OM Systems OM-5. Ho hum.....

Despite my recent (and not so recent) plethora of posts on the Sony a-mount, I am still an Olympus micro four thirds shooter. My camera is the venerable Olympus E-M1, with a couple of Panasonic kit lenses. So I am, to a certain extent, invested in the Olympus micro four thirds eco-system (although for how much longer I'm not too sure).

Earlier this year, OM System - Olympus' new owners - introduced their flagship model, the OM-1. There was, of course, much wailing and gnashing of teeth from the internet trolls who hated on the camera. But honestly, I thought it was a pretty solid release and a worthy successor to the E-M1 line. I wrote about it in a blogpost here.

Now, towards the end of 2022, OM System have introduced their second camera to the fold - the OM-5 (surprise, surprise).

Unlike the OM-1, which still bares the Olympus name on the front, the OM-5 is the first to be branded with OM System. And fair enough too.

But apart from this visual clue as to change of ownership, what else have OM System done to the existing E-M5 Mk3 that it replaces in the lineup?

Well, not much - at all - if we are being brutally honest.

Other than the name-change, the OM-5 and E-M5 Mk3 bodies are exactly the same. Nothing has changed. Same design and button layout, same sensor, same AF system. Same battery. Same accessories. Same-old same-old. It even has the old menu system and doesn't benefit from the upgraded menu that appeared in the OM-1. Bugger!

Ok, perhaps I'm being a little disingenuous (maybe)? It does have a new image processor - the same one as in the E-M1 Mk3, which allows for some extra computational power not before seen in the E-M5s. This includes Starry Sky AF, hand-held hi-res shooting and built-in 4 stop Live ND (the E-M1 Mk3 with the same processor can do 5 stops).

The OM-5 also has better weather resistance than the E-M5 Mk3 - with the same IP53 rating as the OM-1, as well as slightly better (as in 15% better) image stabilisation. But really, for the OM-5's target market, the weather sealing and image stabilisation was perfectly adequate as it was. Still, a little better is preferable I guess?

In a nutshell, the new OM-5 is an E-M5 Mk3 with Starry Sky AF, hand-held hi-res mode and a 4-stop Live ND. Yawn...

Unfortunately it could have been (and I would argue should have been) so much more! Where's the upgraded menu system already incorporated into the OM-1? It would have been such a simple thing to implement. Why not dual card slots (finally) in a 5 series camera? Or a joystick controller on the rear of the camera? Do something to make it look like you tried to give us a different camera!

But no. It really does feel (and look) like OM System really couldn't be bothered. Which is sad. And a little worrying.

Look, I appreciate that this has felt like a bit of a dump on OM System. And maybe it is? But I don't do it simply to be mean. I'm rooting for them. Really, I am. And I thought that their OM-1 was an excellent introduction - I really did. The OM-5 though.... not so much.

If this is your first ever OM System (Olympus) micro four thirds camera, then you'll absolutely love it! And please don't get me wrong, it will be a great camera. But if you were looking to upgrade from the E-M5 Mk3, then the OM-5 isn't the camera for you. A lightly used OM-1 would be a far better upgrade path. Or even a new E-M1 Mk3. That would be where I would put my money.

OM Solutions Olympus OM-1 'Wow' camera - my thoughts

I feel sorry for OM Solutions (Olympus). I really do. But actually, I feel sorry for all the camera manufacturers releasing new camera models in this day and age. OM Solutions just happens to be the latest example in a long line of recent examples. And I'll tell you why...

There is an old expression - I don't know whether you've heard it - that goes: "They were on a hiding to nothing." Basically what this means is that, no matter what they released, they were going to get hate. I guess that also goes together with a more recent saying; "Haters are gonna hate."

Maybe, it could be argued, that OM Solutions (at least their marketing division) didn't help themselves by building this release up to be their 'Wow' camera. But did they really have a choice? They were hardly going to market the first release of their 'flagship' camera by calling it their new 'A bit better' camera!

And yet, as soon as it was officially released (and for weeks prior), the haters were already wading in with what was disappointing or wrong with the camera. And this includes some of the Olympus faithful! Since it's official release on Feb 15th, I've seen numerous posts on-line by people who have said "That's it. I'm selling all my Olympus gear. I'm done." Or words to that effect. Geez Louise! This camera must really suck!? Or does it?

Spec's wise, let's have a quick look, shall we?

For a start, it has a new 20MP quad-pixel AF stacked CMOS sensor with 1053 cross-type AF points and blackout-free shooting up to 50fps with AF and AE - 120fps with AF and AE locked! Wow! What is not impressive about that people?

Okay, okay - yeah I get it. It's only 20MP. I got news for you buddy - you, yes YOU. 20MP is more than enough for 99% of photographers. Period. 20MP is more than enough for large billboards. 20MP is more than enough for weddings, portraits and landscapes. 20MP is more than enough for your Instagram feed and your Facebook page. It just is. If you feel inferior, and have convinced yourself that you need 40+ megapixels, then micro four thirds was never for you in the first place. Seriously! Go and buy a full frame camera for heaven's sake. Go on... off you go...

For the rest of us mere mortals, the new 20MP stacked sensor in the OM-1 will do just fine. Actually more than just fine. And if you really want to capture more pixels, then have at it with Olympus's fantastic hi-res shooting mode, which has been significantly improved on the OM-1. Due to the new stacked sensor, and improved TruePic X Dual Quad Core processor, the OM-1 can now shoot 50MP resolution images handheld with less risk of subject movement between shots (7 seconds processing time vs 16 seconds on the E-M1 Mk3). It can also create an 80MP Tripod-mounted image as well. And it spits out a RAW image at the end of it all - not just a processed Jpeg.

Is that enough Wow for you? No? Well never mind - there's more...

The new OM-1 is one of the most weather sealed cameras in the world. Environmental sealing rated to IP53 (and no, I don't know what that actually means either. But trust me, it's a lot!). Want more? It has 7 stops of 5-axis  in-body image stabilisation, increased to an incredible 8 stops with a compatible lens. OM-D are also claiming an increased dynamic range over the E-M1 Mk3 of 2 stops (that alone is pretty impressive), and, of course, better low-light performance at higher ISO's (up to a boosted maximum of 102400).

It also has a new 5.76M dot OLED viewfinder with up to 0.83x magnification, a fully articulated 1.62M dot touchscreen, and a new menu system with a more Sony/Canonesque layout and configuration. The new battery is good for 500+ shots and will, of course, allow for a new battery grip to bring it up to the weight and size of a E-M1X.

I haven't even touched on it's new AI tracking capabilities and it's video specifications (4k 60p for 90 minutes, OM-Log - yadda, yadda, yadda).

And yet people aren't impressed.... The camera isn't 'wow' enough for them. They feel the desperate need to change systems. It's a disappointment. Not really an upgrade on what they have already... (insert other rants and moans here...). Are we not entertained?

And this is why I feel sorry for OM Solutions, and Canon, and Nikon, and Sony, and all other manufacturers who have released new products in the last few years. Who remembers the internet loosing it's mind over only one card slot in the Nikon Z6 and Z7? Or the overheating at 8k with the Canon R5? Every time a new camera model is released, the interwebs are awash with haters and nay-sayers just waiting to pounce and declare their crushing disappointment in X, Y or Z.

What a bunch of winging, moaning, self-important, self-entitled, hyper-critical, technology obsessed, narcissistic, over-opinionated a**holes we've become! Just who the hell do we think we are?

All of these cameras are phenomenal achievements in design and technology. And all we can do is bitch and moan about them. I watched a Youtuber the other day describe a single card slot in a camera as a 'deal-breaker' for him, since he shoots weddings. Really? A deal-breaker? So what, may I ask did people shoot weddings with 10 years ago when there were NO camera's with two card slots?

Ok, yes, I get that we have 'moved' on, and we do now have cameras with two card slots. If you feel better shooting a wedding with two card slots in your camera, then by all means, go for it. But a 'deal-breaker'. Really? C'mon. 

Personally, I think that today's cameras are actually a bit too good. A bit too feature-packed and technology laden. Where can they really go from here? How could OM Solutions have made the OM-1 any more 'Wow' than it already is? And before you answer that - think seriously (and I do mean seriously) about what you actually need for your photography.

AI and 'computational' photography are the new buzzwords for the future of our hobby/profession. But at what stage does it then stop being about photography and become more about computer programming?

I, for one, don't need the OM-1. And probably wouldn't use a tenth of it's features if I had one. To me it really is a WOW camera. And so is the Nikon Z9, and the Sony a9, and the Canon R5 etc... Just like most people probably don't use even 1/10th of the functionality in their phones. And yet they will 'upgrade' to a new one every other year. Heck - even my current E-M1 Mk1 is still a WOW camera, and does all I need it to without breaking a sweat.

I suspect that these people who 'need' the latest gear, and who complain the loudest whenever a new camera is released, are actually lousy photographers, who simply want to own the 'greatest' gear as a status symbol. Not for any creative endeavors. Heaven forbid they would actually use the gear to take any photos with!

Having said that, I've also seen plenty of posts on-line from people who have pre-ordered the OM-1, and who are genuinely excited about the new camera. Good on them. I'm sure they will be very happy with their new gear. I lusted after the EM1x when it first came out, and I certainly wouldn't say no if one was handed to me. But I'm also not about to go on any forums and slag it off just because it's bigger than it should be, or doesn't do this, that, or the other.

To stay in business, camera manufacturers must release new product. And said new product must be 'better' than last years model. I get that. But have we almost come to the point where they actually can't get much better? Where photography gives way to electrical engineering and computational physics? As Kodak once famously said. "You push the button, we do the rest."

Losing my landscape mojo

A few posts ago I talked about my general lack of interest in taking photos over the past couple of years, and how this might be turning around with macro photography. Hoping that this macro passion might re-kindle my excitement in general, I decided to head out last evening to photograph the sunset at my local beach. In years gone by, an outing such as this would have got me very enthused and eager to be out with camera in hand. Every sunrise and sunset was a photo opportunity, and I could get rather grumpy if I missed capturing a beautiful sunset.

Wind-sprayed waves, Cobden beach. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/200th, ISO 400

The signs for a colourful sunset looked promising, although the wind was very strong on the exposed beach. Not great for setting up a tripod and trying to keep a camera still - but excellent for capturing some fairly impressive wave spray!

I put the 45-150mm Panasonic on my E-M1 and racked it all the way out to 150mm to get as close to the spray as I could. The setting sun was back-lighting the waves perfectly and supplying enough light that I could hand-hold the camera in the wind and still get sharp images. The image stabilisation in the E-M1 (and Olympus cameras in general) is the best in the world, and is truly impressive. But image stabilisation won't correct subject movement, so a decently fast shutter speed was also required.

Washed up. Olympus E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8. f/5.6 @ 1/60th, ISO 200. + Polariser

I had headed down to my local beach for two reasons. One - it was close and I didn't have to travel far. And two - I knew the tide was going out and an old shipwreck that I'm fond of photographing would be revealed on the beach.

The wreck itself has broken into two sections. The image above is of the section that is higher up the beach and away from the water at low tide. I liked the deep red rust colour complementing the blue of the sky and the neutral grey of the beach pebbles, especially when using a polariser on the lens to intensify the blue of the sky. I'm attracted to old rusty machinery in the natural environment as a subject anyway (who isn't), so it was an obvious choice for a quick snap.

Cobden Beach Gold. E-M1 with 45-150mm. f/7.1 @ 1/160th, ISO 400

Then the sunset kicked-off. And boy, did it kick-off! The image above is NOT processed with extra colour vibrancy or saturation increase. That's really what it was like. Just the deepest, richest, golden-orange I've seen in the sky for quite a while. It was beautiful to witness, and yes, exciting to capture. I'm glad I was out, and glad that I got it on an SD card. Been there, done that...

Shipwreck at Sunset, Cobden beach. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/5.6 @ 1/60th, ISO 200

What I was really there to photograph - the shipwreck exposed in the water - was a tougher challenge than I had expected it to be. The 'low' tide didn't really go out far enough to get some long-exposure sea interaction happening, and this meant I couldn't really get close enough for the compositions I was after.

I took dozens of images, varying my angle to try and get what I wanted. The above image is the best I could do. It's OK, but really doesn't 'do' it for me.

And really, that's the feeling that I get from all the images I took that evening. When I got home to process them, I looked at them all in Lightroom and thought 'meh'. I practically had to force myself to process any of them. And the sunset was stunning! 

Am I losing my photography mojo? Finally. After all these years?

I turned my computer off in disgust, and went and had a shower. Hands up who does some of their most productive thinking in the shower? (Yes, I see those hands...). I think I've come to the conclusion that I haven't lost my passion for photography (I'm very keen to get underway with some macro fungi images), but that, after 20+ years living in the same place, I've finally lost interest in my local landscape locations.

I've probably photographed down at my local beach, local lake, local waterfall, local rocks, local (you get the idea) literally hundreds of times - and I'm just not that interested anymore. Even in great light.

I think that when I returned from my amazing photography holiday two years ago, where everything was new and exciting, and found myself back among the all-too familiar, I just lost interest. Familiarity really does sometimes breed contempt.

Which sounds terrible. And it partly is terrible. I'm so lucky, as a photographer, to live in such a beautiful, and accessible, part of the world. I should be grateful. And I am. Honest. But I am also (if I'm still being honest) a bit bored with my local landscapes. As landscapes.

Does that mean I'll stop taking local landscape photos? For a while probably - yeah. In fact, I've already practically stopped as it is. Does that mean I'll never take another local landscape image? No - course not. It just may be a while....

Messing around with macro

I've been on holiday for most of the start of January 2022 (yay!), spending time in Christchurch, house (and dog) sitting for my sister-in-law and her family. Since we were staying for a while, we took a lot of stuff with us (the golf clubs and trundler came), so I decided not to take both the Olympus and Sony camera systems I'm currently using.

I would have opted for the Sony a99 and 50mm macro - since I'm trying to make macro my new thing - but I also knew that I was going to get the opportunity to shoot a family portrait while we were over in Christchurch (of said sister-in-law's family). So I opted for the Olympus E-M1 with 12-35mm f2.8 instead.

Oh Bee-have! Olympus E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/4 @ 1/320th, ISO 200

The Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm has no psuedo-macro features like those found on the Olympus 12-50mm EZ lens, and it's closest focusing distance is only 25cm. So not a fantastic macro performer. All the photos you see in this post, taken on the 12-35mm, are severe crops from the original shot, so that the subject (the 2cm bee) can fill-the-frame. This means that the original 12 megapixel file gets reduced to only around 1 megapixel with the final crop. Not ideal. But good enough when viewed on-line. 

Hard at Work. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8. f/5 @ 1/640th, ISO 400

And I must say, that overall I'm very pleased with the final results (despite the small file size). I spent a very pleasant hour in a park in Rangiora, chasing bees around the flower gardens, and came away with some half-decent images. The E-M1 was quick to focus, using the central focusing point in single-autofocus mode, and simply firing away with reasonable shutter speeds, hoping to freeze the action (boy do bees move fast).

The original capture of the above crop is shown on the left, to give an indication of how much cropping has taken place. And yes, it is a lot. I'm not going to be printing any of these at  A3 (or probably even at A4) sizes anytime soon.

This is certainly one of the down-sides to using a smaller micro four thirds sensor with a 'standard' lens and trying to come up with decent 'macro' looking images. Really you're just hoping for an exceptionally sharp result that you can then blow up to exorbitant proportions and pass-off as a macro image.

Having said all that, as I commented earlier, I am reasonably happy with the results. The Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 is a very sharp lens, so if you nail focus you can expect some very good results. And the benefit of using a smaller micro four thirds sensor when close-focusing is the greater depth of field you get with smaller apertures. f/4 on the E-M1 gives an equivalent dof of f/8 with full-frame, but allows for the extra light, and faster shutter speeds. So that's a win.

'As busy as a....' Olympus E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/5 @ 1/1000th, ISO 400

To get the bee as sharp as possible from such a big enlargement, I've opted for some selective sharpening techniques (just on the in-focus areas of the bee itself). It's a simple technique, but I find it very effective. And the best thing about it is that it is infinitely controllable, and selective.

Duplicate the original image in Photoshop (Ctrl+J), and then apply a High Pass Filter on the duplicate layer (Filter/Other/High Pass) with a radius of about 2. The image with turn grey, with a faint embossed outline. This is what you want. The magic happens in the next two steps.

In the blending mode for the grey layer, choose either Hard Light or Vivid Light. Then add a layer mask and fill the mask with black. This effectively hides the sharpening that you've applied with the blending mode. Choose a soft brush, make sure that the colour is white, and then paint over the areas where you want to reveal the sharpening. You can build this sharpening up gradually over different areas by lowering the opacity of the brush, and you can also lower the opacity of the layer if you feel that the final result is still too strong? And there you go - a nice sharp bee without adding any sharpness or artifacts to the background.

Time for a rest. Sony a99 with Minolta 50mm macro. f/5 @ 1/640th, ISO 400

My final image was taken just recently, once we got back from our trip to Christchurch and were on a local bush walk. This time I did decide to take the Sony a99 and dedicated 50mm macro instead. 

The difference in file size is day and night. Because I was able to use the dedicated macro lens, and get in fairly close to the dragonfly, there is almost no cropping required from the original file. I could print this A3 no problem.

Unfortunately, it's a bit of a grab shot, and I used autofocus, which locked on to the dragonfly's back and didn't quite nail critical focus on the head. In that regards, it's a failure as a macro image. Using the 50mm macro on the full-frame camera has meant that I had to get in very close to the insect - too close for it's comfort - and it flew away fairly quickly. A 100mm macro would afford a little more 'breathing' space, and that's certainly what I would opt for if I was to get a dedicated macro lens for my E-M1 (the 60mm Olympus macro is a 120mm full-frame equivalent field of view).

Still, it's an ok image - especially when viewed on-line - and it's still all a learning curve for me and macro. I'm getting the feeling that you have to shoot A LOT of images just to nail one or two keepers, especially when small flying insects are involved!?

All-in-all some OK early attempts, and lots of learning for the future. That's got to be worth my while wouldn't you say?

Possible gear for macro

In my last post I discussed my recently discovered enthusiasm for fungi (and therefore macro) photography. I also mentioned that I had briefly dabbled in this very genre last year - first with the Sony a99 and then with my Olympus OM-D E-M1.

Fungi photography with the Olympus OM-D E-M1

I still have both systems available to me, so now that I have decided to pursue this style of photography a bit more seriously in 2022, I have a few decisions to make around the type of gear I will need going forward.

First option is to stick with my micro four thirds system, and add to it, to cover macro photography. To do this 'seriously', I would be looking at purchasing the Olympus 60mm f2.8 macro lens.

By all accounts (I've never even held one), the M Zuiko 60mm macro lens is a stellar lens, offering waterproofing and 1:1 magnification. It certainly looks the part - is apparently tack sharp (I don't doubt it) - and would balance perfectly on my E-M1.

Olympus do offer a 30mm f3.5 macro lens as well, but it's not weather sealed, doesn't go to 1:1 magnification - and is a 60mm equivalent full-frame focal length, which isn't as conducive to shooting skittery insects (since you have to get physically closer with the lens). On the positive side, it's a bit cheaper than the 60mm ($450NZ for the 30mm and $600NZ for the 60mm) - but that seems to me to be the only real positive. I'd rather spend the extra for the 60mm (120mm full frame focal length equivalent) than 'settle' for the 30mm and wish I had the 60mm, especially if I am really serious about pursuing macro fungi photography.

The second option is to move to the Sony A-mount system, since I already have access to a 50mm macro for Sony A-mount (it's actually a Minolta AF lens), as well as a few other lenses. The Sony a99 I have at the moment is being borrowed from a friend, together with the 50mm macro, a fisheye, standard zoom and wide angle zoom - so I've got the lenses pretty well covered. I will have to give the a99 back at some stage, but I'm pretty sure I can keep the 50mm macro long-term, since I know the guy I borrowed it from also has a 100mm macro that he uses instead.

If I sold my E-M1 with all accessories and lenses, I could possibly get about $1k (maybe). With that sort of money I could pick up a used Sony SLT 65v or a55 and have a decent chunk of change left over for spare batteries and other accessories if required.

This option has some appeal, not withstanding the fact that the dedicated 50mm macro would get me up and running straight away with a macro lens. If I sold my Olympus gear, I would actually end up in the black, even after purchasing a Sony body. Whereas if I have to wait to be able to afford an Olympus 60mm lens - even secondhand (if one comes up for sale) - it will probably be 2024 before I can actually afford one! Damn...

There is, however, a third option. I already have the a-mount 50mm macro lens - why don't I just adapt it to fit the Olympus E-M1? A mount adapter like the one shown here, will cost me around $45NZ - and viola, a dedicated macro lens for my E-M1.

Yes, this means that the macro lens will be manual focus only - but that's par for the course with macro photography anyway. So no great loss there. And, when fitted to my micro four thirds camera, the Minolta 50mm macro lens becomes a 100mm macro lens focal length equivalent - again great news for a comfortable distance to subject when shooting. So option three is sounding like a win-win.

It also means that I can continue to use my E-M1, which has a whole host of advantages when using it for macro photography. There is greater depth of field when using the smaller sensor - which is helpful for keeping very small areas in sharp focus at lower apertures. It has crazy-good in-body image stabilisation - again very helpful when shooting insects handheld. The body is weather sealed (excellent when out in damp forest conditions), it's very light-weight and portable (never a bad thing), has focus peaking and manual focus magnification aids - and also has built-in focus bracketing and focus stacking - in camera! This camera was built for macro photography! Are you serious!!!! Option three baby! I love option three!

In all seriousness, sticking with the Olympus E-M1 and adapting the Minolta 50mm macro to it does seem like the perfect solution - at least until I can afford that 60mm M Zuiko. For $45NZ I'll be up and running with an excellent macro system, and I may even find that I don't need the 60mm Olympus lens at all?

It will also mean that I can use the Mecablitz flashgun I have for the Olympus in an off-camera wireless flash setup, or I could keep it even simpler and use the Godox LED cube (pictured opposite). Or both.

I've looked into purchasing the a-mount to micro 4/3 adapter from a local retailer, and they can have one for me by the end of February. In the meantime, I still have the Sony a99 and 50mm Minolta macro lens, and I'll  use that combination until the adapter for the E-M1 arrives. That will give me a month to see if I really am serious about this macro-fungi thing - and a month to fall in love with the Sony A-Mount system and change my mind about staying with Olympus! 😉  Me - change my mind? Never!

Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6 lens review

As a landscape photographer, I have a tendency to shoot all my images at the wide-angle end of the focal range. When I'm photographing at a lake, a waterfall, a beach, or a sunset, I'm usually trying to fit a decent amount of the scene into the frame. As such, my Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 lens will spend 95% of its life firmly attached to my camera (until such time as I can afford a 7-14mm f/4).

But what about the other 5% of the time? Well, that's for when I need a bit more 'reach'. Something a little more in the telephoto end of the range. And it's why I kept my Panasonic 45-150mm f/4-5.6 when I was selling everything else.

Waiting for Dinner. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/5.6 @ 1/500th, ISO 800 

If you are looking for a lightweight, well-constructed, reasonably priced, and very sharp telephoto lens for your micro four thirds system, then look no more!. The Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6 Asph. Power O.I.S. lens (to give its full title), fits the bill perfectly.

How small and how light? At only 210 grams and 73mm (at the wide end - 110mm when extended for full telephoto), the lens is small and light enough to always have in your camera bag. Even the filter size for the front is a tiny 52mm, saving you money over larger - more expensive - filters.

With a focal range of 90 to 300mm in 35mm camera full-frame terms, this lens is the epitome of the 'smaller' and lighter' promise of micro four thirds - without compromising on quality.

To keep the weight down, Panasonic have used quite a bit of plastic in its construction, but there's also metal where it counts (such as the lens mount). And as stated, they haven't skimped on optical quality. The lens uses 12 elements in 9 groups. Two of these are aspherical lenses, and one is an UHR (ultra-high refractive index) lens. This means that image distortion is minimised, resulting in clearer, sharper images. Add to this Panasonic's Power O.I.S. (optical image stabilisation) built into the lens, and you have a very fully-featured lens.

Finally, the lens can often be found for as little as $300.00NZ new (as of September 2021), and obviously even cheaper on the used market. This is outstandingly good value for a lens with such an impressive focal range. And to top it off, Panasonic even throws in a lens hood, even at this price. Kudos Panasonic (and are you listening Olympus!?).

At the beginning of this review, I mentioned that my 'need' for a telephoto lens was somewhat limited. But there's no reason it should be that way - even predominantly as a landscape photographer. Because I'm not just a landscape photographer. None of us are really. We are parents who take photos of our children, grandparents who take photos of our grandkids, and passionate creative types who take photos at all types of events. Chances are, then, that a telephoto lens is going to come in quite handy on most (if not all) of those occasions.

Greenstone Speedway, Sunset. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/5.6 @ 1/320th, ISO 200

And then, of course, there is landscape photography. Which is not a genre unique to only wide-angle lenses. Telephoto images can be very effective when shooting the landscape. To be honest, I probably don't use mine enough in the landscape - to the detriment of my images.

The above image - Greenstone Speedway, Sunset - was shot recently with the Panasonic 45-150mm lens, and it's one of my favourite images of this year. It's also a shot that I couldn't have taken with the wide angle, since it was impossible to get close enough to the subject to achieve this composition.

So, since I'm planning on using the lens a lot more for 'serious' landscape work, I thought I'd better test it out a little to see if it was up to the task. If you've read my previous post, where I reviewed my Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8, you'll know my 'testing' methodology. Which is to say, I don't use test charts, brick walls, or studio environments. I actually go outside, find a landscape, set the camera up on a tripod, and have at it! Then I look at the results in Lightroom at 100%, and see if I'm happy or not. Job's a good'n.

It may be difficult to tell from a web-file on this blog, so let me tell you what I can see full-screen in Lightroom (and you'll just have to take my word for it).

Above are 100% crops of a photo taken of the Greymouth Wharf. The wharf itself was probably about 500 feet away from me (across the other side of the Grey River). For all these images, the lens was extended to the full 150mm telephoto end (a 300mm full-frame field of view). Not usually the most optimal settings for image sharpness - wide open and at full zoom.

Nevertheless, at these settings (f/5.6 @ 150mm) the lens is already very sharp! That's pretty impressive - and I must admit I was surprised. I thought for sure that f/5.6 would be only acceptable, and that it would be even sharper stopped down to f/7.1 or f/8. But this wasn't the case - not with my copy of the lens at least. At f/6.3, at f/7.1, and at f/8, there was no discernible increase in sharpness. That is to say, they were all just as sharp as each other! This is very impressive. I even checked to make sure that I somehow hadn't mixed up the files.

I hadn't. f/5.6 is excellent, as is f/6.3 and up to f/10. It's from f/11 and above that the lens actually gets softer - and this is to be expected. 

Cobden Tiphead, Sunset. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/7.1 @ 1/200th, ISO 200

The optical performance of the Panasonic Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6, even wide open at the extreme telephoto range, has blown me away. It's sharp - plenty sharp - and is optically an exceptional performer. It focuses quickly on my E-M1 (although it does hunt for focus a little in lower light), feels solid and well built, has a metal lens mount, and produces superb images. For very little money. Seriously - what's not to like!?

If you are looking at specializing in wildlife, bird or sports photography, then of course you are going to want to invest in a little more serious telephoto gear. Something like the Lumix 100-400mm Leica f/4-6.3 or the Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 Pro. And notice I said 'invest', since neither of these options could be reasonably called cheap (or lightweight).

Greymouth Wharf. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/7.1 @ 1/500th, ISO 200

But for the rest of us, fortunately, there's the exceptional Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6. I'm so glad I kept this lens when deciding what to sell so I could afford the 12-35mm f/2.8. For the price, it's an amazingly good lens. I'm pretty sure I'll be making a lot more use of it for my images going forward.

An easy 5 out of 5 stars and very highly recommended if you are looking for an affordable telephoto lens for your micro four thirds system. If you are choosing between this and the Olympus 40-150mm f/4-5.6, I would say go for the Panasonic. They are both optically excellent, but I think the Panasonic has it over the Olympus in terms of build quality (Olympus has a plastic lens mount). Just saying...

'Action' landscape photography at Punakaiki

We are slowly coming out of Lockdown here in New Zealand. Auckland is still at complete level 4 Lockdown, but the rest of the country has moved to 'Delta' level 2. At level 2, you can start to travel a little further afield, and businesses can re-open (while still maintain strict social distancing and mask-wearing). I'm still working from home, and probably will be for at least another two weeks. The weather has also been rotten this week - wind, rain, thunder and lightning - the works. My wife and I have got a touch of cabin fever.

So when we discovered that Saturday looked promising weather-wise, we decided to pack a lunch and head out for the day. Yay! But where to go?

The Chimney Pot. OM-D E-M1 with Panansonic 12-35mm f/2.8.  f/5.6 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200

A quick check of the tides, and I knew exactly where I wanted to go. High tide was scheduled for 1.00pm, and it was likely going to be very dramatic. The country had been issued with a high-waves warning earlier on in the week, and from our home we can hear, and see, the waves as they crash into Cobden tiphead. With tides, and waves that dramatic, there's really only one place to head to if you're a photographer - Punakaiki and the Pancake Rock Blowholes.

Yours truly ready to capture the action. Photo: Joanna Lorimer. Nikon D70 with Nikkor 18-55mm

The Pancake Rock Blowholes at Punakaiki, are a very famous tourist destination. The 'pancake' rocks are formations that began 30 million years ago, when lime-rich fragments of dead marine creatures were deposited on the sea bed. These were then covered by layers of soft mud. Thousands of years of rain, wind and sea spray have etched the softer siltstone into horizontal grooves, which look like giant layers of pancakes.

Earthquakes have raised them from the seabed to the level we can see today, as well as creating a maze of underground passages and open caverns facing the sea. When there's a big swell and a high tide, the ocean surges into these caverns and water is forced through the passages. Huge geysers of spray can then burst spectacularly skyward - under the right conditions. The sorts of conditions we were likely to have on this very day...

Pancake Rocks Blowholes, Punakaiki. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/1250th, ISO 200

We were not disappointed. I've lived on the West Coast for most of my life, and have visited - and photographed - the Pancake Rocks Blowholes dozens of times. I've never seen them this good. They were, as the young kids say, 'Epic'! In fact, they were so good, and so powerful, that the spray from the really big geysers was reaching the viewing platform and drenching everyone. Very exciting - but not great for camera gear and lenses.

For the hour or so that we were there photographing the blowholes, I adopted a 'burst and hide' style of shooting. I would wait for the really big blows (you could hear them coming), shoot a rapid-fire high speed burst of about a dozen images, then quickly point my camera down and into my chest as I turned my back to the spray! It helped to keep most of the salt spray off of the camera, but I would still need to wipe the front of the lens every 10 minutes or so. Note to self - use a UV filter over the lens next time.

Surge Pool. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/640th, ISO 200

Fortunately, both the Olympus OM-D E-M1 and the Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 are weather-sealed and can take some pretty serious punishment from the elements. But salt water is salt water, and probably not great for lens coatings or metal, weather-sealing or not. I was, as mentioned, trying to be careful and not get my gear drenched.

Having said that, it was pretty difficult to keep anything dry with all the spray from the sea floating around. As someone who wears glasses 100% of the time, it didn't take long between wipes until the lenses of your glasses (and camera) were needing a wipe-down again. Annoyingly, the really big geysers seemed to happen every time I stopped to wipe clear my glasses and lens. I must have missed at least half a dozen really big blows while wiping glass clear of water spots. But as maddening as that was, I knew if I was patient, it would only be a matter of time before another big gush came around.

Thar she blows! Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/1600th, ISO 200

This is the big one! The biggest geyser I have ever seen come from the Pancake Rock Blowholes. And as impressive as it looks in the photograph, it's ten times more impressive being there and seeing it happen. The sheer volume and power of the water is - in a word - awesome!

As I said earlier, I've photographed the blowholes dozens of times. And I've captured some pretty decent geysers in my time. Or at least I thought I had. Until today. 

I really don't think it could get any more impressive than this. The photograph above of the biggest geyser I've ever seen at the Pancake Rocks Blowholes, is a 'bucket list' photo for me. It's one of those "if I never take another shot of this in my life I'd be happy" kind of photo. It's the 'action' shot of the blowholes that I've always wanted. And now, I've finally got it.

Does getting the image fill me with a sense of accomplishment. Heck yeah! Of course it does. The above image is probably a 30+ year image in the making. I smile every time I look at it. Why wouldn't I?

The aftermath. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/1600th, ISO 200

Does that mean I will stop going to Punakaiki to photograph the blowholes? No, not at all. I will still head to the blowholes if the weather and photography gods line-up again. And who knows, maybe there's an even bigger geyser in store for me in the future? 

But I doubt it. And as I said, if I never get the same conditions ever again in my lifetime, I can die happy, knowing I got 'my' image of the blowholes on a good day.

I also couldn't think of better gear to capture it with either. The Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 is creating beautifully crisp, detailed, sharp and vibrant images - with very impressive edge-to-edge sharpness at the apertures I'm shooting with (around f/5.6 to f/8 mostly). And the Olympus E-M1 is blazing fast, wonderfully responsive, fantastic to shoot with, and the RAW files are a joy to process. I've only had this combination for a few weeks, and it has already netted me a 'bucket-list' shot. What more could I ask for? 

My 'dream' kit in 2021

I belong to several Facebook groups to do with buying and selling camera gear (surprise, surprise). Mostly it is people looking to upgrade, sell the occasional lens, or change systems. I've used it myself from time to time. It's actually how I found, and purchased, my Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 recently.

Most of the time I just flick through the posts quickly, especially if I'm not looking to buy or sell anything. But one recent post made me stop in my tracks, and almost made my eyes water! And it also got me thinking (and dreaming).

Someone was selling their entire Sony kit - for $16,000NZ! No, that's not a typo. $16k! That price is enough to make anyone stop and look more closely.

To be fair, this wasn't just some scam artist trying to dupe an unsuspecting newbie into paying way too much for outdated gear. This was a legit seller, with a LOT of quality Sony camera gear, who was hoping to sell it all as a package deal. And I'm sure it was good value, even at sixteen grand NZ. I didn't dive too deeply into exactly what he had in the package, but there were at least two Sony A7R III camera bodies, probably with grips, and about five or six G series lenses to go with it. As well as flashes and other accessories. And it all seemed very lightly used. I think one of the bodies had only done around 15000 shutter actuation's. That's nothing.

But, as much of a bargain as it may have been, it got me thinking about someone's ability to drop $16k on a camera system. Obviously it was being pitched at a professional photographer. And I assume (although I don't know for sure) that the guy selling it was a professional themselves. Although maybe not? I've known a few hobbyists in my time who had the ability to drop some serious cash on photography gear. And good on them, if they can afford to do so.

For me, however, that kind of money to spend on photography gear is dream territory. Although I'm sure if I added up all that I had spent on photography over the last 35+ years, that figure would also make my eyes water! But I have certainly never had the ability to spend that kind of amount all in one go. And I'm sure I never will. And yet, from time to time, I think we all play the 'what if' game in our minds. And this Facebook post, with the seller asking $16,000NZ for his Sony gear, got me thinking - and dreaming - about 'what if'? What if I had $16k to drop on photography gear. What would I get, in 2021?

Of course the very first question I would need to ask myself is "Should I stay, or should I go" (apologies to The Clash).

To be honest, I didn't really have to think about this for too long. I think I'd stay. Which might, for some, be a surprising answer. After all, if you had $16,000 wouldn't it be the perfect opportunity to 'start again' and buy into a completely new system?

And the answer is, of course, 'yes'. It would be a perfect time to buy into a new system. If you were unhappy with your 'old' one. Thing is, I'm not unhappy with my Olympus/Panasonic micro four thirds system at all. Just the opposite in fact. I still maintain that it is an amazing, incredible, fully featured and mid-blowingly capable image-capturing system. So why would I want to change?

But what about the future of micro four thirds - I hear you ask. Yep. Very good question. The future is certainly uncertain (to quote an obscure Rowan Atkinson skit). And yet, my honest (although perhaps somewhat flippant) reply would actually be - I don't care.

I'm not sure how long JIP (Japan Industrial Partners) is going to keep the micro four thirds Olympus camera system going for? Nobody really does. Will they produce another iteration of OM-D models? Will there be an E-M1 mk4, or E-M5 mk4? Or an entirely new E-M'something'? Will we ever see an E-M1x Mk2? I honestly don't know. 

And what of Panasonic? We know the GH6 is coming, which is a good sign. But if Olympus folds, will there be a GH7? Or a G10? Or any new lenses? Again, I simply don't know. We do know that Sony seems to still be developing micro four thirds sensor technology, which is a very positive sign. But this is Sony. So we also know that the development could cease at any time if it no longer becomes profitable. And fair enough.

But in the end, as I stated earlier, I just don't care. And why not? Well, quite simply, even if all production of micro four thirds stopped tomorrow (and it won't), there would be enough product - and probably enough spare parts - in existence already to see me through to the end of my photography days. I'm no spring chicken. I realistically only have about another 20 years of good photography left in me. If that. And barring accidents, I look after my gear. So I reckon, based on current technology, any new camera I purchased in 2021 would probably have twenty years of use in it - easily. I have, and use, a Nikon D70 - which was released in 2004. That's 17 years ago. And it's still going strong. And still produces great results. I have no doubt that the current technology would see me through to the end of my photographic journey.

Having just said all that... if I was 20 years old and just starting out in my photography career, then my decision would be completely different. If I was serious about a photography career, had my whole life ahead of me, and wanted to invest heavily into a system, it would not be micro four thirds. I would look, instead, at the Nikon Z (or Canon R) mirrorless system.

But I'm not (20 years old), so I'm very happy to stick with micro four thirds. And would still suggest that a hobbyist or amateur photographer give it serious consideration in 2021 as well. Despite what I've postulated above, I still think there's life left in the old girl yet 😉

Okay, enough already. If I had $16,000NZ to spend today, on photography gear, what would I get? Not allowing for discounts (but I'd want something taken off  - or included - if I was dropping $16k), and given my bias towards landscape photography, the list would go something like this:

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mk3 bodies x2  $6,194.00

Olympus HLD 9 Power Battery Grip $498.00

Extra BLH-1 Olympus battery x2 $240.00

M.Zuiko 8-25mm ED F4 Pro lens $1,750.00

M.Zuiko 12-40mm ED F2.8 Pro lens $1,400.00

M.Zuiko 40-150mm EZ F2.8 Pro lens $1,800.00

Olympus MC-20 2x Teleconverter $785.00

M.Zuiko 8mm ED F1.8 Fisheye Pro lens $1,500.00

M.Zuiko 60mm F2.8 Macro lens $600.00

Olympus FL-700R Flash $650.00

Filters and Camera Bag $600.00

For a grand total of $16,000NZ (approx)

Prices in NZ dollars, rounded up, as at 8.09.21

I'm not going to go into great detail about why I've chosen what I have, a lot of it is probably self-explanatory. I will, however, clarify a couple of things...

First, I went for two E-M1 Mk3 bodies and one grip for flexibility over going for the E-M1x with built-in grip that can't be detached. If I want to travel 'light' I would simply use the E-M1's sans-grip. That's not an option with the E-M1x. I could have gone with an E-M1 Mk3 plus grip, and an E-M1x body for basically the same cost, but decided that two identical back-up bodies would be a better idea.

The lenses are probably all obvious. I opted for the 8-25mm f4 over the 7-14mm f2.8 as my landscape lens because a) I don't need f/2.8 for landscapes, and b) the 8-25mm allows for using filters, whereas the 7-14mm doesn't. And I think that the range of the 8-25mm is far more versatile as well.

The fisheye, and to some extent the macro, are in the list just because I can. They are very 'specialty' lenses that I wouldn't use very often, but are achievable within budget - so why not. I'm obviously not really a 'prime' guy, but these specialty lenses are an exception to the rule. I also don't feel the need to wait for the 100mm macro Pro version that OMD Solutions are said to be releasing soon. As already stated, I'm not really a macro shooter, so the 60mm will be more than sufficient for my needs.

So there you have it. My 'dream' kit. And as you can see, even purchasing all new, you can get a lot of gear for your money if you go with a micro four thirds system. And I didn't even look at any Panasonic lenses - even though it's what I shoot with at the moment.

I know that this has been a long post already - and thank you if you are still reading this. If you are, bare with me a little longer. I thought it might also be interesting, as a comparison, to see what $16kNZ would get you if you bought into the Nikon Z system that I mentioned above.

Nikon Z6 Mirrorless bodies x2 $6,380.00

Nikon MB-N10 Battery grip $450.00

Extra Nikon Z6 battery x2 $240.00

Nikon XQD Memory Card 64GB x2 $680.00

Nikkor Z 14-30mm F4 S lens $2,185.00

Nikkor Z 24-70mm F4 S lens $1,685.00

Nikkor X 70-200mm F2.8 VR S lens $4,300.00

For a grand total of $16,000NZ (approx)

Prices in NZ dollars, rounded up, as at 8.09.21

I have tried, as much as possible, to find like-for-like in the two systems. And as you can see, $16,000 buys you a lot less if you opt for a full frame Z series Nikon. I have even chosen the first generation Z6, as opposed to the latest model Z6 II. You could also save yourself some money by using the F series adapter and using the older 'F' mount lenses, instead of going for the Z mounts. But if you are 'investing' in the system long-term, why would you? Just get the Z mount lenses in the first place.

While the above may seem a bit futile (I haven't got $16,000 to spend on photography gear after all) and pointless, it's still quite fun. No harm in dreaming - right? It may also be interesting to look back on this post in a few years time - say 2025 - and re-visit it, to see if my 'wishlist' may have changed?

What would be on your wishlist if you suddenly found $16,000 to spend on photography (and you can't say 'a world trip', it has to be on actual gear)? Go on, dream a little...

Photo walk No.2 during Lockdown

Spring has sprung here in New Zealand. Yay!

On the West Coast, that often means wet weather - unfortunately. But, as luck would have it, the first week of Spring has instead brought some wonderful sunny days. And with it, comes a chance to get out and stretch the legs, in my local neigbourhood, during Lockdown.

'Spicy' revisted. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6. f/5.6 @ 1/640th, ISO 400

We are very fortunate to have some rather picturesque places within walking distance of our home. These include; a beach, farms, an estuary/lagoon area and tiphead. So there is no shortage of interesting subjects to photograph.

Having said that, when you are confined to a reasonably local area - one that you've walked almost daily for several years - familiarity can breed a little contempt. To 'spice' things up (excuse the pun from the image above), I decided on my second night's walk around the same area, to just use my telephoto lens. I kept the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm f/4-5.6 Asph Mega OIS lens when I sold all my others, because although I don't use one all that often, I do find a telephoto handy to have. It's also very small, and very light-weight for a telephoto, so takes up hardly any space in the camera bag.

Going around the same area, in the same evening light, you can't help but sometimes be attracted to the same images. I couldn't help myself as I walked past this public rest area again on the second evening. I just had to stop and take the exact same image as the previous night (see last post), but this time with the telephoto lens. If nothing else, I thought it would make for an interesting comparison between the two lenses.

And interesting it is! For while I gave a glowing review of the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 and said how super sharp and clear the images were that I got from it - I actually think the image I took with the 45-150mm is actually sharper! 

Waiting for a Wave. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/200th, ISO 1600

My overall impression of this small, light, cheap telephoto zoom lens is that it is, indeed, very sharp - even wide open at f/5.6 and 150mm (300mm equivalent on full-frame). Just like its Olympus sibling (the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/4-5.6) that I have raved about in the past, the Panasonic Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6 punches way above its weight, and has the capability of producing seriously great images.

Of course it doesn't compete with the truly pro glass of the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 Pro or the Panasonic Lumix 35-100mm f2.8. But at a fraction of the weight, size and cost of these pro lenses, the Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6 is a no-brainer if you need a 'good' telephoto lens for the odd occasion when you need one. Pro wildlife or bird photographers look elsewhere. But for the rest of us, the Lumix or Olympus cheap telephotos are well worth owning.

Spring is in the air. OM-D E-M1 with Panasonic 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/320th, ISO 800

Telephotos are great for getting a bit closer to the action if you're a sports and/or wildlife shooter. But they are also a great option for portraiture and landscapes. Their narrow field of view, compression of elements within an image, and their ability to 'isolate' a subject, are all helpful ways of telling a particular story. And they can also be used to zoom in on unsuspecting subjects if you are in 'stealth' mode. 😄

The photo above, of the couple watching the sea crashing against the rocks, was obviously taken from behind, but also from a fairly long distance away. They were completely unaware of my presence, allowing me to wait with my camera poised to capture just the right moment. I probably stayed for about 10 minutes taking a series of images, as the sea crashed around them and they enjoyed the view. The telephoto lens has compressed the elements within the image, to make it look like the sea is crashing around them a lot closer than it actually was. From the photo it looks like they are in serious danger of getting wet! But in reality, the waves were a good 15 to 20 meters away from them and well out of harms way.

Spring sunset silhouette. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/8 @ 1/320th, ISO 800

The photo above was taken at exactly the same time as the photo of the couple watching the sea spray. Three young women turned up to also watch the sunset, and as they were getting ready to walk down along the rocks, I noticed that they made a prefect silhouette against the setting sun. I fired off two shots before they moved further down the rocks and the effect was gone.

Once again, the telephoto lens has allowed me to grab the shot from a good distance away, with my subjects completely unaware they were being photographed. I don't always shoot this way - I guess it feels a little bit 'creepy' or a bit paparazzi? But in both scenarios above, none of the people in the photos can be identified, none were photographed in a 'compromising' situation, and the final result is - I hope - very tastefully done. No one - as they say - was harmed in the making of these photos.

Heading out to fish. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 40-150mm. f/8 @ 1/80th, ISO 1600

Many photographers who think of landscape images, think only in terms of wide angle lenses. But a telephoto lens is an invaluable part of every landscape photographers kit. As mentioned above, it can help isolate, compress, and simplify a scene - all exceptionally useful techniques when shooting landscapes. A wide-angle (or ultra-wide angle) that tries to include a massive vista can often lead to unimpressive images. Whereas if you isolate, frame, and capture a smaller portion - maybe just the one area of light as it caresses the peak of an impressive mountain - then you will often come away with a much stronger composition. Indeed there are many mountain landscape photographers who would say that their telephoto lens is their most used optic.

Blaketown Tiphead Shipwreck Monument. E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/60th, ISO 800

Whether you use a telephoto lens a little, or a lot, it's always a good idea to have one in your camera bag. The Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm f/4-5.6 Asph Mega OIS (to give it its full name) is an excellent choice for someone on a budget, but who still wants a well made (metal mount), sharp and lightweight lens. When I was selling all my lenses to purchase the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8, the Lumix 45-150mm was the only lens I decided to keep. And I'm very glad that I did.

As a landscape photographer, who wants to travel light, I don't need the heavier, more expensive 'pro' versions of this lens. I'd mostly shoot them at around f/5.6 to f/8 anyway. And at those apertures, the cheap, light and inexpensive (relatively speaking) Panansonic 40-150mm f/4-5.6 is probably about 95% as sharp as them anyway!

What I do occasionally wish for, however, is a little longer reach. Something like the Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 or Panasonic 100-300mm f/4-5.6. At 300mm on the long end, that equates to a whopping 600mm angle-of-view on a full-frame system! If I was a bird or wildlife photographer on a budget, I'd definitely have one of those. But I'm not, so they will have to wait. My use-case for a lens with that sort of reach is even more limited than with the telephoto I already own! 

On the other hand, my sister-in-law actually owns the Olympus 75-300mm, so I may get to 'play' with it one day and do a quick review? Could be fun to take to a wildlife park - once we get out of Lockdown, of course.

Photo walk during Lockdown

In my last post I talked about taking the Sony a99 and Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 lens out for a landscape shoot during Lockdown. I enjoyed using it, and it takes some beautiful images, but I still think it isn't a very 'portable' setup.

Greymouth wharf from Cobden lagoon. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/60th, ISO 200

For that, I turn to my own camera gear - and the Olympus OM-D micro four thirds system. For me (and yes, it is very subjective), it offers the perfect balance of size vs image quality. And by that I mean excellent size, and excellent image quality. Many view anything less than full-frame to be a compromise, at least image-wise. I disagree. Strongly.

Sure, if you're a 'measurebator' or 'pixel peeper', then you won't be caught dead with anything less than full-frame (or maybe even digital medium format). But, on the other hand, if you're a photographer who enjoys the creativity of capturing an image, then you'll use any number of tools to achieve your vision. None are better than the other. They are simply different.

'Spicy'. E-M1 with Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/80th, ISO 200 + Polariser

This isn't another way of saying that 'gear doesn't matter'. I've argued many times elsewhere that I find this an incredibly trite and blatantly untrue statement. Of course gear matters. Give a sports photographer at the Olympics a pinhole camera and ask them to cover the games with this one piece of gear. See how far that gets you - or them for that matter. It's all about having the right tool for the job. And in that regard, of course the gear matters.

But... conversely, the gear also doesn't matter as much as many photographers pretend (or hope) that it does. Yes, certain situations might call for specific functions. But beyond that, for most photographers, it really doesn't matter if the camera is full frame, medium format, or micro four thirds. Especially when you consider most peoples' use-cases.

Sundown, Cobden Tiphead. OM-D E-M1 with Lumixs 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/1250th, ISO 400

Ok, rant over. Suffice to say that when I use the Olympus OM-D E-M1 (which is considered by many an 'old' camera), I'm using an incredibly responsive, superbly designed and highly capable camera/computer that captures stunning images. Match that with a professional optic like the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Aspherical Power OIS (to give it its full name) and the only thing that's holding it back is me.

I firmly believe that pound for pound, and dollar for dollar, nothing comes close to micro four thirds. I've used practically every system, every sensor size, and a plethora of body and lens combinations over the last 36 years of being involved in this fantastic hobby/profession. And when I consider all the systems and weigh up the cost, the features, the functionality and the image quality, my Olympus micro four thirds system stands together with the best of them.

How can I be so bold? Well, in this instance, I believe that a picture paints a thousand words... and speaks volumes for the capabilities of the E-M1 specifically, and micro four thirds generally.

Blaketown Tiphead Sunset. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/160th, ISO 400

All the images I took, walking around my neighbourhood to try out the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8G, are simply stunning.

Yeah, ok, that sounds a bit self-congratulatory. 'Look at me. Big shot photographer'. But that's not really what I mean, or what I'm trying to say. What I really mean is that the photos from this camera and lens combination really 'pop'. There's a certain quality to them that elevate them a step above your normal everyday snapshot - even though ostensibly that's exactly what they are. Admittedly taken in some quite nice light.

There's a sharpness to all of them, although they're not 'over' sharp. And a clarity to them, although they don't look overly 'digital' (to me at least). The colours are exceptionally captured, yet also true-to-life. And the files are robust and easy to work with in post-processing. What's not to like?

Greymouth wharf from Cobden lagoon at dusk. E-M1 with 12-35mm f/2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/20th, ISO 1600

Most of this, of course, is due to the superb capabilities of the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 G lens. It is a professionally designated lens, and as such offers professional quality results. It's a solid lens without being heavy (maybe 'dense' is a better description), balances perfectly on the professional E-M1 body, and performs flawlessly. Zooming is very smooth and well dampened, while autofocus is snappy, quiet and accurate.

It comes equipped with Panasonic's Power OIS (Optical Image Stabilisation), although it won't work in conjunction with the E-M1's image stabilisation, so I have turned it off on the lens. Olympus's in-body 5-axis image stabilisation is far superior to the one in the lens, so should be used in preference.

Not much more can be (or needs to be) said about this fantastic lens. I ummed and arred about getting it for a while, and even after buying it (secondhand) I wondered if I'd done the right thing selling most of my other lenses just to get this one. But that was before I had seen the images it produces. Now, after only using it twice, I don't think I've done the wrong thing at all. I did the same thing the last time I owned an E-M1 - selling all my lenses just to get the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro. I never regretted that decision either. Camera bodies, as they say, come and go. But good glass lasts. And this is very good glass.

Of course all pro-level 24-70mm f2.8 lenses, from all the other manufacturers, are exceptionally good optically. But the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 G is all these things, at half the size, half the weight - and at half the price! DSLR photographers love to gloss over this fact, or find comparison's where this doesn't quite work. But in actuality, the truth of the size/price/weight savings comparison with APS-C and full frame is real. And the benefits of micro four thirds are obvious to anyone who has seriously made the switch.

Swan Lagoon.  E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/8th sec (hand held), ISO 1600

In my last post, after I had used the Sony a99 and Minolta 17-35mm f3.5 on a landscape shoot, I summed up by saying that I was seriously rethinking my choice of system. I think that might have just been the euphoria of getting out and taking some photos after being in Lockdown.

In reality, a simple walk around my local neighbourhood, taking some 'snaphots' in the early evening light, has proved to me without doubt what an amazingly special camera system the Olympus/Panasonic micro four thirds is. Return to full frame? Humpfh!!! What was I thinking!?