If its cheap enough, I may get one just to have an M43 camera I can use with one of my tablets for remote shooting.
I find that shooting small children it is sometimes beneficial not to have someone directly behind the camera. Same for shooting Babies, some pets, and some wildlife
Well Done Bob!
deep7: Don't knock the Olympus E300. It's the most comfortable DSLR I've ever used, a really sensible design. Sadly, the media is full of plebs who couldn't see beyond the fact the shape wasn't "conventional". The E330 was cramped and uncomfortable by comparison. I had both.
I still have (and use) the E-300, along with a bunch of other cameras.It is a solid (and heavy) brick of a camera without many "frills".I didn't care much for its "follow-up" the E-500, which to me always felt like it was falling apart (rather loose, creaky plastic case).
They were the last of the line (in the US) to use CCD sensors.
Bernard Hill: What about Olympus E100RS? Only 1.2Mpx but it captured photos *before* you pressed the shutter. Once it was half-pressed the camera started taking photos, and kept the last five in a circular buffer. Make a full press and the buffer was kept and of course the current view was recorded. And the next photos until you release.I can't understand why no-one else has used this concept (or do you know different...?) but it's great for action shots waiting for a particular event such as a bubble bursting.I eventually sold mine because my thing is landscape shooting and it didn't do a lot for that <g>
The Sony F-707, and its follow-up both had this feature.It worked quite well when shooting action.
None of the Sony models did a "video" with the feature, the captures were all full sized stills.
The cameras did video, but it was totally seperate.
icexe: I have both a Pentax K-5 and an Oly OM-D. I love them both, and use them about equally, but it is entirely dependent on the situation.
I love the controls, handling and responsiveness of the K-5. I also love using an honest to goodness optical viewfinder, no EVF will ever come close to an OVF IMO. It's a beautiful, well-made camera. But because of size it's a camera I only take with me when I specifically want to go out and take pictures.
I love the OM-D for it's compactness and the beautiful images it makes straight out of the camera, very little post-processing usually. I can pack the camera and 5 lenses into a ridiculously tiny shoulder bag. But I just can't get quite as comfortable with the controls, even with the additional hand grip, and it goes through batteries at a frightening rate. Forget fast shooting or tracking with it too. But it's the camera I grab when going out to dinner or on a casual stroll.
I agree icexe..
During this time of year, the wife and I often go to the local Beach and have dinner on the porch of the "Beach House" (out of the sun, but right on the water, with a splendid view).
If I were to bring one of my DSLRs with me, my wife wouldnt be a "happy camper", but a camera and a lens or two that hang in a pouch at my waist, or in a pocket.. She is OK with that.
YouDidntDidYou: @Barney BrittonThere is no reason why a lowly GH1 could not easily do the Shame McGowan image, I've shot in nightclubs and at weddings for ages and usually get better shots than the canikon folks I'm working along side.Lose the myth.......
Im still trying to put together a "day kit" that will fit into a large "fanny pack".I should be receiving the smallest of the 4/3 "Pen" cameras today.. If I can fit it with the 14-42 and the 40-150 along with a spare battery and memory chip I will be a really happy camper.Camera: Olympus EPM2.I've got lots of DSLRs but I cant fit them anywhere thats unobtrusive and just walk around all day and grab whatever shots I want..If it all fits and works out, I'll invest in better lenses (Like the 75 and a 30) and replace the kit lenses in the walk-around kit.
Vitruvius: What would the target buyer be for a camera like this? It isn't really good at anything compared to cameras of equal or lesser cost, it definetly is NOT good looking, and it isn't even small compared to much better performing and cheaper compact system cameras. So I wonder what the reason might be that would make anyone want to buy a camera like this.
I might be interested in this camera simply to give me a more "modern" camera to use my Canon & Canon adapted lenses.
My newest Canon is a Rebel XT, and I haven't used it at all for several years.
If the image quality is "good" on the 100, I just might buy it to have something modern to fit my Canon type lenses.
I have several good C/Y lenses that I used to shoot with (with adapters) on the 350D (last Canon camera I bought), and several Canon Lenses that weren't bad at all.
I might be tempted to add this camera to give me something more up-to-date to use those lenses on.
It wouldn't replace my m43 cameras or my 4/3 cameras, but it would get used when I feel the need to shoot with those lenses.
draleks: I am trying to find out if the image stabilization in E-PL5 would contribute significantly to stabilization of a long lens, such as a 300 mm. Does anyone have tests/opinions about this? After what I understand the older models couldn't do much, but OM-D is able to make significant improvements even with a very long lens. See http://admiringlight.com/blog/om-d-e-m5-is-effectiveness-with-long-lenses/ for a test. As I undestand it, the question is about either how much space the sensor has to move around to compensate for camera shake, and how fast/precise it is.
Is the IS in E-PL5 the same as in E-PL3, or has there been substantial upgrades?
draleks:I've read no claims of improvement in the IBIS in any of the "pens" since day one..
Having said that, I've not seen really effective IBIS in any of the Olympus cameras since the E-510/520 (except of course in the OMD). (I dont mention E-5 or E-3 as I dont own them).
To me, the most crucial point in using IBIS is to NOT have it on all the time, and to NOT expect miracles.
With a 300mm (600 effective) lens, the IBIS can help you get a "Usable" shot when the light isnt good and your shutter speed is below "optimum". It usually wont get a "crystal clear" shot (the aforementioned "miracle").
If you already have the EPL-3, take it out with your 300mm lens and shoot WITHOUT the IBIS unless your shutter speed falls below 1x focal length, and you might be surprised.
Louis_Dobson: Preview? This has been out months now, where's the full review?
Where you been Lou???I agree... they've been a little slow to review what many consider "important" products.
Just another new camera with no VF of any kind.
Designed for those that can see an LCD screen close to the face in the bright sun.
In other words, a camera designed for the clueless, and near clueless.
ogl: 150/3.6 equivalent of 135 format for 900 USD. Hmmm.
I don't think that 150 mm is PORTRAITS distance.
I just looked at 3 of my old hand held light meters and they dont have any setting for film size (sensor size) so for now, I will take the Manufacturers word for the fact that its an f1.8 lens not an f3.6 lens.
You numpties that ONLY consider DOF when looking at aperture numbers are FAR worse than those of us that consider it to be an primarily an EXPOSURE SETTING.
ogl: The OMD-EM5 system for fans in USA:OM-D E-M5 Micro Four Thirds Digital Camera with 12-50mm - 1300 USD M. Zuiko Digital ED 12mm f/2.0 - 800 USDM. Zuiko Digital ED 45mm f/1.8 - 400 USD M. Zuiko Digital ED 75mm f/1.8 - 900 USD
Not bad...But not cheap. European set will be more expensive.
Gee LouisYou seem to approach this with common sense.. That doesn't happen here very often..
If I had my "druthers" I'de rather have the OMD with the 25, the 45, and this new lens than have most anything currently on the market...
Samtendo 64: Very nice informative review, but what I don't get is:
- if it's arguably the best Mirrorless model yet, why does it get a lower score than the Nex-7?- the sample images: ISO 6400, f1.8 and 1/4000s in daylight, are those supposed to be practical examples?
People do tend to complain when a review doesn't agree with their pre-conceptions.
A lot of people expected DPR to do what they usually do with an Olympus camera.. Find some minor niggle and beat Olympus to death with it.. (Remember how "live view" was a cure looking for a problem?). Or how many times they mentioned that you had to wait for the self cleaning to cycle before you could take a photo?
The Olympus bashers have been sitting back waiting for DPR to trash the camera soundly, and DPR didnt do it, so the disappointed bashers are uncomfortable.. When uncomfortable, they grumble about prejudice and bias.
Bare: They say we can choose resolution6144 x 4912, 6144 x 4080, 5520 x 3680, 4800 x 3200, 4608 x 3680, 4608 x 3056, 3680 x 2456, 3600 x 2400, 3072 x 2456, 3072 x 2040, 2400 x 1600Is that for RAW or only for JPEG?
Shoot weddings in DX mode (15mp) and everything else in 36mp...
Because of the way DX mode functions Im pretty sure the raw file is 15mp.
NotSteve: I'm surprised that it seems no one's said anything about what looks to be a much upgraded autofocus system, 81 focus pts. Guess we'll see what it amounts to in real life.
Aesthetically, I think this might be an acquired taste, something that grows on you after a while. It reminds of those boxy little mini-trucks from Scion/Toyota and others, which make you do a double-take at first.
Operation and ergonomics-wise, I would think that it will be very solid. As an example, people found a lot of reason to dislike the Pentax Q especially because of the small sensor, but most of what I have read says it handles very well, similar set up to Pentax DSLRs.
I wonder about the lack of the TAv and Sv modes. Personally, I find TAv something I really like about the K-5, the main mode I use.
Something I'd like to see is a built in panorama function in a camera like the K-01. Seems appropriate for such a camera and something I would definitely use.
I do appreciate the commitment to the K-mount.
I have, and have had many cameras that wont win any "beauty Contests".
I give very little value to aesthetics because I spend much more time looking through the camera than at the camera.
I'm a "brand whore" so I have lenses to fit just about any brand except Nikon.. (Nothing against Nikon, but I haven't owned one in 25 years, so all the lenses are gone)..
USEABILITY is the feature I shop for, and without a VF of any kind, the useability of the camera is, for me, very low.
This camera has no VF nor does it have a "plug hole" to add one....
I, for one, DO NOT like using the LCD to frame a photo outdoors, in the sunlight..
I am willing to sacrifice a little image quality in order to actually be able to "USE" the camera outdoors, where I take 90% of my photos..
Probably a good camera for young people (<50 years old) with no "Hyperopia & Myopia" but no good for us old farts (66+) who are both Hyperopic & Myopic.
I really wanted a new camera with that sensor.
For now, I will stick with my m4/3 camera and my DSLRs, and keep wiating.
incidentmeter: Olympus users have long wanted to see Olympus return to their glory days during the 1970's-80's when they innovated and revolutionized cameras. Today Oly is known more for its late entry, copy-catism and poor marketing especially in the US.
I believe the OM-D is Olympus' last and best chance to re-establish itself as a leader. Clearly the timing of this release is excellent since the market is infatuated with retro-looking bodies. Oly's products have always been good but the biggest issue is image quality especially at higher ISO's. I purchased my E-3 because of the in-body image stabilization and to leverage my investment in older Zuiko OM glass. It's an amazing camera but for high ISO, it clearly falls behind Canon and Nikon. If the OM-D can shoot well in low light situations, I think it will be accepted in the market.
My biggest fear is that if this camera is a smash, Oly will "rest on its laurels" like it did on the original OM series. Innovation is the key to success.
When did Olympus become a "copycat???"Perhaps when they were first with the self cleaning sensor??
Or maybe when they came out with the first "Live View" camera?
The only thing I can think of that they were "Last" with is doing away with the xd-card..
They are the First (and still the only) company to make "Kit" lenses that are worth owning.
taotoo: So a mirrorless E410, M4/3 mount, large EVF and on sensor phase detect AF?
No PDAF will show up in the new camera..Sensor based Phase detect is brand new, and Olympus has't had time to steal/buy/develop it for their new baby.
Earthlight: Well, I hope they will not tarnish the OM heritage with a subpar little sensor, flaky build and a tunnel viewfinder. I remember when I used to covet the OM4Ti... It was the pinnacle at the time. I went for a Pentax LX instead and what a beautiful camera that was too! Anyway, hoping for the best. Peace.
The closest thing to a "flimsy" camera that ever came from Olympus was the E-500...
It creaked and popped while being gripped and handled... so it SEEMED flimsy at first.. but it never broke or fell apart without a lot of abuse.. Flimsy it sounded, but TOUGH it was. (Mine shot many 10s of thousands of images for me before I gave it away).