Cancelled my E-M1 order

Started 10 months ago | Discussions
Marty4650
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,594Gear list
Like?
Which raises an interesting question
In reply to CharlesB58, 10 months ago

CharlesB58 wrote:

What we witness on forums like this is people assume that Olympus overpriced a camera that they assume is a replacement for the EM5, or the camera every EM5 owner should feel compelled to upgrade to. That's not the case, and anyone who really thinks things through needs to consider a couple of things.

Exactly how important is the initial selling price for a high end camera?

I know the price is important for P&S cameras, and for entry level ILCs, but once you migrate to the high end of the market, those customers spend much more on lenses than they do on their camera. At that level, lenses become really important, and M4/3 has assembled a nice lens catalog with plenty of options at every quality level.

I thought that $1000 was a fair price for my EM5, especially when you consider how much inflation has reduced the value of the dollar. Eleven years ago I paid $500 for an Olympus C4000 Zoom, and spending that much seemed to hurt more back then. Of course... back then it cost around a dollar to buy a gallon of gas or a pound of coffee too.

Olympus really did well with the EM5, and a year and a half later it is still a very desirable camera. When discounted to around $750 or so, it becomes a value leader, considering the performance and feature set.

And now we have the EM1, that sits above the EM5, as a huge upgrade for anyone who never bought an EM5, or for anyone who owns high end 4/3 lenses. But it should be noted that MOST M4/3 users have never owned a 4/3 lens or 4/3 camera. So this advantage is really something for the 4/3 faithful who migrated to M4/3. And Olympus must be commended for not abandoning those customers.

With the advent of the PRO lenses, it becomes clear that Olympus had no intention to develop any more 4/3 lenses. High end or otherwise. They are instead replacing their SHG lenses with PRO lenses. So we should probably consider the EM1 as a bridge camera of sorts. Because the ability to use SHG lenses and get quick AF will become less and less important as more PRO lenses find their way into the hands of M4/3 users.

The long view is that Olympus and Panasonic have created a very nice system that keeps getting better. And we must remember that Panasonic has done some really remarkable things too. Like their GH and GX cameras, and creating some of the very best M4/3 lenses.

Where 4/3 failed to deliver on it's promise, M4/3 seems to be delivering.

Even though Olympus has suffered from bad fiscal and marketing management, no one can deny that their designers and engineers are among the very best in the industry.

 Marty4650's gear list:Marty4650's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sderdiarian
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,150Gear list
Like?
Re: Which raises an interesting question
In reply to Marty4650, 10 months ago

Marty4650 wrote:

The long view is that Olympus and Panasonic have created a very nice system that keeps getting better. And we must remember that Panasonic has done some really remarkable things too. Like their GH and GX cameras, and creating some of the very best M4/3 lenses.

This power of two gives them a real and well deserved advantage over Canon, Nikon, Sony and the rest. The lock particularly the first two of those brands put on those who purchased their cameras to also buy their proprietary lenses was shattered when mFT arrived with its open mount.

When Olympus and Panasonic shared sensors this resulted simply in a combined system of lenses being developed. Now that Panasonic has teamed with Fuji and Olympus with Sony on sensors, not only does their joint system of lenses continue to grow, but we're also seeing something of a renaissance in sensor design and new features being built into their cameras.  Ironically, mFT actually appears stronger as a result of this split.

Even though Olympus has suffered from bad fiscal and marketing management, no one can deny that their designers and engineers are among the very best in the industry.

Yes.  Olympus in particular brought many breakthroughs to digital cameras going back to their 4/3's days, and Pasnasonic was the trailblazer in mFT, with Olympus being smart enough to know a good thing when they saw it.

And we're happily enjoying the results; good times!

-- hide signature --

Sailin' Steve

 sderdiarian's gear list:sderdiarian's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Henry Richardson
Forum ProPosts: 12,670
Like?
Olympus future is m4/3, I think
In reply to dahod, 10 months ago

I think you are right that Olympus sees relatively small/light m4/3 cameras and lenses as their future. Well, at least for the near and medium term. For me that is fine since I was never interested in 4/3 since it didn't really have a size/weight advantage over APS-C. I do value the smaller size/weight of m4/3 for my travel so I bought an E-M5, G3, and 6 lenses last year. Coming from Canon and Sony APS-C.

It seems to me that if you really want larger/heavier and want an OVF then it probably makes the most sense to switch to Canon or Nikon, either APS-C or FF. Or just keep your current 4/3 gear and if the body dies try to find a used one to buy.

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CharlesB58
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,538
Like?
Re: Which raises an interesting question
In reply to Marty4650, 10 months ago

Marty4650 wrote:

With the advent of the PRO lenses, it becomes clear that Olympus had no intention to develop any more 4/3 lenses. High end or otherwise. They are instead replacing their SHG lenses with PRO lenses. So we should probably consider the EM1 as a bridge camera of sorts. Because the ability to use SHG lenses and get quick AF will become less and less important as more PRO lenses find their way into the hands of M4/3 users.

The on sensor PDAF also allows better use of Sigma 4/3 lenses, as well as making it easier for third party companies to design lenses that will work well on m4/3 as well as dslrs from other companies.

-- 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: 6,538
Like?
Re: Which raises an interesting question
In reply to sderdiarian, 10 months ago

sderdiarian wrote:

and Pasnasonic was the trailblazer in mFT, with Olympus being smart enough to know a good thing when they saw it.

And we're happily enjoying the results; good times!

-- hide signature --

Sailin' Steve

Actually, m4/3 was Olympus's baby with the PEN EP1 coming out before Panasonic offerings. My view is that m4/3, with both the PEN and OMD series, was the idea for Olympus getting into 4/3 from the beginning. Some seem to assume it was a matter of Olympus coming up with m4/3 because 4/3 wasn't selling as well as they'd hoped, but I think Olympus is too forward thinking to have not had mirrorless in mind from the start.

-- 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
Roger Engelken
Senior MemberPosts: 2,803Gear list
Like?
Re: Renewed hope ..
In reply to Sergey_Green, 10 months ago

Sergey_Green wrote:

Marathonianbull wrote:

Based on your interpretation of Mr. Terada's m4/3 logic, I have firmly decided to buy the whole glittering E-M1 / 12-40mm kit with the renewed hope of attracting loads of young, pretty girls. Thanks for the tips!

You mean to say they will think you are one of them ? Not sure this is a good way of attracting.

-- hide signature --

- sergey

Oh I don't know.....it might just work!  

 Roger Engelken's gear list:Roger Engelken's gear list
Olympus TG-830 iHS Olympus E-1 Olympus E-420 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-620 +22 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Roger Engelken
Senior MemberPosts: 2,803Gear list
Like?
Re: Cancelled my E-M1 order
In reply to CharlesB58, 10 months ago

CharlesB58 wrote:

People are cancelling orders or reconsidering buying the EM1 based on a single interview that involves statements about part of a marketing strategy?

ROFLMAO. Perhaps a different hobby is in order?

-- 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/

Unfortunately, it is likely that with most hobbies, there will be an interview with some obscure internet publication about part of a marketing strategy.

 Roger Engelken's gear list:Roger Engelken's gear list
Olympus TG-830 iHS Olympus E-1 Olympus E-420 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-620 +22 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
windsprite
Senior MemberPosts: 1,997Gear list
Like?
Re: Cancelled my E-M1 order
In reply to erichK, 10 months ago

erichK wrote:

Anastigmat wrote:

The female pros won't be using the EM-1. The amateurs just use a camera phone or smart phone. There is no market among them for the EM-1.

That may be true. I know one prize winning would-like-to-be pro who chronically damaged her wrist and neck using a Nikon F5 and then D3 on freelance assignments. Last I heard from her, she was using a D90 and would have liked to find something smaller, but was afraid the it would make her look less "professional".

Just look at ThikTank's video clips. For new product after new product, the tend to be of a 120-140 pound woman carrying a significant fraction of that weight (and sometimes even size!) in "professional" equipment. Idiotic IMHO.

Well ... sports/wildlife kits are probably the heaviest, and indeed two D4s plus a 500/4 and a 200-400/4 weigh about 10kg.  It's a lot.  But you know what else weighs about 10kg?  A 1-year-old baby.    And at least with the camera gear you can distribute the weight for better balance!

Obviously men have much more physical strength than women, but the other day riding the train from the airport into the city, I saw two petite Japanese women carrying both a baby and a suitcase, and they took the stairs rather than the escalator upstairs to the ground, without breaking a sweat.  So I think even a "serious" FF sporting kit is well within the range of what most women are physically able to carry.  It might be more difficult for them than for a man, but it's not nearly impossible, like it would be for most women to carry 70-80kg (or whatever the appropriate "impossible" weight would be).

Do most women *want* to carry 10-15kg in camera gear?  No way.  But then, neither do most men.  But a man will do it if he thinks the tools are necessary to the task he wants to complete (even if it's "just" a hobby), and a woman is really no different.  A serious female photographer is not going to settle for less quality or performance than a man, so she has no choice but to carry the same equipment.  It's not idiotic at all.

Julie

 windsprite's gear list:windsprite's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F100fd Fujifilm FinePix F550 EXR Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Nikon D2H Nikon D300 +36 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
boggis the cat
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,284Gear list
Like?
Obviously true -- stop misquoting
In reply to Sergey_Green, 10 months ago

Sergey_Green wrote:

boggis the cat wrote:

You need to understand that the second part you emphasise goes with the first part: "... maximizes the image sensor performance to ensure outstanding image quality while also being smaller than 35 mm film SLR camera lens systems."

They all maximize image sensor performance, 35 or smaller, what is your point here?

That you are taking partial quotes out of context in order to support your position that Olympus were only concerned about size -- and that is not true.

Size size size. They lost the plot with the SHG and E-3.

No, they didn't. The SHG lenses are smaller than equivalent EFL lenses on 135 (much smaller) and also a stop faster.

From the trio, 14-35/2 is not smaller or lighter than say Nikon 24-70/2.8. And note, it is not 24-70/4, it is an f/2.8. Just like 14-35/2 is not an f/1.4 lens either, which it should have been to be equivalent.

That Nikon is 8.38 (D) x 13.21 (L) cm, 900 g, and costs US$1890.

The ZD 14-35 f/2 is 8.61 (D) x 12.29 (L) cm, 900 g, and costs US$2300.

OTOH, does that Nikon yield as good an image?

From the SLR Gear conclusion for the Nikon:

Performance on a subframe sensor is exquisite, given that the lens isn't really put to the test. On the full-frame D3, it's sharp pretty much at all focal lengths and apertures, with a slight exception at 35mm. Chromatic aberration isn't an issue on the D200, but does show up on an uncorrected (ie., film) image. On the D3, CA issues are ironed out handily in software. The lens does vignette on full-frame, hard to avoid given its focal range, but even so it's not the worst performance we've seen for a lens that covers this kind of range. Finally, distortion is a bit of an issue - more so on full-frame than sub-frame - but again, it's not extreme, just a little complicated.

From teh SLR Gear conclusion for the Zuiko:

If you need this lens for professional purposes it will deliver unquestionably. If you want this lens because your standards are very high, they will be met. Olympus has clearly invested a lot of time and energy into producing this lens: the results speak for themselves.

Seems to be a slight apples and oranges comparison here. The Nikon appears to do best on an APS-C body, and comes closest to the Zuiko when used as such -- but then you have the crop to contend with which moves the EFL out. So either way you aren't really getting an equivalent result.

Same goes for 35-100/2, it is bigger and heavier than again Nikon 70-200/2.8. Luckily there is an equivalent on the other side, 70-200/4, which turns out to be smaller, half the weight, half the price, and at least with the same or better output.

The SHG zooms are a higher class than the older Nikon (and Canon) zooms -- although I think that the gap has closed a lot on the ZD 35-100 f/2 with the newest 70-200 f/2.8 designs, for example.  But the f/4 variants?  Well, the systems (assuming a new 135 body) may be comparable, but then cost and weight are also comparable.

I did not miss 7-14/4 (from the three) as there is simply no equivalent f/8 FF lens for it. The f/2.8 is way beyond the f/8 comparison. And the difference in weight is not that great still.

This provides an option for people who want a system that can yield a different size to performance ratio -- an optimisation based on designing an entirely new system.

Notice how they are *NOT* doing F2.0 zoom lenses with m4/3rds.

The 'PRO' line so far has two constant f/2.8 lenses.

But they are *NOT* f/2.0 zoom lenses.

Yes -- Olympus have made a lot of compromises in order to get the size and weight down.  Notice that the cost has also dropped.  It appears that they have decided to go with constant aperture zooms one stop slower for the 'PRO' line compared to the SHG line; and have shaved a lot of size, weight and cost off by doing so.

As the SHGs are still available and should now work fully on the E-M1 and successor bodies (at least from Olympus) I don't see that as an issue.  It is also possible that they may retire the SHGs and replace them with a faster native MicroFT line at a later date.

Also, it appears that the 'PRO' line is more of an in-between HG / SHG effort -- the M.ZD 12-40 f/2.8 is as at least as good as the ZD 12-60 f/2.8-4 from current reports.  (I will be able to test this myself in a couple of weeks.)

 boggis the cat's gear list:boggis the cat's gear list
Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
boggis the cat
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,284Gear list
Like?
Unable to grasp reality?
In reply to rovingtim, 10 months ago

rovingtim wrote:

boggis the cat wrote:

You need to understand that the second part you emphasise goes with the first part: "... maximizes the image sensor performance to ensure outstanding image quality while also being smaller than 35 mm film SLR camera lens systems."

Then why did Olympus say this to Darrell while talking about the EM1 ... which has better IQ than any previous 4/3rds camera?

Olympus says if you need absolute image quality or more megapixels then FF is better,

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52240637

Well, gee Tim -- why do you think?  Is it because what Olympus said happens to be correct?  If you want 36 MPixels then the E-M1 won't deliver, will it?  And it is no surprise that spending two or three times more for a larger and heavier system will net you an image quality gain -- or at least not to me.

Why can't you understand such simply concepts?

You are doing a good imitation of someone reading what you want to read in order to have the reality you want to have.

No, Tim.  You are -- as usual -- failing to grasp the situation.

It isn't complicated, so I can only speculate that you are looking for some alternative rationale for moving back to MicroFT now, even though the sensor size has stayed the same.

MicroFT is indeed a smaller system than standard FT, and it has compromises to achieve that.  If the new compromises look better to you then that's fine -- but it does not mean that the standard FT compromises were 'wrong' for everyone else, or that we were buying FT solely because it was smaller than APS-C (which I certainly wasn't, as I had my eye on the definitely-not-small 50-200).

By the way, greetings to Boggis' thumbs up brigade I'm sure you are all just as open minded as he is.

Who is 'thumbing up' your posts?  Do you thumb your own posts up?

 boggis the cat's gear list:boggis the cat's gear list
Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads