Olympus OMD EM5 or 6D

[Overture]

I'm going to college next year, so I'm looking for a new camera to replace the one I have now.
I currently have a T1i with a 18-55 kit lens and a 70-200 f/4.
I'm thinking of getting an EM5 instead of my previous choice, a 6D, because of the portability factor.
I will probably give my camera to my older brother after I get my new camera, but I'm sure I'll stay quite loyal to the Canon brand (meaning that I will probably still get back to photography with these larger cameras in the future).

My current plan is to sell my 70-200 and get a EM5, but I would like to hear some thoughts before I do this, considering the differences between micro 4/3 and full frame...

[hamada]

My current plan is to sell my 70-200 and get a EM5, but I would like to hear some thoughts before I do this, considering the differences between micro 4/3 and full frame...

the EM5 is not much more portable then a 6D.
sure the 6D is bigger.. but in the end that doesn´t matter much (at least not for me) as the EM5 is not pockable either.

you need strap or a bag anyway.

i sold my m43 gear for that reason.

bought a sony RX100 and a 6D.

[Overture]

the EM5 is not much more portable then a 6D.
sure the 6D is bigger.. but in the end that doesn´t matter much (at least not for me) as the EM5 is not pockable either.

Hm.
I suppose it's a learning experience as well.
I might try out both at a camera store before deciding.
I really like both cameras, so I'm really on the fence right now...

Is the EM5's weather sealing better?

[ArtVandelay12]

I was in the same boat as you. Trying to decide between a 6D or an EM5. I ended up buying the EM5. Currently, I'm renting a 6D to see if I made the right decision or not because I couldn't get the idea of it out of my head and the quality that comes with FF.

I love them both, they are fantastic cameras and if I had the money I would buy them both too. The 6D is a pleasure to shoot with and handles nicely. Not too big like I expected it to be and the auto focus isn't so bad, obviously it isn't the best out there but I do use all the points and find they do work. Viewfinder is nice, but after using the OMD, the focus points are very centered in the frame. On the OMD, the entire frame has focus areas which is very nice. One big factor for me not buying the 6D first was the price of the kit I wanted if I stayed with Canon. It would have ended up being several thousand more dollars in lenses (my own choice, YMMV.) so the Canon kit will just have to wait until down the road. The kit I chose for the OMD was considerably cheaper and extremely portable.

Portability was a big factor for me, as I do a lot of hiking and walking, etc.. and I can carry around several lenses and the camera on a full day's hike and I don't even notice I have it. Very light and compact, I love it. I live in a cold climate, and with a jacket on I can easily fit the entire camera + a lens or two into my pockets. Just today I went for a walk downtown and I had it in my hand the entire time with the olympus 17mm 1.8 (35mm FOV) and it was about the same weight as carrying around a typical large coffee. The focus is very very fast and very accurate.

For a long time I was hesitant about the smaller sensor and all the drawbacks of it. I was very surprised with the quality of it. The Dynamic range is better than Canon's APS-c lineup, and similar to the 6D. ISO is good too considering the size of the sensor. Up to 3200 is fine and the noise looks a lot like fine film grain, which I like a lot anyway. I've gone to 6400 and still had great results. After that DR drops significantly though. The EVF is nice and I find it just fine to use. I love all the information I can see when using it, and its great to see the picture before I even press the shutter.

Both are really good cameras and for me it was a tough decision. There are a lot of very good lenses for micro 4/3 too , especially if you like shooting with primes. 6D does have better image quality and lots of lenses available. Though under good light, and unless you're making large prints, it is hard to tell the difference between most formats (micro 4/3, apsc and FF).  ISO on the 6D is stunning. 12800 is still great. 1600 and 3200 are very clean and unless I look for it I don't notice the noise. What kind of shooting do you do? Also many people complain about the small size of the omd but I have big hands and I got used to it and find it fine now.

[sdsr]

the EM5 is not much more portable then a 6D.
sure the 6D is bigger.. but in the end that doesn´t matter much (at least not for me) as the EM5 is not pockable either.

you need strap or a bag anyway.

No, the EM5 won't fit in most pockets, but to say it's not much more portable than a 6D (I'm assuming we're talking about bulk and weight here - obviously they're both portable in some sense) strikes me as bizarre.  Not only is there a notable difference in camera body size, but you don't take photos with the body by itself - you need lenses.  And the size and weight of M43 lenses compared to their DSLR equivalents are tiny across the board.  There's simply no comparison between the size and weight of a body + handful of lenses between the two systems, especially if you like decent zooms and telephoto lenses.  (My heaviest M43 lens is the Panasonic 100-300, but even that's just over a pound; imagine what a dslr equivalent would weigh and the space it would occupy!)

As for the rest, I hardly need to add to all the praise heaped on the EM5 in reviews etc. online, including from pros with FF gear: superb ergonomics, superb stabilization, extremely fast and accurate focusing (including focus points over the entire screen, not just lumped in the middle as with dslrs, plus there's no font/back focusing to worry about; my hunch is that with the EM5 there's a smaller focus fail rate than with any dslr, and for me that's very important), a surprisingly good sensor for its size, etc., plus a very good selection of often superlative lenses result in photos that are often hard to distinguish from those taken with a FF Canon + L lenses.   

As it happens I have both a 6D and an EM5 and I plan to keep both.  Given how good the EM5 is, why do I keep the 6D?  First, I care a lot about background blur; and as a matter of course you get more blur at any given focal length and aperture setting with a bigger sensor (which isn't to say you can't really good blur with an EM5 - that's one reason why I like the Panasonic 100-300).  Combine that with the fantastic bokeh of some some Canon lenses, and the results can be pretty irresistible (which isn't to say that M43 lenses don't have excellent bokeh). Second, I like taking photos in very low light; and while the EM5 is surprisingly good in low light (it helps that the in-body stabilization means that all their fast primes, unlike Canon's, are stabilized, which makes a big difference), no-one would deny that the 6D is better in this regard - its high ISO performance is pretty amazing.  Third (and this is more subjective), I prefer the actual physical process of taking a photo with my 6D - I much prefer looking through a large, bright optical viewfinder even though, frankly, it gives a completely misleading impression of what the photo will actually look like (e.g. on the EM5 one of the dials adjusts exposure compensation, so while you look through the viewfinder all you have to do is turn the dial and, as you do so, you immediately see its effect on exposure).  Fourth, the lowest ISO on the EM5 is 200, and if you peer closely at 100% on a good monitor you will see more noise/grain with the EM5 than with the 6D. Fifth, this may simply be habit, but I have a niggling feeling that FF photos, when everything goes right, are a bit better - but I'm far from certain that that's the case. 

A couple of other DSLR advantages: they are probably quicker overall and thus better for taking photos of action (that's not something I do, so I can't really say for sure first hand).  Plus, if you're into long telephoto primes, well, there aren't any for M43 - the longest right now is the (superlative) Olympus 75mm 1.8 (i.e. 150mm equivalent, which is pretty short by dslr standards).  But of course if you're interested in minimizing the bulk of your camera gear you won't be interested in those anyway, even assuming that as a student you could afford them!  (I have no idea how the two systems compare for flash usage - I've never used flash, including the cute little one that comes with it, on my EM5, and don't often use flash on my 6D.)

As for weather sealing, I have no idea which of the two bodies is more water etc resistant, but you should be aware that lens sealing matters here; and while I could be wrong about this I think the only two M43 lenses that are sealed are the Olympus 12-50 zoom and the Olympus 60mm macro (which is a marvelous little lens for other reasons too).  But it should be easy enough to find out online.

I have no idea what your preferences/needs are, but given the significant differences in size and weight of the two systems, the differences in price (though some Olympus primes are more expensive than their Canon counterparts), and the small differences (if any) in photo quality much of the time, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if you went with the EM5.

[Overture]

Thanks for the lovely comments, sdsr and ArtVandelay.
I'm actually quite surprised that people were in the same predicament I am facing now...
(But to say this is a predicament is a bit over the top, haha.)

I actually never knew about the viewfinder showing the effects on exposure for the EM5, so that's a plus for me.
I've grown accustomed to Canon's cameras, so it may be a time to change to another system.
The 6D (or another full frame equivalent) will still be here if I wish to transition back to Canon, so I suppose I'm leaning more toward the EM5 right now.

I have no idea what your preferences/needs are, but given the significant differences in size and weight of the two systems, the differences in price (though some Olympus primes are more expensive than their Canon counterparts), and the small differences (if any) in photo quality much of the time, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if you went with the EM5.

Though I was (and still am) a part of my Yearbook staff, I do not intend to do much portrait or sports photography in the future. I do not have a particular liking for telephoto lenses, nor do I relish in the beauty of bokeh (fine, I do so occasionally)...
So in general, I just want a camera that I can use daily to express myself or to document my own life, which pretty much means that I'll probably be okay with any camera.
(But I mean, good gear can't hurt, right...?) c:

[Joellll]

As a college student who uses a camera as photo documentation (and was also in a very similar situation), I would prefer a 6D for the following reasons:

1. I am a believer of bigger sensors. That is basically the entire point of upgrading my T1i to a full frame, rather than downgrading to an even more cropped sensor.

2. You already have a great tele zoom for canon. On a full frame camera it won't reach as far, so you might enjoy the lens with less reach.

3. Like others have said, the EM5 isn't much smaller than the 6D. A 6D with the 40mm pancake is probably more "pocketable" than the EM5. I have a pancake lens myself and I love using it.

4. Optical viewfinder. I can never give up an optical viewfinder for a little screen in the hole. I just can't.

I would also like to recommend older 5D series. 5D classic is a steal if you can get a fairly new one, while the Mark 2 adds video capability. 6D is great if you have a smartphone to control it or want to have a wireless workflow.

[Biggles]

I also have T1i with a number of non-pro but nice lenses and have been considering what to move to next. I am thinking about the 6D vs OMD EM5 or of course the new Canon 70D. Anyway, I haven't decided yet, but Overture I think you might want to read this person's story of migrating through P&S to crop to FF to OMD EM5: http://betterfamilyphotos.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/a-tale-of-seven-cameras-and-one-subject.html
and
http://betterfamilyphotos.blogspot.com.au/2012/12/the-truth-behind-migration.html
should give some food for thought.

Personally I really want the high ISO and particularly the shallow DOF of the 6D, but I also like the extra reach, less cost and more portability of the OMD. I want to be able to carry all my lenses with me and it not weigh a ton, and for that matter to only need about 3 good lenses to cover practically everything - 2 zooms covering wide to tele, and a portrait prime. Also I don't like big, heavy, expensive glass. Crop could be the best compromise, but I'm not sure about that. I often want more shallow DOF that crop can't give me. So it is difficult. Perhaps the best thing is to have both the 6D (or some FF) for your more pro situations, and the OMD EM5 to take when you just want to enjoy photography, or when out walking or travelling. But that means two different brands and systems, which seems kind of wasteful. Anyway, the links above may be interesting for you. I would be interested in hearing what you decide and how it goes. I think it would be good to try some hands on practice in a camera store before deciding. And besides that trial, the deciding factor is probably just what it is you are wanting to achieve with your photography.

[Biggles]

Also read his first impressions of using the OMD, I just saw the link on the right: http://betterfamilyphotos.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/olympus-om-d-first-impressions-comments.html

[adhocphotographer]

Not a definitive review or comparison...  but will directly compare the stats and DxO marks (for what they are worth).. http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-6D-vs-Olympus-E-M5

Personally, i would grab the 6D Kit if you can afford it...  24-105 + 70-200 is a very nice set-up...  Saying that i do like the EM5 too!

good luck choosing and enjoy either!

[RadioPath]

Hi there,
take this with a grain of salt, as I do not have my 6D, yet I also did consider the EM-5 shortly, before deciding to stick with Canon.
The question is just, why to upgrade at all? The T1i should be between the 6D and the EM-5 in terms of background blur, sensor size and portability. As for IQ: Would the step up be that big? Looking at sample pictures I don't think the upgrade to an EM-5 would have been worth it even from my XTi/400D (in my humble oppinion from looking at pictures in reviews, I did not research that very extensively and I didn't extensively side-compare on charts, etc.).
Good luck
RadioPath

[Zv]

Another vote for the 6D. Had a play around with it today at a store. I'd also say get it with body only and use the saved pennies for a decent prime lens like a 50mm f1.4 or Siggy 35 1.4, the 24-105 is good but not gonna wow you and I feel the 6D needs some decent fast glass to compliment it's low light ability.

Midrange zooms will lead to midrange photos. Get creative with primes.

[bycostello]

6d

[Canon-F1]

the EM5 is not much more portable then a 6D.
sure the 6D is bigger.. but in the end that doesn´t matter much (at least not for me) as the EM5 is not pockable either.

you need strap or a bag anyway.

No, the EM5 won't fit in most pockets, but to say it's not much more portable than a 6D (I'm assuming we're talking about bulk and weight here - obviously they're both portable in some sense) strikes me as bizarre.  Not only is there a notable difference in camera body size, but you don't take photos with the body by itself - you need lenses.

he acknowledged that the 6D is bigger but when you want to carry around the 6D or EM5 you need a strap or bag. does it make such a big difference then?

i was a µ43 shooter for a few years too. i had E-PL1 and GF1 bodys.
but what i really wanted when i did not want to carry my DSLR, was a camera i can put in a shirt pocket. so i rarely used the µ43 cameras.

i was only using the kit lenses with my µ43 cameras.
because i did not used them much anyway, and second, because i did not want to invest into another camera system. i prefer to put my money into canon glass.

i gave the GF1 to my mother and she rarely used it because it was too big.
she prefered her little ixus. 

So in general, I just want a camera that I can use daily to express myself or to document my own life, which pretty much means that I'll probably be okay with any camera.

nobody can give you and advice here and say he is right... because it depends on YOU.

but for that kind of use i would definately buy a RX100 sort of camera.
a camera i can carry around all day in a pocket.

[ecka]

Do you realize that any f/3.5-5.6 FF zoom lens is equivalent to f/1.8-2.8 MFT zoom lens? I doubt that it would be much smaller, lighter or cheaper and better optically. 6D+40/2.8 equivalent would be EM5+20/1.4, which does not exist, while 25/1.4 is less portable and much more expensive. 6D+50/1.8'II(cheap!) beats EM5+25/0.95 in IQ, price and portability, easily. If you really don't care about DoF, distortion, perspective, OVF and edge-to-edge sharpness, then just get a good P&S camera.