The OM System OM1 Mk II Stupid Good 

12-100 f4 Pro, my goto lens for shooting flash photography in a studio setting. Nothing beats it.

I also use MFT (EM1X and G9) mainly for portrait. Works great 😊

😂😂😂😂😂😂 but damn well said!! Thank you

Yes, I'm very happy to go all the way up to ISO 3200 on my Olympus and Panasonic gear; maybe 6400 in a pinch. Still retains great details and denoises very well using DxO PureRAW or Topaz Photo AI. (However, things to fall apart rapidly beyond that--even PureRAW couldn't perform its magic on recent ISO 10,000 images that I fed into it... 😉)

@@Centauri27 I regularly shoot up to ISO 10.000, and the majority of my low light shots are shot at ISO 6400 - sometimes it's about getting the shot at all. The AI noise reduction in OM Workspace really does a nice job - especially up to IS0 6400.

I do use it and it is amazing.

Advanced new tools like Topaz Gigapixel AI is slowly removing the "not enough pixels for cropping" concern. Sure, having enough real pixels is still the best, but if a tool can get you 90% of the way there, and you get the benefits of the size and IBIS, the decision comes easier...

I found a used one, Cheap. Shot with it today, really like this focal length for me.

⁠Second hand market is a safe bet with these lenses, because they are virtually indestructible :D

Have not got there yet so I can’t speak to it just yet. But I don’t have an issue with the dynamic range with regular shooting.

What capabilities does it lack that's needed for pro work?

I just recently retired from pro work, and used Olympus 4/3's and m4/3's camera systems to shoot weddings, portraits, real estate, print publication, product, and corporate conferences/events for about 17 years -- without a single dissatisfied client. I'm sure glad I didn't know my cameras and lenses didn't have the capabilities needed. Whew!

@bruna.canhos

Most of my shoots are done for social media. This is a relatively inexpensive, fast shoot. It ranges from $175-$225 depending on the time. But when I do find a model I can use for a client, they get to know you shoot is to see if I can work with her and to provide the client images. I most certainly do some TFP work when I personally need to play with new equipment or work on lighting. But I keep that to once a month.

@@kaskoPhoto Awesome! Thanks for your insight. It's very valuable.

​@@kaskoPhoto I live in a small rural area. Where do you find your models and how. I am older than you and I don't want to be looked upon as a creep. I want to be taken seriously. Thanks

@@wadecoffie7255 Most of my social media clients come from other clients. “I saw your work on “ “ page and would like to book a session. Start by reaching out to friends and family. Believe me there are a ton of guys and girls that would love a shoot but just need that easy way into it. I have the luxury of being in the business for 42 years so I built up a pretty big client base, so the referrals come easy. And you can also reach out to people who currently work with other photographers in your area. Reach out to them. Just keep it professional and about the shoot - not how good they look. And always tell them to bring a friend along with them.

TFP?

1.2 - 1.4

That’s a tough question, because I don’t shoot Fuji in their film simulations- which is where they shine. In raw, the OM 1 is definitely a clear winner for me.

😂😂 Photography was not possible before mirrorless and the creation of the RU-vidr.

@@kaskoPhoto glad to see an actual photographer use the system and dispel the myths the spec sheet chasers propagate. Another very enjoyable video, John

@@paulanderson24 thank you Paul

"I learned in the late 80s, we had to expose correctly." Cmon, how can you expose correctly a black bird on a bright sky? You need expose to highlights and pull the underexposed part in post as you said.. There is no other choice.

I think those new Panasonic cameras look amazing as well. I do like the OM system camera though.

​@@pentagramyt417That's not what I meant, digital rules for such things. But especially in landscape it has become normal to totally rely on the DR of the cameras and neglect trying to get a decent exposure in the first place. It's a good argument to continuously sell new cameras though.

@@haakon_b Yes, landscapes would work differently, portraits too. Wildlife is crazy with proper exposure.

I shot at 1/500 to push the auto iso up - wanted to see how it did

i find that with mft inside with normal bulb light I have to shoot a moving subject at 1/500 to 1/1000 or i get a blur. ISO set around 3200 to 4000. thanks for the info

I think that is personal preference. But for me it is a near perfect system for a lot of my paid work. And it’s a joy to use.

In my opinion it is better than Fuji and I own both. The only advantage of the current Fuji APSC lineup is the higher megapixel sensor. In every other aspect, AF, burst speed, computational modes it beats the Fuji. The Sony system overall beats OM-1 on AF and probably higher IQ (especially the high resolution cameras) but OM has better ergonomics and computational modes. I previously owned an A7RIV and A7III, and always taking my Olympus/OM with me if I couldn’t take more than 1 camera

If this OM 1 was any smaller I couldn’t use it. It’s really easy to hold/use and the lenses are very manageable. This camera in hand is surprising

Canon is doing that :) every of them have their own policy. Like OM is for wildlife, Sony is for vloggers, Nikon is to wildlife, and Canon for journalism and weedings.

@@pentagramyt417 Well, these days you will find quite a few press photographers with Sony cameras as well. Even Nikon has still a share of that market. It is not just about the products, but also pro grade service and support. Back in the days Olympus had some dedicated fans among press photographers, for the same reasons that makes the current system appealing today: Size, weight and handling. But that was before my time.

By the way: Canon was my former system, until I switched to Olympus/OM System.

I asked myself that every day. I get that it’s a really good camera for wildlife but for what you do and for how influential social media is, I think micro 4/3 is actually coming into play more than ever

@@kaskoPhoto Agree. When you - like I do for a living - produce images, video (and text) for specialised B2B media that already is digital first and rapidly becomes digital only, full frame is overkill - slowing and weighting you down. M43 is faster and leaner, both for stills and video.

Its not dead yet its still in many uk camera shops, it could happen :) but I hope not :)

I used my OM1 today and it worked great 😂 not dead for me.

@@kaskoPhoto So much the better but personally I am not going to invest in a moribund system.

@@Hector_Malot You should probably tell Panasonic this - they just released 2 new Micro 4/3 cameras - maybe if they knew the system was dead they would have ditched them instead.

Your choice, and your $$$, so spend where you please. But micro four thirds has been declared dead every year since it was born. I'm hardly unbiased, as a micro four thirds owner, but doesn't it seem like Nikon Z DX or even Canon ASP-C is just as likely to "be dead" compared to micro four thirds? Anyway, regarding Sigma... We need to remember that Sigma hasn't made lenses specifically micro 4/3 ... ever. It simply took lenses aimed at APS-C mounts, bolted on a m43 mount instead, and plugged in firmware for m43 standard. These lenses didn't end up being as competitive as native lenses because: (a) lenses like the 16mm f1.4 are very good but completely obese compared to, say, a PL 15mm f1.7 or Oly 17mm f1.8 (b) lenses like the 30mm f1.4 are very good but completely obese compared to, say, a PL 25mm f1.4 or Oly 25mm f1.8 (c) lenses like the 56mm f1.4 are very good but almost no one shoots portraits with micro four thirds cameras (d) great compact Sigma zoom lenses like the 18-50mm f2.8 which don't have as much competition in Fuji/Sony/Canon APS-C formats would have to compete with superb native m43 zoom lenses (all of which are better options on m43 given the crop factor) like the Oly 12-45mm f4, Oly 12-40mm f2.8, Pan Leica 12-60mm f2.8-4, Oly 12-100 f4, and Pana 35-100mm f2.8. I could continue, but basically, Sigma lenses are more competitive with APS-C lenses because they're designed and priced to be competitive with APS-C lenses. The bet in m43 that Sigma made was that it wouldn't cost them that much to adapt existing APS-C lenses for m43 so why not give it a shot. But the bet ended up not really paying off because m43 lenses were simply a better fit and value prop for most buyers. Also, you may not know this but Olympus/OM Digital System recently launched its 150-600mm f5-6.3. You may also know this as the Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3. Because it is, in fact, the Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3. With an m43 mount attached, and m43-compatible firmware. So Sigma is, in fact, still making lenses for m43. Just not under their own name, but licensed to Olympus. Whether this lens will fare any better than other Sigma lenses (or simply be discarded as unnecessarily large and heavy since the full image circle isn't being utilized on m43) remains to be seen. But the fact that it's being sold for twice as much as it is for other mounts isn't going to help things much.

100% on board with you on all of it! But using this for almost all of my business clients (they are all on-line digital media now) is going to be amazing.