why would Oly build an E7....?

i am very impressed with the E-M5. it looks great (dressed with all grips) and specs are great too.

i own E1 (x2), E510, E3, and E5. I have lots of OM, HG and 14-35 and 35-100 glass.
never been inclined to get m43 anything and still am not.
i almost tricked myself into thinking i might get an E-M5...

i recently went to Disney Land with wife and 5 yr old son. i wasn't going to have my kid remember nothing but "hold still and say cheese"...all day long every day so i brought bare min. gear. i took only the E5 (no grip) the 12-60 and a Soligor 135mm 2.8. no flash either.

heck...i was even about to flip the coin on bringing just the C5050. if i had an E-M5 i would have brought it. the thing with the E-M5 is that i would def get the grips and then i am making the camera larger and somewhat defeating the "micro" of m43.

so, i was thinking the E-M5 is pretty good and that I cant wait to see what the E7 will bring -if "in development" means something more than lip service-.

then i thought... why would Olympus build(invest +$$$+) a full size E-M5/E7 just to sell a larger bodied camera to a relatively few (lose -$$$-) Oly fans?
does anybody expect an E7 to have anything spec-wise above/beyond the E-M5?
if not then do we really expect an E7 to materialize?

in Disney Land i saw no Oly DSLR, one m43, about 85% Nikon DSLR and the rest Canon DSLR. i did see way more DSLR than P&S (that was odd).
--
Thanks,
Paul

they'd make an E7 to support all their glass the EM5 will not work properly with.

Some future OM-D series camera may address this weakness, but until that happens, they will have created a market for an E7 once people see the test reports on the improved IS, DR, Noise, MP on the new camera.
--
John Mason - Lafayette, IN

http://www.fototime.com/inv/407B931C53A9D9D

camera even with the grips.

I don't believe we are likely to see an E-7 regardless of what Oly has said. If we do

and I certainly hope we will, I would think it's likely to be an upgrade based on the E-M5 technology and likely in the same E-3/5 body. I can't see Oly spending precious resources on a new body for what's basically a defunct system. I'd buy it and most who've doggedly hung on to the E-system lenses would likely be customers but the numbers are shrinking.

If Oly has a future, they've committed it to the m4:3 format and that's not at all bad.
I'll stay with 4:3 but I intend to get an EM-5 and a few lenses.

I think Kirk Tuck has the right idea. Run two systems...full frame and m4:3. Where does that leave APSC and 4:3? Irrelavent. If I were a younger, serious phtographer,

or a working pro, I think I'd do what Kirk has done and get rid of the "in between" stuff.

Like a lot of us here, you also are caught on the horns of a delimma. What to do?

I've decided to keep what I have and get a little involved with m4:3 at least for a
travel system, and hopefuly to utilize my 4:3 lenses that work for that task.
--
BJM

Already answered

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=40602497
--

Some people operate cameras. Others use them to create images. There is a difference.

http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/

http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Paul Auclair said:

does anybody expect an E7 to have anything spec-wise above/beyond the E-M5?
if not then do we really expect an E7 to materialize?

Click to expand...

I think the penultimate E will appear either at the end of the Sept production slot or March next year, b/se it is too soon for the final phase of joining these systems together.

The next jump in EVF performance will see 240 fps of multi pipeline video feeds, and where the fps of EVFs has doubled 3 times over 4 years. So that outcome could be with us in what 18 months.

I expect at that point the speed and flow of EVFs to be quite transparent to the user, and lag near enough non existent, being too quick for misjudgement and faster than SLR system lag as we know it even from the very best of cameras.

The sole remaining issue of phased CDAF remains, and there are appearing several ways this could be accomplished either on the sensor, or by an apparatus that alters the virtual register relationship. Once we get here there really isnt a reason for the SLR to remain, and a camera could be either micro or 4/3rds native mount and capable of utilising any lens from either mount including some of these sub f/1 lenses.

When it appears phased CDAF will come all at once and there will not be the technology dependent transition we have seen with EVFs. It is akin to reading tea leaves to say where that point will be, but I know it would take 2 years from the starting point if they went the same road as Fuji, maybe a tad less with 'other technologies'.

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'

It's relatively inexpensive to do so (presuming it's heavily based on E-5) and there's a small but important locked-in market of buyers. I suspect even with very low sales volumes there's a bit of profit margin in the E-# cameras, and they can still churn out small batches of HG and SHG lenses as needed with no R&D costs attached.

Cheers,

Rick

good points already...
(yes i'm hoping for an E7)

i mostly shoot 'home' studio(low ISO, f5.6, tripod mounted, mostly M focus, and very well controlled/metered lights).

back when m43 was released i wasn't persuaded to m43 when people/specs claimed/prooved m43 output was better than E3.

i did several family shoots this weekend and was re-amazed at the detail of E5. i know I do not need anything above/beyond the E5 capabilities.

however... i shot both E5 and E3 with the SHG lenses and there really is a vast difference in detail. (yes, i've read that the E3 files can be sharpened more but i've not found them to compare substantially even when done so)

max output quality and ease of use to get that output is key for me. the E5 kept me with Olympus.

if E-7/E-M5 output proves a same level of improvement over the E5 that the E5 has over the E3 then so be it, i will not be able to ignore getting a new body...i'm there...just hoping it's a full size body rather than micro.

from this past weekend one of the couples i shot (the man) is a Canon shooter. i put the E3 in his hands with 14-35 and he almost imediatley claimed he should really switch to Olympus because (and he has $$$$ glass) he is amazed at the sharpness. (that is only looking at the camera monitor of the E3).

--
Thanks,
Paul

I confess I'm eagerly awaiting images taken with the very sharpest SHG lenses on a production-edition E-M5, in comparison with the same lenses on an E-5. I'm presuming there's even more detail yet to wring out of them.

I guess we'll know in a month or so.

Cheers,

Rick

1. Olympus has not achieved full parity in mirrorless either by focusing the big SHG

lenses or duplicating them in m43.

1. those big lenses call for a good sized body, so the smallerOM-D, even with grip, won't be big enough for everyone
2. There are probably enough E-5 users who will want the latest sensor just to keep competitive (w those using APS or FF)
3. some E-30s and E-3s getting old & will need replacement?
4. If there is a new sensor available, people will be reluctant to buy the 'obsolite' sensored E-5... some would even jump ship to get newer tech
5. It hopefully won't cost that much to upgrade the E-X body to the new sensor/IS, though they might have to rejigger everything to get the new stuff to fit. I expect it won't be a straight drop in however.

Then again, what do I know?

--
Art P
"I am a creature of contrast,
of light and shadow.
I live where the two play together,
I thrive on the conflict"

I think we'll see a 100mm macro before a E7.

But if you take the E5 body and just swap the sensor to the 16MP one, they should be able to make money at $1500 to $1700. I'm just not sure how many of us would buy it. If I can buy a EM5, grip, 4/3 lens adapter for less than a E7, I think I would. I don't have the F2.0 zooms though.

Paul Auclair said:

in Disney Land i saw no Oly DSLR, one m43, about 85% Nikon DSLR and the rest Canon DSLR. i did see way more DSLR than P&S (that was odd).
--

Click to expand...

I can't imagine you will see many cameras in Disney Land worth more than $800...so it's not at all surprising or alarming that you didn't spot Olympus dslrs. And P&S's hide in bags and pockets.

The E-5 at $1700 is not aimed at the casual user, and is a different market than m4/3. So, the excitement over the EM-5 by people who are eager to flee bulky entry-level dslrs for m4/3rds, is not necessarily an indication that the E-7 won't be made. If you look at the E-5: it makes a good profit margin for Oly. It's is their most dependable line with the highest build quality. Olympus understands that phasing out a second mount in 12 years will shake consumer confidence in their brand, including future consumer investment in the m4/3 system--which is why Oly adamantly says that they will "continue to support" 4/3. Dslr's are still easier on the eyes for long, constant shoots. The E-5 size is more comfortable to WORK with. Camera trends and technology changes rapidly, so it doesn't make sense to sacrifice future flexibility by ditching an established system with followers...The future success of Olympus 4/3 is entirely in the hands of the Olympus designers and marketing; there's nothing saying that an E-7 (or E-9, E11, etc) can't be a great and profitable product for Olympus if they do it right. And, the EM-5 is not a $1700 professional m4/3 replacement for the E-5.

I may or may not buy an EM-5. But I WILL buy the E-7.

Heck, just the sensor, TruPic VI engine, zippy new IBIS system, OLED touchscreen display and 1080P video would be quite a significant refresh.

Regardless, I'd be surprised to see anything even announced before year's end, much less released.

cheers,

Rick

lasuther said:

But if you take the E5 body and just swap the sensor to the 16MP one, they should be able to make money at $1500 to $1700. I'm just not sure how many of us would buy it. If I can buy a EM5, grip, 4/3 lens adapter for less than a E7, I think I would. I don't have the F2.0 zooms though.

Click to expand...

Currently I do believe that the E-5 will have been my last DSLR. It's a great camera that has got what it takes to keep me happy for another three to five years.

And I'm convinced that µFT will get what it takes to make full use of my wonderful Zuiko zooms, in this period of time.

Until this will be the case, the 50-200 SWD will be virtually glued to the E-5 for my animal and dog action action ehile anything else will be shot with the E-M5 or one of its successors combined with the great µFT primes or my FT HG lenses. I even might add the 150 2.0 to my gear but also will use this mainly on my µFT cameras as they fully meet my demands in every area but sports and action.

And the E-M5 with the 9-18 and two or three µFT primes wilöl need less space in my bag that the Ft 9-18, the 12-60 SWD and the lovely ED 50 2.0.

So no, don't count me in when it comes to purchasing an E-7.
--



Why not - if there's enough space on the sofa...

MManger said:

Paul Auclair said:

in Disney Land i saw no Oly DSLR, one m43, about 85% Nikon DSLR and the rest Canon DSLR. i did see way more DSLR than P&S (that was odd).
--

Click to expand...

I can't imagine you will see many cameras in Disney Land worth more than $800...so it's not at all surprising or alarming that you didn't spot Olympus dslrs. And P&S's hide in bags and pockets.

Click to expand...

makes sense. up until recently a good majority of the DSLRs i seen at any big public 'thing' were at least lower level Pro grade. if i saw 800 DSLRs at Disney i saw only 3 or 4 Pro grade models and i don't think i spotted any top Pro grade models.
of course there are sooo many entry level DSLRs out there to be had nowadays.

MManger said:

The E-5 at $1700 is not aimed at the casual user, and is a different market than m4/3. So, the excitement over the EM-5 by people who are eager to flee bulky entry-level dslrs for m4/3rds, is not necessarily an indication that the E-7 won't be made. If you look at the E-5: it makes a good profit margin for Oly. It's is their most dependable line with the highest build quality. Olympus understands that phasing out a second mount in 12 years will shake consumer confidence in their brand, including future consumer investment in the m4/3 system--which is why Oly adamantly says that they will "continue to support" 4/3. Dslr's are still easier on the eyes for long, constant shoots. The E-5 size is more comfortable to WORK with. Camera trends and technology changes rapidly, so it doesn't make sense to sacrifice future flexibility by ditching an established system with followers...The future success of Olympus 4/3 is entirely in the hands of the Olympus designers and marketing; there's nothing saying that an E-7 (or E-9, E11, etc) can't be a great and profitable product for Olympus if they do it right. And, the EM-5 is not a $1700 professional m4/3 replacement for the E-5.

Click to expand...

my line of thinking is that the better the E-M5 is the more current 43 users will, willingly and begrudgingly, switch over. thus leaving even less intersted parties ponying up for E7. of course i could be wrong am i am not an Oly marketing man either.

MManger said:

I may or may not buy an EM-5. But I WILL buy the E-7.

Click to expand...

yep me too.
--
Thanks,
Paul

Witness the number of E-5 users with HG/SHG glass that claim it is more than just an incremental improvement in IQ over their "old" E-3s (me included). Now just imagine if Oly put the E-M5 sensor (or similar) in a new 4/3 body? If Oly is smart, they'll realise they've got a way to go until their body/sensors can match HG/SHG excellence.

+1 for E-7; think I might pass on the E-M5, as tempting as it may seem: I have no current investment in m4/3, but plenty in 4/3. Sure I've got lots of interesting glass that I could play with on an E-M5 (OM, ZD, Leica) but with an adaptor?
Rob

Member said:

my line of thinking is that the better the E-M5 is the more current 43 users will, willingly and begrudgingly, switch over. thus leaving even less interested parties ponying up for E7. of course i could be wrong am i am not an Oly marketing man either.

Click to expand...

I think most who got an E-5 have it because they like the size. (for big hands or big lenses)

The E-M5 will attract those who want to upgrade from a PEN, and those like me who have been, up to now, left w/o an upgrade path (E-5 too big, PEN too hard to hold)

So an E-7 would only take away sales from E-5... and if they time it right, there will be few E-5s in the pipeline when the E-7 hits.
But I don't see E-7 and E-M5 as competing for same buyers
--
Art P
"I am a creature of contrast,
of light and shadow.
I live where the two play together,
I thrive on the conflict"

xtforest said:

Witness the number of E-5 users with HG/SHG glass that claim it is more than just an incremental improvement in IQ over their "old" E-3s (me included). Now just imagine if Oly put the E-M5 sensor (or similar) in a new 4/3 body? If Oly is smart, they'll realise they've got a way to go until their body/sensors can match HG/SHG excellence.

Click to expand...

I understand what you mean, but at the end of the day, I'm so happy with my E-5 (including trhe IQ) that I just don't see a reason for upgrading. Indeed, I think I would be mad to do so just because of half a step more DR or the likes. But I have to admit that I currently use the E-5 nearly solely as sports and action camera as I've got back problems and suffer if I'm carrying it around for several hours.

Adding the E-M5 to my µFT gear, however, would clearly improve my possibilities for everything but action. That's why I definitely will purchase the E-M5 but arguably won't buy the E-7.

xtforest said:

+1 for E-7; think I might pass on the E-M5, as tempting as it may seem: I have no current investment in m4/3, but plenty in 4/3. Sure I've got lots of interesting glass that I could play with on an E-M5 (OM, ZD, Leica) but with an adaptor?
Rob

Click to expand...

--



Why not - if there's enough space on the sofa...

... because:

A DSLR is still the best camera for fast focus of all those great HG and SHG 4/3 lenses.
A DSLR has PDAF, which they are not creating for m4/3.

C-AF will continue to improve on the E-x cameras and m4/3 is still not a good birding camera, with slow AF and slow lenses.

Most people will continue to expect a rugged, bigger DSLR for mounting those big SHG lenses.

The lens options are not good enough for the most serious work in the m4/3 mount. This is where the 4/3 DSLR line excels.

Olympus keeps producing entry level Pen and OM-D bodies that don't compete with Pro level DSLRs.

That's all a bit redundant, but it's true.
--
Dave
No thought exists without an image. Socrates
http://whaleshark.smugmug.com

We want to buy them! Olympus will make cameras they can sell. I have an E-30. I'd like an E-7 at 16 or more MP. Yes Please!

These guys all prefer 4/3's.





The 300, 150, 90-250, and 50-200 with/without the 1.4 and 2x TC are very
good wildlife lenses that don't work very well with the mFT bodies.

I wouldn't want to go full frame for telephotos.

--
Jeff Taylor
http://www.pbase.com/jltaylor