OM-D E-M1X

Resolution is a lot lower than what you get out of the 10bit mode. What happens is that for some reason the 8bit mode uses either a line skipped or pixel binned readout of the sensor, which leads to the video looking like barely 4K, having much worse dynamic range etc. The 10bit video uses an oversa

They’re mostly all the same. Just get whichever one you want and stick with it forever. I’d probably avoid the cheapest Canons and cheapest Sony’s. The Nikon 50-250mm is a very good lens considering what it is. They also have a cheap but also very good 12-28mm The cheapest Canons like the R100 nerf

Im birding with my E-M1 II and switched to the OM-D from a Nikon D750. I really love my Olympus lenses and the E-M1 II and won’t go back to the bigger systems. I use 4/3rds lenses exclusively to trade them with my E-5. The Olympus 50-200 f2.8-3.5 with an MMF-3 and EC-14 converter is unbeatable for p

Yeah I mean at the end of the day, it's mostly about enthusiats discussing about minor details about modern cameras. Realistically evey camera released since 2016 has only been a minor upgrade over the previous model. I feel this is especially true with Olympus / OM system going from the E-M1ii, to

I see it this way. The OM-1 performs well up to between ISO 6400-ISO 12800, whereas the E-M1X (which I shoot) is good up to ISO 4000. Incidentally, my Z8 @ ISO 8000 has similar IQ as my 1X @ ISO 4000. Keeping this in mind, you can only use f/2.8 or even f/4 with full frame if you are shooting parall

I haven’t used a D8xx but a D750 and switched to an Olympus OM-D E-M1 II. The Ibis makes composing in food handheld so much easier, the high res mode gives me the resolution, when I want it and the bigger dog due to the smaller format is a big plus in my book for food and stilllife! When you search

I used to own those lenses and ran them on an E-M1X and E-M1mkII. The size is great, but the performance per dollar isn’t there. The Oly 7-14 is good, the Nikon 12-28 is better. The 12-40 is fine, but at f/11 for landscapes, not much different over the 16-50 kit lens (or the Panasonic 12-32) and the

I have the OM-D E-M1X. I Thought about this but i want better low light performance and dynamic range for portraits. I use my Olympus mainly for high speed sports cause of its IBIS and for wildlife cause of its reach. A 45mm on my olympus would be 90mm equivalent, which im jot sure is optimal as a p

Best deal: https://www.keh.com/shop/olympus-om-d-e-m1x-mirrorless-micro-four-thirds-digital-camera-body-black-20-4-m-p.html OMD-EM1-X. Was a $3000 camera. You can get them used for around US$600 and pretty much Mint Condition for US$900 which is in your price range. It’s a hell of a camera take a lo

OM-1 . If I remember correctly the E-M1X was a precursor to the E-M1 III. It's basically just a E-M1 III + grip with additional features optimized for wildlife shooting. The OM-1 is essentially an E-M1 IV. The OM-1 would have the latest features so that'd be the best camera to use to get the most mo