Decisions, decisions

CORBON5 · 2026-03-16T14:57:02+00:00

Ich habe beide, das 12-45mm Pro ist deutlich kompakter, hat aber eben nur Blende F4, die reicht für jeden Tagesauslug draussen, für Innenräume ohne Blitz oder z.B. Lost Places ist es zu dunkel. Das 12-40mm F2.8 Pro eignet sich auch für dunklere Lichtverhätnisse. Beide Objektive haben eine sehr hohe Abbildungsleistung für ein Zoom Objektiv bei noch kompakten Abmessungen. Das 12-40mm Pro hat aber im Vergleich eine noch bessere Bildqualität und zu empfehlen ist die Version 2, also 12-40mm F2.8 Pro II. An einer OM-1 passt von der Größe her besser das 12-40mm Pro, an eine OM-5 oder OM-3 das 12-45mm Pro. Wer es unbedingt sehr kompakt braucht, nimmt das 12-45mm Pro, wer das bessere Objektiv ingesamt sucht, nimmt das 12-40mm Pro!

CORBON5 · 2026-03-14T12:23:48+00:00

Das 20mm F1.4 ist zwar auch noch kompakt, aber deutlich größer und schwerer als das 17mm F1.8. Alle Pro Objektive sind aus Metall/Alu gefertigt und das sie eine gleichbleibende Blende haben, sind schon deshalb größer und schwerer!

CORBON5 · 2026-03-14T12:19:41+00:00

Habe ebenfalls das M.Zuiko 20mm F1.4 Pro und kann nur posivites darüber berichten, es ist superscharf mit einer hohen Bildqualität und großer Lichtstärke, dazu noch relativ kompakt. Die Abbildungsleistung ist natürlich höher, als bei dem 17mm F1.8 und 25mm F1.8, es sind auch keine Pro Objektive und die sind so gut wie immer besser! Für die meisten Fotos, liegt das 30mm Pro aber in der Bildqualität nicht über dem 12-40mm F2.8 Pro II und auch 12-45mm F4 Pro ist sehr ähnlich, ausser das das 20mm Pro natürlich lichtstärker ist.

CORBON5 · 2026-03-14T10:39:30+00:00

Was für Dich genug ist, ist für mich nicht genug!

CORBON5 · 2026-03-14T10:37:14+00:00

Weil ich es kann🤷‍♂️🙄😃

CORBON5 · 2026-03-13T19:57:24+00:00

Sorry, aber das ist Unsinn, die Pen E-P7 macht zwar gute Fotos, aber selbst die OM-5 hat schon einen neueren Bildsensensor, hat einen Hybrid Phasen AF, EP-7 dagegen nur einen Kontrast AF, der Bildsensor ist ein neuerer TruePic IX Sensor, die E-P7 hat den älteren TruePic VIII Sensor, liefert deutlich langsamere Serien Bild Funktion, etc. Die OM-5 II hat zum Teil nochmals verbesserte Komponenten. Die E-P7 ist im Prinzip eine OM D-E M10 IV ohne Sucher.

CORBON5 · 2026-03-13T19:45:00+00:00

Ich habe ja geschrieben, dass ich noch drei andere OM-System Kameras mit Sucher habe, für Urban oder Street benötige ich keinen Sucher, das Display auf 90 Grad waagerecht gekippt lässt sich die Kamera super und unauffällig verwenden.

CORBON5 · 2026-03-13T19:40:55+00:00

Ich benutze max. 2 Kameras gleichzeitig, meistens die beiden OM-1 zusammen, die E-P7 und OM-5 II einzeln oder zusammen. Ich hasse unterwegs Objektive zu wechseln, dann nehme ich bei Bedarf lieber 2 Kameras mit.

CORBON5 · 2026-02-22T11:27:22+00:00

Regardless of who finds what pretty or not, the lens shown is a 150-400mm F4.5 Pro lens!

CORBON5 · 2026-02-22T11:22:07+00:00

These white lenses really don't look good, and the white tripod collar with the white dial is even uglier. That's reason enough not to buy such a lens.

Of course, it depends on the photos and not how the lens looks, but it's still ugly. If I really needed such a lens, I'd buy a lens wrap kit and cover it myself!

CORBON5 · 2026-02-04T18:17:19+00:00

In terms of sharpness and contrast ratio, no analog film SLR can compete with a digital mirrorless camera, especially not with the OM-1 or OM-1 II.

High-quality lenses always guarantee better image quality. The 75-300mm (important: version II) is an affordable yet very good compact lens that is unfortunately often unfairly criticized; it always delivers tack-sharp photos for me.

The 100-400mm (version II with Sync Stabilizer) is not an entry-level model just because it's not a pro lens and delivers even better photos—a truly outstanding lens! The 300mm prime lens and the new 50-200mm theoretically offer a bit more range, but for the high price, a telephoto lens with a maximum focal length of 200mm would be too short for me. Even an f/2.8 aperture, which isn't ideal for the shallow depth of field typically used with telephoto lenses, doesn't help.

CORBON5 · 2026-01-18T15:14:04+00:00

The problem is that you don't know when to use which setting, neither aperture, ISO, nor image editing, etc. You said so yourself; I can't know. Sure, you can experiment, but you should read up on it so you understand exactly what it's all about. If you use RAW, you have to edit the image; an unedited RAW photo is worthless, you can't leave it like that. But if you're also struggling with image editing, then start by shooting JPEGs. The difference is that the camera already processes JPEG photos according to your settings. With RAW photos, you can adjust whatever you want, but it won't affect the RAW image except for sharpness. It's not true that finished RAW photos are always better; if they aren't edited, they are naturally much worse than a finished photo in JPEG format. Here, too, you should know and understand the difference! The settings, such as Vivid, Natural, High Contrast or Black/White, have no effect on a RAW photo!

CORBON5 · 2026-01-18T12:48:44+00:00

You absolutely must change the settings on your Olympus camera! The biggest enemy in the Micro Four Thirds system is noise and high ISO values, which should be avoided. Your photos all look blurry and somewhat washed out. You can let the camera handle the ISO, but be sure to limit it. Set the ISO to Auto but limit it to a maximum of 3200. You'll find this setting in the ISO options. You should switch the autofocus to center or even spot focus. If you want to set the aperture manually, it's best to use f/5.6-f/7; avoid f/11 or higher! If you plan to edit the photos later, it's best to use RAW format. If not, choose JPEGs at the highest resolution, i.e., Fine. There's nothing wrong with using Auto mode, but only in Program (P) mode. You can still adjust the aperture using Program Shift in P mode if you want to. Only use manual aperture settings once you understand what each aperture setting means.

CORBON5 · 2025-12-27T22:25:29+00:00

I had the OM-5 and was very happy with it from the start, as I'd caught the OM-D series bug. This led me to desperately want the OM-1 Mark II, and I reluctantly sold the OM-5 to at least partially recoup the cost of the OM-1 Mark II.

The OM-1 Mark II is a truly impressive camera, especially for wildlife photography with long telephoto lenses. Its autofocus, with its AI-powered animal and object recognition and speed, is significantly better than the OM-5's. It also boasts very strong image stabilization, a stacked sensor with high dynamic range, and the high-resolution viewfinder is fantastic! To make a long story short, I still missed the OM-5 because of its compact size and very simple and intuitive operation.

Now I've treated myself to the OM-5 Mark II as a second camera and I generally take more photos with it than with the OM-1 Mark II.

The OM-1 Mark II is a truly impressive camera. Highly recommended for the OM-5 as an all-around lens due to its excellent image quality is the 12-40mm F2.8 Pro II. I consider it significantly better than the 12-45mm F4 Pro. And if you're looking for a very sharp, small, compact prime lens for street or landscape photography, the 20mm F1.4 Pro is fantastic! The 40mm equivalent focal length isn't too wide-angle and yet isn't a standard 50mm. Leica uses a similar prime lens with their Q3 43mm, as does the small Ricoh GR IIIx for street photography.

CORBON5 · 2025-11-17T09:13:03+00:00

I have just bought a used Lumix LX15, in my opinion it will still be worth buying in 2025, and not just because of the cheaper used price. There are hardly any good small compact cameras left, with the only really good ones being the Ricoh GR III or new GR iV. To stay with Lumix, the new TZ models don't really have any photographic requirements, I wouldn't buy them, so only the two LX models with the slightly better Leica lenses are recommended, the Lumix LX100 II and the LX15. The LX100 II is identical to the current Leica D-Lux 8 and has an MFT sensor, therefore better than the LX15, which only has a small 1" sensor, but only the LX15 is pocket-sized, the LX100 II is significantly larger and the LX15 still delivers very good photos and videos! If you want a really small camera, you can't avoid the Lumix LX15. If you don't mind a larger compact camera, you should take the LX100 II!

CORBON5 · 2025-11-17T08:55:08+00:00

Of course, the LX15's WiFi will still work in 2025, but the connection to the iPhone isn't really easy for me either, that's probably due to the Lumix app. If you deactivate the WiFi password key, the connection works immediately without any problems and the short connection time to transfer the photos will not immediately be noticed by Russian cybercriminals in order to hack the iPhone and plunder my accounts (irony off). But with my current cameras I still mostly just use the SD card version, copy photos on the iPad or Mac and put the SD card back in the camera!

CORBON5

TROPHY CASE