fmian

DPReview. Last line of the first paragraph states 'We've had a chance to handle the P7100 and have prepared a preview looking at the changes.'

P7100.
Just thought I'd point it out.

Pull out screen is long overdue, and the design looks like it will handle better than the older models (they felt good anyway).
The lens brightness is a welcome thing too.

I was thinking more along the lines of high end compacts actually.
But I guess it seems like phone cameras are encroaching into that market anyway.

Good to see sensor development moving full steam ahead. Will be nice to start seeing it in larger sensors eventually.
If they could only improve technology at the same rate with batteries, computer monitors and home printers.

'except that the comparison with the Nikon 1 system is wrong'

I was referring to how Nikon released the 1 system and then after made statements that the sensor is capable of doing 2k and 4k video. I think they mentioned a more pro/manual oriented body as well. ie. 'We can do better, but we won't give you a better product. You'll have to wait for that.'
So (potential) anxious users wait a year for an upgrade, and then Nikon announce the equally as underwhelming J2.

In a similar vein, Olympus says of the EM5 in their product brouchure,
'The FAST AF represents the pinnacle of Olympus AF technologies.'
And then several months after release officially state otherwise.

How can you not feel burnt by that?

I wrote: "Are you not concerned that you are seeing a pixellated messed up processed version of what the lens sees when you look through an EVF?"

I guess I should have written 'highly processed' to differentiate between what the EVF is doing on the fly, and raw processing.

'Not if it is consistant with what the same sensor sees when I actually take the shot...'

In my experience the sensor does not take a scrambled aliased jagged noisy shot like an electronic viewfinder displays.

'On a related note, how do you process your photos then?'

Certainly not on an EVF (if I am using a camera with an EVF), and definately not on the LCD screen on the back of the camera.
When I'm shooting black and white film I process them by hand. When I'm shooting DSLR I run them through Lightroom or CS5.

tgutgu wrote: 'Most DSLR optical view finders are worse than the EVF pf the E-M5: they are partly smaller, dim, usually with some clor cast.'
A several year old 5D classic with a fast prime knocks the socks off the EM5 viewscreen.
Please understand WHY an optical viewfinder may be small or dim before making such claims.
Are you not concerned that you are seeing a pixellated messed up processed version of what the lens sees when you look through an EVF?

I'm thinking Olympus should have done this in the first place.

I don't have time to delve through camera release history, but Fuji seem to have created the X100, X10 and XPro1 with this mindset.
Create the best possible camera they can based on the specs at hand, and try to out do the competition with something bold and fresh. They took a chance and stuck to a traditional design philosophy and were given accolades as a result.
Olympus on the other hand meanders about for 4 years rehashing versions of the E-P1 until they get to the EM-5, and then exclaim that it isn't good enough.

ptox: That's what they did with the pen series micro 4/3 system. Started from the bottom and have been clawing their way up right alongside Panasonic.
What they should have done was start at the top with a high end model to let people know they meant business and could have faith invested in them.
Users have had to sit through 4 years of less than stellar pen cameras (that played second fiddle to models from Panasonic, a company that has no history in stills cameras) just to get to the EM5 (which only just compares to low end FF cameras from ages ago), and now they get told it's not the best with PRO lenses.

So you dream of having something that you already have?
Makes sense.

Olympus camera division seems to be taking advice from the endoscopy division on how to bend over their end users.
How many high end E system users sold off their gear cause Olympus has all but left that system dead in the water and been concentrating on Micro cameras.
Now they must be kicking themselves... or not if they have migrated to other PRO systems that majority of the industry shoots with, and has more support and stability than Olympus.
Also, EM5 users now being told officially by Olympus that their 'expensive' high end camera is not good enough for pro lenses. They must be feeling pretty sore as well. Like constantly being told the best is around the corner, similar to Nikon and what they say about the 1 System.
Olympus is clearly on life support, with this new dose of morphine designed to keep the left over signs of life from kicking and screaming towards it's demise.

Most that are serious about photography will be better off using the OVF anyway, and most that are serious about video recording will manual focus.
Does not mean this comparison is invalid, but the features tested here are mainly aimed to the general point and shoot consumer.
Just thought I'd get that out at anyone claiming one system is better than the other just by looking at the test above.

I see, thanks for the reply. And yes, you wrote that in the article, I obviously missed it.
Is it possible to see one of the original shots?
How does it look when the shadows/highlights have been adjusted.
Just curious.
Or perhaps you could try layering 2 different exposures, then masking the foreground.

Most here, and myself included seem to prefer the color tone and overall look of the first image at the top, which is from a single frame using ND and pol filter.
So I must ask, if you can get it just about right in camera, with the use of filters, what is the point of taking multiple exposures and running it through complex HDR software, if the end result just isn't as pretty?
I keep thinking people are using digital manipulation for the wrong reasons, or perhaps just for the hell of it.
Please don't take it in offense or anything though Carsten, I like your work, but perhaps you should learn to trust your instinct rather than have to fiddle with things in post so much.
Then again, I haven't had photographic books published of my work, so what do I know?

Marike6 wrote: 'The J1/V1 are fun to use, no nonsense cameras.'
If by nonsense you are referring to good handling, direct access to the exposure triangle, and exciting lenses, then yeah, I guess these cameras have none of that.

@marike6

from:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&thread=42120859

Camera Market Shares for first half of 2012 in Japan

In DSLR category:
1. Canon @ 59.8%
2. Nikon @ 28.8%

In MILC category:
1. Olympus @ 30.7%
2. Panasonic @ 29.6%

In compact camera category:
1. Canon @ 16.2%
2. Sony @ 15.4%

So Olympus and Panasonic make up ~60% of MILC sales in Japan, leaving 40% between Sony, Samsung, Nikon, Pentax, Ricoh, and Leica.
And Nikon sure as hell ain't selling more 1 cameras than Sony is selling NEX models.

I have had plenty of opportunity to handle and use many cameras.
As soon as you put either of the Nikon 1 cameras in the hand, it's an instant fail. From the lobsided weight, to the lack of grip, it's as if Nikon WANT their customers to drop the camera, and then buy another one, cause they will blame themselves rather than the cameras poor design.
I didn't think they could get any worse than the P7100 layout, with buttons all over the place on a comfortable camera (as long as you don't accidentally press a button while trying to hold the camera) But with the 1 system cameras they have managed to make things minimal, but still screw up the design.
Who cares what the images look like, when the camera is such a pain in the ass to use, it takes all the fun out of taking photos in the first place?
And the new lens? That's just more mediocrity for Nikon fans to lap up.

You really only have Nikon 1 owners to blame for this. If people stopped buying these cameras, Nikon would stop updating/rehashing them. They are only giving the public more of what they are already being fed.

Has it really taken Nikon this long to fix the slow shutter speed issue?
It shouldn't be any more difficult than changing a few digits in a line of code.
From the sounds of it most of the purchasers of this system don't even know they've been suckered into buying a substandard, poorly designed product.

Whatever makes you happy I suppose.