Personal View site logo
Olympus E-M5 II, camera topic
  • 346 Replies sorted by
  • @mpgxsvcd: when @noa said "first" he was most probably talking about the MK one (E-M5).

    @adventsam: profiles and curves don't bring back resolution or PSNR. Neither will uncompressed when compared to 77Mbps. At most, you could get a bit more DR, which is limited by PSNR to start with.

    The only issue at play here is sensor readout. Line skipping doesn't cut it anymore. Especially after Panasonic quit doing it with the GH2. In 2010!!!!!!!!!

  • What about the uncompressed 8bit hdmi out, might that add more detail, is the codec "softening/smoothing" things?

  • @adventsam

    Sharpening in post does improve the E-M5 MK II video but you can’t add in resolution where it doesn’t exist. There simply is nothing you can do to get the E-M5 MK II to match the resolution of the GH3/GH4/LX100 cameras. I don’t even think it would match the GH2.

    That was really disappointing but not unexpected. For my style of shooting the lack of resolution is not a deal breaker. The lack of stabilization would be though.

    I really wish I hadn’t sold all of my old Fast MF lenses now. I would love to use the IS with those lenses. I had a 55mm F1.2 Canon FD lens that was just gorgeous. I also had an 85mm F1.8 Nikon lens that was the best lens I have ever used. Sold them all for a telescope.

  • @noa

    first with not giving any pal frame rates

    My E-M5 MK II has 25p and 50p.

  • @noa, surely we need to see more profiles and increased contrast/sharpness settings to see what the em5ii is capable of? It does look a little soft but does it sharpen? what about the uncompressed 8 bit o/p? blackmagic shuttle/ninja star less than £300 + ssd/cf.

  • If they've made a deal, it isn't with Panasonic. Although you are right, they're holding back (in a sense), but all manufacturers do that. There are two reasons: they need to top this camera with the EM1 replacement, and all camera technology is backdated from some seasons ago.

    We have a tendency to suppose that the latest or next generation camera will surpass all before it, when the reality is that change is very much of incremental proportion. Why would I not suppose then, that the EM1 replacement will be 4k, and that in itself will provide a need for better firmware-software choices to be a companion to an improvement sensor.

    Their dilemma is the same as it is for all the manufacturers, how to tempt you to lay your money down on the next generation camera when the one you have still works fine. These things are not remarkable.

  • It almost looks Olympus is deliberately holding back for whatever reason, first with not giving any pal frame rates and a weak codec and now with a image that's at least a generation behind on other current offerings. I wonder if they have some kind of silent agreement with Panasonic not to step on eachothers turf. Something like, "you improve on the 5-axis stabilization and we on image quality", combine them both and you have a winner. If I only needed one video and photocamera I"d get a em5 II without much thought but unfortunately the camera needs to blend in with a GH3 and 4 and from what I have seen so far, that won't work well.

  • Please note that I think the Olympus E-M5 MK II is probably the best video camera anyone can buy that isn't using it for professional uses. Basically if you are shooting hand held run and gun video that you intend to post to youtube then this is the camera you want.

    That is the exact use case I need. Our sport climbing season is coming up in two weeks. It requires me to shoot at 100-200mm hand held a lot of the time. The 35-100mm was good for that on the GH4 but I always had to stabilize the 4k video in post. Now I plan to just use the E-M5 and cut down my post processing time considerably.

  • Sony is the only one that could catch Panasonic for video if they haven't already.

  • @adventsam

    Yes I turned NR off completely on the E-M5 MK II. It was terrible and should never be used for stills. I didn't try it out for video because it was so bad for stills and I couldn't find a way to decouple it.

  • Thanks mpgxsvd! is NR off on EM-5 II, actually that looks dam good on the Oly, 1080p about the same, slight edge only to GH4, very small.

  • yes its going to be interesting in the future they probably hadnt dreamed that the combination of video and IS would seem so important the reality is, it save $1k on alternative stabilisation approaches on its first iteration where will it be with a competitive sensor?

    yes we have said all that before but now there is SONY, and on that I disagree with mpgxsvcd bigger sensor alternatives only mean variable aspect ratio aka 16x9 is in our grasp a similar step that GH2 made

    in the meantime EM5II has is not without its uses

  • I seriously doubt that Olympus will ever catch Panasonic for video quality. However, I don't expect Nikon or Canon to catch them either. They are just too far behind right now to close the gap. Plus they really don't need to because they have other things that they excel at.

  • Thx for the info, much appreciated. Your 1080p framegrabs are quite obvious when it comes to detail differences and like you said probably not a good idea to try to mix both camera's, let's hope Olympus gives the EM1 4k.

  • @noa

    How about low light at the highest iso's, can the em5 II match the gh4?

    Strictly speaking about noise the E-M5 is closer to the GH4 than it is for resolution. However, scaling down GH4 4K to 1080p can allow you to greatly reduce the noise from the GH4.

    Honestly, my opinion is that they don't match up very well. The GH4 is definitely what you want if you want quality. The E-M5 is definitely what you want if you need stability. Trying to use both together probably isn't a great idea.

    You might as well just spend the money to stabilize the GH4 if you are thinking about mixing the footage.

  • How about low light at the highest iso's, can the em5 II match the gh4?

  • Guys I really don't think the E-M5 1080p video will even cut into the GH4's 1080p very well. There is a significant difference in resolution. The color is great. The moire isn't bad. However, the resolution just isn't there like the GH4's 1080p.

    Don't get me wrong. This isn't "Canon Bad". It doesn't look like 720p. However, the GH4's 1080p and especially its 4K offers significantly more resolution.

    Here are some still frame grabs from each camera and all of the resolutions. These were all shot at 30p. Since there was no movement the frame rate was irrelevant.

    Try switching back and forth between the E-M5 1080p and the GH4 4k. They had very similar fields of view. Yet the GH4 just has tons more resolution even when you scale the image to fit on your screen.

    I believe it is a fair comparison to put the GH4 4K video scaled to 1080p up against the E-M5 1080p video. I don't believe you should dumb down the GH4 just because the E-M5 can't match it.

    Bottom line if you want to shoot high quality video and you don't need stabilization then the GH4 or even LX100 would be great options. However, if you really need to shoot hand held then you will have to weigh whether the quality hit is worth trading for that unbelievable image stabilization. And it really is that unbelievable.

    E-M5 ISO 1250 1080p.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 1M
    GH4 ISO 1250 1080p.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 901K
    GH4 ISO 1250 4K_2.jpg
    3840 x 2160 - 2M
  • Thx, that was a very usefull test, how good is the camera in lowlight? Is it noisier then the gh4 at 3200 or 6400 iso? I also think you should have compared the gh4 at 1080p with the em5, when you downscale 4K to 1080p it is not a fair test because any 4K camera will outresolve almost any 1080p camera in that way.

  • Here is another sample video. This video shows the E-M5 MK II vs. the GH4 vs. the LX100. The GH4 and LX100 were shot at 4K and the E-M5 MK II was shot at 1080p.

    The E-M5 MK II simply can't match the other cameras for resolution. However, it has nice color and the IBIS is outstanding.

    Notice how in this test scene the LX100 has moire and aliasing and to a lesser extent the GH4 does as well. However, the E-M5 MK II doesn't seem to exhibit those traits in this scenario.

    I am not sure how well the E-M5 MK II video will cut into the GH4 or LX100 video. They are just too different to really compare. Sure you can back the GH4 and LX100 down to 1080p to make it fair but why cripple those cameras?

  • @Observer_II

    I will answer all of those questions in my video.

  • It's hard to give a a comprehensive opinion on a camera I only briefly used, but in short, I liked it. It's the kind of camera you can beat the hell out of, and tote along into just about any situation, without fear of missing the shot. The IS is fantastic; CIPA says it will give you 5 stops. I wasn't finding it quite that effective, but was impressed nonetheless. The weather-sealing and build quality are also impressive. Plus, additions over its predecessor like a mic input and flash sync port only add to its versatility.

    http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympus-om-d-e-m5-ii/9

  • @mpgxsvcd there are two things where I am really interested in before I make a buy descision 1. Quality of Video-AF, especially is it possible to follow a fast moving object (of course cats!) and are the transitions from one focus point to another smooth enough? 2. Is there a profile available or is it possible to flatten an existing profile for video in contrasty situations? Both issues are not fullfilled with my existing OM-D E-M5

  • @mpgxsvcd It would be great if you could compare your EM5 II with the GH4 for detail if you shoot @ 1080p on both camera's, also, if you use the same lens on both camera's, is it easy to match in post colorwise? And third, how "clean" is it at 3200 or 6400 iso compared to the gh4? I don't expect an improvement over the gh4 but I would be happy if the camera would match my GH3 in detail and sensitivity, for my work I don't need anything better then the gh3 or 4 which I both have but I would hate to take a step back, it's very important that I can mix the footage from EM5 with my gh3 or 4. Thx for your time.

  • @Vitaliy_Kiselev

    You scared me there for a minute. I thought that DXO Mark had rated the EM5 MK II as a "71". Personally I don't put too much credence into the DXO final score. However, I know that a lot of other people do.

    It wouldn't be a good thing for the EM5 MK II to score a 71 just like the EM5 did. People are expecting it to at least score a 74 like the GH4 does.

    From what I have seen so far I see no reason why the EM5 MK II wouldn't score just like the GH4. However, the DXO Mark scores are hard to predict sometimes.

    Here is a sample 40 Megapixel image for you. This was taken at F8.0 with the 25mm F1.4 lens. Stopping down helped because the depth of field was really shallow this close. The High Res mode limits you to F8.0 because diffraction and lens characteristics will degrade resolution after that.

    The Big RAW file is at the link below as well. Beware that most programs can't open it and the ones that do might not render it properly.

    I also put the equivalent 16 megapixel images in the folder as well. Those were also at F8.0. The P2220017.JPG is the high res image. The P2220021.JPG image is the 16 megapixel one.

    http://tinyurl.com/n7r4afx