Previous news story    Next news story

Japanese news service lends support to Olympus OM rumors

By dpreview staff on Jan 24, 2012 at 00:52 GMT

Kyodo News International, a Japanese news service, is reporting that Olympus will introduce a 16MP camera based on its classic OM series. The news would tie-in with a recent Olympus press advert in the UK that highlighted the letters 'O' and 'M' in the text. The report suggests such a camera would sell for over ¥100,000 (around $1300) and feature 'high-speed autofocus and image stabilization functionality.' Meanwhile, Japanese financial newspaper Nikkei is reporting that Sony is considering investing in Olympus and forming a business alliance. Fujifilm which, like Olympus, has extensive medical interests is also rumored to be interested.

Olympus' fondly-remembered OM-4 SLR

The company's share price has risen since Friday's announcement that the Tokyo Stock Exchange has taken it off its supervisory watchlist. The TSE fined the company ¥10m ($130,000) for violation of disclosure rules in such a way that it 'damaged shareholder and investor confidence' in the stock exchange. The company's share remain on the TSE 'alert' list.

Comments

Total comments: 314
123
Simon97
By Simon97 (Jan 24, 2012)

I was wondering if anyone was ever going to put a sensor in a manual style SLR body. Sounds interesting if not a niche product.

3 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (Jan 24, 2012)

someone should have done that long time ago, seriously. i would love to see Canon F1D or A1D. that would be very sick!

1 upvote
SterlingBjorndahl
By SterlingBjorndahl (Jan 24, 2012)

Panasonic's DMC-L1 DSLR had a shutter speed dial instead of a PASM dial, and several lenses with aperture rings. If it hadn't been ridiculously overprised and released a year late ("only" 7.5 MP at the time), it might have really taken off. The viewfinder was small and dark, but the body was magnesium alloy - it's built like a tank and handles like an SLR of yesteryear. I still take mine out and shoot with it once in a while.

1 upvote
Calvin Chann
By Calvin Chann (Jan 24, 2012)

Leica did it for their R film cameras, but it wasn't a huge hit and they discontinued it.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
d99007
By d99007 (Jan 24, 2012)

It has been attempted before (search for IMAGEK EFS-1), but I think the project is scrapped:
http://www.epi-centre.com/reports/imagek.html

0 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (Jan 24, 2012)

wow back in 1998. I know someone hijacked a A1P and modified it to a digital cam. You can find it on youtube.

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Jan 24, 2012)

If its a m43 - then you have to look very careful if you can find any manual lenses.

0 upvotes
geoson
By geoson (Jan 25, 2012)

No chance. A manual focus D-SLR would be even more of a niche produt than 4/3 or m4/3 is, and a product that specific will have a premium, non-consumer price.

0 upvotes
Jon Stock
By Jon Stock (Jan 25, 2012)

Epson Seiko and Voightmander's parent company made the R-D1. Manual lever between shots. Mine still works well.

0 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Jan 25, 2012)

I would LOVE a Full Frame, no AF, no video, ONLY white balance, and RAW output, manual focus camera- it would be a perfect student camera. There was nothing to replace the Pentax K-1000 when everything went digital.

0 upvotes
retiredpaper
By retiredpaper (Jan 24, 2012)

Hi Brady....
I don't know if obsession is the explanation for wanting smaller cameras. I think it's more a matter of fulfilling that need to have more comfort in walking around with a camera. I'm speaking on behalf of myself as a serious enthusiast, not a professional, in taking pictures. As you get older, smaller & lighter equipment is appreciated. If size interferes with photo quality, then I'm not interested. In the digital world, I started off with the Canon G5 & have truly enjoyed its features & photo quality. I still use it but purchased an Olympus Pen 2 a year ago & now this is my primary digital camera. I wanted the ability to change lenses & had considered a DSLR but gravitated to the PEN due its size, comfort, & the quality of Zuiko lenses. I have large hands & find the PEN to be comfortable to hold. I'm pleased that the camera manufacturers have come out with smaller cameras but at the same time believe there is too much redundancy offered by most of them.

0 upvotes
Brady Davis
By Brady Davis (Jan 24, 2012)

Hello, I appreciate your reply and what you say. I was not trolling in the slightest. You (and no doubt plenty of others) have a need and a manufacturer has catered to it. My point really was why is miniaturisation seen as the holy grail by some folk?

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Jan 24, 2012)

A $130k fine for a $1.7B fraud, which management disguised by a series of fake expenditures over the course of 15+ years. $130k is barely one year's bonus for a junior CFO. Kikukawa's travel and entertainment expenses (golf membership, worldwide conferences, contributions to "corporate governance" boards) probably exceeded that.

Meanwhile, civil suits brought by the shareholders or creditors against the ex CEO and Board will be mired in a search for documents that never existed or were carefully obliterated over the years. The defendants will shake their heads and say, "Well, the CPA said the books were OK, all those years, and we always provided whatever they requested." Civil charges of "maliign incompetence" may be difficult to bring to judgment. Criminal charges, whose burden of proof is higher, may fail or result in brief sentences (which could be cheaper and shorter for the accused than to prolong the litigation).

Can there be any wonder why white collar crime thrives?

5 upvotes
simon65
By simon65 (Jan 24, 2012)

"A $130k fine for a $1.7B fraud"

Agreed, it's a joke.

Corporate boardroom crime and featherweight regulators are killing capitalism. I'm on Olympus purchase strike until I see a proper boardroom clear-out at the company.

2 upvotes
Andreas Roca
By Andreas Roca (Jan 24, 2012)

Sadly I sold my OM-4n and OM-3n years ago. But I still use my two OM-1ns every day. Best film slr ever in my opinion, small body, gigantic viewfinder, ultra stylish design, small and light high quality lenses. If this were true it would be very exciting.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
David Hokanson
By David Hokanson (Jan 24, 2012)

Agree Andreas..I bought my first OM (OM-2) in 1979 and still have it. It is a thing of beauty and style.

I now have a Leica DLux-4 that I love. I have been looking for a new DSLR however for the larger sensor and interchangeable lenes. If this report is true I will be waiting to see what comes of it..

Dream come true possibly..

Best Regards..

2 upvotes
Stephen Blake
By Stephen Blake (Jan 24, 2012)

I have had an OM-1 system from new. I bought it because of it's small size, light weight and build quality. I bought my first digital camera at the end of 2009. An Olympus PEN. Says it all really.

0 upvotes
simon65
By simon65 (Jan 24, 2012)

Death of the Dino DSLR

My old Olympus OM-2N was a full frame, (ie 35mm), with a large viewfinder, and small body.

For years I've wondered why the newer DSLRs had to be the size and weight of a Dino in comparison. And the arguments put forward by the "I like 'em Big" brigade have never added up:

- 'you need a huge body to house the mirror system''
Really? Except the OM-2N mirror system didn't.

-'You need a huge body to fit all the electronics in'
Unless of course you're Sony with the NEX-5N.

-'You need a huge body for the motor drive'
Except of course the NEX-7 which manages 10 fps.

I'm glad that the hocus pocus around huge unwieldly DSLRs has finally been shown up for the fraud it always was. They don't need to be so big, and most users don't want them so big.

As for Canon and Nikon they will either adapt or go the way of Tyrannosaurus Kodak-is. So far they're showing alarming signs of being in denial over the direction the market has taken.

Dino DSLRs are History.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Jan 24, 2012)

You are partly right. But - there are some things you have to consider. 1. Auto focus. How many of the old tiny cameras had auto focus? 2. Sensor. The sensor adds 5-10 mm behind the sensor. 3. LCD - it takes some space - also adding some mm to the depth. So - a FF camera might not be possible to make as small as an OM.

0 upvotes
like a bumblebee
By like a bumblebee (Jan 24, 2012)

Lenses. Think of a Zuiko 250/2.0 on a NEX. Or even on an OM without motor drive/grip.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Jan 24, 2012)

Have you considered -

Handling. High quality autofocus APS and FF lenses are large (no way around that), what's the point of a tiny awkward to hold camera with a massive lens?

Battery. Modern DSLRs are power hungry, so you need a nice big battery. Mirrorless cameras with their smaller batteries have worse battery life.

Flash. Those old cameras don't have a built in flash. A powerful built in flash needs a big capacitor. Mirrorless cameras generally have lower power flashes.

Shutter. Compared to very old SLRs (OM era) the shutter of a modern camera (film or digital) is a world away from those slow canvas shutters. The extra actuators take up space.

Thickness. Film basically has no thickness, a sensor, sensor mount and LCD screen all take up space. With a mirrorless the lens mount can be made closer, with a DSLR they're stuck with the distance, which adds a good cm or 2 to the overall depth.

Of course not everyone needs those features, hence why mirrorless are selling!

1 upvote
harold1968
By harold1968 (Jan 24, 2012)

Digital DSLRs are bigger then Film SLRs purely due to the AF system

There is no possibility of shrinking the size unless you go mirrorless

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

You are wrong on so many levels. Manual cameras like the OM were not much more than glorified empty light-tight boxes that housed film. A modern AF DSLR has a lot more going on inside it! It's not "fraud." That is the most ignorant statement I've ever heard. If you open of a modern AF DSLR, you'll find that every square centimeter of the body is packed with electronics and components. And they don't stuff these cameras with these components just for the heck of it.

0 upvotes
simon65
By simon65 (Jan 24, 2012)

@ T3

"If you open of a modern AF DSLR, you'll find that every square centimeter of the body is packed with electronics"

Yep and the NEX 3C still packs all that in, an APS-C sensor, a full auto focusing system, auto drive, and an articulated screen, and weighs just 225 g.

That's not ignorance I'm afraid, its a fact. You dinos and your clunking heavyweight Canon DSLRs are in for a really tough introduction to market-technology Darwinism.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 25, 2012)

simon65, you forget that Canon, Nikon, and various other companies have been able to adapt and evolve over the decades. It's completely ignorant to think that they will suddenly disappear. Furthermore, you forget that smart companies go wherever there is a market. And as it stands, there is still a huge market for large pro-level DSLRs. That's a FACT. At the next Olympics, see how sports PJ's will be using NEX 3C's! Sorry, but pro sports PJ's will still be lining the sidelines of sporting events with their pro Canon and Nikon DSLR bodies. As long as there's a market to tap into, Canon and Nikon will tap into that market. That's what smart businesses do. And that's why "market-technology Darwinism" has made Canon and Nikon two of the top names in photography, even after decades of change and evolution in photography.

Plus, how ignorant do you have to be to call it a "fraud" that camera manufacturers have been making large cameras as a deception! Pathetic.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Jan 25, 2012)

It's true then that DSLR's are packed with electronics, but couldn't these be minaturised, or maybe have a smaller model that compromises on features but gains in portability (like a mirrorless camera)? I really don't see why they can't make a smaller full-frame camera when the Leica M9 does this so well, or at least a compromise.

0 upvotes
designprof
By designprof (Jan 24, 2012)

The Pen series is not much different in size and form. The OM series is catering to nostalgic memories of baby boomers who used the cameras. I like the grip on the Pen cameras, and if you add it to the OM series, it will be practically indistinguishable. Too bad the old lenses will not work (without a x2 factor loss). But its about time Olympus caught up in the MP department in a DSLR. The Sony collaboration holds great promise for the future if this relationship goes through.

0 upvotes
fmian
By fmian (Jan 24, 2012)

There is rumour this will be backwards compatible with Canon EOS, Nikon F, Minolta MD, and Leica M lenses.

But definitely not OM lenses.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Jan 24, 2012)

Olympus have always officially supported OM lenses in 4/3 and m4/3 from the get-go, what's the point of your post prodding Olympus for something they're not guilty of (not supporting their old lenses)

3 upvotes
fmian
By fmian (Jan 25, 2012)

I was just being cheeky, based on a few other people commenting that they can't wait to put their OM lenses on this new camera.
The DP review image above has an OM lens staring you in the face, and I can see how some people might incorrectly think that it will take OM lenses.
As you say, there is an adapter (and crop factor), but from a wide angle appreciator it's just not the same thing as being FF.

0 upvotes
Brady Davis
By Brady Davis (Jan 24, 2012)

Can someone please explain what the obsession is with tiny, fiddly little cameras please? I am of normal size with normal hands but I just don't get why smaller cameras are viewed as 'what we want'? 'We' don't! I use my cameras in the field and have no trouble 'lugging' them around. If I go somewhere where it is sensible to take a compact I take my Ricoh GX but it isn't my first choice. I recently tried the Fuji X10 for size and just could not believe how uncomfortable it was to hold. I then swapped to a Pentax K5 - much better! But still a bit fiddly for me. I just don't get it!

1 upvote
Zoran Krnjajic
By Zoran Krnjajic (Jan 24, 2012)

If you don't get it by now - it's not for you. WE want it, YOU maybe don't. Keep shooting what you're comfortable with, and let us do the same, don't troll.

9 upvotes
Lbr0805
By Lbr0805 (Jan 24, 2012)

Me too. I want close to DSLR quality in a small package. I carry only a Canon S90. I think that there are lots who want and even need small.

3 upvotes
davecamerator
By davecamerator (Jan 24, 2012)

The capitalised WE in the reply is a little over the top. I don't need you to say what WE want.While I have a fuji X10 that I carry around daily but my most ergonomically comfortable camera is a Nikon F5.

1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Jan 24, 2012)

Your fixation over the inclusion of you in WE is a little over the top Dave.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jan 24, 2012)

Dave is quite right. It's no different when politicians say "We need somebody who will stand up for the American people." So you have someone speaking on your behalf who has no interest in your opinion.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

I use a Canon 5D, and several Canon APS-C DSLRs. But I also own an Oly E-PM1. The E-PM1 is my take-everywhere camera now. And I *love* that it is so compact! I have no trouble using it. I guess some people are more adaptable than other people. To each his own. No one is forcing you to buy any particular camera. The market offers choice. Why are you so against choice?

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Jan 24, 2012)

People keep talking about how small the old film SLRs were but they forget how much larger they were than todays DSLRs like the Pentax K-5 when you add the motor drive. Also with 128GB SDXC card you could shoot much more than the 750 shot bulk film back that was huge.

Photo OM-4 w/motor drive:
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2577/4349554310_99a8c2b8f5_b.jpg

250 bulk film back :
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/om2/images/250mmfilmbkzm.jpg

750 shot bulk film back :
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonf2/motordrives/images/bulkfim750250.jpg

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
1 upvote
AshMills
By AshMills (Jan 24, 2012)

Assuming you needed/used one.

4 upvotes
RKGoth
By RKGoth (Jan 24, 2012)

Sensor size is key. Look at a Pentax Auto 110 - that's got a film area equivalent to Four-Thirds. That's a small, interchangeable lens camera (with some quirky tech) and a true SLR at that, with mirror and split-image focusing.

1 upvote
MP Burke
By MP Burke (Jan 24, 2012)

In the old days photographers must have thought more like snipers than machine gunners. If you had one roll of film in the camera and a couple of rolls in your bag, then you could manage 100 pictures in a day, which used to be seen as quite a lot. Thus most people did quite happily without a 250 exposure back.
Cameras like the Olympus OM1 appealed to hikers and mountaineers who didn't want to have a camera weighing 1.5kg+ hanging round their neck all the time.
I never used a motor drive in my film days and am not impressed by camera manufacturers who seem to assume everybody wants to have 3 or more frames per second.

3 upvotes
Richard Briscoe
By Richard Briscoe (Jan 24, 2012)

When the OM-1 was introduced there was substantial interest in it by the PJ community.

I carried an OM-1 with a wide angle, normal, and 75-150 zoom and it weighed less than an F2 when many others were hauling around an F2. There were worthwhile improvements through the OM-4 and then Olympus abandoned the system. In retrospect it makes the F2 seem the better choice.

0 upvotes
Lbr0805
By Lbr0805 (Jan 24, 2012)

Yes, but we also expect progress in such matters. It is a good reminder tho, that digital has some huge advantages. For example, you mentioned the bulk film back, but even without that one had to carry several rolls of film which also take up space. So even a digital of the same size is smaller to carry around when one counts everything.

0 upvotes
falconeyes
By falconeyes (Jan 24, 2012)

Isn't it interesting that the smaller two (Olympus, Pentax) make reference to their heritage while the larger two (Canon, Nikon) don't?

Nevertheless, I don't like "copied" designs which drop the essential bits. E.g., the original PEN or Pentax Auto 110 had much larger sensors than their digital counterparts (E-PL, Pentax Q). In that respect, I like the Pentax K-7/5 bodies which speak a bit of a retro language but with fewer technical compromises.

As for why digital cameras aren't as small as film cameras ... it's not the battery (as it gows into the grip) or processor (which is small). But sensor assembly and shake reduction require a bit of extra space, although not very much. E.g., compare sizes of a Pentax *ist (film) and *istD (digital):
*ist: 122 x 84 x 63.5mm vs.
*istD: 129 x 95 x 60mm (APS-C, no SR, first digital SLR by Pentax)
*istDS: 125 x 93 x 66mm
I.e., the *istD is thinner even ;)

0 upvotes
MP Burke
By MP Burke (Jan 24, 2012)

When you consider that the ist film camera was full frame (24x36mm) whereas the ist digital models had an APS-C sensor, less than half the size, these size comparisons become less favourable. The fact is that APS-C dslrs are often larger than 35mm film slrs, yet have smaller mirrors and viewfinders.

5 upvotes
DioCanon
By DioCanon (Jan 24, 2012)

will it be 4:3 or some new sensor size?

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Jan 24, 2012)

They'd be mad to use a different sensor size after having so much invested in m4/3

3 upvotes
Zoran Krnjajic
By Zoran Krnjajic (Jan 24, 2012)

I don't think so. On the contrary - they'd be mad to put a small sensor in such a large body...

2 upvotes
DaveMarx
By DaveMarx (Jan 24, 2012)

I think it's time to allow for more sizes than "large" and "small." MFT isn't the largest sensor on the block, but it's a far sight larger than the typical P&S, and orders of magnitude larger than the sensor in my iPhone. At this point, when APS-C sensors and lined up against MFT sensors, the difference in performance is pretty small, not enough to qualify as dividing line between categories. In film days, we compromised on film speed, depending on our requirements. The difference between Pan-X and Tri-X, or Kodachrome and Ektachrome 400? Way bigger than the difference between MFT and APS-C. Body size? I think this new model will echo the classic look, but will likely be smaller.

In terms of madness, it would be madness to do anything other than MFT. It's the difference between extending a line (more buyers for the same lenses and larger bulk purchase of components) and starting a specialty product line that will always be expensive because it'll never make it in the mass market.

0 upvotes
GirinoFumetto
By GirinoFumetto (Jan 24, 2012)

OM1 was small, its lenses where small and it was, obviously, full frame, had prism and mirror and was small.
How many years have to pass before the new technologies can make something similar? OM1 was a jewel to hold.

5 upvotes
ShatteredSky
By ShatteredSky (Jan 24, 2012)

"How many years have to pass before the new technologies can make something similar?" That is what I am asking myself. All these humongousely sized DSLRs ...

4 upvotes
CriticalI
By CriticalI (Jan 24, 2012)

Elves. Bigger cameras need more elves.

Seriously though many entry level DSLRs are quite small, despite having AF, a whole PC's worth of processors and RAM, an LCD, much larger battery and memory card slot- not to mention a lot more connectors.

All this has to fit in the space created by removing the film cannister.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
1 upvote
GirinoFumetto
By GirinoFumetto (Jan 24, 2012)

In the space occupied by one of the big OM1 internal gears, today you can fit more than one cpu. OM1 is jam-packed of mechanisms. Beyond, my OM1 is 35 years old and it is still perfectly working; my digital Oly C2100 in 5 years forgot what she was doing! Anyhow, let's hope that the new Olympus will resemble OM1.

1 upvote
seri_art
By seri_art (Jan 24, 2012)

I bought an OM-1 soon after they were released and later paired it with an XA. I now have a Canon XSi which is quite small and light compared to more "professional" DSLRs, and also a Canon S100 which often takes the place of the XSi. As you can tell, I like small :-)

0 upvotes
joyclick
By joyclick (Jan 24, 2012)

I am told oly is courting Sony why not Pany who they have been friends with in MFT?

0 upvotes
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (Jan 24, 2012)

The answer to the WHY is in the Olympus Medical business which holds a 70% worldwide market share in endoscopes. The camera business is only a relatively small part of Olympus.

1 upvote
herebefore
By herebefore (Jan 24, 2012)

Sony is Courting Olympus for 1 reason only.

The Medical Imaging Division..

That doesn't mean that Sony wont contribute to their photography division, but it does mean they aren't interested in taking anything FROM the camera division.

1 upvote
Bob from Plymouth
By Bob from Plymouth (Jan 24, 2012)

I'm not reading all the comments to find out but I'm sure someone's already observed that Olympus is following Fuji's lead here by producing a retro-design. I hope they do as I have some Olympus glass that would acquire a new lease of life.

0 upvotes
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (Jan 24, 2012)

Sorry, but it's the other way around: Fuji has followed Olympus in the retro styling. Olympus E-P1 (inspired on PEN F) was announced in June 2009, Fuji X100 is a 2011 product.

4 upvotes
MBRome
By MBRome (Jan 24, 2012)

;-) Wonderful news for people still having a lot of Olympus OM lenses!

0 upvotes
ST205
By ST205 (Jan 24, 2012)

Are you for real. They fined them $130k for pulling some of the dodgiest corporate shennanigans in quite a while!?

What a joke.

1 upvote
John.Laninga
By John.Laninga (Jan 24, 2012)

My favorite all time camera was the OM-4T. If that comes back in digital form I'll be in front of the "gotta have it" line....

4 upvotes
Peter KT Lim
By Peter KT Lim (Jan 24, 2012)

Look forward to see more classic camera with digital sensor! It will be great we can see Nikon FM and Canon A1 !

0 upvotes
Gerudo
By Gerudo (Jan 31, 2012)

I'll second that, but why not a FM2n or FM3 instead?

0 upvotes
PhotoKhan
By PhotoKhan (Jan 24, 2012)

$130,000 fine...!?...For those massive financial shenanigans...?

...and there are some that still want "Occupiers" to actually EXPLAIN why they do what they do.

PK

2 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (Jan 24, 2012)

This will probable the surprise to see at CP+..instead of that of an other manufacturer...

0 upvotes
PaulSnowcat
By PaulSnowcat (Jan 24, 2012)

I winder what does "Sony is considering investing in Olympus and forming a business alliance" means exactly? Sony will own Olympus, as it almost owns Tamron? And what concisenesses that will bring?

0 upvotes
M1963
By M1963 (Jan 24, 2012)

Today I read that Sony wants a 20-30% stake of Olympus' shares. Olympus should benefit from Sony's expertise in sensors, while Sony can take advantage of Olympus' know-how in endoscopy and medical imaging. If it's true, the deal could be beneficial to both companies. It won't be a 100% purchase, as it happened to Minolta.

0 upvotes
tektrader
By tektrader (Jan 24, 2012)

Bring it on. I used to love my OM1, BUT MAKE IT FULL FRAME FOR GODS SAKE !!!

5 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (Jan 24, 2012)

Come out of your obsession of FF .. for Gods sake!

FF is not the only solution for your creativity!

12 upvotes
Berneck
By Berneck (Jan 24, 2012)

Thank you!

Stop with FF already! If you want FF you have other options.

1 upvote
steveh0607
By steveh0607 (Jan 24, 2012)

FF is relative. A 35mm FF is small compared to Medium and Large format.

As long as the image quality is good, small is better.

1 upvote
herebefore
By herebefore (Jan 24, 2012)

Olympus has never showed an interest in Full Frame, since its very beginnings in Digital.

It has NO LENSES
It has NO desire
It has NO WAY in, and no bags of money to pay for developing any full frame lenses.

1 upvote
malazaba
By malazaba (Jan 24, 2012)

The sensor size (FF) is very important, almost most important in digital photography so do not complain if some want FF size sensor. Millions of OM lenses are around the world and if you just give people digital body you do not have to make any lenses. Yes, could be even manual focus and good price for the body.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Jan 25, 2012)

So they should make a FF sensor body? So you can use all of those old great lenses as they were intended to be used? Sounds good- except for the fact that they wouldn't be able to sell any new lenses- as that's the cost of doing business in the electronic gadgets world- which is basically all cameras are now: gadgets to be replaced every few years. The days of having a camera for 10 years are gone.

0 upvotes
CriticalI
By CriticalI (Jan 24, 2012)

Since Oly already have an excellent set of 4/3 E system lenses it seems very sensible to team them up with a new reflex camera modelled on the OM retro styling. PEN for mirrorless micro 4/3 and OM for 4/3 reflex.

Make E system users happy too.

0 upvotes
digifan
By digifan (Jan 24, 2012)

The OM will be m43 too

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (Jan 24, 2012)

4/3 won't be as happy .. m4/3 is the standard Oly and Pany gonna focus. If you like your 4/3 lenses, just pray to your lovely God that you get similar lenses. Stop craving for a body that will give you build in adapter kind of support for big and heavy 4/3 lenses.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Jan 24, 2012)

well the writing has been on the wall for the end of 43 for the longest. time. they stopped introducing new lenses long ago. and there will be no new body after e5, that is so obvious i dont know how people can miss that. the best that oly can do is build a proper afing adapter for existing 43 users.

0 upvotes
CriticalI
By CriticalI (Jan 24, 2012)

You may all be right,, in which case I assume OM will just be a PEN with a built in EVF. I'm sure it will look lovely.

1 upvote
sttp
By sttp (Jan 24, 2012)

Cheer up mate, at least 43 is still the smallest 'true' SLR around.

Plus this will be a bonanza for owners of vintage OMs looking to sell.

0 upvotes
CriticalI
By CriticalI (Jan 24, 2012)

MFT is not an SLR format....

0 upvotes
Goreyo
By Goreyo (Jan 24, 2012)

Which is why they didnt say 'MFT'...

1 upvote
rondom
By rondom (Jan 24, 2012)

I hope this is more than a styling resemblance...

2 upvotes
brunobarolo
By brunobarolo (Jan 24, 2012)

Now, DPReview, since you surely have an OM-D in your office right now for a preview on February 8th, couldn't you accidently post an image that shows the OM-D instead of the OM-4 ?

8 upvotes
increments
By increments (Jan 24, 2012)

Even if they do, review sites sign agreements with manufacturers in order to get models pre-release. This means they can't show photos. If they did, they wouldn't get this kind of access.

0 upvotes
DaveMarx
By DaveMarx (Jan 24, 2012)

I'll be surprised if the OM-D offers dramatically different features than the Alpha NEX-7, but if those features come along in a beloved old package, what could be bad? The SLR look, as always, makes it easier to justify the big price tag.

Now, could someone make a retrofit for my 1967 Nikon F? Keep the old FP shutter, replace the camera back with a sensor, LCD, and electronics. Copy the form factor of the old F36 motor drive and there'd be room for a huge battery. The old MD coupling could be used to cock the FP shutter. Lift-out the pentaprism and ground glass, and drop in a system-compatible EVF module (use RF/IR to communicate with the camera back/electronics and there's no need to add wiring). Lock-up the mirror, keep the lens mount and use the same RF/IR system to talk to a new line of OIS/AF/auto-iris lenses (in-lens battery)... All the modern tech with 45 years of "patina," as they'd say on Antiques Roadshow. Ah, the advantages of owning a System camera! ;)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Jan 24, 2012)

It is several years too late. Anyway, if it has a high quality EVF, a swivel screen and supports AF assist for legacy lenses I may buy one.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (Jan 24, 2012)

you better keep your money :)) other than EVF you not getting anything what you are dreaming of here :))) for sure, Sir!

0 upvotes
Knight Palm
By Knight Palm (Jan 24, 2012)

AF assist for legacy lenses is a paradox, so this camera is not for you. You saved your money.

0 upvotes
Ergo607
By Ergo607 (Jan 24, 2012)

Wat a beautiful camera that was, the OM-4Ti (I liked the silver color more than the black finish - which would come off in time, leaving the copper plate blank!) If the OM-D sth is anywhere near that I am in...!

1 upvote
Earthlight
By Earthlight (Jan 24, 2012)

Well, I hope they will not tarnish the OM heritage with a subpar little sensor, flaky build and a tunnel viewfinder. I remember when I used to covet the OM4Ti... It was the pinnacle at the time. I went for a Pentax LX instead and what a beautiful camera that was too! Anyway, hoping for the best. Peace.

5 upvotes
lajka
By lajka (Jan 24, 2012)

Memories oh memories. I agree with you but to a point. The pinnacle of mount Olympus was MDN, never produced due to the costs. A minature Hasselblad to give an idea. An idea worth following. Interchangable digi back, viewfinder system (evf or ovf), battery pack ,lenses that`s top proffessional. Alas. Pentax LX was one of the greatest cameras, especially it`s mechanical AND eletronic shutter and great view system. Did Pentax followed it, sorry no. The could at least digitalise little MX. And what about doing the same to 110 tiny reflex? Nope. By the way, you forgot to mention OM-3Ti. Olympus would do well copying it`s meter display system. RAW

1 upvote
M1963
By M1963 (Jan 24, 2012)

I don't know any Olympus camera that shows «flaky build». The E-5 is built like a tank and my E-P1 has high standards of build quality. I can't imagine why they'd build a flimsy camera now.

1 upvote
herebefore
By herebefore (Jan 24, 2012)

The closest thing to a "flimsy" camera that ever came from Olympus was the E-500...

It creaked and popped while being gripped and handled... so it SEEMED flimsy at first.. but it never broke or fell apart without a lot of abuse.. Flimsy it sounded, but TOUGH it was. (Mine shot many 10s of thousands of images for me before I gave it away).

1 upvote
Knight Palm
By Knight Palm (Jan 24, 2012)

"a subpar little sensor" is the key enabler to smaller lenses. An effective IBIS, due to a more robust magnesiumalloy frame, is a key differentiator, especially with the premium prime lenses.
Luckily, for the sensor obsessive, larger sensor alternative exists, i.e. Fujifilm X-Pro1 as a starter.

1 upvote
Superka
By Superka (Jan 24, 2012)

I''m fan of OM and still use it, more then my Canon DSLR. Any of OM camera or lens are fantastic. Viewfinder magnification is 0.95 - when contemporary full-frame DSLR have 0.76
I would be happy there will be such a perfect digital camera, with the same bayonet, let it be without AF even.
But if it would be 4/3, then it is all about stile, not features.

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

I think for most people, good AF is a much more useful "feature" than a camera that has a high viewfinder magnification but has no AF.

1 upvote
exifnotfound
By exifnotfound (Jan 24, 2012)

I hope it's not going to be M4:3.

3 upvotes
Gabi
By Gabi (Jan 24, 2012)

Of course it will be µ4/3, since otherwise Olympus' own lenses would not be compatible.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
David J Barber
By David J Barber (Jan 24, 2012)

I'm hoping this will be the body that finally replaces my E-400; when the prices settle down at retail.

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
SteB
By SteB (Jan 24, 2012)

I love this contrivance because you can bet that Dpreview already know about this and they are likely to have it for their preview. But because of the NDA, their lips are sealed. But if they are reporting what a news agency have said, they are not breaking any NDA.

2 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Jan 24, 2012)

Excellent point - guarantee they have one right now.

2 upvotes
taotoo
By taotoo (Jan 24, 2012)

So a mirrorless E410, M4/3 mount, large EVF and on sensor phase detect AF?

1 upvote
herebefore
By herebefore (Jan 24, 2012)

No PDAF will show up in the new camera..
Sensor based Phase detect is brand new, and Olympus has't had time to steal/buy/develop it for their new baby.

0 upvotes
mattmtl
By mattmtl (Jan 24, 2012)

What if they've been working on it independently for a couple of years?

0 upvotes
canonluber
By canonluber (Jan 24, 2012)

Awesome, I loved the om-4 and owned one for about 12 years. The only camera that I ever sold for almost what I paid for it new. Too bad it's going to be 4/3 but The IQ will probably still be fantastic.

0 upvotes
Charles Babbage
By Charles Babbage (Jan 24, 2012)

It is about time that all these giants have rediscovered what cameras are really for. Looking through the viewfinder of an OM or any camera of the film era one realizes why some of us remain so hopelessly romantic. Go on Olympus. I, for one, am behind you all they way.

3 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Jan 24, 2012)

M43 -> EVF.

0 upvotes
Razgriz
By Razgriz (Jan 24, 2012)

Personally I'm really delighted about this new product.
Delighted for Olympus and the new business it will create for them and delighted for all us photographic enthusiasts out there.
I'm sure it will be a fun camera to use and will no doubt create its own cult following like the original OM did.
Congratulations Olympus for doing what you do best:-)

2 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Jan 24, 2012)

So this will be a GX-1 camera (feature-wise) with "OM" branding? Oh, great...

0 upvotes
Chris_in_Osaka
By Chris_in_Osaka (Jan 24, 2012)

Which features of the GX-1? The interchangeable lenses? ;-P

0 upvotes
Nathebeach
By Nathebeach (Jan 24, 2012)

Or maybe the sensor? I would love to hear your logic.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

Does the GX-1 have interchangeable lenses?

0 upvotes
Fazal Majid
By Fazal Majid (Jan 24, 2012)

He's referring to the Panasonic GX1 m43 camera, not the Canon G1 X.

0 upvotes
TorsteinH
By TorsteinH (Jan 24, 2012)

+ faster AF
+ weather protection
+ built in EVF
+ Oly JPG engine
+ better styiling
...and maybe we even can use our old 4/3 lenses in a reasonable way!

So yes, its GREAT!

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Jan 24, 2012)

The featureset has more in common with the G3/GH2 than the GX1

0 upvotes
wlachan
By wlachan (Jan 24, 2012)

How about a manual focus OM-D? No more BF, no more FF. Just pure joy with large bright clear sharp viewfinder with awesome well made manual focus lenses which suffer no optical misalignment?

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Jan 24, 2012)

Um, any pentaprism dSLR with MF lens can achieve this already..

0 upvotes
Nathebeach
By Nathebeach (Jan 24, 2012)

True, but the tactile feel of my old Canon fTB was unlike anything I can get with today's SLR's. You may think it is the same but it's kind of hard to describe.

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Jan 24, 2012)

Mate, what you want to buy is a NEX with Leica lenses - the EVF owns and the lenses and focus feel cannot be beat.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

Maybe no BF and maybe no FF, but the biggest issue is that there would be no AF!!! Then all the focus errors would be our faults. Oh joy! No thanks. AF still works better and faster than my eyes 90% of the time.

0 upvotes
ragazzo bavarese
By ragazzo bavarese (Jan 24, 2012)

absolutely agree. the least thing i ever needed is auto focus (next to park-distance-control). i want to decide on what to focus on my own at all times. i need three things: a solid exposure dial (not burried in a crappy menu), an old school aperture ring and manual focus (mechanical, not fly-by-wire). period. and, of course, the cash to buy a leica m9 plus all the lovely lenses they offer. the only alternative is probably the fuji x-pro1 - if it supports my awesome collection of zuiko OM lenses. as of now, they're adapted to a DSLR that never met the standards of the glass, an oly E-620, loaded with useless features but lacking the essential controls. only good thing about it is its acceptable size and pleasingly unlike-star-wars design. besides that, it's a trial and error game nowhere close to being useable, with metering and white balance producing random results. now seriously, more of that same packed into a retro style body with a 16MP micro4/3 sensor for 1,3k? naaaaaaah ....

0 upvotes
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Jan 24, 2012)

I can see the "whine list" already developing....
It's not FF, It isn't pocketable, it's not waterproof, it's not got GPS,it's not got (your favorite obscure video feature here),it's not got hand warmers, it backfocuses, it's not got five f1.2 primes at intro, it's not got IBIS, it's not got in lens IS,it's not got 28 stops of DR, it's not got ISO 256,000, it has noise at ISO 102,000, it has too much res, it doesn't have enough res, etc.

I am never surprised by the number of self appointed experts at engineering, manufacturing, accounting and marketing that surface here to critique products that have yet to see the light of day.

Maybe DPR should create a forum where they can collaborate to create the ideal camera and show us how it really should be done.

7 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jan 24, 2012)

Ironically your post is the biggest whine so far in the comment section! :)

15 upvotes
digifan
By digifan (Jan 24, 2012)

It IS weatherproof!!!

2 upvotes
M1963
By M1963 (Jan 24, 2012)

It has IBIS. 5-way IBIS, if we're to believe the rumours.

1 upvote
mikeoregon
By mikeoregon (Jan 24, 2012)

What's all this fuss about "small"? Why, Edward Curtis hauled glass plates and a view camera all over the West in a horse-drawn wagon, fer Pete's sake!

0 upvotes
Jim Ford
By Jim Ford (Jan 24, 2012)

But most importantly for the dpreview reviewers, will it operate the 'dust shake' on start-up or shutdown?

It'll make at least 20% difference in their verdict!

;^)

Jim

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jan 24, 2012)

I'm hoping for a HUGE viewfinder like I remember from the OM line.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

Seems less likely considering that it isn't going to be a manual focus camera. The original OM cameras had "HUGE" viewfinders to facilitate manual focus. Most manual focus cameras had large, bright viewfinders for this purpose.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jan 24, 2012)

I'll admit it is not likely to be as large as the one from the OM-1, but if it was larger than the current mirrorless offerings, that would be a nice feature.

I like a big finder for composition and checking details, too, not just focusing. Although many people do like to use manual lenses on these cameras.

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Jan 24, 2012)

Could get your wish, i'm sitting here with my NEX 5N EVF and my OM and the viewfinders are very very similar in size.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Jan 24, 2012)

I count the Panasonic Gx/GHx EVF as huge, haven't used the Olympus EVF but I think it's of similar size/quality?

0 upvotes
Klay
By Klay (Jan 24, 2012)

I wonder why those sync connector caps were always so easy to lose....

Hope this market gets a little more crowded to help bring down prices. Some of the recent releases (e.g. Fuji X pro 1 or NEX7) are a bit steep compared to equally capable DSLRs.

KEvin

0 upvotes
David Dolsen
By David Dolsen (Jan 24, 2012)

Me, I'm waiting for a retrofit to my old 4x5 Speed Graphic with full-frame 240 meg sensor and optical viewfinder on top....

Just miss cocking the lens, you know? Ah, the good old days.....

1 upvote
bgD300
By bgD300 (Jan 24, 2012)

That would be the shutter you cocked. I want a nice Potato Masher flash that you could carry the camera with and a shutter button on the flash.

0 upvotes
Gordon7373
By Gordon7373 (Jan 24, 2012)

This is not surprising and a perfectly logical thing for Olympus to do. Think about it - Olympus don't have a M43 camera directly competing with Panasonic's GH-2 etc.
This is most likely to be the OM based camera - so almost certainly would be Micro four thirds. Where is the idea that there would be a sensor size change coming from?

1 upvote
obeythebeagle
By obeythebeagle (Jan 24, 2012)

Twin lens Rollei D w/Planar and forty-meg medium-format sensor please. The mechanical self-timer would be a nice touch.

3 upvotes
Sam Carriere
By Sam Carriere (Jan 24, 2012)

Aren't there enough announcements about products that don't exist for months and months and months past the promised date (NEX-7) without this site now subjecting us to rumors?
You know what guys? I don't CARE.
Tell me about equipment that I can actually go out and buy and spare me the reports and reviews of all the vaporware.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

The NEX-7 was delayed because of flooding in Thailand. Try to be a little more sensitive to the various natural disasters that happen in the world that effect product releases. While you're whining about product delays, some people are trying to survive these disasters. Sorry for the terrible inconvenience to you!!!

4 upvotes
Sam Carriere
By Sam Carriere (Jan 24, 2012)

T3, it would only be an inconvenience if I planned to buy the camera, which I don't. I am well aware of the floods and would be a lot more sympathetic to Sony if they had simply announced a revised availability date instead of relying on all the hype their original announcement (seven months ago, now) created.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

Sam, if you never had any plans to buy, then why in the world are you getting all hot and bothered about it? Seems like a total waste of energy. Or do you just like getting worked up over things that are of no relevance to you? Strange. Some people just like complaining for the sake of complaining.

3 upvotes
Sam Carriere
By Sam Carriere (Jan 24, 2012)

You may be right. I apologize if my comment seemed insensitive.
But on my original principle, it does seem to me like many sites, this one more than most, waste my time with material on non-existent products or products that are mere concepts ... or rumors. I really don't care what a manufacturer may or may not bring onto the market a year from now.

0 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Jan 24, 2012)

Sony NEX7s are available off the shelf at my nearest camera shop. Olympus are usually pretty quick off the mark too. If they announce on the date suggested, the rumoured camera will be available soon enough. Looks interesting but it's a shame they didn't squeeze the viewfinder into a more compact shape, like the EP1-3/Sony NEX7 style.

0 upvotes
Dmrausa
By Dmrausa (Jan 24, 2012)

On the subject of size, for me, this camera doesn't have to be tiny. I have moved strictly to m43 because of the size advantage and my E-PM1 is perfect to take along just about anywhere. What I would like now is an Olympus body for more serious shooting when photography is the primary goal of the moment. Doesn't have to be tiny, but I want to use my m43 lenses and I want in body stabilization. An improved sensor would help though I am sure they won't trot out a tired sensor at that price point.

0 upvotes
Sixpm
By Sixpm (Jan 24, 2012)

I have always loved the OM series of cameras, it would be great if they could either use full frame or APS-C as the micro 4/3 has it's limits in terms of grain, noise and image quality when compares to the former. A new range of OM mount lenses that works just like their 12mm f2 lens with pull back manual focus for us old timers. I still shoots mainly with manual focusing for all my people and street photography.

1 upvote
tilariths
By tilariths (Jan 24, 2012)

4/3 sensor has pretty much the same height as APS, with a more useful form factor.

Sensor size is NOT a limitation. Not even close.

0 upvotes
digifan
By digifan (Jan 24, 2012)

The sensor size is indeed not the problem. It's the sensor tech at Panasonic that's holding m43 back.

1 upvote
Entropius
By Entropius (Jan 24, 2012)

The sensor size is only a problem if you like to shoot very narrow DOF in very low light. There isn't, and there isn't going to be, a 4/3 equivalent to what you can do on FX with a 50 f/1.4. (That would take a 25 f/0.7 on Four Thirds.)

But if you like lenses like a 70-200 f/4 or 300 f/4, Olympus will sell you a 35-100 f/2 or 150 f/2 that will do the job just as well.

0 upvotes
Dedi Kurniawan
By Dedi Kurniawan (Jan 24, 2012)

Back to Manual Focus, Great! miss that Old day, wonder why Nikon dont Make FM10 to Digital system with full manual system?? ^^

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

No, not "back to manual focus." All the leaks clearly indicate "high-speed autofocus." In today's market, a manual focus camera just wouldn't sell well. It would be a very low-volume seller. If you're Leica, you can get away with it. But then again, they sell their Leica M cameras for $6,000+. Heck, even back in the film days, the original all-manual OM cameras didn't sell very well relative to all the auto focus cameras in the market. Coming out with an exclusively manual focus camera in today's market would be shooting yourself in the foot.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Dedi Kurniawan
By Dedi Kurniawan (Jan 26, 2012)

because in my country many student want to buy DSLR but can't afford the price event for $400 eg: canon 1000d/1100D :), that's way i hope they make manual focus 10-12Mp, use only 4AA batteries alkaline/Nimh,etc, many manual 2nd lenses in my country, i think the market like that still exist, i hope nikon can make FM10D too :D huraahh

1 upvote
onlooker
By onlooker (Jan 24, 2012)

For a second my heart skipped a beat. Then reality set in.

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 24, 2012)

Anyone who thinks that the OM-D is going to be a digital full frame camera that takes OM full frame lenses is going to be disappointed. That seems extremely unlikely. But anyone who is expecting an OM-styled m4/3 camera will probably be very pleased. This makes sense, especially considering the current craze for retro-styled cameras (like the Fuji retro-styled cameras).

3 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (Jan 24, 2012)

Of course there will not be a mirrorless FF by Olympus, at least not for many years. Sony might be the first.

0 upvotes
digifan
By digifan (Jan 24, 2012)

Right, no FF but m43.
It's rumored to be MUCH faster than the E-P3, currently the fastest CDAF camera. Nikon 1 is hybrid.
To date the E-P3 is also the fastest focussing mirrorless in low light, even faster than the Nikon1 system.

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 314
123