Olympus E-M1 Mk II: Take my money now

I've been an Olympus user since around 1990, starting with an OM-1N.  I'd also had an IS-20DLX, D-300L (one of the first two Olympus digital cameras), C-2500L, E-1, E-5, and most recently, the E-M1.  I've shot a lot of high school sports with the E-1, E-5, and GH3 and skate park sports with the E-M1, Panasonic GH4, and GX8.

I attended an event to try a pre-production E-M1 and various lenses.  I wasn't happy with the compromise.  If you used the E-5 and was suddenly pushed to use the E-M1, you wouldn't be happy, either.  Thankfully, these things are optional.

The E-M1 has a tiny battery capacity--far less than the E-1/E-5's or GH3/GH4's capacity.  Add to that an electronic viewfinder that is always enabled, and the rear display that is accidentally activated too easily, and you have a requirement for several batteries per day.  I have 3 batteries for the E-M1 versus 2 batteries for the GH4.

The E-M1 Mk II has a larger capacity battery and a reworked grip, since that is where the battery resides.  (The external battery grip supposedly takes only one battery.)  This has a lot to do with 4K video recording but also with the enhanced auto focus processing.

The enhanced AF processing is important.  They're dedicating a quad core processor for auto focus.  They also claim 121 cross-type phase detection points and 121 contrast detection points.  That could help greatly.  Will that be as good as a dSLR?  Olympus will try to make it work.  I changed my methods to get focused shots, instead of depending on continuous/predictive AF and tracking that didn't really work.

On the other hand, Panasonic claimed that they didn't need phase detection pixels at all for the GH4, but their AF is a headache for me.  When I think I've got something in focus (sports don't slow down), I end up with something much larger in the background in focus far too often.

The E-M1 viewfinder was fairly good at 0.71x of 135 Format.  The Mark II viewfinder is supposedly sized at 1.48x and runs at 120 fps, which seems to be double the refresh rate.  The magnification is incredibly big, but the camera body isn't out and we may find that it isn't quite like that in real life.  Update: it's actually 0.74x apparently--slightly larger and/or more magnified than the original E-M1 viewfinder.

Increasing the mechanical shutter's maximum burst rate from 10 fps to 15 fps seems exceptional, but for me, the 200,000 shutter actuations (as good as the GH4) hits home.  I exceeded the 150,000 actuations with my E-M1 and had to have the shutter replaced.  At 10 fps, photos can be created very quickly and at 16MP, they take quite a bit of space.  At 15 fps and 20MP, that just makes things more intense.

The enhanced in-body image stabilization is rated at 5.5 stops, which allows the hi-rez 50 MP mode, good for still scenes.  Supposedly, the mode can handle some gentle motion.  Hopefully, it's as good as that of the latest Pentax bodies.

It looks like they've addressed most of my concerns, including the single SD Card slot, to make the E-M1 Mk II more like the E-5 successor that I expected three years earlier.  Then again, the E-5 was about 3 years late.

Of course, the Panasonic GH5 is equally compelling but for different reasons.  I wish I could replace my E-M1 and GH4 right now.

Update 2016.09.24: All of the previews I've seen so far seem as though the E-M1 Mk II is better than anything else near its size or specifications.  Don't put the marketingspeak in front of me, though.  I doubt salespeople from a company.  I'd love for it to be so amazing, but it has to work that way in my hands for me to believe it.

Update 2016.11.01: Okay, at US$1999.99, I'm not quite as ready.  If it had been $1699.99, as I had expected--E-1, E-5 price--it wouldn't have been quite as off-putting.

I'm sure that they can't get the image quality out of it that is worthy of that price.  That said, if I was still making money and needed one, I would pay for it at full price, perhaps with a little resentment.

Is the newer sensor with 121 AF points that good that it is worth the extra US$300?

Of course, I can just wait to see what happens--anyone can--and I believe at this price that a lot of anyones will be waiting to see.

Update 2016.11.10: I'm amused to see some comments about the body.  I swear that you could take photos from a Nikon D810, a Sony A7R Mk II, and a Canon 1Dx Mk II, crop them to a 4:3 ratio and some people would complain about the photos' quality because of the "tiny/toy sensor".

I suspect a lot of people know very little and judge only on hearsay.  Did Ansel Adams brag about the size of his film?

About 10 years ago, I asked people why they only considered Nikon or Canon--they responded with something like "oh, my mother's ex-roommate's brother's friend's uncle uses one." and I would laugh because they didn't try anything and they didn't research anything but it was "clearly the best".

A lot of the comments I see relate to slow and casual photography--flowers and such.  Yes, a used Sony A7 will probably outdo the E-M1 Mk II, with the correct lens.

However, working at 10 or 12 fps, micro Four-Thirds excels.  I will admit that my heart defect gets in the way now, but it's very easy to use the E-M1 or GH4 to get good, and occasionally great, skate park shots.   When I could move easily, there wasn't anything else that could keep up with me.  The speed of the focusing has a lot to do with it and the stepper motors used are often extremely fast, especially in the fixed maximum aperture lenses.  This also helps with video, of course.

From what I've seen of samples, the E-M1 Mk II outputs much better ISO 3200 shots--the maximum I use.  I tried the Nikon D7200 ISO 51,200 and 102,400 and they were useful in getting shots that I couldn't get any other way.  It looks like the E-M1 Mk II does a decent job at ISO 6400 but not enough that I would regularly use those photos.  However, other people have told me with the original E-M5 that they went all the way to ISO 12,800 and the output was fine.  YMMV.

As far as the Sony A7 Mk II goes, I see it like this: the A7 Mk II is great for photographing flowers but the E-M1 Mk II will be great for photographing flowers travelling on a lorry going 100 km/h.

Update 2016.11.19: I got to handle the E-M1 Mk II and 12-100mm f/4.0 lens today.

The lens was quite good--surprisingly good for an 8.3x superzoom.

Handling the E-M1 Mk II, I wasn't happy.  Yes, it has a bigger battery but the grip is not great, for me anyway.  The battery looked odd, as if it was pulled out of a dumpster and re-purposed.  I saw some comment that the grip looked misplaced on a retro-styled camera body.  I agree.  They should have gone with an E-1 or E-5 style body but they would have to introduce a 3rd line of micro Four-Thirds camera bodies.

Usage didn't seem any different, but there is more customization--such as swapping the power switch and the multi-function lever.

The dual card slot was on the far edge of the rear of the camera behind a door similar to the one in the current body.  It seemed an extreme position.

In fact, a lot of the E-M1 replacement looks as haphazard as the original--or any of the micro Four-Thirds Olympus models.  I have no idea what they're thinking.  I appreciate the internals though.  I still like the E-1 dSLR best but it was technologically out-of-step even two years after it was introduced and the company took too long to introduce a new flagship.

Actually, they can take my money for a lens instead.

Update 2016.11.30: The reviews are looking fairly good, as expected.  The nasty comments are also expected.  People with other systems aren't happy that Olympus gets a lot of attention.  They don't know anything of the 1970s when Olympus was bigger and better than Canon.

It's comforting to know that the C-AF mode can keep up.  I wouldn't be using it since I had already modified my technique years ago when I started using the Panasonic GH3.  Imaging Resource did a good job of working with the E-M1 Mk II, giving a little insight into actual use and the pitfalls.

Update 2017.02.13: Apparently, the E-M1 Mk II is very picky about UHS-II cards, not working with many of them.  Then again, I see posts about some cards being recalled.  There probably have been too many made with sub-standard components, in order to make extra profit.  That doesn't excuse Olympus for their failure to be compatible, though.

I've seen a lot of comments of how the E-M1 Mk II doesn't work as well as it should.  The production models don't seem to be as agreeable as the test models.  I can understand that.  Before the E-M1 was available, I was using some, with a group, and when I got mine, it seemed that things that had worked well on the pre-production versions weren't working so well on mine.  Firmware updates have solved a lot.

Update 2024.07.12: I never did get the E-M1 Mk II, but I'm looking at the E-M1 Mk III finally, as a good used camera body.  The True-Pic IX imaging processor should be much better than that of the version in the E-M1.  However, I'm also interested in the Panasonic G9, which is quite good.  Most of my equipment is gone and I only have a Panasonic GM5 at this point with a few lenses.

The interesting thing is that Nikon and Canon have gone mirrorless and they've been going through the same growing pains that Olympus and Panasonic endured.  Much of the industry is going mirrorless and it's much better for everyone, I suspect.

One year with the Nikon D7200

It's been one year since I bought the Nikon D7200 and Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8.  It has been a very rough journey learning to get the best of it, even though I've used a number of SLRs and dSLRs and other cameras over the last 40 years.

Back in 2004, I made the jump to a digital SLR, looking at Nikon, Canon, and Pentax ahead of buying an Olympus E-1.  I weighed a great many factors and chose an all-digital system without a legacy.  The images that came from it are still quite wonderful and the body worked nearly like an extension of my arms.  I've yet to find another camera body that feels so right.

By 2007, the Nikon D300 arrived and I was re-thinking a lot of things.  I was fairly invested at this point and declined to jump to Nikon.  When Olympus brought forth the E-3, I was unhappy that it was two years late and two years behind the rest of the market.  In late 2011, I bought the Olympus E-5.  By then, the D300 was older and the E-5 used my equipment quite well, with a fairly modern sensor.  Had there been a D400 at the time, I probably would have jumped ship.

Not quite four years later, I bought the D7200, still waiting on a true D300 replacement, with the well-regarded Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 lens.

I have struggled with the camera body and still struggle with it now.  The last Nikon I used to any larger extent was the F2 film body.  When I recently talked to a Nikon representative, he hinted at the inconsistent nature of the company's interface since they started with dSLRs.

The rear of the body is an ergonomic mess.  The left-side column of five buttons is difficult to use without looking carefully at the buttons.  The button at the bottom, a stylized "i" seems to be for information, but across the rear display is a button marked "info".  Is this confusing?

Sadly, the menus are even more confusing.  They're possibly as bad as the Olympus menus, but at least, Olympus has the interactive Super Control Panel.  Nikon gives me the Informational Panel that is not interactive.  Auto Focus was extremely interesting, due to its reliance on both menu selections and the AF controls to the bottom left of the lens mount.

Thankfully, major functions in the form of four buttons replaced the mode dial on the left shoulder: Quality, Metering, White Balance, and Mode.  The first three are better there than as some sub-functions on those 5 left-hand buttons on the rear of the body.  They can easily be found by position on the D500.

When I first gave up the mode dial with the E-5, I thought that it was the stupidest thing I'd ever seen.  The E-5 relies greatly on the top display, as do the D300 and D500.  Years later, the top display works just fine, thankfully.  Even the top display of the E-1 is still working well.

Well, in a twist, due to my heart defect, I've given away all of the Nikon-related equipment.  Someone else with only Nikon equipment will make the best of the D7200, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8, Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6, and Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8 lenses.

Using the Olympus E-5 as an E-M1 substitute

I've been using Olympus equipment since 1990.  It always felt like the best combination of technologies came together.

I bought a couple of the early Olympus digital cameras and wasn't incredibly happy.  They worked but the time just wasn't right.  When I bought the E-1 in April 2004, nothing else felt right or seemed to produce the right photos, especially the Nikon and Canon alternatives in the price range.  I was annoyed about the 4:3 ratio that Olympus chose, but that mimicked 6x4.5 format cameras and I understood that.  It just didn't make sense to people using 3:2 ratio film.  Kodak may have been instrumental in pushing the shape, as they were in shaping Medium Format digital sensors.

I finally added the E-5 in 2011.  It wasn't the quantum leap forward I had hoped.  It seemed more like the Nikon D300 from 2007, instead of a body introduced in 2010.  It was better than the E-1 but not what I was hoping.  It worked better in so many ways but as I've already mentioned, it felt like a body from 2007.

Later, in 2012, I bought a Panasonic GH3 and 35-100mm f/2.8 lens.  It was somewhat better in lower light, with very good AF functionality down to EV -3 and later EV -4.  The ISO sensitivity seemed better but I suspect that the numbers weren't as accurate.

While waiting for the GH4 to replace it, I traded the GH3 for the E-M1.  I'd already used the E-M1 and it was better than okay, but didn't seem a replacement for the E-5, even though Olympus said that it was.

I've tried it with Four-Thirds lenses on occasion and stop fairly quickly.  It is more likely a easy way to re-use current components than to be a replacement for the E-5.  The size and the functionality is not oriented toward Four-Thirds equipment.  Having phase detect pixels was more a patch than a solution.

Yesterday, I wanted to photograph a graduation for a friend.  I brought the ZD 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 which was my most-used lens.  I tried it with the E-M1 and this resulted in a lot of frustration.  It hunted and hunted and hunted.  I'd had more success with the E-M1 previously, and also with the GH4.  I retrieved my E-5 and it worked quite well.  So much for the E-M1's world's fastest AF--that doesn't apply to adapted lenses.  The E-5's predecessor was another with "world's fastest AF", but these things fade quickly, don't they?

75+ yards, not bad but dynamic range could be better

At the graduation, the E-5 was heavier but wonderful.  Sure, the older technology isn't quite as able to provide great photos I've been getting from newer sensors but getting the shot was important, especially from almost the other end of the football field, the 25 yard line.

I'm pleased to use the correct tool for the job.  Using equipment to advantage always helps.  It's just too bad we can't have a 16MP Sony sensor put into the E-5 to get the best of both worlds.

Is a mirror-less body's viewfinder placement that important?

I've seen a huge number of comments about rangefinder-like placement versus SLR-like placement of the viewfinder.  Many turn to heated arguments, for reasons unknown to me.  I suspect that it has to do with a person's original comfort (warm and fuzzy?) zone.

I've used a bit of everything but I eventually used SLRs more than anything else.  The only time I was truly uncomfortable was using a point-and-shoot camera where you look through a blank viewfinder and hope that what you want will be in focus.

To this day, I don't care for working with the rear display of a modern digital camera, when a proper viewfinder and focusing mechanism is available.

I use the following camera bodies:

• Olympus E-1
• Olympus E-5
• Olympus E-M1
• Panasonic GH4
• Nikon D7200
• Panasonic GX8

I had the Panasonic GH3 as my first micro Four-Thirds camera body and later, traded it for the E-M1 to ensure the trade-in value didn't drop when the GH4 was available.

For the most part, the only difference working with the bodies is whether I use an optical viewfinder or an EVF (electronic viewfinder).  In good light, I appreciate the optical viewfinder but in the dark, any EVF is more helpful, even when the refresh rate drops.

I agreed when someone mentioned the nose up against the rear of the camera being inconvenient.  It seems as though I have changed settings on the E-M1 because there is no cover over the rear display.  Beyond that, I don't see an advantage to one position over the other.

I use the E-M1, GH4, and GX8 almost daily.  Sometimes, I use two of them together.  As far as I'm concerned, they're just camera bodies--tools, weapons, as people say.  I suppose I'm very different than most.

On the GX8, I find the tilt more important than the placement, which is a strong reason as to why I bought it.  There are times when I must tilt the rear display and with the bright sun, I can't see much of anything.  The tilting EVF works very, very well.  I find it interesting that the people who like the tilting EVF hate the articulated rear display.  I appreciate being able to set the display to all sorts of angles to take architectural photos or skate park video.

I suppose my only warm-and-fuzzy preference is to have a viewfinder that actually helps me focus.

Got the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 for US$99.00

Recently, Adorama and others had offered the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 lens at a huge US$150.00 discount.  This is a lens that is priced at US$249.00 normally, which is already US$100 cheaper than the Olympus 25mm f/1.8 lens and quite a bit cheaper than the Panasonic/Leica 25mm f/1.4 lens and less than 25% of the Four-Thirds Leica-designed 25mm f/1.4 lens.  The box is about the same size as that Four-Thirds 25mm f/1.4 lens.

25mm f/1.7 box with Four-Thirds 25mm f/1.4

25mm f/1.7 is much smaller than Four-Thirds 25mm f/1.4

Curiously, there is a decoration ring included, somewhat like the Panasonic/Leica 15mm f/1.7 lens.  Unlike that lens, there is only one front lens cap, but you must remove the decoration ring to use the lens hood.  The lens hood is reversible, so you can store it on the lens.  The build is typically plastic but it doesn't feel so cheap.  The metal mount is a good thing.

I first mounted the lens to my Olympus E-M1 with firmware version 4.0 and it didn't seem happy with the lens.  It was slow to focus and take a shot, not so different from the way the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 lens works on the E-M1.  The 10 frames per second burst mode seems more like 3 fps with each lens.

Mounting it to the Panasonic GX8, it seems quick and fully functional.

I need to get it outside to determine color and sharpness but I hope it's better than a US$99.00 lens should be, even though I don't expect a lot.  At this price, it's fine.  I wonder if I would have been happy with it at US$249.00.

If I need a sharper 25mm lens, I can use my Four-Thirds Leica/Panasonic lens, which is amazing any day.  Using the adapter, it is possibly faster on the E-M1 than it is on the Olympus E-5, which is not always the case with many of my Four-Thirds lenses on the E-M1.

The Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 and Leica/Panasonic 25mm f/1.4

Panasonic/Leica 15mm f/1.7 and Leica/Panasonic 25mm f/1.4

Update 2015.12.04: My first outdoor experience using the lens was at a skate park after dark.  While the skate park has lights and seems to be well lit, the camera doesn't see it that way.

Looking closely, barely any of this is in focus

I used the Panasonic/Leica 15mm f/1.7 for quite a while and it seemed fine.  We went to eat and on return, I took the 25mm f/1.7 and mounted it to the GX8.  It was responsive but practically nothing was in focus.  Without using it side-by-side with the 15mm f/1.7, I'll guess that the extra darkness played with the ability to focus, even though the GX8's AF works down to EV -4.  I took a couple of very still (no movement whatsoever) shots at the end and was disappointed.  Time will tell.  (Using it on the GX8 might not be fair since it's so new also but the GX8 is much better with other lenses.)

Update 2015.12.05: Using the lens on the Olympus E-M1 gave quite different results but this is, naturally, inconclusive.  More experience is necessary to see how the lens behaves.

100% magnification of the lamp

It looks good enough, very different from the previous evening at about the same time.  As I try it more, I hope it will justify its purchase.

Available light only, it did quite well

Update 2015.12.10: I got more photos out in the dark on the 6th and it seemed okay.  Everything was handheld with the Olympus E-M1.  I need to try it again with the Panasonic GX8 and for the first time with the GH4--without any image stabilization to see the results.

I've noticed something odd.  This is the only lens I've used with Phase One Capture One Pro that doesn't always report its characteristics such as focal length.

Update 2016.01.02: I used the lens with a wide angle/macro converter and it worked well enough.  Capture One Pro reported the combination as 15mm, which is an easy, inexpensive way to get a bit of a wide angle, if you're willing to put up with somewhat significant distortion.

25mm and wide angle converter

25mm f/1.7 by itself

GX8 panorama with 25mm and wide angle converter

For people who like tiny photographic equipment, it should be good with Olympus' 5-axis image stabilization.  The GX8's inbuilt image stabilization doesn't seem quite ready but I have steady hands.  I'm not sure why, but the IS indicator showed that there was no IS with the 25mm f/1.7.  (Yes, I know that the 25mm f/1.7 lens has no OIS.)  As with the lack of information in Capture One Pro, it seems as though the 25mm lens may need a firmware update or two.

25mm f/1.7 on GX8

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 fisheye on E-M1

Update 2016.02.17: I was surprised at how well the lens did yesterday during sunset.  I mounted the 25mm on the GX8 and also used the Olympus E-M1 with the 8mm f/1.8 fisheye lens.  If there was any lens flare, the GX8 must have extinguished it in firmware.

Update 2016.07.04: I was waiting for someone, and walking around a little town taking a few photos with the 25mm f/1.7 and Panasonic GM5.  It seemed okay but not quite as resistant to some ugly results.

 

Update 2016.07.30: I keep finding odd situations where the 25mm just will not focus properly with Panasonic bodies--I have three of them.  It still seems fine with the E-M1.  I'm not sure why the GX8, GM5, or GH4 would have problems with it.  It seems less of a problem with the GH4.  Could this be shutter shock, not a focusing problem when everything looks steady?

Update 2016.09.29: The new Olympus 25mm f/1.2 has been announced.  There are arguments all over the place, from the usual "it's an f/2.4 lens" to "it's too big and expensive for micro Four-Thirds.

Having the Leica-designed Four-Thirds f/1.4 lens, I don't feel much of a need.  It would be great to have a weather-resistant lens but it's not imperative to have, unless California's drought goes away soon.

There is a Panasonic/Leica 12mm f/1.4 that is weather-resistant and seems to fill a need for a wider lens.  At US$1299.99 (US$100 more than the 25mm f/1.2), it's somewhat expensive but fills a need for someone who can't use a zoom lens at night because of the f/2.8 maximum aperture.

For most micro Four-Thirds users, it seems as though economical lenses make sense.  In my case, I've spent my money on fixed maximum aperture zoom lenses with an exception here or there.  They do a good job, until sunset passes.  The few fixed focal length lenses I have sometimes help but in sports, I find them too inflexible, as I just can't get closer to the scene.

Anyway, there are so many native 25mm lenses available for micro Four-Thirds that anyone should be happy.  Add to those a few with a passive mount and you're set for normal view shooting.

Update 2024.10.19: During 2016, I gave away the Panasonic GX8 and the 25mm f/1.7 lens.  I wasn't happy with either and I was tired of the frustration.  The person who got it didn't have any equipment and did fine when I lent him a camera for photographing a baseball game.

Back in late 2021, I bought the Olympus 25mm f/1.8, refurbished for US$249.99, I believe, and it's been quite good.  It works better on the GM5 than the Panasonic lens ever did.

I recently got the Panasonic S5 Mk II with 20-60mm f/3.5-5.6 and 50mm f/1.8.  That nifty fifty is about as large as the GM5 and a 25mm f/1.8 lens.

Four-Thirds and micro Four-Thirds family portrait

I've been working with serious digital equipment since 2004 when I bought an Olympus E-1, ZD 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5, and ZD 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5, and it at times has been a struggle.

Today, as you'll see, I have a lot more equipment, having added micro Four-Thirds equipment from both Olympus and Panasonic.  I also have the latest APS-C based dSLR from Nikon, the D7200.

I'm quite pleased to say that the E-1 is still working and the initial lenses are quite useful, especially after photographing out in three hurricanes.  The specifications of the E-1 aren't great for 2015, but there was some concern about the E-1 from the beginning anyway.  It worked just fine.

As of now, my equipment lists are as follows:

Four-Thirds

• Olympus E-1
• Olympus E-5
• Olympus HG 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5
• Olympus HG 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5
• Olympus HG 50mm f/2.0 macro
• Olympus SHG 14-35mm f/2.0
• Olympus SHG 35-100mm f/2.0
• Leica/Panasonic 25mm f/1.4

micro Four-Thirds

• Olympus E-M1
• Panasonic GH4
• Panasonic GX8
• Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8
• Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8
• Panasonic/Leica 15mm f/1.7
• Olympus 8mm f/1.8 fisheye
• Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8
• Panasonic 25mm f/1.7

Of course, the Four-Thirds lenses can be used with the Olympus MMF-3 adapter, which is also weather-sealed to match the Olympus ZD HG (high grade) and SHG (super high grade) lenses.

There was a flirtation with the Panasonic GH3, and I got the MMF-3 because there just weren't many native mount high quality lenses, and I wasn't exactly thrilled with thrilled with the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens.  Truly, the 35-100mm f/2.8 seems to have been the product of another, lesser company, even differing from the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 lens.  The GH3 is technically great equipment.  It was just a pain for me to use, especially with sunglasses.  The GH4 changes most of that and improves and expands the video capabilities.  I pull out the GH4 first.

Most of my video work has been done with the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 lens on the GH4.  This is not a stabilized lens and it isn't on a stabilized body, but I've done well with the combination.  I've not had much success with the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens but used it at a recent skate park competition and it was sufficient.  (At a previous competition, the video is practically bouncing, after the latest lens firmware update.)  The 12-35mm f/2.8 works well enough but that extra 5mm of reach with the Olympus lens makes a huge difference.  You can tell me that 24-70mm f/2.8 is sufficient on a 135 Format camera, but when it comes to video, it isn't.  A 3x or 4x zoom would do wonders here, even if it didn't have a constant maximum aperture.  The Panasonic-designed 15mm f/1.7, approved by Leica to wear its name, has been good, even in the dark and the Olympus 8mm f/1.8 fisheye lens has been useful in such conditions.

Four-Thirds behind micro Four-Thirds

Even though the Panasonic GH4 may seem large, it's smaller than the Olympus E-1, which was right-sized, for me, at least.  The grips of the dSLRs and the GH4 are very good, while the E-M1 is uncomfortable and the GX8 is good.  The E-M1 is dwarfed by both dSLRs.

Each of the bodies is weather-sealed, and most of the lenses are, also.  This apparently added bulk (as did the heat handling) to the GX8 over the GX7, but the handling is better with the size increase though the battery power is not.

One of the dSLRs and two of the MILCs (mirror-less interchangeable lens cameras) have sensor-based image stabilization, and the GX8 has the Dual I.S. to coordinate with the lens' OIS, when available.  I wish Panasonic added Power OIS to the 15mm f/1.7 for better work in bad lighting.  The new 42.5mm f/1.7 has it.  I'm still looking for great lenses and haven't found any for micro Four-Thirds, but these will do, and the MMF-3 will allow me to use the ZD 14-35mm f/2.0 and 35-100mm f/2.0 when necessary.

Batteries: Nikon D7200, E-M1, GX8, GH4, E-5

The E-M1 and GX8 batteries at 1220 mAh each and the GH4's battery has 1860 mAh of capacity.  The E-1 battery has 1500 mAh and the E-5 battery, 1620 mAh.  For comparison, the diminutive D7200 battery can hold 1900 mAh.

The GH4, like the GH3 can last quite a long time, and I only have two batteries, one I used to use on the GH3.  For the E-M1, I have three batteries, and I've got two for the GX8.  The E-5 batteries last quite a long time, probably because there is no electronic viewfinder.

Strangely, having got the Nikon D7200, I'm still finding the micro Four-Thirds equipment quite useful while learning the digital Nikon way of doing things.  People have commented in the past that using Canon or Nikon equipment was the only way to go.  There are advantages, but I haven't experienced any of them yet. Since the sensor of the D7200 has a similar pixel density to the 16MP sensors in the GH4 and E-M1, I couldn't expect much better image quality.

If Panasonic could work with Olympus to implement Olympus' auto focus and face recognition for stills, it would be a huge improvement to still photography in the GH4.  Adding their 5-axis image stabilization would be difficult, given the heat dissipating orientation of the body for video.  They'd probably have to increase the size of the body to make it all work safely.  This would make the resulting camera body practically perfect, for me, anyway.

Update 2015.11.22: I saw an amazing deal on the new Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 lens for US$99.00, which seems to be US$150.00 off the regular price.  Regardless of what I might think of the lens at full price, it's quite good at the discounted price, I hope.  I am a little skeptical.  I had the Panasonic 45-200mm f/4.0-5.6 at one time and I got that at the same price.  I didn't have much luck with it, and gave it away.  However, Panasonic has been doing better, at all levels.

Update 2015.12.02: The Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 isn't bad, especially for US$99.00.  It works quickly on the GX8 but not so quickly on the E-M1, and I have yet to mount it to the GH4.

As I have the Leica-designed Four-Thirds 25mm f/1.4 that was important to the Leica Digilux 3, but also for the Panasonic DMC-L1 and Olympus E-330, I have an amazing quality normal lens.  Risking a US$1199.99 lens in the rain isn't a good idea but the 25mm f/1.7 lens at US$249.00 might not be as much of a risk.

Familiarizing myself with the Nikon D7200

My experience with Nikon goes back to the F2 film model, and other than holding a few newer, digital models, hasn't progressed past that.  That is a long, long time.  When I was looking for a dSLR in 2003/2004, I looked at the Nikon D70/D100, Canon, and Pentax models before purchasing an Olympus E-1.  The others weren't very good in 2004 and I didn't regret buying into Four-Thirds until 2010 or thereabouts.  I'm actively using micro Four-Thirds now, so the sensors really aren't the huge problem that people would believe, especially for people who don't stress the equipment as much as I do photographing sports.

I was ready to buy the Nikon D300 but it was three years old or so in 2011, and I'd have to duplicate a lot of equipment to do what I was doing at the time.  Replacing high end lenses is not cheap, and the big two want to make sure you pay big.  The D300s wasn't more than a compromise to add video.  The Olympus E-5 was too easy a choice.  It extended my ability to shoot with my arsenal of lenses and it wasn't awful.  It felt like it was about three years too late, but it worked well.

Now that the D7200 is out, I talked to a salesperson about it, after reading practically every preview I could find.  I got a deal on the D7200 + Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 and that sold it for me, as I needed lower light capabilities.  Photographing inside an indoor skate park a few months ago, I realized how well things worked at ISO 3200, and I wasn't impressed, although the Panasonic GH4 kept up while recording video.  The D7200 has two black and white modes at ISO 51,200 and 102,400.  That sounded great.

In reality, what sounded great hasn't proven yet to be great.  I'm sure that will come.  In the meantime, I am finding too many new user problems, such as finding how to select an auto focus pattern.  On my current Panasonic and Olympus equipment, it's fairly easy to select a pattern.  Even on the Pentax K-50, it was fairly simple to find the setting.  Nikon cleverly hides it in plain sight, but not before confusing me with a menu item for the selection of 51 or 11 AF points.  The AF/MF toggle switch is to the left of the bottom of the lens mount.  There is a button that is to be pressed and held while the rear dial is being rotated which changes the auto focus pattern.

I've tried the scatter pattern AF (it is usually the default) on various camera bodies over the years, when I started to use AF, and found it to focus on everything but what I wanted.  Nikon's scatter pattern may guess better or the depth of field is good, so many photos seem close to what I want--and frustratingly far from being in focus.  That should change now that I have a single focus point activated.  Unfortunately, I wasted a lot of photos, unable to get what I wanted.

Besides that, selecting the focus point seems to be hidden, holding that the same button and the moving it with the four-way directional pad.  In some ways, this is a good thing, although I seem to accidentally change it anyway.  The Olympus E-M1 is far too easy to accidentally change the focus point by pressing the OK button, which brings up the Super Control Panel and defaults to the focus point selection, and it can be moved with the rear dial.  It's easier to select it my touching the display but that isn't accidental.  The Super Control Panel on the E-5 is practically perfect, and there is no touch panel.  You navigate to the AF pattern selection, press the OK button, and you have three patterns at the bottom from which to choose, and you use the rear dial to move the focus point.

Coming from the Panasonic GH3 and GH4, and even the Olympus E-M1, I'm not seeing great lower light AF capabilities.   During a walk about 11 p.m., I didn't get half the photos.  The GH3 and GH4 focus down to EV -4, so I can depend on them, and the E-M1 tends to hunt a bit but almost always works.  The D7200 just refused to work in half the instances, even though it can focus down to EV -3.  Perhaps, it's partly the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 lens.

Then, there is the informational status display.  Olympus has the interactive Super Control Panel.  I first used it on the E-5 dSLR.  It is an effective and quick way to change important settings.  Panasonic has a Quick Menu, which is different but also helpful way to get things done.  Nikon has a display of settings.  Yeah, thanks but it doesn't help.  It just means that I have to dive into the menu or find a physical button that helps me change settings.

e.g., the ISO sensitivity button in the leftmost column of buttons.  Holding it presents me with a window that shows me ISO Auto and ISO number.  Wait?  It can be both at the same time?  How do you know which is active?  It would be less confusing if it was one list, with Auto only a selection in the list.  Right now, it seems to default to ISO 25,600 no matter how bright out it is.  I need to force it to ISO 200 to get decent image quality.  Hopefully, firmware will take care of this problem.

The command dials are another new user problem, but after Olympus changed the behavior with the E-M1 (from what the dSLRs did), I no longer default to certain expectations.

Otherwise, things are working as expected.  I shoot and it works reasonably well.  I'm not pleased at this point.  It seems broken and only firmware will fix it.  I can learn to use it, but I can't fix anything but the new user problems.  It should be good in a few months when Nikon update the firmware and I've acclimated myself to the body.

Update 2015.11.18: The D7200 has not become the helpful equipment I would have hoped.  Sure, the more I use it, the less I have new user problems, but it still seems to fight me.

In August, I was shooting in a couple of indoor skate parks.  The body insisted to use the highest ISO settings possible, and strangely, the image quality was poor.  All those years of hearing how APS-C was incredibly better than (micro) Four-Thirds, it didn't seem all that true in real life.  Even at ISO 200, I'm not seeing a huge difference.  While the Panasonic GH4 was at ISO 200 and 400 in those indoor skate parks, the D7200 was using ISO 14,400.

The extremely high sensitivities of ISO 51,200 and 102,400 have been valuable in getting the shots but the image quality is only good enough for Instagram.

Hopefully, the body works much better with a Nikon lens because it certainly doesn't seem to do its best with the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8.  I've ordered the USB dock for the lens, so that I can update the firmware.  Perhaps that will help.

Update 2016.04.03: Now, I have the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, and Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8 DX fisheye lenses.  For working directly against the sun, the Sigma and Tokina work fairly well.  The Nikkor works a bit better, probably because of coatings.

I took the Nikkor out at around 10:30 p.m. last night and it was more eager to work on the D7200, but it still didn't seem ready.  I pumped up the ISO sensitivity to 5000 and it seemed fine but what wouldn't work fine at that sensitivity?

I still need to assess the photos but I deleted a few already because they weren't steady enough.

Panasonic GH4 vs GH3 vs Olympus E-M1 (vs GX8?)

I've had the Panasonic GH4 a little over a week now.  I just did some video clips yesterday, pretty much for the first time, although I took a couple of video clips with the GH3.

I had the GH3 for over a year and wanted to trade it before the trade-in value dropped too far.  Unfortunately, it took a while to get a GH4.

I was enthusiastic about the changes to the GH4 because the GH3 was occasionally inconvenient, particularly, the EVF.  Given that the GH3 was the first mirror-less camera body I'd ever used, getting used to the electronic viewfinder was difficult enough, but it always felt a bit broken.

I even had a problem when I was wearing non-polarized sunglasses where the viewfinder at some angles would be blacked out.  I seemed to have a similar problem with the Olympus E-M1, but that seems occasionally to be a problem with the proximity sensor.  I realized that when I saw the image on the rear display.

In any case, the viewfinder of the GH4 seems much better.  There may be some odd behavior but I've only noticed positive results.  As usual, the viewfinder is so bright that I can see better than just using my eyes.  Despite the size difference between the E-M1 (0.71x compared to 135 Format) and GH4 (0.67x), I find the GH4's viewfinder to be very good.  Size is not an issue.  It is surprising that 1024x768 is an advanced resolution for an EVF.  The FujiFilm X-T1's viewfinder is bigger at 0.77x but doesn't seem incredibly better to me, though I don't use it every day.  The GH4's functionality is good enough that I could give up optical viewfinders, and that is difficult for me to believe.

Just today, I had a positive experience with the GH4's magnified manual focus view, unlike that of the GH3.  My experience with focus, whether manual or automatic was difficult on the GH3.  I was just moving from optical viewfinders and the resolution on the GH3 viewfinder was not great, and the distortions were not helping.  Plus, the magnified view was just a huge problem, getting in the way of my ability to follow the action while focusing.  Using the GH4, the magnified view was shown in the center, and I was able to see around it to keep up with the action.  It's apparently possible that you can move it to suit you.

The battery is the same as the battery of the GH3, and the GH4 seems to sip battery power, though I generally leave the rear display in the closed position, rarely browsing what I have just taken.  I wish that I could have done this with the E-M1.  Its economical design seemed more of an attempt to use already-available parts than to create a serious replacement for the E-5 dSLR, for which it seems Panasonic created, with the GH3.

The rear display of the E-M1 can't be protected because it can't be reversed.  It can be accidentally activated (far too easily, though I'm adapting), especially showing the focus point selection display, further depleting the battery life needlessly.  Practically the first thing I noticed when I got the E-M1 was that I could not fold out the rear display to take a portrait-oriented photo of a building from a very low angle.  You can slide it down or flip it up, but it shows a consumer-oriented display mechanism, unlike that of the E-5, GH3, or GH4.  Of course, my E-1's rear display couldn't be reversed either, but that came with a plastic screen protector and of course, didn't have touch capabilities.

The E-M1 does not seem to sip battery power, and my first experiences with the camera body was that I would run out of power early, and end up being a door stop, and I would have to get the E-5 out of the bag.  As the battery is small, so is the grip.  I have acclimated to the E-M1's grip, but it can be uncomfortable coming from a dSLR, unlike the GH3 and GH4 grip.

Using each body, I find myself referring to every SLR, all the way back to my first Fujica SLR but focusing on the Olympus E-1, my first dSLR, which felt instantly intuitive.  The GH3 and GH4 have the drive mode selector on the left shoulder of the top plate.  I feel it might be better to have exposure controls there, including ISO and exposure compensation.

As well, Olympus should have done something similar with the E-M1, assigning it to aperture control rather than having the front dial assigned to exposure compensation.  It was uncomfortable moving to the E-M1 from the E-5, and there are still times when it has been unintuitive, making for accidental changes that I didn't want.

I could hope that all companies come to use a standardized menu interface, but it feels that it won't happen any time soon.  Olympus' Super Control Panel is really amazing, and Panasonic's Quick Menu is satisfactory.  The regular menu systems are the opposite with Panasonic's being more easily navigated, in contrast to those from Olympus (8 levels within the Tools Menu, seriously, Olympus?).  The extra video options on the GH4 should make professional people working in video happier.

I've recorded a few videos and it went well.  Outdoors, it looked very real in 1080p, much like some documentary.  Indoors, there was a similar feel, even though it wasn't extremely bright.  Having been at the skate shop and their half pipe a couple of weeks earlier with the E-M1, I was surprised at how responsive and accurate the GH4 was.  I used the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 lens in both cases.

Checking the photos and videos later, I was so pleased that the focus was great, surprisingly great.  The photos and videos looked as though there was much more light than what the E-M1 had.

While I was taking video, I tapped the shutter release a couple of times and ended up finding two JPEG files.  I need to analyze them further, but they were taken at unfortunate times and I wouldn't be able to use them.

There was a problem for me finding the button for video recording, but even when I left my thumb on it, I wasn't always able to start or stop recording when I expected.  It's recessed to avoid accidental use.  I'm sure I'll become acclimated to it eventually.  I was thinking that it might be better if the video capture button was near the shutter release--in the front.

Many people value image stabilization and it may save me at some time.  I haven't noticed that it works or not, whether it's in a lens or working the sensor platform.  With the GH4 (and previously, the GH3) and 12-40mm f/2.8, I have no image stabilization, and I don't see any problem.  I finally bought a tripod about a year ago, and I've used it so few times.  When photographing sports in lower light situations, what will help other than more lighting?

At ISO 3200, you probably don't want to use the photos as your best work but from what I've seen, that could also be the story for APS-C and 135 Format sized sensors, as well, except for a very select few that include ISO sensitivity at 102,400 or greater.  Regardless, film didn't do so well at ISO 3200--or 1600 or 1000.

Panasonic GH3 Pros:

• 1080p image quality and video format/bit rate flexibility
• Video industry support
• Grip comfort and battery life
• Multiple function buttons
• 5 custom sets--3 positions on mode dial
• Fully-articulated rear display
• Silent mode

Panasonic GH4 Pros:

• Lower light auto focus ability and responsiveness
• 4K/C4K video
• Video industry support
• Video format/bit rate flexibility
• Grip comfort and battery life
• Improved EVF over that of the GH3
• Multiple function buttons
• 5 custom sets--3 positions on mode dial
• Fully-articulated rear display
• Manual focus magnification mode
• 1/8000 of a second shutter speed
• Silent mode

Olympus E-M1 Pros:

• 5-axis image stabilization
• Electronic ViewFinder clarity
• Button feature set toggle switch
• Responsiveness
• Phase Detection pixels for tracking, and PDAF with Four-Thirds lenses
• Effective Face detection
• 1/8000 of a second shutter speed

I appreciate the Olympus E-M1 and Panasonic GH4 equally.  The extra money for the GH4 is consistent with its extra functionality and ease of use.  While I felt a bit betrayed by Olympus for the mess they created after the E-1 (Four-Thirds) body was released, the E-M1 is a very good camera body on its own, but with micro Four-Thirds lenses.  10 fps (E-M1) vs 12 fps (GH4)?  They both work really well.  I've seen plenty of reviews that say that none of these bodies are good for sports but I get my shots, though the GH3 made it much tougher and caused me to return to the E-5 dSLR in many cases.  The only real problem is the lack of wonderful lenses but Olympus is working on that.

The GH3 should be a great body for anyone who is interested in high quality 1080p video, with still photography on the side.  The price has come down quite a bit and it's a good compromise, especially with the fully-articulated rear display.  I was able to get some good architectural photos at a very low angle, thanks to it.

I'm not even sure that the E-M1's video capabilities have improved over the E-5 and without the fully-articulated rear display, it's not nearly as flexible.  Still photography is its domain and for the size of both the body and the system's lenses, I doubt there is a better compromise.

That said, the E-M1 is now the second most used body in my bag, rather than the E-5.  I doubt that will change once I'm more accustomed to the GH4.  It is both supremely comfortable and it's extremely capable.  The little problems I had with the GH3 seem to have been fixed.

Update 2014.12.13: I've found that the GH4 and E-M1 really automatically focus micro Four-Thirds lenses well (although there is an odd performance issue between the E-M1 and 35-100mm f/2.8).  I'm seeing mixed results with my Four-Thirds lenses.  The E-M1 and 50mm f/2.0 macro are a great match.  The E-M1 works better with the 50mm lens than any other body, including the Olympus E-1 and E-5.  I need to really plan and test, but my 2004 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 wasn't very good with the E-M1.  I suspect that Olympus only tested with the SWD version.  It seemed that it worked well with the GH4.

As I'd found when I was using the GH3, auto focus was better with my Four-Thirds lenses than with the E-1 in low or ordinary light.  My E-1 may have had a problem with auto focus, though it seemed okay in bright light.  The E-5 is still faster with Four-Thirds lenses than the GH4, GH3, or E-M1, except with the 50mm macro.  The 14-35mm f/2.0 is often a pain with auto focus but usally works reasonably well even with the GH4 and E-M1.

Update 2014.12.26: The GH4, as with the GH3, often focuses on something else entirely than what I put in the focus area.  It often finds a fence way behind the person I want to photograph.  Apparently, face detection is not useful.

Update 2014.12.30: Panasonic Face Detection asks me to register a face when I try to use it.  If this happens every time I need to use it, it's going to be a pain.  I hope it works beautifully.

I shot some 4K video the other day.  I tried to pass it through the Sony 4K-upscaling Blu-Ray player and it wouldn't handle it.  Maybe, it didn't like the file format.  I need to transfer to a USB stick and feed it directly through the TV's port.  That works.

Still having more fun/frustration with the auto focus.  It seems to randomly lose focus in the middle of what I'm shooting.  For a professional, it shouldn't be a problem since they won't likely be using auto focus at all--or the native lenses that suppose auto focus.  I'm learning, although, I'm looking at lenses that aren't native or those which won't have an electronic interface.

Update 2015.01.20: I went to take some portraits.  I'm not a portrait photographer but the E-M1 is quite good, partly because of face detection.  Focus rarely fails.  I really need to set up face detection on the GH4 to see how it works with the 35-100mm f/2.8 lens.

I keep wondering about the value of Panasonic going it alone with their DFD technology only working on their lenses.  They need to work with Olympus for the sake of the format.  On the other hand, I've noticed the slower performance between the 35-100mm f/2.8 on the E-M1 versus the GH3 or GH4.

Update 2015.02.09: The GH4 continues to impress in most cases.  The auto focus is still a bit inaccurate (focusing on the fence behind a person rather than the person where the single focus point is place) and it would be better if it worked better with Olympus lenses since the premium Panasonic lenses are generally only adequate.  That said, I bought the Panasonic/Lumix/Leica 15mm f/1.7 lens the other day.  It has the typical purple fringing that seems to define Panasonic lenses but AF is almost always accurate.

I took a trip down south to San Diego and the LA/OC area, photographing at skate parks, both still and video.  I also used the GH4 and Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 at a small concert venue and it performed very well, and I managed to hold it fairly still.  Even though I was close to the speaker, it recorded the sound very well, and the video was good.

I bought some new USB drives, with USB 3.0 speed and copied the 4K video files onto one of them.  After connecting it to the USB 3.0 port on the TV, I didn't really see improved performance.  I'm just not sure the problem is with the TV or the GH4, given that they cost me about the same amount of money.  There was something in Panasonic's latest firmware for the GH4 that mentioned improved playback of 4K files but I figured that it was for the rear display or the viewfinder.

Update 2015.12.11: Things have changed a bit in a year.  The Panasonic GX8 and Nikon D7200 have moved the E-5 out of my current tools.  In many ways, I have regretted buying the E-5. Until the GH4 or E-M1, there was no incredibly-usable alternative for my Four-Thirds lenses.

I looked at jumping to Nikon instead of buying the E-5 but the price of lenses was so significant that I hesitated, and the D300 was looking old in 2011.  Since I now have the D7200, I'm not sure a Nikon body would have made me feel really good about the switch.  While I get good image quality from the D7200, it isn't a clear difference over the E-M1 and GH4.  It also doesn't work as well in lower light conditions.

The GX8 works in most conditions as well as the GH4 and E-M1.  It's really small and the battery has about the same capacity as the E-M1, which isn't much.  Since the rear display isn't exposed, that should save a bit of battery life.  I have three batteries, as I have for the E-M1, versus two for the GH4.

I still pull out the GH4 first, as I've created over 120 videos in the last 12 months, mostly from video clips shot at skate parks.  The GX8 has become a good companion to the GH4 for video.  I used the E-M1 so much in a year that I had to have the shutter replaced, as I had apparently exceeded the 150,000 actuations.  At 10 frames per second, that isn't difficult to do.

Almost all of my equipment is still weather-sealed and the GX8 adds to that.  One of my most-used lenses, the Panasonic/Leica 15mm f/1.7 lens is not.

Update 2016.11.24: Almost two years from when I got the GH4, I'm pleased to use it the most.  I have over 100 videos on YouTube and appreciate the body's size and weight and battery life.  The GX8 is fine at times but the grip doesn't quite match my hands, even if it's better than the E-M1's grip.  Battery life for the E-M1 and GX8 are fairly bad.

I got rid of the Nikon stuff.  It was marginally better with the lenses I had.  Finding weather-sealed lenses was a major problem.  Some of the lenses had a fluorine-coated front lens element and that was the extent to the weather-resistance.  That's sadly amusing.  You can depend on FujiFilm and Pentax for APS-C systems with clearly marked "WR" weather-resistant lenses.  Sigma Sport line lenses are also weather-resistant.

The Olympus E-M1 has been succeeded with a Mk II model that is superior in most every way.  The price is the sticking point for many people.  In an era of almost zero inflation, the E-M1 Mk II is US$300 than Olympus dSLR flagships and something like US$700 more than the E-M1 was at launch.  It feels as though the extensive AF grid will make it worth the extra $300 over what I expected and the dual card slots, articulated rear display, and more show real value.  It's still a difficult price if you're moving from the E-5 dSLR, especially when the Panasonic GH4 feels so much better.

I'm glad to be using micro Four-Thirds for exactly what the reviews say isn't easily possible--sports.  I don't know how other people photograph sports, but what I've seen people show me needs to be improved.  For American Football, they can keep their Nikon D5.  It's obvious that it works well.

Panasonic GH4 is in my bag

It's just before Thanksgiving Day in the U.S.A. and the sales are all over the place.  One of the national broadcasters mentioned that electronics would be cheaper before Black Friday, and cameras and other photographic equipment generally falls into line with electronics.

I read that Panasonic has reduced the price of the GH4 by $200.  Adorama, B&H Photo, and Mike's Camera (Colorado and California) have said that this is an instant rebate.  Mike's Camera ended this instant rebate on November 26th--today.

I braved holiday traffic to drive 30+ miles to buy the camera body.  I met with a salesperson with whom I'd previously talked.  I asked about the body, and he checked their web site, and I bought it, even using my extra battery from my GH3 to try it.  (My battery appeared to be fully charged, even though I traded my GH3 in early June.  That makes it almost six months since it was charged.)

At $1499.99, the body is somewhat more reasonable for me, and it's the same price I paid for my Olympus E-5.  That also makes it less than half the price of the Canon 5D MkIII, its nearest (hybrid) competitor in the business.  Well, actually, the 5D MkIII was the competitor of the GH3, and the expanded 4K capabilities and high bit rates at 1080p add to the differences between the GH4 and the 5D MkIII, above those between the 5D MkIII and the GH3.

The salesperson mounted an Olympus 25mm f/1.8 lens, so I could check the body.  The lens seemed almost tiny, though not as small as the 15mm f/1.7 approved by Leica, designed and made by Panasonic especially for the GM1/GM5.  The image through the viewfinder seemed improved (it has over double the density) over my memory of the GH3.  I didn't notice that much difference from the E-M1 I use regularly, or from my memory of the FujiFilm X-T1.

I used my sunglasses briefly, explaining about the blackout problem that I had with the GH3, and I currently have with the E-M1 on occasion.  It only happened on occasion, but it happened enough that muscle memory was my only way around it with the GH3.  I'm guessing that it may still occur.  Perhaps, switching to polarized sunglasses may help.  It isn't a problem with optical viewfinders.

Of course, it took a few minutes to find settings to change, to try to personalize it similarly to my GH3.  I was pleased to see many video additions in the menus, bringing up the professional specification.  I can't say enough how great it is that the GH3 and GH4 have 5 slots for settings.  I only used two slots with the GH3 and that might be the same with the GH4, although I'll be more focused on video this time, so I might use more.

The most wonderful thing about the GH4 is the instant familiarity.  Panasonic wisely chose to keep ergonomic choices almost all the same.  They added a lock to the mode button, something it has in common with the E-M1--and the Olympus E-1 from way back when.

I just checked the What Digital Camera (my go-to magazine) review for the GH4 and E-M1 and they said that the design of the GH4 was an 85 and the E-M1, 95.  In the text, they complained about the GH4 having so many buttons but appreciated the dSLR-like design.  Strangely, everyone else seems to like that you don't have to dig through menus, and the Panasonic menus are a bit less extreme than those of Olympus.  The magazine has had a complete change of staff and they seem to work toward advertisers more than 10 years ago.  89% for the GH4 vs 92% for the E-M1 isn't a huge difference.  However, I would say that, given Olympus' poor video performance and uncomfortable grip, the two are equal at least.

One of the bigger issues for me with the E-M1 was the combination of the small battery and small, angular grip.  Now that I have 3 batteries for the E-M1, I don't run out of power early, but I don't use it nearly as long as I used my dSLRs, so I'm still concerned.

With the GH3, I never had a problem where I exhausted both batteries during a long day of shooting.  Since the battery is so much bigger than that of the E-M1, there is definitely a difference.  Getting battery grips for each won't help much, as either grip only holds an extra battery, though they might help with using my Four-Thirds 35-100mm f/2.0 (3.64 lbs./1650g) lens.  I was never happy with that balance on the GH3 and I've never bothered to try it for more than a few minutes with the E-M1.  Of course, with the tripod collar attached to a tripod, the balance issue goes away.  Naturally, this was never a problem with the Olympus E-5, which is only as big as the Nikon D7100.

When mounting the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 lens outside the store, I found that the lens operated at full speed again, in contrast to its performance on the E-M1.  I had not used it significantly since the Panasonic Repair Facility had checked it.  The few times I tried it with the E-M1, the frame rate was significantly slower than Olympus' 12-40mm lens, which made no sense, since it was very fast on the GH3.  This makes the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 lens important for the E-M1.  I expect that the color from the lens will be equally better over the 35-100mm f/2.8 as the 12-40mm f/2.8 was.  I thought that there was a problem with the GH3, until I used the 12-40mm f/2.8 on it.  It should be interesting to see how fast the frame rate of the GH4 will be with the 40-150mm f/2.8 lens.

I'm hoping to try some skate park video soon, using the 12-40mm f/2.8 lens.  I don't know much about video but I took a few with the GH3.  I don't have an enhanced speed card to handle 4K video but learning how to handle video is more important at this time.  Responsiveness with my current SanDisk Extreme Pro card seemed much better than with the GH3.

Oh, and concerning the bag, I'm afraid that I've got to re-distribute equipment again to emphasize the smaller equipment, though I still want to use my Four-Thirds lenses through the adapter.  I hope Crumpler has something appropriate.

Update 2014.11.28: Ouch!  The firmware needs to be updated and for some reason, I'm unable to update it for various reasons.

First, the U.S. Panasonic web site ends up with only a Windows executable when I open the .zip file I've downloaded.  Perhaps, I didn't see a Macintosh-related link or the web site incorrectly detected that everyone uses Windows.

I used the Japanese web site that I'd used for the GH3 and that seemed to give me the correct file, but the camera body doesn't recognize that there is an update available when I go through the procedure.  I'm sure I'll be fine with firmware version 1.1 instead of 2.0, for a while anyway, but whatever.  Panasonic continues to be an administrative screw up.  What was downloaded was labeled AH4 instead of GH4.  I got something different tonight, and have updated my GH4.

Taking the GH4 and 35-100mm f/2.8 to the skate park, it performed well, but not with as much performance as expected.  (Continuous AF is enabled by default.)  Auto Focus accuracy was acceptable, similar to the GH3.  I'll try it with the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 at a later date.  It didn't feel as fast or responsive as the Olympus E-M1 and 12-40mm f/2.8.  Auto Review is also enabled, which not only slows things down, as it does with the GH3, but it's also a battery waster.

Update 2014.12.01: I ordered a 4K-capable SD card from Adorama.  It's interesting that these cards were UHS-I, class 10, U 3.  Do I need such a card right now?  Probably not, but having dedicated for-video storage would be a good idea, especially on those days when I've been busy taking still photos.  I'm a little short on cards now that I have three bodies that take SD Cards.

I had a chance to buy a higher capacity SanDisk card but, after viewing several descriptions of the card, I couldn't determine the exact performance.  One mentioned 95 MB/sec., while others mentioned 60 MB/sec. and 80 MB/sec.  They were also labeled Extreme or Extreme Plus because the company changed the name at some point.

Update 2014.12.07: Part of my order was not readily available, so I ended up at Best Buy getting a 4K-capable card.  It was about the same price for 32GB as Adorama had for 64GB.  That's not the worst I've seen.  At least, it's a SanDisk card.  They had the Extreme and Extreme Plus cards, but this one is labeled Pixtor.  I've barely used it for anything.  I thought that the card would enable 4K options immediately, but that happens through the Creative Video mode on the mode dial.  Getting past the GH3 is taking time.

I'm impressed with how responsive the GH4 has been, especially in low(er) light.  I went to a skate shop with an indoor half pipe, and shot both still photos and video.  I was there a few weeks earlier and the E-M1 struggled with the 12-40mm f/2.8 lens but the GH4 didn't seem to have any problem at all.  That doesn't mean that it's great in the dark.  It isn't.  I could use more lenses at f/1.4 or wider than my older Leica/Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 from the Four-Thirds system.

The Voigtländer lenses look good.  There is a 10.5mm f/0.95 that should be available soon (okay, officially Q1-Q2 2015), and that is wide enough to get skate park shots easily, and should be good for sharp landscape shots at a less aggressive aperture.  Is US$1000 or more too much for a manually focused lens?  It depends on your wallet, of course, and whether you can make money from it.  The other three (17.5mm, 25mm, 42.5mm) have all been rated well and many people are satisfied with what they do.

Update 2014.12.31: The Panasonic card is flaky and has had general errors in both the GH4 body and the computer SD Card slot.  Almost naturally, the SanDisk card isn't a problem--I've had to have one replaced in the past, but only one.

I'm having some struggles learning the GH4.  I'm not finding it as instantly familiar as I thought I would--or at least, I'm not as successful with it as I had hoped.  As I go further with it, I'm finding little issues.  The drive mode dial has been accidentally moved.  The burst mode position is adjacent to a +/- burst mode position that allows you to take bracketed auto exposure photos.  For instance, it will take photos at -1/3 EV, +0 EV, +1/3 EV, much like HDR preparations.  Your bracketing settings will affect the latitude of the exposure range.  It is useful, although there have been times when I was getting a series of shots and naturally, it stops at three and the action continues without me.  Yes, I should be more aware of my settings.  I'm sure I saw it in the viewfinder and didn't really notice as the +/- didn't seem so significantly distinct.

The GH4 is so capable that it could be 6 months before I'm really comfortable.  It's been a little over a month that I've had it now, so getting casual photos are easy but action photos are usually more involved.  I've basically given up the use of the E-M1 to get up to speed with the GH4.

2015.01.09: The auto focus still isn't everything it should be, with continuous auto focus or not.  During video, it will lose focus completely, which is a great effect that people like, except that it will do it at the wrong time.  That's not unlike the Olympus E-M1.  Maybe, the 12-40mm f/2.8 isn't feeling well.  I was using the 35-100mm f/2.8 the other day and I noticed that the auto focus on the GH4 was similar to the E-M1, lower performing burst speed, but with better AF accuracy.

2016.12.07: It's been over two years since I got the GH4.  I've got over 100 videos on YouTube.  Most are skate park videos but I have some music performances and random things, also.  The camera itself does a very good job, except for AF.

I've got a number of Panasonic lenses and it loses focus on those, as well as while using the Olympus lenses.  It just seems too busy to bother with auto focus duties, but in this price range, it shouldn't have such a problem.  I'm not asking it to track someone.  I want it to focus on the single area I select while I move the camera.  It has predictive focus--it's always busy.

I'm still learning.  I've been learning to do time lapse photography because I wanted to try some shots while driving, to condense little road trips as I've seen someone else do.

Since the GH4, I've bought the GX8 and GM5.  The GX8 has very good 1080p video which matches what I get from the GH4, and that is so useful at skate parks since I'll have the 35-100mm f/2.8 on one and the 12-35mm f/2.8 on the other.  The E-M1 doesn't come close and I suspect that the GM5 won't match either.

The GH5 should be released in spring.  What the whole feature set is, no one outside Panasonic knows, and I'm not certain even they know at this point.  3840x2160 at 60p is one of the few things that are guaranteed to be included.  They've shown mockups of the body and it's agreeable, but nothing is much different.

The new sensor may be 18MP or 20MP, but they're not saying.  The new Olympus E-M1 Mk II has a 20MP sensor with 121 cross type AF points--both PDAF and CDAF.  Many speculate that they will use a lot of the same equipment in the GH5.