M DeNero: Fantastic! Now if Olympus would just learn to produce a midrange 12-60ish zoom that isn't junk like the ones they offer now.
You mean the Zuiko 12-40/2,8 is junk???
Oh my...strange, since that´s one of the better medium range zooms there is, overall.
If used w a newer m4/3 camera it offers high enough resolution/sharpness that you can (almost) compensate the lack of those last 20mm in the tele end by cropping the image, if you need "60mm". Related to using the old 12-60 on the best of the 4/3 cameras, which had 12 Mpix, vs the new lens on the newer m4/3 camera´s 16 Mpix.
Or did you mean to diss the 12-50/3,5-6,3? Ok, it´s not as good as the old 12-60 or the 12-40, of course...but it´s not that bad either.
M DeNero: Are those cameras really large? Or is Mr. Imano really small?
The image was probably shot with a smartphone = @wideangle, making the foreground large relative to the background.
Greg VdB: I think this is a very fair review, well done DPR! I just wished that all "interesting" cameras were reviewed as quickly... (the K-3 definitely deserved the same level of priority, if not more so because it is potentially a very important camera for a much wider audience!)
From only a price perspective, the K-3 would be a much much more potential "christmas present" than would ever the DF.
Seriously, du you really consider christmas to be a factor for decisions on which cameras to review first, really??
And, I may add that DPR´s influence is most probably valid for the more hobbyist kind of readers than for the average public. But, among the hobbyist segment of readers/buyers, many base their interest from what they have read in reviews (and previews) thus I might say that to publish a K-3 review may have been more interesting, generally, for DPR readers, than would a DF review. And, frankly, I don´t think most of either of those 2 models mainly were sold as christmas presents at all.
Teru Kage: What's the X-sync? I've seen it reported as 1/180 and 1/200 for external flash (1/250 for built-in).
Oly´s press release (upwards in this DPR page...) says X-synk is at "1/200", and says nothing about a difference in x-synk speed betw built in or extended flash.
thx1138: Is this replacing the E-M5 or will we see a successor to that camera as well at some point?
@thx1138:"at some point" is the keyword. Of course the E-M5 will be followed, but not yet.
ybizzle: You can buy used EM-5 bodies for around $500 these days so why bother with this? That's what I paid for mine at a local camera shop. Why pay more and get less?
@ybizzle:If the used price of any camera (or other commodity) would be the benchmark for manufactturers when they try to price position their new products, how would ANY market work, in your book???
Studpid statement, really. And I am a nice person, in spite of writing this...
PhotoHawk: Truly disappointing - nothing new here. It is the same Olympus strategy we've seen before. The same box, slightly different dials, same IQ, same sensor, the same performance. Do you want fries with this or do you want home fries.
Think back to the EP1, EP2, EP3, EPL1, EPL1s, EPL2, EPL3, EPM1, E600, E620,E5. All use the same sensor and pretty much have the same IQ. Different form factors but we don't even have that really in three models of OMD.
If someone can slam Canon for reusing the 18 MP sensor in many bodies then we should be critical of Olympus as well.
Now Fuji - thats exciting! They are moving the bar forward fast. And say what you want about Sony but clearly they are moving quicker as well.
@PhotoHawk: WELL...ever thought about such a minute thing as PRICE??? In swedish kronor, I paid about 12000+ sek for my E-M5 w 12-50 kit lens, just over a year ago. Now this new E-M10 will set one back at 7400 sek w the new miniature kit lens. Quite a quick and nice development, price wise, since they both offer (near) the same IQ (talking about the body, the new kit lens is unknown yet as regards its IQ)
Olympus said when E-M5 was presented that there would follow both higher and lower level cameras in the OMD-guise! It´s ok they have very similar IQ of course, but lets you choose from their equipment/features/shapes etc. Really good in my book!
munro harrap: Is it still a half-frame sensor? that IS the question
(M)4/3 is a fourth of the area of a FF (24x36mm), not half of it!
Hmmm...IF Fuji will lauch this camera in a few days, we can be SURE that DPR already knows a lot about it in this very moment I´m writing these words ;-)
They simply have to say "we´re not sure whether Fuji will have anything new to announce..." even though they most certainly DO know what this camera will be like.
It´s ok, just couldn´t help to note...
The new images of it indicates a real beauty is in the pipeline...niiice!
marike6: Locking exposure dials a la the Nikon Df? Any amount of money that DPR loves this camera and the dials from day one. :-)
Part of what makes the X cameras at least interesting is the rangefinder design, the whole poor man's Leica thing.
What is the point copying a DSLR body styling? It's has no bright Pentaprism so why the pseudo pentaprism housing?
This is a head scratcher move from Fujifilm that is for sure. No FF, just an X camera dressed up as a DSLR. Has anybody asked why?
The main thing with the absence of a mirror isn´t the taking away of the "hump"!
It´s the quiite notable reduction of the depth of the camera body, which makes it easier to make it compact. A "hump" also will make it possible to make the body´s width a bit less, and its height except for the hump itself can be a bit less too.
Many have already stated much of this, but I found noone mentioned the depth reduction as a reason for the basic mirrorless design.
These 5 alternatives are there because they were selected before by the DPR readership to be the best in their respective category.
Of course the A7 twins are superb cameras, IQ wise especially, but obviously other characters of gear also took place in folk´s minds while making their choices. And, frankly, the m4/3 system as a whole is way more mature than the A7 w its dedicated lenses, so far, and will so continue to be a fair amount of time from now. From that we may assume that choosing the E-M1 as "best" wasn´t ONLY because the camera in itself is very good, but also because it can within its system be considered a better choice for a larger number of people than would the A7 in its present system context. Even the dedidacted lenses will, to a fair degree, offset at least a part of the benefit the camera´s small dimensions offer...
Just my thoughts, not supposed to be considered The Absolute Truth about this matter!
revio: DPR says: "The D3300 continues to be one of the smallest and lightest digital SLRs on the market"
How can a NEW camera "continue to be one of the smallest..."???
Since it´s not been existing until now, it can´t of course...
The D3300 seems, anyway, to be a nice and capable camera, and notably smaller than its predecessor was.
Yes, the DXXXX LINE consists of a row of similarly sized cameras, but they did not state that. They said this new camera *continues to be one of the smallest*.
Well, only words...
DPR says: "The D3300 continues to be one of the smallest and lightest digital SLRs on the market"
Barnaby B:PLEASE articulate when you´re talking, and don´t talk aiming your face down to the table. It´s very hard to actually hear and "register" what you are saying. No other complaints! ;-)
(Im not having English as my native language, and i suppose many out there also are in my situation language wise. When listening to you it´s sometimes almost undecipherable, which is a bit sad...)
With kind regards, from Swedenrevio
Edited: Well, I have to say it got better after a while, thanks! Also easier now to hear what Richard B is saying, thank you too!
yabokkie: E-M1 may be the first Oly 110 format camera that's not just a toy, andmZD12-40/2.8 should be able to compete with DX16-85 and EF-S15-85.
The 12-40 is better (sharper) than both the Nikon 16-85 & the Canon 15-85. It´s also F:2,8 fixed, and weather sealed. Did I mention very compact vs its performance?
On cameras: I own the OM-D E-M5 and it´s definately not a "toy".It´s not perfect for sure, but a TOY? No way, man.It´s definately very competent, IQ wise, and also to some extent a bit complicated to use, so what. Does that make it a TOY? Haha, you are definately kidding.
HubertChen: @ Andy Westlake
Thanks very much for the comment on the feature to Auto Focus on the eyes automatically. I shoot lots of portraits wide open, and wish my camera had this feature. You just added one more reason to very seriously consider to change to the M43 system :-)
The Olympus way of implementing "Eye Focus" (and/or Face Detection if you like) is quite another, and better, than most any compact use. On the OMD´s you can decide WHICH EYE the camera shall focus on:The left or the right, or simply the closest eye if for example the subject is not facing you right on. That´s not really the same thing as the "Face Detection" feature most compacts do have. It´s quite useful, and a nice example of Oly innovation!
revio: Why, oh why, isn´t there ANY size comparison in this preview?There use to be in most every DPR Review, and often in the pre-reviews, so why not here?Many, I am sure, would like to se it placed beside a FM/FM/FE/FE2/FA, which are the cameras which´s design most resemble the design of the new camera. OK, all those are smaller, but that´s the point of getting a view of the case: HOW MUCH larger is the new camera.It´s not enough to know "it´s close to a D610" or so.I for my part want to see a photo of the difference, so I can judge for myself how it differs, or how it comes close (if it does)
(I must add, I like the design a lot)
I found a photo with the DF beside a Nikon FA, on the Swedish site "fotosidan.se", link here:
For anyone who´d like to watch! ;-)
Thanks Richard Butler for replying, and for the info! ;-)
Why, oh why, isn´t there ANY size comparison in this preview?There use to be in most every DPR Review, and often in the pre-reviews, so why not here?Many, I am sure, would like to se it placed beside a FM/FM/FE/FE2/FA, which are the cameras which´s design most resemble the design of the new camera. OK, all those are smaller, but that´s the point of getting a view of the case: HOW MUCH larger is the new camera.It´s not enough to know "it´s close to a D610" or so.I for my part want to see a photo of the difference, so I can judge for myself how it differs, or how it comes close (if it does)
Zvonko: I just don't understand why any brand would sell a lens which needs tweaks for focus from the moment you buy it. Looks like a FAB lens but as others have said, the focus issues suck.
The way PD-AF as technology works is such that the precision needed to make a lens that always focuses perfectly well at max aperture like at F:1,8 is next to impossible to reach in mass pruduction like most lenses are the results of, so to speak.Even if not mass produced it would still be next to impossible, simply because of the way such AF-systems are desiggned to work.That´s why the need for "after manufacture adjustment" have come into existence, and why it is the chosen way of manufacturers to make their products more usable.
The constantly risen resolution (higher pixel count) of modern cameras made this necessary; had all cameras stopped at fex 6 megapixels these things (micro adjustment of AF) would not have came about.