PRohmer: I totally regret getting Olympus. I hate everything about this camera except for I.S. Olympus is a shitty company with shitty support. You're gonna tell me this is photographer's camera, so don't expect much of video features? Fujifim x-t1 is a photographer's camera, Em-1 is an angular camera. I only got it because i wanted to keep using my Panasonic lenses, but it was a mistake. I still don't get how this camera got its high ratings. Is it some kind of hipster camera? Who designed it?? It gets caught in my clothes all the time. Evolution in design is there for a reason.
"It gets caught in my clothes all the time."
I've seen cameras panned for silly reasons...but this is the winner.
reginalddwight: I don't own an EM1 but from what I can gather Olympus seemed to have hit a home run with this one.
It looks like video could be improved and the camera could use a nip and tuck.
Overall, a well-deserved selection among the top gear of 2013.
Without the grip, you have the OMD-EM5. And what's so big about the 4:3 lenses?
vesa1tahti: Sensor ratings by DxO: Oly E-M5: 71, Nikon D7000: 80, Nikon D800E: 96. Rely on that. Small sensors- weaker IQ. Micro Four Thirds can't be competitive, sensor size MUST be APS-C or FF. Camera size has no matter, normal people can carry DSLR- cameras, others are too small.
DxO while useful, weigh a lot of their sensor ratings on high ISO performance. Few experienced m43 users expect the same IQ at high ISO situations as they would from a larger sensor. However, at base ISO IQ is very close to the best APS-C sensors. Combined with it's superior IS, the new Olympus' are very useful tools for street photography or similar situations.Personally if I'm shooting grand sweeping landscapes like mountain ranges I'll use FF.Or I can drag out and dust off my 4x5 view camera and really give the pixel peepers something to look at.
marike6: Two things stand out form the RAW files:
* the higher per-pixel sharpness and detail of the D7100 vs the E-M1. * And how biased to red the EM-1 RAWs are.
Of course the reviews are worth reading and studying. How else can someone make an educated decision when purchasing a camera.
It's what the readers that post here have to say about the reviews, like your original comment, that I find tiresome, and useless.
You must have been frothing at the mouth, unable to hold back from posting your opinion that the Nikon D7100 was per pixel sharper.
"DPR uses the exact same RAW workflow for each camera, AFAIK. If they didn't the RAW comparison would be meaningless."
Exactly my point. Each camera demands a different workflow to get the best image.
The Nikon D7100 is a fine camera. So are the Olympus. and so are the Canons, Sonys and so on.
Most important of all is the operator. a person that understands the advantages and limitations of his equipment, and knows how to get the most out of, during the shoot, and in post processing.
This pastime of pitting one camera against the other is a childish game of oneupmanship...something to do after they realize their creative juices have long dried up.
Ya think? Nikon D7100 is a 24 megapixel camera vs. Oly's 16.Considering the Nikon's extra 8 megapixel's it doesn't offer that much more detail.
Also looking at detail quality of RAW files can be skewed, too much depends on the person performing the RAW>JPEG conversion and how detail and sharpness is adjusted.
retro76: That is one ugly camera, but I guess that more so due to the fact that their retro designs are so attractive.
If you want to have something pretty hanging around your neck...buy some jewelry. You want to take pictures, or make a fashion statement?
Edwaste: Not surprising, no innovative designs from Canon. Only one, rather useless innovation, from Nikon.
I also remember DP Review saying the live view of the Olympus E-330 was "a solution looking for a problem" Now it's groundbreaking...
History always reveals the true visionaries.
Perhaps it's a bad practice, but I always spend my money on the innovators. Canon and Nikon has never improved on image stabilization, sensor dust removal, or live view implementation like Olympus has. As for live view, Olympus and Panasonic were wise enough to jettison the mirror to get a proper live view camera.
i won't deny Canon and Nikon sell well, but so does plain vanilla ice cream and McDonald's burgers. Bland and ordinary can do well in the marketplace.I am referring to the hobbyist level of Canon and Nikon offerings. Their Pro cameras are stunning at least in their image quality and ruggedness. But those are not innovations, just good old fashioned engineering.I wouldn't call live view a design that failed. Or large sensor fixed lens cameras. True, the early version may have been clunky and poorly implemented, but they paved the way for successful designs that C&N eventually imitated.
Not surprising, no innovative designs from Canon. Only one, rather useless innovation, from Nikon.
If GIF is an abbreviation for Graphics Interchange Format, Wouldn't the G be hard like the word Graphics?Anyway Mr. Wilhite invented it...he can call it anything he pleases.
I always said "Graphics Interchange Format"...it made me sound like I knew something.
Timmbits: "Computer Industry" news now, on this photo site? what's up with that?
I've been in computers since the mid eighties, and I've never heard it called a jif either. gift, gif... should be a hard g I would think. now if I pronounce it correctly from today onwards, everyone will be correcting me all the time. now that doesn't sound like much fun! I'd much rather continue to upset it's creator whom I've never met.
""Computer Industry" news now, on this photo site? what's up with that?" It's a DIGITAL photography site. So news about imaging formats such as GIF, JPEG or TIFF, would be in order.
I love it when the tail wants to wag the dog.
JohnyP: I think the laws should be amended: any content posted online by copyright holder should lose copyright protection and should be open to reproduction, modification and derivative works.
If you don't want others to be exposed to your work - open a gallery or travel and display your works on tour.
time to clear our courts of these nonsensical cases.
I can see why someone would feel that way if they had nothing worth protecting, or sharing.
Edwaste: In other photos I've seen of the A58, the lens mount is black. I hope that's not made of plastic.
I've owned "cheap" cameras in the past, and they all had metal lens mounts. I would not mind a composite lens mount, if it was user replaceable, and the part was easy to acquire, and inexpensive.
In other photos I've seen of the A58, the lens mount is black. I hope that's not made of plastic.
Deleted pending purge: Nice world we've made for ourselves. You tell the truth, and you've got "to pass every word through three sets of lawyers, to avoid legal issues"? So why do our kids have to go to school at all?
To become lawyers?
I own both Sony and Olympus cameras, it should get very interesting for someone in my situation.
I would like to participate, but I'll probably be arrested for being a Terror Suspect.
Sabatia: The Carlyle Group is primarily made up of former big league defense contractors and oil magnates and their friends. Dick Cheney was among the founders. Very rich, very smart, very greedy and completely without morals, and even less aesthetics, except making more money.
If a picture is worth 1,000 words, that's a lot of history in the hands of people like the Caryle Group. Very troubling to me.I don't think money alone was the motive behind this purchase.
MPA1: Not too sure why I would want to edit my work on a half-baked solution in Flickr rather than in proper software prior to posting the work there, but then that's just me!
Many times after adjusting the tones of my photo, when I post them on Flickr, it doesn't quite look the same as it did in my editing software. So I relied on Picnik to fine tune the highlights.