Questions regarding micro 4/3 - Oly OM-D and Lumix GH3

As I seriously take a look at a 4/3 system, I wanted to ask some pertinent questions that I believe some in this forum will be able to answer. I wish the GH3 was in the hands of more folks so these questions could be answered, since I am leaning toward that camera. Yea, I know some may not believe a 4/3 system is "serious" photography gear and frankly, I believed the same until recently. But doing even the minimal research and viewing images, it's clear the gap between high end DLSRs and 4/3 has narrowed significantly. Significantly enough for me to possibly forgo the weight and inflated prices of DLSRs.

For some background, my digital photography has lead me down a path of taking a variety of subjects. I am primarily a nature photographer, thus, landscape and macro close-up images are most photographed. Can be anytime during the year, so cold weather performance is somewhat important. I also have started taking night images as well, primarily Milky Way images. With my son grown up, child/family photos are not important as they once were. Video capability is also not as important as it once was, but having a camera such as the gh3 would be added advantage for sure. Currently, with the variety of photography I'm interested in, I have a Nikon D7000 system with all the associated lenses, flashes, remote cords, etc.

With the new 7100, I'm at a crossroads now of deciding whether to stay the course with Nikon or move to a new system. My most important reason for wanting to change are weight and cost. I certainly noticed last summer trying to carry that 17 extra lbs of camera gear backpacking is not enjoyable! From the research conducted so far, I am encouraged to know there are great 4/3 lenses available at reasonable prices, not to mention a significant reduction in weight. I am also very concerned about the cost of high end Nikon/Canon cameras. I believe they are inflated, particularly in an age with electronics are mass produced. And although higher resolution of full frame cameras can be appealing, a 36mb raw image is overkill in most situations. 16mb is sufficient for the 16x24 images I print.

On to the questions:

1. Are they significant issues with sensor dust on the Oly and GH3?

2. If so, can one clean those sensors themselves?

3. For macro images, my technique is primarily focus stacking. Thus, I either use a focus rail or better yet, use very small incremental manual focus movements of the lens. Can anyone comment on their experience with focus stacking using one of the oly/gh3 macro lenses? The ability of a macro lens to have a lot of manual movement is typically called "lens throw." The more, the better. I have to say, I have seen some of the macro images taken by these cameras/lens handheld and was quite impressed. However, I never handhold my macro images so I'm encouraged that the quality will be outstanding with a tripod.

4. For those who use Aperture for RAW processing, any advantage to either the oly or gh3?

5. I am still confused over the Oly lenses(Zuiko). Do they need an adaptor to fit onto the OM-D?

6. I really like the idea of the articulating screen on the gh3, particularly as it relates to macro photography. However, for those with the oly, is their tilt screen sufficient or do you wish it had the same movement capability as the gh3?

7. Anyone can relate experience with the gh3 wifi and a Mac?

8. Probably to early to tell on the gh3, but any bugs or issues folks can related on either model (i.e. back focusing, build quality, battery life, etc.)

9. I am assuming on all Zuiko and Lumix lens, one can utilize a manual focusing mode?

10. What are the experiences folks have on moving focus point via the rear screen? I believe both cameras have that ability? I would find that quite a nice advantage over DLSRs. Oftentimes, I have to use focus stacking to get DOF in a landscape scene.

11. For landscape images, I am often confronted with high dynamic range scenes. Thus, HDR software or exposure blending is often used. I noticed both cameras have a nice range of multiple auto bracketing exposures available. In fact, more exposure range than my Nikon. Any experiences with auto bracketing you can relate?

12. With the HDR setting in the gh3, is that achieving decent results? I have seen very few examples.

Considering the questions and my general explanation on my photography, if anyone wants to chime in on either camera (plus or minus), it would be appreciated. I would particularly like to hear from folks who moved from a DLSR to a 4/3 system.

Like others I suppose, I am struggling on which camera to go with. With some financial issues Olympus reported last year, that makes me somewhat nervous. I certainly like having more external buttons on the gh3. It would make the transition to 4/3 much easier. And although I don't have monstrous hands, I believe the GH3 would fit better? Wish I could try them out, but there are NO camera stores in Colorado where I live that have them. Another transition I would have to get used to is the 4:3 aspect ratio. I have become quite used to printing 16x24 (3:2). Yea, no doubt I can crop, but that will be an adjustment.

So, any words of wisdom will be appreciated.

Ken

Hi, Ken. I recently purchased the GH-3. Can't answer all your questions, but here's my thoughts...

The manual does caution about cleaning the sensor. I love the articulating screen; it's new to me, and I still prefer using the viewfinder. But for those shots that require some contortion, I have enjoyed the ease of the screen. I currently use a card reader with my Mac for downloading images. But I am eager to use the camera with the iPad and wi-fi; it's one of the main reasons for the purchase. Manual focus doesn't seem too crisp compared to my Nikon D700. As to aspect ratio, you can set the GH-3 to any of several, including 1:1, 3:2 and 16:9. A big plus for me is the weight and size of the system. The body, 2 lenses ( both telephoto ) and accessories fit nicely into a lunchbox size bag. I can once again go all day carrying it and my tripod. After acquainting myself with the camera's setup, buttons, etc., I found it very intuitive to use once I was in the field with it in my hands. All the controls are handy on buttons or the control dial right under where your right hand naturally sits when holding the camera. I am pleased with the image quality I am getting compared to the D700, though I still do not have a lot of field experience with it yet. Hi ISO/low light looks good to me; focus is fast, internal stabilization for hand-holding does not seem so good but is adequate and will probably improve as I get used to it.The camera is so light, it's flighty, if that makes sense. The photo is an example of high ISO, long range telephoto shot from tripod. Hope this helps a little for the GH-3. I don't know the Olympus at all. Overall, I am very happy with the GH-3 and have relegated my beloved D700 system to backup status with hardly a 2nd thought.

Thanks SO much for your response and image, Catherine. That image certainly tells me this camera is quite adept at what I may be looking for. The details are quite evident. What focal range was that at?
I am leaning toward toward the gh3 for some of the reasons you mentioned. The ergonomics are first and foremost. I believe the transition would be easier with the gh3 since many button functions are external rather than buried in menus.
Like you, I would find the weight and size of the 4/3 system SO appealing. Last summer I went out just a few days backpacking and my pack was close to 60 lbs, 17 of that camera gear. I didn't enjoy that trip like I should have.
Have you manually focused much with your lens? I am concerned over this new "focus by wire" system these lenses have. In particular, with macro lenses. Its not a deal breaker since I can use a focus rail, but many image stacked macros are better taken with focusing via the lens.
Also, glad to hear you feel the low light capability is acceptable. I know for many, that is a deal breaker. And, of course, why FF cameras are popular. But for the majority of my shooting, a tripod is used, so I normally don't need to jack up the ISO. The exception being some night photography.
Back to whole weight issue, I really feel I would expand my photography to more spontaneous images since I would have the camera/lens handing around my shoulder more. That idea really is appealing.

Ken - I can only help a very little, but here goes...

5. I am still confused over the Oly lenses(Zuiko). Do they need an adaptor to fit onto the OM-D?

Yes... 4/3 (four thirds) and m4/3 (micro four thirds) are 2 different lens mounts. They are not compatible, so you should be careful not to refer to the GH3 as a 4/3 camera - it's not. Olympus sells an adapter that will let you use 4/3 lenses, but then you give up some of the size advantage, and by all accounts some autofocus speed and usefulness.

9. I am assuming on all Zuiko and Lumix lens, one can utilize a manual focusing mode?

Yes, but a lot of the lenses (all?) are focus by wire. I.e. turning the ring tells the motor how much to change focus. Works fine, but some people don't like the feel as much as true manual focus lenses.

10. What are the experiences folks have on moving focus point via the rear screen? I believe both cameras have that ability? I would find that quite a nice advantage over DLSRs. Oftentimes, I have to use focus stacking to get DOF in a landscape scene.

Since focusing on m4/3 cameras is done on the sensor, you can theoretically set the focus almost anywhere in the image. It won't change your DOF though, so if you needed to stack before, you still will. (Unless you were only stacking because you couldn't get autofocus to do what you want. In that case, the answer would be to learn to manually focus better on your SLR.)

11. For landscape images, I am often confronted with high dynamic range scenes. Thus, HDR software or exposure blending is often used. I noticed both cameras have a nice range of multiple auto bracketing exposures available. In fact, more exposure range than my Nikon. Any experiences with auto bracketing you can relate?

Bracketing is good, but you might need to do it a little more often with the GH3 compared to your D7000. The D7000 dynamic range is about a stop and a half more than the GH3.

It might be good to take a look at the DxOMark comparison between the GH3, OMD EM-5, and D7000. The comparison tells me that you're giving up a bit less than a stop of noise performance, and the 1.5 in dynamic range. Very good for a m4/3 sensor, considering the D7000 is a very good sensor.

David,
In regard to the focusing via the screen, the situations where that would come in handy is where a landscape shot had something of interest in the very near foreground (ie flowers), yet I wanted to also capture depth out to infinity. Thus, I would focus stack typically 3 images. Although, it can be done on my Nikon, I can visualize the m4/3 cameras having a better and quicker solution with just touching a screen.
Good to hear the focus by wire does work as it is essential for my focus stacking of marco images.
And yes, I will review the DXO info. Dynamic range is important for the landscape images since most are taken at sunrise or sunset.

Ken,

Just want to give a brief interjection here of my opinion/experience. I use a Nikon D300s (which I'll likely upgrade to the D7100) and I also have the Nikon V1. Nikon V1 is a great camera... very small/light/compact. I have the adapter so I can use my nikkor lenses (with a resulting 2.7X crop factor while maintaining f-stop), video is way better than my D300s and the option of the electronic shutter gives 10fps.

But, it's not a replacement for the DSLR. Images don't look as great, currently the lens options are minimal (and using it with nikkor lenses is a bit cumbersome and you lose out on all focus points but the center). It's not a truth 4/3 like the GH3, but it's quite similar. I think for the price of the GH3 (and lenses) you might as well sell your 7000 and upgrade in the future, OR look @ getting a V1 (not a V2, those things are HIDEOUS!)

I was actually shooting at a birthday party yesterday at ISO 3200 (since the V1 has no flash) and the images came out amazingly clean. Here's a shot of the moon where I used my 1.7X TC and 300mm f4 lens paired with the V1 on a tripod.

Besides the V1, I have also seriously reviewed the Sony NEX 6&7. Of course, they have a bigger sensor and thus some impressive dynamic range numbers from the DXO website. However, the lack of lenses is very troublesome. Typically, one should start their system building from the lenses they would use and then match with the camera. Decisions, decisions.

Ken, I was using the 100-300mm lens on the GH-3 @ 300mm for the bird shot above, (which in 35mm equivalent is 300-600 @ 600mm, f 5.6). I was happy with the result.

Also took the very same shot of the moon, as Luke did, also at 600mm, and through a window, and was blown away with the result (obviously a personal opinion!). Plus, the photo was taken in JPG(L) format, cropped, and for this post was downsized.

More food for thoughtful decision-making, all. Think I'll go read the comparison at DxOMark now.

Yea, I certainly know I take stock in DXO numbers only as a relative comparison. The images I have seen from the GH3 have shown me its quite a capable camera. If one has to pixel peep to find significant differences between camera images, then it not a issue for me.
Based on a lot of research and responses I did order the GH3

Now I just hope my decision to change system was the right one in the long run. That said, we technology changing so rapidly, I probably will be changing again something in the future.

Thanks again for the comments!

Yea, I certainly know I take stock in DXO numbers only as a relative comparison. The images I have seen from the GH3 have shown me its quite a capable camera. If one has to pixel peep to find significant differences between camera images, then it not a issue for me.
Based on a lot of research and responses I did order the GH3

Now I just hope my decision to change system was the right one in the long run. That said, we technology changing so rapidly, I probably will be changing again something in the future.

Thanks again for the comments!

Well, its update time. As previously mentioned, I did purchase the GH3. Wow, the features of this camera are outstanding. I thought it handled most images quite well. Of course, the low light images certainly displayed more noise than my D7000, but not by much. The ability to focus by touching the screen was clearly my favorite feature.
That all said, obviously we all seek high quality images. Frankly, for my photography, I knew I was going to miss the ability to crop significantly on some shots. Additionally, I never could appreciate the electronic viewfinder in bright conditions. In shade and dark situations, it wasn't bad. But for me the reason bright conditions failed was solely because of the prescription sunglasses I wear. Just couldn't see enough either via the viewfinder and live screen.
So, reluctantly I sold it and moved up to the Nikon 7100. Back to familiar territory and lugging around heavy equipment. But its all the image and the 7100 appears to meet my demands of a camera. And no doubt I appreciate the 24mb images.

Thanks for sharing that Ken. I've been thinking my next camera will be an m4/3's as well, so I'll be in a similar boat to yours in the next year or so I think.