I may have posted this A LONG time ago. Prior to the E-5 being released I sent Olympus an email expressing my concern and anger about dumping the 4/3 system. This was when the rumors were everywhere they were done with 4/3 camera's and working on PEN's to take their place. A rep from Olympus actually called me and we spoke for a very long time. He said then that Olympus has never gone on record that 4/3 was dead and they were done with the line. I had made comments about switching systems in my letter and he said be patient, I can't tell you what's coming but if I can wait my concerns will be put to rest. Then the E-5 came out. I have since sold my E-5 in favor of the E-M5. I'm not sorry I did. For me the E-M5 is near perfect. I don't miss the size and weight of carrying my E-5 with the 50-200SWD on it. Sometimes I miss the girth of the grip. The only thing I miss is a line of weather sealed lenses. If the E-7 out performs the E-M5 I may switch back. But right now I love it.
Notice as they get older and softer the shirts stay on? lmao
I can understand it's looks are not for everyone. But personally I love the old style and look. Just because things change in their appearance does not make them better all the way around. Like old cars compared to new cars. Man old cars had style, they had curves and were beautiful. Today's cars? Eh. My favorites are the ones who took a little old style and mixed it with new. Like the new Mustang, the Dodge Challenger, a lot of the sport cars are adding a little retro to them. Camera's IMO all look the same. If you painted them all black you would not be able to tell them apart just glancing at them. The E-M5 on the other hand as well as the Fuji pro. Different and I like different.
derfla1949: Test setup flaw or camera flaw?
in the studio setup comparison, please to look at the Irish Cream bottle, at the letters IR.There is a dark spot around them, which does not occur in the studio scenes of most other cameras (didnt check them all). With the OM-D, the obscure effect occurs at any iso, in jpg and raw.
So, is the bottle a different one or did the camera create an artefact or did all other cameras suppress some detail (which I cannot believe) ???
I noticed that when they first posted the E-M5 samples. It is a ripple in the label that for whatever reason does not stick out on others photos for some reason. If you can honestly and truly judge from DPreviews samples, the E-M5 is up there with the best on IQ, no doubt about it.
latifron: Guys, please look at the pictures ( jpeg) from om-d, the color rendition and the IQ is not good.
Are you looking through crack user glasses? I think the Oly images look above and beyond better than anything it's compared too on that page.
Nikonworks: The review glosses over the fan noise issue.
The review complains about focus tracking ( in a Contrast AF camera).Seems they can't say 'This camera is Great!'
If this is all they found wrong, it must be a Great M43 camera.
There is no fan, it is the new IS from what I have read and from people I know who own it say it is not an issue and you do not hear it in the video.
I was about to order an E-P3 just because I did not want to spend the $$$. But after reading this I thought screw it and placed my order with Amazon. Now we wait......and wait until they ship. :)
filcon: I must admit, that when I first saw the quality of the jpeg out of this new baby, I was blowen away by the way the noise has been dealt with on this 43 sensor...well done Olympus! However, on closer inspection, the noise fix comes at a price of blurring fine detail. I would feel happy printing a reasonably large print up to 3200 and at 6400 would have to take the print size down.
I see that some are intent on selling their APS-C cameras and going all the way with the E-M5!! That would be a retrograde step of throwing the baby out with the bathwater!! I compared the 3200 jpeg file download from both the E-M5 and the D7000, and the noise was better in the E-M5 than the Nikon, but the detail due to blurring was not up to scratch in the E-M5 file. Note, the D7000 file was not a real issue with noise, it just had a more film like look to it. Be carefull before you make any rash moves and turn a corner you can't retreat from.
Spoken by an old Olympus dog from way back. Love the E-M5
I must have biased Oly eyes because I dragged that little box all over that photo with the D7000 in the next window and I did not see more blurring in the E-M5. I seen less noise and truer color, and more detail. Take it up to 6400 and drag it over the print. You can still clearly read the E-M5. The blacks still look black and the reds still look red. Blue is blue. I'll take the E-M5 any day.
In no way am I trying to say the E-M5 is better. But compare it to the new D800 images up to 6400, hell even 12,800 and tell me that is not impressive for a $999 m 4/3 compared to a $2500 FF for many of us this is a perfect affordable option. I rarely went over 1600 ISO on my E-5. To have usable 6400 is more than I could ever ask for, and the colors it maintains even next to the D800 makes me look forward to owning this camera.
I read a quote in a forum ( not sure what one) but they said "the best camera is the one you have with you" As an E-5 user I honestly never carry it around with my large back pack bag, with my flash, lenses, etc. I take it out for walks with me and I get tired of having it around my neck. So I carry it. I can deal with it no problem but I really like the idea of this camera and even though it is bigger than the PEN's it is still small enough to be a great walk around camera. I cannot wait to get mine. It's going everywhere with me. :)
Douglas F Watt: Clearly the best m4/3 sensor performance ever, and better in low light than Nikon D7000, Canon TS3i, Sony A65, and even the Pentax K-5. However, let's not get too carried away, as this is just the latest manifestation of the REAL story in DP, namely, sensor and (to a lesser extent) software evolution to improve low light performance. Systems have been, in that regard, leapfrogging each other for years, and although this is an impressive jump (one of the bigger ones for sure), someone will jump over this sensor's low light performance. Keep in mind that the Sony A65 is probably better in low light than the full frame Sony A900 (admittedly neither is a low light phenom). In 10 years, if one extrapolates from current trends, one might predict we will have APS-C sensors in the 36+ megapixel range with at least decent to good low light resolution in the 3200-6400 ISO range.
True, but for a lot of people ( and a lot who shoot Olympus) there is a point where a camera reaches where most will say " this is perfect" or " good enough". I have never cared for the rush for the latest and the greatest and to do it just because they can. I think the more the improve and the more expensive they get, the smaller the market for said camera's is going to be. I sold my E-5 for this camera. Not so much the ISO performance, but the performance in such a small weather sealed package. 36mp? $2500+ bodies? You can have them. This body is going to last me for years, and is going to go with me EVERYWHERE I go. With the 4/3 adapter I will get with my pre order I can still mount the BEST glass Olympus makes if I need it. Maybe not a pro camera BUT more than capable of professional results, and that works just fine for me. :)
NoFunBen: The JPG images are great, the raw ones only average.What ever olympus is doing to process the JPG's may be the best in the industry. It takes the noise away from jpg's like only after market raw programs could do in the past.if you have any other 4/3 camera it is time up grade.
I have shot JPEG with every Olympus I have owned, and they have always had amazing JPEG processing. I have had comments about how they like how I did this and how I did that and it was never me it was always the camera. My sister and my nephew both shoot Nikon and have asked why my photo's colors seem better than theirs. ( neither consider themself to be a photographer by any means). I just say " well that's why I shoot Olympus" A question both had asked me more than once. I only shoot RAW when it for someone other than me and I need to have the control in lightroom.
Pete_Murrell: I have only one question that may not be answerable by people in this forum however I will ask it anyway.I currently use 4/3rds stuff and obviously I love it. I was just wondering if anyone has heard rumours about Olympus releasing a camera with this sensor in the 4/3 lens mount range (Maybe an E-6 or 7)? ... because I can't see myself investing in a whole new range of lenses but based on this small snippet, this sensor is pretty special. Fingers crossed. Can't wait for the full review.
All they have said is that the E-5 successor is in the works. I'd imagine they will use this sensor and the 5 point IS system in it. Maybe upgraded focus. I shoot with an E-5 right now but am in the process of selling it. The idea of getting smaller with that lightning focus and high ISO has me drooling.
Abtin: Does anyone know if the In body image stabilisation is compatible with any lens? I'm looking forward to connecting some of my old nikon lenses to this body.
Olympus's IS will work with any lens you mount to the camera. That's the beauty of their in body system.
ezradja: the 3200 iso sample image is not in the same 2012 standard quality. Just peek at Sony NEX 5N/7 and/or Fujifilm X100 and/or Canon Powershot G1X and they have better noise and details. Sorry but there's no big improvement on micro third system while other system has right now.
Until you can see real life samples side bye side how can you honestly make a statement like this?
bobbarber: @ J2GPhoto, I agree with you, but you forgot to figure in the cost of the full-frame lenses, which are much more expensive than four thirds lenses. So the total cost of the FF system compared to 4/3 is even higher than you make it appear.
@ Anastigmat, FF iis not better than m43 for most uses. Most people print at 8x10. m43 makes just as good prints as FF at 8x10 under most lighting conditions. It's like the Ferrari argument that alxdava makes. Who cares that your Ferarri does 200 km/hr if you spend all of your time driving where the speed limit is 50 km/hr? And who cares that your FF has clean ISO 12,800, if you rarely shoot over ISO 1600, which describes a lot of us?
I was only comparing body cost's. The cost size and weight of FF is more than enough to steer me to m 4/3. I have only had the need for 3200 once, and to be honest was not thrilled with the results my E-5 gave me. But I've read clean.... CLEAN 6400. I'm good.
Anastigmat: Anyone who expects good high ISO performance from a sensor that is half the size of a full frame model is a fool, and a fool and his money will soon part company. If high ISO performance is of paramount importance, look instead at full frame cameras like the Canon 5DMKIII and Nikon D4.
Anyone who thinks it will be on par with a FF may not be too bright. BUT it has achieved much better performance than many have claimed it ever would. Clean ISO up to 6400 for $999 compared to $2500 - $6000? 6400 is more than I'll ever need. So I'll save my $$$ and carry an E-M5 and a half a dozen lenses in a bag 1/2 the size I carry now thank you.
gl2k: Does ANYONE still shoot during daytime ?
According to all those tests and high iso talking I assume that the photographic community has turned to a nocturne society.
At least I do about 95% of my photographic work under good to fair light conditions. Am I a dying breed ? Seems so ...
No you ARE NOT a dying breed in fact you do most of your shooting in good light. However you are probably one of us in the minority that are not sheep. Following the latest and the greatest with the most MP and highest ISO. In the film days 800 was pretty fast film, 1600 was pro grade. I honestly don't recall Perry's drugs selling 3200. I don't recall anyone bitching then the way they do now. Todays digital camera have far exceeded film in many ways. Yet people line up with money in hand because it's new it has to be better and I NEED IT!!!
Earthlight: I hope that Sony will buy the Camera business, make the OM-D a little bigger, a proper size camera, slap a full frame sensor in it and sell sell sell those in huge numbers.
Nikon and Canon need even more competition. Instead of Canikon we would have Casonykon.
Sony is superior to Olympus? Really? In what way? Because they threw about a bunch of #%*@ to see what sticks? Sony seems like a company with no direction, or should I say every direction. Olympus glass is still superior to ANYTHING Sony has out. People still get so hung up on spec's they refuse to look at the bigger picture, like REAL LIFE use and results. I've been an Olympus shooter since I bought digital. Your going to have to pry my Olympus out of my dead hands. I'd be willing to bet if you could shoot with a Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony, Pentax without knowing what camera is what. No names or distinguishing marks. A lot of the Olympus, small sensor, 4/3 bashers would be very surprised to find out just how much they like the Olympus when the makers of said cameras are revealed. But so many are programed to think the BIG names they see on T.V are superior in every way.
mcd3: Anyone that has owned an OM camera will love this. To all the detractors, you have no idea.
Lets hope the image quality is great
There are samples floating around already. WOW comes to mind. :)