Reading mode: Light Dark

The EM-1 Mark II should have been called E-M0

Go to last post
MinAZ

MinAZ

Veteran Member
Messages
5,715
Solutions
5
Reaction score
2,212
Location
Los Angeles, CA, US
Thinking about it, I am beginning to realize that perhaps what Olympus should have done is to create a whole new line and call it the E-M0. The E-M1 mark II is not so much a successor to the M1 but a whole new type of camera. The original M1 was a do-everything camera like say a 5D Mark III, and the M1 II is a sports camera, like the 1DX II. What is making a lot of people upset may not be the price of the Mark II per se but that there are lots of people wanting to upgrade the original M1 and not being able to do so because of the stratospheric price of the Mark II. They should have instead made clear that the Mark II is a whole new line for sports/bird shooters and then come out with a refresh of the M1 that is more in line with the current system - i.e. increase the IQ, MP count, and Autofocus of the the M1, but leave out some of the pro-sports-shooter features like fast burst, huge buffer, and dual SD cards. It would be a compromise, but then so would the price.
 
MinAZ said:
Thinking about it, I am beginning to realize that perhaps what Olympus should have done is to create a whole new line and call it the E-M0. The E-M1 mark II is not so much a successor to the M1 but a whole new type of camera. The original M1 was a do-everything camera like say a 5D Mark III, and the M1 II is a sports camera, like the 1DX II.
Click to expand...
The original E-M5 shot at what, 9fps? Sports camera!

Just because Olympus claims greatly improved IQ and AF (at exactly the same point in time they desperately need to justify a higher than expected $2000 price point) does not mean there are truly revolutionary advancements to be had. The early BIF results make it look like you could well get 18fps focused on the background, and the IQ is hardly even different much less represents a revolutionary improvement.

The sort of advancements Olympus has claimed - blood from a turnip IQ wise, and from dead-stupid AF to action shooter extreme! - were never feasible for a single generation of development, much less exist to define a new class of camera.
 
Last edited:
MinAZ said:
Thinking about it, I am beginning to realize that perhaps what Olympus should have done is to create a whole new line and call it the E-M0. The E-M1 mark II is not so much a successor to the M1 but a whole new type of camera. The original M1 was a do-everything camera like say a 5D Mark III, and the M1 II is a sports camera, like the 1DX II. What is making a lot of people upset may not be the price of the Mark II per se but that there are lots of people wanting to upgrade the original M1 and not being able to do so because of the stratospheric price of the Mark II. They should have instead made clear that the Mark II is a whole new line for sports/bird shooters and then come out with a refresh of the M1 that is more in line with the current system - i.e. increase the IQ, MP count, and Autofocus of the the M1, but leave out some of the pro-sports-shooter features like fast burst, huge buffer, and dual SD cards. It would be a compromise, but then so would the price.
Click to expand...
Might have worked but Olympus would have to be really confident in the real world performance of the E-M1 II (not just paper specs) to do that IMO. So far the reviews seem to be decent in terms of the AF improvements but I'm not sure we've seen anything that validates the E-M1 II being able to keep up with the similarly priced sports cameras like the D500.
 
The olympus EMO? Named after the people who couldn't justify buying one.

Sorry, allow me a laugh there.
 
They have enough product lines that exist, starting another one to appease those who can't afford one or don't see the value in upgrading isn't the answer. They released a product that they determined has $2,000 worth of value in it currently, whether or not the general public agrees is up to them.
 
JYPfoto said:
They have enough product lines that exist, starting another one to appease those who can't afford one or don't see the value in upgrading isn't the answer. They released a product that they determined has $2,000 worth of value in it currently, whether or not the general public agrees is up to them.
Click to expand...
For every E-3/E-5 Oly sold at $1700 they sold hundreds of 4-, 5- and 6-series cameras, usually in two-lens kits. We don't have that model proliferation but there's still something for nearly everyone. As to what one can ultimately do with the new camera, we have no idea what its ultimate capabilities are, and that's pre-FW enhancements.

Cheers,

Rick

--
Equivalence and diffraction-free since 2009.
You can be too; ask about our 12-step program.
 
Last edited:
I think they should have called the E-M1 how {"expletive of choice} much! as that seems to be the most popular response :-)
 
E-M1S, then they could have done and E-M1 II in the original form factor at a sensible price using the same grip and battery.

Bruce
 
I agree the E-M1 II looks like a different class of camera. But here's another way of thinking about it. Among the things that need to be pushed (speed, IQ/tonality, global shutter, ...) speed was pretty much the one thing that could be pushed just now. 14 bit data paths and global shutter, for example, are just not to be had, as of yet. Perhaps Olympus just pushed a little hard with speed, and the price suffered. (Well, yes, they added some other things like dual card slots and bigger battery that look like "a new class.") But maybe at this level (or, hopefully 10% less) we'll be getting those other wishes pretty soon, too. No doubt I'd pay $2K for a cam with this speed, global shutter, and 14 bit data (with a sensor that can supply data worthy of that).

If I decide that $2K is too much for me, I'll just want for the E-M5 III. 1.5 years is not that big a deal.

--
The BoxerMan
 
Last edited:
But then, I'm just a romantic at heart.
 
MinAZ said:
Thinking about it, I am beginning to realize that perhaps what Olympus should have done is to create a whole new line and call it the E-M0.
Click to expand...
Don't give up the day job :-)
MinAZ said:
The E-M1 mark II is not so much a successor to the M1 but a whole new type of camera.
Click to expand...
It's an updated flagship, with a nearly identical form factor.
MinAZ said:
What is making a lot of people upset may not be the price of the Mark II per se but that there are lots of people wanting to upgrade the original M1 and not being able to do so because of the stratospheric price of the Mark II.
Click to expand...
"It's not the price, it's the price"

That's helpful ;-)
MinAZ said:
They should have instead made clear that the Mark II is a whole new line for sports/bird shooters....
Click to expand...
That only holds if they keep the Mark I around indefinitely, which is not likely. It'll be phased out, leaving the Pen-F and E-M5 ii as the midrange models.
MinAZ said:
and then come out with a refresh of the M1 that is more in line with the current system - i.e. increase the IQ, MP count, and Autofocus of the the M1, but leave out some of the pro-sports-shooter features like fast burst, huge buffer, and dual SD cards.
Click to expand...
Yeah... That's probably not going to happen. Sorry.

More likely is that in a few years, they'll update the E-M5 line with a body with better tracking and C-AF, not quite as good as the E-M1 ii but on part with midrange DSLRs.
 
Last edited:
.... I don't think this is a 'new class' of camera at all.

It appears to be an incremental upgrade from the EM1:-

Useful frame rate (mechanical shutter with AF between frames) has increased, but not hugely.

AF has improved but still too readily drifts off the subject in tracking mode.

Image quality in RAW appears too similar to the older generation sensor to be significant.

The reduced viewfinder blackout and faster refresh is probably the most significant improvement.

It's a worthy upgrade with a lot of other minor refinements too, but nothing revolutionary. The price increase is harsh, but that is more to do with the unstable global economy and the ongoing decline in camera sales generally.
 
Photo Pete said:
.... I don't think this is a 'new class' of camera at all.

It appears to be an incremental upgrade from the EM1:-

Useful frame rate (mechanical shutter with AF between frames) has increased, but not hugely.

AF has improved but still too readily drifts off the subject in tracking mode.

Image quality in RAW appears too similar to the older generation sensor to be significant.

The reduced viewfinder blackout and faster refresh is probably the most significant improvement.

It's a worthy upgrade with a lot of other minor refinements too, but nothing revolutionary. The price increase is harsh, but that is more to do with the unstable global economy and the ongoing decline in camera sales generally.

--
Have Fun
Photo Pete
Click to expand...
Interesting. So are you saying that in terms of critical AF focusing (for sports/wildlife), the E-M1 Mark II is still not up to the standards of dedicated sports cameras such as the 1DX Mark II and D5? So where does it put this camera in terms of AF, perhaps more in line with the Sony A6300 or RX1R Mark II?

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/myazphoto/
 
Last edited:
Steve_ said:
Steve_ said:
Thinking about it, I am beginning to realize that perhaps what Olympus should have done is to create a whole new line and call it the E-M0. The E-M1 mark II is not so much a successor to the M1 but a whole new type of camera. The original M1 was a do-everything camera like say a 5D Mark III, and the M1 II is a sports camera, like the 1DX II.
Click to expand...
The original E-M5 shot at what, 9fps? Sports camera!

Just because Olympus claims greatly improved IQ and AF (at exactly the same point in time they desperately need to justify a higher than expected $2000 price point) does not mean there are truly revolutionary advancements to be had. The early BIF results make it look like you could well get 18fps focused on the background,
Click to expand...
I haven't gotten background focused BIFs since I stopped using a super zoom. With experience, you should be able photograph BIFs with almost all ILC cameras.

The E-M1.1 will sometimes lose precise focus in CAF mode (it will have some frames which not sharp), but I haven't found it to jump to something else (unless you don't keep the focus points on the target) and if you keep the focus points on the target, it will return fairly quickly to correct focus. I do expect the new camera with more sensors which are cross PDAF sensors to be better. The current cameras CAF+TR is useless, I assume the new camera is better, but it is really not a concern for me.

Reviews of CAF or tracking performance are of little value, unless the reviewer has had significant experience with the specific camera and understands the camera settings. None of the early users have had time to evaluate the new cameras performance accurately. We will know how well it functions only after experienced users start to post images.

I have read posts on other forums and on other sites by experienced birders, who have switched from Nikon to Canon or the reverse and spent weeks in order to learn how to photograph BIFs with the new camera. Some give up and switch back. The jump is larger if you go from mirrored to mirrorless cameras. Unless the reviewer is experienced at using long telephoto lenses to photograph moving targets, then I find that their evaluation is of practical value.
Steve_ said:
and the IQ is hardly even different much less represents a revolutionary improvement.
Click to expand...
The IQ is unlikely to be much improved for this or any other mFTs cameras in the near future. We are very close to having reached the potential of current sensor technology. Unless there are major advances in sensor technology in the near future, you will see only small improvements in IQ as well as changes in technology which let you extract more from the current sensors (high resolution techniques, improved stabilization for longer exposures, faster but larger/heavier lenses, etc.)
Steve_ said:
The sort of advancements Olympus has claimed - blood from a turnip IQ wise, and from dead-stupid AF to action shooter extreme! - were never feasible for a single generation of development, much less exist to define a new class of camera.
Click to expand...
 
No. The EM1 Mk2 is a natural progression of the top tier. It'a not a specialty "sports" camera and anyone who thinks that's the case has little idea how broad the appeal and application of the feature set is.

It's a pro-oriented camera, and frankly people who don't have a realistic understanding of what that entails need to learn a bit more before talking about the camera, whether in positive or negative terms.
 
MinAZ said:
Photo Pete said:
.... I don't think this is a 'new class' of camera at all.

It appears to be an incremental upgrade from the EM1:-

Useful frame rate (mechanical shutter with AF between frames) has increased, but not hugely.

AF has improved but still too readily drifts off the subject in tracking mode.

Image quality in RAW appears too similar to the older generation sensor to be significant.

The reduced viewfinder blackout and faster refresh is probably the most significant improvement.

It's a worthy upgrade with a lot of other minor refinements too, but nothing revolutionary. The price increase is harsh, but that is more to do with the unstable global economy and the ongoing decline in camera sales generally.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
At the time the E-M1 was released 3 years ago the flagship cropped sensor camera was thought to have been killed by FF cameras. It was thought there would be no more 7D or D500 replacements. So the E-M1 was competing with the 60 and the D7100. After Canon released the 7D Mkii and it sold really well, Nikon released the D500 and it sold really well. So Olympus released the E-M1 Mkii to compete with those two cameras.

This does leave a performance gap between the E-M1 Mkii and the E-M5 Mkii. I would the next E-M5 model will fill this performance gap. Then again Olympus could introduce a new model line to fill this gap. How does E-M3 sounds for a camera name. Then there could be a E-M1 Mkii at $2,000, a E-M3 at $1,500, a E-M5 Mkiii at $1,200 and a E-M10 Mkiii at $900. Anyhow, just an idea. Olympus did state that they will be providing FW updates to the E-M1 Mkii. So a new OMD release each year with 4 models in the OMD line.
 
Steve_ said:
Steve_ said:
Thinking about it, I am beginning to realize that perhaps what Olympus should have done is to create a whole new line and call it the E-M0. The E-M1 mark II is not so much a successor to the M1 but a whole new type of camera. The original M1 was a do-everything camera like say a 5D Mark III, and the M1 II is a sports camera, like the 1DX II.
Click to expand...
The original E-M5 shot at what, 9fps? Sports camera!

Just because Olympus claims greatly improved IQ and AF (at exactly the same point in time they desperately need to justify a higher than expected $2000 price point) does not mean there are truly revolutionary advancements to be had. The early BIF results make it look like you could well get 18fps focused on the background, and the IQ is hardly even different much less represents a revolutionary improvement.

The sort of advancements Olympus has claimed - blood from a turnip IQ wise, and from dead-stupid AF to action shooter extreme! - were never feasible for a single generation of development, much less exist to define a new class of camera.
Click to expand...
Have you actually held and used the E-M1 MkII?

I have used it. Compared with my E-M1 MkI, it is like it is pumped full of steroids, after a couple of years of serious body building!!

In every aspect of the camera, the speed even surprised me greatly, even though I was expecting it to be faster after reading every reviewer's comments. Nothing I imagined prepared me for the reality.

In a dim store, if the camera missed AF (operator error), it recovered it so fast that one could be forgiven for not noticing that it had missed in the first place ... no "zit, zit", just one continuous, fluid action that ended up with perfect AF.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it is usually wise to actually have some experience with any piece of equipment before making categorical statements about it.

BTW, I just love the new camera grip (not the detachable one). It just hangs off my fingers like it was glued on there.
 
JaKing said:
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it is usually wise to actually have some experience with any piece of equipment before making categorical statements about it.
Click to expand...
So I take it you did some action shooting in the store to establish your right to run your mouth on the internet.
 
Steve_ said:
Steve_ said:
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it is usually wise to actually have some experience with any piece of equipment before making categorical statements about it.
Click to expand...
So I take it you did some action shooting in the store to establish your right to run your mouth on the internet.
Click to expand...
That is not what I said ...

I played with the camera in store for about an hour. What I found out from handling it with the 12-100 caused me to pay a deposit for both on the spot

Nor was I outright rude in my response to you. I asked a civil question, and apologised in advance if I was wrong.

I take it from your response that you have not even seen the camera, let alone used it.
Am I right about that?

If so, what do you base your categorical statements on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top