and 40-150 kit lenses for the E-M10's. I do find it slightly ironic that Fuji, with no sealed mid-range bodies has a full set of sealed mid-range lenses and Oly is in exactly the opposite situation, having the bodies but not the lenses.

The Last Frame, Revisited

 

Fujifilm X-T2, Micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5 AI

About 18 months ago I posted The Last Frame, my goodbye to my first X-T1 and a short summary of what I thought Fuji needed to do.

I noted 3 issues in their lens line.

1. The XC 50-230 is too expensive - Still true today, and more so now with the space getting more aggressive. Fuji needs to drop the price, the XF70-300 will result in a flood of used XF55-200's which will make the XC50-230's pricing even more difficult to sell at.

2. Consumer UWA. I said the 10-24 needed a WR update, which arrived last fall, and they needed a cheap UWA option. With used original 10-24's coming down and a plethora of cheap 3rd party options around 12-14mm, I think this is much less critical although I still want an XC10-xx zoom for ~400USD

3. No consumer Fast prime. The XC35/2 solve that a year ago. Fuji too the other option from what I suggested, cloning the XF35/2 into a cheap barrel rather than doing a slower 35/1.4

In addition I noted they needed a 80-300, a 135 and 300/4 prime and a 200-600. We got the XF70-300 and a 150-600 is now a strong rumour, which will cover the zoom side of things. I still think they need the telephoto primes as well. 

In addition we got 2 lenses that I happen to think were a complete waste of time and effort.

The XF50/1.0, which has not been well received. It's clearly a good lens, but it's not exceptional and the price is, and Fuji dropped the ball badly when they decided to change track from a needed XF33/1.0 to an unneeded XF50/1.0. They'd have been much better off doing a WR/AF update of the well loved XF56. 

The XF27 updates a lens which is beloved and ignored. The original lens was optically excellent and quite liked by a small but vocal group of users. The rest thought it too expensive for a lens without an aperture ring (it is the only XF lens like that), too large for a f2.8 APS-C pancake and/or too slow for a large APS-C pancake. Fuji's updated added WR and an aperture ring, but didn't solve the fundamental issue with the lens for many, it's too big for its speed, or too slow for its size. I'd rather have seen it either become a 27/2 on the same size budget or be tiny and an XC27/2.8.

The 10-24 and 27 updates now set the expectation that Fuji will be updating or replacing their older XF lenses. And I agree they should. But not all of them.

1. The primes - all should get WR and AF drive updates. The 23/1.4 probably should get a full redesign. I'd like to see the 35/1.4 keep its optical design and Fuji should launch a XF 35/1.2 WR to deliver that fast modern lens. Note we already know that a XF18/1.4 is coming that will replace the XF18/2

As noted above, I want to see a 135 and 300, I think Fuji needs a 70/1.8 or 70/2.8 and a 180-200/2.8 as well on the long end (a 500/5.6 PF would be amazing). They also need some work on the wide end, a 8-10mm prime would bring some real love in an area Fuji has mostly ignored for years.

2. The zooms need some work too. As I noted above, I think Fuji needs to get a consumer UWA out. The 150-600 is even more important as telephotos remain Fuji's weakest area system-wise.

What else I'd like to see:

XF18-55 and XF55-200 need either an update or a price drop. The XF16-80 and XF70-300 functionally replace them for the higher-end user, but the older 2 lenses are still smaller, faster at the wide end and cheaper, but they aren't cheaper enough for non-WR lenses.

I'd like to see an XC100-400 as well, say f4.5-7.1 or 5.6-7.1 and compact. This is a 'nice to have' as for many the XF70-300+TC14 will cover this need. But if they can get this really small, it will sell.

I'd also like to see an XC18-135, essentially the same idea as the XC35, stick the current good optics into a cheaper barrel.

The idea here is largely building the right lens options for the X-S10 user. 

On the Body side, Fuji has 3 issues that I see.

1. No consistent UI. There are 5 current X bodies, the X-T4, X-T30, X-Pro3, X-E4 and X-S10. There are 5 current UI variants in that line. You cannot buy 2 different model bodies and have consistent UI unless you buy a body and its predecessor. Fuji only has bad choices here, but I can't help thinking that it's going to settle out with the X-Pro series + the X-S series. As much as I love the UI on the X-Tx series, when I look at how I use the cameras I'd get much more use of a camera laid out like the X-S10 or GFX100s and having real Custom Settings banks. And I'm probably about as close as you can get to someone for whom the X-Tx is perfect for in terms of UI. 

2. No WR bodies to match the lower-end WR XF lenses. It's interesting as Olympus has the exact opposite problem, no WR lenses to match their mid-level WR bodies. One of the X-S10, X-T30 and X-E4 replacements needs to be WR. The X-T40 is the obvious one, as the X-T30 has really lost its relevance in the current lineup, it's not small like the X-E4 but it's not got the ergonomics or IBIS of the X-S10. 

3. The $850-999 model jumble. This was bad enough when it was just the X-T30 and X-T200, now it's 3 bodies targeting the same pricepoint. That really should be one consumer body or two wider spaced models. Killing the X-T30 would largely solve this, as there's enough price and capability gap between the X-S10 and X-E4 to make them make more sense. The big issue is that the X-T30 competes against both the X-E4 and the X-S10, while those two bodies are so different that they only sort-of compete on price.

I can't help but think that Fuji needs to get back to the two line split. I'd like to see one of two model lines:

X-S1, X-S10, X-S100, X-Pro3

or X-S1, X-S10, X-Pro3, X-E4

I don't see Fuji going back into the low end of the market now that the X-T200 and X-A7 are done and Fuji has dropped their relationship with the 3rd party that was doing those bodies for them. So the second line makes more sense. 

I would be sad to see the X-T line die, but as much as I love those bodies, the X-S UI style would let Fuji grow their system. I think that Fuji would have introduced custom setting banks

I'd like to see it play out like this. X-T30 is quietly discontinued. X-S1 or X-H2 is released with an updated sensor, improved processing and GFX100s-derived ergonomics, but with a flip/twist screen for the hybrid shooters. X-T4 soldiers on until sales dry up or relative sales vs the X-S1/X-H2 show the market doesn't like the change.

Fuji could then either treat the X-Tx line like the X-Pro line and make it a specialty body (a X-T5 that's reverted back to a pure stills-oriented body at a premium cost and with the double-tilt screen returning could work alright, as  long as it is a niche body like the X-Pro3)

Playing Some More With The A7II

A7II, Nikkor 105/2.5 AI-S

I've had the A7II out a couple times more, and have been having fun with it and my Nikkor manual focus lenses. It's just a solid platform for those uses and somewhat nicer than the Fuji's for adapting old 35mm lenses. This is for a couple reasons.

1. Field of view. Because there's no crop factor, the lenses have the same field of view as they do on film. Since my current selection was largely built with FF in mind (film and the D800 and/or D750 I bought them for) this works better than they do on crop like the Fuji's, or even my D300

2. IBIS. Yeah, the A7II's IBIS is nothing to write home about, giving at best 2 stops of stabilization. But it's there and it does save shots.

3. Better handling in winter. Bigger buttons beat dials when you tend to leave things in Aperture Priority and are wearing gloves. I do retain a preference for Fuji's ergonomics when ungloved, if only for the joystick (Need a Mark 3 on Sony to get that).

It's not perfect though, the big issues as a MF platform are:

1. No focal length written to EXIF. This is key for figuring out which lens you used where. Even my X-T1 has this even though it gains no functionality beyond EXIF from that.

2. Over-sensitive EVF eye sensor causes inconsistent LCD/EVF switching when using the LCD tilted. The Fuji's suffer from this too, but much less due to a better tuned sensor

3. Crap battery life. The main issue this time is self-discharge. the Fuji's sit better with a battery in the camera and their batteries self-discharge slower when sitting. You always have to charge the Sony batteries if the camera has been sitting for a while, not so much with the Fuji's.

All in all, I'm really looking at a platform for shooting FF manual lenses, and it's GOT to be mirrorless this time. Need to be patient though, as a work award I received may result in a free camera (usually it's a trip, but this year they can't really do that, the question is how are they going to handle alternate prizes)