Boxbrownie: It's a lovely little camera but that's one hell'o'va price for a compact, the new Oly 5II with lens costs same/less.
A lot of margin for fashion in there.
Exactly. The price is fine for those that will really enjoy the finder/handling of the camera.
nicolaru: Hi FogdeanDurn.It is a 23mm F2. 23 X 1.5 = 34.5mm
Shot noise... isn't that a function of the sensor though regardless of its size? Take an original 5D and compare it to a Sony A6000. Pretty sure the shot noise on the 5D would be much higher than the smaller sensored A6000. The lens cares about light, not noise.
kadardr: They could come with a FF X100. Would buy in a second.
...and it's $3,000. Might as well just buy an A7R and superglue a Sony 35mm f1.8 lens on it.
mgatov: How is this better than the older Sony RX-1?
The RX1 is over double the price of the Fuji. There is really nothing to compare except that they are both fixed lens cameras with prime lenses.
Astrotripper: "We also want to add some more reasonably-priced lenses for entry-level users, similar to the 45mm F1.8 - we’re looking into this now. "
Yeah, that'd be nice, but I wonder if it's not too late for that. MFT has already earned a reputation for being on the expensive side, at least in some regions. Excluding body caps, 45/1.8 and 17/2.8 are the only affordable primes here. From zoom lenses, 40-150 is the only good value proposition. All other lenses are either expensive (some rightly so) or just ridiculously overpriced.
And there's still no middle ground zoom in MFT. You either stay with the kit lens, or have to pay serious money for large and heavy f/2.8 PRO zoom. I still can't understand why we don't have a f/2.8-4.0 zoom.
A Canon 50mm f1.4 in the US is $349. The same price that I can get the Oly 25mm f1.8 new. Yes, you can get a Canon 50mm f1.8 for cheap, but it does not compare to the Oly 25mm at f1.8 (I know because I've owned both of them).
mpgxsvcd: I would love to see an example where 16 megapixels simply isn’t enough. Most kit lenses won’t even resolve that much detail. Dpreview had to resort to the “exotic” 42.5mm F1.2 lens to get consistent results in the high resolution mode.
ALL lenses, yes all of them benefit from an MP increase from the sensor. Better lenses are just able to get closer to resolving the maximum resolution than midrange or kit lenses, but they all increase in captured resolution. Just look at lenses that were shot on an A6000 vs. A7R on DxO, or, look at the Sigma 60mm f2.8 for the A6000 and look at that exact same lens on an EM-1.
WT21: mini clip-on bounce/rotate flash. Yes! Not a reason to get this camera, but more makers need to provide this!
I hope they sell it separately. That flash is awesome.
tgutgu: Welt, it is a pity that dpreview follows the urban legend that Olympus menus are more complex than the competition. It is clearly not the case.
The UI is definitely not intuitive, but its actually pretty dang easy to figure out. Once the Super Control Panel is on, most of the major controls are ready to go. Deep diving into the custom menu can be a pain, but you never have to do it during an actual shoot.
Angrymagpie: Steve Huff claims the optical performance of the 35/1.4 easily surpasses the FE55/1.8. He did not specify this beyond "rich rendering" in his preview, but do you guys think we might soon be able to get a 35 AF lens that's both faster and visibly sharper than the FE55/1.8?
@aman74No really... Bokeh is not objective at all. Some like it busier, with more contrast and shape to it, others like it smooth. That is not the same thing as some people like a lens that is less sharp than another. Micro-contrast is also up for debate (though contrast isn't) as it isn't necessarily a "thing" to begin with.
eaa: Very interesting report!It is rather amazing what level of ingenuity, knowledge, whit, craftsmanship and even pride that goes into a production line like this. From the design, to materials, to handling, to the machinery... Let alone the theoretical calculations and design of the lenses themselves. The Japanese are good at this! I mean, what would photography and gear as we know it have been without them?Respect! 😊👏
Right, but the process and flavor profile is VERY similar to Scotch Whiskey (which was their intention).
The Japanese, through sheer will and culture, are creating some of the best products around. Hell, even their Scotch is fantastic, better than any US-based whiskey and rivals many of the greats from Scotland.
@enenzoIt is one of the only objective factors that we can compare with though. "Rendering", "micro-contrast", "bokeh quality" are all in the eye of the beholder.
Thorgrem: Only the 28 f/2.0 has a normal size and price. To bad it's not wider than a normal kit-lens. The rest is to big and to expensive. If I wanted to go FF, Sony wouldn't be an option anymore. To big and to expensive, can get the same size at a cheaper price at CaNikon.
@TrojMacReadySure, you can manually focus any lens you want on a Sony and some will AF (though very poorly). Or, as Thorgrem suggested, you can just buy into a FF system that already has every lens need/want covered natively with Canon or Nikon.
Everlast66: This looks like a nice little camera, but I can't believe they are asking $1,100 for a m4/3 body only!
The A7 has been out for about 1.5 years, of course you can find it cheap, just like I can find an original EM-5 for $500 right now.
Founder: What lens is being used on the Nikon in the high res studio comparisons?
The Olympus 45mm/1.8 is a solid lens for right around $250 used, but it would have been really interesting to see the difference with say the Leica Noticron 42.5mm/1.2
Don't need a Noct for corner-to-corner sharpness. Honestly, the Oly 45mm isn't that great for corner sharpness to begin with. The Sigma 60mm f2.8 is MUCH better in the corners than the Oly 45mm.
Suzanne D.: I have an OMD EM-1 which I love, love, love. How does the new EM 5 II compare? The prices will be very comparable. My main interest is the smaller size of the EM5 II compared to the EM-1.
Actually, what's funny is, Oly cameras are much easier for those getting into photography simply because the IBIS helps make up for poor shooting technique (which I seem to possess in spades even though I've been doing this for years).
Manti44: As usual, DPR does not even attempt to conceal their disdain for anything no Canon/Nikon.
Sorry, I find that DPR does a good job balancing the pro's of the m43's system to its limitations. Their review scoring also seems right in line with their analysis. Sure, the D750 got an amazing score, because, well... for a FF shooter that is fine with the form factor/size, its just that good of a camera.
petebryan: At last we're going back to articulated / flippy screens, much better than tilting, so much more flexible. Well done Olympus.
I used to agree with this, but after using a G6 for awhile, I actually like my tilting screen on my EM-10 better as I feel I have more control over the camera and less parallax effect.
Anastigmat: The 4/3 sensor was invented when sensors were very expensive. The smaller 4/3 sensor cost a lot less than APS-C sensors so it allowed 4/3 format manufacturers a much higher profit margin. Nowadays there is hardly any difference in cost between an APS-C and a 4/3 sensor. Even FF sensors are fast becoming commodity priced. That puts 4/3 format cameras at a disadvantage because they are destined to be low volume compared to the APS-C models, and the low volume forces the makers to raise prices above APS-C models. That means a smaller, noisier sensor must be sold at a higher price than a larger sensors with more pixels. For this reason, the 4/3 format is doomed, in much the same way that half frame 35mm film cameras were doomed.
Size advantage for the m43's standard over APS-C still exist thanks to physics. For example:
Fuji 16-55mm f2.8Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.28 x 4.17" (83.3 x 106 mm)Weight 23.10 oz (655 g)
Oly 12-40mm f2.8Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 2.75 x 3.31" (69.9 x 84 mm)Weight 13.47 oz (382 g)
Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 2.66 x 2.91" (67.6 x 73.8 mm)Weight 10.76 oz (305 g)
Kim Letkeman: No PDAF ... same grip ... same OIS specs ... not that exciting.
High end video specs ... now that's exciting. Now we wait to see how good the codec is at any bandwidth ... and of course how long it can record before giving up ...
Oh yeah, forgot that the EVF in the EM5-II is the same one used in the EM-1... a much better EVF than the original EM-5 or the EM-10.