E-M5 II worth upgrading over E-M5?

Hello,
I have recently acquired my first MFT system, an E-M5 Mk1, with the 12-50, 40-150 (plastic fantastic) and 75-300. I am overall quite satisfied but I have a few gripes with the E-M5 (mostly the low resolution the EVF and screen),and the 12-50 is quite slow, even if I can take good pictures with it with some effort.

I can get both the E-M5 Mk2 and a 12-40 f/2.8 for around €800, or an E-M1 (mk1) with the same lens for around €700. Would it be worth it to upgrade? The high-res shot as well as the software improvements and lack of shutter shock of the Mk2 are quite attractive, and improved IBIS is also always appreciated.

I pondered a long time over the PL 12-60, PL 12-35, or Oly 12-45 f/4 as well for the lenses, but I would rather have fast glass for indoors shooting, particularly since I cannot crank up the ISO above 6400 on such cameras and hope for a great result (but you can convince me otherwise!).

Thanks for your input

IIRC, the EVF on the E-m5 mark II (as well as E-m10 mark I, E-m1 mark I/II/III, and maybe E-m1x) is the same size and resolution as the EVF on the E-m5 mark I. They all use a TFT LCD monitor for the display. Thus if you are hoping for a higher resolution viewfinder, you won't get it.

However, if you wear polarized sunglasses, the E-m5 mark II's viewfinder goes completely opaque when you shoot in horizontal orientation.

The E-m5 mark I (and the other cameras mentioned above) have areas in the viewfinder that are distorted when viewed with polarized sunglasses, but if you concentrate on the areas that are not distorted (using single point auto focus in an area that is not distorted) you can use the viewfinder.

The E-m10 mark II/III/IV, Pen-F, E-m5 mark III, OM-1, and OM-5 use a different technology (OLED) for the viewfinder, which does not have distortions when viewed through polarized sunglasses. The OLED viewfinders tend to supersaturate (IMHO) the colors compared to the TFT LCD viewfinders, but I find I just mentally tune down the colors to get an estimate of what the photo will look like. Since I need to wear polarized sunglasses (due to migraines), it is an issue for me.

However, in terms of resolution of the EVF, you need to go to the OM-1 to get a higher resolution viewfinder. Note, the OM-5 has essentially the same viewfinder as the E-m5 mark III.

Thanks, I took my notes from www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=oly_em5&products=oly_em5ii (or cameradecision which has the same numbers) which made me think that the E-M5 mark 1 was the only one with such a low-res display and EVF, being the first after all.

I don't usually wear polarized sunglasses, but that is a good think to look out for.

Hmmm, you are right. The E-m5 mark I has 1,440,00 pixels, the E-m1 mark I has 2,360,000 pixels, and the OM-1 has 5,760,000 pixels. I never noticed when I switched from the E-m5 mark I to E-m1 mark I that the viewfinder was more detailed.

I still use my EM5, and when I do, I notice that the buttons remain as squishy as they always did, I bought it in 2012 and it's still a better camera than I am as a photographer. I never worried about resolution on EVF or screen. I use them for framing. In my opinion, shutter shock is something gear freaks worry about, Good light or a fast lens keeps you out of that place where the shutter shock dragons live.

Better lenses are amazing, especially if you're a pixel peeper like I am, I've got some of the Olympus f1.8 primes, and they were better than upgrading the body, I'd recommend the 12-40 zoom by itself, You'll never touch the 12-50 again, I just bought the 40-150 f4, and we'll see how I feel about my plastic zooms.

I guess going up in MP is worthwhile. I don't print big, so I don't really see the advantage of my 20MP PEN-F or 16MP GX-85 over my beater EM5. Anyway, congrats on getting into M43. I hope you enjoy it,

I agree that the E-M5 is still a great little camera in this day and age, and not very limiting in actual photography. I actually bought the E-M5II bundled with the 12-40, for cheaper than stated in the first post, so from a day of experience, the E-M5II is more of the same, but only more refined and slightly more pleasant to use. I will not comment on image quality, because having the 12-40 over the 12-50 is obviously cheating in many ways and I expect sensors to be very similar, but they have added a "superfine" jpeg mode, stabilization is slightly better, the e-shutter is quite silent, there is a HDR mode (which is more usable than most DSLRs), high-res mode, and more knobs and buttons. I am overall very satisfied, even if a bit saddened that it is slightly heavier. I should get a Pen for lighter days!

Going up in MP from 16 to 20 is not that much, the only difference that makes for me is that at 16 the picture is only slightly bigger than my 4k screen, whereas on 20 (e.g. my D7500) I have to zoom a bit more to get at pixel equivalence. MFT seems like a lot of fun, and I actually have the film OM-1 from the 70s, so this is a nice touch of nostalgia for me as well.

I have no personal experience with the E-M5 Mk1 but the Mk2 is an excellent camera and would definitely make a difference in product photography with its hi-def mode. Quality lenses can transform the photography experience and the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 is a quality lens. Concerning the EVF, I have had no concerns about the resolution and find that it works fine for me. My E-M5 Mk2 sits in a camera bag more often than not because of ergonomics. Specifically, the grip doesn't suit me and even though I have added a metal grip, it still doesn't feel right. I really like the external controls, especially the front and rear command dials and the fact that moving a small lever can switch the functionality of those dials, providing capability for four different adjustments.

I solved the problem with the grip with an upgrade to the Olympus E-M1 Mk2. After targeting an E-M1 Mk3, I found a mint E-M1 Mk2 at a wonderful price and I have been delighted with this camera (thanks to the firmware updates). So far, my Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 has lived on this camera and I have been very pleased with the performance and with the way it feels in my hand. There is no need for an add-on metal grip!

I am 6'7" and used to be able to catch and palm a basketball off a dribble (large hands). Of course, that was a number of decades ago! :-)
If you have large hands, there is a chance that the E-M5 Mk2's grip may not suit you as well as the E-M1 series.

Good luck!

Jim

Some how I seem to have accumulated more Oly cameras than I know what to do with... I won;t go into the list... But the EM-5ii is still a strong standard bearer for me and was my primary for some years. Now I'm using the EM-1ii & iii a bit more, but not exclusively - I like them a bunch.
However, the EM5ii is still used often, especially when 'size' (over weight) makes a difference, outdoors...
The EM1ii is a bit more complex in settings, but once figured out, quite quick to use.
I shoot 95% outdoors, rarely close or indoors. So need for high ISO is rare. Long lenses dominate.
IF, I was shooting indoors more often, under difficult light, and in close quarters, and possibly need ISO above 3200, I would favor the EM1ii and iii.
Lenses - whatever... I have a 12-40 2.8 which I almost never use. It's not that great...
I have a 40-150 plastic fantastic - it is truly a wonder as an imaging device - can't pry that from my cold, dead hands... LOL!
Oly 14-150, the one lens to rule them all.
Again others have and use others, for their reasons. The 12-40 2.8 seems a good choice for what you describe and very worthwhile for consideration as a primary lens.
I'll add one more reason for either the EM5ii or EM1ii & iii. You can do focus stacking incamera with a PRO lens. AND you can also do a modified firmware for any of those 3 which allows in-camera Focus Stacking with ANY Auto-focus lens - Oly or Pany, PRO or 'consumer' level. I'm using that very often now, and it has expanded my appreciation for these 'older' camera bodies and the consumer lenses !
Thx
Yuri