First Use: OM-D E-M10 w/40-150mm f:4-5.6 R ED MSC

[VidThreeNorth]

If you ask me if I have a long term plan for my equipment evolution, the answer is yes and no. I have a loose plan, and it tends to change. Overall, at this minute, I would say that I intend to stick with Micro 4:3 for 4K video work (the Yi-M1 is actually doing quite well, and I can use it for 2K 4:3 format video as an extra bonus), and I am using my Sony a5000 for some still photography. I have in-lens stabilization in the Panasonic GM1 for "Full-HD" video and still photography, but it only works with Panasonic lenses. I have wanted "in body image stabilization" (IBIS) to cover my growing collection of "non-native" lenses. I cannot afford an IBIS Sony body right now. Even if I found a used one, it be too costly for me.

Lately, the older Olympus OM-D series bodies have shown up as people have traded up to 4K video bodies and 20MP. There were some first generation E-M10 and E-M5 bodies I could afford. I decided on an E-M10 because it had a built-in flash as well as a hot shoe. The Sony a5000 and Panasonic GM1 have no hot shoes and the Yi-M1 has no built in flash. I liked having a body with both. Price-wise, I could have bought an E-M5 for $50 Cdn more, but without its "included" external flash. I value the flash at $50-$100 Cdn., so the price jump is actually a lot more than it sounds. I would have liked the E-M5 splash-proofing and better battery and more advanced IBIS but, I guess that might be something for the future.

Anyway, I now have a used E-M10, and in late June, I took it out for my first test run. I used my Olympus 40-150mm and a monopod. Yes, I plan on using IBIS with a monopod. I am old and shaky, and it never hurts to have more stabilization.

These pictures are based on out of camera JPEGs. Out of them only one "P6200039b-rsz1840-C1.JPG" has been substantially changed. I brought down the exposure too far trying to protect highlights, so I used Corel Paintshop Pro X9 Smartfix to brighten and sharpen it. All the other files are just reduced in size. I took extra time to find optimum sizes that allowed "C1" compression -- the highest detail level allowed in JPEG. Ironically, that means that the "best" original pictures often end up the smallest.

In most cases if I upload a file in a reduced size, I could post an "detail" file that would be very impressive. Unfortunately, "P6200018a-rsz2120-C1.JPG" is a rare exception. This "reduced" version is about the best it can be. The problem was caused by auto-focus. The most important parts of the picture are the clusters of small white flower that are in the sunlight. But they are screened by foreground plants which I could not "get around". If I could have focussed manually, I think I could have found a mid-point and covered both with depth of field. If not, then I would have chosen to focus on the white flowers. But I did not know how to get the E-M10 to focus manually on that day. When I got home I immediately checked the manual and learned to focus manually. Unfortunately, I could only return a week later to try again, and by then the flowers were gone. I checked "The Field Guide to Weeds", Lawrence J. Crockett (Copyright 1977) and I think it looks like "robinia pseudoacacia" (black locust -- poisonous). If it was, then this might have been "pruning waste" rather than new plants. At any rate, I might see it again next year.

[2018-07-12 14:37]
I forgot to post the EXIF data before:

P6200015.JPG
- quiet pond
Partial EXIF
Software Version 1.3
Date and Time Jun 20, 2018 17:08:48
Pixel height 3456
Pixel width 4608
Component configuration YCbCr
Exposure program Normal program
Scene capture type Standard
Exposure mode Manual exposure
Exposure bias -2.30 ev
Exposure time 1/160 sec.
F number f/4.7
Max aperture f/4.0
Focal length 74.0 mm
ISO speed 320
Metering mode Center weighted average
Custom rendered Normal processing
Gain control High gain up

P6200018.JPG
- white flowers
Partial EXIF (from JPEG):
Date taken 2018-06-20 17:09
Program name Version 1.3
Dimensions 4608 x 3456
Bit depth 24
Resolution unit 2
Color representation sRGB
F-stop f/5.1
Exposure time 1/250 sec.
ISO speed ISO-250
Exposure bias -2.7 step
Focal length 105mm
Max aperture 4
Metering mode Center Weighted Average

P6200039.JPG
- apple?
Partial EXIF
Software Version 1.3
Jun 20, 2018, 17:20:01
Pixel height 3456
Pixel width 4608
Component YCbCr
Color space sRGB
Exposure mode Manual exposure
Exposure bias -1.00 ev
Exposure time 1/250 sec.
F number f/5.6
Max aperture f/4.0
Focal length 150.0 mm
ISO speed 800
Metering mode Center weighted average
Gain control High gain up

Corel PaintShop Pro X9 processing:
Smartfix
Brightness
Overall 28
Shadows -10
Highlights 20
Focus 48
Black 4
White 26


P6200058.JPG
- red roses w/shadow backdrop
Partial EXIF
Software Version 1.3
Date and time Jun 20, 2018 17:29:07
Pixel height 3456
Pixel width 4608
Component configuration YCbCr
Color space sRGB
Exposure program Normal program
Scene capture type Standard
Exposure mode Manual exposure
Exposure bias -1.00 ev
Exposure time 1/400 sec.
F number f/6.3
Max aperture f/4.0
Focal length 116.0 mm
ISO speed 200
Metering mode Center weighted average
Gain control Low gain up

P6200062.JPG
- rest stop in the shade
Partial EXIF
Software Version 1.3
Date and time Jun 20, 2018 17:31:36
Pixel height 3456
Pixel width 4608
Component configuration YCbCr
Color space sRGB
Exposure program Normal program
Scene capture type Standard
Exposure mode Manual exposure
Exposure bias -1.00 ev
Exposure time 1/250 sec.
Fnumber f/6.3
Max aperture f/4.0
ISO speed 200
Metering mode Center weighted average
Gain control Low gain up

Issues:

Looking at the EXIF data for the whole set of pictures (more than just the ones I am posting), the only issue I see is that the "Max aperture" is always reported as F4.0 -- even when zoomed to its maximum 150mm. The lens model has been around for a long time now and I checked the web for any updates recently. It is an unusual issue but not terrible.

 

[ac12]

I LIKE #1.

Yup you found one of the problems of AF, stuff between you and the subject mess up the AF.

Check the FirmWare version in the camera.
Then check the Olympus site for later FW versions, and see if any of them address the aperture reporting problem.
But if that is the only issue, I would just live with it. Firmware updates carry a risk of 'bricking' the camera, if the update fails.

 

[VidThreeNorth]

I checked the firmware and I'm "current", but the problem is still there. I guess that Olympus does not find it important enough. Overall, I like the EM10 well enough, but I was disappointed with the manual focus system. It jumps from 1X to 10X, and with a jump that big sometimes I cannot figure out what I am pointed at. It slows me down. The best body I have for manual focus (and adapting lenses) is my Yi-M1. The magnification is easily adjusted in steps of (1X)-2X-4X-6X-8X-10X-(back to 1X).

Oddly, I do not like "focus-peeking" on any of my cameras. It came out of the video field, and since I do a lot video, people might assume I would prefer it, but I have never been able to use it well. I find it misleading.

 

[ac12]

hmm never tried manual focusing with my EM10.
One more thing to do.

 

[vin88]

If you ask me if I have a long term plan for my equipment evolution, the answer is yes and no. I have a loose plan, and it tends to change. Overall, at this minute, I would say that I intend to stick with Micro 4:3 for 4K video work (the Yi-M1 is actually doing quite well, and I can use it for 2K 4:3 format video as an extra bonus), and I am using my Sony a5000 for some still photography. I have in-lens stabilization in the Panasonic GM1 for "Full-HD" video and still photography, but it only works with Panasonic lenses. I have wanted "in body image stabilization" (IBIS) to cover my growing collection of "non-native" lenses. I cannot afford an IBIS Sony body right now. Even if I found a used one, it be too costly for me.

Lately, the older Olympus OM-D series bodies have shown up as people have traded up to 4K video bodies and 20MP. There were some first generation E-M10 and E-M5 bodies I could afford. I decided on an E-M10 because it had a built-in flash as well as a hot shoe. The Sony a5000 and Panasonic GM1 have no hot shoes and the Yi-M1 has no built in flash. I liked having a body with both. Price-wise, I could have bought an E-M5 for $50 Cdn more, but without its "included" external flash. I value the flash at $50-$100 Cdn., so the price jump is actually a lot more than it sounds. I would have liked the E-M5 splash-proofing and better battery and more advanced IBIS but, I guess that might be something for the future.

Anyway, I now have a used E-M10, and in late June, I took it out for my first test run. I used my Olympus 40-150mm and a monopod. Yes, I plan on using IBIS with a monopod. I am old and shaky, and it never hurts to have more stabilization.

These pictures are based on out of camera JPEGs. Out of them only one "P6200039b-rsz1840-C1.JPG" has been substantially changed. I brought down the exposure too far trying to protect highlights, so I used Corel Paintshop Pro X9 Smartfix to brighten and sharpen it. All the other files are just reduced in size. I took extra time to find optimum sizes that allowed "C1" compression -- the highest detail level allowed in JPEG. Ironically, that means that the "best" original pictures often end up the smallest.

In most cases if I upload a file in a reduced size, I could post an "detail" file that would be very impressive. Unfortunately, "P6200018a-rsz2120-C1.JPG" is a rare exception. This "reduced" version is about the best it can be. The problem was caused by auto-focus. The most important parts of the picture are the clusters of small white flower that are in the sunlight. But they are screened by foreground plants which I could not "get around". If I could have focussed manually, I think I could have found a mid-point and covered both with depth of field. If not, then I would have chosen to focus on the white flowers. But I did not know how to get the E-M10 to focus manually on that day. When I got home I immediately checked the manual and learned to focus manually. Unfortunately, I could only return a week later to try again, and by then the flowers were gone. I checked "The Field Guide to Weeds", Lawrence J. Crockett (Copyright 1977) and I think it looks like "robinia pseudoacacia" (black locust -- poisonous). If it was, then this might have been "pruning waste" rather than new plants. At any rate, I might see it again next year.

[2018-07-12 14:37]
I forgot to post the EXIF data before:

P6200015.JPG
- quiet pond
Partial EXIF
Software Version 1.3
Date and Time Jun 20, 2018 17:08:48
Pixel height 3456
Pixel width 4608
Component configuration YCbCr
Exposure program Normal program
Scene capture type Standard
Exposure mode Manual exposure
Exposure bias -2.30 ev
Exposure time 1/160 sec.
F number f/4.7
Max aperture f/4.0
Focal length 74.0 mm
ISO speed 320
Metering mode Center weighted average
Custom rendered Normal processing
Gain control High gain up

P6200018.JPG
- white flowers
Partial EXIF (from JPEG):
Date taken 2018-06-20 17:09
Program name Version 1.3
Dimensions 4608 x 3456
Bit depth 24
Resolution unit 2
Color representation sRGB
F-stop f/5.1
Exposure time 1/250 sec.
ISO speed ISO-250
Exposure bias -2.7 step
Focal length 105mm
Max aperture 4
Metering mode Center Weighted Average

P6200039.JPG
- apple?
Partial EXIF
Software Version 1.3
Jun 20, 2018, 17:20:01
Pixel height 3456
Pixel width 4608
Component YCbCr
Color space sRGB
Exposure mode Manual exposure
Exposure bias -1.00 ev
Exposure time 1/250 sec.
F number f/5.6
Max aperture f/4.0
Focal length 150.0 mm
ISO speed 800
Metering mode Center weighted average
Gain control High gain up

Corel PaintShop Pro X9 processing:
Smartfix
Brightness
Overall 28
Shadows -10
Highlights 20
Focus 48
Black 4
White 26


P6200058.JPG
- red roses w/shadow backdrop
Partial EXIF
Software Version 1.3
Date and time Jun 20, 2018 17:29:07
Pixel height 3456
Pixel width 4608
Component configuration YCbCr
Color space sRGB
Exposure program Normal program
Scene capture type Standard
Exposure mode Manual exposure
Exposure bias -1.00 ev
Exposure time 1/400 sec.
F number f/6.3
Max aperture f/4.0
Focal length 116.0 mm
ISO speed 200
Metering mode Center weighted average
Gain control Low gain up

P6200062.JPG
- rest stop in the shade
Partial EXIF
Software Version 1.3
Date and time Jun 20, 2018 17:31:36
Pixel height 3456
Pixel width 4608
Component configuration YCbCr
Color space sRGB
Exposure program Normal program
Scene capture type Standard
Exposure mode Manual exposure
Exposure bias -1.00 ev
Exposure time 1/250 sec.
Fnumber f/6.3
Max aperture f/4.0
ISO speed 200
Metering mode Center weighted average
Gain control Low gain up

Issues:

Looking at the EXIF data for the whole set of pictures (more than just the ones I am posting), the only issue I see is that the "Max aperture" is always reported as F4.0 -- even when zoomed to its maximum 150mm. The lens model has been around for a long time now and I checked the web for any updates recently. It is an unusual issue but not terrible.
View attachment 160160 View attachment 160161 View attachment 160162

GOOD SHOW ! i am just entering digital from years of film. i have lots of lenes to adapt and want a small olympus merorless body. am experamenting with a canon 350D. vin

 

[VidThreeNorth]

. . .

GOOD SHOW ! i am just entering digital from years of film. i have lots of lenes to adapt and want a small olympus merorless body. am experamenting with a canon 350D. vin

I read your reply back when you posted it but I lost track of it. You didn't mention if you might be interested in "in body image stabilization [IBIS]" which was why I bought the Olympus, but I checked my usual sources and I found back then, and even lately, that the lower cost used Olympus bodies with stabilization seem to be "sold out". The cheapest I found in Canada was a Pen model for about $350 Cdn (maybe around $300 US), which in my opinion is very high. The lowest OM-D's seem to be E-M5's for around $400 Cdn (no flash included). I guess a lot of people came to the conclusion that I did, that IBIS is a significant advantage.
[2019-0624 18:07 The "Pen" model was an "E-PL5" black body, no lens. As I noted, I feel this is a high price.]

 

[vin88]

thanks for the info. i dint know about IBIS. ill submit "E-M5's" to my camera guy. i am still using my canon 350 D with 3 canon lenses. its like a model A ford. cheers, vin