Olympus E-M1 Journal: #11: Out in a snow storm

The E-M1 is advertised as weather proof.  I have no reason to think otherwise. A couple of weeks ago I took it out in the cold for a few hours for the first time, walking around the historic town of Concord, Massachusetts.  I'm talking "single numbers" (Fahrenheit). The camera worked very nicely. My fingers gave me problems that day!  Even the battery worked nicely in the cold, showing basically a full charge after two hours of use.

Yesterday I decided to go out in the middle of a snow storm.  It wasn't cold.  In fact it was 36F at ground level, so the snowflakes were large and wet. The camera got wet for sure.  I wasn't out too long, however, as I wasn't really dressed for a trek in the woods.  I just took a few pictures around the outside of the house giving particular attention to a stand of three hemlock trees which looked beautiful in the snow.

This is  the only picture I liked.  It was taken with the 75mm F1.8 prime lens.  I didn't remember until I got back inside that this lens in not sealed (I think?), so I am glad I didn't stay out any longer.

75mm @ F2, 1/640sec, iso200

Olympus E-M1 Journal: #10: Wide open 12-40 v 14-54

In journal entry #7 I wrote about my comparison of the 12-40 and 14-54 when shooting a brick wall.  Obviously not a real world comparison, but I do feel comfortable concluding that at F4 through F8 these lenses are (essentially) equally sharp, both in the center of the frame and in the corners.

I did not test the lenses "wide open".  So, today I went back to the brick wall to take a few more pictures. I suspected that I would see a difference when shooting wide open.  For the new 12-40 that would be F2.8.  For the old 14-54 that would be F2.8 to F3.5.

On older lenses it is often necessary to stop down a stop or two to get maximum sharpness.  But we are finding on these new Olympus lenses that they are at the sharpest right out of the chute at maximum aperture.

Well, that is exactly what happened.  I compared lenses at 14, 18, 25 and 35mm, all at maximum aperture.  On the 12-40 that was F2.8, and on the 14-54 that was F2.8, F2.8, F2.9 and F3.1 for those four focal lengths.

In all cases the 12-40 was noticeably sharper both in the center and at the edges. I won't show all 8 images but the results at 35mm (F2.8 for the 12-40 and F3.1 for the 14-54) are illustrative.

The overall scene at 35mm

To keep it simple, I am showing below 100% crops from the center of focus, and just two corners, the upper right and the lower left.  (The other two corners gave the same results.) What you are viewing are screenshots from Lightroom 5.

In the comparison screenshots below, the 12-40 is on the left and the 14-54 is on the right.  I used the X:Y comparison tool in Lightroom 5.

Center Focusing Point.
Click to enlarge this screenshot.
12-40 on left is sharper than 14-54.

Upper right corner.
Click to enlarge this screenshot.
12-40 on left is much sharper than 14-54

Lower left corner.
Click to enlarge this screenshot.
12-40 on left is much sharper than 14-54

Olympus E-M1 Journal: Entry #9: Winter (cold weather) shooting

Here in New England we've had quite a winter so far.  Since the beginning of December, Boston has received over 24" of snow total, in three storms.  I don't know what the "normal" amount is, but last year it was less than 4" during the same time frame.

This last storm dumped up to 24" all by itself, in some of the towns north of Boston and near the New Hampshire border.  Where we live, we were spared, with only 7".

Something that is unusual is the severe cold that accompanied the snow.  Obviously, one expects it to be cold when it snows.  But we've had temperatures far lower than freezing.  We woke up this morning to -6F.

Inside the house we were warm and toasty.  A comfy fire warmed us in the living room, as we enjoyed our morning coffee.

The weather forecast was for rising temps and sunshine.  Normally, I might have gone off for the day with my skis, either skiing cross country locally, or taking the short trip to southern New Hampshire.  But at -6F?  Not so much.  Even the promise of rising temperatures was not enough to move me off the couch.

Then I had the bright idea of testing out the E-M5 and the 12-40 lens, both of which are supposed to be "weather proof".  Who knows, perhaps equipped with this setup winter photography will become a new genre for me.

What I decided to do was to grab the camera, the lens, and a spare battery and head by car to the historic town of Concord, Massachusetts.  The center of the town still has an "old" feel to it, and there is a nice walk out to the Old North Bridge, where (arguably) the American Revolutionary War started.

My Little Excursion to Concord

I spent a total of two hours roaming around Concord.  As you can see, there were not a lot of people about.  When I arrived at the Municipal Parking Lot the temperature had risen to 5F.  When I left two hours later it was a balmy 15F.

The camera operated flawlessly.  It was my fingers that gave me trouble.  I used bare hands the first 30 minutes, then moved to a glove on my left hand for the second 30 minutes, and then decided I'd better learn to do winter photography wearing gloves on both hands... that is if I wanted to enjoy the activity.

Here's what else I learned:

1.  When you have no expectation for creating "portfolio" pictures, wear gloves on both hands and keep it simple.

2.  Create a customized "myset" with all your basic default settings.  For purposes of an outing like this, add 3 shot bracketing to your default settings.  I'm happy with 3-shot 1-stop bracketing.  But you also need to remember to set the drive mode to high speed sequential shooting, so that with one press (and hold down) of the shutter button you will get three bracketed shots.  If you want 2-stop bracketing, use the HDR feature instead.  Don't let the camera create an HDR image, you just want the three shots at different exposures so you can pick the best one of the three when you are home and warm.  The HDR setting is easier to use than the BKT setting because it automatically switches the drive mode to high speed  sequential shooting.  My myset default setting includes the P mode, Auto WB, Auto ISO.  I'm letting the camera do all the thinking.

3. Use the myset in "P mode".  I started out the day using EV compensation to get the "right" exposure.  Actually, this is very easy with gloved hands as EV compensation is achieved with the front dial and the forefinger.  But once I added BKT or HDR, I no longer had to even think about EV compensation.  Why fiddle in the cold trying to get the correct exposure, when bracketing will do it for me?  Basically I turned the camera into a Point  'n Shoot where I knew bracketing would give me at least one suitable exposure.

4. If you want to control depth of field, use your myset in "A mode".  I will probably use this next time now that I have some familiarity with the camera in the cold.  I didn't bother this time because I just didn't want to think about it. This was actually my first time with this camera outdoors.  As it was, the camera basically chose between F4 and F8 with the light I had to work with.  AutoISO always chose ISO 200, and shutter speeds were fast for these essentially stationary scenes, ranging from 1/200 to 1/1000.

Olympus E-M1 Journal: Entry #8: The wonderful EVF

I'm a big fan of EVF's (Electronic View Finders).  I have used them on the legendary Olympus C-8080 (circa 2003 but bought by me on eBay in 2008), the Panasonic FZ-7, the Panasonic G2, Panasonic GH2, NEX-6, Olympus E-M5 and now the E-M1.  The EVFs are getting  bigger and better.

Viewfinder (EVF) on the Olympus E-M1

There are at least six features I like about the EVF on the E-M1, all of which are features that are either not found (items 2 - 6) or difficult to find (item 1) on cameras with OVFs.

Of the list of cameras above, I currently own the NEX-6, E-M5 and E-M1.  Except perhaps for the focus peaking feature which is referred to in item #6 below, the E-M1 is the best of the bunch, in my opinion.

1. I enjoy the 100% coverage provided by EVFs.  Typical consumer OVF's have a coverage of 90% or 95%.  Much less than 100% coverage guarantees that you'll need to do some cropping in post, to match the view you composed through the OVF.

2. The live view shows the changes one makes to exposure, whether that be by adjusting shutter speed, aperture, or ISO.  White balance changes are also seen "live".

3. I always use the histogram overlay. I believe the histogram is the best way to insure the desired exposure.  As you make EV compensation changes, you can see the histogram change.  I've enjoyed the Olympus implementation of the histogram ever since I first saw it on the legendary Olympus C-8080.  It's situated in the center, at the bottom of the screen which makes it easy to see without having to shift your eyes (usually on other cameras) to the lower right corner where sometimes the histogram hides a bit in the margin of the screen where it is hard for us glasses wearers to see.  [On the GH2 I vaguely remember being able to use the touch screen to customize the location of the histogram.  If that is correct, my guess is that it is also an available feature on the newer Panasonic mFT models.]

4. The viewfinder on the E-M1 actually brightens up the dark areas without blowing out the highlights.  The dynamic range of the EVF is the best I've ever used.  But my experience is only with the EVFs on the cameras listed in the introductory paragraph.

This is where some of the magic is created.  I believe the default setting
for Auto Luminance is "on".  This feature is unavailable
on the E-M5.

5. After the shot, I have my cameras set up so I can immediately review the image in the EVF,  until I half press the shutter button.  [Actually, the review time is set at the maximum of 20 seconds.  But I'm done in just a few seconds, and then the half press of the shutter gets me ready to record the next picture.]

With the appropriate review setting (use the "info" button) , you can also check out blinkies and color channel histograms while keeping the camera to your eye all-the-while.  This feature is great on sunny days, and it makes it so easy to re-compose your subject and take subsequent shots without taking the camera away from your eye.  Also, I have found it especially helpful when taking hand held macros.  Without moving the camera body from my eye, I can review the resultant image for sharpness right through the EVF, and take subsequent shots, again without moving the camera or my body.

6. Manually focussing with the EVF is a breeze, because with one click of a button the EVF will magnify the subject.  The maximum magnification with the Olympus system is 14x.  Other magnification options are 5x, 7x, and 10x.  This is a tremendous aid in focusing; though the E-M1 EVF has such nice resolution that I haven't felt a need for more than 5x magnification.  In addition, the E-M1 has "focus peaking".  The EVF (and the LCD) shows a white "shimmer"  (or black, if  you choose) around the highest contrast areas which at the very least implies that those areas are in sharp focus.  At this time, I am not yet convinced of the accuracy of Olympus's implementation of focus peaking. I need to play with it more, but at least preliminarily I prefer the focus peaking implementation on the Sony NEX-6.

Olympus E-M1 Journal: Entry #7: 12-40mm v. 14-54ii

I have owned the 14-54ii longer than any other digital lens.  I think it was 2008 when I bought my first digital SLR, an Olympus E-520.  Along with it I purchased the 14-54, and have been using it faithfully since then.  It has found itself on the E-520, the E-620, the Panasonic G2 and the Panasonic GH2, the E-M5 and now the E-M1, the timeline sort of in that order.  Of this group, I currently own only the E-M5 and E-M1.  As far as I am concerned the E-M1 is the best of the bunch.

As for lenses, I have always been happy with the 14-54, as far as sharpness is concerned.  It's a bit large on the E-M5 but balances reasonably well on the E-M1 with an accessory base plate from RRS (Really Right Stuff).  This base plate adds about 10mm to the height of the camera and snaps onto an Arca Swiss compatible tripod head. The required FT-to-mFT adapter adds some length and weight (adapter and lens total is 18.4 ounces with lens cap and hood).

But one thing about the 14-54 that has become annoying is the slow focus and focus noise.  Yes, the phase detection pixels on the E-M1 sensor have improved the autofocus of the FT lenses I own, and I presume they are now focusing as fast as they did on the E-520; but my FT lenses are still slow to focus (and noisy) compared with all the slick new native mFT lenses.  After experiencing the speed and quiet operation of several mFT primes and even the "lowly" kit 40-150, it's difficult to go back.

Enter: the 12-40.

The newly minted 12-40mm constant F2.8 zoom arrived last week (see prior post) and in time for some Christmas day antics.

The 12-40 is one sexy lens.  It's metal and without rubber zoom and focus rings.  I am thinking this is good, as the lens should hold its value better.  The rubber always makes a lens appear to be more "used" than it really is.

The 12mm wide angle is something that I have been missing on the 14-54.  On the other hand, I really enjoy that 54mm long end.  I'm thinking the trade off is about equal.  A bonus for owning the 12-40 will likely be that I can sell the oldie but goodie FT 11-22.  We'll see about that.  I did take a couple of 12mm shots indoors with the 12-40 and there seemed to be significant distortion.  I'll have to do some controlled comparisons with the 11-22.  Distortion at that wide an angle may just be the nature of the beast.  See image below:

Flash, 1/60th, F4, ISO 1600, OOC jpg, 12mm wide
Seems like a lot of distortion on the right side but perhaps this is
the nature of the beast.  Regardless, edges are very sharp!

Which lens is better: the new 12-40 or the old 14-54?

Well, I already reported above about the operation of these two lenses.  The 12-40 definitely has the advantage here.  Plus it is smaller and lighter.  Plus it has a nicer manual focus feature.  Plus it has a customizable function button.  Plus it is weatherproof.  And, like my 14-54, it came with a pouch and lens hood.

14-54ii on left with adapter weighs 18.4 ounces if hood is used
12-40mm on right weighs 14.8 ounces if hood is used.

To check out lens sharpness, I took both lenses outdoors to do some brief comparisons.  Nothing too complicated.  Just aiming toward a forest.  I shot both lenses at F4 and F8 at four common focal lengths, 14, 18, 25, 35.  There was a little breeze but I shot at very high shutter speeds.  The old 14-54 definitely held its own.  Using the X:Y comparison tool in Lightroom at 1:1 (100%), I could not tell the difference between these two lenses, both in the center and in the corners.  No difference in CA, either.  I need to find a brick wall somewhere; but regardless of the results of a brick wall test, I doubt there is any real world difference in the image quality coming from these two lenses.

This tentative conclusion on my part is supported by the data on slrgear.com.  Lenses are rated for sharpness from 0 to 12 with "1" being "tack sharp", and anything above "4" being "soft".  Personally, I have found that anything between "0" and "2" represents differences in sharpness that I can not detect with my eye, at least not in normal viewing situations.  Both of these lenses score between "0" and "2" at essentially all focal lengths that I tested, and from center to edges.

One potential difference might be wide open.  It appears from slrgear that the 12-40 is sharper wide open at F2.8 than it is at F4; while the 14-54 is softer wide open than at F4.  Wide open on the 14-54 starts at F2.8 and reaches F3.5 at 54mm.  I feel another test coming along soon!

One nice feature I appreciated with the 14-54 is its closeup feature.  When you don't have a macro with you, it works nicely in a pinch.  The 12-40 does even better.  Both of the images below were shot fully zoomed in.  The working distance doesn't leave much room for light or stinging insects, as it is just an inch or two between the front lens element and the subject.

Close up capability: 14-54 @ 54mm
about 2 1/8" across

Close up capability: 12-40 @ 40mm
about 1 5/8" across

The close up capability of the 14-54 came in handy here.

Olympus E-M1 Journal: Entry #6:12-40 zoom arrived Dec 24

What a great Christmas gift to myself.  The 12-40 arrived by overnight mail on Dec 24, just in time for Christmas photography!

I had preordered the lens from Adorama in the beginning of December so that I could take advantage of a $200 rebate.  Unexpectedly, it arrived just in time for some Christmas fun. Our celebration presented my first opportunity to use this new zoom.

F4, 1/60th, ISO 1600, flash

Holy moly.  The 12-40 is awesome.  Our grandchildren, at ages 5 and 1.5 are moving faster now, even when indoors around the Christmas tree, so fast focusing is important for "getting the shot".

F2.8, 1/60th, ISO 1600, flash

The focus speed of this mFT lens was highly desirable as I know I caught opportunities I would have missed using my only other Olympus standard zoom, the slower focusing FT 14-54 zoom.

No flash, 1/13th, F2.8, ISO 1600

This was definitely low light focusing and the lens performed effortlessly.  All shots shown here were at ISO 1600 and all but one was with flash.  For the flash images shot at 1/60th, I was focusing in ambient light that would have required ISO 3200 or 6400!  This would challenge almost any focusing system.  I didn't use the LED focusing light.  I also turned off the focus confirmation beep for a bit more stealth... stealth at least until the flash went off.

Two images below at

1/60th, F2.8 ISO1600 with Metz AF-1 50 flash

I love the addition of a function button on the lens.  I have it set right now for one-touch white balance.

The pull-snap focus ring adds some nice functionality to manual focusing. Though the focus ring will work on a fly-by-wire basis like all the other Olympus lenses (I have my menu set for S-AF-M), when the pull-snap is engaged instead, the ring feels like a mechanical focus ring. With the pull-snap engaged, the ring will move over a 90 degree range only, with a hard stop at "0" when the ring is turned all the way one way, and infinity when the ring is turned all the way the other way.

As is the E-M1 this lens is weatherproof.  I can't wait to try this kit outdoors this winter.

Olympus E-M1 Journal: Entry #5: AF with legacy FT lenses

One of the hopes for the E-M1 is that with the addition of phase detection pixels on the sensor that the camera will be able to focus legacy FT lenses better than the sluggish focusing they are getting with the E-M5.

For legacy FT glass I own the 50mm F2, 11-22mm, 14-54mm and 70-300mm.  I have now tried each of them on the E-M1.  The results didn't excite me.  I think my expectations were too high.  These lenses definitely focus faster than on the E-M5 and the Panasonic GH2.  But I guess I was hoping and expecting a lot more.

All four of my legacy FT lenses are a bit cranky to focus on the new E-M1,
but faster then they are on the E-M5.  On the E-M1 they are probably on a par
with the Olympus dSLRs.  But this is old technology now.
If you own any FT lenses, then by all means use them on the E-M1.
However I wouldn't suggest buying any of these unless the price is unresistable.

I don't think it is the camera's fault, however.  I just think there are limits due to the design of the older lenses.  I think, too, that I have probably become spoiled by the quiet and fast focusing of the 45, 60, 75 and even the 40-150 for mFT.

So when I tried out the FT lenses on the E-M1 I was initially quite disappointed.  I wish I had my old E-520 to compare with.  I even checked out prices on eBay thinking I might be able to pick up an E-520 body for $100, that I would then be able to sell it a few weeks later for the same $100.  There were very few E-520 bodies available when I last looked, and for those that were up for auction, it didn't seem that $100 would be a winning bid.

After the initial disappointment with my FT lenses on the E-M1, I began to realize that these are old lenses, and that they are doing the best they can. I am now prepared to believe the several people on the Internet who feel that the focus speed of these consumer Olympus FT lenses on the E-M1 is similar to what was achieved on bodies like the E-520 and E-620 (both of which I have owned).  It's just that they cannot compete with what has been produced for mFT. As I think hard on it, back to the "old" days of the E-520, I think this is correct.  Then, like now, the 11-22 and 14-54 seem adequately fast for general photography, especially landscapes, but the 50 and 70-300 were annoyingly slow, and the noise of them racking in and out trying to find focus is obnoxious.

I think the 50mm F2 will soon be on my chopping block.  As a macro lens, manual focusing is a fine way to go and it would avoid the noise of the autofocus, but I find the fly-by-wire manual focus ring too fiddly.  Plus the autofocus is so awesome on the 45mm and 60mm macro.  The 50mm just can't compete with the silent and nearly instant focusing of the 45mm and 60mm.  In fact I just spent a morning with the 50mm and 60mm shooting closeup flower pictures at a local botanic garden.  The 60mm was so much more pleasurable.  Yes, it is F2.8 and the 50mm is F2, but I never use F2 for macros. I was shooting at F4 to F8.  There were  many times when the 50mm racked one way and then the other, only to stop with a complete blur of the subject.  It would finally find focus, usually with little studder steps,  after half-pressing the shutter a second time.  Yet, in the same conditions, the 60mm locked focus easily, quickly and quietly.  I like the completely internal focusing, with no lens barrel moving in and out.  Very neat.  And now with the new smaller focus points available on the E-M1, for macro work I think I can use autofocus all the time. The results were fantastic this morning.  I didn't even need to rock back and forth. With the 60mm and smaller focus points I no longer see a need to use manual focusing for macro shooting.

[It's my understanding that the old "super high quality" (SHQ) lenses are performing very nicely on the E-M1. But their performance was always better than the consumer lenses. I am sure those who held onto these "oldy but goody" lenses are happy that they did.]

Olympus E-M1 Journal: Entry #4: The awesome shutter sound

Well, it's cold and snowy here in New England.  Too cold to go out and shoot real photos (even with a cold proof camera) so I've decided to stay indoors (after a morning of shoveling snow) and make comments about really silly stuff like the sound of the shutter on the new E-M1.

Actually, maybe having an opinion about the shutter sound isn't so silly.  I see that on my  hard drive I have about 5,000 "keepers" so far this year (2013) from the several cameras I use.  I put keepers in quotes because I use that word loosely; let's just say I have 5,000 photos that I have decided to "keep".  My guess is that I actually pushed a shutter on one camera or another about 20,000 times last year.  If I am going to listen to a shutter some 20,000 times a year, shouldn't I prefer that it sounds good?

I don't recall the shutter sounds on the Olympus E series cameras I have owned (E-520 and E-620).  I presume they were neither pleasing nor annoying.  But I do remember the shutter sound (ker-chunk) on the two Panasonic mFT cameras I have owned (G2 and GH2).  The sound they made (your mileage may vary) sounded, well, cheap.

Enter the E-M5.  I really like the sound of its shutter.  It sounds very crisp and precise, like it was made by some Swiss watch maker.

Enter the E-M1.  I really really really like the sound of this shutter. It has a slightly higher tone than the E-M5 and a shorter stroke. It seems quieter.

This video clip was taken with a NEX-6.  I relied on the in-camera stereo mics.

Olympus E-M1 Journal::Entry #3: Adding the RRS grip

Yesterday I posted the above picture of my new E-M1 with the Really Right Stuff base plate and and side bracket attached.  RRS makes beautiful (and expensive, but you get what you pay for) camera accessories, typically tripod related stuff.

Each of the two pieces (the base and the side bracket) cost about $60.  For some cameras, like the E-M5 and the Fuji X-series, they even make a grip attachment which adds another $60.  In fact, I have the three part system on my E-M5.

What I especially like about the RRS design when it comes to the E-M1 is that it adds about 10mm to the height of the camera and in particular the grip.  This allows all four of my fingers to engage the grip.

For assembly, using Allen Wrench machine screws, the side bracket screws into the bottom bracket which in turn screws into the camera's off center tripod mount.  In so doing, you have a new tripod mount built into the base plate, and this mount is nicely aligned with the lens mount.

__________

Especially nice about these RRS plates and brackets is that they are designed to be used with Swiss Arca compatible tripod heads.  Note in the images below the dovetail grooves on the side bracket and the base plate.  Pretty nifty!

"Aerial" view of the side bracket reveals the dovetail design for
Swiss Arca compatible tripod heads.

You can see the dovetail groove along the back of the base plate.
To orient yourself, that's the LCD screen also on the right.

You can see the dovetail groove along the entire front of the bottom plate.

Olympus E-M1 Journal::Entry #2: The Little Beast Arrives!

Splendid!  The E-M1 arrived within just three days of ordering it, and I have fallen in love.  This is in spite of already being an owner of the superb E-M5.

In my first post (#1 here) about this camera I listed a dozen or so things about it that caused me to press the "order now" button.  I do think that many of the new features have a bit of hype to them; but nevertheless the improvements are so many that this E-M1 is definitely a keeper.

Though I am excited about many of the features, I do need to point out for any new Olympus users that these Olympuses are really complicated machines.  This is my fourth interchangeable lens model from Oly.  Before purchasing the E-M5 when it came out in 2012 I owned an E-620 and before that an E-520.  Even so, when I received the E-M5 nearly two years ago I remember writing on some one's blog that it took me two days to get it set up whereas the equally good image-maker, the Panasonic GH2, took two hours.

What helped this time was that I turned on both the E-M5 and E-M1 and merely duplicated by inputs from the M5 to the M1.  Of course there were a few additional menu items on the M1, but by pushing the "info" button I usually got enough information to figure out what I was doing.  Of course, there is always the manual... which I tend to avoid except as a last resort!

Eye-Candy: Using a Minolta MD mount-to-M4/3 mount adapter ring I have
attached an old Minolta 35-70 F3.5 zoom with hood

Looking at my original list of twelve items, in this post I will comment on the 10th item:  

The Size.

Though in the title of today's post I called this a "little" beast, there are many who question the word "little".  The body alone is 17.5 ounces and it is solid thanks to its magnesium alloy construction.  (By the way, that's heavier than the E-M5 but lighter than the Panasonic GH3.) Plus I have added another 3.5 ounces with the RRS (Really Right Stuff) base and L-plate.  

The RRS base and L-plate arrived the same day as the camera and the first thing I did was to screw it into the camera's off-center tripod mount.  The base plate itself also has a tripod mount, which is centered directly under the lens mount. As a result of the plate, the camera is now 10mm higher in dimension.  I like, like, like this, as it allows my pinkie finger to hold onto the grip rather than being awkwardly curled up under the camera body.  The grip is awesome already, but with the added height from the RRS base plate, I am really smiling.  The haptics and ergonomics of this camera are a step up from the E-M5.

Some would argue that a camera body this large defeats the purpose of the m43 format.  I understand that argument, but when you add in the lenses I think you get a much smaller kit than with the APS-C and FF kits.  (Time will tell about the new Sony A7 FF camera.)

Overall the camera is enough bigger than the E-M5 that it can offer bigger and more buttons, plus more real estate to the right of the LCD.  The result is that I don't feel cramped.  The below size comparison is from www.camerasize.com.  If you haven't checked out their Web site, you should.  It allows you to compare any number of camera bodies, two at a time, side by side, from different angles.

For me, the most important things that come from the larger size are: (1) bigger grip, (2) better ergonomics of the shutter button, slightly forward of the camera and angled slightly downward, (3) more accessible dual dials, (4) more real estate on the back of the camera and to the right of the LCD, and (5) bigger buttons. With regard to the buttons, the four-way controller on the E-M5 had to be pressed with my thumb tip (or fingernail) pointed into the buttons whereas now on the E-M1 I can press with the pad of my thumb... lovely.