What will happen to Olympus now??

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
Martin.au
Senior MemberPosts: 5,816
Like?
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
In reply to bobn2, 11 months ago

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

They are also substantially different in build.

How?

-- hide signature --

Bob

The E-M1 has more of a "pro" build. Shutter life is longer, weather proofing extensive, the whole camera can be dropped, it can be roughed up, take years of abuse.

How do you know all this? How many years of abuse has any E-M1 taken?

All within limits of course, but it's clearly targetting the pro segment with its build. Oly is also sending a message to resilient 43 DSLR users that the E-M1 is a suitable replacement to their E1/E3/E5 which were "built like tanks".

The A7(r) is more... fragile.

In what way is it more fragile?

It looks quite substantial to me

-- hide signature --

Bob

E-M1 build

As you can see. Quite a substantial difference. The A7 is somewhere around an EM-5 in terms of build.

I see no substantial difference there. What about them do you propose is 'substantially different'?

-- hide signature --

Bob

Wow. Are you blind.

No, I understand mechanical construction.

Here's the metal body components of the A7(r).

As you can see, in the case of the A7r, you get a metal subframe, topplate and front plate. In the case of the A7 you get a metal subframe and top plate. The rest of the body is plastic.

Seems to me the front panel is also metal on the A7r. When you look at the exploded diagram, there is a metal sensor carrier which screws on the sub fame. In both cameras the back panel is plastic. So, in both cameras the substantive 'chassis' is metal, the back cover is plastic. Without the evidence from some detailed strutural analysis, I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that one is stronger than the other.

What are you talking about. The EM-1 has a metal back. What pics are you looking at?

The ones you posted. The EM-1 has a plastic back. Here is the back of the E-M1

Notice that the shape is different from the metal panel in your shot, the back itself is plastic mouldings applied to the plate in your picture.. Acuually, it doesn't ,matter because the 'back' is not structural. How many cameras, plastic or metal, do you see with back failure? Do you have any evidence anyway that the metal plate results in a more damage resistant assembly than a steel frame with a plastic cover?

You numpty.

No need to get personal.

You're looking at the foldout screen. The back is the same as the metal shell.

Actually, it isn't. Look at the shape round the right hand side, completely different from the emtal component.

Another pic for you then.

The A7 is like the E-M5. The A7R is lower still.

The A7R is the same as the A7.

No it isn't. The low spec A7 has a metal subframe, but no front metal body.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3561571

OK, turns out we're both wrong, since it is the A7r that has a metal front skin. The explanation in that post in rubbish though, look at the construction, the mount doesn't attach to that front skin, it attaches to the subframe behind. The skin is cosmetic, a piece of spec engineering.

Whoops. I got that right originally (A7r, not A7).

I'm not sure why you find this so upsetting.

I don't find it upsetting. I just comment on people making claims that they can't justify.

Well, yeah, if you're going to ignore the actual pics posted, that's your problem.

I'm not 'ignoring' the pics posted, I'm telling you that they give no direct evidence of what is the relative damage resistance, weather resistance or anything else. Just because it's metal one place and plastic another doesn't make it of itself stronger. In fact, metal bits can be less durable. One metal chassised camera apparently suffers from cracking of the metal frame, while its cheaper plastic framed sibling doesn't. Mag alloy is brittle, plastic composites much less so. So, while the pictures look nice from a marketeer's point of view, they don't tell you which is more robust.

It's not that uncommon. eg: APS-C 7D has a higher build spec than the FF 6D.

A slightly higher 'spec', but is there any evidence that it's actually more robust, weather resistant or anything else?

-- hide signature --

Bob

So, how exactly do you determine build quality?

I don't. I think the way it's use it's a pretty meaningless term, like 'image quality'. I know how you do stress testing and environmental testing of electronic products (I used to design marine and avionic equipment) and have a lot of experience working with industrial designers identifying the best design and materials for products. I've also worked with automotive designers from VW, BMW and Ford. The professionals in the trade never use the term 'build quality' about their own work, and in fact are quite cynical in application of materials, surface finishes, etc to give a (bogus) impression of quality.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Well, for the same reason I prefer unibody laptops, I'd prefer the E-M1.

If you want to wait for 4 years of usage so you can assess which is more durable, then be my guest.

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