Cancelled my E-M1 order

Started Sep 26, 2013 | Discussions thread
Macx
Senior MemberPosts: 1,396Gear list
Like?
Re: No, it never was
In reply to boggis the cat, Sep 28, 2013

boggis the cat wrote:

rovingtim wrote:

dahod wrote:

This new Olympus has clearly targeted the "grab your gear and go" market. I'm not saying it won't take good pictures because it will as we've clearly seen. What I am saying though is that the Olympus commitment is now on small, portable and discrete - that's not necessarily my world.

As Olympus' stated unique selling point of 4/3rds was "smaller, portable" then I would humbly suggest you picked the wrong system for yourself.

That wasn't the USP, Tim:

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/index.html

"As you can see, the Four Thirds system is the ideal digital SLR system. By pursuing the optimum relationship between image sensor size and lens mount size, the Four Thirds system successfully combines high image quality and compact size."

"pursuing the optimum relationship between image sensor size and lens mount size" is the USP.

In the mind of Olympus themselves, 4:3 wasn't about size, but when you read the reviews almost all the "large body" Olympus cameras was met with a bit of incredulity: If it wasn't cheaper than larger format dslrs, and it wasn't smaller than larger format dslrs, why get the Olympus instead of its APS-C rivals? The better relationship with the lenses never broke through to the general market; so while I doubt that anybody didn't realise that the optics were top-notch, the practical benefit of them was harder to sell.

In the 500- and 400-series Olympus had a much easier sell in that here was a palpable advantage for the user from using a smaller sensor: A smaller camera. I think Olympus is right in thinking that the "full size" lenses and cameras was a disadvantage to them in the marketplace.

That's not saying that nobody wanted that size lenses and bodies for 4:3. That would be demonstrably false, but I think the direction Olympus is going with their micro four-thirds is the right one: You can go tiny, and you can go larger, and the E-M1 with grip is still a substantial camera even if it's still smaller than a lot of DSLRs. I definitely see it as a spiritual successor to the E-1 that I fell in love with. It lacks the OVF, but the EVF has its clear advantages too.

Yes, the micro-four thirds range is smaller, but I don't think there is any need for hand-wringing about it being targeted to gurls and not burly men's men: From all accounts so far the E-M1 is a solid piece of kit that'll work well for both genders.

And it may be a while before Olympus get around to producing native MicroFT variants of the SHG line (if ever), so in the meantime you have to accept those APS-C size and weight lenses (along with the high cost) if you want the best optics.

Maybe. I doubted this at first, but the new 12-40/2.8 really looks good. Really good. And if the 40-150 that is expected next year is as good, then a lot of the SHG-range is covered, if only in focal range. For the tele range beyond that, yeah that's still TBA.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow