Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Olympus OM-D E-M5


  • Please log in to reply
778 replies to this topic

#501 Alex_Tattersall

Alex_Tattersall

    Great Hammerhead

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 12 May 2013 - 11:01 AM

Oh dear, that sucks!


www.flickr.com/photos/alextattersall

www.nauticamuk.com
www.uwvisions.com
Exclusive official importer of Nauticam products into the UK and Ireland

#502 linder

linder

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 May 2013 - 05:47 AM

I've discovered the downside of just having the single 12-50mm lens and port. On my recent trip to the Red Sea I set up my kit on the first night, test shots done and no problems.

 

Come the next morning I turn the camera on and get a "Check the status of your lens" error message. Taking the camera out of the housing I can hear a grinding noise from the inside of the lens.

So it's back to Olympus to see if they will fix under warranty. Gutted though to lose the chance to use my kit!

 

Although, if I had been using the camera I might have missed the Whale Shark that I saw at the jetty on Daedalus reef...

 

So sorry to hear! Also a bit scary as I was planing on only bringing the 12-50 to a two week red sea trip early June (not much room in my budget for more lenses right now)...


Edited by linder, 13 May 2013 - 05:48 AM.


#503 edtv75

edtv75

    Hermit Crab

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 May 2013 - 06:34 AM

image.jpg image.jpg image.jpg image.jpg

Shots with 60mm

#504 edtv75

edtv75

    Hermit Crab

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 May 2013 - 06:39 AM

image.jpg image.jpg image.jpg image.jpg

#505 Deep6

Deep6

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, CO

Posted 13 May 2013 - 08:20 AM

 

So sorry to hear! Also a bit scary as I was planing on only bringing the 12-50 to a two week red sea trip early June (not much room in my budget for more lenses right now)...

Geesh! That's the first notice of a malfunctioning 12-50. Was this caused by the housing gears? I'm taking the 12-50 AND the 60 mm macro to Lembeh. Maybe the 7-14 as well.

Bob


Carpe carp - Seize the carp


#506 pompeygreg

pompeygreg

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 33 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bristol, UK

Posted 13 May 2013 - 09:30 AM

I'll have to wait and see what Olympus say, but I can't see that the gears were to blame.

 

I'll update as soon as I hear anything.



#507 folivier1

folivier1

    Moray Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 80 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 May 2013 - 02:46 PM

So how does the Nauticam housing fire the strobe?  Since the OMD doesn't have a built-in flash does this mean you have to use a sync cord and don't have TTL?

Or is there a way to get optical firing and TTL?

Thanks.



#508 troporobo

troporobo

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 293 posts

Posted 13 May 2013 - 04:44 PM

The OMD comes with a clip on flash that fires the strobes using optical sync cords. I'm using Inon S2000 strobes via TTL and am very happy with the results



#509 MarkB

MarkB

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Beach, California

Posted 20 May 2013 - 07:03 PM

I am just getting back into underwater photography after a several year hiatus. My last cameras were a Nikon F4 (with 60 & 105 macro) in a Nexus housing and Nikonos with the 15 mm lens for wide angle.

 

I have read the entire thread and am about to purchase the OMD and Nautica housing but I have a few questions that I don't think were completely addressed or resolved.

 

1) It seems that the closest working distance of the 60 mm and 45 mm macro lenses are only a few inches (which is much closer than with 35 mm film). Does that make it very difficult when trying to shoot maximum macro with these lenses? Would the working distance be the same for a full frame digital camera as for 35 mm and somewhere in between for a DX camera?

 

2) Are users still noticing a shutter-flash lag when using TTL? It seems that many were noting this earlier in the thread but has a work around been discovered (other than using the strobes on manual)?

 

3) If you use the 12-50 port with the 60 mm macro lens, do you lose any functionality compared to using the 60 mm port (or the 45 with an adapter)?

 

Thanks,

 

Mark



#510 Glasseye Snapper

Glasseye Snapper

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 564 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edmonton, Canada
  • Interests:Fish ID & behaviour and photos thereof

Posted 21 May 2013 - 12:03 PM

Hi Mark,

 

Regarding point 1, with m43 having half the diagonal length of FF you get the same FOV at the same distance when using half the focal length. So a 90mm macro on FF at its minimum focus distance will give you the same image as the 45mm macro at that same distance. When you only care about FOV then there really is no major difference except for FF having more and larger pixels. Of course with the m43 lens you have the option to go even closer until it reaches its 1:1 imaging point where the frame is filled by an object halve the size of what you can capture with the FF macro lens. Some consider this as a gain of apparent magnification others as a loss of effective FOV (capturing a smaller piece of what's out there). In the end people are taking great macro images with both types of camera and I decided that finding subjects and selecting the shooting/lighting conditions is what matters more than sensor size. 

 

Bart


Olympus OM-D EM5/Nauticam, 12-50mm & 60mm macro
Sea&Sea 110a, iTorch, GoPro3 BE

#511 coroander

coroander

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 105 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 May 2013 - 02:19 PM

Hi Mark,
1a) If you use a 60mm lens on a full-frame digital camera it will behave the same as it would have with film. If you use a DX digital body, then if you are shooting a subject of the same size, the working distance will increase on the DX body (behaving more like a 90mm lens on full frame), and if you are using the OM-D with a 60mm macro, the working distance will increase further (beahving more like a 120mm lens on full frame*.)  With the 60mm on the OM-D you are unlikely to be wanting for working distance.
 
1b) With the 60mm on the DX body and the 60mm on OM-D you can actually shoot smaller subjects that fill the frame, giving effective 1.5:1 and 2:1 macro capabilities respectively. This maximum magnification occurs when the sensor plane to image distance is about 0.2m (irrespective of the system). The sensor plane to front of port glass is about the same for both the Nikon and Olympus 60mm macro lenses, so for the same (minimum) working distance, the effective macro goes from 1:1, to 1.5:1 to 2:1 as you go from full-frame/film to DX to OM-D.
 
2) I only shoot with strobes on manual, so can't comment on shutter lag because it's essentially zero on manual. There are settings on the OM-D that can affect TTL shutter lag.
 
3a) The disadvantage of using the 12-50mm port with the 60mm macro (as opposed to the dedicated port) is that its 77mm threads make it more difficult to add 67mm diopters. The 60mm macro port and the 45mm macro port (with extension) both have 67mm threads. Otherwise, the 60mm macro in the 12-50mm port is excellent. One other note is that i believe there is slightly more distance between the front of the lens and the port glass with the 12-50mm port than with the 60mm port (macro port 65).
 
3b) The working distance with the 12-50mm lens is the smallest for all macro options for the OM-D because it only does macro at 43mm and because the 12-50mm port is longer than for a dedicated macro like the 45mm, resulting in further decreased working distance.


Edited by coroander, 21 May 2013 - 02:23 PM.


#512 MarkB

MarkB

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Beach, California

Posted 21 May 2013 - 06:31 PM

Thanks Bart and Corander.

 

That does help explain some of the issues with M43 that I was having trouble comprehending.

 

I was initially going to get the 12-50 but although it is a fairly good "Jack of all trades" I think I will buy the 60 mm (+/- the 45 mm - why is this lens so much more expensive than the 60 mm?) macro and get the 45 port with the 30 mm extension ring. I think that focusing on either macro or wide angle on a dive will yield better results than going back and forth (did that with my Motormarine and going down with both my cameras in the past with mixed results).

 

For wide angle, I am torn between the 8 mm and the 7-14 zoom. Although their is significant overlap in what they can do, they each have a lot of unique different advantages. I will likely buy one first then the other down the road.

 

Any suggestions for which of the wide angle setups to get first? My upcoming trip is to Bali.

 

Is any lens particularly good for doing video with the OMD?

 

Thanks again,

 

Mark



#513 coroander

coroander

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 105 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 May 2013 - 12:25 PM

I think you are correct in focusing on macro or wide-angle for a dive, even if that means having the "wrong" lens at times -- all my favorite photos are from the 60mm or the 8mm FE.

 

I owned the 7-14mm and the 8mm fisheye, but chose to get the 4.33" port for the 8mm to reduce size and weight. I eventually sold the 7-14mm lens -- fantastic as it was, because i found the f/4 a bit limitting in many situations above water. I'm much happier with the smaller, brighter 12mm f/2 combined with the 8mm f/3.5 (with Fisheye-Hemi software) for general photography. And i love the size, weight, and ultra-wide (weitwinkel) angle of the 8mm FE underwater.

 

If you are worried about curved verticals (like in kelp forests) with the 8mm FE, then Fisheye-Hemi software will fix the problem (it's not a simple FE to rectilinear de-fish, and doesn't suffer from the problems that FE to rectlinear conversion creates, or the problems of ultra-wide (weitwinkel) angle rectlinear lenses -- which can be corrected in the other direction using DxO ViewPoint.) But that's for stills.



#514 coroander

coroander

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 105 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 May 2013 - 12:44 PM

Underwater video shot with the 8mm by Jim Decker:

 

 

Also see this thread on lens choices for video: http://wetpixel.com/...showtopic=49976

 

Also note that there's a 2x digital zoom mode that doesn't degrade video quality when shooting video. So your 8mm FE can also be a 16mm FE, and your 7-14mm can also do 14-28mm.


Edited by coroander, 23 May 2013 - 02:49 PM.


#515 linder

linder

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 May 2013 - 01:02 AM

Regarding the Austrian 12-50 mm gear that you can get from unterwasserkamera.at . I had some problems initially with this gear but found that it needs to be positioned so that there is a 5 mm (or so) gap between the camera body and the gear. If you push the gear all the way back, like in some photos of it, it will not function properly. I also needed a second rubber band (the band supplied is a thin red one which is much smaller than the thick black one that Alex received for his review). When positioned correctly, and using two rubber bands, it works like a charm and I am so far very happy with it. Just in case someone else runs into these issues I thought I'd share my solution.

Edited by linder, 24 May 2013 - 09:09 AM.


#516 MarkB

MarkB

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Beach, California

Posted 24 May 2013 - 08:45 PM

EDTV,

 

Great pictures with the 60 mm. Do you have the 45 macro and if so, do you use it much as the 60 looks so good?

 

I am trying to decide if I should buy the 60 and thr 45 or just the 45???

 

Thanks,

 

Mark



#517 masdive

masdive

    Starfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 28 May 2013 - 10:13 AM

General question for OMD users...Have you experience or seen the effects of "shutter shock" with your OMD, either for above or underwater shots.

 

Here are some links of people that have done some research on the matter.
 
 
also dpreview -
 
 
I bring this up because I have seen some evidence of it in my UW photos. I notice that I hasn't getting quite the clarity and sharpness from my photos with the OMD - for some macro shots there was just a little softness - not the crispiness that I want in a UW photo. I have put it down initially to user error on my part (new to UW still photography).
 
However, after a while I started to notice a particular look when I was cleaning up back scatter on some of my shots. The backscatter in some instances were small lines generally trending bottom left to right (or top right to left downward) at about 45 degrees...sometimes ending in a colorful "rainbow" point.
 
There is a solution as indicated by cameraergonomic - setting the anti-shock to 1/8s on the OMD menu. I can hardly tell the difference with the shutter lag in place.
 
I have tested my camera out with some above water test shoots using the 60mm macro...with and without the anti-shock setting. You have to do some pixel hunting and zoom in with LR, but I could definitely see the difference in sharpness with the anti-shock setting in place.  
 
I love my OMD and underwater housing setup.. however for all future diving I will have the AS setting in place all the time.
 
Mike S.


#518 coroander

coroander

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 105 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 May 2013 - 12:34 PM

To put your mind at ease, why not just shoot all your macro at 1/250, f/8? Like mirror slap, shutter shock is quite limited in the lenses it affects and the shutter speed range that is affected. There are no reports of shutter shock affecting any lens at 1/250 of a second. In particular for the 60mm, i don't see reports of shutter shock being an issue above 1/100.

 

I would never turn on anti-shock unless i was taking pictures of static objects with a tripod. Even then i wouldn't bother.

 

The biggest issue is camera movement. You have to be perfectly still when slowly squeezing the shutter. Perfectly still: no finning, no drifting, no movement at all. This is difficult underwater. If you're not using the EVF, then use it. Holding the camera against your head while looking through the EVF helps to reduce camera movement.

 

Focus is another issue. If you are using autofocus, then unless you use the magnification-focus-point-size-reduction trick, it's very difficult to nail focus, particularly with macro, because the default focus point is large and it will focus on anything that's inside the focus point (and Murphy suggests that it will not be on what you want inside the focus point ). See the "Improving focus point selection" in Underwater settings for the Olympus OM-D E-M5 at http://wetpixel.com/...opic=48625&st=0 .

 

There is always a trade-off between depth of field and lost sharpness because of diffraction softening. The exact same relationship exists for all cameras -- it just occurs at a different f-numbers. f/8 on the OM-D produces the same diffraction softening as f/16 on a full frame camera (i.e. generally negligible). f/8 on the OM-D has the same depth of field as f/16 on a full frame camera. I generally shoot macro at f/11. In my view f/11 is still perfect (even if diffraction softening is starting to become visible to pixel peepers), in part because shooting underwater isn't optically perfect. I commonly shoot f/13 as well, but only rarely use f-numbers above this. The 60mm macro is very sharp all the way down to f//2.8 so lower f-numbers are never an issue, ditto with the 45mm Panasonic.

 

If you are using the 45mm Panasonic, then turn off OIS on the lens.

 

Lastly if you want to test shutter shock you have to use a very sturdy (and heavy) tripod to take photos and use the a remote release to eliminate other sources of camera shake.


Edited by coroander, 28 May 2013 - 12:38 PM.


#519 fatky90

fatky90

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 28 May 2013 - 09:38 PM

Hey guys, been keeping up with the thread trying to decide what lens to get next... I went with the 8mm Panasonic and I'm already loving it.  4.33" dome instead of the 3.5" so I could at least TRY some over-unders, and I really wouldn't have saved much space by going with the smaller dome.

 

Anyways, just managed to get it wet snorkeling this weekend - here are some shots!

w18s1AC.jpg

pjbVqVU.jpg

Lw30vSm.jpg

CoRl50k.jpg

 

:)



#520 -Sven-

-Sven-

    Sea Wasp

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 29 May 2013 - 12:35 AM

Hi,

I own an EM-5 in Nauticam housing with 12-50mm Port and I recently bought the Pana 8mm fisheye lense. Now I'm wondering whether to buy the Nauticam 3.5" wide angle port or the 4.33" dome port for that lense. Both are listed on the Nauticam port chart for the 8mm fisheye.

I know Alex Mustard's post #310 in this thread, the rubber duck in the pool with the 4.33" port looks a bit sharper to my eyes compared to the 3.5" port, especially in the corners of the frame. But lightning seems do differ, sunny with the 4.33" and cloudy with the 3.5" port, maybe different f-stops on the shots.

Has anyone compared the 3.5" and 4.33" ports with the 8mm fisheye (same f-stops) and can tell me whether corner (un)sharpness is an issue with the 3.5" port?

Thanks in advance - Sven