Who are we?



We're Mathieu and Heather and we run MirrorLessons!

Want to find out more about us?
Click here to read on...

Search MirrorLessons

Socialize with us!

Google+ Community


Are you on Google+ ? Join our community!

Inspired Eye Issue 13 is out!


A website created by photographers for photographers.



Like us on Facebook!


3 versus 5 axis stabilization: Can the Olympus OM-D E-M10 keep up with the E-M5?

3 versus 5 axis stabilization: Can the Olympus OM-D E-M10 keep up with the E-M5?

Be sure to check out our first impressions of the OM-D E-M10, the 25mm f/1.8 and the 14-42mm pancake!

The Olympus OM-D E-M10 is an exciting new camera that will join the OM-D line-up. The more I use it, the more I prefer it to the E-M5, mostly because of its high speed EVF and fast processor, which makes the camera’s operations run all the more quickly and smoothly. This said, the OM-D E-M5 still has some things going for it…one being the great 5 axis stabilisation.

As a fan of 5-axis stabilisation, I was curious to put it to test against the new E-M10 stabilisation which only has three axes. The million dollar question is: can two missing axes really make a big difference when shooting at slow shutter speeds?

3-Axis vs. 5-Axis for Stills

As I’ve said many times, I’ve had no problem taking hand-held shots at 1 second of exposure time using the 5-axis stabilisation of the OM-D cameras. With the OM-D E-M1, I’ve even managed to obtain sharp images with shutter speeds slower than 1 second. For this reason, I consider the OM-D (and Pen E-P5) stabilisation not only unique amongst stabilisation mechanisms, but also very interesting for low-light situations where there isn’t much action involved.

, , f/ , ISO

First, let’s talk specs. Unlike the other OM-D cameras, the new OM-D E-M10 lacks the vertical and horizontal shifts axes. Olympus told me that this choice was made for three reasons: first, and most importantly, because the camera is too small to house 5 axis stabilisation. Secondly, they claim that only real difference between the two IS mechanisms can be seen in macro shots. Finally, since the camera has been designed for amateurs, they believe that the presence of 3 axes instead of 5 won’t be a concern for the users of this camera. During the first days of testing, I did sense that the E-M10 was more sensitive at slow shutter speeds than the E-M5.

I performed a series of tests with the same lens and settings, shooting the same frame with both cameras. I took 4 different photos at 1/10s, 1/5s, 1/2s and 1 second.

The first series was taken with the M.Zuiko 12mm f/2 lens. I was sitting in one of the red chairs that fill the Temple Hall in the Turin National Cinema Museum, pointing the camera up towards the dome.

N.B.: since the E-M10 raw files aren’t supported by Lightroom yet, all the images below are all OOC JPGs.

The four pictures shot with the E-M5 came out razor sharp on the first try, even at 1 second of exposure. Nothing surprising for me. Usually at 1 second I do need to make a few attempts before obtaining the optimal result, but in this case, being sat in a chair was certainly of help.

(100% Crops)

With the E-M10, the results are different starting from 0.5s. The sample above is sharp, but I achieved that result after four attempts. As for the 1 second exposure, the one I posted is the best result I got but it is slightly blurry. It is the best I got out of 6 different attempts.

(100% Crops)

For the second test, I changed the lens and mounted the new M.Zuiko 25mm f/1.8. I wanted to see how much I could push the E-M10 with a longer focal length.

The E-M5 handles the 25mm well on the first attempt down to 1/5s. At 0.4s, I got the sharpest result on the fourth attempt. The other ones were slightly blurry. At 1 second, the best result was achieved with the fourth out of a total of six shots.

(100% Crops)

As for the E-M10, I has some trouble from the shutter speed of 1/10s and slower. The first came out slightly blurry, the second was okay.

Of course, it is important to keep in mind that the fact you achieved the best result on the second (or third or fourth!) attempt isn’t necessarily a weakness of the camera. As good as internal stabilisation can be, the results may vary depending on how still you stand or sit between one shot and another.

At 1/5s on the E-M10, I had to lean against a railing in order to achieve the same result as the E-M5. Before changing positions, I tried different shots in burst mode as well, but none came out as sharp as the E-M5 version. The best result I got was the third picture out of a total of 16 photos taken. Three other pictures had a pretty similar result but it was when I changed positions that I got the best results.

At 0.4s, I didn’t achieve a perfectly sharp result either, and at 1 second I quickly understood that there wasn’t a comfortable position on this earth that was going to help!

(100% Crops)

The important thing to note here is that, except for some very slow shots taken with the 25mm, you really need to see the picture at 100% of its size to notice the differences. To me, that is a sign that the 3 axis stabilisation of the OM-D E-M10 is very effective.

90% of the time, you won’t shoot slower than 1/20 or 1/10 anyway. If you go below, it is at least useful to know the limits of the camera.

Below are two additional examples taken with the 12mm. In this case, I must say the two cameras behaved very similarly, with the exception of the pictures taken at 1 second. This helps to prove that a good result is also related to how still you can remain while taking the shot. In a real world situation, you will rarely get the same exact results each time you take a shot with a slow exposure.

3 Axis vs. 5 Axis for Macro Photography

When we spoke with Olympus regarding the 3 axis stabilization of the OM-D E-M10, we asked where the difference between the two types of stabilization would be most pronounced. The answer was hand-held macro photography.

To test this, we borrowed the Lumix-Leica 45mm DG Macro lens for the day and compared the two cameras at various shutter speeds. We began at one second and finished off at 1/100 of a second. For each shutter speed, we took four consecutive shots and selected the sharpest image of the four. The aperture was set to f/13 for all shots (with the exception of 1/100 of a second where it was set to f/10) so that shallow depth of field would not make focusing a challenge.

Our test subject. He's no taller than Mat's thumb!

Our test subject. He’s no taller than Mat’s thumb!

We were surprised to discover that while there is a difference, it is minimal.

Between one second and 1/4 of a second, both cameras produce blurry results, which was only to be expected at such a close distance and slow shutter speed. However, at 1/4 of a second, the E-M5 appears slightly less blurry than the E-M10 equivalent.

At 1/6 of a second, the E-M5 produces a sharper result than the E-M10 but at 1/10 of a second, the results are identical. Between 1/15 and 1/100 of a second, there is no noticeable difference between the two.

E-M5, 1/100, f/ 10, ISO 3200

E-M5, 1/100, f/ 10, ISO 3200

E-M10, 1/100, f/ 10, ISO 3200

E-M10, 1/100, f/ 10, ISO 3200

As I mentioned above, we must always take human error into account when performing this kind of test. The fact that the E-M5 was noticeably sharper than the E-M10 at 1/6 of a second, but identical at 1/10 of a second may have more to do with the micro-movements my body was making than a lack of stability in-camera.

In conclusion, we can see that the E-M5, while slightly more efficient, isn’t exactly leaps and bounds ahead of its little brother.

In fact, I would even bet that an E-M5 user out on a macro photo shoot would hardly notice the difference between the stabilisation of the two cameras. This is great news for those thinking of buying their first Olympus Micro Four Thirds camera, as they will have all the benefits of a great image stabilisation mechanism in a more affordable body.

Note: This test was performed inside as it has been raining non-stop for the past few days. Ideally, I would have liked to perform some additional tests outside but, as you can imagine, the call of a warm, dry and cosy house was too tempting. :)

The new M-IS for Video

When you switch the mode dial to video, you will notice in the quick menu that the IS is called M-IS. This is because in the E-M10 video mode stabilisation is enhanced with electronic image stabilisation in addition to the 3-axis VCM stabilisation. This is why, when you activate it, you will notice that the image is slightly cropped.

We compiled a short video below to show you the differences between the M-IS turned on and off, and a comparison with the 5-axis stabilisation of the E-M5. It seems that both cameras produce pretty similar results for video stabilisation.

Conclusion

Despite the two missing axes, I have to say that Olympus engineers did a very good job in keeping the E-M10 IS up to the OM-D standard of excellence. In video mode, the differences between it and the E-M5 are barely noticeable. For stills, I would say that overall you are safe down to 1/10s, and even then, taking two pictures in a row and checking for sharpness on the LCD screen is always an option.

With extremely slow shutter speeds, the 5-axis stabilisation, especially the enhanced one built into the Pen E-P5 or E-M1 will give you more precise and usable results. But unless this is something you really need for your photography, you will be fine with what the E-M10 has to offer.

There is one last comparison I didn’t have the chance to do and this was to compare the E-M10 to the GX7. My impression is that the two IS systems deliver very close results based on previous experience I had with the Lumix camera. However, the E-M10 IS has the advantage of working in video mode as well.

The OM-D E-M10 is also available on Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.de

List Price: $499.99
Current Price: $399.00
Buy Now
Price Disclaimer

The M.Zuiko 25mm f/1.8 is also available on Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.de


Like our blog? Be sure to follow us on Facebook and Twitter! If you’re planning on buying camera gear, you can check out Amazon and Adorama. Prices remain the same for you, but a small percentage of your purchase value is valued back to us. Thank you!

About the Author Mathieu

Mathieu Gasquet is a professional photographer with French and Italian origins. Besides running his own video and photography studio 3Dit Lab, he is also the official photographer for the National Cinema Museum in Turin. You can follow him on Google+, Twitter or Facebook!

14 Comments

  • Hi,

    Thanks for this comparison. I had a good look at the video, and to me it seems that, although the stabilisation seems equal, the EM10 is much softer. I would expect it to be the other way, with the weak codec in the EM5.
    Is this a real issue, or am I imagining things? It could be the impact of he digital part of the EM10 IS.
    Any opinions on this?

    Regards,

    Merijn

    • I didn’t find any substantial differences regarding sharpness between the two cameras but since the video IS on the E-M10 is electronic, it could slightly affect IQ.

  • How is the video quality of E-M10 compare to GX7?

    • The GX7 has a better video codec (AVCHD) and an overall better result concerning video, as for all Lumix cameras.

  • Hey Mathieu,

    I was just wondering if it’s possible to turn off DIGITAL stabilization on the E-M10 during video. I’d much rather work without it, and rely on the mechanical 3-axis sensor IS alone.

    Thanks!

    • Hi Edward, I didn’t see any option to disable the digital stabilisation during video recording.

  • The video was really very informative. It’s quite amazing to see the difference when stabilization is on versus when off. A question that I have is how would a GX7 do in comparison? Can you get anything like that smoothness whith that camera and a good stabilized lens?

    • Unfortunately the GX7 IS doesn’t work for video. You would need to use Lumix OIS lenses that have an internal stabilisation.

    • Right, that’s what I meant: how would a GX7 with perhaps the Panasonic 12-35 2.8 lens compare?

  • Great! Thanks, just what I was wanted to know. One more thing I would like to see is a comparison of continuous focus performance between either the EM-5, or EM-10, and the EM-1, specifically related to subjects moving toward, or away from the camera. I am thinking of sports/automobiles/motorcycles/airplanes. Whatever I buy, it will be for more than a few months. More on the order of years, so I am leaning toward the EM-1 or whatever comes out next in that range. I don’t want to find myself wishing later that I had gone that extra step.

    • You can find a quick AF-C test between the E-M5 and the E-M10 here. The E-M10 has more focus target points so it should behave better in continuous focus mode than the E-M5. But if you want to be really sure about this, you should go with the E-M1. I had a chance to try AF-C and tracking extensively and it word really well, even in low light conditions such as a contemporary dance show.

  • Hi Heather, great tests very informative. Some questions:

    During this tests did you used the grip accesory in any of the cameras? Do you think results would change if you did?

    Comparing the EVF from the GX7 and the EM10 are there any mayor differences?

    Thanks

    • Hi Rodrigo, we didn’t use the grips during our test but I am sure they improve the stability.
      The GX7 EVF is pretty close to the E-M10 EVF. I think that the E-M10 EVF has a better frame rate.

    • Thanks Mathieu!
      I’m a crazy ir did you not post this article originally… Maybe I need to sleep better :P

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Recent posts

Speed in a small and simple package: Review of the Sony a6000
2 Comments   Sep 2, 2014

Speed in a small and simple package: Review of the Sony a6000

TweetWe’ve been very keen on testing the  since its announcement back in February 2014, but with so many other interesting cameras emerging around the same time, it sadly fell by...
Speed in a small and simple package: Review of the Sony a6000
2 Comments   Sep 2, 2014

Speed in a small and simple package: Review of the Sony a6000

TweetWe’ve been very keen on testing the  since its announcement back in February 2014, but with so many other interesting cameras emerging around the same time, it sadly fell by...