Can anyone tell me, if used on my OM-5 (probably the same as on the E-M5 III), when the camera sleeps, does the lens retract or is it only when you power off?

The 14-42 EZ retracts automatically when the camera sleeps and reopens on wake (touch of shutter button). Great little lens!

40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:Can anyone tell me, if used on my OM-5 (probably the same as on the E-M5 III), when the camera sleeps, does the lens retract ...?Yes, it retracts when sleeping.  I use this exact combo, and it is even nicer with the automatic lens-cap that opens and closes with the lens.  TheJJC versionis only $30.Olympushas one for $44.

cc99 wrote:40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:Can anyone tell me, if used on my OM-5 (probably the same as on the E-M5 III), when the camera sleeps, does the lens retract ...?Yes, it retracts when sleeping. I use this exact combo, and it is even nicer with the automatic lens-cap that opens and closes with the lens. TheJJC versionis only $30.Olympushas one for $44.Very cool.  Thanks!

cc99 wrote:40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:Can anyone tell me, if used on my OM-5 (probably the same as on the E-M5 III), when the camera sleeps, does the lens retract ...?Yes, it retracts when sleeping. I use this exact combo, and it is even nicer with the automatic lens-cap that opens and closes with the lens. TheJJC versionis only $30.Olympushas one for $44.How do you like it's performance?  Also, how's the zooming?  Being a power zoom I understand it's not very precise?

40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:How do you like it's performance?SOOC, it's OK at 14mm, and a little soft at 42mm, but if then run the RAW's through DxO Photo Lab's lens corrections, the improvement isstunning, even at ISO 6400.DxO allows consumer lenses to deliver pro-level sharpness (plus noise reduction). It actually got me back to preferring smaller lenses over pros. Expensive ($240) but worth it.Also, how's the zooming? Being a power zoom I understand it's not very precise?I can move it in 1mm increments, so it's not a problem for stills. Perhaps, if you wanted a smoother zoom for video, you might prefer manual zoom.

cc99 wrote:40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:How do you like it's performance?SOOC, it's OK at 14mm, and a little soft at 42mm, but if then run the RAW's through DxO Photo Lab's lens corrections, the improvement isstunning, even at ISO 6400.DxO allows consumer lenses to deliver pro-level sharpness (plus noise reduction). It actually got me back to preferring smaller lenses over pros. Expensive ($240) but worth it.Really.  That's intriguing.  So better that Adobe?

40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:cc99 wrote:40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:How do you like it's performance?SOOC, it's OK at 14mm, and a little soft at 42mm, but if then run the RAW's through DxO Photo Lab's lens corrections, the improvement isstunning, even at ISO 6400.DxO allows consumer lenses to deliver pro-level sharpness (plus noise reduction). It actually got me back to preferring smaller lenses over pros. Expensive ($240) but worth it.Really. That's intriguing. So better that Adobe?Yes, Adobe only does the lens corrections in the MFT lens profile. DxO actually corrects sharpness for each lens and body combination. With cheaper lenses, the improvements are quite dramatic; with pro lenses, they still noticeable.There is a cheaper version of DxO PhotoLab, called DxO PureRAW 3, which is a pre-processor that only does lens corrections and noise reduction, so you run your RAW's through it before importing into Lightroom. It costs around $99. PhotoLab is a Lightroom replacement, while PureRAW is a supplementThis is anexplanationby Rob Trek on YouTube.

cc99 wrote:40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:cc99 wrote:40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:How do you like it's performance?SOOC, it's OK at 14mm, and a little soft at 42mm, but if then run the RAW's through DxO Photo Lab's lens corrections, the improvement isstunning, even at ISO 6400.DxO allows consumer lenses to deliver pro-level sharpness (plus noise reduction). It actually got me back to preferring smaller lenses over pros. Expensive ($240) but worth it.Really. That's intriguing. So better that Adobe?Yes, Adobe only does the lens corrections in the MFT lens profile. DxO actually corrects sharpness for each lens and body combination. With cheaper lenses, the improvements are quite dramatic; with pro lenses, they still noticeable.There is a cheaper version of DxO PhotoLab, called DxO PureRAW 3, which is a pre-processor that only does lens corrections and noise reduction, so you run your RAW's through it before importing into Lightroom. It costs around $99. PhotoLab is a Lightroom replacement, while PureRAW is a supplementThis is anexplanationby Rob Trek on YouTube.Another vote for DxO Photolab.It makes nice cameras nicer and even makes old cameras quite a lot nicer in some cases. Easy to use, the default settings can be adjusted and create new default setups. There's plenty of canned settings that make good starting points for further fiddles.So the lesson is to always take raw files and as software improves, so does the camera.In cases like my old Panasonic LX3 compact it really turned it into a new camera.The warning is that the DeepPRIME noise reduction option is slow to process if you have not got a good GPU, so need a good card in a desktop or a gaming laptop where a good GPU is included. I live in a forest of GPU-less notebooks and desktop and simply start a DeepPRIME conversion or batch conversion while getting on with some other task on the computer, or maybe go and mow the lawn while a DeepPRIME batch is being processed.So far DxO Photolab has not added focus stacking or image stitching, so other software like Affinity Photo or Silkypix is what I use for that. I am an Adobe avoider from long ago because when I used to compare raw conversion results from a bunch of 30 day trials, the Adobe efforts were not the best available. They are very close but I wanted what my occasional pixel peeping eyes saw as best.DxO does run discounts throughout the year so maybe make an account there and get the messages about products and discount periods.https://www.dxo.com/dxo-photolab/I've dropped into the habit of only updating most software every second update, and at initial update there is always a 40% discount with DxO, that nicely halves my keeping more or less up to date costs. I certainly do not want any software that demands a monthly subscription.

Guy Parsons wrote:The warning is that the DeepPRIME noise reduction option is slow to process if you have not got a good GPU, so need a good card in a desktop or a gaming laptop where a good GPU is included.Any modern Apple Silicon laptop or desktop works great.  For example, my M1 Pro laptop can do a DeepPRIME image every six seconds, and DeepPRIME XL every nine .  It's fast because of the ten neural cores, which are ideal for this.

cc99 wrote:40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:cc99 wrote:40Eridani-Vulcan wrote:How do you like it's performance?SOOC, it's OK at 14mm, and a little soft at 42mm, but if then run the RAW's through DxO Photo Lab's lens corrections, the improvement isstunning, even at ISO 6400.DxO allows consumer lenses to deliver pro-level sharpness (plus noise reduction). It actually got me back to preferring smaller lenses over pros. Expensive ($240) but worth it.Really. That's intriguing. So better that Adobe?Yes, Adobe only does the lens corrections in the MFT lens profile. DxO actually corrects sharpness for each lens and body combination.