Previous news story    Next news story

First impressions shooting with the Olympus OM-D E-M5

By dpreview staff on Feb 21, 2012 at 20:39 GMT

The European press event for the Olympus OM-D E-M5 gave us a chance to get some proper shooting time in with one of the most discussed cameras of 2012. Our previously-published preview already looks over the features and custom options but this trip gave us a chance to really use the camera. Andy Westlake hit the streets of Amsterdam with an E-M5, determined to find out how its features work in real-world use and looks at how well the Art Filters and processing options work.

Comments

Total comments: 269
12
Sosua
By Sosua (Feb 22, 2012)

Odl, DX has an 85 3.5 and there is a Voigtlander 90mm 3.5 for full frame. But why would you use one when you xould have an 85 1.2/1.4/1.8 for full frame or Dx?

1 upvote
odl
By odl (Feb 22, 2012)

An 85 f3.5 is an 130mm f4.5? on FX the 85mm lenses you list are also not the equivalent of a 90mm lens, they are all significantly longer.

A FF body is also very expensive, while there are plenty quality lenses available for FF, there are far fewer available for DX. So why attack the m43rds 45mm f1.8? Why not look at the equivalent lenses for DX, or the lack of them?

EDIT: oh and I dont mean you attacking the 45mm but bradley's ignorant comment.

Comment edited 50 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Feb 22, 2012)

I'd actually say the lack of good quality lenses especially for DX is one of its drawbacks. Already, M/43 is doing very well in this regard, probably because Olympus and Panasonic only have one mount to design for, whether it be a pro or budget lens.

The smaller image circle is a huge benefit, I just wish they'd make more use of this in DX designs (like the smallish 35mm f/1.8).

4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 22, 2012)

Not a lot of DX lenses? There are 33 DX lenses for Nikon and 28 EF-S lenses for Canon. Tamron, Sigma, Tokina now make mostly lenses for APS-C like the 17-50 2.8, 30 1.4, 10-20 4-5.6. Lots of choices for DX.

0 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Feb 22, 2012)

Odl, nobody would buy a 56mm (84mm equivalent) fast DX lens if it would be available. The 85mm is not some kind of holy cow, if you need exactly 85mm equivalent lens you could always get the 17-55/2.8, which is almost there. As for primes, there is a 40/2.8 DX, 50/1.4 FX and a 60/2.8 FX already. The focal length you are talking about is more than well covered, so what are you exactly missing if you would be shooting DX?

The 35/1.8 is small because it is a 35mm. The wider the lens is the smaller it becomes, but the 35/1.8 is actually larger than the Olympus OM 50/1.8.

Your problem is that you don't know what you are talking about.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
odl
By odl (Feb 22, 2012)

I think you need to take off you rose coloured specs there olyflyer. I bought a D7000 on Friday, returned it on Saturday. For the simple reason, the DX lens selection blows. YOu end up buying bigger more expensive FX lenses to shore it up. And just because there are about 15 middling zooms doesnt make up for the lack of say a 70-200 equivalent, a real DX 35mm equivalent, a real DX 85 or 90 mm portrait prime with some reasonable speed and so on and so on. Just because you can stick on a zoom and "nearly" get there is not the point of performance primes. Just because you can stick on a 50mm and get some pretty average performance and nearly get there doesnt make up for it.

Nikon just doesnt produce a reasonable selection of lenses for DX. I know, I looked at sigma, i look at tamron, i looked at tokina, and what did I see, more middling zooms, overlapping what Nikon themselves offer, a macro or two... But where is the say 60mm f1.8 they could so easily make? Where is the 50-150 f2.8 etc.

3 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (Feb 23, 2012)

It should be noted that there only 2 f/2.8 (or faster) Canon EF-S lenses - 17-55mm and 60mm. I couldn't believe, Sony actually have more NEX lenses that are f/2.8 or brighter - 3! Needless to say, there are way more for m4/3.

0 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (Mar 1, 2012)

@olyflyer - Agreed 85mm equivalent is not some kind of holy cow - but a good fast 60mm (90mm equiv.) or 70mm (105mm equiv.) DX lens from Nikon would be welcome and show they are really committed to DX (APS-C) as well as FX ("full frame") A nice 14mm or 16mm DX prime would also go down well. (I can think of a couple more too). Right now it sometimes seems Pentax seem to be the only company really committed to traditional APS-C DSLRs and lenses. Obviously with this OM-D E-M5 Olympus are providing something similar for M4/3 format.

Either APS-C or M4/3 is going to give most people much better shots than they could achieve with a 35mm film SLR. "Full frame" DSLR cameras and lenses have now really moved into the IQ, size and price bracket once occupied by medium format cameras.

0 upvotes
odl
By odl (Feb 22, 2012)

Bradly clearly doesnt understand. But that is okay brandley, you dont need this camera, in fact, I can assure you it wasnt intended for you.

You are all over the map with your comment, if you are using a 90mm f3.5 you are upping the ISO or increasing shutterspeed. Not everyone wants razor thin DoF, not everyone wants huge clunking cameras, huge clunking lenses, huge clunking file sizes.

People say that FF gives you choices, sure it does, at a size, weight and pricepoint that puts them in a different category of camera. I use my a850 when I want, and I use my Pen cameras when I want... Isnt it nice to have choices?

But nevermind, pray tell what is the 25mm f1.4 equivalent to? It is so interesting reading your comments :) Oh and the 40-150. While you are at it, please show me a 90mm f3.5 lens for FF... Nono please show me the DX 90mm portrait prime that achieves this speed... wait wait, there isnt one. So it looks like m43rds has more choices than Nikon DX, isnt that nice :)

5 upvotes
bradleyg5
By bradleyg5 (Feb 22, 2012)

Unless it has better high ISO performance than a D800 I wouldn't be interested. a 45mm f/1.8 is equivalent to a 90mm F/3.5 full format lens which is pretty unimpressive depth of field wise, if the ISO can't keep up what's the point?

2 upvotes
Prognathous
By Prognathous (Feb 22, 2012)

If high ISO is the only thing that matters to you, why do you even read this article and comment? You might want to do some reading about the relationship between sensor size and high ISO performance.

13 upvotes
zyran
By zyran (Feb 22, 2012)

I can actually carry it everywhere the entire day without feeling burdened - that's the difference.

11 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Feb 22, 2012)

I don't think any of us care what your interested in. And quit up voting your own posts.

7 upvotes
jll35
By jll35 (Feb 22, 2012)

get your facts right it's F1.8 , the aperture do not change(amateur)
comparing with the camera that 3 times the price,
try getting FF lense at 90mm F1.8 at around $399

0 upvotes
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (Feb 22, 2012)

Unless a D800 has a price tag of 1000€ I wouldn't be interested. A D800 is equivalent to an EOS-5D full format camera which is utterly unrelated to m4/3, if the apple can't keep up on the orange what's the point on doing such comparisons?

0 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (Feb 22, 2012)

What in earth do you mean? m4/3 lenses offers better DOF with larger apertures ;)

Not everybody wants shallow DOF.

2 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Feb 22, 2012)

Bradley, of course this is not the camera you should buy if narrow DOF is what you need, this is hardly news and even if DX is a bit larger it will still not produce the same narrow DOF as the FX, not only the D800. Besides, this camera costs about the third of what you have to pay for the D800.

0 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (Feb 22, 2012)

jll35,
You are talking nonsense, it seems that you need to get your facts right, not Bradley. He is talking about DOF and DOF wise there is no doubt that an f/1.8 lens is f/3.6 in FF equivalent terms. You like it or not, that's the truth and if you don't believe us go visit the Olympus site where they explain the FT advantages and differences, also the equivalence. It is even mentioned in the Olympus user manuals, which you apparently not bothered to read, but perhaps you are not using an Olympus at all.

1 upvote
zxaar
By zxaar (Feb 23, 2012)

@DarkShift , pentax Q offers deeper DOF than m43. You should be buying Q not m43 if you are after what you wrote.

0 upvotes
petrocan
By petrocan (Feb 22, 2012)

I was very interested to see how it performs with 4/3 lenses. I have a few I would like to be able to use.

I know I can buy a e30 or e3, but this camera is tempting.

0 upvotes
453C
By 453C (Feb 22, 2012)

Olympus has already said it won't significantly speed up AF on 4/3 lenses:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=40554073

Otherwise, it'll perform fine, and now you have a weather sealed MFT option when combined with the MMF-3.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
petrocan
By petrocan (Feb 22, 2012)

too bad, I thought it can be faster.

0 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Feb 22, 2012)

They did say SWD lenses do focus much faster vs EPL-3. (someone said, not olympus)

0 upvotes
Antony John
By Antony John (Feb 22, 2012)

Of possible greater interest is what Oly intend to do with the 4/3rd lenses as the 'E' series is essentailly dead (subject to correction)
Perhaps there's a 'bigger brother' of the OM-D EM-5 on the way?
Maybe a 'full size' OM camera?
Which begs the question 'Should I invest in 4/3 or m4/3 lenses?'

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
seaotterpup
By seaotterpup (Feb 22, 2012)

What an absolutely dreamy looking rig! Nice job Oly!

7 upvotes
harley13
By harley13 (Feb 22, 2012)

Lens shade not, camera retro hmmm...otherwise cool

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 22, 2012)

Leica M rangefinder lenses have a history of having squared lens hoods.

http://diglloyd.com/articles/LeicaM/images-Leica/Leica28f2-300.gif

3 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (Feb 22, 2012)

square shade is super retro..(oh...and it costs $100...just for the accessory shade!!!!)

1 upvote
photohounds
By photohounds (Mar 6, 2012)

You can buy a lens hood for $5 ..

1 upvote
harley13
By harley13 (Feb 22, 2012)

Very Nice too bad I pulled the trigger on another camera, shoot!

1 upvote
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Feb 22, 2012)

How do you like your other camera?

0 upvotes
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Feb 22, 2012)

Stupid nostalgic design for snobs. Why not make a Ford T hybrid. Live now and proyect to the future.

6 upvotes
zyran
By zyran (Feb 22, 2012)

Says the Pentax fanboy who was trying to defend the K-01.

15 upvotes
88SAL
By 88SAL (Feb 22, 2012)

Yes, he will stay with his stupid contemporary design, for snobs :)

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 22, 2012)

It's more like a "back-to-the-basics" design. Nothing wrong with that. Sometimes, you just want a hammer to look like a hammer. I think it's great. I was getting tired of the melted soap bar look that so many cameras have today. And the fashion-before-function "designer" cameras like the Pentax K-01 are even worse.

5 upvotes
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Feb 22, 2012)

Anyway, with the K-01 you can get more DOF control, no need for extra-aditional-disgusting 35mm lens adapter and a real large CMOS sensor for better performance and all for less than us750
With the OM...5 you get chrome shinny edges for eu1.100

0 upvotes
Antony John
By Antony John (Feb 22, 2012)

One could always recycle some plastic bags, add a 42 MP sensor, call it the Canikon Ultimate and tell everyone its 'the answer to life, death and everything' for a princely sum.
(with apologies to Dougla Adams)

0 upvotes
SamTruax
By SamTruax (Feb 22, 2012)

Keep grasping :-)
...and you get weather sealing, smaller size, an actual viewfinder, more features, an IS system that outperforms anything that Pentax has come up with so far... the list goes on.
"extra-aditional-disgusting 35mm lens adapter" ...you sound like a 12 year old. Oh, I know, you mean the fact that m 4/3 users need an adapter rather than having it incorporated into the body of the their cameras making the camera twice as thick as it needs to be...great bit of form/function in that decision by Pentax.

0 upvotes
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Feb 22, 2012)

And you have to add to the lens adapter the extra pocket on your jacket for the non incorporated flash in body. On this case Olympus transfer problems to users. Weird strategy that pass unobserved by the effect produced by the desesperated desire of a Retro-digi-cam. You´re wrongly convincedon it compactness, but on field it will be bulkier than a FF Canikon with all its stiked parts together and a smaller sensor. Talking about Form & Function, on this Olympus lie and Pentax K-01 is more near the truth.
At the same time it can´t even be compared to the 2 years old Pentax K5, although on its price.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 22, 2012)

@waxwaine - "And you have to add to the lens adapter the extra pocket on your jacket for the non incorporated flash in body."

First of all, you can just attach the plug-in flash to the body and leave it there if you want to.

Secondly, the plug-in flash comes with a pouch that you actually attach to your camera strap. At least that's where I keep mine. Works great! No problems.

Thirdly, the beauty of the plug-in flash is that it positions itself as high on the camera body as possible, giving maximum clearance for longer lenses and/or lens hoods.

Fourthly, the Pentax K-01 is more about "style first, function second". What exactly is the point of the K-01? It has what looks like a viewfinder hump, but when you turn the camera around to see the back, you find that it doesn't actually have a viewfinder! Isn't that a "lie"? And it has the body depth of a DSLR, with room for the reflex mirror, but when you look inside you find that it doesn't have a reflex mirror! Another "lie"?

1 upvote
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Feb 23, 2012)

T3
The point of the space inside without the mirror is that lens now can be proyected to the inside and not only to the front as it is now, so new lenses could be thinner to the outside and less prominent and safe. With that it get resoved a problem in traditional DSLR design. That is how creativity work on design, at least more than make a Evil camera look older because the silly masses demmand it. So bright yellow K-01 is a more serious new design than your OM...5

0 upvotes
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 27, 2012)

Actually I wouldn't call a yellow Pentax K. O. 1 'serious'...
Neither can I see the point of making a mirrorless camera with all the disadvantages of the breed. Surely it can use all Pentax K-mount lenses, but so can the K-r - which has a proper OVF and PD AF. The K. O. 1 is a 'pointless' camera, rather than 'mirrorless'. It is a 'neither fish nor fowl' camera - and the ridiculous looks don't help its cause...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
love_them_all
By love_them_all (Feb 22, 2012)

Why not just call it the OM5? Lean and simple, just like the camera wants to be.

3 upvotes
Liberty555
By Liberty555 (Feb 22, 2012)

Does anyone else find it amusing the the lens shade appears to be on a bit wonky?

2 upvotes
Don Simons
By Don Simons (Feb 22, 2012)

Appears? Is it wonky? Let's get off the fence here Liberty555.

0 upvotes
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Feb 22, 2012)

The sensor is tilted too. It's the secret sauce. :)

4 upvotes
Markoe Photoe
By Markoe Photoe (Feb 21, 2012)

Why couldn't we pick our cameras based only a photo of the final output that the camera produced? The cost would also be listed next to the print to justify the cost to get to that level of quality.

Not sure why we have to discuss models hair, her eyelashes, camera hood slightly crooked...who really cares about this?

When you're out shooting with this camera, or other cameras, do people think about this mindless chatter?

3 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Feb 22, 2012)

You must be a Vulcan from Star Trek!

2 upvotes
453C
By 453C (Feb 22, 2012)

"Why couldn't we pick our cameras based only a photo of the final output that the camera produced? The cost would also be listed next to the print to justify the cost to get to that level of quality."

I care about ergonomics, weight/bulk of the system, the feature set, etc. Your photo/price list would be sadly lacking for me, or any Vulcan of good upbringing.

0 upvotes
kevin camera
By kevin camera (Feb 22, 2012)

it is your personal opinion that there are only two measurable qualities in a camera -- the picture quality and price

there's the experience while taking a picture (leica MF lenses vs AF in P&S), size of camera (dslr vs mirrorless), convenience of sharing pictures (smartphone vs real camera), which cannot be easily measured in your system.

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Feb 21, 2012)

Maybe Canon will buy Olympus' photo business and make the next model the OM-D E-M5 II mark IV. I get the retro thing but I'm a little suprised it resembles the OM-G, the "poor man's" OM camera and I wonder who would want a silver one.

0 upvotes
babart
By babart (Feb 21, 2012)

This look is not "retro." It's been popular since the early 20th Century because it's simply the best way to build a camera that's both sturdy and easy to carry and use.

bab

9 upvotes
BJN
By BJN (Feb 22, 2012)

The OM-G was indeed the cheapo camera with styling to match the low-end status. But that doesn't matter to the target market which seems to relish the more tacky product design cues in their fake retro mashups. None of the digital Pens look much like a real vintage Pen, either.

1 upvote
Tim in upstate NY
By Tim in upstate NY (Feb 22, 2012)

This article's comment thread is fast becoming a magnet for dysfunctional malcontents.

18 upvotes
MichaelKJ
By MichaelKJ (Feb 22, 2012)

I would be happy to have a silver one sitting beside my OM-1.

0 upvotes
rmbackus
By rmbackus (Feb 21, 2012)

Interesting, the cameras are getting smaller and smaller and the same time the manufacturers are offering expensive optional grips to hold them better.... ;-(

Comment edited 13 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
erebuni99
By erebuni99 (Feb 21, 2012)

Option comes with money

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 22, 2012)

It allows you to have your camera the way you want it. I think the OM-D is all about customization. Sometimes you want a bigger camera with a vert grip, sometimes you want a smaller camera for candid street shooting.

7 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 22, 2012)

Personally, no matter how small the camera is, it good to have a grip built in. My GH2, and GX1 are both as small as I would want, but the fairly deep grips make them a pleasure to shoot with. The way the model is holding the camera is so much more natural than having to wrap your pinky and ring finger under the body, while putting pressure from the back of the camera with your thumb.

Anyway, the OM-D looks much nicer and more balanced with the 12 f2 than the kit zoom which I find too large for it's moderate max aperture.

2 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 22, 2012)

...I've been begging for a vertical grip option since the E-P1 came out. It's indispensable. Of course some people like wrist cramps and blurry pictures, but hey, to each their own.

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Feb 21, 2012)

The new long lens looks ugly
cameradesign is very good - lens is ugly

2 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (Feb 22, 2012)

You can change the lens and body is available by itself. Just sayin

1 upvote
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Feb 22, 2012)

In person that lens is very small. About the size of the sony nex standard zoom.

1 upvote
Infared
By Infared (Feb 22, 2012)

all sony nex lenses are HONKERS!

1 upvote
inorogNL
By inorogNL (Feb 22, 2012)

honkers lol :)

0 upvotes
ediblestarfish
By ediblestarfish (Feb 21, 2012)

Does anyone know if the new sensor is from a new partnership with Samsung?

Maybe that's why they deny any confirmation since they haven't made a partnership public yet. Someone notified me of it a while back, but I can't confirm it with anything online.

0 upvotes
Joesiv
By Joesiv (Feb 21, 2012)

Olympus isn't saying, they have said that it might or might not be a Panasonic sensor.

my thoughts are that it IS a Panasonic sensor, but they don't want to verify that information, but would rather let the images do the talking. Panasonic sensors, and Panasonic processing seem to get a bad rap these days, this seems like a strategic move to avoid getting lumped in with the Panasonic reputation.

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Feb 21, 2012)

When the Swedish site Fotosidan.se asked an Olympus employee about which company manufactures the sensor, he replied: "Ouch, that's a tricky question." Then his superior stepped in and said that the Japanese haven't informed Olympus Europe about that yet, but that "it could be from Sony, it could be from Panasonic."

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 22, 2012)

Now the sensor is a mystery? Right in the specs (on B&H for example) it says "16 mp Live MOS", which is the exact name (Live MOS) of the Panasonic sensor in the GX1 and G3.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Revenant
By Revenant (Feb 22, 2012)

That doesn't necessarily mean it's the same sensor, but it's likely made by Panasonic. The E-M5 sensor has more photo detectors than the G3/GX1 sensor.

0 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (Feb 22, 2012)

The image quality looks very similar to my GX1 with a good lens attached.

0 upvotes
amalric
By amalric (Feb 21, 2012)

The review is kept simple and effective. Congrats.

What I don't understand is if you liked the burst mode compared to similar grade dSLR. Does it work or not?

1 upvote
petrocan
By petrocan (Feb 21, 2012)

I like the model :)

0 upvotes
DoctorJerry
By DoctorJerry (Feb 21, 2012)

what is that attached to the bottom of the camera? Is that an accessory battery pack or ?? You don't mention that anywhere in the preview
Jerry

0 upvotes
Keto
By Keto (Feb 21, 2012)

It's a battery pack - there's also an optional grip. Shown on the third page of the preview.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 21, 2012)

There's an accessory grip over the normal grip. And on the bottom is the accessory vertical grip/battery pack.

0 upvotes
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Feb 22, 2012)

It's actually a power winder to complete the whole retro thing.

1 upvote
esdeebee
By esdeebee (Feb 21, 2012)

Why does Olympus offer so many lenses with different silver color tones? And the silver E-M5 body has another silver tone too.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
1 upvote
wlad
By wlad (Feb 21, 2012)

why on earth would somebody want to drag around a mirrorless camera of a size and proportion which more or less exactly fail to please the eye ?

no, really, this is as *huge*, as a DSLR... so there goes the only benefit of mirrorless cameras...

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Feb 21, 2012)

You may not realize this, but the accessory grip and battery pack can be removed, leaving a camera /significantly/ smaller than a DSLR. You also have to factor in the size of the lenses, which are also significantly smaller than their DSLR counterparts.

12 upvotes
esdeebee
By esdeebee (Feb 21, 2012)

The E-M5 has the same size as the G3. Look at the preview. There you can compare the size.

3 upvotes
Joele
By Joele (Feb 21, 2012)

1) Not the case if you take the optional grip off, LOL

2) Lenses are much smaller...

I like the option of having a bigger camera wth vertical shutter button, being DSLR size but not as big as a dSLR with grip and can also be far smaller if you simply take the grip off.. Add to that the lenses are far, far smaller than NEX or DSLR..

5 upvotes
88SAL
By 88SAL (Feb 22, 2012)

Weight in the system is important to me. I normally pack a D90 and I tell you that plus two lenses, bag, batts, (not even the grip) gets a little heavy in a day where im just out for casual shooting. Weight is important to me, and im only a young guy.

Honestly, whats with bashing on 4/3. Go buy a nex if you care about sensor size /THAT/ much. Enjoy your crap lenses.

6 upvotes
wlad
By wlad (Feb 22, 2012)

@88SAL - Im not bashing m43 at all.
In fact I'm considering a m43 camera for traveling light, but something more in the directions of the Panasonic GX1.
This OM-D E-M5 thing appears really monstrous to me.

NEX has crappy lenses that are too huge for that camera.

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 22, 2012)

@wlad- other than the viewfinder hump, the OM-D is actually very similar in size to the GX1. And of course, that viewfinder hump gives you the benefit of an intergrated EVF, elevated accessory port, and elevated hotshoe.

0 upvotes
ZephyrZ33
By ZephyrZ33 (Feb 22, 2012)

The OM-D is no bigger than a GX-1 with an attached EVF.

"Monstrous" is a stretch... no?

http://m43blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/gx1_em5.jpg

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
revio
By revio (Feb 21, 2012)

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 ;-)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Feb 22, 2012)

Mr. Monk...

0 upvotes
Then4
By Then4 (Feb 21, 2012)

So sexy looking camera...ofc the girl to !

0 upvotes
Dennis
By Dennis (Feb 21, 2012)

Andy has never looked better !

6 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Feb 21, 2012)

OM-D E-M5

OM-D E-M5

OM-D E-M5

OM-D E-M5

OM-D E-M5

Allright, Olympus... better come up with a nickname...

.

7 upvotes
roblarosa
By roblarosa (Feb 21, 2012)

Yeah, right! Otherwise people will start calling it the "Omdem 5" :-)

2 upvotes
cesaregal
By cesaregal (Feb 21, 2012)

Or: "Olim-5".

Latin language "Olim" = English language "Once"

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 21, 2012)

@ CameraLab Tester-- just drop the "OM-D". It's no different from dropping the "EOS" when you say "EOS Rebel T3i". People just say "Rebel T3i" or "Canon Rebel T3i". Likewise, people will eventually say "E-M5" or "Olympus E-M5".

2 upvotes
dgrogers
By dgrogers (Feb 21, 2012)

It already has one -- the OM-G or "OMG."

0 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Feb 21, 2012)

They should have just called it OM-5D or OM-5E. Even just E-M5 alone would have sufficed.

1 upvote
Nic Walmsley
By Nic Walmsley (Feb 22, 2012)

We don't call the E-P3 the PEN E-P3. Same with the E-M5. The range is O-MD. The model is E-M5.

Just call it the E-M5.

0 upvotes
Keto
By Keto (Feb 22, 2012)

You could say the same for the PEN E-P3.

0 upvotes
Dan4321
By Dan4321 (Feb 21, 2012)

It's good to see a lot more pictures involving people in the sample photos. Tired of looking at photos of food stands, signs, scenery, etc.

13 upvotes
Manny E
By Manny E (Feb 22, 2012)

I do hope the testers are taking note of this.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 22, 2012)

Food stands, signs, and scenery are cheaper than models, make-up artists, and stylists.

0 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (Feb 21, 2012)

The biggest criticism I read from this preview is that "the buttons are too small".

3 upvotes
Klay
By Klay (Feb 21, 2012)

That, and Amsterdam was dull ;-)

2 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Feb 21, 2012)

Maybe, but with that hair, she reminds me of Sean Young in Balde Runner.

5 upvotes
MGJA
By MGJA (Feb 21, 2012)

My thought exactly.

"Paging Decker, Replicant loose in Olympus isle!"

Very easy on the eye though - both the girl and the cam.

1 upvote
glanglois
By glanglois (Feb 22, 2012)

Isn't that Andy?

0 upvotes
tunaguna
By tunaguna (Feb 22, 2012)

Am a bit (lot) confused. Why don't take best of all. a) It has to be small..read mirrorless,NEX-7,both comes on the top with their different but good approach. b) now when on every digital mirrorless camera flange to sensor is below IMHO Leica standard,why nobody goes for full frame and adapters for any camera lens in the world (there are tens of million lenses waiting).
c) for 2k bucs it is possible to launch any kind of digi camera. d) it has to be from both worlds wheels and digi controls,main controls has to be fast,for everything else you have time to adjust it thru software. e) the mount has to be rather large so it can adapt any lens (no problem). f) even connecting manual lenses to digi body wo'nt be a problem,when using adapter i.e. Nikko,Minolta just to name two can be connected to drive f-pin and to be transfered to a digital signal for a body,within small amount of electronics within adapter. g) manual focus, do you think everybody is in a hurry. Most of solutions sucks.

0 upvotes
Odesius
By Odesius (Feb 22, 2012)

Just checking the specs on this camera and wondering how difficult it would have been to allow for selection of other image ratios besides 4:3. Say 3:2, 1:1, etc. Is this difficult to do on a camera such as this. If not, wonder why they wouldn't just implement it.

0 upvotes
tunaguna
By tunaguna (Feb 22, 2012)

Sorry for mistake,I forgot to mention the other camera FUJI X-PRO1
kind of a viewfinder camera. It seems APS C is going to stay for quite some time,and everything below 4/3 will finish in oblivion,or switch to gadgets phones etc. But why the wait for full frame,as there is enough space for both formats. But only 24x36 will bring all those with enormous number of quality lenses to the shops,crop 1,5 or bigger (Canon & 4/3)\ makes investment in a new gear obsolete.Me personally have used the downward trend,and purchsed the complete line of Rokkor MC lenses 16-135mm,and spend a a lot more for full line of Cosina/Voigtlander LTM & M line from 15-90mm. THE FULL FRAME IS COMING. Oly is dead,but no one told them,and they had a chance with bringing something really new to the market, and try to make their way thru the needle hole.Sorry for taking everybody time,and going away from the subject.

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Feb 22, 2012)

@Odesius: The EM-5 lets you select the following aspect ratios: 4:3, 3:2, 16:9, 1:1, 3:4. See p.55 in the manual if you don't believe me:

http://www.olympus.co.jp/en/support/imsg/digicamera/download/manual/omd/man_em5_e.pdf

Comment edited 41 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
FRANCISCO ARAGAO
By FRANCISCO ARAGAO (Feb 21, 2012)

No white orbs, I presume.

1 upvote
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Feb 21, 2012)

No white orbs? For this price I would assume a fair amount of orbs, and not just white ones.

5 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 21, 2012)

I think they are going to add a "White Orb Mode" option as one of their Art Filters. Supposedly, Fuji is working on that for them.

3 upvotes
AmaturFotografer
By AmaturFotografer (Feb 22, 2012)

No, Fuji patented white orb tech and Oly doesn't want to pay.

0 upvotes
JJDK
By JJDK (Feb 22, 2012)

Here are 3 more low resoulution pics (1600*1200, Jpeg, no EXIF) from the OM-D.. Think they are from the same event.
http://zoom-online.dk/nyheder/olympus-om-d-billeder-1.502037.html

0 upvotes
Total comments: 269
12