"it’s hard to imagine most users at this level would delve into the deepest depths of the E-M10 II’s menus."
Shame on you for implying that Olympus should create a dumbed down camera merely because this camera costs less than the E-M1.
And maybe you don't understand the camera market very well because you are used to reviewing $5000 full-frame cameras. To the average person, $650 is a very expensive camera. People who didn't want to be able to customize the camera are just using their iPhones.
Kurt_K: I still don't understand why Panasonic isn't offering electronic first curtain shutter. Heck, my Samsung NX20 has EFCS and it was announced more than three years ago. Other than that, though, I don't really see much to nitpick about with this camera. It looks like a solid offering.
Two possible reasons.
1. The Panasonic sensor is incapable of that (because Panasonic is behind Sony in sensor technology).
2. Panasonic was too lazy/cheap to hire a developer to program it into the camera's operating system. Maybe this review will make them regret their stinginess.
Even in an April Fools joke, Olympus can't fix the shutter shock problem or include a free lens hood.
I take back my last comment. I sized an image to 640x640, copied it to my iPhone, and then sent it on to Instagram, and it's displaying as a 640 x 640 image on Instagram.
I wish Instagram had just explained that in their release announcement. Maybe they think the vast majority of their users are too stupid to care about that nerdy stuff.
As far as I can tell, same 612 x 612 resolution photos, but now they are being upsized to 640 pixels, resulting in blurry unsharp photos.
What am I missing?
The Mavica may seem stupid today, but remember that computers from the 1990s didn't have USB ports, and prior to Windows XP in 2001, even if your computer did have a USB port, it didn't work unless you installed drivers for it, which probably required you to type in cryptic DOS commands.
So recording to floppy disk was a creative solution from Sony.
The cheapest entry-level DSLR is going to be a lot more practical than the most expensive "professional" film DSLR with this insert.
So the author of this article is using a very expensive RX1 to take mediocre photos. I haven't learned much.
Just what the world needed, another filter that adds fake film grain and vignetting.
What about an iPod touch?
Ivan Lietaert: So glad dpreview is reminding us on a weekly basis that one can only make artistic photos with an iPhone! plug plug plug
Well other smartphones suck compared to Apple; people who own ugly Samsung Galaxies feel very little inspiration to use it as a poor-quality camera.
Wayne Pilling: Why the need for such speed? What's wrong with taking a 'better quality' image on a camera that shoots raw, then processing it in say, LR? You then email it to the patiently waiting world from your work station! Too much to ask?
He should get a Canon 6D. It has a wireless function so it automatically sends photos to the mobile phone. That way, he can instantly upload 6D-quality photos to Instagram, and have a 6D-quality raw file for future editing.
People are violating the spirit of Instagram by using borders to make the photos rectangular.
Bruce McL wrote: "On a phone you can edit and publish as you are photographing. No other equipment is required. That ability is what makes using a phone different from using traditional cameras."
So people want to be acknowledged as Fine Art Photographers, but they are too lazy to copy the photos from the camera to a computer. OK.