E-M1 - my take

Started 10 months ago | Discussions
Darrell500
Senior MemberPosts: 1,990Gear list
Like?
Re: For the most part, agreed.
In reply to MatijaK, 10 months ago

MatijaK wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Either Olympus continued pouring cash over a black hole (4/3rds) or look for their best chance for camera system survival while continuing innovating *and* providing an upgrade path to the 4/3rds owner.

Why does everyone keep getting this wrong? :/

4/3 wasn't a black hole - it was profitable by itself and it had a growing market share until the plug was pulled. The *camera division* was a black hole, and guess what: it still is. Olympus keeps losing money there. Year after year the camera division as a whole is in the red and nothing that Olympus releases pushes it into the black, even after seriously cutting down on CSC and ultrazooms.

I agree and also believe a new DSLR with the newer sensor would have sold better then anyone on here can imagine.

I'm looking at the E-M1 and it's a 2000€ cost *just* to keep using all of my lenses in front of a new sensor. None of the other camera manufacturers do that, and if I were to guess, they never will ("never" being relative; here in terms of "not obsoleting a mount two years after it started gaining market acceptance", which Olympus basically did in 2009, after the E system started becoming popular in 2007 and steadily growing to 10+% market share).

Yep an advertisement for the E system called it future proof that's why I need an adapter to now use my lenses but Nikon shooter are using lenses from 30 years ago.

I'm trying to find reasons to like the E-M1, but I can't. The money that I would need to invest is seriously huge (we're talking over two average salaries here), and in return I get a camera that uses a sub-par memory card format (single slot only!), has no top LCD, semi-articulated back LCD (am I supposed to duct tape it when shooting in the dark?), has no built-in flash and has low battery life (which is probably even lower when driving 4/3 lenses), tripod mount offset to the side, etc... It does have a lot of nifty tech features, but I don't need any of them to create actual photos.

Agree again this can't be serious for pros with only one memory card

I'm sure some can like the new camera, but I'm unable to. For me, it's not an upgrade, but you know, different strokes for different folks... Upgrades give you something better, but what the E-M1 offers to me is worse than what my E-3 does. Yeah, yeah, video, high ISO, moar megapickles, measurebating, DR, dxomark, this and that... But in the end, at least for me personally, m4/3 offerings - including the E-M1 - are just tech gadgets, while my E-3 is an actual tool. I don't know how to describe it better. Then again, I'm one of those freaks who have a dumb mobile phone made in 2008 and I only want it to ring, transmit and receive voice and text message

-- hide signature --

"Don't Be Afraid To See What You See"
Darrell

 Darrell500's gear list:Darrell500's gear list
Olympus Stylus 1030 SW Olympus E-500 Olympus E-520 Olympus E-5 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro +27 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Doug Brown
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,867
Like?
Re: For the most part, agreed.
In reply to MatijaK, 10 months ago

MatijaK wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Either Olympus continued pouring cash over a black hole (4/3rds) or look for their best chance for camera system survival while continuing innovating *and* providing an upgrade path to the 4/3rds owner.

Why does everyone keep getting this wrong? :/

4/3 wasn't a black hole - it was profitable by itself and it had a growing market share until the plug was pulled. The *camera division* was a black hole, and guess what: it still is. Olympus keeps losing money there. Year after year the camera division as a whole is in the red and nothing that Olympus releases pushes it into the black, even after seriously cutting down on CSC and ultrazooms.

I'm looking at the E-M1 and it's a 2000€ cost *just* to keep using all of my lenses in front of a new sensor. None of the other camera manufacturers do that, and if I were to guess, they never will ("never" being relative; here in terms of "not obsoleting a mount two years after it started gaining market acceptance", which Olympus basically did in 2009, after the E system started becoming popular in 2007 and steadily growing to 10+% market share).

I'm trying to find reasons to like the E-M1, but I can't. The money that I would need to invest is seriously huge (we're talking over two average salaries here), and in return I get a camera that uses a sub-par memory card format (single slot only!), has no top LCD, semi-articulated back LCD (am I supposed to duct tape it when shooting in the dark?), has no built-in flash and has low battery life (which is probably even lower when driving 4/3 lenses), tripod mount offset to the side, etc... It does have a lot of nifty tech features, but I don't need any of them to create actual photos.

I'm sure some can like the new camera, but I'm unable to. For me, it's not an upgrade, but you know, different strokes for different folks... Upgrades give you something better, but what the E-M1 offers to me is worse than what my E-3 does. Yeah, yeah, video, high ISO, moar megapickles, measurebating, DR, dxomark, this and that... But in the end, at least for me personally, m4/3 offerings - including the E-M1 - are just tech gadgets, while my E-3 is an actual tool. I don't know how to describe it better. Then again, I'm one of those freaks who have a dumb mobile phone made in 2008 and I only want it to ring, transmit and receive voice and text messages.

Too expensive, just wait 6 months to a year when they will probably announce the new EPL or EM-5 successor. Olympus always trickles the newest sensor tech down to it's entry level fairly quickly.

Two things;

A lot of people have their shorts in a knot over the EVF.
I'll tell you right now that there isn't a single person in this forum who's photography wouldn't be improved by using an EVF.  Unless your photography regularly requires you to catch a speeding bullet in mid-flight, the instant input and WYSIWYG view from an EVF is a major advantage in the vast majority of picture-taking circumstances.
I've been using one seriously for two years now with the micro cameras (and a couple Sony Alpha models).
Now, it's to the point where going back to a DSLR feels primitive, like a real step down after the EVF.
Years ago shooting film, and then shooting digital with instant preview on the rear LCD converted a lot of people right over to digital. Once you get used to shooting with an EVF it's the same. It just seems like a much more informed way of shooting. Less mistakes, fewer lost opportunities.

Secondly, there are so many ways in which even the E-M5 is head and shoulders better than your E3 (which I've owned and used previously) I don't know where to begin, but the most obvious is the 5 axis IS system.
Using the 5 axis IS system is like shooting with a steadycam. Like shooting with an invisible tripod all the time.
It is jaw-dropping what that thing can do.
You saw the part of the leaked engadget video where they put the camera on a bouncing platform and show the perfectly steady video output right beside it on a tablet? I've been in the room when they've demoed that and it's like black magic. It shouldn't be possible, but it really is happening.
That IS system is going to save more shots for you than any OVF ever will over the long haul.

Douglas Brown

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
OM User
Regular MemberPosts: 256Gear list
Like?
Re: For the most part, agreed.
In reply to MatijaK, 10 months ago

MatijaK wrote:

... has no top LCD, ...semi-articulated back LCD (am I supposed to duct tape it when shooting in the dar)?

1) The top LCD information you are used to can be displayed either on back LCD or in the viewfinder.

2) No, just turn the LCD off by permanently sending the information to the viewfinder (bit like a DSLR really) rather than relying on eye detect to do the switching.

 OM User's gear list:OM User's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Skeeterbytes
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,008
Like?
Re: For the most part, agreed.
In reply to Doug Brown, 10 months ago

Doug Brown wrote:

Two things;

A lot of people have their shorts in a knot over the EVF.
I'll tell you right now that there isn't a single person in this forum who's photography wouldn't be improved by using an EVF.  Unless your photography regularly requires you to catch a speeding bullet in mid-flight, the instant input and WYSIWYG view from an EVF is a major advantage in the vast majority of picture-taking circumstances.
I've been using one seriously for two years now with the micro cameras (and a couple Sony Alpha models).
Now, it's to the point where going back to a DSLR feels primitive, like a real step down after the EVF.
Years ago shooting film, and then shooting digital with instant preview on the rear LCD converted a lot of people right over to digital. Once you get used to shooting with an EVF it's the same. It just seems like a much more informed way of shooting. Less mistakes, fewer lost opportunities.

Secondly, there are so many ways in which even the E-M5 is head and shoulders better than your E3 (which I've owned and used previously) I don't know where to begin, but the most obvious is the 5 axis IS system.
Using the 5 axis IS system is like shooting with a steadycam. Like shooting with an invisible tripod all the time.
It is jaw-dropping what that thing can do.
You saw the part of the leaked engadget video where they put the camera on a bouncing platform and show the perfectly steady video output right beside it on a tablet? I've been in the room when they've demoed that and it's like black magic. It shouldn't be possible, but it really is happening.
That IS system is going to save more shots for you than any OVF ever will over the long haul.

Douglas Brown

From using the E-5 and E-M5 side by side for various situations, there are times when each is better. For field sports I shoot long exclusively with the E-5 and near the sidelines with the E-M5. Part of that is system lenses and part is AF response and the different blackout characteristics of the OVF and EVF. For indoor and evening settings, there comes a time when available light drops to a point I simply put the E-5 away and continue with the E-M5 exclusively. One no longer functions while the other does.

I would be nice, and best for photographers, if both paths remained viable. I think at this point we see that the E-series is no longer, because Oly simply doesn't have resources to back both. Everybody is left to decide his/her path going forward. From a purely speculative position I'll guess Oly will now concentrate on fleshing out their advanced µ4/3 lens portfolio and cease the 4/3 lens line entirely. Some downsized long, fast primes with real-time CAF will have folks saying "what E-system?"

Canikon gear leaves me unmoved. Bleah. If I were to get serious about sports (I only do it because of my kid) I'd consider the Sony route as it becomes more mature, as I think they've got the dlsr thing sorted out the best, having no multi-decade mountain of legacy gear to hold them back (Minolta doesn't really count).

Now, back to your regularly scheduled garment-rending.

Cheers,

Rick

-- hide signature --

"Whiskey is for drinking, digicams are for fighting over."
—Mark Twain

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MatijaK
Regular MemberPosts: 237
Like?
Re: For the most part, agreed.
In reply to Doug Brown, 10 months ago

Doug Brown wrote:

Too expensive, just wait 6 months to a year when they will probably announce the new EPL or EM-5 successor. Olympus always trickles the newest sensor tech down to it's entry level fairly quickly.

But those cameras will be even smaller and have less buttons and no grip.

A lot of people have their shorts in a knot over the EVF.

I have nothing against an EVF and wouldn't have minded an E-7 with one - because at least I'd have two vastly more powerful batteries in the camera.

I've spent countless hours peering through the viewfinder in silence and without any movement, trying to shoot some animals and waiting for the right moment (though I'm not a birder and lack the proper lenses for it).

To be honest, I have no idea what three hours of constant peering through an EVF would do to the E-Mx batter(y/ies), but I wouldn't expect it to be pretty. Also, I can easily do 2500 shots with my E-3 and HLD-4, with a fair bit of chimping and not a lot of bursts. Can I do that with an E-Mx?

Secondly, there are so many ways in which even the E-M5 is head and shoulders better than your E3 (which I've owned and used previously) I don't know where to begin, but the most obvious is the 5 axis IS system.

Yeah, that thing is nice, but I don't really _need_ it, especially since a gripped E-3 is heavy enough to be rather steady. And if I go shooting in the dark, I have the PL 25/1.4, which doesn't even require me to go above ISO 800. I've also had decent 1s exposures with a 9-18, after a glass or two to steady my hand

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CharlesB58
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,519
Like?
Re: For the most part, agreed.
In reply to Messier Object, 10 months ago

Messier Object wrote:

. . .. Olympus produced an E7 prototype, which means they had a plan to continue the E series.

. . . There is the simple fact that Olympus has, since the advent of m4/3 indicated that eventually the E seried would be discontinued.

So they had a plan to continue, and also from the start of m4/3 they had a plan not to

. . . people who don't seem to grasp how a company goes about deciding how to develop and market a camera.

obviously they have multiple (and conflicting) plans and from time to time they do "Comparison testing by pro and enthusiast users" to see which one is most popular at various times

You are correct Charles, I can't grasp this

Then you can't grasp something that is a common practice in all manufacturing and service business circles. Have you never seen "concept cars" that look great, but never go into production. Have you ever participated in a product test of something that never actually goes to market. For that matter, fast food restaurants often have foods they try out in limited markets, but never distribute company wide.I used to do alpha and beta testing of computer games. The amount of "vaporware" (games that never go live) outnumbers the amount of games that do go live.

This sort of thing goes on all the time. It is certainly aggravated by how Olympus has announced certain things (or failed to announce) amidst their financial troubles. But I am wondering why it is a few people on this forum just simply are unable to grasp that Olympus has limited funds, a shrinking presence in the market, and so is facing "clutch time". Which, for a business, means abandoning plans that don't meet a certain projected profit threshold.

Conflicting plans? Only in the simplistic view that companies follow only a single business plan with no contingencies. Of course, I did not say that Olympus planned to discontinue the E series from the outset. What I said was that the EM1 was probably a concept at the time they adopted 4/3 format. Meaning that they could, and should, and have, and been smart to, modified their plans as sales have increased or decreased.

If a business, dealing with a loss of revenue and market share, changing plans is something beyond your grasp, take heart: it's not beyond the grasp of Olympus (or any other camera manufacturer-note the withdrawal of the EOS-M from the US market). Nor is it beyond the grasp of the many photographers on this forum who understand how businesses work, and that Olympus isn't a charity that is supposed to put out a camera model to appease a small-and shrinking-group of customers just because they will complain if it doesn't happen.

That is the cold, heartless truth of it all: it's about profits, not about whether 1 out of 50 Olympus owners gets the camera they want. As someone else pointed out: would we rather have no Olympus consumer imaging division at all?

-- hide signature --

If, in my lifetime, I will have produced just one image that makes a real difference in the life of another, I will have achieved my highest goal as a photographer.
http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/
http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CharlesB58
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,519
Like?
Re: For the most part, agreed.
In reply to MatijaK, 10 months ago

Skeeterbytes wrote:

Welllll, had there been an E-7 it would surely have been $1700+, so $1400 isn't a bad fallback.

E-M1 + HLD-7 + MMF-3 + new SD cards + new spare batteries = ?

An E-7, which could have been nothing more but a new sensor inside the E-5 body, couldn't have made a loss. Maybe not so much of a profit, but definitely not a loss.

Given the a abundance of complaints-and lost customers-because the E5 was pretty much just an E3 with a new sensor, why are sone people under the delusion that doing the same thing again would be a smart move?
--
If, in my lifetime, I will have produced just one image that makes a real difference in the life of another, I will have achieved my highest goal as a photographer.

http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/

http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Gesture
Senior MemberPosts: 1,937Gear list
Like?
Re: For the most part, agreed.
In reply to CharlesB58, 10 months ago

I agree.  In many ways, this camera is as "impractical" as an E-7 would have been.  Olympus will not capture that many professional systems users in my opinion, as I think the intent was when the E-1 came out. This is an extremely high specification, aiming high quality camera. I compare it most to the higher end Fuji cameras.  The premium technologies might be a bit different but this and the Fujis are directed at super-enthusiasts.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MatijaK
Regular MemberPosts: 237
Like?
Re: For the most part, agreed.
In reply to CharlesB58, 10 months ago

CharlesB58 wrote:

Given the a abundance of complaints-and lost customers-because the E5 was pretty much just an E3 with a new sensor, why are sone people under the delusion that doing the same thing again would be a smart move?

The E-5 only had a slightly better sensor, comparable to the one in the E-30. It wasn't much of an upgrade, and many E-3 owners waited for an E-7 instead; myself included. An E-5 with a Panasonic GHx sensor would have sold a lot better - though even with that old sensor, it still sold well enough to make a profit.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads