Hands on: Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III review - better than Nikon Z50? 

Thanks so much, Jess! :-)

yes but not while operating the camera...

they sacrificed battery life and put more plastic for less weight!small 4K camera but the battery life is the deal breaker for me!I got the 5mkii and I really like the video functions!thats why I switched from Nikon D750 to the 5mkii!selling the 5mkii after newyear for the 1mkii!I almost got all the pc parts for a 4K video pc and I like the Cine4k videos here on youtube from the 1mkii!

@@bernhardtsen74 They are claiming no loss of duration. This battery appeals to me as I picked up a cheap E-PL a while ago, so I'll probably get one of these cheap in a year or so for the phase AF

It's always perilous doing these kinds of direct, table-based comparisons - especially, as you say, when there are so many options! The Z50 comparison seemed quite timely because the two bodies are so similar, and seem to be targeting similar audiences, but yeah - there are so many great features that deserve more epxloration. Like Live Comp - such a cool tool!

Artaius, but Nikon still only has two slow f6.3 zooms for APS-C, no primes. It’s a Z50 dealbreaker for me.

I always go for silver, but I must admit I did like the black option for this one! Agreed, APS-C will have advantages in raw IQ terms, but also agreed that there's more to life than sensor size!

The 14-150mm is an underrated lens, as is the 12-200mm - great go-anywhere, shoot-anything optics!

I liked the review and the trumpet in the background but yes it was a little too loud.

Thanks for the feedback, both. Was trying something different for this vid and struggled with the music a bit… lesson learned :-)

asanmartinjr07, they’re $999 in the US now.

Even cheaper now. 10/2020

It would definitely be worth mentioning if I did, but I don't work for Olympus, so it definitely isn't :-)

Your Digital Camera World bio says you were principle photographer for Olympus and shot campaigns and did product testing for them. It doesn't say if and when your relationship with them ended. Figured you get paid or they sponsor your gear.

John Alsayegh No, my bio says that I worked *for* the principal photographer for Olympus. I’ve never been employed by Olympus and never had any of my gear paid for by it or anyone else. “Figuring” things about people is very dangerous!

Thanks for the clarification and my apologies. I re-read your bio and even knowing what I know I'm still reading it in such a way that makes it seem like you worked for them. Maybe it's just me. As far as the camera goes, don't you think it's too little too late? I'm in Canada and bought the EM-5 MK II as soon as it was available for $1100 CAD body only. The mark III is set to come out at $1500. That's nearly 40% more than the last gen. And for that money, they've made it plastic (claiming weight savings as a positive), included a 3 year old sensor, a smaller battery, and have improved the IS by half a stop. It would have been nice to see them work on the things that were really lacking like low light shooting. I never thought "hey this IS needs improvement" or the camera is too heavy. I have wished for a better battery and it looks like they went the opposite way on this. I know it's supposed to be more efficient but from most reviews it sounds like it's worse than the previous model. The one thing going for it is the phase detect autofocus, but I can't justify a 40% increase in cost for basically one improvement and 3 set backs. At this price there are bigger sensor options with better image quality, battery life, and autofocus. Am I missing something here?

​@@JohnAlsayegh Thanks John, I appreciate it. I guess it depends what you're looking for - I can't speak to the Canadian price or inflation (all the pricing here in the UK is set to get screwed up with the Brexit madness), but in the UK it's not unreasonably priced. Many people may not have felt like weight was an issue, but Olympus' recent strategy has been to focus on areas where larger sensor cameras can't compete, such as reduced size and weight. And until you actually hold the camera, it's probably unfair to criticize it for having composite components - it feels little different to the E-M10, which is light without feeling cheap. I've seen "plasticky" thrown around a lot by people who haven't used the camera and, while it obviously isn't metal like its predecessor, it really isn't a big deal. (Also from experience, dropped plastic cameras tend to survive certain impacts and falls better than metal ones!) IBIS does improve the ability to shoot in low light, and ISO performance feels slightly improved (we'll be lab testing the camera this week to see just how much), so that's certainly something that's been addressed. Phase detection really is a massive thing, though, and is largely the premium that you're paying for this camera - no other Micro Four Thirds camera offers PD aside from Olympus' flagship models, and it makes a helluva difference. Plus you get other flagship features like Pro Capture, which again is a big deal for a certain kind of shooting. Certainly if you were expecting a revolutionary camera, this isn't that - and maybe it is too little too late. But the entire reason for the comparison with the Nikon Z50 is that Nikon has basically released the exact same camera in an APS-C configuration - and I'm not sure that "too little too late" is a criticism being leveled at that camera (though plenty of others are!). As always, though, different strokes for different folks :-)

Lars Erik Nes i tested image quality to but i see image quality of olympus on par with any of those other cams. Its all about personal preference

I seriously doubt if you could pass a test between a large print taken with the Olympus and one taken with any APSC camera

lomoholga pixel peeping is not my thing. I am all for REAL world decisions! No one does very large prints. Most people dont do ANY prints. In theory bigger sensors can do more but its all about what you do with your pics. Most people load ot up to insta or fb get their 4 likes and forget it. I dont print large pics but i enjoy good looking pictures and etit it as good as i can. The results are very good to me especially if you consider the much better price of a mft system. Recently i watched a vid where a guy DID pretty big prints with an olympus 16 pixel cam and it looked great

castiel vargas hi my comment was meant for Lars. I seriously doubt if 10% of people could tell the difference between a camera that produces 13 bits of dynamic range over in that produces 12.7. Similar with other differences. Of course, full frame has better dynamic range, resolution, depth of field possibilities, and low light performance than m4/3, however I think in 75% (at least!) of photography situations, the advantages of full frame are not needed. There are people with full frame cameras just taking pictures of family in good light.

@@lomoholga Of course there are small differences and i agree with what you are saying about not telling them apart. My initial comment was only because he was targeting z50 so hard. I think m4/3 is a cool little system. I kind of envy those lenses because they are good and small. I don't like m4/3 once we go above 800 iso. It will be fun to see which brands that are with us the next 10 years. If not olympus comes ut with something new i think they will be in trouble. (I hope i am wrong)

Just like Canon EOS, Nikon D750/D850 and the Sonys A7s

@@TL-xw6fh nikon d850? a7s sony? .... u must be smoking sth :)

@@beavis1474 I own a D750, so I know. Indeed polycarbonate bodies are better than metal because they absorb the shock impact when hit, thereby protecting the internal mechanisms.

@@TL-xw6fh first of all u mentioned d850... caling it plastic build (polycarbonate is PLASTIC, and a cheap one, im an engineer so please dont do clever naming over known stuff). Anyway, d850 plastic??? u must have something with your eyes. Plastic is a JUNK and absorption u mention is ending up with cracked body. Not to mention that plastic FEEL cheap, feels CRAP, over time BENDS, and if you dont belive me - leave your PLASTIC camera in a car on sunny day... Plastic also EASILY scratches and wipes off, not to mention micropores that absorb dirt and other crap. PLASTIC is and will always be worse than magnesium/alloy.

" Indeed polycarbonate bodies are better than metal because they absorb the shock impact when hit" - this is straight lie.

I agree that the EM5 Mark II has a more solid feel but overall the Mark III is a better camera. It is lighter, has 20 MP vs 16 on the Mark II, has better autofocus, IBIS, etc. I have had my Mark III for over a year and am very happy with it. I see no reason to "avoid" it. I thought about buying a Mark II because of the metal construction and lower price but I believe I made the right decision to buy a Mark III.

Turk99, $500? You must be joking. Sony sells the little RX100 vi for $1000.