I recently came across the channel of Gerald Undone who has very succinct but detailed explanations of complex technical issues in photography. If you don't understand them after watching his videos, you are probably beyond salvation.

I have selected some, and there are probably more in his channel.

I was particularly intrigued by the depth of field explanation, which says that it is the same regardless of focal length, but the bokeh looks more pleasing in high focal length lenses because they also magnify the out of focus area in the photo, along with the subject.

The one about crop lenses was also enlightening, and it explains how speed boosters work.

And finally here is one on white balance. It allows you to detect the photographers who really care about it, because they wear something grey on their wrists.

I spent some time collecting some of my nicer photos into a portfolio, organised by theme.

Have a look.

The promise of the micro four thirds format (micro43), about which I have written [before]({filename}/111222-ParisShares-my olympus pen experiment.md), is good quality in a portable package.

Here is an asterisk on quality: great photographs are mostly not about technical quality, which is a matter of fashion, opinion, conditioning and procrastination from things that matter. Quality is mostly a distraction, especially in a world where mobile phones compete for quality with pocket cameras of a few years back.

Asterisk two on quality: Unfortunately knowledge that quality for which one used to pay a premium for is now the standard does not make people happy with what is currently available. The expensive option will always have demand some of which is just a consequence of having two options.

Anyway. when I first heard about the micro43 format I expected a compromise between low quality and the specific advantages of the small format. In other words I was expecting quality to be a distraction.

The EM5 quality is not a distraction

The point at which one decides that quality is good enough is tricky, because 'good enough' shifts with time.

After considering all the above about quality, I am happy to say that the EM5 achieves good enough quality (unlike the EP3) so that the user only needs to worry about the art.

Micro43 strengths

In this respect, the insights on the strengths of the micro43 format are as relevant as they were when I first wrote about the format 6 months ago:

1. The camera is portable, almost pocketable, and this includes the lenses.
2. Subjects are not intimidated to be photographed or to photograph you if they are given the camera.
3. You can compose from many viewing angles without suffering a focus speed penalty, as with dSLR live view.
4. Video is easier to shoot than a dSLR.
5. Olympus-only, you can take advantage of image stabilisation even with prime lenses and shoot in the dark handheld.
6. Olympus-only, there are in-camera filter effects, highlight/shadow preview before shooting and the super control panel, which makes most settings accessible for easy changing from a single menu.

Cartoon filter, new to the EM5.

Black and white dramatic tone.

The EP3 may be better

Actually if it was just for the above, the Olympus EP3 is better, except for the low light ability and more limited dynamic range (i.e. quality). In fact I appreciate the EP3 more now, as it could become very small, or larger with add-ons depending on needs.

For example I could put my EP3 in my trousers pocket and go dancing in a club. It required slightly lose trousers, but it worked. The EM5, with its bump and rubber eyepiece on the top does not fit in trousers, and is difficult to take out of bigger pockets (like a coat pocket).

Similarly, if I need a flash I now have to carry one. Yes, the included clip- on is small, but using it adds the worry of keeping track of 2 ports on the camera where it connects, one port on the flash and a flash case, all of which contribute to the weather sealing of the camera. I think the consequence is that I will often not be bothering with the flash, which is a loss compared to the EP3. Commanding an external flash will also be happening less, because there would be even more parts to worry about, especially outdoors.

The EM5 is a different class of camera

The advantages of the EM5 that compensate for the lack of portability compared to a PEN, are in the combination of new technologies it incorporates.

The image quality is better, and very impressive: I think it surpasses the last dSLR I owned, the Nikon D90. It probably does not beat today's dSLRs, but it is certainly good enough for most situations, and I would need to look hard to find differences worthy of carrying a much bigger camera. And lenses.

Another big asset of the EM5 is the stabilisation technology it uses. The sensor is suspended in air so that it can compensate for movement in 5 axes. It works great, and it is used in every picture you take. It is really good, and works in video too.

More minor things for me are the weatherproofing which will hopefully prove useful (I live in Scotland after all). There is also an external grip which I am waiting to receive as it was part of a UK promotion for early adopters by Olympus.

The other big difference from the EP3 is the flexibility of the composition tools available in the EM5, that are the primary reason of the physical differences between the two cameras. I use both the tilting screen and the viewfinder a lot, and I would miss them if I returned to the EP3. The touchscreen, which allows to touch and shoot, is also something I use a lot and works great, especially for macro shooting.

The autofocus is fast, the shutter is quiet and there is a 9 FPS shooting speed all of which I am quickly getting used to and would miss in another camera.

Flying swallows from multiple exposures combined into one. The 9fps shooting helped capture them.

I also like the 12-50 lens which came as a kit lens. Its strength is its flexibility. It goes from very wide (24 mm equivalent) to a moderate zoom (100 mm equivalent), it has a respectable macro mode, it is weatherproof and has an electronic zoom mechanism to use for video. Its biggest downside is it is too big. However it is ideal for a hike or as a general purpose lens, which is the idea of a kit lens, and at the kit price it was a bargain.

The macro mode of the 12-50 lens does not offer a 1:1 magnification, but it is similar to the 14-150 lens combined with the Olympus macro adaptor, and is a good general purpose macro lens. The photos are at the closest focusing distance of either setup.

So while individually none of the EM5 strengths would justify an upgrade from the EP3, their combination makes for a different machine which belongs to its own class, and was worth the upgrade price to me.

EM5 problems

I don't think there is a big problem that would stop me from buying the camera. Some are annoyances that you have to adapt to, others could be improved in a future model or a firmware update.

Annoyances include the on/off switch position, the small buttons and the complicated menu. I am already getting used to these and I expect they will become even less annoying with time.

Some obvious potential improvements:

1. The ability to program all arrow buttons.
2. An in-camera panorama mode (which is missing).
3. An easily accessible recall setting for multiple presets (from mode dial or by adding them to the multi function buttons, for example).

Micro43 problems

There are some things about the micro43 system that may bother you. While some may catch up with dSLRs as image quality has, others are part of using a smaller system. I view these as something insignificant compared to the flexibility allowed by the format.

The greatest constraint of the micro43 format is the achievable depth of field, which will always be less narrow than that of full frame cameras as a consequence of physics. A broad depth of field is not always a problem, but the limited range limits photographic options. It is still possible to achieve out-of-focus backgrounds using specialised lenses like the Olympus 45 mm.

Still if all photography you do is about bokeh, then you should consider a different system. For me it is good enough.

Tracking auto focus is still not fast enough. It keeps improving and at some point it might be as good as a dSLR. However it is not there yet, so micro43 is not ready for sports photography.

Battery life is lower than a dSLR. This is a consequence of smaller batteries, and the fact that the camera constantly consumes power while on. One of the things I liked most about dSLRs was they could be permanently turned on, and whenever something interesting happened you could just shoot. It is a different shooting experience to have to turn the camera on after not using it for a while. Still, I prefer carrying extra batteries than carrying a system double the size/weight.

Summary

When I sold my Nikon dSLR system for an Olympus micro43 system I called it an experiment. I was fed up with the bulk and geekiness of dSLRs which imposed assumptions for what I have to be with such a camera. I knew there were important compromises I had to make and that I would still miss my kit in some events such as action and low light. I captured this uncertainty by asking whether I would use the EP3 at my wedding. Unlike the EP3, for the EM5 the answer is that I would be willing to try, even though I know it still is not a full replacement for a dSLR.

I am not asking it to be. In fact the reasons I moved away from dSLRs still hold and I am happy I did.

I am at the point of not looking back. I see too many clear advantages in micro43, so I have to work around the disadvantages rather than consider an alternative.

Just as I did when I ditched my Windows PC for a Mac.

Time lapse photography of the sun during the May 20th Eclipse.

I recently gave up a proper dSLR (digital SLR - one of those big cameras where lenses change) for something that promised to be smaller but not compromise much in photographic experience - the Olympus Pen EP3. It is a micro4/3 camera, i.e. its sensor is almost as big as dSLRs leading to comparable image quality, but slightly smaller so that the whole camera and lenses can be much smaller. It is supposed to combine the advantages of point and shoot cameras (small size) with those of dSLRs (lens choices, higher quality pictures, add- ons, etc). See [more](http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0344780582 /mirrorless-cameras-a-primer) on the class of camera the Olympus EP3 represents.

After 3 months of getting to know the new system, it is a good time to write about it. My aim is to distill the information that ended up mattering the most to me and write the post that I would have liked to have read before making the decision to switch.

Overall, it is a compromise in terms of image quality and portability. This I knew beforehand. The quality is still very good and usually I prefer the balance between portability and quality that the small camera give. One unexpected outcome has been that for many things the micro4/3 camera is better.

The main advantages have been

Portability - With a small lens, I can carry the micro4/3 camera with me anywhere. And that has definitely helped take more photos, and take photos without planning.

Lack of intimidation of subjects - The micro4/3 camera looks like something people are used to, so they are more relaxed around it, which often allows for better photos. Many people are impressed by the retro look, which can be a distraction but also an ice-breaker.

Screen instead of viewfinder - The lack of a viewfinder is a serious disadvantage in cases where manual focus is required, long zooming (it helps counter camera shake) and bright outdoors situations. In other cases the ability to focus fast using the screen is an advantage over dSLRs, as it allows shooting from strange angles and can be discreet which helps with people photos or photos in public places. The EP3 'touch to shoot' mode is great for focusing without dealing with focus areas (just touch the screen!). Overall usually I am happy without a viewfinder, then again I live in Scotland where a surplus of light tends not to be a problem. When I need a viewfinder it is indispensable and I had to buy one that clips on, which is an annoying inconvenience.

User friendliness for handing the camera to others - It is really important to trust you will get good photos from random people using the camera. This is the case more often with a micro4/3 camera compared to a dSLR. Face detection auto focus is part of this user friendliness and I end up using it all the time myself.

Video - There is autofocus, in contrast to my previous dSLR (Nikon D90, although newer bodies are catching up). It can be silent, depending on lens, which is great. Sound is recorded in stereo, also great! The in-camera stabilisation of the EP3 makes the video look unnatural and is best to turn off.

Nice touches

Usually I don't think about them, but would probably miss them:

In-camera stabilisation - Coupled with a prime lens it means reliable handheld shooting in available light.

Lens distortion correction - Apparently happens automatically in jpegs.

Camera effects - I don't use them often, but when I do they are nice.

Main problems have been

Motion tracking and action shooting - In short, there is a high miss rate in animal and people action shots. A workaround is to manually focus (easy to set up to the touch of a button) and shoot with pre-adjusted focus, but it is a worse shooting experience than a dSLR where action is handled effortlessly by the camera. In practice there are not many occasions I need such fast focus, but when I do it is frustrating.

Physics - Equally large lens apertures result in a broader depth of field on the micro4/3 system compared to dSLRs, especially full frame ones. This will never change and means that prime lenses will always look better with dSLRs, in terms of the intensity of the out of focus part of a picture. This can be a problem. Currently the best solution is the Olympus 45 mm lens which is quite nice for portraits, and has the benefit that it does not intimidate people. For macro work it is usually an advantage to have a broad depth of field at large apertures.

Problems that don't matter

High ISO noise (grain) - It is higher and noticeable in dark photos, even by non-photographers. However in the grand scheme of things it is counteracted by the use of prime lenses, the very usable ISO 800 and partially by the in-camera stabilisation. Also noise is subjective, was much worse in the pre-digital era and can sometimes be considered beautiful (although not my cup of tea). So overall I dismiss it as something people learn to focus on, while in the grand scheme of things has little to do with picture quality.

Battery life - It is much shorter than a dSLR (which typically goes on for days). Also the micro4/3 camera must be turned on and off constantly to conserve battery, unlike dSLRs which do not use battery when on. In practice the micro4/3 startup time is faster than storing the lens cap, I bought a second cheap battery and so far I can do a day of shooting without depleting two batteries. So I worry about battery life much less than I thought I would.

Finding a bag - I spent a lot of time trying to find the perfect bag until I decided it is an advantage that the camera size varies so much depending on the lens and add-ons it has. Currently I have a dSLR lens pouch to carry the camera with a prime lens and a bigger bag in case I use a bigger lens and want to carry backup lenses. All accessories and lenses are small compared to dSLR equivalents, that it seems practical to split them in various pockets and forget about the bag, which is an advantage over dSLRs.

Default settings - At the default settings of the Olympus EP3 the noise reduction applied is too strong to most people's liking and skin tones and hair look like watercolours. It is not a big deal as none of this happens with noise reduction off, but I did have to experiment for a while. Also it is mostly noticeable in people photos, when I take nature photos the overall result is usually pleasing. I read that Panasonic cameras deal better with noise by default and I am confident that technological advancement will improve this in time.

Lack of saved presets - I really liked the ability to recall different settings on my Nikon D90 with the touch of a button (I usually use one for portrait and one for saturated-nature). It takes slightly more steps on the Olympus EP3, but the smart menu where most-commonly used functions are on one screen, and the easy white balance setting, compensate so it is not a big deal. More generally, there are enough buttons to change settings without going through menus, and the smart menu gives fast access to most commonly used settings that I don't find it slower to work with than a dSLR.

Lens prices - Generally lenses are more expensive than equivalent dSLR lenses, especially since there is no used market. If they turn out not lose their value, as dSLR lenses don't, their high price should not be a big problem as they can be sold for little loss. The uncertainty of the new market they are competing at leaves value as an open question at the moment. However I am hopeful that I can recover most of the cost of lenses by selling on eBay, as I did with my Nikon gear.

Summary

If it comes down to value for money, it is difficult to judge because it depends on usage and priorities. The fact that micro4/3 are as expensive as mid-level dSLRs (although they keep getting cheaper) without the photographic quality or professional abilities (like high frame rates, motion tracking, usable high ISO and extreme bokeh) makes them seem expensive.

Micro4/3 are still a niche market, and their potential audience is not as focused as the dSLR audience meaning there is probably more variation within micro4/3 cameras than within dSLRs. They are also not established, for example Sony is making its own equivalents, with larger sensors (and lenses) and Nikon is trying too. Currently the micro4/3 system is more mature as a whole, for example there are more lens choices than Sony will be able to produce in the coming years, although it will eventually catch up. However Sony cameras have impressive abilities currently lacking in micro4/3 cameras, like better image quality, in-camera panorama modes, real HDR and the like, so they may end up dominating. So there is some risk in investing in the micro4/3 system.

I would still have doubts in the use of micro4/3 on an important event such as my wedding, because some essential shots might be missed even if most would be ok.

However most of the time I am shooting for fun, and I have lots of fun with the EP3. I also like that it feels like a camera and not an electronic gadget, which is not the direction all 'micro4/3 niche' cameras take. Sometimes the compromise in quality is evident to non-specialists, other times the ability to have fun with the camera more than compensates when it is captured in the photos.

Get an ancient photo of yourself in an environment that has not changed much. Find the same or similar clothes. And take the same pose as in the past.

The result is [back to the future](http://irinawerning.com/back-to-the-fut /back-to-the-future/).

I should definitely do something like that.