chekist: Though it is not clear what the outcome of the collaboration would be I am excited to see what could happen when two of the most innovative companies join forces.
Going by past experience some probable results can include innovative products that don't sell or corporate scandals of the highest magnitude ;-)
micahmedia: ...this is sad. The new digi OM looks good. Real good. It's a shame the hard workers that comprise the rest of the company will suffer the poor decisions of the board members.
On one hand I definitely can. I was using DSLR without that feature for a few years with no issues.
On the other hand I can not. In the same way as I can not imagine using camera without features I have mentioned in my previous post.
I am not sure I agree with your definition of innovation. It seems to me you are contradicting yourself. Art filters are not standard in professional cameras. There are also few different implementations of sensor cleaning solutions. The common goal in photo industry should be and hopefully is delivering cameras with better image quality. Applying your definition of innovation would mean that any company that comes up with new and better sensor is not really innovative.
If however I apply term innovation as defined in wiki or other dictionary sites then I can see many innovators in camera market. Olympus somehow does not seem to lead the pack. Of cause I do not have knowledge on the number of patents registered by each company, so it is just my 2c
I am not a camera historian but by quick look on the net it looks like... Minolta introduced in body IS and followed with its own dust reduction system year after Olympus. Sony introduced EVF in SLR body. Fuji introduced hybrid viewfinder. Canon introduced first affordable DSLR, first full frame camera with video capability , Af micro adjustment etc. I bet Nikon came up with some ideas in the meantime as well. Most of those manufacturers introduced series of new sensor technology.
I do not see any clear innovation leadership from Olympus. If it was a leader it would make better products. Its cameras are good but do not separate themselves from the pack. If Olympus really is leading with number of digital camera related patents then it probably should think through where it puts R&D money to as its innovations seem not convincing to the buying public.
That's fine and I can very believe Olympus makes good cameras. Just as about any major manufacturer. Their products do some things right, some just adequately and in some respects are lacking.
What suprises me are claims that Oly is some kind of the innovation leader. I do not see it. Their (low) market position does not seem to be caused by offering cutting edge but pricy products. If they exit camera market it will be sad for their current userbase but they will in time find comparable or better products on the market.
Do I miss anything? What's so innovative about Olympus's camera business? When I check Oly forum I see only complains about old sensor developed and produced by Panasonic. Their m43 cameras seem to be tiny step upgrades one over another. What is so breath taking that they developed or produced recently, or within few last years for that matter?
KonstantinosK: Design-wise, the more I look at it, the more I like it and I think it looks brilliant. Its toyish plasticky semi-retro look is obviously intentional. It's like saying that a photographer should make fun of shooting and that he/she doesn't have to look like some serious pretentious artsy middle-aged single with a 5D and some huge lens on it. (Honey, if you're reading this, can I have a yellow one for Valentine's? Pity there's no red yet...)
I am not sure. To me the design says - "Look, I am original in a same as million others kind of way. I pitty you old farts with boring black boxes."
But seriosly, I have hard time finding anything original in that design. You do not like black? Paint your DSLR in any color you like. It was tried and offered many times already. Shapewise that new camera looks similar to previous models - boxy little thing - with some controlswhose placement seems to be an afterthought.
AnandaSim: What is sad is the company decision to amputate their design to achieve product differentiation and segregation within their own catalog. Nikon engineers must be as good or better than anyone else. However, from their product philosophy, they purposely cripple their D3100 and D5100 line by not having an AF motor so that it does not steal sales from their D90 and above lines. And I hear (I don't own one) that they cripple their D90 class with metering handicap for manual lenses vs their D3 etc..... These are not technological can't do, they are management and product design decisions.
Now, they are doing every other brand a favour by purposely choosing an in-betweener sensor size - it's not small with the advantages of small like an LX-5 class and it's not DX with all the advantages of DX.
It seems "normal" lenses, not try-hard-primes are difficult to make small for any crop bigger than a bridge camera size sensor. That big lens for this cam is huge.
And isn't any brand doing the same? What about Sony not providing feature to enter and store manual lens information? What about time that took them to allow to shoot manual lenses in A mode? Does Canon act differently? Does Panasonic or Olympus? Every company tries to keep their system closed in some way or other to force users buy their other accessories or limits features to force users buy their more 'advanced' and expensive products.
Maybe the review should include actual field tests. I wonder how well the tripods with twist locks would fare in less than clean environment. My personal experience, having clogged two tripods of two different manufacturers with sand while shooting in South-West, is not encouraging.
Is the other version the original? For some reason I prefer the light from the other picture and the crop from that one. Obviously I haven't been there and haven't seen the scene but the other picture gives that feeling of the warmth of the sun rays in the winter day. The darkness of this version looses it.