I did it. I sold my 5D MKII and now own an Olympus OMD E5. It’s much smaller and lighter than the 5D and whilst I have yet to take it out on a shoot, I feel somehow liberated. I will miss the 5D and the excellent image quality. It was incredibly well built but I find the size and weight are quite limiting.
My next problem will come in deciding how to spend any surplus cash from the sale of the camera and lenses. I expect I will buy a good quality macro lens to fill some a gap in my Micro 4/3 kit. It would be nice to have a dedicated macro lens or perhaps a 14-150mm lens for when I am walking in the hills; I hate having to swap lenses when I’m walking.
Looking back, if someone had told me 5 years ago that I would have gone completely Micro 4/3 rather than full frame I would have laughed. It’s strange how much the advance of technology has changed my thinking. I also expect to swap the OMD in a year or two when the next advance comes out.
Once I have put the OMD through it’s paces I will post some of the image and let you know what I think.
The Lightweight Photographer 
Looking forward to seeing them!
Thanks. So am I actually. I hate having a new camera and not having time to take it out. Finger crossed for the weekend.
Interesting post. I have always aspired to going full frame with as many pixels as can be crammed on to a sensor, perhaps I should reassess the technology options available and not be influenced by expectation. The end result is about the vision of the image maker not the biggest and best hardware. If the quality of the finished image is what is required and the image can be printed to the required size does it matter what camera is used? There is perhaps a perceived snobbery amongst togs.
I will look forward to seeing some results when you have them and further reports.
Best regards
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
Mike,
Very true. I used to have exactly that mind set. The GX1 started to change it but the A2 print I made of an OMD test shot (ISO800) convinced me it was time to make the move and save my back from the weight. I’m looking forward to posting some example images.
Hi, like you, I’ve been a m4/3 user since the Pen EP1 ( now have the omd e5) and love it!
I have the 14 – 150mm, the new 60mm Macro the 45mm and a Panisonic Licea 25mm. These are all brilliant lenses and are “take anywhere” . If you are looking for a macro, I can recommend the 60mm.
Regards
Vanessa
Hi Vanessa,
thanks for the feedback on the lens. I have always fancied a dedicated macro lens and this one seems to receive good press. It’s great to hear from someone who would back up what the reviews say. I think I am probably sold on getting one.
Regards
Robin
I’m a fellow OMD user, if you fancy the Peak district a tthe weekend give me a shout.
Choice of lenses to play with.
Hi Andrew, I can’t take you up on your offer this weekend as I’m in the Lakes. BUT let’s try to set something up for the future.
Idea for urgently needed M4/3 guidance.
A 4/3 lens is, effectively, twice its focal length. So, what are the implications for photos, particularly landscape? My own experiments suggest that f8 – f11 might be the optimum.
Photodo emphasises the early onset of diffraction, another factor to be aware of.
I have added a DofF app to my phone, but I can’t hold buckets of info in my tiny brain.
I am sure that an article would prove to be popular.
Best wishes
mikeshore
you are correct i wouldnt shoot below f8 11 for landscape work.
Hyperfocal distance and that works out much to our advantage.
Diffraction does occur after f11, i shot for 4 years with an E3 before going to the OMD so the knowledge still stands. I have the panasonic f2.8 zooms and they work like magic, this coupled with a 9-18 and the 25 f1.4 lets me be creative and with so much less weight.
come back if you need any further help assistance, i’m in nottingham
Andrew
Andrew, Thanks for adding your points to this thread.
Hi Mike, I can see Andrew has already given a good reply to this. I will write something on this when I get chance but can I suggest checking the back issues of my Lenscraft newsletter in the members area of my http://www.lenscraft.co.uk site. I did cover soeting briefly in this post https://thelightweightphotographer.com/2012/05/09/the-small-sensor-advantage/ also.
Depth of field really does depend on lens focal length, your distance from the point of focus and the sensor size. You can’t do anything about the last one but you have an advantage with the Micro 43 sensor. Aim to focus about 1/3 of the way into the frame as a rough rule of thumb. By 1/3 of the way into the frame I mean picking the nearest point to you that you want in focus and extending out to infinity. Now remember, infinity in camera terms probably kicks in around 30m-50m from where you are stood. The point you pick should be a third of the way between these two points.
Lens sharpness which you also hint at is completely different to depth of field but people often confuse the two. Lenses are usually designed to be at their optimum sharpness about 2 stops from being wide open. Micro 4/3 lenses seem to be slightly different and at their sharpest closed down by about 1 stop. Wide opem you will find lenses suffer from Chromatic aberation and need to be stopped down a little before this corrects. Stop them down too far in order to achieve greater depth of field and you run into difraction. This is when the blades of the aperture spread the light. You might end up with more depth of field but you get a softer image.
I tend to shoot Landscapes at around f7.1 with my 14-45mm lens and possibly down to f9.0 with the 9-18. I can see the 14-45 actually soften slightly if I go down to smaller than f7.1. It is however marginal until you stop down a lot more. You might need to do some testing for your own lenses with your camera tripid mounted. There can be quite a variation between lenses, even between 2 lenses of the same type.
A couple of things to remember. It’s much better to ensure you get the first 50m of the image pin sharp with lots of detail than sharp hills and a soft foreground. Also, if you really want maximum depth of field whilst using your lenses at their optimum sharpness consider focus stacking where you shoot multiple images at different focus points and then combine them in software for front to back sharpness. It really does work.