J2Gphoto: "A high-end camera is nothing without optics to match, and while the X-system is little more than 2 years old, the lens line-up is starting to look distinctly mature."
Personally the lens line up and the price of their lenses are what are steering me toward going with the E-M1. Also does anyone else think the white balance is way off on the E-M1 sample images? I've used the E-M1 and have never seen whites look so yellow.
Yes the lens line up IS the reason I'd buy the Olympus. What many forget is that you have 2 lines of lenses now that work on the E-M1, and work well I might add. Fuji has nothing in the way of telephoto ( and I love shooting nature) with the E-M1 I not only ave the 75-300 which I'd guess is better with more reach than the Fuji telephoto. I also have the 50-200 SWD weather sealed 4/3 lens. The Zuiko 25 and 45mm are 1/2 the price as the Fuji comp's. 1/3 if you buy used and I'd bet every bit as good. I have looked at the Fuji line, the entire line and it does not have what I would want or for how much I'd like to have to spend.
"A high-end camera is nothing without optics to match, and while the X-system is little more than 2 years old, the lens line-up is starting to look distinctly mature."
I don't know what they are thinking at Nikon. Maybe counting on loyalists to buy these? That zoom is between $300 and $400 more than other mirrorless systems.
KariIceland: My opinion on the last years "winner of the year" the OM-D as an OM-D owner myself and having purchased it AFTER seeing that article:I have owned this camera for almost a year now and in NO way did it deserve camera of the YEAR, neither does this camera, the X100s or X-pro 1Deserved last years win in my opinion & this year?Who knows who deserves the win but NOT this that is for certain.
For what it's worth, review.com already named the E-M1 camera of the year and m 4/3 camera of the year. :)
Jogger: Thank goodness for Sony supplying the sensor. If Oly had to rely on Pana sensors the EM1 would still be in the dark ages. At least now they can almost compete with Canon APSc SLRs on image quality.
Nikon APSc sensors (D5300) are still many times better though. Now Oly has to bite the bullet and license AVCHD from Sony/Panasonic.
Stated opinions on what? The DXO ratings? I have yet to read a review that did not rave about the IQ out of the E-M1 and I'd be willing to bet that side by side all things being equal YOU could never tell me what image was from one camera to the next in real world usage. Not what some geek in a lab says is better. What I have read is " what little IQ you may give up" is made up in many other ways with the E-M1.
Many times better? You base this on what? Every review I have read give very little to no IQ advantage to shoot with a APSc camera any longer. So how did YOU who has most likely not had the opportunity to shoot with every new camera come to this conclusion?
Retro? Looks space aged. That is one ugly camera.
mpgxsvcd: Nikon just created a camera that none of their competitors will ever dare to compete against. Freaking Brilliant is what this is.
How does it compete when it is more than twice the price and does less?
Am I in the minority in my thought process, where I would prefer one of these companies to PERFECT a lower MP camera instead of trying to cram more and more MP into every upgrade. 12mp was fine with me, 16 was fine with me. Now they keep jamming more and more onto the same size sensor with minimal IQ improvements and lower IQ in some cases. Wouldn't it be nice to have a 16MP that just nails every rating you could have or want in a sensor? With a blazing speed processor that boosts the FPS? I mean really why not PERFECT one before trying to replace it? The D7000 was hardly perfect. In fact I've read more posts about people dumping them for the micro camera's than any other camera or brand. Another problem with the MP cramming is every time you read reviews they almost ALWAYS say you need to have the BEST glass to get the most out of the 20+ mp sensor. Screw that. Give me a perfected camera with less MP's and I'll be happy.
Alex Hubenov: All I want is a new 4/3 body !!!I don't get this obsession with smaller camera bodies! Why would one sacrifice so many good things just for a smaller body? And who is it good for? Snappers and tourists? The 4/3 gear is still more compact than NiCanon DSLR's and the Oly lenses are unmatched!Come on Olympus, give us a good new 4/3 body this year!!!
I sold my E-5 and felt I gave up nothing as far as IQ goes with the OMD. I did lose two of the finest lenses in the 50-200SWD and 12-60SWD But I feel what I gained makes up for it, and has more potential to make up for it with some of the lenses available that I do not own yet.
Houseqatz: does anyone have experience with the tg-1? how is the jpeg rendering engine? i had an 725sw and never had issues with it's jpegs, and the ep-1 i have outputs fine jpegs. in fact, i've always been happy with the olympus jpeg look.
i'm not saying that raw wouldn't be nice, but i'd like to see some actual, "i was under water when i took this shot with my tg-1" pics.. which never seem to surface (heh) with the clamor for RAW
I bought my son the TG-610 a couple years back. A buddy of mine has the TG-1. His son had it when we went out shooting together and I'll tell ya the images are pretty darn good IMO. Not DSLR quality but for the typse of camera I thought they were pretty good. ( edit) I brought up the 610 because it sucks in comparison lol
mauijohn: It can't do continous autofocus but got the first prize.? but no thanks i'll get the second prize,the Nikon....a decade proven reliable brand of camera since before the ww2.
Yes it CAN do C-AF, can it do it as well as a $3000-$8,000 pro model? No, but for the price it does it just fine. I've seen images of a hawk swooping down over a lake, dragging it's wing and then landing on land all shot with the OMD C-AF and the shots are amazing. I personally never use it, but I know several OMD users who have had a lot of success with it.
JVSuryanarayana: I own Canon 5D Mk III and like the IQ very much. I tried Canon 1DX also but for IQ I found only 1Ds Mk III superior to 5D Mk III. I can't say any thing about Nikon or Olympus though I respect both. But, a caveat. Micro four thirds can't be compared with FF cameras.
@ marike6 What your definition of a better camera is may not be the same as someone else. For me the OMD is the better camera. Why? Simple. Size, weight, quality and price. I can walk around with my OMD around my neck and a lens in each pocket and cover macro, wide angle and telephoto. Throw in the weather sealing and for me it's the best damn no brainer camera I could find. I did a photowalk in pouring down rain with my OMD and the 12-50 mounted. The ONLY other person in the group who was not coddling and worried about their camera was another Olympus shooter. Every Canon, Nikon and Sony user there kept their camera's under plastic, or their jacket. For a LOT of people, the OMD is just right. As for a popularity contest, I'd like to know how other sites who did not have votes came up with the same results. You base your opinion on one thing and one thing only and that is why you will never understand how and why the OMD won.( EDIT) my fault I posted this under wrong person lol
DStudio: The Olympus OM-D is merely m4/3 finally reaching its potential.
Fujifilm X-Pro 1, Nikon D800E, and Sony RX1 are changing the direction of the industry, as will be clear next year.
Fuji probably wouldn't have gone that route if not for m 4/3's. I don't see how the D800E has changed the direction of anything except more MP and high prices. It's not like it does a whole lot of things better than other cameras that are already on the market, as well as larger formats. The RX1? I may be in the minority here but I do not see the point of spending nearly $3000 on a fixed lens camera. Ever. Merely reaching potential? 23.5% pf voters don't agree with you.
Najinsky: I don't get the negative reactions to the poll. Are people assuming they're on the Panel of CIPA and being asked to judge on behalf of the industry? What would be the point of that? Did they all send you a review copy?
This is a consumer site for camera buyers, they want to know which new Cameras hit the target. Who got it right. What worked for US.
If you want to pretend your on the CIPA panel then I guess you could try to vote for the best industry achievement, a hard vote in 2012, with nearly all manufacturers hitting a home run or two.
OM-D is not a superior imaging machine to the D800, 5D3, A99, etc. But for many peoples shooting objectives, the OM-D was a big (small) hit.
I left a superior machine 6,000 miles back at home this year, taking the OM-D instead. It was a scary decision, but in hindsight absolutely the right one. The OM-D hit a sweet spot of results and portability.
Why not vote what was a hit for YOU, and let others say what a hit for THEM. You know, like a poll.
You hit it right on the head. Nicely done.
CameraLabTester: A very interesting poll.
In fact, very tempting for forensic analysis.
One example of the many analysis that could be done:
Take the top 3 contenders.
Remove the votes with accounts less than 1 week old before the polls.
Remove the votes from those coming from only one computer. (multiple user names)
Lets see how the graph would look like...
You really think people care enough to create multiple accounts to try and rig the poll? Sound like a stretch to me. Who really cares THAT much they would bother? That just sounds..... I won;t say
For those saying the fanboys are swaying the results I invite you all to google camera of the year. 3 camera's are mentioned in just about every one I seen. The Canon 5DMKIII, the Nikon D800E and the Olympus OMD E-M5. One will say the Canon, another says the Nikon and I seen one that say the Olympus. The fact that these three are the leaders in this poll tells me this poll may be a little bit more than fanboy loyalty. Heck how many fanboys would Olympus even have left after they once again abandoned another system? I'm an Olympus user and was ticked off more than once and looked to other systems to use. As were a LOT of Olympus users I know. Read the buyer reviews on B&H, or Adorama. Many say "I was a Canon/Nikon shooter before I bought the OMD." Almost seems like people are mad they lost some of their club members.
Boris F: OMD EM-5 is the King! Look for ISO performance, it is maybe one stop only below full frames.
Essai, there is a very interesting video on youtube that compares the video output from the OMD to the D800. May not be side by side photo's but to see a camera that cost that much less hold it's own against such an expensive camera is pretty damn impressive to most. I don't put much into DxOmark, I look at real life side by side comparisons and the OMD is pretty damn good for it's size and weight and cost.
marike6: Keep reading how the OM-D is "revolutionary" but nobody says HOW it is.
* IQ? m43 IQ was improved incrementally with the OM-D which has slightly better IQ than the G3/GX1. It still doesn't equal any of the better APS-C cameras like the NEX-7, D7000, K-5, or X-Pro1.
* Resolution? Panasonic G3 / GX1 increased the resolution of m43 to 16 mp long before the OM-D was released.
* Weather sealing? Pentax and nearly ALL FF DSLRs have been weather sealed for years.
* EVF and tilt LCD? NEX-7 had both way before the OM-D and NEX-7's are higher spec'd to boot.
* Size? OM-D is not the first small camera.
* AF tracking? The OM-D doesn't have PDAF like the Nikon 1 or NEX-5R.
* Video? GH2 and GH3 completely outclass the OM-D in video specs and performance.
"revolutionary" implies something new like the D800's 36 mp or D800 E (no AA filter) or both having uncompressed HDMI outs - All DSLR firsts.
So what is so revolutionary? Or is it you just like your cameras?
I don't agree with a lot of what you say. First off the IQ is hardly incrementally improved, but most of the time IQ is. Panny G3/GX1 16mp first? Yeah maybe but the OMD still does it better. Tilted screen? Olympus brought it back and was the first to have it on a DSLR if I recall. Size? Maybe not the fist small but the first to do so much well. AF tracking? I can't speak about the others but my E-M5 works good enough for me. Video? Could care less. As far as your ALL DSLR firsts. Uhhh no. The Olympus E-5 was the first to remove the AA filters if I'm not mistaken. So whats revolutionary? Well probably the fact it's the first small camera to do so much well. If you put any stock in Dpreviews samples and reviews. Put your selected bodies with better IQ in the comparison windows against the E-M5 and boost up the ISO. Then tell everyone the E-M5 does not do well against the ones you mention.