E-620X (or pro-spec E-620: a wishlist)

mfbernstein · Aug 13, 2009

I apologize in advance for another one of those 'if only they would release a camera that did...' posts.

However, I've been using the E-620 a lot more lately and its safe to say that while the output is more than sufficient for most things, the operation of the camera isn't quite as I'd like. It feels... sedate. Competent save for in low-light, but nothing special. And after playing with an E-3 and having a D700 for 6+ months, I'm used to a bit more.

Basically, I'm still hoping for that small pro-spec SLR (the one the E-3 ate for lunch!).

So what would this E-620X look like? Well, trying to be realistic on the technical side (no fancy new sensors, etc.) so... Same as the current E-620 except:

1) Slightly larger body than the E-620.
2) Accurate, fast (especially in low light) 5 point AF system.
3) 5 fps, 15 RAW frame buffer.
4) Low shutter lag (
5) Replace built-in flash with a pentaprism viewfinder with good eye-relief.
6) High-resolution 460k or better LCD.

7) Uses chipped variant of the BLM-1 to provide good battery life and detailed info.

8) SD instead of XD slot with writing to both CF and SD for backup or RAWs on one and JPEGs on the other.
9) Allow detailed image viewing/editing/deletion in record review

And finally
10) Weather-sealed mag-alloy body.

The last one is probably the least likely. To answer the obvious criticism, it would be heavier than the E-620, but not enormously so - the E-3 is only 130g more than the E-30 after all, and it not only has the weather-sealed metal body, but the bigger OVF and bigger size overall. Would it cannibalize high-end sales? Perhaps a bit. But if they charge a fair price (say $1300 like the K7 sells at) they should still be able to upsell to a new updated E-3. And many pros wouldn't be caught dead with a little camera

Overall, I'd expect the size to be ~ 135mm x 95mm x 70mm (larger than the E-620 a bit, but no bigger than the E-520) and the weight to be about 650g (+110g from the E-620). Basically the same size as the K-7, but with a flip-screen.

Anyhow, if Olympus makes something even reasonably close to these specs, I'll be the first in line to get it. If not, well my E-620 can look forward to a lot of use over the next few years...

Cheers,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

faranya · Aug 13, 2009

mfbernstein said:
... However, I've been using the E-620 a lot more lately and its safe to say that while the output is more than sufficient for most things, the operation of the camera isn't quite as I'd like. It feels... sedate. Competent save for in low-light, but nothing special. And after playing with an E-3 and having a D700 for 6+ months, I'm used to a bit more.

Basically, I'm still hoping for that small pro-spec SLR (the one the E-3 ate for lunch!).

So what would this E-620X look like? Well, trying to be realistic on the technical side (no fancy new sensors, etc.) so... Same as the current E-620 except:

1) Slightly larger body than the E-620.
2) Accurate, fast (especially in low light) 5 point AF system.
3) 5 fps, 15 RAW frame buffer.
4) Low shutter lag (
5) Replace built-in flash with a pentaprism viewfinder with good eye-relief.
6) High-resolution 460k or better LCD.

7) Uses chipped variant of the BLM-1 to provide good battery life and detailed info.

8) SD instead of XD slot with writing to both CF and SD for backup or RAWs on one and JPEGs on the other.
9) Allow detailed image viewing/editing/deletion in record review

And finally
10) Weather-sealed mag-alloy body.

The last one is probably the least likely. To answer the obvious criticism, it would be heavier than the E-620, but not enormously so - the E-3 is only 130g more than the E-30 after all, and it not only has the weather-sealed metal body, but the bigger OVF and bigger size overall. Would it cannibalize high-end sales? Perhaps a bit. But if they charge a fair price (say $1300 like the K7 sells at) they should still be able to upsell to a new updated E-3. And many pros wouldn't be caught dead with a little camera

Overall, I'd expect the size to be ~ 135mm x 95mm x 70mm (larger than the E-620 a bit, but no bigger than the E-520) and the weight to be about 650g (+110g from the E-620) ...

Interesting post. I've just ordered an E-620 to replace my defunct E-510 and it should arrive Monday. It's useful to know the problem areas as well as the pluses. I don't really know what pro-spec means in real terms. I've always believed that light and composition make the biggest difference between memorable and ho-hum results regardless of the camera involved.

Is the AF not accurate, then? That's not reassuring for me, since hummingbirds are one of my favourite summer subjects. I like the idea of a nicer viewfinder because I have a visual issue. An LCD display is useless to me so it is irrelevant. I can't focus on anything that close up, and need the built-in correction that an optical viewfinder offers. I do use the built-in flash as a fill flash when taking macro shots. It often is very helpful in that situation. Not sure I would want to give it up entirely. But for most other things, it's not very effective.

For me, the modest size is a huge selling point. I have small hands, and I also take my cameras into the woods or gardens and move around constantly after little but fast-flying creatures (without a tripod, needless to say). Most of my shooting is done in daylight hours, and seldom indoors. And I hike a lot. I tried the feel of both the E-3 and E-30 and found them both too bulky for my outdoor comfort zone. The E-510 was just right, so I'm assuming this one will feel rather similar.

Dunno about the pros-want-a-large-camera thing. At a recent workshop, Gary Friedman had everything from a Sony A900 to a pocket-sized P&S and showed us his shots from both extremes. He tailors his camera use to whatever is needed at the time, and one thing he stressed was that the best camera for the job was the one in your hand - not the one left at home because it wasn't as readily portable. So maybe size isn't everything to everyone ... I guess it's a matter of the feel, and that's very individual. But I think your point is well taken, that many people think "big" means "professional" and "small" means "amateur". So perhaps the pros themselves buy into that idea. And we let them do so.

If the price were raised into four figures, I would probably be left out and have to look elsewhere. I'm just a typical middle-class retiree in terms of my purchasing power, which has shrunk considerably over the past year. The price of the E-620 is really appealing. I couldn't afford the extra to go to the E-30. There could be a lot of us out there who are in the same position. Once a camera goes over the $1000 mark, some people will think twice before parting with extra cash even though they might very much want to. There are some really nice cameras by other manufacturers (like the Sony A3xx systems) that cost about the same as an E-620 at present.

The magnesium alloy body would be wonderful! I love my C8080 for its extreme ruggedness. It seems ironic to have a dslr that is less well-made.

All in all, a post that no doubt will generate discussion and that's always a good thing.

Regards,

Brenda

rssarma · Aug 13, 2009

--
Raj Sarma
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rssarma
--
Follow me on Twitter: rssarma

Olympus enthusiasts from NYC Metro, join UKPSG:
http://snipurl.com/crc3n

Tom Hodge · Aug 13, 2009

I would be happy if Oly would weather seal either the E620 or E30. That would fit my needs for the short term.

mfbernstein · Aug 13, 2009

rssarma said:
This might as well be the next E-3 or E-30!

Yes, but I doubt it.

The fact is that some people do prefer big cameras. They do in fact handle better with big lenses (I'd hate to use the Nikon 24-70 on anything smaller than a D700). The ergonomics are less cramped (top LCD etc.). They can accommodate larger OVFs with less engineering (though I still believe that the E-620 OVF could be significantly better without a corresponding size increase to the camera).

So basically, there is a market for a big camera, and for perception reasons too, I suspect Olympus will want to continue to have a larger flagship camera.

Ideally, Olympus would have 3 grades of cameras to match their lenses: SG (E-520/E-620), HG (E-620X) and SHG (E-3X). But I'd only be interested in the HG line.

Cheers,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

jkrumm · Aug 13, 2009

I think there is room in the line-up for a 720 or 730, more or less like you describe, sort of a replacement for the 520 if you see the 620 a replacement for the 420. It would likely kill E30 sales until the E40, but I'd buy one.

--
John Krumm
Juneau, AK

Ergo607 · Aug 13, 2009

mfbernstein said:
I apologize in advance for another one of those 'if only they would release a camera that did...' posts.

No worries...

mfbernstein said:
However, I've been using the E-620 a lot more lately and its safe to say that while the output is more than sufficient for most things, the operation of the camera isn't quite as I'd like. It feels... sedate. Competent save for in low-light, but nothing special. And after playing with an E-3 and having a D700 for 6+ months, I'm used to a bit more.

Basically, I'm still hoping for that small pro-spec SLR (the one the E-3 ate for lunch!).

So what would this E-620X look like? Well, trying to be realistic on the technical side (no fancy new sensors, etc.) so... Same as the current E-620 except:

1) Slightly larger body than the E-620.

Or same size if would be possible. Check.

mfbernstein said:
2) Accurate, fast (especially in low light) 5 point AF system.

If anything, just take the AF of the E-30/E-3. But it wouldn't be all to much a worry for me.

mfbernstein said:
3) 5 fps, 15 RAW frame buffer.

Check, although 3,5-4 isn't bad either.

mfbernstein said:
4) Low shutter lag (

Check.

mfbernstein said:
5) Replace built-in flash with a pentaprism viewfinder with good eye-relief.

Check, although leaving out the built in flash won't enlarge the place all that much.

mfbernstein said:
6) High-resolution 460k or better LCD.

I don't care about the resolution as long as it is readable in direct sunlight. That should be the first thing to look at.

mfbernstein said:
7) Uses chipped variant of the BLM-1 to provide good battery life and detailed info.

Check. Make it downwards compatible with BLM-1.

mfbernstein said:
8) SD instead of XD slot with writing to both CF and SD for backup or RAWs on one and JPEGs on the other.

Check, although I must stress I rather take the dual slot (even if that implies xD) than only one slot...

mfbernstein said:
9) Allow detailed image viewing/editing/deletion in record review

Not really necessary for me.

mfbernstein said:
And finally
10) Weather-sealed mag-alloy body.

Double check.

mfbernstein said:
The last one is probably the least likely. To answer the obvious criticism, it would be heavier than the E-620, but not enormously so - the E-3 is only 130g more than the E-30 after all, and it not only has the weather-sealed metal body, but the bigger OVF and bigger size overall. Would it cannibalize high-end sales? Perhaps a bit. But if they charge a fair price (say $1300 like the K7 sells at) they should still be able to upsell to a new updated E-3. And many pros wouldn't be caught dead with a little camera

Overall, I'd expect the size to be ~ 135mm x 95mm x 70mm (larger than the E-620 a bit, but no bigger than the E-520) and the weight to be about 650g (+110g from the E-620). Basically the same size as the K-7, but with a flip-screen.

Anyhow, if Olympus makes something even reasonably close to these specs, I'll be the first in line to get it. If not, well my E-620 can look forward to a lot of use over the next few years...

Basically an E-620 on steroids, but you forgot two things if you want me there:

the illuminated buttons of the E-620
the digital levels of the E-30

I am going to buy the E-30 after having looked carefully at the E-620. The things that made me buy the E-30 is the better viewfinder and the levels, although I must say I am going to miss the illuminated buttons (you can't get it all) and weather sealed body (don't care if it is Mg alloy or not...

mfbernstein said:
Cheers,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

--
Cheers,
Marc

http://www.marcist.be
http://www.digifotofreak.nl

mfbernstein · Aug 13, 2009

faranya said:
Interesting post. I've just ordered an E-620 to replace my defunct E-510 and it should arrive Monday. It's useful to know the problem areas as well as the pluses. I don't really know what pro-spec means in real terms. I've always believed that light and composition make the biggest difference between memorable and ho-hum results regardless of the camera involved.

Sorry to hear about your E-510. New toys are fun, but its sad to lose the old ones...

As to pro-spec, it's not really a very descriptive term. To me though, it means solid and responsive. The D300 is pro-spec. The D5000 not so. Even though the intrinsic image quality of the two is basically the same.

faranya said:
Is the AF not accurate, then?

I've had some oddities and misfocused shots (good light, wide angle). Not a lot mind you, but enough to keep me looking over my shoulder. The more obvious issue for me is that In low light (e.g. ISO 1600, f/2.8, 1/30s) it will often not even lock at all (12-60). This is in contrast to other entry-level DSLRs.

faranya said:
I like the idea of a nicer viewfinder because I have a visual issue. An LCD display is useless to me so it is irrelevant. I do use the built-in flash as a fill flash when taking macro shots. It often is very helpful in that situation.

I use mostly the 12-60. For that lens, I really don't find the built-in flash much use. I'd rather they used the space to improve the VF. I also don't like using the LCD display as a VF, but for reviewing shots (and focus) more resolution can be very helpful.

faranya said:
For me, the modest size is a huge selling point. I have small hands, and I also take my cameras into the woods or gardens and move around constantly after little but fast-flying creatures (without a tripod, needless to say)... The E-510 was just right, so I'm assuming this one will feel rather similar.

Yes, the E-620 should be pretty close to the E-510, with the possible caveat of the smaller grip that some folks seem to deeply dislike (not me!).

I'm not morally opposed to larger cameras (see my profile), but my view is that most things being equal, I'd prefer smaller and lighter. And I guess the idea of the E-620X is getting most of those things equal...

faranya said:
Dunno about the pros-want-a-large-camera thing. At a recent workshop, Gary Friedman had everything from a Sony A900 to a pocket-sized P&S and showed us his shots from both extremes. He tailors his camera use to whatever is needed at the time, and one thing he stressed was that the best camera for the job was the one in your hand - not the one left at home because it wasn't as readily portable.

No, I do substantially agree with you (and Gary Friedman, and Thom Hogan for that matter). I do think that there are some (fewer than many claim) who do like the ergonomics of the larger bodies though, and if you really are going to be hauling around a big lens all day (the 14-35/2 for instance), I can see the sense in that.

faranya said:
If the price were raised into four figures, I would probably be left out and have to look elsewhere. I'm just a typical middle-class retiree in terms of my purchasing power, which has shrunk considerably over the past year. The price of the E-620 is really appealing. I couldn't afford the extra to go to the E-30.

I should be clear: I don't think a potential E-620X should replace the existing one, it would be an addition. And yes, you're right about the price, and I'm not terribly thrilled to spend more. But the thing is that if Oly were to do this, I think they'd want to ensure that there wasn't too big a gap with their flagship model, both to avoid cannibalizing the higher-end model, and to keep margins just as high.

Personally, if they were to price this thing at, as you say, under $1k, I think the increased sales would more than make up for the downsells and lower margins.

faranya said:
The magnesium alloy body would be wonderful! I love my C8080 for its extreme ruggedness. It seems ironic to have a dslr that is less well-made.

Yup! Never had the C8080, but certainly my film SLRs are like tanks compared to the current ones.

faranya said:
All in all, a post that no doubt will generate discussion and that's always a good thing.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments, and I hope you find the E-620 fits your needs. If nothing else, I'd say it's a somewhat more forgiving camera than the E-510 (DR, noise etc.) which should make using it somewhat easier.

Cheers,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

mfbernstein · Aug 13, 2009

jkrumm said:
I think there is room in the line-up for a 720 or 730, more or less like you describe, sort of a replacement for the 520 if you see the 620 a replacement for the 420. It would likely kill E30 sales until the E40, but I'd buy one.

I'm tempted to believe that the E-520 has actually been replace by the E-620 in practice (pricing, market-placement).

As to E-30 sales, it depends on where the 620X is priced. If they price it like the K-7, the E-30 probably will do okay (~$350 gap). But I think a bit of judicious design (perhaps enlarging the grip?) would make a 620X a perfectly suitable E-30 replacement too.

Cheers,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

mfbernstein · Aug 13, 2009

Ergo607 said:
mfbernstein said:

Basically, I'm still hoping for that small pro-spec SLR (the one the E-3 ate for lunch!).

2) Accurate, fast (especially in low light) 5 point AF system.

Click to expand...

If anything, just take the AF of the E-30/E-3. But it wouldn't be all to much a worry for me.

Well, I've not used the E-30, but my (admittedly rather brief) experience with the E-3 (v1.4) not to mention the E-620 makes me hope that they really focus on the low-light aspect. It's not something one will use a lot, but you really do notice it. I almost never use any AF point besides the center, so 5 or 7 or 11 is all the same to me...

Ergo607 said:
Ergo607 said:

3) 5 fps, 15 RAW frame buffer.

Click to expand...

Check, although 3,5-4 isn't bad either.

Basically responsiveness. Again, not something one uses a lot, but on the E-620, the reality is more like 3 fps, and the buffer fills in barely 2 seconds.

Ergo607 said:
Ergo607 said:

5) Replace built-in flash with a pentaprism viewfinder with good eye-relief.

Click to expand...

Check, although leaving out the built in flash won't enlarge the place all that much.

I don't think it really needs to get that much bigger to accomodate the pentaprism.

Ergo607 said:
Ergo607 said:

6) High-resolution 460k or better LCD.

Click to expand...

I don't care about the resolution as long as it is readable in direct sunlight. That should be the first thing to look at.

I think the E-620's is fine in direct sunlight. If anything, it's almost too bright!

Ergo607 said:
Ergo607 said:

7) Uses chipped variant of the BLM-1 to provide good battery life and detailed info.

Click to expand...

Check. Make it downwards compatible with BLM-1.

Good point. Basically what Nikon did with the EN -EL3e (vs. the older EN-EL3).

Ergo607 said:
Basically an E-620 on steroids, but you forgot two things if you want me there:

the illuminated buttons of the E-620

the digital levels of the E-30

Both sound find by me

Actually, I assumed the E-620's buttons would come as part of the initial design. Digital level is a neat idea. Also a pretty cheap one to implement I think, so it shouldn't be too hard for them to get it right.

Ergo607 said:
I am going to buy the E-30 after having looked carefully at the E-620. The things that made me buy the E-30 is the better viewfinder and the levels, although I must say I am going to miss the illuminated buttons (you can't get it all) and weather sealed body (don't care if it is Mg alloy or not...

I actually find the buttons a bit distracting at times. And of course the mode dial isn't illuminated. But it can be helpful, yes

I'm sure you'll have fun with the E-30!

Thanks for the comments,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

radsaq · Aug 13, 2009

faranya said:
Is the AF not accurate, then? That's not reassuring for me, since hummingbirds are one of my favourite summer subjects. I like the idea of a nicer viewfinder because I have a visual issue. An LCD display is useless to me so it is irrelevant. I can't focus on anything that close up, and need the built-in correction that an optical viewfinder offers. I do use the built-in flash as a fill flash when taking macro shots. It often is very helpful in that situation. Not sure I would want to give it up entirely. But for most other things, it's not very effective.

The focus accuracy of my E-620 has been at least as good as that of the E-330 and E-300 I had previously. My only complaint is that it does sometime struggle with medium contrast subjects in lower light, but generally if there's something high contrast it will continue to focus even in very poor light (this is with the 14-54mm I and the 50-200mm).

--
radsaq
http://www.flickr.com/photos/radsaq/

Ergo607 · Aug 13, 2009

They could always make an E-30 on steroids: there isn't a lot to make it the perfect camera 'weather proofness is one, and if they could make it a (little) compacter, that is what I would hope in an E-30x...

Then again, I think I am going to be perfectly happy with the E-30... ...untill the E-60 arrives...

--
Cheers,
Marc

http://www.marcist.be
http://www.digifotofreak.nl

Heikki Kultala · Aug 13, 2009

The point of E-620 is to make a very good comphromize between size and features.

What you seem to want is a bigger camera with many features which increase size of weight.

So just go and buy E-30..
oh, you wanted weather sealing? then E-3.

mfbernstein · Aug 13, 2009

Heikki Kultala said:
The point of E-620 is to make a very good comphromize between size and features.

What you seem to want is a bigger camera with many features which increase size of weight.

So just go and buy E-30..
oh, you wanted weather sealing? then E-3.

That would defeat the purpose of the whole thing.

I don't want a bigger camera at all. However, some of the features on that list will probably require a slightly larger body to accommodate them, and will add a bit to the weight.

Compare:
E-3: 142 x 114 x 75mm, 895g
proposed E-620X: 135 x 95 x 70mm, 650g

That, to me, is a sizable difference. Indeed, it'd be smaller and lighter than the Pentax K-7 or Nikon D90, despite having the flip out screen.

Cheers,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

Travel_G · Aug 13, 2009

The way I see it (wish it)

It would make sense to have:

1 cam "entry level" No IS, 3 Focus Points, small VF, 4 fps, basicaly a E-4xx super cheap entry point to the system

2 cams "level 1" IS, 7 focus points, bigger viewfinder, 5 fps, the E 6xx and the weather proof E 7xx (E 5xx size)

--2 cams "level 2" IS, 11 focus points, large VF, 2 control wheel and top plate screen, > 6fps that's the E30-40... and the weather proof E4/5

Enough product differentiation in terms of photographic features between level 1 and 2 and weather proof bodies in each level.

Pricepoints (Body only) something like:

E4xx $350
E6xx $600
E7xx $800-900
Exx $1000-1100
Ex $1500

My 2 pesos
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/guillaumeserandour/

Rriley · Aug 13, 2009

it is

i read it and thought, what about the money
predictably, he just doesnt want to pay for it
developing a new AF would actually add to costs
an armoured 620n that costs more than E30 ?

i dont think so

--
ʎǝlıɹ

plɹoʍ ǝɥʇ ɟo doʇ uo ǝɹɐ ǝʍ 'ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ uı

mfbernstein · Aug 13, 2009

Rriley said:
it is

i read it and thought, what about the money
predictably, he just doesnt want to pay for it

Because clearly $1300 is unreasonably low. Oh wait, that's what the MSRP on the E-30 was when it was introduced.

Rriley said:
developing a new AF would actually add to costs
a 620n that costs more than E30 ?

The E-3 had a new AF, new flip LCD, new OVF, flip LCD and whatnot for $1700. Given how much of the E-620X would be reused from the E-3, E-30 and E-620, $400 less is hardly a travesty.

Rriley said:
i dont think so

That's okay. We wouldn't have it any other way.

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

mfbernstein · Aug 13, 2009

Travel_G said:
The way I see it (wish it)

It would make sense to have:

1 cam "entry level" No IS, 3 Focus Points, small VF, 4 fps, basicaly a E-4xx super cheap entry point to the system

2 cams "level 1" IS, 7 focus points, bigger viewfinder, 5 fps, the E 6xx and the weather proof E 7xx (E 5xx size)

--2 cams "level 2" IS, 11 focus points, large VF, 2 control wheel and top plate screen, > 6fps that's the E30-40... and the weather proof E4/5

Enough product differentiation in terms of photographic features between level 1 and 2 and weather proof bodies in each level.

Pricepoints (Body only) something like:

E4xx $350
E6xx $600
E7xx $800-900
Exx $1000-1100
Ex $1500

Interesting ideas.

I certainly wouldn't complain if that were to happen as you describe. But I think the odds of Olympus putting weather-sealing in a $900 body are pretty remote. Particularly with an E-XX line that isn't sealed selling for a higher price.

Thanks for sharing,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

Travel_G · Aug 13, 2009

mfbernstein said:
Interesting ideas.

More "observations" than idea really

mfbernstein said:
I certainly wouldn't complain if that were to happen as you describe. But I think the odds of Olympus putting weather-sealing in a $900 body are pretty remote.

I agree that it is unlikely to happen and I think it is a shame. For someone like me who likes the outdoors and trecks quite a bit a small and lightweight weatyherproof body has a lot of appeal (cf K7D) + 2 lines of weather sealed lenses really deserve two alternative regarding bodies (well me think at least)

mfbernstein said:
Particularly with an E-XX line that isn't sealed selling for a higher price.

That's exactly why in my view you need an über E 620 (I call it 7xx) to only be a weather sealed E620. That way the E-30 retains enough difference to justify a higher pricepoint (Better AF, VF, FPS, controls...).

The solution could be to have an E4/5 in a E1 form factor

mfbernstein said:
Thanks for sharing,

You're most welcome

mfbernstein said:
--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/guillaumeserandour/

Rriley · Aug 13, 2009

mfbernstein said:
Rriley said:

it is

i read it and thought, what about the money
predictably, he just doesnt want to pay for it

Click to expand...

Because clearly $1300 is unreasonably low. Oh wait, that's what the MSRP on the E-30 was when it was introduced.

so your plan is to make all non pro releases $1300?

one of the major attractions to 620 is its price and value

oh wait, then you could introduce a revamped 520, with articulated LCD, the 620 OVF, and 4fps.............errrr....sound familiar...?

mfbernstein said:
mfbernstein said:

developing a new AF would actually add to costs
a 620n that costs more than E30 ?

Click to expand...

The E-3 had a new AF, new flip LCD, new OVF, flip LCD and whatnot for $1700. Given how much of the E-620X would be reused from the E-3, E-30 and E-620, $400 less is hardly a travesty.

what are we using here, s/h parts?
presumably the mag body would be a new 'smaller' design,

that costs money to develop, foundry costs are wildly different from moulded polymers and are not done within the same plant, all adding to costs. Weather sealing in itself is costly and requires a higher spec QC

The 7 point AF would have to be developed, it would probably be cheaper to use the existing 11 point, which has after all had a lot of work perfecting it since E3 was released.

mfbernstein said:
mfbernstein said:

i dont think so

Click to expand...

That's okay. We wouldn't have it any other way.

whos we? the grumpy we cant focus a single lens in the inventory club?

no maker can keep stamping out bodies to meet every individuals needs

i think 620 is a successful and well received well featured camera at an honest price
why fool with that? quite puzzling

this is really an E30 with a mag body weathersealed and a new AF, how will that be cheaper then E30?...surely that synopsis makes sense.

--
ʎǝlıɹ

plɹoʍ ǝɥʇ ɟo doʇ uo ǝɹɐ ǝʍ 'ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ uı

E-620X (or pro-spec E-620: a wishlist)

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

jkrumm

Guest

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts