E-M1 mk iii vs E-M10 mk iv

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

hancockks

ScubaBoard Supporter
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
18
Reaction score
3
Location
Merrimack, NH
# of dives
200 - 499

Opinions or direct experience? Given the used market now for the E-M1 mark iii, it seems like the camera + housing cost is a $500 upcharge. As far as I can tell the AOI housing for the M1 and M10 are very similar, share the same TTL hotshoe adapter, same PEN ports. Is the PDAF and improved focusing speeds useful underwater?

 
I used the M1mkIII underwater a fair amount and never had complaints about the autofocus. I have not used the M10 at all, so while I'm not qualified to offer an opinion this is the internet so I'm going to anyways. The PDAF is a big deal, but the stabilization and processor are also objectively better, and I think the ergos are subjectively better, at least topside (I have handled other M10 bodies). To me, in my opinion, the $500 is worth it.
 
You don't say what type of photography you expect to do, but I have used the EM-10 iv underwater and the EM-1 mk ii & OM-1 above water. I've been happy with all the cameras. The only instance in which the EM-10 sometimes struggles is focusing on somewhat distant (e.g. c. 3 m or more) fish moving against a busy background – but in my experience even the most hyped autofocus systems, including the OM-1, often struggle with that kind of scenario (just as above water it is very difficult to focus on birds or other critters flying against a busy background).

Also, there is very little difference between the EM-1 mk ii & mk iii, so if I were buying used I wouldn't pay more for the latter. The EM-1's also have the advantage versus the EM-10 of having multiple custom setting modes which you can access on the dial – so if you envision switching settings a lot underwater, that would be a consideration.
 
I think that the EM-` uses a bigger battery that might be useful for multi-tank dives
Bill
 
I think that the EM-` uses a bigger battery that might be useful for multi-tank dives
Bill
The battery is bigger, but I suspect the camera also uses more power. In any event, the EM-10 mk iv seems to last at least as long on a single charge as my EM-1 ii.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/peregrine/

Back
Top Bottom