OM-1’s Industry-leading Technology
A recent blog post by the Phoblographer titled SMALL SENSOR CAMERAS SUCK; IT’S TIME TO BE REAL HERE was truly off-base in its critique of small sensor cameras in general and the OM System specifically. It’s obvious these folks somehow missed the OM-1’s industry-leading technology. In fairness to Chris Gampat, I’m not certain he was trying to be critical in a negative way or simply pointing out what he felt could be improvements the manufacturers aren’t giving their less expensive camera line.
Either way, his comment “OM System is often behind all the other manufacturers. If it’s not with image noise, it’s the fact that they’ve been using a 20MP imaging sensor for almost a decade now. Their autofocus has also lagged behind many others out there.” Much of this comment is simply not true, with the exception of the sensor size. But his broad, overreaching generalization doesn’t stand up in my everyday use of the Olympus OM-1.
21MP For Almost Ten Years Is True
I can’t argue with the claim of OM System using a 21MP sensor, but I’ve not found it to be a problem. Several top-of-the-line full-frame cameras aren’t using sensors much larger than 21MP either. Examples include the Canon R3 with a sensor size of 26MP. Then there’s the Sony A7 at 24MP. In short, other camera manufacturers obviously understand that not all photographers want monster MP sensors. The files take up huge amounts of hard drive space and aren’t needed for what most people use them for, Facebook and Instagram!
But what about large prints? Not an issue. I’ve printed images from my Lumix and Olympus MFT bodies as large as 80 inches on the long side. With software available today, such as Topaz Photo AI, 21MP has been more than acceptable. And yes, I do crop now and again if needed. You would be amazed at what you can accomplish with a 21MP sensor and astonishingly sharp optics such as the Olympus 150-400mm F/4.5 lens. In short, the critique of the OM-1’s 21 MP sensor is a nonissue.
Micro Four Thirds Pushes The Envelope With New Features
Another comment Chris makes is, “All the best features end up with full-frame cameras first.” My goodness, I have no idea how he can think this. Let’s break down the many unheard of features Micro Four Thirds has pioneered.
MFT Lens and Camera IS First
Although Panasonic invented image stabilization in 1980, Micro Four Thirds brought it to the masses. Olympus’ first Micro Four-Thirds camera with image stabilization was the Olympus E-510. The IS technology in that camera was included in their MFT line and eventually improved with Sync IS, where lens and camera IS work in tandem.
Panasonic actually beat Olympus to Sync IS by inventing Dual IS in the Lumix GX8. Getting the lens and camera to work together was a huge improvement in overall image stabilization and it was all perfected by Olympus and Panasonic. Nobody in the full-frame world was even thinking about Dual/Sync IS before the folks in the Micro Four Thirds camp brought it to market. And today the new OM-1 Mark ll boasts a staggering 8.5 stops of effective IS, much more than any full-frame camera is making claims to.
Starry Sky AF
Starry Sky AF is a game-changer for those who enjoy night sky photography. Gone are the days when I used to simply set my lens to infinity, dial in the proper exposure, point it at the night sky, and start shooting. Those were the days before AF lenses didn’t have a true and easy-to-set infinity position.
Before Starry Sky AF I had a few options for getting a lens set to infinity. One way to do it was to set up for the shot before the sunset. Another would be to have a powerful flashlight and hopefully trees far enough out to reach infinity. Another would be to meticulously enlarge the image on the back of my LCD to check the focus of the stars. All of these methods were time-consuming and not always effective.
Then came Starry Sky AF. In fairness, Panasonic was the first to introduce this feature in what they called Starlight AF. However, I could never get it to work consistently with my Lumix cameras. It was always hit or miss. Imagine the disappointment when I would come in from shooting in temps of -30F, check my images of the Auroroas, and find they were not critically sharp. That’s not an issue with OM-1’s Starry Sky AF. The OM-1 acquires the stars, locks on, and succeeds every time I push the AF-On button. It is so liberating to happily change compositions and know your photos are in sharp focus with the Northern Lights blazing above. Not a feature on any of the full-frame cameras that I know of.
Focus Stacking in MFT Cameras
I tried to find exactly who invented in-camera focus stacking first. And I have to say it wasn’t easy. However, I had never heard of focus stacking until I saw it from Olympus. I searched on the internet and found the earliest date of November 2015, discussing Olympus’ focus stacking within a group on Flickr. I found nothing that early from any of the full-frame camera groups.
High-Resolution 80MP Files
From what I can find on the internet, it was Olympus that brought Pixel Shift into the realm of possibilities. It all began with the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II, where they harnessed the sensor stabilization to move in such a way that recorded a combination of frames and merged them together into a much larger RAW file. It makes sense that they were the first to this game due to their leadership position with sensor stabilization. Another first. With the OM-1, the 22MP sensor is turned into what is effectively an 80MP sensor. All the full-frame companies are now doing the same. Once again, the technology started with Micro Fourth Thirds. It didn’t start with Sony, Not Nikon or Canon.
Professional Moisture and Dust Sealing
Olympus has led the way in professional-grade moisture and water-sealing for over a decade. Now, with the OM-1 and the new OM-1 Mark ll, they are taking it even further. Both these cameras are rated to an incredible IP53 rating. It’s the world’s first camera system to feature such impressive capabilities.
Did I mention that the OM-1 is the world’s FIRST for this type of sealing? Meaning no full-frame camera comes even close. Let me repeat. No full-frame comes even close when it comes to this type of water sealing. It seems others aren’t aware of this very much-appreciated feature.
In-camera ND Filters
ANOTHER FIRST for any mirrorless camera company is in-camera ND filters. Being able to turn these off and on at will is another feature nobody else is doing. At least not in the mirrorless stills world. I no longer carry any ND filters for still photography. Unfortunately, that’s not the case for video.
NDs are still required for video, but I’m hopeful OM System will eventually eliminate that issue as well. Using the in-camera ND filters allows me to get beautiful silky water images, moving clouds, and the ability to slow the shutter down when needed. Did I mention this was another first for any camera that came from a small sensor camera company?
Pro Capture Anybody?
Olympus gave us Pro Capture long ago. Many people ask, what is Pro Capture? It’s a feature where the camera starts collecting pictures and saving them to the buffer BEFORE the button is fully pushed. The advantage is that you have photos in the buffer the camera saves before the action takes place. For example, if a bird is sitting on a branch and you’re hoping to get it in flight as it leaves, Pro Capture is your answer.
As you place and hold the camera on the subject, pushing the shutter button halfway to activate Pro Capture, it starts recording what you see in the viewfinder. As the bird leaps into the air, you try your best to capture the leap. A very difficult task for any photographer. But with Pro Capture, the camera has been saving a dozen or so frames before the bird took off. So now you have the exact moment the action started.
Add to that Pro Capture SH1, which shoots at up to 120FPS in S-AF, and Pro Capture SH2, which shoots up to 50FPS in C-AF, and you can understand the many advantages of action. All of this magic is collected in RAW format. Can anyone tell me how many full-frame cameras can do this? I know the Nikon Z9 and Z8 can do Pre Capture but Z9 was originally only capable in JPEG format. That might have changed. Even so, Olympus has had this feature for years and it has always been in full RAW mode. Trickle down from the full-frame cameras? I don’t think so. Another Micro Four Thirds first.
Live Composite
Live Composite is another first for OM System. It uses Computational AI to collect just the right amount of light for extended exposures. Live Composite allows the ability to expose the foreground, and then the camera keeps adding only the changing light from fireworks or other sources. You can watch this happen on the rear LCD and cut the exposure when the light equals your desired effect. Below is an amazing video of this feature in action.
So… No! Small Sensor Cameras Don’t Suck
So there you have it. I don’t think anyone can argue that Olympus is behind the curve regarding state-of-the-art features. Pro Capture in RAW, focus stacking, IP53 weather protection, Starry Sky AF, and the other tools I mentioned prove the fallacy in the comment, “Small Sensor Cameras Suck.” In fact, the unique features mentioned above and the size, price, and mobility of OM-1’s Industry Leading Technology keep me firmly committed to the MFT cause, particularly to OM System. In their blog post titled: It’s Time to Stop Being Elitist About Camera Sensor Sizes, you can also read another take on my argument favoring Micro Four Thirds on the Petapixel website.
NeilOn Dec. 22nd, 2024
I agree with all of those points!
I hesitated like crazy between an OM-5 and an
Sony A7C. I was really attracted to M43, especialky for the compact ff. What swung it for me was the consistent reviews showing better DR and noise performance with the Sony FF camera. Im very attracted to light variance in photos, and the 14 bit mode clearly shows a big difference to the 12 bit mode, which OM use. I think the reason for not going 14 bit is because of the M43 noise threshold, but modern electronics should allow it. The Sony A9 mk 3 is using a 24mp sensor with 120fps, so a 20 or 24mp m43 sensor at 20 mps should be well possible. Note that the Sony A9 mk2 is 24mp with 20fps. If OM could do some physical R&D and not push too far on the fps, then 14 bit would be possible. With that spec, an OM-1 mk3 would be a killer product, taking many people like me back from FF.
Daniel J. CoxOn Dec. 22nd, 2024
Thanks for joining the conversation Neil.
Eddie KwanOn Sep. 10th, 2024
Daniel, I am repeating what others have said.
Yes for the other FF brands ( no point I repeat), yes their auto focus is better than Oly. But if you go to the field for wildlife photography, unless you are rich enough to hire an entourage to carry your gears while walking the trails, the FF owners will not share or admit the difficulty they have encountered.
I went twice to Indonesia Sulawasi for birding photography. There were slippery slopes or steep slopes to climb. Unless you well trained to walk such terrains, you will be using both hands to hold any branches to steady your walk.
Plus the tripods or even monopods they are holding because of their big and heavy 600mm lenses, not only they have the difficulty to walk & hold on to their gears, some of them slipped and drop their gears in the slopes! Those who strapped the tripods or gears in the backpacks, sometimes got entangled in the branches during the walk.
For me, I slung my Oly OM1 with 300F4 lens and free my both hands navigating the challenging slopes.
I am a weekender photography and not a pro. I bought what was affordable to me and worked around the shortcomings of Oly to get better shots. I cannot afford to lose or spoil my gears like those accidents I have mentioned or any other bulkiness issues encounter whenever I go for birding trips.
Daniel J. CoxOn Sep. 10th, 2024
Thanks for your input Eddie.
Mircea BlanaruOn Jul. 22nd, 2024
I have read some negative comments about the OM 1 camera coupled with the expensive 150-400 F4.5 OM System lens in comparison with a Canon FF camera coupled with a 600mm Lens and a 1.4x convertor I simply don’t buy it. The lower quality of the probes I am sure it is the fault of not mastering the exposure together with the shutter speed and the ISO sensitivity all three combined with the extraordinary powerful image stabilization. These continuing attacks on the Micro Four Thirds system make me very sad…
Daniel J. CoxOn Jul. 23rd, 2024
I read that comment as well Mircea. There were just too few details on how the comparison took place for me to put any validity in it. It’s certainly not what I’ve found. I may try to recreate the issue he talks about but it won’t be for sometime since I’m in the field for several months now. Thanks for adding joining the conversation.
Alex LandrumOn Jul. 12th, 2024
I use an OM1 with an OM 150- 400 IS pro zoom lens and Recently I was shooting a static rare vagrant Tern, at some distance, from a hide in a bird reserve in the UK, along with another photographer. He has a FF Canon camera with a 600mm lens plus a 1.4 TC. We compared our pictures once we had processed them in imaging software. The upshot is that his photograph was far sharper than mine. The key for me is that the MF3 has many benefits in terms of its portability and the ability to shoot without a tripod – which my friend can’t – but if its resolution of detail at a distance then FF cameras can’t be beat in my experience.
Luis MesaOn May. 3rd, 2024
Today Chris Gampat, the editor of the Phoblographer, wrote another critical piece about smaller sensors photo equipment. In my opinion he has made up his mind. I wrote an email to him as follows:
On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 10:18 AM ‘Luis Mesa’ via Reviews wrote:
Chris,
While I appreciate that you don’t think highly of photo equipment with smaller sensors than full frame, I think that in order to be honest with yourself and the people that read your reviews, and pay a subscription to your blog, you should stop reviewing and recommending any photo equipment with smaller sensors, or at the very least start your reviews by writing a caption indicating that you publicly have recommended to avoid any smaller sensor equipment because you think that only full frame and medium format are the right tools for the job.
Sincerely,
Luis Mesa
He already replied to me:
I agree with you. And we’ve actually stopped on several pieces going forward. I literally just finished writing an article scheduled into the middle of June. So some of those pieces were written before I made those statements. Currently the team is insanely small and under a lot of pressure. We can’t be expected to go edit every single piece.
I still plan on reviewing the X100vi in full though. And if something is really unique, we’d consider it. But overall, I am truly honest with myself. And that starts with the fact that we’ve largely moved away from talking about camera gear. All of it is more or less the same.
Chris Gampat
(he/him/his)
Editor in Chief/Publisher/Founder
The Phoblographer
There are good reasons to like smaller sensors, but we are not going to convince the people with such strong opinions about smaller sensors. Obviously he is not going to change his mind, but at least he is accepting that he will be honest. Let´s watch for what he writes in the future.
I have cancelled my subscription to his blog, because he wońt review the equipment that interests me.
Best,
Luis Mesa
Daniel J. CoxOn May. 3rd, 2024
Thanks for this Luis. I did some sleuthing after my first comments on the Phoblographers initial negative comments about OM System. I can’t say who told me this but I was informed that the Phoblographer suddenly became critical of OM System just after OM System decided to quit advertising on the Phoblographer website. Readers will have to make their own minds up.
HiroyukiOn Mar. 29th, 2024
I also completely agree with you.
When I used film cameras in the past, I used Olympus OM-3/4 and Contax etc.
When I became interested in bird and animal photography, my main camera became the Caonn EOS-1.
However, the Canon 600mm lens weighs 6kg, making it difficult to use without a tripod.
When Olympus announced the Four Thirds system and released the 300mm (approximately 600mm) with the E-1, it made me say goodbye to tripods.
I have been using the Four Thirds system and Micro Four Thirds for a long time.
Full size is overwhelmingly popular in Japan.
I regret that many users are not interested in Micro Four Thirds.
Currently, I really like the LUMIX G9 PRO II.
Before I met the G9 PRO II, I had been using the OM system for a long time.
I think the OM-1 has better autofocus, but the G9 Pro II is designed to be very easy to use.
Panasonic also updates its firmware, so I hope that future firmware updates will improve AF.
The LEICA DG series lenses are also great.
It’s a shame that Panasonic doesn’t have a high-grade telephoto zoom like Olympus.
If you have a chance, please try out LUMIX G9PROII.
I also have a full size SONY α9, but I usually use the LUMIX G9 PRO II.
Daniel J. CoxOn Apr. 2nd, 2024
Good info Hiroyuki. I too appreciate the additional depth of field. There are a few very loud voices on the internet today that scream about the advantages of virtually NO Depth of Field. But for nature photography the added DOF from MFT is an advantage. I can’t recall one person our go the over 200 people per year i travel with that have wanted less depth of field. They virtually all ant more. MFT gives that to them. I’m also a huge fan of the MFT’s more portable form factor and the less expensive system overall. Thanks for sharing your insight.
TomOn Mar. 29th, 2024
The one thing you didn’t mention is depth of field.
For specific kind of photography I think little depth of field can be important.
But mostly I like more depth of field. MFT has more of that and it’s beneficial to me.
All arguments aside, I think for some people bigger is always better. That’s why there are so many big big cars driven by just one person that makes much roaring sound. Just reminding that we are not much more than the gorilla’s in the woods. From that perspective I would say don’t defend MFT, just make some more interesting pictures, they are the good arguments.
MikeOn Mar. 28th, 2024
As you say, OM System cameras have lots features for still photography that no other camera has as you have described. Perhaps anyone of them in isolation is a bit niche, but all together they make a very compelling package. I love my OM-1 and would not want to use a camera that didn’t have these computational features now that I’ve gotten used to them. I do wish OM system could backport the live grad-nd from the OM-1 ii to the OM-1, that seems like another nifty feature if the scene is right.
I could care less about the M43 cameras being “only” 20 mp (although the g9 ii does bump this). That’s plenty reasonable crop, more than adequate for photo use on the web and making moderate print sizes maybe 11×17 which realistic is all I would every do.
I’ve no desire to go to full frame. I just don’t want to care those lens. I don’t need insane high ISO performance or bonkers ability to post-process. M43 provides more than enough for me as a hobbyist.
RicardoOn Mar. 27th, 2024
“ Can anyone tell me how many full-frame cameras can do this?”
Both Canon and Nikon make FF cameras with the same kind of feature. It matters litters if Olympus did this first- that’s part of the problem- the competition caught up. Just like in many areas IBIS.
What’s missing in this story is that it is m43rds precisely who is in more need than FF cameras of these features. Like for example, a FF camera doing 6 stops IBIS can still match by the leeway its sensor has into venturing in higher ISO territory.
HHHR is nice, but it has lots of constraints that a Sony A7CR at 60MP doesn’t have to deal with.
Also the OM-1 sensor- that takes 20MP photos in its regular mode, not 21MP or 22MP. So it’s completely valid to call it a 20 MP sensor in the real world results.
I really would love to see an OM-5 Pro model, in that size, ideally with he EM5.2 body. But I am not holding my breath. OM Systems clearly has shifted completely to outdoor/wildlife/nature. Lumix seems focus on hybrid video and both body sizes that have the latest features and not “hand me down tech” have grown in size making some dangerous overlaps with Fujifilm and some even FF cameras.
M43rds was supposed to be about a clear differentiation by being smaller. Long telephoto is where this advantage is still clear but it didn’t use to be this way.
Daniel J. CoxOn Apr. 2nd, 2024
Ricardo, I disagree with your comment that the other have caught up. OM System still leads Image Stabilization by as many as three stops. Canon advertises 5.5 as does Nikon. OM-1 is rated at 8.5 stops. On top of that which of the big three full frame camera companies offer Live Composite, Live Bulb, Builtin in ND Filters, Pro Capture with 50FPS and 120 FPS in RAW. Nobody! And as for Nikon, depending on the features you need, the Nikon Z9’s top shooting speed is either 20 FPS, 30 FPS, 60 FPS, or 120 FPS. The 30, 60, and 120 FPS options are JPEG-only. OM-1 is RAW at similar frame rates. Finally, I shoot with 200+ people per year. And the vast majority no longer want to spend the money on full frame cameras their massive lenses nor do they want to carry the additional weight. Full frame has some advantages but the same is true for MFT. Full frame cameras are simply overkill for most people doing photography today and the masses are starting to understand that.
Alan M. HalfhillOn Mar. 27th, 2024
I have been a M43 user since the GH2. I recently added the Lumix S5 and S5iix to my camera inventory. I have found that, while the S lenses can be a little larger and heavier, they actually are sometimes cheaper than M43 for the same depth of field. A good example is the Leica 42.5 f1.2 at $1600 verses the Lumix S 85mm f1.8 at $599. Also, my Sigma S 100-400 f6.3 at $900 vs the Leica 100-400 f6.3 at $1600 all though this is not equal as the Leica is 2 times more telephoto which is a M43 advantage. I can also use f4 S lenses instead of f2.8 in M43 which keeps the size and weight down. I do use my m43 systems if I want really small and lightweight.
Joe DotsonOn Mar. 14th, 2024
After toting around a bunch of heavy Nikon equipment and doing the same with Olympus and Panasonic, I am 100% in agreement with Dan. Fact is, the vast majority of people with cameras do not make a living with photography. They simply do not need all of the purported benefits of large sensors. When you look at the photo processing software advancements, relative differences become very small. Then you have to ask the question, is the added expense and weight of the larger systems, worth it? It seems to me that the best camera is the one that you are carrying. If more people can afford to carry nice equipment like Panasonic and OM Systems, all the better for the hobby.
Finally, people that are so hypercritical need to remember that our camera equipment needs to be fit for use. With what the majority of the people are using their cameras for, M43rds is more than adequate. Get out there and use it and quit writing ugly drivel.
Lukasz JozwinskiOn Mar. 9th, 2024
Actually OM-5 got most of these features too. Very underrated camera. I got 2 FF cameras and actually sold Sony APS-C for my new Olympus OM-5.
Don SaundersOn Mar. 7th, 2024
Your article is very well written and factual. The OM-1, and now OM-1.2, are outstanding cameras with game changing technology and capability. Add to that, a wide range to amazing PRO lenses that can produce excellent results. Like you, the 150-400mm f/4.5 + 1.25X PRO lens has become my Holy Grail lens for wildlife photography!
For many years professional and amateur nature photographers have been told to shoot with full frame or APS-C sensors from three well known companies. OM has not had the exposure and recognition. However, that is changing. The recent issue of Nature’s Best Photography – International Awards had several winning images made with OM/Olympus cameras and lenses. More well known professionals, like you and Joe and Mary Ann McDonald, have switched to OM and continue to make amazing images. Plus new pros, like Lee Hoy, are strong advocates for the OM system and will make an impact.
The amateur photographers, belonging to clubs and groups around the world, can have an impact with their quality images. Plus, many experienced photographers no longer want to carry heavy cameras and lenses. And are not satisfied with the sharpness of the affordable long zoom lenses, especially when compared to the 150-400.
Wish you the best!
Daniel J. CoxOn Mar. 7th, 2024
Thanks for your input Don. Great hearing from you.
LucasOn Mar. 6th, 2024
Totally agree!
Remarkable that even people like him don’t know about the many virtues of MFT.
Maybe it is also a testimony to the fact that the PR of MFT has never been effective?