I already received my GM5 and I could not be happier with this cam combined with tiny M43 lenses like the 35-100 f/4-5.6, the 20/1.7 and the 45/1.8. Very very happy.
Summi Luchs: My guess is that they will use the sensor-shift to de-Bayer the image. They can move the red, green and blue pixels between the exposures so, that they get a full RGB sample for every pixel (like a Foveon sensor). This would not give us 'true' 40MP resolution, it is simply the same calculus of 'equivalence' Sigma uses for its cameras. (Sigma uses a factor of three, Oly gets a lower factor of equivalence, as the Bayer sensor is not RGB but RGGB).The gain would be better color information, that what makes Foveon images special.
I don't think they do the same as Hasselblad and other earlier attempts to increase true resolution by sensor movements. Earlier sensors had more blind gaps between the photosites making such techniques meaningful. Newer sensors have a dense array of microlenses (to gather more light per photosite), so there is not much left to sample in between.
@duartix, you make very good points. My opinion is that the E-M5's achilles heel is actually the color separation and tonality, and not the resolution (16mp is plenty).
prossi: Sounds like a gimmick, grasping for straws to extend the life of the current 4/3 sensor. I'd rather commission a better sensor from sony like a quad RX100 III sensor for 80mp and work on other improvement that should come first...better AF, more fps, more battery life, better software, better video. But the light gathered by the 4/3 sensor is what it is and the lumympus universe has already many great cameras. Both manifacturers built their ceiling before the walls when they married the 4/3 sensor.
The question is if it still uses the Sony sensor from the EM-5 and E-P5 (which is lousy, imo), or if it uses the Panasonic sensor from the E-M1, GX7 and GM5 (which is quite decent actually).
I just wish they wouldn't try to hard to compete with full frame, and just make a 10-12mp 4/3 sensor with native ISO 50.
Richt2000: Effectively this is manual re-sampled interpolation.The good thing about this (If I understand correctly) is it doesn't require the optics to be sharper to make a noticable benefit like going from a 16 to 40mp sensor would.
Considering that you are shifting the sensor and not the lens, the maximum achievable sharpness is still limited by the lens.
kodacolor: Sony is catching up with olympus' OM-D line
@Cameracist: in terms of M43 equivalence Sony has: 8-17mm f/212-35mm f/235-100mm f/214-70mm f/217mm f/1.427mm f/0.9Zeiss Loxia 25mm f/1Mitakon 25mm f/0.42
And announced for 2015:14mm f/117mm f/0.742.5mm f/0.745mm f/1.4 macroZeiss Loxia 17mm f/1
So I really don't see the problem compared to M43. And this is coming from a M43 shooter.
SirLataxe: Very nice - but lacking in two essentials: no articulating screen and no facility to mount a wide angle conversion lens.
An articulated screen would make the camera so much more useful, especially for close-ups, street photography and video, where taking the pictures from waist or lower level makes such a difference.
A high quality add-on WA lens would make the camera an ideal tool for landscapes taken during longer walks in difficult terrain, where the weight of a larger camera and lenses would be tedious.
Those are not essentials.
What I would like to see is a comparison from this little gem of a camera to the Olympus E-M1 with monster-size 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO lens.
The Df was a great missed opportunity.
A typical DSLR wastes more than a centimeter of space between the sensor plane and the surface of the LCD screen. This is part of the reason why DSLRs are so much more bulky than analog film SLRs.
They could have done some Apple-style trickery and left out the LCD to shave off that rear centimeter.
Instead Nikon chose to do a skinned D600 with the most ridiculous dial interface ever vomited onto the face of this earth.
The camera is a joke.
Mike99999: Time for Olympus to launch a full frame OM-D with E-mount.
@String, no, your opinion is wrong, as Sony already supports that mount and Sony owns Olympus now, so nobody would need to support anything new.
@Bluevellet, your opinion is wrong as well. Crop sensor mirrorless will die the same fate as the original four thirds, Pentax, Nikon DX, etc... There's not a single indication otherwise.
A great design experiment that lives on in X-T1 and A7 series cameras.
The problem is the sensor. The E-M5 produces flat and digital-looking images. Worse so than older, albeit more noisy, micro four thirds sensors.
Time for Olympus to launch a full frame OM-D with E-mount.
loafer: The demographic group that purchases this kind of camera has already bought into the fuji x and sony A7 systems.
Exactly and I'm one of them. Sold my Olympus gear for Sony + Loxia. I could not be happier.
Sirandar: If Pana and Oly want to make "Pro" lenses they need to know what kind of pros they are targetting and realize they are competing against their own 40-150mm lenses which usually can do the job. I love my OMD-E5 to death but if I was really making my living with it I probably would be forced to used FF, if only because my customers would expect it. Thankfully I am free of the bondage of actually trying to sell photography.
Take home message .... there is not much point making 1000$ plus pro lenses for M4/3. The rich want more prestige cameras and the middle that loves and supports M4/3 cant justify the price when the 40-150 is only 149$
If the Oly primes I wanted dipped below the 400$ mark I would buy them tomorrow (12mm and 75mm). That is the price these primes should be.
The 75mm is worth it's money. The 12mm is a bit overpriced.
Everlast66: I think it is laughable to call anything associated with the M4/3 system "PRO"!!
Surely there would be one or two enthusiasts, but no normal professional will rely on a M4/3 sensor for their professional work.
A lot of things coming out of Panasonic lately are M4/3 and are most definitely as PRO as it gets, like the GH4 camera.
And the new GM5 with pop-up viewfinder and two collapsible zoom lenses is a winner for extreme outdoors sports photography. No more lugging around huge tele lenses in the mountains.
But Olympus... Olympus is going down the same downward spiral as in the 4/3 days.
Dheorl: I'm impressed at how little screaming about equivalence there's been. Maybe that phase has at last passed.
They are too busy taking photos with their A7 camera.
I can't believe Sony beat Olympus in bringing a professional mirrorless wide angle zoom to the market. Olympus is taking a really long time on this one.
I'd like to see a real-world comparison between the Olympus PRO zoom trinity and the Sony Zeiss/G FE zooms trinity, analyzing sharpness and bokeh. I already kind of know the answer, but it would be good to see it in the flesh.
Lukino: Learned a lot from comments today:-Pro Photographer don't use wide angles-Pro Photographer don't use less than full frame-M43 is dead-People misses non micro 4/3 for some reason-You don't F4 if you can F2. NEVER
For a pro photographer, the question is: why would you settle for the constraints of a quarter-frame sensor if you can have a full frame camera in the same size and weight (A7 + Zeiss zooms).
carlnor: I had a "hands on" with both the Panny and the Leica this week, and I was quite impressed. They seem very well built, and handling is very intuitive and snappy, with most parameters you need in a shooting situation right on the surface. I mainly use a Fuji X-T1 for my work, and I felt right at home with these two. For someone who like to take control over their camera these are two fine compacts indeed. To those who want a swivel screen and a faster 24-120mm lens + complain about the size of the camera + want one for USD 500 - good luck finding your dream camera.
Nikon Df has the worst controls of any DSLR ever made.
ulfie: Why not just get a ZM 50/2 w/ E-mount adapter? Save money and get basically the same thing as the Loxia.
Because ZM lenses are designed for film and don't perform as well as these Loxia lenses which are optimized for digital sensors.
helltormentor: @Rishi Sanyal
I am going to upgrade to a full frame camera. Since I am fond of manual focusing, initially, I wanted to go for the Sony A99 with its EVF and manual focus assists but I realized that its high ISO performance was not on par with Nikon FFs. Since you have not included the A99 in your new studio scene, an accurate comparison is not possible. Can you please tell me how many stops does it fall behind its Nikon peers (this D750 for instance)? I think up to 1 stop could be acceptable since it can compensate for it with its IBIS.
If you want to manual focus, you are best off getting a A7-series camera with Zeiss Loxia lenses. Try it and you will see why.