As much as I love some of Leica's high-end gear, everything that is below their M cameras seem to be in a near-permanent state of denial.
Why any person would pick this up instead of a Fuji X camera, or Sony's RX1 is beyond me.
Leica's putting itself in a very sensitive position. While some people will gladly forfeit the modern functionality of a lot of cameras for the experience of using a full-frame rangefinder camera.
But by dropping the sensor to an APS-C size the camera is going to be pitted directly against the likes or Sony and Fuji both of which produce cameras capable of rendering very beautiful pictures and already have their own followers.
I'm curious, and I won't say I have no interest in it, but I think that if this camera doesn't perform as well as its direct competitors it will tarnish the Leica brand a little.
This camera is growing on me more and more every time I look at it.
Darn you Olympus, did you have to go and make such a pretty Camera? don't you understand a lot of us need to save money? Even the white version glitters like it's made out of pearls or something. And I'm a guy!
Thank God, they omitted the EVF, else my bank account would be taking a blow.
Yet who knows. Maybe if it drops a lot in the next few months, and my used OM-D doesn't suffer so bad on the used market, I might even go for it. I like the EVF but I think I can live without it.
I wouldn't trade my OM-D for this camera.
Shouldn't they have showcased this camera with a pancake lens or something a bit smaller than the kit zoom?
This is why eastern companies sometimes appear so disconnected from their public.
thewhitehawk: A truly great little camera, though at it's pricepoint, I'd be more interested in looking at a Leica with interchangeable lenses, even with the immensely worse low-light performance.
@HowaboutRAW - did you read my comment? I'm well aware of that fact.
A truly great little camera, though at it's pricepoint, I'd be more interested in looking at a Leica with interchangeable lenses, even with the immensely worse low-light performance.
tkbslc: Tens of people are soooo excited today!
And one person is jealous.
acidic: What happened to Tokina and Tamron? They joined MFT last year and we haven't seen anything yet.http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/26/Tamron_Tokina_join_MicroFourThirds
R&D takes time. I'm guessing it would surprise you greatly if you found out how long some of the products currently in the market take to develop.
thewhitehawk: I find the lack of wheels on this camera body... disturbing.
On a more serious note, this camera looks more comfortable to hold than most mirrorless cameras, however, I have to say that that large pixel count raises a few yellow flags in my head. Over the years I have observed that whenever Samsung tries to compete with other companies in terms of megapixel count, they tend to sacrifice many other things (see their old Ultra range for reference).
I hope they can prove me wrong, as Samsung tends to be one of the most disruptive companies when it comes to mobile devices, and it would be great to see more competition in the mirrorless camera market. But it will take more than a 3D lens and 20 megapixels to convince me, that's just my opinion.
The touchscreen implementations of camera interfaces that I have seen so far, outside of cellphones, have been everything but usable.
Let me put it another way.
I don't consider having a touchscreen, by itself, a good feature. It's how good the software is that will determine how useful of a characteristic it will be. If it's closer to the implementations I've seen in cellphones, then it should be ok, but if it's closer to any other camera I've used with touchscreens, then I think you'll find the experience lacking.
But this is mere speculation, we can't make a judgement on this matter without knowing how it actually operates.
I find the lack of wheels on this camera body... disturbing.
iae aa eia: it's a pity the sony rx1 not be one of the three here. it just pulled the trigger for the race for compact full frame cameras, something long time wondered to when it would be happening. it's like it finally makes the digital age to catch up with the film, since back then full frame compacts were not something out of this world, but the opposite. sony made it with the rx1, and in a very competent way. the olympus om-d can't even come close to it. it's attempt to live up the 'om' status failed for me. if you pay close attention, the film om's are far more beautiful, elegant and well balanced (in terms of design) cameras. the om-d, despite its unquestionable quality, does not deserve the first place.
I think that the RX-1, despite of it's excellent specifications is a niche product. It's one that only a very slim percentage of users will ever consider purchasing. Since polls are essentially popularity contests, and the RX-1 is a niche product, it's not very surprising to me, that it didn't score so highly as some of the other offerings.
I don't think we should get too philosophical about what cameras ended up in first place but if there is one thing that I would take from this poll is that mirrorless cameras should start getting less skeptical-attention from DSLR users.
Turbo 46032: Methinks there are way too many oldsters here reminiscing of the Olympus glory days especially the OM-2... The OM-D captures the 'spirit' of the OM-2 quite well (is there an all-black OM-D?)
Yes, there are two models, a silver/black model, and an all-black one.
gulffish: Another view, based on thread count today:
1. Nokon D800 223,6062. Olympus E-M5 52,2163. Sony RX100 42,2644. Canon EOS 5D Mark III 4,582
Too bad there isn't a way to limit votes to those who have actually owned the camera they vote for.
It would be a shame if a significant number of voters were people who had no experience with the camera or similar ones. I can't speak for them, but as for myself, biased as I may be as an E-M5 owner, I can safely say it's one heck of a camera.
Sarge_: Full frame mirrorless, Nikon. Everything else is 'meh'. Most likely, it seems Sony will take my money for that one. I'm a pro Nikon shooter, but for 'walkaround' I'm sold on the Sony NEX series at this point (roughly pocketable, for someone who's 6'2"). Canon has potential, but Sony has the lead in glass at the moment.
Nikon's AF system seems nearly ideal for skiing, but the (sensor) size matters...
Sony sure has done a great of turning "full frame" race into the new "megapixel" race.
While you're busy arguing whether the V2 has a big-enough sensor or not, photos taken with phones are being printed on Time magazine.
I think that smaller sensor devices have done a much better job at evolving rapidly than full or APS-C-sized sensors have, and I think that makes DSL-R owners afraid and defensive for some reason.
Anyway, while you're busy arguing how many millimetres a sensor needs to be good I'll be going outside and taking some pictures with my crop sensor camera.
When you pair this with the recent articles about 500px inability to listen to users / bring tools to improve users' lives, it seems that Flickr may be on the rise again.
METROMODEPHOTO: by the way the camera on the galaxy note 2 has a low light seting wich works very very well too for those in the market who wants the best for their money.with the ability to see your photos on a 5.5 inch screen this is truly awesome and yes the note 2 is "BIG" and not as comfortable to hold in your hands like an iphone. once you get comfortable with its size after 3 to 5 days ,your good to go. yes 1080p video capability too and many many more photo feature you can find on slr you will find on your galaxy note too. i thought it was funny to have iso setting on a mobil phone but i was totally okay if it came with it.
Have you tried handling one? I recently held one during a trip to Belgium, and I found it considerably easier to wield and use than my iPhone 4, which was very surprising to me.
Ropo16: AP's vendetta against Olympus continues. They? have been dragging this morsel out for most of the year.
I don't think there's anything wrong with reporting actual news, as long as it's actual news and not just speculation.
emircruz: Pretty Lens but I wish Oly would stop producing these premium lens cr*p. It doesn't make any sense. How do they expect to get a bigger market share when they release interesting lenses at uninteresting pricepoints?
I say make them good but make them cheap. ie 20mm and 45mm. No need for these all metal construction and pull-manual focus gmicks.
And if you want command higher prices.. I say reincarnate the old SG line to m43! Now those lenses are real gems! They are pricy but at least all come weather-sealed.. and all come with hoods and cases.
I think that M4/3 has been losing a few users because of larger-sensor mirrorless systems. Right now, for someone who appreciates very high quality, for some people it makes more sense to choose an NEX system or a Fuji X one. I think now, more than ever, it's important for Olympus and Panasonic to introduce lenses that appeal not just to ordinary consumers but also enthusiasts, they already have a very strong selection of affordable primes.
It's time to show the maturity of M4/3 and elevate the quality and performance, so I think that lenses like this one are important. If you look at most of the lenses that Panasonic announced, they have been also introducing a lot of high-quality fast aperture lenses.
And if you look at Sony's and Fuji's lens roadmap, it isn't very different.
This is simply the way of the market right now. If you don't like the way things currently are and the way the lenses are being priced, perhaps you should consider changing system, to a Nikon 1 or a Pentax Q.
flipmac: What is it with m4/3 lens announcements that get people buzzing? Previous 2 lens news (from Sigma, Canon) didn't get as much comments. Don't tell me talk of equivalence, lens color, price, performance assumptions, etc. is more exciting than praising Canon for their ground-breaking center pinch lens cap. Crazy!
@joejack951 You are not wrong, I agree with you. The lenses for full-frame or APS-C cameras are usually cheaper, or around the same price as M4/3 lenses, though the prices do tend to diverge the more tele the focal lengths are, but that's outside of the point.
The point I've been trying to make, is that it's perfectly fine for people who use or understand larger sensor cameras to come to an announcement of a smaller lens and criticise it for it's price or performance, when compared to a larger counterpart, yet, whenever such a lens is released for a larger sensor system, I have never seen any M4/3 user respond on the topic saying something like "hah, on M4/3 this would fit in your pocket, have fun dragging this huge piece of glass around". I even made a comment making fun of that fact on another announcement, and it was very poorly received.
There is a double-standard in this community that doesn't go both ways, and I find that a bit saddening.
thewhitehawk: That first picture almost made me spit coffee at the screen with laughter.
Yes I do. And I'm sure it's a perfectly serviceable, if not very good accessory.
But I have this pair of things, called eyes, and when my eyes compare the miniscule size of the Nikon 1 with the digiscoping accessories attached, it looks, quite frankly, a bit ridiculous, and goes completely against the ethos of small and compact mirrorless systems.
Does that mean it's a bad accessory? No. Does that mean that some people won't appreciate this accessory? No. I just think that coupling the two things together looks a bit silly.
And since you have to throw portability out of the window, when you think of a setup like this, why not use it with a larger sensor camera with better image quality?
That's my point of view.