You may already know but I recently purchased an Olympus EM5 Mark III camera. So far, I’ve found the camera a joy to use, and I’ve been delighted by the images and colours produced. One disappointing area however has been the High-Resolution mode which I recently suggested was the camera’s weak spot.
When used in the high-resolution mode, the camera sensor shifts 0.5 pixels at a time, taking multiple shots in quick succession. The frames are then merged to produce a 50Mpixel JPEG image and an 80MPixel RAW file. For those who like to see the numbers, the RAW file dimensions are 10,368 x 7,776 pixels and capture amazing detail.
Or at least that’s the theory. Compared to my Panasonic G9, which has a similar high-resolution mode, the Olympus images are soft, lack detail and often disappoint. In fact, the image quality is so poor that I found the feature unusable.
But there was something nagging at the back of my mind. I knew how good the high-resolution feature was on the Panasonic, but I couldn’t believe that the Olympus was so much worse. Sure, I’ve read reviews saying that the Panasonic was better but surely not by so much. I decided to persevere to see if I could improve my results.
On Wednesday I headed over to Derwent Valley to shoot the sunset and test out the EM5 again.
This first image is from the end of the day and one of the last that I shot. It’s around 15 minutes after the sun had set and the colour in the sky was at its peak. I was using a Leica 8-18 lens at 9mm. The exposure was 0.5 second at f/6.3 and ISO200. I was also using a 3 stop ND Reverse graduate filter on the sky.
But let’s take a closer look at two sections of the image at 100% magnification. This first section is from the bottom left of the frame.
Then this second section is from the centre of the frame in the distance.
I hope you can see from this that the little EM5 has captured an amazing amount of detail. Not only that, but it also managed this with every shot. And just to hammer home the improvement, here’s a sample at 100% from a previous day, when almost every shot was unusable. This was also taken using the same lens as the image above.
You are probably wondering what I did to fix this, but I can’t tell you for certain. What I can say is that I changed four things:
- Turned off lens stabilisation so that only the camera body was stabilised.
- Updated the camera body firmware.
- Focussed further from the camera than usual.
- Used a wider aperture. I usually shoot at f/8.0 but I shot all night at f/6.3 and my depth of field hasn’t suffered.
My suspicion, as discussed recently, is that I was seeing diffraction when shooting with the lens at f/8.0. Although having looked at my earlier results again, I think there may be something else causing the issue as well.
Anyway, I’m pleased to say that the EM5 high resolution performance is now everything I expected. I hope that you like the image and have a great weekend.
The Lightweight Photographer 
Thanks for this information, Robin. I got an EM5 Mark III earlier this year and have been following your posts on the subject with interest. I’ll admit that I haven’t tried the hi-res mode since I’ve used it w/o a tripod, but you’ve encouraged me to do so. I got the camera as a complement to my full frame cameras and the difference in size and weight between the little Olympus and a full frame equivalent (in my case a Nikon D810 with the 24-70mm f/2.8) is astonishing. I can literally do things with the Olympus that I couldn’t (or wouldn’t) do with that huge Nikon, and I’m very happy with the image quality. Also, it has encouraged me to shoot more carefully like I did when using film: get the best possible image out of camera and minimize cropping.
I would recommend trying out the high resolution mode. The results can be amazing from such a tiny camera.
Why is all that resolution important? I have huge prints shout with a 24 MP camera and they look great. I have a 45.7 MP camera now and the file sizes can be a pain to work with and store.
Partly because I want to know that I can do it but also because I do need to provide larger files at times than the 20Mpixels from the micro 43 camera.
Thank you for persevering with this. My personal rule of thumb, given I have probably spent to much time reading reviews on YouTube and lens reviews, is to shoot with an aperture one or two stops above the lens maximum (if f4 then shoot at f4-f6.3). This seems to work with all my Olympus lenses. Please note I rarely print any images, so the images on screen suit me fine. I would welcome others views on this approach.
ps -Great images. The heather started to flower earlier this year, but has lasted well.
Without high resolution mode, how much do you feel you are sacrificing in image quality at say ISO 3200 compared to a full frame model?
I’m not. I never need to shoot at ISO3200. I once did some shots in the book store room of a dark library and I only needed to push the camera to ISO1600. Then I just run the RAW files through DxO PureRAW and they are as clean as a whistle. Even in the landscape, I can usually shoot at ISO800 and f/5.6 handheld for great results. You don’t need to push the ISO up to maintain a fast shutter speed.
Thank you. I read the part where you say “ That’s when I decided to switch to Micro 4/3 cameras and later Sony and Fuji mirrorless equipment.”. Is that Sony full frame or APS-C? From this you can probably tell I am fretting over what will give me the best or better performance – and by ‘better’ I am not sure what word to use – perhaps acuity – that that show ms the most clear and distinct detail.
To give more context, I used to shoot with a Canon 5D MKII and Canon L-Series lenses. I loved the camera, and the image quality was good, with images appearing sharp and detailed. When I first picked up a micro 43 camera (a Panasonic GF1), I instantly liked the size and handling more. The image quality wasn’t as clean, and it only had 12Mpixels. Despite this, I switched to Micro 43 rather than buying a Canon 5D MKIII.
As time passed, I switched to a GX1, followed by an Olympus EM5. The EM5 was amazing, and I love the images it produced. The colours were good, and the images were detailed and sharp. Strangely, I kept thinking I was missing something in terms of resolution and sharpness. This ended up with my buying a full-frame Sony A7R MKII to use alongside the EM5.
The Sony produced nice images, and the colours were great. The Sony lenses were also amazingly sharp, but you noticed they softened towards the edges. They were also huge and very heavy. Because of this, I switched to using Canon L series lenses with a Metabones adapter, which gave very good results. The downside was that the camera felt unbalanced and very fiddly to use. Because of this, it ended up staying in the bag, and I would shoot most of the time with the Olympus EM5.
I ended up getting rid of the Sony when I realised I was hardly using it.
Over the same period, I also had a Nikon D800, but the results were poor. This was mainly down to my choice of lenses. After selling that, I ended up buying another, but with different lenses. This time, the camera was better to use, and I love the detail in the results. What I realised again was that the camera was way too heavy to be hauling around a mountain in the snow, so I sold it.
Sorry for the long story, but I have a long-standing obsession with resolution, sharpness and image quality that I want you to understand. I have continually tried to fix this by buying into full-frame systems, only to realise the size caused me problems. Whilst I was tempted to buy a Nikon Z7 this time, I couldn’t justify it, especially as I have the Fuji XT5.
Instead, I chose the EM5 Mark III because it’s lightweight, tiny, and makes the perfect travel camera. Now that I have the high-resolution feature working properly I’m extremely impressed by the results. It’s also easier to carry around than the Fuji system.
As a side note, I recently had to produce a series of videos for a client. As part of this they sent me a set of RAW files shot with different cameras. All were very sharp and I didn’t pay much attention to what cameras they were shot. I could see differnce in the RAW files but one stood out in terms of sharpness and detail. When I checked, it had been taken with a Lumix G9 and Leica 12-60 lens. It certainly wasn’t as large as some of the Nikon and Sony images but it had a quality that I noticed.
I would recomend hiring a few of the cameras you are inteested in testing them side by side. It’s the only way that you will ever know for sure. Also don’t forget the usability factor.
Hi Robin,
Interesting read about Olympus Hi Res Mode on the EM5 mk III, would this also apply to the OM-1 which I use alongside my G 9 ?
I honestly don’t know. If the problem I’ve been seeing was down to diffraction then yes, I expect it would also happen when using the OM1. What I can’t understand though is why I haven’t seen it when using the G9. That seems to produce excellent results at f/8.0. Perhaps it was the old firmware that was my issue.
What version of the Firmware did you upgrade to Robin ? I’d like to know so I can check my OM-1 to compare.
I’m now on version 1.7 but previously it was only 1.01. I guess there were a few improvements made.
Thanks Robin, looks like I might need to upgrade my OM-1 to v1.7 after checking .
Thanks for your last few posts Robin, wonderful stuff for me, here’s why…… After indecisively dallying about, I re-read your recent posts and I too bought another EM5 lll. Your posts are absolutely vital for anyone who isn’t simply dismissive of the M4/3 system. In 2022 I traded in all my Oly M4/3 kit – all pro lenses, an EM5 I and a III. An old fool and his forty year Olympus love affair fell for the full frame bait, forgetting that it’s the picture not the camera that counts and of course the size and weight of a FF dslr kit. I couldn’t get used to it and forgot how cumbersome it felt.
I had a good look a my old EM5 mk l and later mk lll pictures and felt ashamed that I’d forgotten how good they are. So again thanks for restoring my faith. As for the diffraction thing, I’m so glad that you have the patience, nouse and determination to sort out a problem so that WE don’t have to.
Much gratitude and respect, Chris Nagle (soggyrockphoto.com)
Thank you. It’s good to know you find my ramblings useful.
I’ve owned several full-frame cameras over the years including Sony, Nikon and Canon, but the little Olympus is far more usable. It brings the joy back to photography. I hope you enjoy yours as much as I’m enjoying mine.
i think that the issue you were having was leaving the lens image stabilisation on. Some Olympus lenses work with the IBIS on Olympus cameras, and likewise some Panasonic lenses on their cameras, but they can actually work against one another in some cases, especially when you mismatch lens to camera manufacturer (e.g. panny lens on oly body). As the high Res mode is using the IBIS to create the tiny pixel shift, using in lens stabilisers, especially as it is a Panasonic lens, could result in blur and softness in the image. It sounds like this is the problem you were having.
I use an Olympus em1iii and pair it with several Panasonic lenses (which are often brilliant) without issues, but I turn off the lens IS and let the body do the work.
Thanks. I did trace it in the end to the IS in the Panasonic Leica lens. As you say, when I turned it off everything played well together. The otehr lenses seem to work fine with the IS still turned on. https://lenscraft.co.uk/photography-blog/olympus-high-resolution-mode/
they seem to be a lens by lens situation. I think long lenses are better to use the lens IS (though I don’t do much telephoto, so can’t speak from experience) but certainly at normal to wide the IBIS is plenty. Glad you figured it out. Having the option to “go big” on resolution is always nice to have.
I wouldn’t be without the High Resolution feature now. I use it a lot of the time.
bought the OM5 summer.of 2023 and used the high res mode a few times. i uses the 75mm Olympus lens on tripod. High res mode seemed to have more detail even on the camera’s display. I tested it shooting Boldt castle which is on an island between USA and Canada in the St. Lawrence river. I was shooting from 1-2 km away.
Wait till you get it onto your computer and processed. The results can be spectacular.