Em1-mk2 v OM1 discussion.

[Will Rose]

Fitment is highly dependent on hand size, and I have large hands (I can palm a basketball).

When I hold the OM-1 securely, the knuckle of my thumb lands between the ISO button and the joystick. This means the rear wheel is near the rear of the pad of my thumb, not at all near the tip, which sticks up above the top of the camera. It was no different with the older cameras, but because the OM-1 rear wheel is recessed, I cannot turn it with that part of my thumb; I must retract my thumb somewhat so that the tip and access the recessed wheel; and that requires shifting the weight of the camera a bit. With the older cameras, just swiping my thumb back and forth was enough to roll the wheel, even if the tip of my thumb didn't touch it.

Likewise on the front: the shutter button is just ahead of the last knuckle of my index finger. With the EM1.2/3, the whole wheel was accessible and I could roll the wheel with that part of my finger easily. With the OM-1, which has the wheel set into that "groove" below the shutter button, I must retract my finger to get the tip on the wheel, and that again means that I have to slightly adjust the purchase my palm has on the grip.

Because the OM-1's new recessed wheels require actuation with the tip of the finger, it is more cumbersome for people with hands the size of mine. The wheels of the mk2/3 where commodious to digitsof more varying sizes.

I could hold the camera further out in my fingers, so that the tips of my finger and thumb ended closer to where the wheels are, but then the weight of the camera would not be set into the meat of my palm, and my grip would not be secure. Such a delicate grip was unnecessary with the older cameras.

The OM-1 is a good camera, with better controls than many out there. But in my view the controls are a downgrade from the EM1.3, which had a superlative and widely accommodating layout.

A bigger camera could fit my hand better, but it would be a bigger camera. The EM-1 was half the size of some DSLRs but still felt "right" in the hand. The genius of the design of the EM-1 models was that the camera was compact and yet the controls still felt natural even to someone with big hands. By catering to the accident-prone, the OM-1 lost some of that.

 

[MEDISN]

Fitment is highly dependent on hand size, and I have large hands (I can palm a basketball).

When I hold the OM-1 securely, the knuckle of my thumb lands between the ISO button and the joystick. This means the rear wheel is near the rear of the pad of my thumb, not at all near the tip, which sticks up above the top of the camera. It was no different with the older cameras, but because the OM-1 rear wheel is recessed, I cannot turn it with that part of my thumb; I must retract my thumb somewhat so that the tip and access the recessed wheel; and that requires shifting the weight of the camera a bit. With the older cameras, just swiping my thumb back and forth was enough to roll the wheel, even if the tip of my thumb didn't touch it.

Likewise on the front: the shutter button is just ahead of the last knuckle of my index finger. With the EM1.2/3, the whole wheel was accessible and I could roll the wheel with that part of my finger easily. With the OM-1, which has the wheel set into that "groove" below the shutter button, I must retract my finger to get the tip on the wheel, and that again means that I have to slightly adjust the purchase my palm has on the grip.

Because the OM-1's new recessed wheels require actuation with the tip of the finger, it is more cumbersome for people with hands the size of mine. The wheels of the mk2/3 where commodious to digitsof more varying sizes.

I could hold the camera further out in my fingers, so that the tips of my finger and thumb ended closer to where the wheels are, but then the weight of the camera would not be set into the meat of my palm, and my grip would not be secure. Such a delicate grip was unnecessary with the older cameras.

The OM-1 is a good camera, with better controls than many out there. But in my view the controls are a downgrade from the EM1.3, which had a superlative and widely accommodating layout.

A bigger camera could fit my hand better, but it would be a bigger camera. The EM-1 was half the size of some DSLRs but still felt "right" in the hand. The genius of the design of the EM-1 models was that the camera was compact and yet the controls still felt natural even to someone with big hands. By catering to the accident-prone, the OM-1 lost some of that.

Most likely the case that hand size, finger length and dexterity play a role. I can palm a basketball so I don't think it is size alone. When I am shooting, my grip does not change for my thumb to rotate the rear control wheel. I do it either with the inside of my thumb knuckle or the tip of my thumb. I press the ISO button with the tip of my thumb without changing my grip. Same with the front control wheel. It naturally lands dead center of my middle phalanx so I can rotate it clockwise 10-audible clicks from resting position in one motion. I wonder if the wheels on my OM-1's are more pliable than yours? I am going on 1yr now with the two of them.

 

[Will Rose]

Most likely the case that hand size, finger length and dexterity play a role. I can palm a basketball so I don't think it is size alone. When I am shooting, my grip does not change for my thumb to rotate the rear control wheel. I do it either with the inside of my thumb knuckle or the tip of my thumb. I press the ISO button with the tip of my thumb without changing my grip. Same with the front control wheel. It naturally lands dead center of my middle phalanx so I can rotate it clockwise 10-audible clicks from resting position in one motion. I wonder if the wheels on my OM-1's are more pliable than yours? I am going on 1yr now with the two of them.

I've heard there's some variation in stiffness with the wheels. But stiffness isn't the ultimate problem for me. The rear wheel is flat out too recessed for the side, knuckle, or any other lower part of my thumb to actuate. That part of my thumb is not flabby enough to get purchase on the recessed wheel; I have to get the tip or end of the thumb on it, and since that's about an inch above the top of the camera, it's awkward. This was a non-issue with the previous models, as I said, because the side of my thumb could easily reach and move the wheels.

If your wheels have loosened up some after a year that's good, but my wheels are not excessively stiff now. The stiffness is a factor, but much less than the placement and recessing.

 

[whumber]

Fitment is highly dependent on hand size, and I have large hands (I can palm a basketball).

When I hold the OM-1 securely, the knuckle of my thumb lands between the ISO button and the joystick. This means the rear wheel is near the rear of the pad of my thumb, not at all near the tip, which sticks up above the top of the camera. It was no different with the older cameras, but because the OM-1 rear wheel is recessed, I cannot turn it with that part of my thumb; I must retract my thumb somewhat so that the tip and access the recessed wheel; and that requires shifting the weight of the camera a bit. With the older cameras, just swiping my thumb back and forth was enough to roll the wheel, even if the tip of my thumb didn't touch it.

Have you tried using the first knuckle of your thumb to control the rear dial? I know what you mean about the pad of the thumb not being effective; I find I either use the tip of my thumb or the first knuckle to control the rear dial, depending on exactly how many hand is positioned on the camera in the moment. The setup on the E-M1X is better, but the OM-1 is still very good.

Likewise on the front: the shutter button is just ahead of the last knuckle of my index finger. With the EM1.2/3, the whole wheel was accessible and I could roll the wheel with that part of my finger easily. With the OM-1, which has the wheel set into that "groove" below the shutter button, I must retract my finger to get the tip on the wheel, and that again means that I have to slightly adjust the purchase my palm has on the grip.

I haven't really experienced this one, I seem to just kind of drag my entire finger along the "groove" the wheel sits in to roll it.

Because the OM-1's new recessed wheels require actuation with the tip of the finger, it is more cumbersome for people with hands the size of mine. The wheels of the mk2/3 where commodious to digitsof more varying sizes.

If you're trying to use the finger tip, I can see why it would seem that way but there are definitely easier ways to use them.

 

[Will Rose]

Have you tried using the first knuckle of your thumb to control the rear dial? I know what you mean about the pad of the thumb not being effective; I find I either use the tip of my thumb or the first knuckle to control the rear dial, depending on exactly how many hand is positioned on the camera in the moment. The setup on the E-M1X is better, but the OM-1 is still very good.

I haven't really experienced this one, I seem to just kind of drag my entire finger along the "groove" the wheel sits in to roll it.

If you're trying to use the finger tip, I can see why it would seem that way but there are definitely easier ways to use them.

Maybe for you, not for me. Our hands must be shaped differently. Like I said, I can hold the OM-1 so the wheels are easily accessible, but if I do, because of the size and shape of my palm, the weight of the camera is not in a comfortable or secure position. It's a trade off.

I don't have to use the tippy-tip of the finger on the front wheel; I can start to get it with the rear of the pad, past the knuckle, and then roll towards the tip. The person who said he gets 10 clicks on the front wheel is using two full segments of the finger to roll, because that's the only way to get 10 clicks, as that requires more than three turns of the exposed portion of the wheel, more than anyone can do with just the fingertip. We'll chalk that up to extra dexterity on his part; I don't like turning wheels with the middle part of my finger - not enough control for me.

The first knuckle (the main part) of my thumb cannot turn the rear wheel when I have a secure grip, because the wheel is just too recessed. I can turn the wheel with the underside of my first knuckle (maybe you're not distinguishing between the two), but that requires stretching my thumb further up, and that is even more inconvenient that bringing the tip down. I've been using cameras a for a good many years, and have been using my thumb and index finger a for a good many years too. I know how to use them. The OM-1's wheels are just not in a good position for me.

I know a lot of people love the EM-1X, but to me something that gargantuan defeats the purpose of mft. I tried the EM-5 once, but I couldn't stand that little gripless thing. It just wasn't comfortable to hold. It's a great extra small camera, but I would have to put a grip on it, and then it wouldn't be so small! But I'll concede to being picky. Sony cameras are good sized and have ample grips, but I find them extremely uncomfortable to hold, sharp edged and pointy in all the wrong places. Shape counts for a lot, and Olympus, Canon, and Nikon are good at that. I don't think Sony is.

 

[MEDISN]

Maybe for you, not for me. Our hands must be shaped differently. Like I said, I can hold the OM-1 so the wheels are easily accessible, but if I do, because of the size and shape of my palm, the weight of the camera is not in a comfortable or secure position. It's a trade off.

Palm shape must have something to do with it. It fits quite comfortably in my hand in a shooting position that allows manipulation of various dials and buttons. Although I tend to rotate the mode dial in the wrong direction while looking through the EVF. Trying to go from C4 to C3 puts me in movie mode every time

I don't have to use the tippy-tip of the finger on the front wheel; I can start to get it with the rear of the pad, past the knuckle, and then roll towards the tip. The person who said he gets 10 clicks on the front wheel is using two full segments of the finger to roll, because that's the only way to get 10 clicks, as that requires more than three turns of the exposed portion of the wheel, more than anyone can do with just the fingertip. We'll chalk that up to extra dexterity on his part; I don't like turning wheels with the middle part of my finger - not enough control for me.

10 clicks is one swift motion that opens the aperture 3.3 stops. Going the opposite direction (counter clockwise) I only get 7 clicks.

The first knuckle (the main part) of my thumb cannot turn the rear wheel when I have a secure grip, because the wheel is just too recessed. I can turn the wheel with the underside of my first knuckle (maybe you're not distinguishing between the two), but that requires stretching my thumb further up, and that is even more inconvenient that bringing the tip down. I've been using cameras a for a good many years, and have been using my thumb and index finger a for a good many years too. I know how to use them. The OM-1's wheels are just not in a good position for me.

Interesting! The rear dial falls right in the IP joint for me. That is usually how I roll the dial but any part of my thumb from the IP joint distal works well. This makes me think your dial must be stiffer than mine.

I know a lot of people love the EM-1X, but to me something that gargantuan defeats the purpose of mft. I tried the EM-5 once, but I couldn't stand that little gripless thing. It just wasn't comfortable to hold. It's a great extra small camera, but I would have to put a grip on it, and then it wouldn't be so small! But I'll concede to being picky. Sony cameras are good sized and have ample grips, but I find them extremely uncomfortable to hold, sharp edged and pointy in all the wrong places. Shape counts for a lot, and Olympus, Canon, and Nikon are good at that. I don't think Sony is.

I suppose that depends on the purpose of mft for you. Moving to a pair of EM1X's cut my former (1DXII) kit in half. Not to mention the cost of buying/replacing/insuring was significantly less. For me, this is very much in line with the mft ethos. High quality and compact.

 

[Will Rose]

I suppose that depends on the purpose of mft for you. Moving to a pair of EM1X's cut my former (1DXII) kit in half. Not to mention the cost of buying/replacing/insuring was significantly less. For me, this is very much in line with the mft ethos. High quality and compact.

Completely agree with you here. If you were moving from something like that the EM1X would seem compact, and of course you get the benefit of the smaller lenses. But one can't reasonably consider the EM1X a "small" camera. It's just considerably smaller than a giant camera like the 1DX. I would consider the OM1 "compact" but the EM-5 is small for an ILC. Not as small as a PEN, but still small. But it depends on your point of view, as you say. Someone coming from something like a Sony RX100 is going to think any ILC is big once you start including the lenses. I saw someone in a camera store quite a while back who was trying out the 300 f4 on their EM-5.