Did this coupon
work for you?
work for you?
Popular
(open box) Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III Mirrorless Digital Camera with M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f/4 IS PRO Lens $2199 + free s.g at Adorama
If you purchase something through a post on our site, Slickdeals may get a small share of the sale.
Recommended Deal Alerts For You
What are Deal Alerts?
Want more deals like this?
Create a deal alert for Cameras.
Add Deal Alert for Cameras
More Tech & Electronics Deals & Discounts
View AllFrontpage
$299
(In-Store Only, Select Locations)
82
133
Frontpage
$299
& More + Free S/H
50
63
Popular
Frontpage
$13.70
w/ Subscribe & Save
49
61
Frontpage
$699
+ Free Shipping
52
73
45 Comments
Your comment cannot be blank.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
True but I bet the difference in image quality between your phone and m43 is much more noticeable than it is from m43 to full frame
i do own a number of olympus lens, about 8 or 9 total, i have most of their premium prime lens and some F1.2 pros, i don't own their F4 lens so maybe that's different. but at least between kit lens, F 1.8 premium and F1.2 pro lens, if you pixel peeping, then maybe, but most times it actually is very close for the same aperture. (but obviously no one buys F1.8 or F1.2 and use it only for F4)
you could also head to DXO mark and check out their measurements. the P-pixel count is actually quite close.
do i wish i can see huge difference between the kit 14-45 lens vs 1000 dollar 17mm F1.2 to justify the spending? heck yes, but in actuality the difference isn't that ground shuttering under the same condition.
Try setting that 14-45 to f1.2... Getting good IQ at that aperture is where the money goes. If you don't care about 1.2 then sure, no big difference, although the corner sharpness of the kit lenses is very different from what you get from a Pro lens. Between the 1.2 and 1.7/1.8 there is almost no diff.
that said, the brand new EM1 M3 is about 1499. so you paying extra 600 for the 12-100 F4. whether that's worth to you or not is debatable. all olympus lens are actually really good, even the el cheapo 99 dollar 45-150 lens or the 14-45 kit lens. so the benefit of constant aperture lens only truly worth it if you do serious videography, as you can have constant ISO for that smooth pan and zoom.
I agree though, this deal is not really slick.
They are going for about $500 used.
My daily carry lens is the Olympus 17mm 1.8mm, which is perfect for street photography, impromptu photos. But I am finding it isn't wide enough, and sometimes I need more flexibility when out with friends.
Does 2.8 on M43 still provide enough bokeh?
They are going for about $500 used.
My daily carry lens is the Olympus 17mm 1.8mm, which is perfect for street photography, impromptu photos. But I am finding it isn't wide enough, and sometimes I need more flexibility when out with friends.
Does 2.8 on M43 still provide enough bokeh?
Bokeh is a measure of how nice the out-of-focus areas look. Sometimes, there is a bit of a trade-off between sharpness and bokeh. It comes down to other factors too, like distance between your subject and background, how busy the background is, etc. In other words, the lens is Okeh for Bokeh. Not "feathered" like the f1.2s, or "character" like the Voigtlaenders, but not horrible either.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
They are going for about $500 used.
My daily carry lens is the Olympus 17mm 1.8mm, which is perfect for street photography, impromptu photos. But I am finding it isn't wide enough, and sometimes I need more flexibility when out with friends.
Does 2.8 on M43 still provide enough bokeh?
i assume you have the kit 14-42 mm lens? keep in mind that 12 is just slightly wider than 14. if 14 doesn't work, 12 won't work either. i have the 9-18, and i really think you need to go under 10mm for any actual wide angle shot. human eye is about 17mm (or 8mm for MFT) for reference.
The Oly 12-100 is much better built than the Tamy, plus it start at 24mm equiv which IME does result in a significant wider angle than 28mm. Not sure about IQ.
The OMD has a lot of features over the Sony, like focus bracketing, excellent IBIS, better ergonomics, high-res shooting (tripod and even hand-held), ND filter for smooth waterfalls, Star AF, lossless compressed RAW, and many more.
But, since FF cameras (and lenses) have come down in price, size and weight, it's a challenging decision. Comes down to what you specifically prioritize in your shooting habits. IMO m43 excels in Wildlife/Sports/Macro/Street, while FF wins in low-light, landscape, portrait. Of course one can do anything with either system.
i assume you have the kit 14-42 mm lens? keep in mind that 12 is just slightly wider than 14. if 14 doesn't work, 12 won't work either. i have the 9-18, and i really think you need to go under 10mm for any actual wide angle shot. human eye is about 17mm (or 8mm for MFT) for reference.
Bokeh is a measure of how nice the out-of-focus areas look. Sometimes, there is a bit of a trade-off between sharpness and bokeh. It comes down to other factors too, like distance between your subject and background, how busy the background is, etc. In other words, the lens is Okeh for Bokeh. Not "feathered" like the f1.2s, or "character" like the Voigtlaenders, but not horrible either.
Thanks Sean, yeah I had the 14-42 in my drawer. It looks like 14mm is still not wide enough for me. oh well, I guess that's the difficulty with M43 (wide end)
Thanks Sean, yeah I had the 14-42 in my drawer. It looks like 14mm is still not wide enough for me. oh well, I guess that's the difficulty with M43 (wide end)
Two weeks ago I handed this camera to a 13 year old kid who has never shot a video clip before to capture me doing something and the focus and stabilization were both spot on. I love that I could hand this to a kid, tell him where to point it, and the camera takes care of everything else.
This is truly an underrated camera.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.