CFynn: What happened to Swedish design?
The classic 500c/m Hasselblad was a masterpiece of design - this is absolutely hideous.
I am with you: what happened? I feel good not living in Gothenburg (the city of H-blad manufacture) today...but still I live in Sweden where at least some of these grotesque designs may have been thought out...forgive "us" please.
D1N0: So Hasselblad is now a sony brand? sort of the Lexus where Sony is Nissan?
"Lexus" is the dearer brand used for selling luxuory Toyotas, it has nothing to do with Nissan...except country of origin.
And Hasselblad is not getting taken over by Sony,; the two companies have announced a partnership for development of a number of cameras. No less, no more, than that.
Demon Cleaner: Anyone who outlays $1100 for the "special edition" 12mm f/2 instead of paying the same amount for the 12-35mm f/2.8 X lens needs their head read. Oly can't honestly be expecting to sell even a single unit at that price point.
By including a metal hood and cap, the price increase from the silver version seems not that high... Another issue is whether the hood should have been included already at the "silver price point"; which I think it should have. The worst of it is they say the black will be a limited edition, which to me sounds nothing but crazy. If the OM-D, and follow ups to it, will, and would, be sold in black, then a black edition of this lens (especially as it now is in fact launched) MUST be available without a silly "time limit", like "get it now, or dust off". A VERY bad approach by Olympus.
If they never lauched a black 12mm it would have been another story, but making it a limited edition is simply disrespectful of their own customer base.
mpgxsvcd: Why were the T1i, T2i, and T3i all considered to be mid level Interchangeable lens cameras and the T4i is now entry level? Was that a mistake?
It is quite telling that the T2i still sells extremely well. This T4i seems more like a T2.2. Not that it is a bad camera. It just really isn't as exciting as some of the other new products we have seen lately.
@mpgxsvcd:So what if a camera is "considered to be" of this or that "level"! Compare its actual performance to your needs and other cameras performing at or close to the camera in question. Then make your choice.
What kind of "level" some one else than you yourself considers it to be is irrellevant.
That said, of curse it´s expcted that a camera testing website places cameras of the same "class" in the same "class" now when hey long ago has begun to use such wording when comparing them.The only "level" I´d consider is price level, and that changes in time so a camera can at times happen to find itself in another "class" or "level" just because its price gor lowered/risen vs other cameras.
Shakens: don't like the idea of a touchscreen on my DSLRits bad enough keeping the screen on my phone clean.don't what greasy finger marks allover my camera too
Don´t touch the screen then! The controls are there anyway, if you don´t like it "the touchscreen way"...
And if you have greasy fingers any camera would be getting "greasy finger marks all over..."
Deem the 650D on its actual merits, or lack thereof, please
wlachan: It's good to know 4/3 wasn't dead but it must be in a very difficult spot. Would Olympus be able to produce a super high performance body that is affordable enough when compared against Canon & Nikon's similar DSLRs? And how about those way overpriced lenses? It's like half the weight and engine of a Ferrari but asking for the same price because it can accelerate just as fast. Hello?
Well, same "performance" (in your example a car´s acceleration performance) at much lower weight. If it possible to make it, WHY should, and how could, that cost less to design and manufacture???
Answer: it doesn´t cost less, rather sometimes more, to make smaller things perform as well as, or better than, bigger...
spoorthy: I have heard that the liveview autofocus on the pentax k-30 is extremely fast. You guys should do a comparision
Yes, of course it´s more interesting for us buyers that this or that camera actually is faster or better in xxx factors, rathre than we would care for with what technology this preformance is achieved.
@MarkInSF:That a certain camera will sell more than another, better, camera, is no reason to cover it more in tests/news etc. If a camera actually have a performance advantage in fex Liveview focusing, like the K30, then naturally THAT would be covered, as it is more in the interests of the potential camera buyer.
OK, Canon is way bigger than Pentax, but if Pentax do have a superb product why not see that as a value in itself? Now, knowing K30 have better liveview focusing than EOS 650D then that is more interesting than that the 650D uses some new tech. Seemingly that new tech is outperformed by some supposedly "old tech"....talk about matters of priorities...
MattBrisVegas: One more reason to think of switching to a m4/3 system EXCEPT why are m4/3 lenses so expensive? I can't help but compare this 75mm f/1.8 for $900 to the Nikon 85mm f/1.8 for $430 (both today's prices at B&H). The m4/3 lens is built to cover a smaller image circle, so it uses much less optical glass. So why is it about twice the price?
The smaller sensor makes it necessary for the lens to be at least(!) double as sharp as a lane for 24x36mm sensor size. If not, images would be softer than FF. Now, the Oly 75 seems to be superbly built.Presicion in mechanics is costly, especially if smaller dimensions are at hand like with m4/3 & 4/3 format lenses vs lenses for larger formats. Simple as that.
Richard Murdey: I'm all for more color variations, but this "let's make a batch in silver and charge several hundred dollars more" racket should stop.
Why is silver the "cheap looking" version, in your opinion?
My view is that it would not look cheap at all if the silver parts were actual metal surfaces, not painted plastic. The older Pentaxes like MX/ME look very good in silver, not cheaper looking at all in my view. And I´m sure it´s because they were not silver painted but instead real metal bodies. .-)
I have seen some of the images of the girl photo model holding a silver OM-D E-M5w 12mm/2 on a few forums now, and I am more and more disturbed by the Lens Hood being mounted a bit "off"...as in "not straight". It destroys the feel of thoise images even if both the camera and model are gorgeous...why on earth did Olympus not even ensure such small stupid things was not let through...???
That said, I am now going to read DPR´s report.
The swedish site "fotosidan" (= "Photopage") gave a short report recently from the same event. They did find that the images were very "denoised" meaning they thought they were too processed. I suppose Oly set the camera on "standard" noise filtering etc, like they use to be on delivery (?)
Well. now on to the DPR report ;-)
simon65: The proposed price is higher than Sony's NEX-7, which I'm afraid makes no sense at all.
Even Nikon's new D800 is less than double the price of this camera, athough that requires a lens to be attached.
Olympus OM-D E-M5 UK: £1,150 with lensSony Alpha NEX-7 UK £1,100 with lens
Panasonic LUMIX DMC-G3 meanwhile which uses the same 16 MP sensor as the Olympus can be bought with lens for under £450.
My guess is Olympus are going to have to cut the price of the OM-D pretty quickly to avoid embarrassment. It looks like a good camera but the price is right up there in cloud cuckoo land, and unless your names Leica people are only prepared to pay so much of a premium for the novelty of a "classic design".
Real metal body, weathersealed to that, a SHARP (would anyone think else?) 12-50 lens, w fastest AF available (said by Oly) If as fast as the E-P3 it´s surely very fast.A really advanced Image Stabilisation system, a JPEG engine from the leader in the industry regarding OOC jpegs.The Oly Super Control Panel, still the best interface yet to be seen in the "advanced amateur class", add to that around 25+ available built-for-it lenses incl. Panasonics offerings, and you say the OM-D is to expensive at 999 dollars/body???
Ok, the Pana G3 have the sensor in common, but the BUILD itself cost way more than a few pounds/dollars whatever, and it is very clear Olympus are not trying to sell this to newbies searching max spec per invested dollar/pound etc, rather to enthusiasts who VALUE a good and serious build, and also want a CLEAN and simple control set.
This camera offers exactly that.
Recently (2 yrs) that amount (close to) bought me E-620 w twin zoom kit & grip...
rawengine: seems a great camera, but... please Olympus, add an aspect selector. I own a E-PL1 as second body and shooting 1:1 straight out of the camera is great for improving my composition skills.. so please, won't you? ;-)
It´s there! (Aspect selection)
Richard Murdey: "they do embody the spirit of the much-loved camera line - a small, well-built camera designed for enthusiasts"
So what was the PEN series about then!?
The OM is built for enthusiasts, with fex two control wheels, and REAL such in addition, not the flimsy and un-ergonimic ones on the Pens... Also metal build w weathersealing, and finally, but not least important: a built in EVF.
The PENs were, and are, about small, hi IQ, and compact cameras for shooting in auto mode more than manual...and for those who do not need weather seals and the solid build of the OM.
"1280x1024" said somebody would not be sharp enough...eeeeh...this new EVF is said to be much better than that:"The 5.4 million-pixel density microdisplay comes in full color (16 million colors), SXGA or monochrome formats (2,560 by 2,048 pixels)"
Why rant on, and critisize, "only 1024x1024" then???
I have owned three of Sigma´s lenses: The wonderfully sharp (first version of the) 18-50mm/2,8 EX, the 24mm/2,8 "macro", the 70-210/4-5,6 APO. All these were good, especially the 18-50 & the 24mm, which were really superb optically.
I especially do miss the small 24mm/2,8 which I used in its manual version on my then owned Nikon FE/F-601 & F-801, during almost a decade. Its 18cm close focus distance was a nice bonus to its sharpnes and compactness, and it was also very well built.
Thank you, Mr Yamaki!
Can the included clip-on flash be tilted upwards? No hints in text or images, upwards tilt is neither shown nor said to not be there...
And in "included in sales box" section the flash is not mentioned, only higher up in the specification page...is it really included or an optional accessory?
Matt Yardley: Dear Richard Butler
I feel I must point out your needless negativity regarding the LCD screen use on the new pen. The fact that the screen can accomodate a full 16:9 image is commendable, I fail to see how you could fit a larger 4:3 image on the back of this camera. The space at either side is not wasted it's a touch screen and allows for the placment of buttons and info keeping the preview of the image uncluttered. Not a waste of space at all.
Also, for straight 16:9 photgraphy the screen was better made as is, than "just" a less wide one. I happen to often shoot in 16:9 as it better corresponds with showing images on a TV, and that I often happen to shoot subjects that benefits from being shot as 16:9.
So, a good chioce by Oly to make the screen wide, rather than having 16:9 shooting to be made by reading off a very small part of a less wide 4:3 screen (as in all the Oly DSLRs)
The space for the wide screen was there in the first place, why not use it?
At last: FAST Auto Focus! ;-) Now that was something, which taken into the context easily outweighs the "lack" of a "new super sensor". The IQ of E-5 in a super small package (Pen Mini), or slightly less small as in the other 2 new models, but very capable overall performance is what Olympus (= its customers) really needed.
Only thing I´d complain about is why no built in flash in the Pen Mini? Those supposed to get it (newbies, former compact shooters) are those most inclined to ask for a (or rather: get puzzled by an absent) built in flash. A separate flash at a high price is NOT very good...better with a few grams/millimeters more than lacking the flash!
johnparas11zenfoliodotcom: do they record their video's audio in stereo though? i can't seem to find that in the specs..
2 choices: A:Full 16-bit Stereo audio.B: "Dolby AC3" , which I suppose is some sort of surround, or simply a variation also recording sound in stereo, but compressed, like MP3.