Making The World a Safer Place?

View of the St. Paul's Cathedral in London, England
From the rooftop bar of an adjacent building
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

OVER THE years I have lamented the "old days." Someone, somewhere, once said "the only thing that is certain in life is change." Given that truism, I suppose my even writing about it is Quixotic. Like a river, I know I am powerless to stop it, and this blog (and any others of mine like it) isn't really an attempt to stave of the ineveitable. It is more an observation of that truth. Change will happen. Inexorably.

Someone, somewhere, once said "the only thing that is certain in life is change."

IN THE context of photography, change takes the form of "improvements" by humans, and destruction by humans and by nature (primarily through fire, flood, misuse, and disuse). Prime examples of "human" change include such "improvments" as colorful metal roofs on formerly rustic buildings in rustic settings; the building of roads and of new (often modern) structures that do not blend with the former landscape (and its often Arcadian beauty); and the addition of modern "infrastructure." All of this is - I suppose - in the name of progress.

Rooftop Viewpoint of St. Paul's Cathedral - London
With new "safety" barricades installed
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

BUT RECENTLY, I was (rudely in my view) reminded of another phenomena of change by humans. in September, we spent a week in London, England. It is, as an aside, a wonderful city to visit. If you haven't, I highly recommend spending some time there. This was our second, week-long visit there and for the most part, we found new things to do on this trip. We would be spending the majority of our time on of two different couples (both of whom we met aboard cruise ships). We flew in to LHR on Monday morning and our friends, Carol and Rob, from Manchester, England, joined us for a short walk-around, stopping at a few local pubs in Paddington, where we were all staying, and dinner that night. We spent the next 2 1/2 days with them.

Barricades, unfortunately for photographers, often impede visual access to certain scenic views

ONE OF the places we revisited was a splendid view of the central St. Paul's Cathedral and the London skyline. There is a restaurant/bar on the top floor of an adjacent shopping mall, where there is a patio giving a wonderful view of the cathedral dome against the London sky. On a walking tour of London in 2021, our guide took us there. It is freely accessible and there is an elevator to the top. We only went for the view (and for me, the photographs). On this trip - just 4 years later - our "mission" was a bit different. We planned to sit and have drinks at the bar with the view (I don't believe our British friends had been there and it was a bit of a treat to show them someplace we knew). The view is still spectacular. But I was dismayed to see that the "powers that be" had installed a 6 - 8 ft high plexiglass barrier around the entire perimeter of the viewing area! A little post-trip research revealed that in 2023, on two different occasions, people jumped to their death from this viewpoint. As you can see from my 2021 image, it would have been relatively easy to clmb the prior barrier (which is easily visible in the first two images) for this purpose. The low railing was more of a "common sense" warning to visitors who were - presumably - forbidden to go past it. It was, however, easy enough for a photographer to walk up to the railing and exclude it from their photograph. It made for, in my opinion, a much nicer and perhaps more dramatic view of the dome.

Rooftop View of St. Paul's Cathedral - London, England
Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

THE PLACING of "safety" barriers in strategic spots around the world is becoming a "thing." These barricades, unfortunately for photographers, often impede visual access to certain scenic views. I am not trying to be insensitive here. There are certainly valid arguments for such barriers to prevent accidental falls, etc. I suspect, however, that a much more significant reason for these barriers is because of people who have abused the freedoms we have so long taken for granted, either by taking unreasonable chances around these scene, or in some cases, purposefully jumping off, or fall to their death. When I see these things, my first thought is what a shame it is that this has become necessary in our society! I know that when my parents visited The Grand Canyon, however, most of the popular viewing spots had no safety railings. Today, most of them do. The reason is people. People (and perhaps especially photographers) often take unreasonable risks in places like this. I understand the reasoning behind the safety barriers. Still, I lament the days when things were naturally open to us - when presumably we exercised a modicum of common sense. For those who are not photographers, you might ask: "what's the big deal?" You can still see a wonderful view of the church. The barriers only really come into play when you are trying to make nice photographic images. The way of the (new) world, I suppose. But to me, it is a shame this kind of thing has become necessary.

PERHAPS A bit ironically, we recently returned from a 3-week trip to Europe, the first week spent in London, and then off on a cruise ship from Southampton up into the Norwegian Fjords. My archival process generally takes me some time to complete and I usually don't start writing the blog posts until I have been through all of my images from a trip, so I am just now getting to the post writing process. As readers here know, the blog is as much a "travelog" as it is about the other aspects (technique, gear, musings, etc.). The irony? I leave again in just 2 days, for 10 more days out in the field; this time in my beloved Vermont, which means I will probably be MIA for another couple weeks of posting (at least one). Then I am back for pretty much the balance of 2025, so will work to catch up. In the meantime, I hope you all will get out and enjoy what is shaping up to be a pretty good fall foliage season!

Review of the Olympus OM-D EM5 Mark III

[I "upgraded" to this model shortly after our trip to Europe in the fall of 2024, but haven't traveled much and didn't really get much of a chance to shoot with it. Knowing I would be in London and then up in Norway in August - September, I decided to wait until after that trip. Back now, a few exposures under my belt, I feel like my review comes from more of a "hands-on" perspective.]

Olympus OM-D E-M5iii

WHAT? ANOTHER "new" camera? This one is an "upgrade," with a small story behind it (and, there would be another new camera - this time replacing my Sony A7riii "serious" camera a short time later - more on that in the future). Of course, it isn't really "new." Released in November 2019. In fact, the EM-10iv it replaces is actually newer by a year (released in September 2020). Both are now probably considered "long in the tooth," by many, particularly given the emergence of the new company (OM Systems) and several OM-Systems models having been released more recently. The immediate successor to the EM-5iii is the OM-Systems OM5. Ironically, the new price is the same as it was for the EM-5iii. But of course, having been around for a while now, there is a better used market (and price) for the EM-5iii. I compared the two and felt that for my purposes, the differences "on paper" just didn't justify the cost of a new one. Plus, for me, the proverbial jury is still out on the new company (OM Systems). From what I could tell the differences include that the OM5 has a magnesium alloy body compared to the EM5iii's polycarbonate body (a source of some concern for some users - see the comment below about the tripod socket weakness) and a slightly newer processor. Every other feature is identical (including the body size). Every image in this blog post was made with the EM-5iii.

I REALIZE that photography is 1% about "gear," and 99% about more important things like creativity and getting yourself in front of great subjects and making creative images. However, there are only so many things to be said about that in a blog. Then it is "get out there and shoot." At least that's my view. And let's face it: every repeat reader here knows that I am a "gearhead." 😀 Not necessarily the "fanboy" type who latches onto a brand, or piece of equipment and can talk about nothing other than its virtues, defending it at all costs, and essentially limiting photographic "vocabulary" to that very small universe. Instead, I like to think my approach to such things is more pragmatic, and non-partisan. I like to think that when I do grab onto a particular accoutrement, that I have a useful reason for doing so.

Olympus EM-D EM-5iii

IF YOU have happened to follow this blog long enough, you have read about (suffered 😅) my slog through a number of different cameras, from the early days of Nikon DSLR, to my jump to so-called "compact" mirrorless (various Sony models), to my travel gear evolution from a very small 1" sensor Sony DSC X100, to the current, Olympus M4/3 line of small, but feature-packed Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras (MILS).

"Little Venice" - Regents Canal - London
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

THE M4/3 thing all started for me when I stumbled on, and began playing with, a copy of Olympus' entry-level MILS M4/3 sensor model (OM D- EM10i). I always considered it one of many options and never really seriously contemplated it until I held it in my own hands and used it. My point of view was (and still is - as modified by my own "small camera" experience) I wanted the largest physical sensor I could economically and practically get. For me that has alway been the 35mm equivalent (so called "full frame). After playing with the M4/3 OMD 10, I really loved its physically small size with "grownup" controls. I could immediately see it would become my primary "travel" camera. From there, to gain just some small upgraded features, I purchased the newest of that entry level line (the EM10 Mark iv). I have carried that camera now for a couple years on all of my travel and have delighted in its very small size, along with its versatility. In spite of that, I made another change just recently - not because of any dissatisfaction with the EM10. I would still highly recommend it to someone who is looking for a nice, fun camera that won't completely deplete the bank account and will give the user (much) more than just a "point and shoot experience." It is a lot of camera in a small, reasonably priced package. In fact, I cannot detect anything in my EM5 files that make them "better" than the EM10 files (maybe even not as good, though that is probably my imagination and maybe some other factors).

I like to think that when I do grab onto a particular accoutrement, that I have a useful reason for doing so

IN LATE September and early October 2024, we spent 17 days in central Europe. A couple of things about that trip conspired to have me thinking about (as we left for the trip back home), and looking at another camera change once we returned home. It wouldn't be a major change. Just a small "upgrade." After some comparison research, I bundled up the EM10iv and sent it in for trade for the EM5iii. Like the other makers, Olympus does some wierd (I am sure there is "method to their madness") things with their numbering scheme, so the "5" model is actually a proverbial "step up" from the "10" model. Go figure. My primary criteria was that the EM-5 shares the same small size of the EM-10 (anything substantially bigger would have been a non-starter for me). All but one of Olympus (now OM Systems) other cameras are substantially larger - approaching, if not equaling, my Sony a7r "full frame" camera (the newest OM Systems release: the OM-3, appears to have the same relatively small size character of the EM-10, and EM-5). I have already gone down the size compromise road with my newest travel zoom (accepting substantially chunkier for better IQ), so I don't want or need anything to increase bulk and weight even more. At some point, it no longer makes sense to have two systems, as they approach the same size. I am happy to report that the EM-5 is essentially the same size, making my "kit" for travel still a palatable small size for both carry and packing.

RELEASED A year before the EM-10iv my "new" EM-5iii is close to the same base configuration, with a few "improved" items, like weather sealing, better IS (6.5 vs. 4.5 stops, according to Dpreview - but I always take that with the proverbial "grain of salt"), the addition of phase-detect AF in addition to contrast-detect, a fully articulating rear screen viewfinder (as opposed to just a tilting screen in the OM10), continuous drive speed of 10fps (vs 6fps), a microphone port, and wired remote control. The EM-5iii has the same 20mp sensor and processor as the EM-10iv and shares many other features that were a part of my decision to purchase the EM-10iv a few years back. Since that is really only a few "improvements" and comes at an increased cost, why do it at all? Read on and I'll try to justify it. 😏

WHILE THESE things are all cumulative, a particular instance in Prague was the prime motivator for change this time. I hired a local professional photographer for a few hours to guide me. I had done that very successfully in Lisbon and Porto a couple years back. I was so pleased with those results that I have decided to add that into my itinerary wherever I can in the future. This was one of those times. I learn something new each time and I think my approach to photography grows with each of these experiences. Our Prague guide (the proverbial "we" included my buddy and travel companion Bruce, who had also joined me with our guide in Lisbon back in 2022), was focused on finding unique scenes and stimulating us to take a creative approach as opposed to the more "this is where I have been" reporting shots.

Prague; Czech Republic
Olympus EM-10iv
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

ONE OF the shots he showed me involved some "gymnastics" as I knelt on a slippery dock under the Charles Bridge to shoot a scene with water and a reflection in the foreground, framed by the round bridge arch. I have done "framing" before. The unique takeway for me on this one was getting the camera lens right down on the water, which in addition to the unique perspective, completely changes the look and character of the reflective water surface. I think it was an effective approach. I'll let you judge for yourself. But this was obviously done without a tripod, handheld and with the camera held at arms length. Composing was challenging. Martin (our guide) demonstrated with his camera - which sported a fully articulating rear screen. My EM10 did not have that, so there was a fair amount of guesswork involved. The screen was - of course - not the sole reason for seeking a change, but it was a catalyst that got me looking at the cost/benefit of an "upgrade." The other factors "added up," making the change a reality.

WAS THE change worth it? I will know better after giving it some more time in my hands, but obviously, I thought so. With the same sensor and processing engine, I expect image quality to be essentially identical. It is the "convenience" factors - weighed against a very low out-of-pocket expenditure with my trade that justified it in my mind. On our very recent caribbean cruise, I had a chance to use the camera some and have some hands-on comments: Here is my review after acutal use.

Blackwall Basin - Canary Wharf, London
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

NEW / ADDITIONAL FEATURES

The primary additonal features with the upgrade from the EM 10iv to the EM5iii9 are:

• Fully articulating rear screen
• Wired remote
• Weather sealing
• Improved IBIS (nearly 2 stops)
• Phase detection AF (in addition to the contast detection only that the EM10 has)
• Faster FPS sequential shooting (did not really figure in my personal decision as I almost never shoot "action" photos)
• A microphone socket (again not a feature that swings me - I don't do video or vlogging)
• Separate (included) detachable flash

A handful of these features seemed to be real "upgrades" for my purposes and type of photography. Some of them, however, would not be enough to motivate me make a change from my already satisfactory EM10iv. The things that did attract me stem from my own actual experiences: wired remote, articulating screen, weather sealing and the additional (phase detection) AF capability. While only time will tell, it is possible that the slightly better IBIS will also be useful.

Alesund, Norway
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

Screen.  As noted in the intro, this feature was a primary motivator for my considering a change from my EM10iv. Every time I change from landscape to portrait orientation, I realize how much I like that feature. Over time, I have often used the screen interchangeably with my preferred viewfinder. I will very often set up my composition and fine-tune it in the standard viewfinder (and I cannot imagine a camera without a viewfinder in my future).

There are negatives; the primary one in my view being the potential interference between the articulating screen and one of my favorite accessories: the L-bracket. For the most part, I think the reason this is an issue stems from a poorly thought out design (probably mainly shaped by the "no need for a tripod" approach  that seems to be part of Olympus/OM Systems gestalt view), partly by Olympus and partly by the accessory manufacturers. On my Nikons and Sonys, there was always a good variety of choices for brackets, including the very expensive Really Right Stuff (RRS) and Kirk models, to some economically reasonable (and perfectly functional) offshore manufacturers. For the M4/3 models the choices are stark, and generally lean toward enhancing the hand grip - not the tripod mount.

Ultimately I was only able to find one that was even close: the RRS bracket. At $150, it was not a "good buy," considering that it was substantially less used on the Olympus camera. But more significantly, the "L" portion of the bracket obstructs the functioning of the articulating screen! It seems like some head could get together and find a way to incorporate both of those features in a useful way. The RRS (I bought it - for lack of a single workable alternative), does have an adjustment for the upright (portrait mode) bracket, which allows it to be moved slightly foreward allowing not 100%, but at least workable use of the articulating figure. Problem solved, right? Wrong. The rearmost "upright" member of the dovetail on the the bracket now completely obscures the 2/3 of the connection sockets (all on the same side of the camera body as the bracket upright, inclulding the HDMI, USB and wired release ports. I don't ever use the USB or HDMI ports. But as I discuss below, the remote release was a factor I wanted to have when in use on a tripod (which is, of course, the only time the L-bracket is being used). Fail!

Fortunately for me, I have a pretty good shop, and some decent mechanical skills. I took a grinder (to my new, $150 piece of "kit") and removed enough of the upgright to access the port I needed. That leaves very little left to engage the dovetail clamp. But I think it is enough. That highly finished aluminum accessory now has a bit of a "Rube Goldberg" look to it. But it is functional. That shouldn't need to happen! I blogged in detail about this fiasco not long ago.

The only remote capability on the EM10iv is an app on your smartphone (an inexplicable development, as all three predecessors - the EM10 versions I, II and III all had wired remote capability). The wired capability on the new camera is a welcome "throwback" for me

Wired Remote.  This one will probably always remain a debatable subject (and for me, unfortunately, it looks like "my side" is loosing the debate to the market place, as fewer and fewer new camera bodies incorporate wired remote release capability). With the dominating emphasis on hand-held shooting, IBIS, and the like, more and more people have eschewed a tripod altogether, and therefore, any need or consideration of any kind of remote release capability). I am old school, and am a believer and preacher of the use of a tripod. And once mounted on a tripod, a remote release is normally necessary to gain the full advantage given by a fixed mounting system. Over the years, I have used cables, wired, and wireless remotes. One of the things I have sorely missed on my newer cameras is wired remote. It is just more positive and responsive - and therefore effective and convenient. The only remote capability on the EM-10iv is an app on your smartphone (an inexplicable development, as all three predecessors - the EM10 versions I, II and III all had wired remote capability). The wired capability on the EM-5iii (an earlier release than the EM-10iv) is a welcome "throwback" for me.

A hard-wired release works best in my experience vs. the electronic. Wireless is sluggish in most cases and is also sensitive to position vs. the camera body. While it has certain advantages (like group selfies or being further from the setup), in most cases its effective range thwarts the advantages. While I know I am losing this (generational?) battle, I abhor the smartphone app approach. I have a smartphone. These days I am not sure how I would function without it. But there are limits. I am not one of those with my nose constantly in the screen, or having it as a body part extension. And having to have just one more additional accessory in hand when trying to compose and sometimes catch that moment? Nope. Don't need it. So I prefer a wired release and this one went on the "positives" side of my decision matrix (ironically, I only rarely mount this camera on a tripod, whereas my primary landscape setup - the Sony a7riii - I rarely handhold. Yet the Sony is not fitted for a wired remote, so I have to deal with the limitations of wireless).

Weather Sealing. Weather sealing is always a plus. It rained off and on for 15-1/2 of the 17 days we spent in central Europe. At times it was a downpour that was sustained over the hours of the day. I had a good raincoat with large pockets and was able to do a pretty adequate job of keeping the camera body dry (ish), even though some of my images suffered from raindrops on the front of the lens. Still, you wonder whether you are in for a surprise later, when the camera's interal workings decide they have had enough. Though I have been fortunate over the years in semi-wet conditions, that kind of experience makes you think about the virtues of weather sealing. I generally don't plan to be out in foul weather. But there are certainly times when it just cannot be avoided. I was able to keep the non-weather-sealed EM-10 dry enough so it didn't get damaged, but weather sealing would have made it less of a worry. I doubt anyone would disagree that the addition of weather sealing is a desirable upgrade.

Celebrity Beyond - Caribbean - 2025
Olympus EM-5iii
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

IBIS. An improvement in IBIS ("in body image stabilization) is another one of those improvements that - for me - fit the "I'll take it if I can get it" categories. The nature of my photography means for me that I really didn't want or need that improvement enough that it would have been a factor in my choice. But for some, it would be a welcome; even perhaps needed improvement.

Phase Detection AF. I have optical correction all my life. As I have aged, AF has gone from being a very welcome technological improvement to essentially a necessity. Most of the Olympus cameras at the entry-level end of their lines (which also happen to be the very small ones) have had only contrast detection. The addition of phase detection just makes the AF process that much faster and more accurate, especially in certain (low - contrast) conditions. Certainly a welcome improvement. I found the AF system to be very quick and accurate during my limited use in the Caribbean recently. But it seemed to perform well in every lighting condition I attempted. It is primarily a "walk around" setup for me. I cannot really say how it would work in action shooting. We know there are better alternatives for those uses. But here, it seems to work flawlessly for my purposes.

Westbourne Terrace Road Bridge - London
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

Faster FPS. faster fps for multiple shooting is not something I really use (but may be significant for those looking for that feature). As a carry-all, travel camera, there are always going to be compromises. I think if I was looking at action photography, rather that "settle" for the slightly increased FPS feature the EM-5 offers, I would probably go with one of the "higher-end" cameras more dedicated to that kind of shooting. In all cases (including the M4/3 line), that means physically larger and heavier - and for me defeats the purpose of moving the the Olympus M4/3 in the first place.

Microphone Port. Nor is the microphone port particularly enticing to me. I don't record video or do any vlogging. Again, if that was my primary focus, I would probably seek one of the very capable camera setups out there that are really designed for vlogging.

I don't see myself vlogging in the foreseeable future

Flash. Unlike the EM-10iv (and essentially all the other OMD series cameras), the EM-5iii does not have an incorporated popup flash. Instead, Olympus bundled a tiny little flash that attaches to the camera's hotshoe. When I say tiny, I mean tiny (2'' x 1.25"). I am not sure how powerful it is, and it may be a bit of a pain to carry (just one more unattached part to keep track of), but it seems versatile. Functioning like most hotshoe flashes, the head rotates horizontally and vertically. My primary use for flash over the years has been for a little fill in light and/or to use as trigger for remote units. Not a major consideration for me either way, but it if you use flash, you might find it a very useful addition.

SOME ADDITIONAL TAKEWAYS:

• The Camera Top Plate is redesigned from prior models (which were nearly identical to the EM10iv) to more closely resemble the more "professional" Olympus models. I like the layout and find it logical and functional
• The EM5iii body has a few more assignable buttons: always a plus
• The button layout adds and re-organizes a couple buttons that seem quite "useable." For example;, there is a new button dedicated to shooting sequence (switching from single shot to multiple) and for the self-timer settings; the dedicated button for switching between the live view and Super Control Panel is now easily reached and read on the left side of the camera top, and there is a dedicated ISO button (where the movie button - which I assign another function to) used to be. I know I will find that logical, and at the same time, more intuitive. The On/Off button has much less swing and seems more postive and compact.
• On the camera back, the EM-5 ties moving the focus point to the arrow buttons, which is a significant "plus" for me. My Sony a7rii works that way. The EM-10 did not (and to the best of my recollection, there was no way to assign it that way). Instead, once you got the screen with the focus point position up, you had to use the front and rear dial to move it around. Not only not intuitive, but every time I switched between Sony and Olympus, I fumbled with it. I try - to the extent possible - to configure both cameras the same. I am going to like this feature. One touch of any of the arrow buttons an you are in the screen you need and moving the focus point around.
• There is a dedicated DOF preview button which is positioned at the more or less "traditional" spot near the lens mount. I don't use that a lot, but being "old school" (this button goes way back to my film/SLR days), it is a comfortable old friend. If you don't use, or like it, it is programmable and can be assigned one of a few other functions.
• I don't really notice it, but the right finger grip is slightly deeper (this is obviously going to have varying utility depending on the size of your hands and possibly the way you shoot and hold the camera).
• There is a two-position (programmable) lever housing the AEL/AFL button (while this gives additional programmability, I am not sure I can see any particular utility for that in my own case). The AE lock featur of this button (which I am most likely to use) is programmable so that it can be actived by "press and hold" on the button (the way most of my experience has been) or as a toggle on and off. I used this latter method on our recent trip and really loved it. I have it programmed that way.
• Battery and memory card slots are separate, with the card slot moved to the side (again, pretty much identical to the layout on my Sony a7rii).

Olympus OM-D EM-5iii Top Dials and Buttons

AS I have worked through the setup of the camera, there are a couple of things that I wish Olympus had done that would be useful (and are present in a number of competitor cameras). The first one is the somewhat new "C" setting on the top mode dial. It is a great feature, allowing a full lineup of camera settings to be switched to just by changing the dial to "C." Internally in the menu system, though, the camera allows for 3 separate "custom" lineups to be saved ("C," "C1" and "C2"), but switching to the C1 or C2 configurations requires going into the menu system. It sure seems like they could have had a way to switch between the three choices in the "C" area on the dial, rather than having to dive into the menu system.

ANOTHER IMPROVEMENT I would like to see concerns the grid pattern that can be imposed on either the rear screen or the EVF. Olympus has included a pretty wide array of options here, but not the one I would like to see. For years, I have used the "rule of thirds" grid on most of my cameras as a guide to composition. When Sony offered a combination of rule of thirds and an "X" pattern across the frame, I immediately adopted it and haven't looked back. Both Sony and Olympus offer the rule of thirds grid (Olympus has two iterations) and the "X" pattern as separate choices. Would sure like to see Olympus add the "combo" choice though. Having the diagonal lines is a real compostion "help" for me.

It sure seems like they could have had a way to switch between the three choices in the "C" area on the dial, rather than having to dive into the menu system

IN THE hand, the camera feels good (essentially no real change from my EM-10iv). My fingers fit and "find" the control dials comfortably. I really only use a couple of them continuously. I rarely change the shooting dial from "A" (aperture priority) while walking around. I may occasionally change to shutter speed priority if that part of the equation is critical. I mostly leave things at the lowest ISO, but the new dedicated ISO button makes switching ISO - or to "Auto-ISO" quick and easy on-the-fly. I really like the newer implementation of the joystick (as I have mine programmed for basically one function: to move the focus/exposure bracket point around). The front and rear top dials work as expected and are programmable. Again, as on my Sony gear, I have them programmed so that in most instances the rear dial is handling aperture (shutter speed if "S" mode) and the front handling exposure compensation. One quirky thing (I guess because I haven't seen it before) is the center button on the main top dial locks the shooting position with a toggle, rather than hold down and turn. Takes a bit of getting used to, but really a good feature, as it makes it easy to turn when toggled off and impossible to accidentally turn when locked. Just a different implementation. On the EM-10 there was no lock.

Sunset Bar - Celebrity Beyond - Caribbean 2025
I used the AE-lock feature to get a reading of the bar area on this very bright day making it possible to get that dark area exposed - Olympus EM-5iii
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

I HAVE noted in other cases that Olympus has some odd naming schemes in their settings. The screen review that comes up (if so-programmed) immediately after shooting, for example, is called "Rec View." I had this set to 0.5 seconds. I found it a bit laggy, (perhaps due to a slower write speed to the card?) and overall, an annoyance. Trying to figure it out on the road was a challenge (perhaps because the odd naming scheme didn't occur to me), but I have now turned it off. I really don't need the review - or if I do, I can do so manually. I have it configured that way on my Sony setup also.

Unfortunately, manufacturers have never designed to a consistent standard when it comes to accessories

ALSO, I have read online, numerous reports of issues with the EM-5iii tripod socket. It is my understanding that prior generation EM-5 models were built on a magnesium-metal frame. The EM-5iii is purportedly all composite (plastic). Generally, these plastics are tough and resilient enough, and result in a might lighter product. Apparently the bottom of the case is thin and does not have the tensile strenght that metal might have provided for the torsional forces applied at the single tripod screw point. They break, which is basically catastrophic damage to the camera body. The most commonly suggested preventative measure is to use on of the metal grip or L-bracket bases, which will distribute the forces somewhat across the entire bottom of the case. My RRS bracket looks to fit that bill and I am not particularly concerned. It does help me justify that $150 expenditure in my mind, to protect my several hundred dollar. If you have or are considering getting the EM-5iii, and plan to ever mount it on a tripod, I strongly suggest you purchase some kind of bottom protection.

Magic Carpet on Celebrity Beyond - Caribbean - 2025
Overall, the EM-5iii handled contrast and detail very well in comparison to the EM-10iv
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

So how did it Perform?

MY EXPERIENCE with the EM5 has been mixed. Mostly good, but mixed. I really didn't see any difference from the few shots I made on our Caribbean Cruise back in February in decent light. The camera seems to control contrast reasonably well, as can be seen in the shot in the bright early morning light in Tromso, Norway; and in flatter, less contrasty conditions, it still gets the (more subtle) color differentials, as in the following photo taken at the North Cape of Norway.

Tromso, Norway
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

Nordkap, Norway
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

GOOGLE's AI succinctly summarizes what I knew when I purchased the EM5iii; that it shared the same sensor with the EM-10iv: "The Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV and Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III feature the same 20MP 4/3\" Live MOS sensor and TruePic VIII image processor, so there is virtually no difference in sensor performance or image quality between them. The primary differences lie in other aspects of the cameras, such as the E-M5 III's superior weather sealing, articulating screen, and advanced autofocus." So what follows is not really a difference in the cameras, but perhaps in the way I have been using them. I have been processing the recent images from Europe, and I have noticed a couple issues. One thing is that I am seeing more "noise" in many of my images. I generally have pooh-poohed what I think is often an overemphasis on noise in digital images. It is as natural, in my view, as grain was in film-based images. And certainly not the image-wrecking phenomena that many on-line pundits (mostly FB'ers) would suggest. But in my case, the noice is noticeable, particularly in the dark areas of some of my photos. I can suggest a number of factors that would effect noise in my images, including light conditions (more often than not overcast in the recent trip, and usually bright sunlight in the Caribbean trip) ISO (I also have been experimenting a bit more with the ISO settings recently, in some instances allowing the camera to choose the ISO within certain set limits). When looking at images where I perceive more noise, I did note that they were at times made with higher ISO than the usual "native" setting I have mostly used.

sometimes these beasts are just too darn complicated!

 

THE OTHER thing that kind of stood out to me was (and this isn't really necessarily restricted to the EM-5) was my growing view that sometimes these beasts are just too darn complicated! In anticipation of the trip, I made some settings on the camera. The EM-5 has more "versatility" with settings than the EM-10. In certain cases, that may have been to my own detriment. I switch-hit between two different systems depending on the nature and purpose of my outing. As much as I love the compactness of the M4/3 system, my most recent experiences have me thinking about whether I should just stick with the Sony "full frame," and put up with "lugging" it around. This is especially a thought as more and more, I am eschewing the dedicated camera for my smart phone in certain insances. Time will tell on that one. Back to the noise issue. What I have (mostly) found is that I can deal with the noise (either in Adobe Raw, or with my third-party noise reduction software. More time in post, but certainly not an insurmountable thing.

Alesund, Norway
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

BUT THE other part may be a more important consideration. As we walked ashore in Alesund, Norway, I wanted to make some images of boats in the harbor. I was able to do so with my current settings, but something felt off. The images were darker than I would have liked. Using the dial to adjust exposure compensation, I thought, should help me with that. But suddenly, it wasn't working. As you can see from the Alesund Harbor image above, the image is a bit dark - even after post-processing. I would have liked to have tried to brighten things up while shooting. But when you are in the field and something isn't working it is normally very difficult to "fix" it. I usually have to get home and do some digging to see what is going on. It was frustrating. Later, we sat in a restaurant, and I "played." I realized that I had inadvertently changed a switch on the camera back. Once I figured that out and moved the switch back, everything worked again as I had set it up to work. A big part of this is not having familiarity enough with the camera and its settings. I don't use it often enough to have become thoroughly familiar with it. And switching to the Sony for my next couple outings doesn't help. The thing is, I really don't need an awful lot of the many settings that can be made on these cameras for my day to day photography. I sometimes wish they weren't so confounded complicated. Another consideration for picking a system and sticking with it.

Decoration outside a local craft brew pub in Honingsvag, Norway
Overall, I was as happy with the performance of my EM-5iii as I have been with any of my other Olympus M4/3 cameras
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

LIKE MY experience with all of the Olympus Camera models, the menu system is deep and complex with myriad (maybe too many) choices and settings, and as noted above, some unusual naming schemes. Some would say this is true of all digital cameras, BTW. In this case, I have found only one written resource that has any in-depth coverage of the complex EM-5iii settings: "Mastering The Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III," by Darrell Young and James W. Johnson. I recently reviewed this book in brief and recommended it, here. In general, however, I will conclude that there is really not much difference in performance between the EM-10 and the EM-5. If some of the things that make it physically different (like weather sealing, articulating rear screen, and phase detection AF) are really important, they give the EM-5 a slight edge. But I wouldn't necessarily say it is significantly "better" than the EM-10. The EM-10 will always be a bit like my old school, Nikkormat to me. A wonderful "first" camera that stands up to time and could easily enough be the only M4/3 camera you ever need to own!

As my Brit friends would say: "brilliant."

 

WHILE NOT really a comparison issue, I do think I "discovered" one final item in this "batch" of photos. A short while ago, I read some rather exhaustive coverage of where the sharpest images for M4/3 lenses and sensors reside. For years, I had been going happily on my merry way, using the f/8 aperture as the so-called "sweet spot" for all my shooting, using it as my default aperture unless there was some reason for a different one. The reading persuasively suggested that this was wrong for M4/3 sensors and that diffraction distortion began to occur at a wider aperture. The suggestion was that if the so-called default sweet spot was f8 for a full frame camera, it should probably be f5.6 for M4/3 cameras. I began using f5.6 as my default. Now I am not one to defy the science and suggest that isn't right. I can only go by my own experiences and perception. I feel that in many cases, f5.6 is too wide for good overall sharpness throughout the image, even with my M4/3 cameras. This is just empirical, looking at several of the shots I made during the past month. I really noticed it with the image of the fence rail in the Honingsvag image below. It is already a semi-tricky focus setup. For fun, I tried focusing with a wider aperture on the chain rail and letting the background go soft. I didn't really lilke it. The image here was made at f/11 (the particular lens's smallest aperture). In terms of focus throughout, it was my best take of this scene. For the foreseeable future, I will return to my prior approach, using f/8 as my "default" aperture, but making settings in each individual case based on what I know will yield the result I want.

Honingsvag Harbor - Norway
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

IT SHOULD be kept in mind that purchasing a new camera (even a model within brand and series) is not as simple as buying it, unboxing it and putting it in your bag. Instead, the purchase sets off a chain-reaction. Most of us have accessories we use. Some of them are nearly indispensible. Others not necessarily so much, but still important enough in our flow that we want to have them. Unfortunately, manufacturers have never designed to a consistent standard when it comes to accessories. The one exception I have come across is Tamron's recent commitment to their lens front elements being one consistent size. With my Sony setup these days, I am using Tamron lenses, and "my 'holy trinity'" all have the same size front element, accepting the same size filters and attachments. As my Brit friends would say: "brilliant." For me, I have a few of those "indispensible" accessories, including and "L" bracket and a remote release. And of course, batteries are a required accessory. I generally carry 3 or 4 of them in the field. Fortunately, the EM5-iii uses the very same batteries as my EM-10iv did, so there was one additional purchase I was able to avoid. The remote release is available (actually only) from third parties and is reasonably inexpensive. The L-bracket? Another story entirely (see the link earlier). As you do think about that exciting new camera purchase: a word to the wise. Count up all the necessary accessory costs in your planned purchase.

Expose To The Right (ETTR) - Still Relevant?

[ I am recently back from about 3 weeks "in the field," if you will. This year our late summer/fall trip - cruise was to the Fjords of Norway. Our ship departed and returned to Southampton, England (maybe England's most popular cruise port). Because we spend a substantial amount just getting over to Europe, we try to make the most of our time over there. Of course, in retirement, time is a "currency" we have more of - in the short run, at least. The most practical flight for us was a direct flight from our Tampa, Florida (TPA) airport to London (LHR). Once in London, a city we have grown to love, it made sense for us to spend a week in the city before heading down to the cruise port. The cruise took us up into the northernmost parts of Norway for nearly 2 weeks. While I will blog about this time, it takes a while for me to "curate" photos, and write the prose - so don't expect to see them right away - but do stay tuned, as I will have blogs on the photographic aspects of this trip, as well as my thoughts on the Olympus EM5ii, which I acquired since my last trip and have carried now on two trips. In the meantime, I will post some blogs that have been waiting "in the qeue" as my British friends would say. Stay tuned.]

A FRIEND recently sent me a link to a You-Tube video by a popular wildlife photographer/presenter. At first glance, the viedeo appears to question whether the popular concept of ETTR was still valid in today's digital world. In the context of wildlife (and probably most other forms of action photography), that might just be right. Or . . . not. I am going to play "devil's advocate" here, and suggest that ETTR is alive and well. In all types of photography. But - like all the tools and techniques we use - it is just that. A tool. and knowing what it does (and what it doesn't) do is going to make all the difference in its effectiveness. What I do think the video underscores is the over-reliance on any one technique, to the detriment of the overall photographic result. ETTR is shorthand for "Expose To The Right," and refers to the actual tool we are talking about here: the histogram.

I am going to play "devil's advocate" here, and suggest that ETTR is alive and well . . . In all types of photography

FIFTEEN YEARS ago, I posted on this topic in "Expose Right To Expose Correctly." At that time, although I was familiar with the histogram tool, the ETTR concept was somewhat new to me. I had been using my old tried and true exposure techniques and relying heavily on the very good Nikon metering system. I could see the exposures immediately after recording them on the LCD screen on the camera back. I could also see the histogram of my just-shot image, which was a proverbial "game changer." With that tool, you can see if you have blown out your highlights or blocked up the shadows. Well, sort of (the histogram on the camera LCD is only a jpg rendition of raw images - which I have always shot, and therefore not entirely accurate). I also knew that I had a bit of latitude to adjust exposures in post-processing. Consequently, I was still in the habit of bracketing exposures when I wasn't sure. Learning the ETTR method freed me from that (maybe only making room for other bad habits 😀).

IN THE post referenced above, I explained in my simplistic layperson's terms, what the ETTR concept was all about:

"Now, here is why to expose to the right.  Consider the graphical 5-stop diagram below.  Note that as we progress from 128 to 2048, the area under consideration continues to double.  What this means in very simple terms is that the last step contains 50% of all the pixels captured!  Note that that is also the highlight.  So we want to capture as much of that as possible.  We accomplish that by shifting our histogram as far right as we can without blowing any highlights.  Another way to say this is that if you do not fill the right side of the histogram you are effectively potentially wasting up to 50% of the available information that your camera is capable of capturing."

2009 SEEMS like eons ago when it comes to digital technology. I was shooting with a  10 megapixel, "APS-C" sensor camera. Today my current primary camera is a 60 megapixel, "full frame," "dual-gain" sensor camera (a technological mouthful, for sure). The noise handling capability of newer sensors is much advanced over the older sensors. Sharpness and overall image quality is many times better. We are using much higher ISO settings today than we felt comfortable with back then.

THE YOU-TUBE video throws a curveball at many of us, who have always assumed that higher ISO = higher noise. But, the video teaches us that ISO really isn't the critical factor for noise. Rather, noise is a characteristic of individual camera sensor designs (smaller sensors still produce more noise), and on a given sensor, is really effected only by aperture and shutter speed (the only two real adjustments to the amount of light the sensor is exposed to). ISO is a measure of light sensitivity - not amount (and amount is what effects more or less noise).

ISO isn't really the critical factor for noise

I AM with the author to this point. I am not sure, though, that I agree on the conclusions he seems to draw about ETTR. I think his assertion confuses two different ideas: namely ETTR and ISO. The ETTR construct is really more directed at the fundamental suggested above: that noise (or not) is about the amount of light that reaches the sensor for a given exposure. In the ETTR explanation above (orginally brought to light by Canadian photographer, Michael Reichman, perhaps best known for his "Luminous Landscape" internet site), what we are talking about is really the amount of light, and there is more in the top 2048 pixels than in the bottom 128 pixels. Noise is traditionally presented in the lower (blacks) level of the image. None of this explanation has really touched on ISO.

ONE OF the things that causes confusion is the ability to (and in many cases advisability of) setting modern cameras to "auto-ISO" (letting the camera choose what it thinks is the appropriate ISO). With the much higher quality performance of modern camera sensors, it makes a lot of sense to do this in certain conditions. With any kind of "action" shooting, things change so quickly that letting the camera decide ISO gives us more flexibility as shooters. It is one less parameter we have to worry about. Instead, we can adjust aperture and shutter speed to meet the conditions, knowing the auto-ISO is going to adjust accordingly.

ETTR has never espoused clipping the highlights

FOR LANDSCAPE shooting involving "still" subjects, there normally isn't as much benefit to high ISO settings (though there could be some in a few cases). Here, we are wanting to create the best quality images we can. This usually means shooting at the "native" ISO of the camera (usually around 100 for full frame, between 100 and 200 APS-C and 200 M4/3 cameras). It also means shooting from a stable platform (generally a tripod), allowing us to make slow shutter speed exposures in many cases (of course, wind or other movement will limit that). Generally the only reason I would change the ISO on a tripod-mounted landscape image would be for wind movement or if the light is too bright (though there are better methods for addressing the latter). However, there is certainly continued benefit to using ETTR for landscape images. Detail is often where it is at in a good landscape image and ETTR is going to enhance our ability to show that detail.

THE VIDEO suggests that ETTR can actually degrade an image at higher ISO by causing parts of the image to "clip" at the lightest pixels. But that is where I think maybe we are mixing concepts. It is not the ETTR technique that causes clipping. It is more likely a misunderstanding of the purpose of ETTR by the person using it. The histogram is a tool to indicate to us when we have clipped either highlights or blacks in an image (kind of: remember that it is based on a jpg and if you are shooting raw files, you probably still have a slight amount of headroom and you will still have to use some judgment there). ETTR has never espoused clipping the highlights. It only suggests that, when appropriate, moving the histogram to the right as far as possible without clipping the highlights will result in retaining the most digital information in a file. I think this applies at any ISO setting.

It is not the ETTR technique that causes clipping

THE REAL point of the video, in my view, centers on the fact that the histogram, auto-ISO, and ETTR are all parts of the photographers "toolbag." It is still requisite that the photographer understand what the tools are doing for them. An over-reliance on any one tool or technique is quite likely to result in lowered image quality from time to time. The video warns of clipping in the highlight areas of the photograph and implies that ETTR creates a danger of doing so. But it is really not the ETTR that creates that danger. I do think over-reliance on it might do so. But that is not really on ETTR. It is on the shooter not understanding exposure and the histogram, and again - I think that is true at any ISO. A lot of wildlife images have high contrast and an abundance of whites (and often blacks). Those are areas where exposure is touchy. Again, the concept of ETTR is not to indiscriminately jam everything to the right. It is more to gain an understanding of where the most digital date is in an image file. Some images don't have much information in the lightest areas of the histogram. Others, while they do, aren't necessarily pure white (e.g., clouds and bird feathers). The far right side of the histogram represents pure white. Knowing this and knowing that your whites should not be pure white in an image will inform your use of the ETTR technique. At the same time, I do believe the presenter makes a very good point - perhaps the point - in his video. When shooting a moving target like wildlife, often in difficult lighting conditions, and more often than we would like, handheld, any reliance on the ETTR technique in the middle of the action might simply be impractical.

In my view . . . many photographers are obsessed with the issue of "noise"

IT SEEMS to me, though, that the real "worry" here is about noise. In my view too much is made of this and many photographers are obsessed with the issue of "noise." I blogged about this a year back in "What's All The Noise about Noise?" I am repeatedly taken by how often an on-line discussion about a camera model turns to the issue of noise. For years and years we used cellulose films. The "faster" their ISO rating, the more "grain" was present in the photo. While not the same phenomena, "noise" in a digital image creates a very similar effect in images. While there was certainly discussion about grain (or lack thereof) back then, it wasn't the all-consuming issue that today's ability to "pixel peep" on your monitor hath wrought. I have many images the display noise in the shadows. In most cases it is not that pronounced and is not, in my view, unpleasant. With that, today's sensors have significantly decreased digital noise. And, our post-processing software can nearly eliminate it. So if noise really bothers you, there are solutions out there. Frankly, it doesn't usually bother me that much (and when it does, I apply some noise reduction in post-processing).