Zvonimir Tosic: Thank God for Leica; they are delivering things as they should be done — right and without cutting corners. It was about time that someone teaches Japanese and Korean toddlers how mirrorless things are done. This is pro thinking, first time in digital mirrorless history; everything else we had so far was kindergarten play.
I'm pretty sure the Japanese company Panasonic helped Leica build this. They're not teaching the Japanese much of anything these days.
Photoman: -Struggles to maintain focus on moving subjects
I thought Olympus would have fixed this by now. That is why I sold my EM-5, case it is fast on single focus, but not very good on moving objects (video tracking was terrible!)
Not sure how you are using your camera but you can compensate by shooting a smaller aperture and pre-focus locking so your subjects stay in focus even if they are moving around. It doesn't work for every situation but that's how I manually deal with it. Not a big deal for me.
I like compact camera bodies with small lenses to be able to fit easily in the back pocket of my backpack without adding a lot of weight. To my requirements, the m43 system is the best system for me. I am perfectly satisfied with the images I get. I don't care about the marginally better performance of APS-C sensors and I certainly don't care about lugging FF camera and its larger lenses around. The quality and impact of my images are more determined by my skill than the larger sensored DSLRs. There is nothing in the m43 system that hinders my ability to create great photography.
nerd2: It's 2015 and $649 m43 camera is far from affordable, considering how cheap FF cameras (a7 or d610) have become.
You see the prices for good native lenses for FF? Body may be cheap, but you will spend mega dollars on lenses.
It's tough to use FF at F1.8. FF lenses at F1.8 are very soft and not very useable. Try taking a portrait at F1.8 and you get the eyes in focus but the nose out of focus. You generally have to stop down to f2.8 to get useable photos and possible even smaller aperture.
Serious Sam: As I guessed the increased resolution isn't helping when you have no improvement on the signal to noise ratio. At this price point, I rather by an A7m or go stingy and get a D5500, both kick GX8's ass once you go pass 1600.
I do have a Nikon D5200. D5500 is slightly smaller and lighter, but it won't fit in the back of my backpack with a lens attached to it. It just won't. I like to hike and it ain't fun lugging a DSLR with a heavy zoom lens on a 10 hour hike. On the other hand, a m43 body with 2 lenses is a piece of cake.
Portability with good image quality my friend. I can fit this wiht 2 lenses in the back pocket of my backpack. That's what it's all about with m43.
Is not that bad. Just get some good gloves and make sure you do pull ups and chin ups to get your strength up to pull yourself up the cables.
The sensor is going to be the same, if not, or almost exactly the same as an existing sensor Panasonic uses for other cameras. Noise and color should be the same. Which means that it's a good sensor that can compete well against other APSC sensors. However, the lens and JPEG algorithm are the two varying factors here. Doubt Leica will approve of a lens on a camera which doesn't meet its standards. Therefore, it's either a bad copy of a camera or the jpeg algorithm screwing up the pictures.
Nikon is not serious about selling this camera. I think they are producing this in lower volumes and jacking up the price to try and break even. "Here, we made you a mirrorless, so just shut up already."
Here's what happens in the American market. First time DSLR purchase goes to buy a DSLR because they want better image quality. They see professionals use DSLRs, so they trust it will provide them with similar image quality. User might purchase 1 extra lens to go with the kit lens. DSLR gets used for a few times initially, now sits in the closet while user opts to use cell phone to shoot 98% of photos.
Educated consumer purchases a mirrorless camera from Sony or Olympus offering. Uses it a few times, loves the portability. Camera gets used to take about 30% of photos while 70% of photos still taken with cell phone.
Overall, the average consumer is better off buying mirrorless camera. It just gets used more.
MarkByland: It's because a majority of people don't trust the EVF in mirrorless cameras. It really is that simple. I hate the things. I appreciate the 1:1 visual analog connection to my subjects. It is some thing I depend upon for my photo making. It's not about the "quality" of the image so much as it is about the connection of the photographer with the subject. The EVF is horrible technology and I don't care what "advancements" or "innovations" Company $ (S) or Company F can come up with, it's still a major disconnect and, quite literally, a converted electronic view of the past.
ugh..no. I took one look through an EVF 1 year ago and I was astounded by the wealth of info that was displayed in front of my eyes. EVFs are good and I would never want to go back to an optical VF.
4K is coming fast and furious. 4K TV for $1,000 is coming out this year. But i've got to wonder if 8K is gonna hit just as hard in 2 years and obsolete 4k quickly.
PhotoHawk: Truly disappointing - nothing new here. It is the same Olympus strategy we've seen before. The same box, slightly different dials, same IQ, same sensor, the same performance. Do you want fries with this or do you want home fries.
Think back to the EP1, EP2, EP3, EPL1, EPL1s, EPL2, EPL3, EPM1, E600, E620,E5. All use the same sensor and pretty much have the same IQ. Different form factors but we don't even have that really in three models of OMD.
If someone can slam Canon for reusing the 18 MP sensor in many bodies then we should be critical of Olympus as well.
Now Fuji - thats exciting! They are moving the bar forward fast. And say what you want about Sony but clearly they are moving quicker as well.
Olympus doesn't make sensors. It now depends on what Sony gives them. Don't blame Olympus here. Unless they strike a deal again with Panasonic to use their sensors. Besides, Sony sensors haven't really much evolved since 2 years ago either. I read they are working on an organic sensor that might appear in 2015, better color depth and noise characteristics.
Gesture: Neat cameras down-specifying. But $700 is not budget-friendly; it is a lot of money.
Compared to what? A Nikon d3200? An NEX 6? You realize an entry level DSLR for $499 is a crappy shooting experience with it's small optical viewfinder, single dial wheel, limited button customization, no touch screen shooting, limited settings, etc. The NEX 6 is almost the same price with an inferior body design.
Maverick_: I came close to get an A7 as I am in the market for upgrade, but the camera has too many important flaws to be used as a serious semi-pro model. It seems that it would make better use as an enthusiast camera.
But we can't ignore the potential of this groundbreaking camera, full frame interchangeable lens in a very compact body. Perhaps in 3 years they'll resolve the focus issue.
If you actually shot with it, you'd probably not notice the flaws at all. Nitpicking is at an all time high.
harold1968: The e-m1 is the same size, weight and price.The sony handling is better (I have used both, at most it's a taste thing), the e-m1 has slightly faster focuses (but still hunts in low light)The sensor is far inferior compared to the A7, it even has noise in base ISO.Yet dpreview describe its IQ as excellent and yet the A7s as very good.For sure something is going on with this review.
The EM1 didn't need to be a larger camera. They could've easily made it smaller but people wanted a larger body, so they obliged. You do have a choice of going with smaller m43 bodies.
Wow..sexy, but FUJI lenses are wallet busters. Still, do want.
jennyrae: does not appear worth $1,600.
f1.2 lenses are all very expensive. The build quality looks superb. However, do not judge the lens by looking at the pictures dpreview takes. dpreview takes 'snapshots', not world class photos.
munro harrap: A friend of mine is quite happy with one of these, but I dont get it, no. The camera is as big as a 35mm full-frame Olympus OM2n and bigger than a D40x Nikon.It is almost as big as my Nikon 7100 and a lot more expensive. With the good f2.8 zoom it costs as much as a new Nikon D800 body, WIERD!!OMD is nowhere near as flexible as the old R1 Sony which was a complete system in itself with a great 24-120mm lens (still the best available-but not on NEX machines).You can then spend another fortune on another set of doubtless excellent lenses, and get Leica quality for less..... but existentially WHY would you do this? Beats me, mate....
Pro photographers asked for a larger body with more buttons. This is what they wanted. Did Olympus have to make it large? No. They did it in purpose because there is a market. On the other hand, they can make an m43 camera as small as the point and shoot bodies. You can pick an m43 in all sizes, but not APS-C.