It's hard to give a a comprehensive opinion on a camera I only briefly used, but in short, I liked it. It's the kind of camera you can beat the hell out of, and tote along into just about any situation, without fear of missing the shot. The IS is fantastic; CIPA says it will give you 5 stops. I wasn't finding it quite that effective, but was impressed nonetheless. The weather-sealing and build quality are also impressive. Plus, additions over its predecessor like a mic input and flash sync port only add to its versatility.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympus-om-d-e-m5-ii/9

Here is another sample video. This video shows the E-M5 MK II vs. the GH4 vs. the LX100. The GH4 and LX100 were shot at 4K and the E-M5 MK II was shot at 1080p.

The E-M5 MK II simply can't match the other cameras for resolution. However, it has nice color and the IBIS is outstanding.

Notice how in this test scene the LX100 has moire and aliasing and to a lesser extent the GH4 does as well. However, the E-M5 MK II doesn't seem to exhibit those traits in this scenario.

I am not sure how well the E-M5 MK II video will cut into the GH4 or LX100 video. They are just too different to really compare. Sure you can back the GH4 and LX100 down to 1080p to make it fair but why cripple those cameras?

Guys I really don't think the E-M5 1080p video will even cut into the GH4's 1080p very well. There is a significant difference in resolution. The color is great. The moire isn't bad. However, the resolution just isn't there like the GH4's 1080p.

Don't get me wrong. This isn't "Canon Bad". It doesn't look like 720p. However, the GH4's 1080p and especially its 4K offers significantly more resolution.

Here are some still frame grabs from each camera and all of the resolutions. These were all shot at 30p. Since there was no movement the frame rate was irrelevant.

Try switching back and forth between the E-M5 1080p and the GH4 4k. They had very similar fields of view. Yet the GH4 just has tons more resolution even when you scale the image to fit on your screen.

I believe it is a fair comparison to put the GH4 4K video scaled to 1080p up against the E-M5 1080p video. I don't believe you should dumb down the GH4 just because the E-M5 can't match it.

Bottom line if you want to shoot high quality video and you don't need stabilization then the GH4 or even LX100 would be great options. However, if you really need to shoot hand held then you will have to weigh whether the quality hit is worth trading for that unbelievable image stabilization. And it really is that unbelievable.

@noa

How about low light at the highest iso's, can the em5 II match the gh4?

Strictly speaking about noise the E-M5 is closer to the GH4 than it is for resolution. However, scaling down GH4 4K to 1080p can allow you to greatly reduce the noise from the GH4.

Honestly, my opinion is that they don't match up very well. The GH4 is definitely what you want if you want quality. The E-M5 is definitely what you want if you need stability. Trying to use both together probably isn't a great idea.

You might as well just spend the money to stabilize the GH4 if you are thinking about mixing the footage.

I seriously doubt that Olympus will ever catch Panasonic for video quality. However, I don't expect Nikon or Canon to catch them either. They are just too far behind right now to close the gap. Plus they really don't need to because they have other things that they excel at.

Thanks mpgxsvd! is NR off on EM-5 II, actually that looks dam good on the Oly, 1080p about the same, slight edge only to GH4, very small.

Sony is the only one that could catch Panasonic for video if they haven't already.

It almost looks Olympus is deliberately holding back for whatever reason, first with not giving any pal frame rates and a weak codec and now with a image that's at least a generation behind on other current offerings. I wonder if they have some kind of silent agreement with Panasonic not to step on eachothers turf. Something like, "you improve on the 5-axis stabilization and we on image quality", combine them both and you have a winner. If I only needed one video and photocamera I"d get a em5 II without much thought but unfortunately the camera needs to blend in with a GH3 and 4 and from what I have seen so far, that won't work well.

@noa, surely we need to see more profiles and increased contrast/sharpness settings to see what the em5ii is capable of? It does look a little soft but does it sharpen? what about the uncompressed 8 bit o/p? blackmagic shuttle/ninja star less than £300 + ssd/cf.

@adventsam

Sharpening in post does improve the E-M5 MK II video but you can’t add in resolution where it doesn’t exist. There simply is nothing you can do to get the E-M5 MK II to match the resolution of the GH3/GH4/LX100 cameras. I don’t even think it would match the GH2.

That was really disappointing but not unexpected. For my style of shooting the lack of resolution is not a deal breaker. The lack of stabilization would be though.

I really wish I hadn’t sold all of my old Fast MF lenses now. I would love to use the IS with those lenses. I had a 55mm F1.2 Canon FD lens that was just gorgeous. I also had an 85mm F1.8 Nikon lens that was the best lens I have ever used. Sold them all for a telescope.

@mpgxsvcd: when @noa said "first" he was most probably talking about the MK one (E-M5).

@adventsam: profiles and curves don't bring back resolution or PSNR. Neither will uncompressed when compared to 77Mbps. At most, you could get a bit more DR, which is limited by PSNR to start with.

The only issue at play here is sensor readout. Line skipping doesn't cut it anymore. Especially after Panasonic quit doing it with the GH2. In 2010!!!!!!!!!

I would expect a EM1 update to be in order soon, there currently is not that much reason to get a EM1 instead of a EM5II, I"ll just see and wait what that will be all about. I would be happy with a GH3 image, that's not too much too ask is it? :) If the EM1 can deliver that I"m getting it and replace my GH3 with it.