King Penguin: Interesting rumour.....but what about real news, ie, Hassleblad stopping making the 500 series after 50 years or so?.....
We'll always have the lovely Hasselblad Lunar...;)
In my opinion it betters the E-M5 in terms of design, whilst retaining the Pen FT's styling cues. Plus it adds what appears to be the same exposure dials layout as the E-M5. Nice touch. The previous E-Ps had dual controls too, but the lower one was fiddly to reach. I'm not really warming up to the tilting screen, but it should be useful for shooting at certain angles. I could do with an electronic viewfinder in the place of the flash, too, but after two years shooting with an E-P1 I became used to looking at the screen. Most importantly, it will certainly have at least the same picture quality as the E-M5. Rumour has it that AF speed has been further improved, which must put it way above its competitors. All in all, this is the first digital Pen that really made me consider replacing my E-P1. (I could do without the white shoes and the Acqua di Giò, though...)
marike6: It looks very similar to the EP-3, but with a tilt LCD. They just wrote "Olympus PEN" in all caps on as a nod to the original PEN.
The country club, polo shoes, cologne theme makes me NOT want to buy it at all. I cannot think of a more square marketing theme than "country club chic".
It's also not nearly as beautiful as the X100s, nor as small and utilitarian as the Ricoh GRD V. So I'm out, but I'm sure it will do well with m43 users.
I don't think anyone expected you to wax lyrical about an Olympus m4/3 camera...
Davidfstop: There's a definite favouritism towards the big two.There are lots of other camera's that we have been hungrily waiting for reviews on (Pentax Olympus etc). Nikon walks in and the others get a back heel!When the 7200 comes out next month, will that get a full review too? ;-0The Nikon on paper seem nearly as good as the K5 though.
Bobbarber: what the commenter was implying was that Canon and Nikon equipment get some sort of precedence over all other manufacturers. It's just not true. I'm tired of conspiracy theories, hence my reply.On the other hand, it is clear that the staff at DPR are so excited about Connect that they tend to leave real photographic equipment behind, but that does not allow anyone the conclusion of «bias» towards one or another brand.
That's a completely unfair criticism which is not based in actual facts. There may be many things to criticise about DPR's reviews of serious cameras - one being the delay, which compares unfavourably to mobile phones' reviews on Connect -, but actually DPR's reviews are not biased at all. Pentax and Olympus get great reviews when they make great cameras, and so do Sony and Panasonic.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: Equivalent focal length, equivalent aperture, equivalent field of view and, according to some, «equivalent ISO» and «equivalent image quality» (yes, I read that too!) And now a resolution equivalence. What's next? Equivalent battery life? Shutter lag...?A happy day for the equivalence trolls, who will have no end of fun calculating equivalences. Just wait until Olympus implement this EVF on their cameras.
Oh gosh, I felt into the idiots' vault... must be more careful next time.
Yes, facedodge. That's the kind of people who come up with the strangest theories about equivalent depth of field, equivalent aperture and other oddities whenever a new micro 4/3 camera or lens from Olympus is announced here at dpreview.com. Surely you must have read some of those comments. If not, just wait for the next Olympus announcement. (Panasonic seems to be spared from this foolishness, despite its use of micro 4/3 sensors. Go figure.) Anyway, never mind: it was only a sarcasm. Fortunately, R Butler "got" it. Unlike kaiser soze...
Equivalent focal length, equivalent aperture, equivalent field of view and, according to some, «equivalent ISO» and «equivalent image quality» (yes, I read that too!) And now a resolution equivalence. What's next? Equivalent battery life? Shutter lag...?A happy day for the equivalence trolls, who will have no end of fun calculating equivalences. Just wait until Olympus implement this EVF on their cameras.
I can see, by the number of comments, that this camera didn't exactly stir the photographers' soul... which is a shame, what with all those intelligent features such as "Sweet Child's Face" scene mode.Maybe Panasonic should try a little harder in order to attract a greater number of enthusiasts. "Moist French Kiss" scene mode would be a nice feature.
Camediadude: On a purely superficial level (but who here does not care for aesthetics!!), these Fuji X-series models are -such- gorgeous cameras. Modern day rangefinders pure and simply. I was teethed on an old Pen EE-2 though I have always lusted for the beefy dial-laden control capable RF's. I wish I could justify buying one of these, heheh. Perhaps on the used market someday :) ...
I use an E-P1 myself, which is considered obsolete by this minute's standards. When I bought it, Olympus had already discontinued it. Need I say more?The trouble I see with the Fujis is that they're so expensive that it will take years before they reach reasonable prices at the 2nd hand market. Hence my assertion.That said I believe the concept of obsolescence is more marketing-induced than real. 'Planned obsolescence' has been widely used by the industry to make consumers get rid of goods they've bought recently in order to buy what is announced as the next big thing. (It works well with cameras!) Call it 'consumerism'...
edm78: Is it just me, or does the RX-1 look a little soft over the Martini bottle.
That's because they don't approve alcoholic beverages at Sony.
They'll be completely obsolete by then. That's the problem with digital cameras... :(
Beautiful camera but raws are way too soft compared to the other cameras. What's the excuse this time? Not depth of field again, I expect...
WT21: Don't see any reason to come off my m43 kit based on this. I had the XE1 briefly and returned it. Glad I did. I loved the Fuji handling and styling, but the size, IQ and AF speed of m43 still bests it, IMO. And is a better compliment to my 6D.
Draschan, I have an E-P1. Its controls are similar to any midrange DSLR, with two exposure dials that you can configure for aperture and shutter speed in M mode. And it's an outdated camera by now! The E-M5 is another camera with manual exposure controls handled by two dials, no fiddling with menus or pushing buttons while rotating a single dial as in the E-PL5. Ergonomics and size aside, both of the aforementioned cameras handle like DSLRs.
So am I alone in seeing the ridiculous contradiction in a mobile phone emulating old-style photos...?
ManuelVilardeMacedo: It scares me to think people are actually buying these apps. While I can see some fun in using Motion Shot, the Light Shaft app is completely absurd. People should learn to photograph instead of relying on these thingies to make their pictures more (superficially) striking.
Revenant, you're right. Manipulation for artistic purposes has been used since, say, Man Ray. I don't object to that. On the contrary, some of these photos are fantastic. (One by Yves Klein, named 'Saut Dans Le Vide', comes to mind as one the most accomplished examples of manipulation for artistic purposes.) The question is - will people buy these Sony apps for making surrealistic art? Or any kind of art? I have some doubts...
Sdaniella: a better 'app' from anyone would be to offer a 'super-shallow-dof' look that is foreign to tiny aperture/tiny sensored systems, but originally a royal pain of larger FILM/digital sensor systems, where all had to make something artistic out of it. which they did (thus: bokeh-generator or bokehnator app)
this way, tiny smartwebmobilecellphonecams can have that FF 'big wide open aperture' look or TELE lens look where one is stuck with shallower dof than deeper dof.
I think it already exists. It's Photoshop Blur Gallery.
Sdaniella: mimicking fake analog optical lens flare?lol.
ridiculous. as bad as seeing it replicated in non-photographic paintings or graphic illustrations [ditto: fake 'patterned' bokeh of OOF images]
i see it in many modern movies which use CGI animation, even if it is a 'full animation (like the recent: The Croods - 3D, which otherwise all else was visually exquisite to watch), it's just as absurd. why highlight a flaw of analog optics [the bane to any photographer] in a 'digital virtual world' makes absolutely no sense except for it's sentimental 'hey look, we can fake pretending we have a real optical lens involved!' rather than a virtual (mathematically calculated image of a light source (sun, spot-lights, what have you) shining into a 'virtual camera')
next, they'll have 'fake bad sky polarization' effect on wide angle shots, or 'fake digital rainbows', which were so often misapplied INCORRECTLY via optical filters in the film days.
I'm already daydreaming of a 'fake chromatic aberration' app!
What's your point? I use post processing, but I don't fake my pictures.
It scares me to think people are actually buying these apps. While I can see some fun in using Motion Shot, the Light Shaft app is completely absurd. People should learn to photograph instead of relying on these thingies to make their pictures more (superficially) striking.