Woodlink: Petax design team is off the hook for "ugliest camera of the year".
I was taken aback by the look, but at second glance I actually think it looks great. At least it's a departure from the frankly horrific 1990's retro "melted bar of soap" looks of most current full frame DSLRs.
That does seem like an unnecessarily harsh way to dump someone.
joshxiv: I wonder how much smaller they could have made the lens if they dropped the IS. I think most potential buyers here would value size vs IS? Or just me?
The RX2 will come in at a lower price point, for sure. There's a chance it might even have a built in EVF, but it is unlikely it will have an on-lens distance scale like the Q. I know I will be in a tiny, tiny minority here, but for the way I shoot, AF + on-lens distance scale makes the price difference worth it for me. Of course, I largely prefer 28mm vs 35mm too, LOL.
Might be time to say sorry to the wallet. Unless of course the GR II turns out to be full frame as well, haha.
Personally, I prefer systems with some sort of image stabilization to allow for a more flexible shutter time.
nikkornikon: They Need to, Like Fuji...to Step away from 16mp. It is time to move on. When 24mp is truly old...16 seems freaking ancient.
There is ALWAYS diffraction. The idea that it shows up or becomes especially noticeable at a certain aperture diameter isn't true, and in any case more pixels will provide a higher resolution / sharper image even if the individual pixels may be softer. It's the end image that counts, not the pixel peeping. ;)
Also, while adding pixels to the sensor may indeed add a little noise in low light shooting, it's the sort of noise that is very technology dependant and because of this, it's likely that advances in technology at the very least would balance out the smidgeon extra noise.
Well done, Samsung! Great to see such innovation and performance.
That said, it's not much of a looker. It could almost be mistaken for any old DSLR with that 1990's retro styling.
pkosewski: Ah... the "eyes are sharp" thing.I looked at some shots in the gallery. We are talking about DoF of 2-3 meters. It's not really about nailing focus as getting something in focus or being totally lost. Players are isolated very well...As such, 20% rate of "being totally lost" is quite a lot. Especially at 5 fps.
I'm pointing this out because Olympus is planning to release the 300/4 and600mm FF equivalent is not exactly a general-purpose lens. With this quality of focusing I don't think it will win over many nature photographers...
@Pkosweski: "Depth of field" comes down to "does it look sharp". When we estimate it mathematically, we need to take into account the size of the image output and how close the viewer is looking at it.
Most DoF-calculators on the web defaults to the common film standards of postcard-sized images, but for enthusiasts making digital images it's more reasonable to think in large high-definition displays or large print outs. In these cases, the DoF is smaller.
When I look at the images in the gallery on my display, I see focus drop off a lot faster than the 2-3 meters you were claiming.
Claiming we're dealing with a DoF of 2-3 meters is wildly overstated, unless you're talking about watching the images with a tiny output size.
Thank you for a interesting and thoughtful review. I bought the E-M5ii two weeks ago, trading in my original E-M5 in the process.
For me, the major upgrade is ergonomics. Better camera controls (the 2x2 dials works wonders), the larger and better viewfinder that adjusts brightness so I can shoot with both eyes open, and the powerful and easy-to-use wireless "tethering". For me the improved ergonomics makes the camera easier, faster and more pleasurable to use than the original camera (which I also enjoyed using). The addition of live composite mode to the ingenious live time/bulb-modes is also very good, and the list goes on...
This is maybe underrated by a portion of this site's readership as there is, justifiably, a lot of focus on pushing the envelope of high resolution, DR and SNR. While the improvements on the mark I in these areas maybe marginal, it still holds its own against most of the competition, and it's now more effortless to actually realize the full power of the thing
Mateus1: No AF-Back button???
What is AF EV sensitivity? Hope not poor 0EV.
Just to clarify, there IS a back focus button. As it is Olympus, just about anything you can imagine can be mapped to what ever button you prefer, and making the AEL/AFL-button act as a back focus button is simple.
rebel99: i wanted this camera for travel and landscape but the files (16mp) are to small and won't cut it! i really like the quality of olympus but maybe the next generation with larger sensor! on the other hand, the new amsung with new NX-1 has a killer 28mp sensor that is perfect but i am not quite sure of the lens offerings! like i have commented before, the M4/3 cameras have a couple more generation to be ready for show time! until then, i'll stick with my clunky canon 1Dx and 1dmk4 cameras :-( the new canon announced 5Ds/r cameras supposed to have 53mp sensor, perfect for landscape photography ;-) and i have a big load of "L" lenses to go with it. but the announced price is ~ $4000.00, yuk... ;-( we'll see!
I would think it very hard to find the ideal camera for both landscape and travel photography. I'd say that something similar to the E-M5ii would be top of the list for travel photography, but for landscape, you should probably look closer at medium format (or larger) cameras rather than clunky yet small format dslrs like your Canons.
nerd2: "Better image stabilization is better than just more pixels"
Just EVERY company out there provides optical stabilization with similar level of performance (4-5 stops of stabilization). And the stabilization technology only gets better over time - unlike m43 system which cannot provide "just more pixels" due to its sensor size limitation.
Kipplemaster: Difficult to see how you could spoof this as it is so spectacularly inept. "We see insanity" perhaps.
At Canon, we're delusional
English isn't my first language so please bear with me, but is "We see impossible" proper English?
Regardless, it's still complete marketing bullship, akin to "We're giving it 110%", unless of course they're suggesting that they're delusional at Canon.
darklamp: Do any of the Fanboys understand they can just paint a red dot on an LX100 for a dollar ( or thereabouts ).
So many posts telling us how great it is to get a red-dot this cheap. I hope you lot are a small proportion of the population. Scary to think that gene is being passed on.
And extend the warranty plus get the lightroom software. It really isn't that bad a deal.
Almeida: How is this a "portrait lens"?
Maybe it's meant for m43 or Nikon 1!
joe6pack: flip-down is only good for hand holding. You cannot put the camera on a table and take group-photos like flip-up cameras.
I don't think you would have to rotate the picture in post. At least my E-M5 can tell if the camera is upside down and will automatically rotate the image.
nerd2: So basically equivalent to MF 20mm f5.6 for FF?
It's likely to be the opposite, no less wide than f/2.
In any case, cinematographers are unlikely to be interested in DoF/diffraction-equivalence. For them it's about exposure. And if you think of exposure in equivalent T-stops, you need to use "equivalent ISO" as well for it to make sense.
Jogger: Although its technically equivalent to 20mm in FF terms.. in video mode, the crop penalty is even more severe due to the 4/3 aspect ratio of the sensor. Its
Not if you shoot Academy ratio, but yeah, for cinema-work it'll probably be used together with something like SLR Magic's anamorphic adapter to get the 2.39:1 ratio needed.
Alexis D: Another compact camera with nothing special. Just wait 9 months and it will be sold for $499 with 2 kit lenses.
Olympus is so dumb not to issue a compact with built-in EVF and built-in flash. This E-PL7 will go down fast, just like their last mistake, the E-P5.
Isn't the E-M10 the camera you're looking for?