The same arguments about the EM1x

Ab Latchin said:

How can anyone here know anything about the performance of a camera by the way it looks?

Let me help:

"It's too big"
We read this again and again, and despite many users chiming in that for a long day shooting, or when shooting with heavy lenses they prefer to use the grip. I can tell you that for every professional shoot I do with the EM1.2 or EM5.2 they both are gripped.

We don't know what Olympus has chosen to do with the extra room, maybe it is for the dual processors and cooling, maybe it is for extra IBIS tech and motion sensors, maybe it has sim tech/wifi and an antenna etc.

"It's too expensive"
Currently the Nikon D750, a 24mp FF body retails at $1300 at BH, the Nikon D5 retails at $6500 at BH. How can Nikon justify the price difference? It isn't image quality as the D750 has that beaten on all fronts. We are talking 4 times the price, how could they dare ask such a price with no IQ improvement????

The Pen F, a 20mp rangefinder is currently $999 at BH, at $3000 this body would be 3 times the price. It would offer a number of technical features that the Pen doesn't, as well as the usual benchmarks of a professional grade tool of build quality, reliability etc.

But more importantly if it performs the part, and we have no idea yet, it is under half the price of the larger sensor camera targeting the same market.

"The sensor is tiny"
2 stops. That is the difference between the smaller sensor and the larger. Visit the wildlife 2018 photographer award on the home page. Note the apertures are stopped down for the most part and depth of field is best described as "deep" in most images.

Most sports imagery is not poster material, but online and in small print. This is why, combined with speed, all sports cameras have around 20mp.

Often one of those 2 stops is clawed back by lenses. So if a FF users uses a 300mm f4, the difference is one stop, one. The FF user needs to buy the fastest long lenses to maintain that advantage. So they need a 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8, 600mm f4. And if they select the lighter option the advantage is now 1 stop, one.

"Noone will buy it"
The idea that the majority of m43rds users are frail individuals who only casually use the equipment and need the lightest stuff possible becomes a self fulfilling prophesy. If Olympus never builds a top of the line body, people who want a top of the line body will never be able to buy it.

If technologies are as leading as seem to be implied:
Fastest FPS with AF
Industry leading stabilization
Hand Held High res (portrait, landscape, macro
GPS, barometer and thermometer readings in camera
Longest battery life of any mirrorless camera
Fully functional wifi and high speed sharing of files
Most complete mirrorless lens suite of any camera maker
Improved video with LOG and framerate options
Industry leading weathersealing and ruggedness

Those elements have real value. The hand held high res might be enough for me to get it. If it combines that with GH5-ish video quality it is a no-brainer.

"It is like 43rds all over again"
This is complete revisionist history. When Olympus moved to Mirrorless it was ahead of the game, when it moved to AF cameras and Digital SLRs it was behind the times.

When Olympus launched the E-Volt system it began with its most expensive cameras and lenses and trickled down. However in mirrorless it built from the ground up, with smaller lenses and cameras first, building up to a professional set of bodies.

When Olympus made the E-5 it was trailing the leaders in almost every technology, AF, DR, Resolution, Video specs, Lens selection etc. Today with the new EM1x the m43rds system has one of the most diverse lens selections and technologies in the market.

To finish, without a doubt the camera market is contracting. However the production of lenses and bodies to expand the usefulness of the lenses in the system makes the system successful. When DJI makes a drone with the M43rds mount they sell Olympus and Panasonic lenses, as Black Magic makes a class leading video camera with a m43rds mount they sell m43rds lenses etc.

The success of this mount is less on the individual bodies, but as an ecosystem. The EM1x builds on 10 years of mirrorless development, as the major players move into mirrorless and their users move into the mirrorless space, being the maker with the smallest high performance body and fullest suite of compatible lenses is not to be ignored.

The major push at winning the FF mirrorless wars will leave Olympus and Fuji with a larger crop sensor market with both companies having deep lens selections and little competition. In fact, so little that I wouldn't be surprised if sony releases an APSC body soon.

Anyways, back to work.

Click to expand...

tjuster1 said:

ahaslett said:

Ab

You make a very good case - coherent, well-argued and constructive. Personally, I would like to see reviews of performance before coming to any conclusion.

Your post may sway some people but maybe not as many as you hope.

Hopefully this thread won't degenerate into the dreadful bickering we have seen recently.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I think it's OK to fear for the survival of the format, even if you have no plans to buy a product. So although agree with every one of the OP's rebuttals, I also know that there's truth in every criticism. It is really large--for m43, it's gigantic--and given that many people got into the format because of the appeal of smaller cameras, this will probably be an issue for many people. It is very expensive, which will dissuade many potential buyers from even considering it. It is a small sensor compared to the size of the camera, and many potential buyers will be attracted to the higher sensor size/camera size ratio of the new mirrorless FF offerings. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that m43 is a compromise, and that it will always be somewhat inferior to larger sensor cameras in pure IQ.

Finally, history has value and the story of 4/3 is well known to many people in this forum . . . so it seems just natural that there would be some trepidation about the fate of m43, because in many ways it's traveling the same path.

The problem, in many people's eyes (like mine), isn't the camera itself but the direction it suggests. Olympus has focused on large, heavy "Pro" equipment for the past few years. Compare the engineering that went into the E-M1-II and the E-M10-III. I absolutely recognize that my preference for small cameras/lenses isn't shared by everyone, and that one of the strengths of m43 is the incredible diversity of both bodies and lenses (in size, quality, and price), but I can't help but fear that Olympus (and Panasonic with the G9) have decided to devote the lion's share of their resources to develop and improve the big cameras and lenses, which leaves the rest of us feeling a little neglected.

Click to expand...

Ab Latchin said:

Messier Object said:

Ab Latchin said:

How can anyone here know anything about the performance of a camera by the way it looks?

Let me help:

"It's too big"
We read this again and again, and despite many users chiming in that for a long day shooting, or when shooting with heavy lenses they prefer to use the grip. I can tell you that for every professional shoot I do with the EM1.2 or EM5.2 they both are gripped.

Click to expand...

So your preference for a gripped E-M1 II for professional shoots means that a gripped E-M1 II should be what everybody else wants and needs - is that what you are saying ?

Click to expand...

I am sorry, is that what you read? I thought I was speaking for myself from my experience, and said nothing like what you wrote.

Click to expand...

Henry Stamm said:

Raist3d said:

4/3 went down when the company attempted the big camera/ fast zoom lens to compete with bigger sensors - this failed miserably

Click to expand...

If I remember the info that came from the development of m43, Olympus actually made test models of an E-7 and what would become the EM1.1. Same guts in each with same menus and the main difference being m43 vs 4/3 format and mount. Supposedly, there was extensive testing of each by their dedicated team of shooters. Also, supposedly, the overwhelming response was for the smaller form factor.

Click to expand...

Henry Stamm said:

So I'm not at all sure the 4/3 form failed "miserably."

Click to expand...

Henry Stamm said:

I still prefer the feel of the E-5 in my hands (with grip) compared to my em1.2 with grip. And I would have preferred to have purchased an E-7 or successor if that had been made available. Evidently, Olympus did not have the resources to develop both formats simultaneously for actual production and sales.

Click to expand...

Astrotripper said:

Raist3d said:

4/3 went down when the company attempted the big camera/ fast zoom lens to compete with bigger sensors - this failed miserably

Click to expand...

Which I guess is the best proof that m4/3 is nothing like 4/3. Just look at what Olympus did with the lenses for MFT compared to their 4/3 lenses.

Click to expand...

Astrotripper said:

--
My photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/astrotripper2000/

Click to expand...

ahaslett said:

tjuster1 said:

ahaslett said:

Ab

You make a very good case - coherent, well-argued and constructive. Personally, I would like to see reviews of performance before coming to any conclusion.

Your post may sway some people but maybe not as many as you hope.

Hopefully this thread won't degenerate into the dreadful bickering we have seen recently.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I think it's OK to fear for the survival of the format, even if you have no plans to buy a product. So although agree with every one of the OP's rebuttals, I also know that there's truth in every criticism. It is really large--for m43, it's gigantic--and given that many people got into the format because of the appeal of smaller cameras, this will probably be an issue for many people. It is very expensive, which will dissuade many potential buyers from even considering it. It is a small sensor compared to the size of the camera, and many potential buyers will be attracted to the higher sensor size/camera size ratio of the new mirrorless FF offerings. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that m43 is a compromise, and that it will always be somewhat inferior to larger sensor cameras in pure IQ.

Finally, history has value and the story of 4/3 is well known to many people in this forum . . . so it seems just natural that there would be some trepidation about the fate of m43, because in many ways it's traveling the same path.

The problem, in many people's eyes (like mine), isn't the camera itself but the direction it suggests. Olympus has focused on large, heavy "Pro" equipment for the past few years. Compare the engineering that went into the E-M1-II and the E-M10-III. I absolutely recognize that my preference for small cameras/lenses isn't shared by everyone, and that one of the strengths of m43 is the incredible diversity of both bodies and lenses (in size, quality, and price), but I can't help but fear that Olympus (and Panasonic with the G9) have decided to devote the lion's share of their resources to develop and improve the big cameras and lenses, which leaves the rest of us feeling a little neglected.

Click to expand...

I'll break a personal rule and respond, since your post is so reasonable. I imagine that Olympus makes a higher margin out if its higher end bodies and lenses. It needs to sell more of the cheaper ones to make the same absolute profit.

I'm not keen on the larger bodies, like the big Panasonic ones, but someone must be buying them.

I have no idea what their strategy is, other than to focus on high margin products. Much of the discussion about strategy on this forum seems to involve people with limited experience of segmentation, platform analysis and product strategy. The EM1.2 was supposed to be a huge mistake on launch - how does that look now?

Maybe things will look different in twelve months, when 3 new bodies and some lenses will have some kind of market record.

Andrew

Click to expand...

ahaslett said:

variethe arguments of mages. Truth is a jewel with many facets. Ursula K LeGuin

Click to expand...

Okapi001 said:

Ab Latchin said:

If technologies are as leading as seem to be implied:
Fastest FPS with AF
Industry leading stabilization
Hand Held High res (portrait, landscape, macro

Click to expand...

The only problem is that this looks too good to be true.

It's hard to imagine the revolution a handheld 80 mpix resolution (at 1/60 sec) would mean. Virtualy all the landscapes, most portraits, a lot of wildlife and a lot of other stuff in a medium-format quality. And on top of that a state-of-the art autofocus, image stabilisation ... for only $3000.

I'm afraid that if something looks too good to be true, it usually is not true.

Well, I reckon we'll see soon enough ;-)

Click to expand...

Messier Object said:

Ab Latchin said:

How can anyone here know anything about the performance of a camera by the way it looks?

Let me help:

"It's too big"
We read this again and again, and despite many users chiming in that for a long day shooting, or when shooting with heavy lenses they prefer to use the grip. I can tell you that for every professional shoot I do with the EM1.2 or EM5.2 they both are gripped.

Click to expand...

So your preference for a gripped E-M1 II for professional shoots means that a gripped E-M1 II should be what everybody else wants and needs - is that what you are saying ?

Do you use the E-M1 II for non professional work ?

Do you always use the battery grip for recreational shooting, eg when travelling ?

Can’t you at least acknowledge that many people would like the best Olympus camera but with the option to remove the grip when they want a less bulky body ?

we actually do know what’s in the majority of the extra space of the EM1X. It’s a slide-in carriage that takes two BLH-1 batteries

Peter

Click to expand...

Paco 316 said:

Messier Object said:

Ab Latchin said:

How can anyone here know anything about the performance of a camera by the way it looks?

Let me help:

"It's too big"
We read this again and again, and despite many users chiming in that for a long day shooting, or when shooting with heavy lenses they prefer to use the grip. I can tell you that for every professional shoot I do with the EM1.2 or EM5.2 they both are gripped.

Click to expand...

So your preference for a gripped E-M1 II for professional shoots means that a gripped E-M1 II should be what everybody else wants and needs - is that what you are saying ?

Do you use the E-M1 II for non professional work ?

Do you always use the battery grip for recreational shooting, eg when travelling ?

Can’t you at least acknowledge that many people would like the best Olympus camera but with the option to remove the grip when they want a less bulky body ?

we actually do know what’s in the majority of the extra space of the EM1X. It’s a slide-in carriage that takes two BLH-1 batteries

Peter

Click to expand...

And do you understand that the E-M1X is a complete different model than that of the E-M1.

Do you understand that Olympus has 7 Levels (styles) of cameras?
E-M1X
E-M1
E-M5
E-M10
Pen F
E-P
E-PL
Are these not enough?
Can you at least acknowledge that you are judging without thinking?
Should Olympus have a "Peter Department" and make a model named after you? Only what you want counts? The rest is garbage?
Please!

Click to expand...

Messier Object said:

Ab Latchin said:

How can anyone here know anything about the performance of a camera by the way it looks?

Let me help:

"It's too big"
We read this again and again, and despite many users chiming in that for a long day shooting, or when shooting with heavy lenses they prefer to use the grip. I can tell you that for every professional shoot I do with the EM1.2 or EM5.2 they both are gripped.

Click to expand...

So your preference for a gripped E-M1 II for professional shoots means that a gripped E-M1 II should be what everybody else wants and needs - is that what you are saying ?

Click to expand...

MEDISN said:

2018 Wildlife Photographer of the Year

Out of curiosity, I looked at the images. There were really none too exotic for mFT lenses. Two of them would require the FT 300/2.8 and the last is beyond the mFT envelope but the overwhelming majority are fairly easy with current options.

Click to expand...

ahaslett said:

I'll break a personal rule and respond, since your post is so reasonable. I imagine that Olympus makes a higher margin out if its higher end bodies and lenses. It needs to sell more of the cheaper ones to make the same absolute profit.

I'm not keen on the larger bodies, like the big Panasonic ones, but someone must be buying them.

I have no idea what their strategy is, other than to focus on high margin products. Much of the discussion about strategy on this forum seems to involve people with limited experience of segmentation, platform analysis and product strategy. The EM1.2 was supposed to be a huge mistake on launch - how does that look now?

Maybe things will look different in twelve months, when 3 new bodies and some lenses will have some kind of market record.

Andrew

Click to expand...

Messier Object said:

Paco 316 said:

Messier Object said:

Ab Latchin said:

How can anyone here know anything about the performance of a camera by the way it looks?

Let me help:

"It's too big"
We read this again and again, and despite many users chiming in that for a long day shooting, or when shooting with heavy lenses they prefer to use the grip. I can tell you that for every professional shoot I do with the EM1.2 or EM5.2 they both are gripped.

Click to expand...

So your preference for a gripped E-M1 II for professional shoots means that a gripped E-M1 II should be what everybody else wants and needs - is that what you are saying ?

Do you use the E-M1 II for non professional work ?

Do you always use the battery grip for recreational shooting, eg when travelling ?

Can’t you at least acknowledge that many people would like the best Olympus camera but with the option to remove the grip when they want a less bulky body ?

we actually do know what’s in the majority of the extra space of the EM1X. It’s a slide-in carriage that takes two BLH-1 batteries

Peter

Click to expand...

And do you understand that the E-M1X is a complete different model than that of the E-M1.

Do you understand that Olympus has 7 Levels (styles) of cameras?
E-M1X
E-M1
E-M5
E-M10
Pen F
E-P
E-PL
Are these not enough?
Can you at least acknowledge that you are judging without thinking?
Should Olympus have a "Peter Department" and make a model named after you? Only what you want counts? The rest is garbage?
Please!

Click to expand...

I like what I have so far seen of the E-M1X, and I like my E-M1 II, but what I specially like I about the E-M1 II is that it’s the best Olympus has made, and it has an optional grip and for those times when I need a smaller camera I can take the grip off without losing any features or performance.

Its going to be a real pity that soon the best Olympus camera ever made won’t have an optional grip.

This is what I dislike:

”so many people are already complaining about the size of the E-M1 X. But let me tell you that I use an E-M1 II for my professional work and I always use the grip”

How does that help anybody?

Click to expand...