Tag: mirrorless

Sony A7III vs A7IV

Sony A7III vs A7IV

In this post I am putting the Sony A7III vs A7IV to see how the two compare. Is the Sony A7IV worth upgrading to from the Sony A7III?

I originally owned a Sony A7III back when it was released in 2018. I was pretty impressed with it as you can see in my review at the time. The Sony A7IV intrigued me as I wanted to see how they could improve upon what is still one of the best hybrid cameras, even in 2022.

In this article I am going to cover everything that you need to know when considering the Sony A7III vs A7IV including image quality, video quality, ergonomics, menus and all the upgraded features. If you would rather watch then my video comparison of the Sony A7III vs A7IV Can be found here . The video shows screen recordings of the AF in action, the IBIS and video quality as well as everything else.


Sony A7III vs A7IV – Ergonomics

The first thing that you notice when you put the Sony A7IV next to the A7III is that the new camera has gained a little size over its predecessor. In terms of weight they are within a few grams of each other but the size difference, particularly the depth of the camera is more noticeable than the figures would have you believe. The mark III feels quite small and dinky in comparison to the latest mark IV version. The A7IV is deeper due to Sony adding a fully articulating screen (more on that later) and improving the heat management of the camera.

The grip has also grown and now offers more depth and provides more purchase on the camera, particularly when operating it one handed. Those with larger hands will definitely appreciate the added space and comfort. The A7 IV now weighs in at a measured 658g with the battery which is only 8g more than the mark III.


One of the most obvious changes to the A7IV is the switch to a fully articulated rear LCD screen. The previous model had a tilting mechanism often favoured by purely stills photographers but the new, articulated screen works much better for hybrid shooters like myself.

 

Not only is the new screen fully articulating it has also increased the resolution from 0.92 million dots to 1.04 million dots. More importantly the screen now has a 3:2 aspect ratio which matches the cameras sensor resulting in less wasted space on the screen.

The Sony A7IV’s screen now uses the touch screen functions to much greater effect, allowing you to use it to navigate the menus as well as the usual AF funtionality. The A7 III touchscreen was mainly limited to selecting AF points. The new one feels much more modern and in keeping with what we have become used to with modern gadgets like phones and tablets.

The EVF on the Sony A7IV has also been upgraded to 3.69m dots from 2.36m dots on the A7III. The improvement is welcome and a noticeable one but it is not class leading compared to some of the competition. The refresh rate can also be boosted to 120hz, double that of the older model. Everything else remains the same on the viewfinder.

One of the ergonomic changes that I find most satisfying is the increased size of the buttons on the mk IV. The AF-On button is now substantially larger and the AF joystick has also been enalarged and also flattened slightly which definitely makes it easier to move your AF point as desired.

The record button has been moved to the top of the camera instead of to the right of the viewfinder. In all honesty I don’t mind either location but given the choice I prefer the new placement as it is more in keeping with the other cameras that I use such as the Canon R5 and Nikon Z series bodies. I would prefer the Menu button to be on the right hand side like Nikon and Panasonic cameras so that it can be selected one handed.

There is now a dial below the PASM dial which allows you to switch between photo, video and S&Q modes. The dial is lockable as is the unmarked exposure compensation dial (it can be set to whatever you want now). There are also 3 custom setting slots on the PASM dial as opposed to 2 on the A7III.

The Sony A7 IV now has dual UHS-II card slots with slot 1 also accepting CF Express type A cards. You will need either V90 rated SD or CF Express A cards to record in the higher video resolutions/bitrates now available on the A7 IV. The A7 IV wont allow me to even try using a Sandisk Extreme Pro 170mb/s card for these higher quality video settings. I ordered a couple of these cards to enable recording using the higher quality video modes and they work well.

There is also a new locking mechanism on the memory card door. You now have to slide the lock (similar to the A7III) and at the same time slide the memory card door towards you. It is kind of awkward to be honest and one of the things that I prefer on the Sony A7III. Also the strap lugs on my A7IV are quite thick and can get in the way of the memory card door when opening. It’s not a big deal but something that I have noticed.

 

Menus

The A7IV uses the latest Sony menu system and my goodness what a difference it makes. The old Sony menus were a confused mess fo the most part. I often still find myself searching through them to find certain options and settings.

The new menu system is now much better laid out and for the most part it is logical and much quicker to find what you need. I particularly appreciate that it gives you a preview of the items contained within the selected menu option so that you don’t waste time diving into a menu only to find that the setting you needed is not there. I’d go as far as to say it is now one of the best menu systems available.

One thing that has caught me out and something that I find annoying is that when you set the camera up to use a picture profile in video mode, the camera carries this across when you switch back to photo mode. So I shot a bunch of images this morning with the log profile set for photos. Why Sony thought this was a good idea I do not know. Luckily I shoot in RAW + Jpeg so had the RAW files to fall back on.

Sony A7III vs A7IV – Image quality

The main headline grabbing upgrade for the A7IV is probably the increase in resolution from 24mp to 33mp. In all honesty, if this were the only reason that you are considering an upgrade from the Sony A7 III then I would save your money.

The increased resolution is nice to have as it enables a little more cropping room but the difference is not enough to justify the expense of an upgrade. You’re going from images measuring 6000×4000 pixels to 7008x 4672.

Yes, there is a little more detail in the 33mp images but it’s only just about enough to go up one print size. It does make the A7IV a more interesting proposition for landscape photographers who also have a hybrid workflow, perhaps aspiring youtubers who focus on landscape photography may give the A7IV more consideration but for most people resolution alone, while nice to have, likley isn’t the main reason to upgrade.

From my testing dynamic range remains essentially the same so at least that resolution bump has not come at the cost of dynamic range.

Here is an A7IV raw file with no adjustments. The blacks and highlights have clipped
And here is the same file with the exposure increased by 1 stop along with a 100 push on both the blacks and shadows as well as -100 pull on the highlights. It looks hideous but gives an idea of just how flexible the RAW files are.

In terms of high ISO noise performance, you can see from my test shots below that the A7III and A7IV perform very similarly.

A7III Raw ISO 3200, Converted in Lightroom, no adjustments
A7IV Raw ISO 3200 converted in Lightroom, no adjustments
A7III Raw ISO 6400, converted in Lightroom, No adjustments
A7IV Raw ISO 6400, converted in Lightroom, no adjustments
Sony A7III compared to A7IV 100% crop, ISO 6400

 

The A7III does slightly better once above ISO 6400 but once you down size the A7IV file to match the A7III dimensions it is actually a tiny amount better.

A7IV Tiff resized to A7III dimensions, converted in Lightroom, no adjustments
A7IV downsized to A7III dimensions, ISO 6400, 100% view

 

One thing that I have noticed is that the auto white balance in the A7IV does a better job than the A7III. I often had to apply fairly significant corrections to the A7 III images as they sometimes gave a magenta or yellow tint depending on the lighting conditions.  I have not found this to be an issue with the mark IV. Outdoors the colours are very similar as seen below.

A7III (left) vs A7IV

Skintones have also been improved on the A7IV vs A7III, particularly in mixed lighting conditions. This quick portrait was shot in window light with auto white balance and auto ISO. The AF nailed shot after shot. It really is impressive and the more I use it the more I appreciate just how easy the A7IV makes everything.

A7IV, Sony 85mm 1.4GM @ 1.4, 1/250, ISO1250 – RAW file, no editing done

The A7 IV now also adds the ability to shoot lossless compressed RAW files which helps to save some card and hard drive space without compromising image quality.

You can also shoot in 10bit HEIF format instead of Jpeg. In theory this should give more colour information than the 8bit Jpeg files but in use I haven’t noticed any difference. You also have to consider that HEIF is a relatively new format so before shooting chekc that they are compatible with your device/PC.

A7 IV vs A7 III – IBIS

The IBIS in the A7 IV is said to give 5.5 stops of image stabilisation compared with the 5 stops quoted for the A7 III.

 

I wanted to test out whether there was any real world difference so I shot my usual tests handheld at 24 mm on the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8.

I found that results were so similar as to not warranty any further testing.

It is impossible to explain the difference in IBIS performance for video without showing the footage so please see my video here

 

This is where the A7IV shines against the A7III – Auto Focus

The AF in the Sony A7 III was always pretty good, especially as Sony updated the firmware to add better Eye AF as well as animal detection. However this has been improved again, with the A7 IV taking advantage of the BionZ XR which Sony claims is 8x faster than the BionZ X found in the mark III.

The A7 IV has 759 phase detect AF points giving 94% coverage vs 693 with 93% coverage on the A7 III. The increase doesn’t sound like much but more importantly it puts it in line with the A1 and A7SIII which I suspect will allow it to benefit from any AF improvements added to those bodies.

The phase detect points now work down to f/22 (vs f11 on the A7III) and the AF will work in -4 EV vs the A7III’s -3 EV.

When I first noticed that you can now change the AF point selection colour from white to red I gave a little prayer to the camera gods as this was something that I often had issue with in previous generation Sony cameras. When using the A7III and the A7R2 I owned before that, it could sometimes be incredibly difficult to know which focus point was being activated if the colour matched the background. It’s funny how small things can sometimes turn out to be instrumental in giving you a feel for whether you will like to use a camera or not.

The A7 IV has ported over the same AF algorithms found in the top of the line Sony A1 which adds real time eye AF and subject tracking. The A7 IV also adds human/animal AF that works  in both photo and video mode. There is also vehicle tracking for photography as well as the ability to select bird eye AF.

Having tested this out on some not too challenging geese and pigeons I can say it does a great job.

Bird Eye Af works flawlessly for subjects such as this goose.

Again, it is best to watch the video for demonstrations of just how good the AF in the Sony A7IV is.

In use I have found it to be as good as anything available (including my Canon R5). In fact I would even put it a notch above the R5. It locks on really quickly and is accurate. To see this in action subscribe to my Youtube channel and hit the notifications bell as the full video will be released soon which includes footage of the AF captured on an Atomos Ninja V. You can now see the video here

With Eye AF turned on it is the quickest system that I have used to pick up the subjects eyes and it can do it even when the subject is quite small in the frame. Mind you, the Sony A7III is no slouch in this area either.

I could see a discernible difference when shooting the Sony A7IV vs A7III. It is simply much quicker to react, pick up the subject and place that green box over the eye.

When the subject either turned away from the camera or left and then returned to frame it was significantly quicker to regain focus on the eye than the A7III. The MK III  did not always pick up the subject’s eyes again quickly and on some ocassions even failed to do so at all. I believe this is due to the older algorithm scanning the entire scene to re-aqquire the subjects eyes whereas the Sony A7 IV has been programmed using machine learning to prioritise looking for a subjects eyes in the same area as it last detected them. Whatever the technicalities it is a marked improvement.

 

Video

The Sony A7III was one of the first true hybrid cameras, bringing together great stills and at the time, excellent video specs. However times have moved on and the lack of 10 bit internal video as well as 4k is starting to show against the competition.

The A7IV has adressed this and now offers upto 4k30 with no crop whereas the A7III tops out at 4k25 without a crop. Once you go to 4k30 there is a 1.2x crop on the A7III. The recording limit of 30 minutes found on the A7III has now been removed too.

As well as the usual S-log options the A7IV now includes S-Cinetone.

Importantly the A7IV now offers 4k60 full pixel readout (no binning) but this does crop to APS-C or 1.5x.

Where the A7IV has definitely taken things up by several notches vs the A7III is with the codecs and colour depth available. This is great news for those wishing to colour grade their footage in post.

The A7III only offers 8bit 4:2:0 internal shooting options whereas the A7IV now shoots 10 bit 4:2:2 internally with the option to use the H.265 codec or All Intra H.264 at a bit rate of 300mbps for 30p or 600mbps for 60p footage. Lower data rates are also available for those who don’t need the added grading headroom or simply want to save on disk space.

Below are the various 4k codecs and bit rates available.

4k H.265 24p bit rates
4k H.265 60p bit rates
4k H.264 24p Bit rates
4k H.264 30p bit rates
4k H.264 60p bit rates

4K All intra has fixed settings as follows :

24p – 4:2:2 10 bit 240mbps

30P – 4:2:2 10 bit 300mbps

60p – 4:2:2 10 bit 600mbps

 

The A7IV does away with the Micro HDMI port and replaces it with a full sized HDMI which is so much more sturdy.

It also adds what Sony call Active stabilisation. This is basically a digital stabilisation using information from the gyro on the IBIS. The field of view crops in a little to allow this. This is something that I tested for my video review and will show there.

The A7IV now lets you adjust (in 7 steps) how quickly focus transitions are performed as well as 5 steps of control for how quickly the AF will switch from one subject to another.

 

An interesting concept and one that I have seen carried out extremely well by DJI is the focus mapping option. This shows you which areas of your image are in and out of focus by colouring the areas. I’m still not convinced on its usefulness so will report back when I have had time to use it a little more.

Sony A7III vs A7IV – Conclusion

When I saw the specs for the Sony A7IV I wasn’t blown away. There was no one aspect that really stood out to me as groundbreaking or a must have. A little more resolution, an articulating screen, a new menu (again), a few extra video modes and promised AF improvements didn’t really seem like that much considering how groundbreaking the A7III was back in 2018 and how long it has been since then.

I have had and owned at least one of each generation of Sony’s A7 series bodies since the A7R. I have always appreciated their technical abilities, groundbreaking specs and ability to push the boundaries for autofocus. However, I have never gelled with one the way I have with say, the Fuji X-Pro 1 & 3 or the Nikon Z7II or Canon R5. The difference, I have always felt is that those feel like cameras made by a camera company that understands photographers. They get the little things right in terms of button placement, menus, ergonomics, design and handling.  These things really do make a massive difference when it comes time to pick up a camera and shoot.

 

The Sony A7IV is the first Sony camera that I have picked up and felt like it is finally designed by a company that understands what we as photographers/videographers want. There are no headline grabbing features that blow your mind the way that the Canon R5, Sony A1 or Nikon Z9 did at release but the whole is definitely more than the sum of its parts when it comes to the A7IV.

After having shot a lot with both of these cameras side by side, if it were my money and I had to decide between the Sony A7III vs A7IV , I would buy the A7IV without doubt. It feels like a camera, makes everything easy and gets out of your way and lets you shoot. Not to mention that I would no longer consider a camera without 4k60 video.

 

I hope that you found some value in this article and it helps with your decision. Please don’t forget to help out in anyway you can by subscribing to this blog, my yotube channel or buying through my links. Any help is much appreciated and allows me to spend more time creating content like this.

Fuji XT4 vs X Pro 3

Fuji XT4 vs X Pro 3

 

If you are new to Fujifilm or simply looking to upgrade to the latest and greatest that Fuji has to offer you have probably looked for comparisons of the Fuji XT4 vs X Pro 3 but how do you choose between them. What are the main differences and more importantly what are they like to use?

I’m fortunate enough to own both of these top of the range APS-C models from Fujifilm and have used them both extensively. I bought mine from Amazon as I like their returns policy and customer service.

 


I love them both for very different reasons which I shall go through after explaining the more obvious differences in this Fuji XT4 vs X Pro 3 article. If you want a more detailed review of the Fuji XT4 then click here or watch my Fuji XT4 video review on youtube. You can also see the video version of this Fuji XT4 vs X Pro 3 article here


One thing that I should mention straight off the bat is that if you are a videographer then you can skip the rest of the article and just purchase the Fujifilm X-T4 as it is much more suited to video work due to its larger battery, fully articulating screen and better video specs including 4k 60 and 10 bit internal recording as well as IBIS.

 

For those of you who are primarily stills shooters then the choice is somewhat more difficult.

The Fuji X-T4 is like a sports saloon car, it can go fast and do virtually everything that a 2 seater convertible can do but with a bit less style and of course you can’t put the roof down on a sunny day (the roof in this case being the X-Pro 3’s hybrid viewfinder).

 

So let’s start with what the Fuji XT4 and X Pro 3 have in common:

26.1MP X-Trans IV CMOS APS-C sensor

X-Processor 4

weather resistance

maximum continuous shooting speed of 30fps (with crop) or 20fps when using the e-shutter

hybrid autofocus system with contrast and phase detection (max. 425 points)

dual SD card slot (UHS-II compatible)

Both cameras are using the same 26mp X-Trans IV sensor which results in identical image quality. They are both powered by the latest X-Processor 4 and offer the same hybrid AF system and in use they appear to be pretty much equally as fast. Neither are laggy when switching between menus items or indeed switching the camera on. The X-T4 may have a very slight edge in face detect AF due to the latest algorithm being employed but in the real world they are pretty much neck and neck.

XF 55-200mm, F/7.1, 1/480, ISO 160

Both are weather resistant and I have no issue using either of them in less than perfect weather. The feel in the hand offers very similar build quality but in a different way. The XT4 feels more dense and solid and it should as it weighs 609g vs the X-Pro 3 at 497g.

They are so similar in size that it is not even worth writing down the measurements. However when you pick them up they feel worlds apart.

The XT4 feels very solid, weighty and like a workhorse with its enlarged grip (compared to the XT3). It is a very nice design and I must admit that I do like the look of the camera. However the X-Pro 3 feels different to other cameras due to its range finder esque styling, beautifully machined and subtle finish. I should say that I have the standard black version not one of the Dura coated models.

The X-Pro 3 is probably the most beautiful camera that I have ever owned and that includes models such as the X100T (in silver) and a Silver Pen F, both of which are among the best looking digital cameras ever created. Pictures on the internet don’t do it justice. They really don’t.

In use there is no denying that the XT4 makes more sense for most people.  It offers an individual ISO dial rather than the slightly fiddly design on the X-Pro 3 where you have to lift the shutter speed dial and twist it to your desired ISO speed. This also feels like a weak point that may be prone to break in the future but to be fair it hasn’t yet.

The XT4 also continues to use the D-Pad which offers up extra Fn buttons that can be programmed to your liking. I can happily accept cameras from Fuji with or without the D-Pad but if given the choice I would retain it.

 

That X-Pro 3 LCD Screen

The other main physical difference which may or may not affect you depending on your shooting style is the XT4’s fully articulating LCD screen vs the highly contentious inward facing screen on the X-Pro3. The Screen on the X-Pro 3 faces inward and only opens downward. This Is supposed to encourage you to use the viewfinder and avoid constantly chimping your images giving a pure and authentic photographic experience. Okay, I made that last bit up but I think that is the general idea.

The screen on the X-Pro3 while not conventional is actually not a dealbreaker for me unlike for some. It actually works well in practise and as I use the camera purely for stills, particularly, street, candid portraits and documentary photography it offers the only function I would ever want in those scenarios which is the ability to shoot from the hip on the street in order to be discreet. Plus if I want to review my photos I can easily do so via the EVF.

The rear of the screen has a second display which is permanently on and shows the current film simulation with what looks like the label of old Fujifilm film emulsions. Maybe it’s a bit cheesy but I quite like it. The display can also be changed to show your current shooting setting.

As much as I like the X-Pro 3’s rather novel LCD screen there’s no denying that for most, it is not as useful as the fully articulating one found on the XT4. If I was solely a street shooter or just taking travel/documentary type stills then my opinion would be different but as I shoot a lot of landscapes as well as some video too, the fully articulating screen offers more flexibility. I can reverse it to check framing when creating video and it offers a variety of positions should I be shooting at high or low angles as well as in portrait orientation. It also closes with the LCD screen facing inward which means  it is protected and you can ignore it altogether should you wish.

In the end which screen you prefer will depend on what type of photographer you are and how you shoot. I imagine that someone coming from using their mobile phone for photography would find the X-Pro 3’s screen quite limiting. However I very rarely use the LCD screen on any camera to compose my photos so being forced to use the viewfinder simply is not an issue for me.

Prime or Zoom?

I choose whichever one will serve me best for whatever I plan to shoot on that occasion. If I’m heading out for landscapes I grab the XT4 along with the 10-24mm and 55-200mm lenses. If I am going on vacation with the family and just want a camera with me for candid shots of them and anything else encountered then I usually put the X-Pro3 with the 23mm 1.4 or 35mm f/2 in a small bag along with the 56mm 1.2, a spare battery and a powerbank. IMO the X-Pro 3 suits prime lenses and the XT4 works better with the zooms. Both of course can work well with either.

Fuji XT4 vs X Pro 3 EVF/OVF

The EVF on both models is virtually the same although the XT4 offers a little more magnification at 0.75x vs 0.66x and aa much larger viewfinder eye cup which helps to shield the viewfinder when shooting in bright sunlight. . In use the differences are hardly noticeable. Even though I am left eye dominant I am fortunate to be able to use either eye. The range finder style viewfinder on the left of the X-Pro 3 does have some advantages when shooting people as you are not quite so hidden behind the camera. This allows me to  feel more connected with my subjects and be more aware of what is happening outside of the field of view of the viewfinder.

The hybrid viewfinder on the X-Pro 3 offers all the benefits of an EVF as well as providing an OVF. Using the lever on the front of the camera you can very quickly change between the two. You can also superimpose a small electronic image onto the OVF which can aid in focusing.

The design is excellent and although I have preferred EVF’s for sometime now the OVF can come in very useful when shooting on the street.  For instance, it would allow you to perfectly time someone walking into frame and capture them in exactly the right position in your image due to the lack of any delay.

IBIS

100% Crop @200mm 1/10

Of course, the XT4 now has IBIS which can be useful when wanting to keep your ISO as low as possible as it allows you to shoot at shutter speeds not otherwise possible. If you shoot mostly people then the benefits of IBIS are probably not all that important as you will usually be using a faster shutter speed. It does allow for a little bit more creative control by enabling you to add motion to your images, for instance blurring the motion of subjects while retaining perfect sharpness of the surrounding scene.

If you are a travel/ landscape photographer and would rather not bring along your tripod then the IBIS in the XT4 is at its most useful. Allowing you to keep the ISO as low as possible to ensure the best possible image quality. I have found that with the Fuji 10-24mm lens I can consistantly handhold shots at the wide end down to 0.5 seconds. As useful as this is, if I am going out to do landscape photography then my tripod will be coming with me and so the IBIS becomes redundant. It is useful for grabbing quick shots which would otherwise require bumping up the ISO so it does add a level of flexibility that the X-Pro 3 lacks.

 

Staying Power

The XT4 also uses the larger capacity NP-W235 battery which offers significantly more shots than the NP-W236s used in the X-Pro 3. I get about 900 shots from the former and around 500 from the latter. Both cameras can be charged via USB-C so I usually only carry one spare for each and then recharge from a power bank. So although the new battery in the XT4 is definitely welcome it is perhaps not quite the deal breaker it would have been had neither of the cameras been capable of charging over USB-C.

The NP-W235 battery in the XT4 is much better.

When out and about shooting street and documentary photography I have noticed that I get a better reaction to the X-Pro 3 than the XT4. The design is minimalistic with no obvious Fuji logo on the front of the X-Pro3 and the classic range finder esque styling seems to be viewed as less threatening. I guess it looks more like an old film camera, a novelty if you will and so people pay it less attention or they enquire in a positive way about what camera it is. Yes you will get asked if it is a film camera quite a lot. Either way the reaction or lack of definitely makes me feel a little more confident and comfortable pointing it at strangers on the street.

Fuji XT4 vs X Pro 3 Conclusion

In the end the choice will come down to what type of photographer you are as much as the specs.

As an owner of both models my opinion is that for pure stills, perhaps with a focus on candid/street/documentary photography the sheer pleasure of owning and using such a unique camera would have me gravitate towards the X-Pro3 even though it is less flexible, less fully featured and actually more expensive than the XT4. For this type of photography I prefer using prime lenses and that is where the X-Pro 3 makes sense and shines. Attach the 23mm, 35mm or 50mm f/2 prime lens on the X-Pro 3 and you have a  discreet, lightweight, weather sealed and very capable camera that (without sounding too poncy) epitomises the joy of photography, at least for me. It is a pleasure to use and it doesn’t hurt that it is as beautiful as it is capable.

 

With all that said, for 90% of photographers the XT4 is probably going to make more sense. It is cheaper, more capable, more comfortable to hold for long periods has better battery life and works better with Fuji’s zoom lenses (especially the red badge lenses) thanks to the larger grip and the option of a battery grip.

Add in the IBIS, fully articulating screen and better video options and it is one of the most well rounded mirrorless cameras available in any format and despite my love of the X-Pro 3, it is the one I would choose if I had to pick only one camera. However it doesn’t make me feel the way that the X-Pro 3 does and there is definitely something to be said for that.

Which one would you choose? I’d love to hear in the comments below.

 

My latest article on the Sony A7IV can be found here 

Fujifilm XT4 Review in 2021

Fujilm XT4 Review in 2021

The Fujifilm XT4 was released in April 2020. In that time many other cameras have been released by various manufacturers. So I wanted to review the Fujifilm XT4 in 2021 to see how it performs. If you want to see how the Fuji XT4 compares with the X-Pro 3 then take a look at this article 

If you would prefer to see a quick video on why you should buy the Fuji XT4 then you may want to check out my latest video instead. Alternatively you can see my Fuji XT4 video review which is now up on Youtube

The Fujifilm XT4 that I am reviewing is my own. I purchased it in October 2020 as it featured several important upgrades over the XT3 that convinced me that the XT series could finally be my main camera system. So here I am in 2021 reviewing the Fujifilm XT4.

The XT4 is Fujifilm’s top of the range X series camera. It uses the same 26mp X-Trans sensor as the previous generation of X series bodies. Having experience with the XT3 I already knew that the image quality that can be achieved with this sensor is excellent both in terms of resolution, dynamic range and high ISO performance. I will include sample images below just in case you are unaware of how this sensor performs.

Original raw capture
Shadows pushed all the way in Lightroom
100% crop of above image shows very little noise in the shadows

For me, the image quality that I would get was a known quantity and one that I knew I was happy with. However, the upgrades that made me look more closely at the XT4 were more on the handling side of things.

As I spend a lot of time out shooting with my family in tow, I often find that I don’t carry a tripod on these types of trips. Having been a long-time user of Olympus cameras and their excellent IBIS (in body image stabilisation) the inclusion of IBIS in the XT4 was a very welcome addition. So how well does the IBIS work?

 

With the Fuji 10-24mm f/4 lens attached the IBIS in the XT4 works alongside the OIS in the lens to give a claimed 6 stops of image stabilisation.

100% crop @10mm 0.4 Seconds

I took a series of images to see just how effective the IBIS was. Normally I can get sharp hand held images on the 10mm end of this lens shooting at 1/20th second. If the shutter speed drops any lower then my keeper rate goes down. 1/15 of a second and below and it becomes a bit hit and miss.

With the IBIS turned on I found that I could consistently get sharp handheld photos at 1/3

to ½ a second. This is with excellent technique. If I shoot in a more casual manner, then I cannot achieve sharp images with slower shutter speeds than 1/5 second.

So, the XT4 IBIS in combination with the OIS in the 10-24mm lens is giving me approximately 4 stops of stabilisation at the wide end.

100% Crop @200mm 1/10

I repeated this experiment using the Fuji 55-200mm lens and found that I could consistently get sharp handheld images at the 200mm end at 1/10 second whereas normally I would have to be shooting at 1/320 giving me around 5 stops of stabilisation.  This is pretty much in line with what Fuji says the XT4 IBIS will give you alone and about a stop under the 6 stops they claim the combined IBIS and OIS of the lens will give.

Overall the IBIS is not quite as effective as that found on the Olympus EM1 III where I could regularly handhold wide angel images at 1-2 seconds but I’m still happy with it when you take into account the larger APS-C sensor found in the XT4 giving you better ISO performance. It allows me to just about get down to speeds where I can add an element of motion to water which is the main reason I would be shooting at those shutter speeds.

Build quality and handling

When I first opened the slick black packaging of the Fuji XT4 and held the camera in my hand I was very pleasantly surprised. My previous experience with the XT series ( I have owned the XT1 and XT2 and tested out the XT3) was that they are well made but always felt a little hollow. I was not a fan of this feeling as I like a camera to feel solid in my hand. I take my gear all over the World and I want it to feel as if it can stand up to some serious work.

The XT4 immediately felt better and much more solid. Yes, it weighs a little more at 607g vs 539g for the XT3 but it feels much better built, does not have that hollow feeling and the grip has been enlarged which makes it much more comfortable in the hand. It is now 2mm wider and 5mm deeper than the XT3 at 135 x93x 64mm. The size now seems just about a perfect compromise between feeling solid, well-built and comfortable in the hand without being too bulky or heavy. Please do not change this Fuji as I think you nailed it this time.

The shutter mechanism is now rated to 300k actuations compared with 150k on the XT3. This alone speaks to the improved build quality and gives me confidence that the XT4 will easily cope with professional use.

LCD Screen

One of the most significant (and controversial) changes comes in the form of a fully articulating rear LCD. I know that some Fuji fans prefer a standard or 3-way tilt screen as found on previous generations, but I find a fully articulating rear screen to be the most flexible solution. It allows you to tilt up and down as well as front facing when horizontal and it also allows you to flip it 90 degrees to the camera body when shooting in portrait orientation. Not to mention that you can conveniently close it so that the screen faces in towards the body and is protected from being scratched or damaged. I understand that for ‘from the hip’ street shooting it may be less balanced and subtle but I rarely do that so don’t miss that ability.

 

The fully articulating screen is great but note the mic prot cover which is fiddly in use.

While I love the screen, I do have one gripe with it. Well actually its not with the screen itself but with the cheap flappy port covers for the mic and remote sockets. They get in the way when you are setup for video and then want to flip the screen from rear facing to forward facing. I wish Fuji would have made them removable but they didn’t. Inexplicably they did decide to make the memory card door removable. Surely that is the wrong way around.

Battery

Lastly the other change that was especially important to me was the use of the new NP-W235 battery which lasts much longer than the older generation NP-W126s found in the older generation cameras. I can now shoot well over 500 shots on one battery and as I have the battery grip and two additional batteries this can easily see me through a long weekend landscape photography shoot. The camera itself can also be charged by USB-C which is great as I have a ton of power banks lying around so I can just bring one or two power banks on my trips and charge all my devices including the camera.

Something that I am not so fond of is that Fuji does not include a proper charger in the box. Only a cheap looking Phone style USB charger and USB-C cable is included so you must charge the batteries up while in the camera. Not great if you need to charge batteries while using the camera. The same can be said of the batter grip as there is no way to charge this separately. You must attach it to the camera and then charge all 3 batteries together. Again, not really the best solution as it would be nice to be able to charge the batteries in the grip while using the camera. It’s not a big deal though because the batteries now easily get me through a day’s shooting and I can simply plug everything in to a power bank at night to charge them.

There are a few other additions to the XT4 which may be of interest to you but are not that significant for my use. One is the addition of Classic Chrome film simulation. This is a beautiful filmic looking preset that I find works very well for side lit scenes and Caucasian skin. However, as I shoot a lot of my portraits in Asia it doesn’t work so well for Asian skin tones, so I only tend to use it when I’m back in Europe.

Classic Chrome (used for this shot) suits Asian skintone better than the new Classic Neg but I tend to use one of the Pro Neg film simulations the most.
100% crop of above image using the 56mm 1.2@ 1.2, 1/125, ISO 160

The Fujifilm XT4 now also allows for 240 fps HD video capture but I must admit I have not used it thus far being primarily a stills shooter. The video specs of the XT4 are excellent and varied, offering a lot of options for professional video capture which I will be exploring more later in the year if I can get back to the UK once this damned pandemic is dealt with. The Eterna profile along with very good 10 bit 4k video means that the Xt4 is more than good enough for my video needs.

Image Quality

Finally, as promised here are some image quality samples for those of you who are unfamiliar with what the 26mp X-Trans sensor can produce. The image quality is basically unchanged from the XT3 and X-Pro 3. I own an X-Pro 3 and get exactly the same images from it as I do the XT4.

The AF performance and in particular face and eye detection is slightly improved in the XT4.

XF 55-200mm, F/7.1, 1/480, ISO 160
XF 56mm @ f/1.2, 1/4400, ISO 160

So why would I (and you) choose the Fujifilm XT4 over rivals such as the Sony A7II (which I have also owned)?

For me there are 3 main reasons.

Firstly, and most importantly (for me) the handling, ergonomics and joy of using the XT4 is beyond the A7III. The XT4 feels like a ‘real’ camera with its manual dials for ISO, shutter speed and aperture. The Sony feels like a smart phone on steroids and as a bit of a techno dinosaur I prefer the more analogue feel of Fujis. If I enjoy using a camera and it makes me feel inspired then I generally get better images with it.

Secondly, I wanted a rugged but lightweight camera system (note I said system) and while the XT4 may not be much smaller than the A7III/Z6/EOS R etc, when you combine it with the vast array of Fuji lenses (particularly the Zooms) then the kit as a whole is still significantly smaller than a full frame kit. My go to lenses for travel are the trio of 10-24mm, 18-55mm, 55-200mm and the 35mm f/2. This all fits easily in my bag ( Lowepro Flipside 400AW) with room for a spare body, batteries, filters, laptop, hard drives, mics, Mavic 2 Pro drone + 3x batteries and more.

You can build out quite a small full frame mirrorless kit but I always found it limiting to only stick to the smaller cheaper lenses and having used Sony cameras with the GM series of lenses in the past I found them unbalanced and unwieldy on the A7 series bodes. I understand why many use them and would never discourage that but for me the Fuji system does what I want at a size and weight that I am happy with.

Finally, an important factor in any decision is price. The Fuji system has options from cheap to expensive but overall, the cost of building a comprehensive kit around Fuji is cheaper than that of full frame and IMO the difference in image quality between APS-C and full frame is not worth the additional cost. In fact, I skipped it altogether and also added a medium format camera to my kit for those occasions where I need it.

 

For an alternative view from a talented photographer check out Jonas Rask’s Fuji XT4 article

 

 

Panasonic GX9 vs Olympus OMD EM5 III vs Fuji XT30

In this post I’m going to compare the Panasonic GX9 vs Olympus OMD EM5 III vs Fuji Xt30. As you probably know, I’ve shot Panasonic, Olympus and Fuji cameras for years now, going back to the the Panasonic G3, EM5 and X Pro1. I want a compact and lightweight camera that I can use mainly with prime lenses for some projects that I have planned in the Philippines later in the year. The project will be documentary and involve lots of candid portraits as well as some street photography. I plan to use whichever camera I choose with a (35mm equivalent focal lengths) 50mm and 85 ish mm prime lenses as those are my preferred focal lengths for the kind of shooting that I have planned. On the Panasonic and Olympus I shot the Pana-Leica 25mm 1.4,Olympus 45mm 1.2 and Sigma 56mm 1.4 while on the Fuji I paired it with the 35mm 1.4. I had planned on using the 56mm 1.2 as well but in the end couldn’t get hold of one in time for my testing but the AF performance is pretty much on par with the Fuji 35mm lens and having owned the 56mm previously I know how it performs.

 

Firstly let me say that all the specs are available online so I’m not going to go through them all here. I’ll just talk about those that mattered to me for the project that I have planned. Those being image quality, AF, handling and performance.

While the GX9 and EM5 III uses a 20mp Micro 43 sensor the Fuji XT30 makes use of the larger 26mp APS-C sensor found in the XT3 so it should be a no brainer that the image coming out of the Fuji is better and it performs better when pushing your ISO higher. The thing is that when reading forums on the internet they would lead you to believe that the difference is night and day and this simply is not the case. Yes the Fuji is slightly better once you get up to 3200+ ISO but the differences wont be enough to make or break an image. For me the more interesting question was about the colour each camera produced and I was particularly interested in the Acros black and white profile of the XT30 as a lot of my project will be shot in black and white. Quite frankly I chose the XT30 as one of the most affordable ways to get the Acros profile.  In my opinion the image quality produced by all the cameras is good enough for what I had in mind.

 

Fuji are heralded within the media for being excellent for portraits, skin tones and the Acros profile and in a lot of situations I know why. I love the organic look of the colours coming off the X-Trans sensor and under the right lighting conditions the Acros profile produces some beautiful black and white images. However sometimes the colours can feel just a little flat while the Panasonic and Olympus in my opinion actually produce more pleasing colours more of the time. I am a big fan of the colours that both Panasonic and Olympus cameras put out SOOC. For me they win when shooting colour images but the Fuji does well for black and white work. This is why I bought an XT 30 just for this project. However I like the Fuji and Panasonic black and white rendering equally and it really depends upon the subject and light as to which is better in a given situation.

In terms of handling all the cameras are small, lightweight and discreet. They are quick in use and it is easy to quickly change settings on them. I prefer that the Olympus has a separate door for memory cards and I still prefer the PASM system employed by virtually every camera manufacturer rather than the separate dials for shutter speed employed by Fuji. (note the XT30 has a shutter speed dial which when using most Fuji lenses combines with the Aperture ring to give control over exposure). The XT30 does not have and ISO dial unlike its big brother the XT3.

All the cameras feel well built although I’d have to give the nod to the GX9 and Em5III (although I have heard issues reported around the strength of the tripod plate on the EM5II) as they just feel a little higher quality finish and of course the Em5III is weather sealed.

I had fully expected to love the little Fuji XT30 but there were 2 major issues for me once I had a little time with the camera. Firstly, I wanted to shoot the 35mm 1.4 and 56mm 1.2 for my project and quite frankly the AF motors on these lenses still proved to be pretty poor. I had hoped that with the latest generation of camera bodies the AF when using these lenses would have improved but unfortunately (and this is no fault of the XT30’s) it hasn’t. Now I know that a lot of Fuji users love these lenses and in terms of their image quality, yes they are gems but the problem I had while testing the gear out (on not very trying subjects) was that it took multiple shot to get perfect focus. No, it wasn’t a bad copy of the lens, this is exactly how I remember my previous version being as well. I guess it is my own fault for hoping for an improvement that simply can’t be provided by a newer camera. These lenses desperately need updating and I really hope Fuji is working on this as their more modern lenses perform much faster. However it is these lenses that I particularly wanted to use. I’m not interested in the f/2 primes as I’m giving up some of the benefits of that APS-C sensor when shooting with them. In all honesty I like the ergonomics and handling of the EM5 III the most, so unless the XT30 is going to give me tangible benefits (which it would if these lenses auto focussed quickly enough) over it then I’m not going to choose it. The EM5 III is simply more fun and gives me more confidence that I can nail the focus every time.

 

Fuji Acros ISO 4000

While the Fuji XT-30 does offer slightly improved High ISO performance the differences are minimal and I’d still place my limit of acceptable IQ for portraits at ISO 3200, exactly the same as the Micro 43 cameras.

Olympus EM5III Monochrome + Green filter , ISO 2000
GX9 , L Monochrome Pofile, ISO 200

The second major issue (and one which even had me and my wife spend and evening trying to figure out) was the Fuji App to transfer images to your mobile device. I have used this app before, along with the ones form every other major camera manufacturer (except Canon). The best ones are from Olympus and Panasonic, Sony’s is fine too and Nikon’s although temperamental usually works. Well this Fuji App is a complete and utter bag of S**t. I spent hours trying to get it to connect to my phone, my wifes phone, my tablet and in the end gave up. When I’m out in the middle of nowhere taking photos and I want to quickly transfer some images then this is a big no no for Fuji. I didn’t previously have this issue when I owned the XT2 so I can only assume that the updated app is either useless, has compatibility issues or it’s the XT30’s fault. Either way in the end no matter how beautiful the Acros black and white images were, far too many were out of focus and when they were in focus the app made viewing them on my mobile device impossible. The Fuji is sadly out of the race and has been sent back.. As you saw in my Olympus OMD EM5 III Review this camera does everything that 90% of people will need it to do with no fuss. It makes photography easy and fun and dare I say it, quite cool too.

 

However I already own the Panasonic GX9 and a GH5 so is the Olympus at approximatley £1000 twice as good as the Panasonic GX9 which can be had for under £500 (as of early 2020)?

 

In the Olympus’ favour it has slightly better IBIS, is weather sealed, has a better viewfinder and offers Hi Res mode as well as the useful long exposure modes such as Live Bulb and Live view. In the Panasonic’s favour for me is the fact that it uses the same menu system and has the same colour profile as my existing GH5 and so using the two together would be a more seemless experience and mean my lazy ass doesn’t have to memorise two menu systems. It is of course half the price.

 

When I wrote my Olympus EM5III review it was before the Coronoavirus Pandemic had really hit the UK hard. Money and business was quite good and I could afford the additional cost of the EM5III over the GX9. However as I sit here writing this (early April) the UK economy has basically shut down, business has dried up and I am now putting a much higher priority on bang for buck to ensure that I get the most out of any investment that I make in to a camera or system. This puts cost way higher up my list of priorities than would previously have been the case and I’m sure like many photographers out there I am now really asking myself the question, do I honestly need these extra features and are they really going to make a difference to my work and earning potential.

 

For me, in the end it comes down to the image I can produce. Yes it is nice to have the better viewfinder but the one in the GX9 does not hinder me from getting the shot. I also quite like the tilt mechanism on it. Yes, hi res mode would be nice to have and I can see myself using it quite a lot for landscapes but the projects that I have lined up will be fine with 20mp of resolution. Am I going to suddenly start doing a lot of long exposure photography to make use of live bulb and live view…..If I’m bluntly honest with myself then no, that just isn’t going to happen.

Does my camera need to be weather sealed? Well a lot of us like to kid ourselves that a certain specification is an absolute must. I hear people all the time saying that weather sealing is absolutely essential. I don’t buy it for the most part. I used to live in the Outer hebrides, a place where the weather could not be more challenging to a photographer. My cameras back then didn’t offer top notch weather sealing and you know what I did when the heavens opened… I popped my camera back in my camera bag and waited for the torrential wind blasted downpour to pass. Just before and just after the storm is the best time to photograph anyway not during it. Even if the cameras were weather sealed like a tank the front element of the lens woud be covered in rain and ruin any image. The philippinnes, just like the Outer Hebrides is prone to sudden torrential downpours but for the subjects that I plan on shooting it is irrelevant as I doubt many portrait subjects will be willing to stand out in the rain while I photograph them. Long story short, weather sealing is nice to have but not essential for me.

 

Both the GX9 and EM5 III have fast enough AF speed for my needs. Yes the Olympus may be a little better at tracking thanks to its phase detect Af points but it doesn’t make a difference for what I shoot as the GX9 is quick to focus and has decent face and eye detect AF.

Conclusion

The crux of the matter comes down to which camera offers the features that I need in the cheapest package and this is where the GX9 delivers in spades. IMO it is probably the best value camera in the photographic universe at the moment.

In terms of output it is virtually identical to the Olympus EM5 III however it actually bests it in my opinion in one area that is vital to my project. The black and white profiles of the latest generation of Panasonic cameras and in particular L Monochrome D is just about my favourite black and white profile of any camera.

 

Despite wanting the Fuji XT30’s black and white output the |fuji sytem currently has too many compromises to work for me (Slow AF, No IBIS, Poor Wifi App, No PASM). Despite quite liking a lot of the EM5III features I don’t really need them. My Panasonic GX9 takes beautiful black and white images (particularly in the L Mono and L Mono D profile) and offers everything that I need in a small lightweight package. It doesn’t hurt that it looks beautiful too. So I’ll be using it alongside my GH5 for my projects this year.

 

 

 

Olympus OMD EM1 mark II vs Panasonic GH5 for Photography

In this article I am going to compare the Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs the Panasonic GH5. I own both of these top of the range Micro 4/3 cameras.

I have been using them for a few months now with a variety of different lenses and for different types of photography including landscapes, portraits and travel.

There are loads of comparisons on line that deal with the video side of things far better than I ever could as a primarily stills photographer. However despite the often stated presumption of using Olympus for stills and Panasonic for video I thought it would make an interesting comparison to see if this still holds true with these two flagship Micro 4/3 cameras.

So let’s get straight into the comparison by looking firstly at the specs and then on to ergonomics and handling.

  • Both have the latest 20mp Micro 4/3 sensors
  • Both shoot 4k video although the GH5 has many more options including super slow motion full HD at 180fps as well as higher bit rates.
  • The EM1 II has a 3 inch touch screen LCD and 2.36 million dot viewfinder
  • The GH5 has a larger 3.2 inch touch screen LCD and 3.6 million dot viewfinder
  • Both are weather sealed down to -10c
  • The Olympus can shoot at up to 60 fps with the electronic shutter and 15 FPS with the mechanical shutter
  • The GH5 shoots at 11 FPS
  • Both have in-body 5 axis image stabilisation
  • Both have a variety of shooting modes including time-lapse, HDR and focus bracketing

So let’s look a little bit beyond the specs and see what the cameras are actually like to handle.

 Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 – Handling

First up the Panasonic GH5 is 139x98x87mm and weighs 725g with the battery in. I might note it’s the same battery as the GH4 which is great if you already own some. Compare this with its predecessor the GH4 at 133x93x84mm and with a weight of 560g with battery and you can see that the GH5 has put on a considerable amount of weight and some heft too. Where I really notice this most is in the depth of the grip. It is very comfortable but I have to be honest and say I prefer the GH4’s grip.

 

The Olympus OMD EM1 mark II is slightly larger than its predecessor at 134x91x69mm and lighter too at 574g but still feels svelt in comparison to the GH5.

Both cameras feel great in the hand and are very comfortable to hold, even with larger lenses attached. However the GH5 is starting to feel quite large for a Micro 4/3 body. A lot of people (myself included) use this system for its light weight and portability.

I personally prefer the size and weight of the Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II. When I had both cameras on me in Asia recently I found myself gravitating towards the Olympus when given a choice. It was the one I naturally reached for out of the two. The reason is not just the size and weight but the fact that I also find the grip more comfortable. The grip on the GH5 is just a little too deep and results in your hand feeling the strain on extended use.

In terms of controls, both of these cameras are incredibly customisable. You can set them up virtually as you want. However one of the benefits of the larger body on the GH5 is more function buttons and more direct access buttons to things like ISO, white balance and exposure compensation. If you are used to the direct controls of a DSLR then the GH5 will feel more natural to you.

 

The Olympus takes a little more setting up initially but once you have set it up to your liking then you rarely have to delve in to the menu system during everyday shooting. The Panasonic just make sense and is very logical and intuitve in its control layout. I really can’t find fault with it. Picking it up for the first time everything was just where I would expect it to be and using it comes very naturally to me.

 

As for the menu systems themselves, the GH5’s menu is a little better set out and more intuitive to use thanks to a simple layout and straight forward logical ordering. The Olympus on the other hand does take a little getting used to with some odd naming of items such as noise reduction being called the noise filter etc. However once you are used to it then even the Olympus is quick and easy to navigate through. Top marks to Panasonic here though as I feel their menu system is one of the best available and having used loads of different cameras I find that everything is where I would expect it to be.

One new addition for the Panasonic GH5 is the AF joystick which has been added to the back of the camera. This allows direct access to change your AF point and it is a joy to use. Not only does it enable you to change your AF point more quickly but when clicked it also returns the AF point to home (default is centre point). Panasonic have implemented this brilliantly. There is also a switch which lets you quickly flick between AF-S, AF-C and manual focus.

The Olympus on the other hand relies on the D-Pad and while it is quick to use I do prefer the AF joystick of the GH5 and I’m sure most people would too.

Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 – Image Stabilisation

 

One of the big new additions to the Panasonic GH5 over the Gh4 is in body image stabilisation. Traditionally this has always been one of the big advantages that Olympus had over Panasonic.

 

However now that Panasonic have added this to the GH5 it really is a great improvement. Not only does it allow you to handhold shots at much lower shutter speeds enabling you to use a lower ISO but I also find it results in a much higher keeper rate for virtually all photos that you take.

So how does the image stabilisation compare between these two models.

Olympus claims 5.5 stops of stabilisation on the EM1 Mark II and Panasonic claims 5 stops on the GH5.

In my testing I found that I could comfortably handhold the Olympus at shutter speeds as low as 1-2 seconds at 12mm and still consistently get tack sharp images. Some even claim shutter speeds as low as 10 seconds are possible but I think that is a bit hit and miss and requires propping yourself up against a wall or tree to try and minimise any movement in your body.

With the GH5 I was able to consistently get tack sharp images at 1/3 second at 12mm on the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro lens ( see my review of that lens here ). So while the Olympus does still hold an advantage in this area the Panasonic certainly puts up a respectable fight.

Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonci GH5 – Auto Focus, Burst rates and action

Both of these cameras are built for speed.

The Olympus boasts an incredible 60 fps burst rate  (single AF only) and 18 FPS with C-AF with the electronic shutter . These drop down to 15 FPS (S-AF) and 10 FPS (C-AF) with the mechanical shutter.

The GH5 while not as fast still offers very reasonable rates of 12 FPS (S-AF) and 9FPS (C-AF). So if you actually ignore the headline grabbing rates of the Olympus and look at the most useful option which is C-AF with the mechanical shutter there is on 1 FPS difference between the two.

So how do these two cameras handle fast action. 

I’m going to say straight up here that I am not a fast action shooter. I do portraits, landscapes and travel photography. However just in my simple testing having models walk through the scene I found that the Olympus AF system copes better and gives a higher keeper rate than the GH5. Although the GH5 has more focus points at 225 vs Olympus’ 121, the EM1 II uses a hybrid system of phase detect and contrast detect points that seem better able to keep up with movement.

Panasonic’s Depth from Defocus contrast detect system struggles a little bit more when it comes to C-AF and tracking auto focus.

Olympus also captures images at any of its high frame rates in full raw resolution. Pro capture is a feature which will pre record 14 images and constantly hold them in the buffer. Then if you start shooting you will be able to select from those pre-recorded images. It allows you to capture shots where maybe your trigger finger wasn’t quite fast enough.

Panasonic on the other hand offers 6k photo mode which allows you to continuosly record at 30fps and then extract 18mp still images from the recording but only in Jpeg format.

If I’m honest I find the implementation of Panasonic’s 6k photo mode more useful than Olympus’ due to one factor. With the Olympus you have to trawl through and delete any images that you don’t want. With the Panasonic you still have to look through all the images but you can simply select the ones that you want to keep. That saves me having to constantly delete multiple photos. However I rarely find myself using either of these options as I prefer a more considered and slower paced approach to photography but I understand birders, wildlife and sports photographers would appreciate them. Basically you can choose between the Raw files of the Olympus or the Jpegs of the Panasonic.

Standard focus performance from both is excellent

When it comes down to what I use most which is S-AF in single shot mode both cameras are brilliant in good light. They lock on quickly and are incredibly accurate. When the light drops slightly the Olympus is a tad better but there really is not much in it.

One thing I did notice while testing the Olympus 25mm 1.2 Pro on the GH5 was that a strongly back-lit scene could throw the GH5 off and it would hunt or in some cases fail to focus altogether.

 

When it comes to how I use these cameras I would take both of them over a DSLR any day of the week because they  just focus much more accurately.

Let’s not forget that both offer face detection and eye detection which is so useful for portrait work. Both work well but I prefer Olympus’ implementation as it adds a square over the face and then a smaller one over whichever eye is in focus. Panasonic puts a square around the face but then has intersecting lines to show you which eye is in focus. It is not quite as intuitive as the EM1 II and on occasion the intersecting lines do not meet over an eye so I was unsure as to whether the eye was in focus or not.

Taken on the EM1 II using face detect and near side eye selection
Panasonic GH5 + 25mm f/1.4 shot using eye detect AF

 

Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 – Image Quality

Both cameras are using the latest Micro 4/3 20mp sensors so they should be quite evenly matched. However there has always been a notion that you use Olympus for stills and Panasonic for video but does this still hold true with the latest generation of cameras.

In terms of IQ the two cameras are virtually identical, offering sharp detailed photos. The GH5 removes the AA filter but in practise I have not noticed this to offer any tangible benefit. Both cameras seem to resolve the same level of detail.

One area where there is a slight difference is that the Olympus offers an extended ISO setting of 64 compared to that of 100 with the GH5. This does allow the EM1 II to give incredibly clean results with none of the noise that used to be present at base ISO in clear skies. This is a big improvement for me personally with my landscape work.

Look how clean those shadows are at ISO 64 on the EM1 Mark II

In terms of high ISO performance the two cameras are very evenly matched offering very usable files even at 3200 ISO and even 6400 ISO if the photos are just for web use or small prints.

Panasonic GH5 + Pana Leica 25mm f/1.4

At up to 800 ISO images are very clean and retain detail. At 1600 ISO you can see a slight loss of detail but no noise. At 3200 ISO there is further loss of detail and some noise creeping in to the images. At 6400 ISO details become smeared and noise is quite visible.

One thing that I have seen is that the Panasonic GH5 seems to handle colour noise a little better than the Olympus EM1 II at higher ISO settings. At 3200 the Olympus sometimes shows some ugly colour noise in skin tones whereas the Panasonic doesn’t. This is in the Jpeg files but not present in the raw files so if you shoot raw then it is nothing to be concerned about. If you shoot jpeg it is worth being aware of.

The colours on the GH5 have been improved quite a lot and I particularly like their natural profile for almost all types of imagery. The L Mono setting also gives very nice high contrast black and white shots. The natural profile on the Olympus is still the one I go to for most images and of course you can tweak the black and white profile in both the highlights, shadows and mid-tones to get it exactly as you wish.

Dynamic range of the two cameras is essentially identical.

 

I’ll be adding some high ISO examples soon. Having just gone through all my photo from these two cameras I realised that I don’t have good test shots to share because I was using the Olympus 25mm 1.2 (see my review here )and Pana Leica 25mm 1.4 a lot of the time and that allowed me to keep my ISO to 1600 or below at all times while in Asia.

GH5 + Pana Leica 25mm f/1.4
EM1 ii + 25mm 1.2
EM1 ii + 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

 

Olympus does have a trick up its sleeve to best the GH5 for stills imagery in the form of the Hi Res mode. This combines 8 images in camera using sensor shift technology to give one hi resolution image.

I have found that this worked better in the EM1 Mark II than on my old EM5 II. It deals with movement better. For instance it is usable for running water now. However movement in trees and grass etc can still leave issues in your images that means this mode is only really fully usable for things like product photography. Let’s hope Olympus can improve Hi Res mode further as it has so much potential.

To use Hi Res mode you have to have the camera locked down on a sturdy tripod. I use the Manfrotto 055 XPRO3 which is absolutely rock solid.

You also need to be using very sharp lenses to really take advantage of this and resolve all the detail.

Another area where the Olympus EM1 II has an advantage is in night photography. Live view, live boost and live composite really are very useful as they allow you to see the image on the LCD screen as it is being created. It gives you a live preview as the exposure is taking place so you know exactly when you have the correct exposure and can stop at the perfect time.

 

Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 – Conclusion

 

So which camera is the better one for stills photography?

If you are not going to take advantage of Hi Res mode, Live view, Live bulb and Live composite then at £1699 compared with £1849 the GH5 is surely the logical choice with its better viewfinder, LCD and far better video features. It definitely offers the better value and can keep up with the Olympus EM1 Mark II for general photography use.

However having said all that I still prefer the Olympus EM1 II and here is why.

I prefer the handling of the Olympus. I use Micro 4/3 to keep the size and weight of my kit small and light. The Panasonic GH5 is just a little too large for my liking and I prefer the grip on the Olympus which is more comfortable to hold all day long.

The GH5 does have good ergonomics and I particularly like the AF joystick and direct access to ISO via a dedicated button but I am quite happy using the D-pad to move AF points on the EM1 II and I can assign almost any button on the EM1 II to give me quick access to ISO. In all honesty if I am shooting in situations where the ISO needs changing quickly then I will have either camera set to auto ISO and set a maximum ISO and minimum shutter. If I want to set the ISO manually such as when shooting landscapes then quick access is not so vital and a quick press of the OK button and I am in to Olympus’ Super Control panel.

I find the auto focus on the Olympus just a touch more reliable in low light and I prefer their implementation of face detect AF. These two things can and did make the difference between me getting a candid shot of my daughter and not.

 

Lastly and this is a very subjective thing but I find the Olympus OMD EM1 II to be a beautiful camera and the finish in my opinion feels higher quality and more refined. It just works so well. In fact I would say that ergonomically it is the best camera that I have ever used and in the end this factor more than specs make me want to pick it up and take it with me everywhere.

 

So which one should you chose?

My brain finds it hard to recommend the Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II vs Panasonic GH5 at this time but my heart would chose the Olympus each and every time. However I will be keeping both as they are two of the best cameras available right now and whichever one you choose I’m sure you will be delighted.

 

 

Olympus OMD EM5 II Review

This is not just any old Olympus OM EM5 II review. I have written this review after having spent nearly a year using this camera for travel, landscape and portrait photography. In this review I will tell you what is great and not so great about this small but powerful camera. So lets crack on and get into the review. If you are looking at higher end Micro 4/3 cameras then you might like my comparison of the Olympus OMD EM1 ii vs Panasonic GH5



 

Olympus OMD EM 5 II review – Build Quality and Handling

 

Let’s start with the build quality and handling of the EM5 II because for me in these days where almost all cameras produce high quality results I find myself more and more concerned with how a camera feels and handles.

The OMD EM5 II is a very well built little camera. It is constructed of a magnesium alloy body and is fully weather sealed. I have used it in everything from tropical rain to sub zero temperatures and it has functioned faultlessly.

The body weighing in at 469g feels dense and solid. Unlike Fuji cameras which often have a slightly hollow feeling. It is a little larger and heavier than the Mk I at 124x85x45mm  but I also find it more comfortable to hold. This is thanks in part to the thumb rest (which extends out a little further) and the increased grip size on the front.

The buttons on the camera also lose the slightly spongy feeling of the mark 1 and as a result give better tactile feedback when in use.

The dials on the mk II are larger and the power switch has been re-positioned to the top left of the camera a la the EM1.

The 3 Inch fully articulated LCD screen feels robust and not in danger of snapping off or becoming a weak point. Let’s not forget that this little camera is weather sealed against dust, water and it is also now tested to be freeze-proof.

The only issue I have had in the handling department with the Olympus OMD EM5 II is the tendency for the rubber viewfinder eye piece to get knocked off when taking it in and out of my bag. So I would advise that you keep an eye on it to make sure you don’t lose it.

I would also mention that in its default state the startup time can be slow. It can also be tedious when the eye sensor is turned on and you switch between the LCD and EVF. I personally turn off the eye sensor and shoot only through the EVF. Leaving the LCD for reviewing images. This greatly speeds up operation of the camera.

I like the modular nature of the OMD EM5 II. What do I mean by this? Well I would advise any owner to at least pick up the HLD8G part of the battery grip because it really adds to the handling of the camera when using larger lenses. I find that with the HLD8G grip added the camera handles very similarly to my old EM1. It feels just right with larger lenses like the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro attached. Of course with this combination you now have a very well weather sealed camera and lens combination that can take in just about any climate.

But of course you also have the choice to go small and light when you wish by removing the grip and using smaller prime lenses like the 25mm 1.8.

The HLD 6G grip transforms the handling with larger lenses attached.
All the function buttons are customisable and so are the dials.

 

Olympus OMD EM5 II Review – Features

 

  • 16mp Micro 4/3 sensor
  • In-built 5 axis image stabilisation
  • 40mp Hi res mode
  • 1080/60p shooting and 1080/30p at up to 77Mbps (All-I)
  • 1/8000th sec maximum shutter speed (1/16000th with electronic shutter)
  • Built-in Wi-Fi
  • Live Bulb and Live time for easy long exposure photography

 

 

Let’s talk about that 16mp sensor because some may feel it is lacking compared to many competitors today where they are regularly offering 20-24mp on larger APS-C sensors.

While the 16mp sensor doesn’t quite keep up with competition anymore it is still perfectly capable of giving detailed images that can easily be used for everything from social media to prints up to 30×20″ with proper technique.

 

This is a 100% crop from Raw file with no adjustments or sharpening.

 

Dynamic range is on par with larger APS-C sensor offerings from Fuji and Nikon (see my Micro 4/3 vs APS-C comparison here).

Up to ISO 3200 is perfectly usable and the grain from noise is not unsightly.

Below are a couple of samples from shots taken at ISO 3200. Test charts don’t really give you a clear idea of real world noise performance. I find that the real test is shooting portraits and seeing how the camera does with skin tones. Both of these are 100% crops.

ISO 3200 straight from raw file with no adjustments, no noise reduction or sharpening

 

The same shot with +25 luminance NR in LIghtroom CC and a little sharpening.

Olympus also offers a Hi Res mode which gives 40mp files that both improve the detail and colour accuracy of the images. It is an incredible feat. However the caveat is that you really need to lock your camera down on a solid tripod and have minimal to no movement within the scene. It is workable with landscape images and is certainly very useful for studio product and architectural photography.

Click the image to see the full resolution shot on Flickr

The image stabilisation within the EM5 II is one of the standout features of this camera. At 24mm I can comfortably hand hold shots at 1 second which has several benefits. Firstly it allows you to lower the shutter speed and keep the ISO low, resulting in better quality photos with less noise. This somewhat negates the benefits of larger sensor cameras if your subjects are stationary.

Secondly it allows you to feel comfortable heading out with your camera without a tripod.

Shot handheld at 1/3 second.

The 1/8000 of a second fastest mechanical shutter speed means that even using fast prime lenses in broad daylight is usually not an issue.

Video has been improved on the EM5 II over the original and the quality is decent enough for travel use and V-Logging. You can even shoot time lapse and slow motion in camera. However the video image is nowhere near as sharp as that given by recent Panasonic cameras.

Here is a quick video I put together using the OMD EM5II and GH5. The scenes up to the vegetables being chopped are all shot on the EM5 II

I also find myself using the handy Olympus Viewer app to transfer images from the camera to my phone for quick uploading to social media. Unlike Fuji there is no 30 picture transfer limit. The app is simple and functional, allowing you to also leave your shutter release at home as you can trigger the camera from it.

The viewfinder on the EM5 II is taken directly from the EM1 and is larger than the one found on the Olympus Pen F for example. It is not the largest EVF in the world, with those from the Fuji XT2 and Panasonic GH5 offering a better experience. However it is large enough to manually focus lenses and see all the details that you will need to capture the moment.

With really useful tools in camera such as Live Bulb and Live Time you can capture long exposures while being given a preview on the LCD screen as the image builds. This is one of the standout features of Olympus cameras at the moment and genuinely useful.

Olympus OMD EM5 II Review – Verdict

 

So why am I reviewing the Olympus OMD EM5 II when it has been out for a couple of years now and its replacement is expected in a few months time.

Well in this day and age with companies constantly bombarding us with their marketing telling us that we need the latest and greatest in order to be good photographers, compete with everyone else etc, I wanted to show that this 2 year old small sensored camera is still perfectly capable of producing professional quality results in a small package with all the features you are likely to ever need.

It can now be bought for around £600 in the UK from some suppliers such as Cotswold Cameras and at that price it is an absolute steal.

If you are trying to decide between the Olympus OMD EM5 II and the Olympus Pen F then check out my comparison here 

 

And if you are going to do any shopping on Amazon UK or Amazon US then please do click through my links as I will earn a small commission and it wont cost you a penny more.

Olympus 75mm 1.8 Review

 

 

The Olympus 75mm f/1.8 has a rather odd focal length but despite this it is regarded as one of the best lenses in the Micro 4/3 lineup.

In this Olympus 75mm f1.8 review I am going to show you how this lens performs in the real World. You wont find any charts here, just real World use and everyday photos.

Olympus 75mm 1.8 Review – Build quality

 

Lets not beat around the bush, the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 lens is not cheap, however it is within the price range of a lot of enthusiasts before we push into the territory of really expensive glass such as the Panasonic Nocticron 42.5mm 1.2.

 

The build quality of the Olympus 75mm feels excellent with its metal barrel and smooth focus ring. In matt black finish it looks beautiful attached to my black EM5II. Suffice to say you can feel where the extra money goes in comparison to lenses such as the Olympus 25mm 1.8 and 45mm 1.8. Those lenses are optically very good but they feel made to a budget whereas the 75mm 1.8 feels like no expense has been spared in crafting this lens. Easily on par with the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro lens, in fact it feels a little nicer in the hand.

It feels well balanced on an EM5 II and even better with a grip attached. For a 150mm equivalent lens this is exceptionally small and light. But it doesn’t feel cheap. Just well built, solid and professional.

Size wise it is easier to just show you the lens compared to the 45mm 1.8 and 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro zoom to give you an idea of the size.

 

 

The 75mm compared to 45mm (left) and 12-40mm Pro (right)

 

 

I’m not going to go into detail on auto focus performance except to say that it is very quick to focus. As fast as any lens on the system. The only caveat is that in low light it can hunt a little but that is due to the contrast detect AF system on the EM5II. All lenses perform like this on the EM5 II. However I will retest it on the EM1 mk II once I have one as its phase detect focus points should help it perform better.


Olympus 75mm 1.8 Review – Image Quality

A lens like the Olympus 75mm 1.8 is a beautiful thing. I really do find satisfaction in handling and looking at a piece of glass that is this well made. There is a beautiful aesthetic to well made products and I appreciate this.

However that means very little if the performance is not up to scratch.

 

This is the second copy of the Olympus 75mm lens that I have owned and they both performed to a very similar level. That is they are both pin sharp. In fact this is some of the sharpest glass you will ever use should you decide that the focal length suits your style.

It is sharp from wide open with only minor improvements when stopping down to f/4 and f/5.6.

 

Lets take a quick look at some samples below.

 

 

Shot at f/1.8
100% crop from the centre (conversion from raw with no adjustments)

 

100% Crop from the corner

 

The lens is sharp and gives plenty of detail even wide open at f/1.8

 

Stopping down to f/4 increases IQ slightly

 

 

 

All the above images were shot in raw and then exported as jpegs for the website without any adjustments in lightroom.

 

The Olympus 75mm 1.8 is pin sharp in the centre at 1.8 with some slight loss of quality as we get out to the edges. One thing you can pick up on here is a little bit of purple fringing in the corners in the first image. I’ll go in to that in more detail later.

Here’s a shot of my wife that I took which shows how sharp details such as eyelashes look when shooting portraits. I didn’t make any extra effort to get a really sharp shot here. This was how it came out when we were playing about taking pictures.

 

 

 

Shot at F/8 using off camera flash but sharpness is nearly as good even wide open.

 

Bokeh

It’s pretty obvious that a lot of us buy fast glass for the ability to throw the background out of focus. Some lenses exhibit nervous bokeh (out of focus areas) and others render the scene in to a dreamy hazy creaminess. It is somewhat subjective to analyse bokeh with many factors playing a role. However I can say that the Olympus 75mm 1.8 offers creamy smooth bokeh with a gentle fall off. It doesn’t suffer with nervousness which can cause the out of focus areas to become distracting to the viewers eye. But hey, why read about bokeh when it is easier for me to show you a few examples below.

 

 

 

 

Shot at f/1.8
Look at the difference in subject isolation between the previous shot and this one shot at f/4.

Is the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 a perfect lens?

It’s pretty close to perfect if the focal length suits you. However there are two points that I would note.

  1. It is not weather sealed but I don’t mind as this is a specialist lens for particular situations. It is not intended to be a do everything lens like the 12-40mm Pro. Therefore weather sealing while nice is not essential.
  2. It suffers with some Purple fringing in very high contrast scenes.

Lets talk more about the purple fringing

This is quite a common flaw in many of todays lenses and I am not usually put off by it as long as a lens doesn’t suffer too badly.

The Olympus 75mm f/1.8 lens does suffer some purple fringing when shooting very high contrast scenes. The real acid test for this kind of fringing is always backlit leaves on trees so I shot a few example to see how it performed.

 

 

Notice the purple fringing due to the very high contrast scene. This is 100% crop of the worst affected area of the image

 

Just bare this in mind if you are going to shoot in very high contrast conditions but I would not let it put you off what is otherwise a superb performing lens.

Olympus cameras generally do a good job of removing Chromatic abberations in camera using profiles for each lens so it is not always a problem. I have also intentionally shot the lens in what is the most difficult situation so that I can highlight any flaws.

 

The Olympus 75mm 1.8 doesn’t exhibit any issues with lens flare. In fact I shot it straight into the sun through some leaves and it coped remarkably well. It retained plenty of contrast in the image. Move the sun just out of frame and you have no problems with flare at all.

 

The lens does not suffer any noticeable levels of distortion.

 

Olympus 75mm 1.8 review – Verdict

 

Overall the Olympus 75mm is a great performing lens. Optically it is one of the sharpest lenses I have used for any system. If you are using micro 4/3 and you want to define every eyelash in your vicitms (ahem sorry I mean subjects) then this lens can easily do that. The creamy bokeh and sharp glass from wide open mean that you can use this lens exactly how it is intended to be used.

The fact that Olympus do not provide a lens hood with a more premium lens like this still grates a little but in the end the results that this lens can produce makes it worth the added cost over something like the 45mm 1.8.

However if you are just looking for your first portrait lens to add to say, a standard zoom, then I would advise you to look more closely at the incredible value of the Olympus 45mm f/1.8. It is sharp, light and a lot cheaper than the 75mm. Plus I find the focal length much more useful in a wider range of situations.

 

If you found this review helpful then all I ask is that if you buy anything from Amazon that you click on my links below first so that I can earn a small (and I mean tiny) commission. It wont cost you a penny (cent, pesos) more.

Exit mobile version