OM-5: Designed by Olympus in Tokyo

I just noticed inside the screen panel on the OM-5, it says:

OM Digital Systems Corp
Designed by Olympus in Tokyo

I thought it was kind of neat to see. I wonder if there is any real meaning to it.

Is it maybe an easter egg that they put there for us to enjoy? Many of the people probably stayed over from Olympus.

Is it an indication that the OM-5 was already designed before the OMDS spinoff?

Is it an indication that Olympus still designs stuff for OMDS after the spinoff.

We may never know- I'll take it as an easter egg.

On an unrelated note: I was delighted to see that the OM-5 had the convenient micro-USB adapter for which I have many cables instead of the old mini-USB style that was prone to breaking and I can never find cables for. I have some arduino microcontroller boards that use mini USB and it is always a hassle.

I also appreciated that the OM-5 had the menus I'm so familiar with on the E-M1 Mark II. I was able to go right to the stuff that I've used for years. Kudos for not senselessly changing things, Olympus or OMDS- whichever did it.

Somebody had to say it.

chrishurley said:

I just noticed inside the screen panel on the OM-5, it says:

OM Digital Systems Corp
Designed by Olympus in Tokyo

I thought it was kind of neat to see. I wonder if there is any real meaning to it.

Is it maybe an easter egg that they put there for us to enjoy? Many of the people probably stayed over from Olympus.

Is it an indication that the OM-5 was already designed before the OMDS spinoff?

Is it an indication that Olympus still designs stuff for OMDS after the spinoff.

Click to expand...

I read that as an allusion to "Designed by Apple in California" on an iPhone.

The OM-5 is just the works of the E-M1.3 in the body of the E-M5.3, so it was largely designed by Olympus.

They're not allowed to put "Olympus" on the front any more.

If it had been a proper update it would have had USB C rather than Micro B and the new menus from the OM-1. It will have to be replaced later this year as it cannot continue to be sold in the EU without USB C. I think this is a sure sign it was developed by Olympus before the sale and OMDS just put its name on it.

Snapsh0t said:

If it had been a proper update it would have had USB C rather than Micro B and the new menus from the OM-1. It will have to be replaced later this year as it cannot continue to be sold in the EU without USB C. I think this is a sure sign it was developed by Olympus before the sale and OMDS just put its name on it.

Click to expand...

Micro USB was fine for a bazillion devices before and suddenly it is an abomination? Makes no sense to me.

The OM-1 menus are just a different set of menus to learn. I don't see how they are really much better- just different. I still found myself hunting for things. With the my menu functionality of these cameras, I'd assign anything there that I used often that I didn't assign to a button- easy.

I will agree that it was a minor update in some ways but I'd say the handheld high resolution mode is a much bigger deal than the USB port. That is a significant upgrade- only a few cameras on the market even have that. But we don't focus on that- we focus on the fact that it uses the same USB port as a billion other devices.

It's super easy, in dim light, to attempt to plug Micro-USB in with the plug flipped around. USB-C is symmetrical so it plugs in no matter which way you orient the plug.

USB-C has potentially higher power delivery, too, which never hurts. AND a USB-C cable is the same on each end, which also simplifies things.

Micro-USB works, but... it's not as "nice" as USB-C in my opinion. Horses still work for getting around, too, but automobiles are an improvement.

Micro-USB is a pita, along with mini and the original plug. Having the same type for everything is great. One charger fits phone, tablet, camera, power bank, etc. and no chance of the plug going in the hole the wrong way round. Yay!

chrishurley said:

Snapsh0t said:

If it had been a proper update it would have had USB C rather than Micro B and the new menus from the OM-1. It will have to be replaced later this year as it cannot continue to be sold in the EU without USB C. I think this is a sure sign it was developed by Olympus before the sale and OMDS just put its name on it.

Click to expand...

Micro USB was fine for a bazillion devices before and suddenly it is an abomination? Makes no sense to me.

The OM-1 menus are just a different set of menus to learn. I don't see how they are really much better- just different. I still found myself hunting for things. With the my menu functionality of these cameras, I'd assign anything there that I used often that I didn't assign to a button- easy.

I will agree that it was a minor update in some ways but I'd say the handheld high resolution mode is a much bigger deal than the USB port. That is a significant upgrade- only a few cameras on the market even have that. But we don't focus on that- we focus on the fact that it uses the same USB port as a billion other devices.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. If you're trying to move over to USB C chargers, just get an adapter or a Micro USB - USB C cable from Amazon? An OM-5ii will eventually come out with a USB C port and then we'll be able to buy surplus OM-5s at a knockdown price ;-)

For me a much better option than charging in camera is to use batteries with integrated USB C ports (https://newell.pro/product/newell-bls-50-usb-c-battery-for-olympus/). Saves wear and tear on the camera and the need to carry around a charger.

Like you, I've been using the original Olympus menus for so long, I can navigate quickly to wherever I want. But I have to say it is bonkers to have two models from the same manufacturer with different interfaces. OM Systems really does need to start getting it's act together otherwise it will start to look inept.

chrishurley said:

Snapsh0t said:

If it had been a proper update it would have had USB C rather than Micro B and the new menus from the OM-1. It will have to be replaced later this year as it cannot continue to be sold in the EU without USB C. I think this is a sure sign it was developed by Olympus before the sale and OMDS just put its name on it.

Click to expand...

Micro USB was fine for a bazillion devices before and suddenly it is an abomination? Makes no sense to me.

Click to expand...

That is what people call "progress".

The micro-B port of OM-5 was already anachronistic choice since 2019. It works fine with my OM-5 and it is anachronistic. Both states won't cancel each other.

chrishurley said:

The OM-1 menus are just a different set of menus to learn. I don't see how they are really much better- just different. I still found myself hunting for things. With the my menu functionality of these cameras, I'd assign anything there that I used often that I didn't assign to a button- easy.

I will agree that it was a minor update in some ways but I'd say the handheld high resolution mode is a much bigger deal than the USB port. That is a significant upgrade- only a few cameras on the market even have that. But we don't focus on that- we focus on the fact that it uses the same USB port as a billion other devices.

Click to expand...

Of course, the micro-B port is not a deal breaker to people like us. By the way, I've never heard of a camera captures greater images than others because its charging is inconvenient.

The era of dedicated charger and proprietary cables are gone and what we (or OMDS) need is the entry of newcomers, who will sustain the camera market ecosystem.

THEIR FIRST CAMERA was a SMARTPHONE with USB-C port. Explain them the virtues of archaic ports. That's too much for me.

chrishurley said:

Is it an indication that the OM-5 was already designed before the OMDS spinoff?

Is it an indication that Olympus still designs stuff for OMDS after the spinoff.

Click to expand...

Neither. The OM-5 is litterally an E-M5 mark III with the "Olympus" logo at the front replace by "OM SYSTEMS"

What the OM-5 is, is an E-M5 mark III with the E-M1 mark III's processor and some features added from the E-M1X.

It's more Olympus than it is OM Systems.

chrishurley said:

On an unrelated note: I was delighted to see that the OM-5 had the convenient micro-USB adapter for which I have many cables instead of the old mini-USB style that was prone to breaking and I can never find cables for. I have some arduino microcontroller boards that use mini USB and it is always a hassle.

Click to expand...

Mini USB is an obsolete standard... and the Micro-USB type B port is also an obsolete port (it's also one of the most prone to breaking USB ports in history of USB ports...)

When the E-M5 mark III was released in late 2019, it was already obsolete as nearly all brands had moved to the USB-C standard. As a result, there was cameras that could be charged through USB pretty quickly when the E-M5iii took 6 to 7 hours to do so because of the power limitations of the USB 2.0 standard this port uses.

You might see a nice compatibility, I see an obsolete port that makes it not compatible with any other device I own.

chrishurley said:

I also appreciated that the OM-5 had the menus I'm so familiar with on the E-M1 Mark II. I was able to go right to the stuff that I've used for years. Kudos for not senselessly changing things, Olympus or OMDS- whichever did it.

Click to expand...

Actually, it would have been the opportunity to get the newer (and actually excellent) menu system that was introduced with the OM-1.

But no, they kept the old one. Meaning that a camera released after the OM-1, still had the same menu system as a camera released in 2016. Menu systems aren't a big issue but that was clearly a little weird to see.

Overall the OM-5, as nice as it is, is very much the last "Olympus" camera, while the OM-1 was the first "OM Systems" camera, despite the logo stamped in the front.

I'm looking forward to what the OM-5 mark II will be, hoping for the return of a full metal body like in the days of the E-M5 mark II.

I guess we're still waiting for a Pen-line continuation and an E-M10iv (OM-10?) replacement.

chrishurley said:

Snapsh0t said:

If it had been a proper update it would have had USB C rather than Micro B and the new menus from the OM-1. It will have to be replaced later this year as it cannot continue to be sold in the EU without USB C. I think this is a sure sign it was developed by Olympus before the sale and OMDS just put its name on it.

Click to expand...

Micro USB was fine for a bazillion devices before and suddenly it is an abomination? Makes no sense to me.

Click to expand...

It breaks easily, had a couple of phones I had to trash because of that port.

Also, it doesn't allow more than 5W of power delivery, and no speed faster than what USB 2.0 could do.

For reference, modern phones can charge up to 100W through a USB-C (USB-4.0, or 3.2 gen 2 or whatever they want to call it), have bandwidth up to 20GBps when the micro USB could only do about 60MBps.

They're also much more resilient, and can be plugged in both ways.

When the micro-USB port was all we had, we didn't think of it much. After all it was that or the Mini-USB which was basically teh same but thicker and more fragile.

When USB-C was introduced, pretty much every device switched to it because of how good it is compared to micro-USB

Think of it like power steering in a car... "unpowered steering was fine and suddenly it's an abomination?" Yeah, it wasn't when we didn't have anything else. Nowadays, it's the clear inferior option, that's all.

Technology advancement and all that

chrishurley said:

The OM-1 menus are just a different set of menus to learn. I don't see how they are really much better- just different. I still found myself hunting for things. With the my menu functionality of these cameras, I'd assign anything there that I used often that I didn't assign to a button- easy.

I will agree that it was a minor update in some ways but I'd say the handheld high resolution mode is a much bigger deal than the USB port. That is a significant upgrade- only a few cameras on the market even have that. But we don't focus on that- we focus on the fact that it uses the same USB port as a billion other devices.

Click to expand...

The OM-5 is overall a great camera, but it's not because it has a great hand held high resolution mode that it makes the decision to keep a micro B USB port any less idiotic.

And besides : it's not like it was introduced with this camera, it was already there in previous Olympus bodies like the E-M1X, but now it's in a smaller body.

to use a car analogy again : "yeah my car can't turn very well because it doesn't have power steering, but hey look at that big V8!"

The big V8 doesn't change the steering issue. Just like a car with amazing steering and a dinky little engine wouldn't be much better.

lunic said:

THEIR FIRST CAMERA was a SMARTPHONE with USB-C port. Explain them the virtues of archaic ports. That's too much for me.

Click to expand...

A substantial number of them probably had lightning ports eh?

I'm not saying USB-C isn't better. It is- I get it. I work in IT where I have probably had a million times of having USB turned the wrong way. It starts the wrong way so you flip it, then it is the wrong way again, then somehow the first way works. As an aside, I have seen micro USB cables that will go either way- I'm not sure how universal they are but they exist.

On the other hand, it must mean the camera is pretty solid if the USB port and the menu thing is the biggest complaint because neither is a big issue.

Having had the OM-5 for a few days now, I can readily say it is a very nice camera, except for these two minor issues.

MJ_Photo38 said:

Neither. The OM-5 is litterally an E-M5 mark III with the "Olympus" logo at the front replace by "OM SYSTEMS"

What the OM-5 is, is an E-M5 mark III with the E-M1 mark III's processor and some features added from the E-M1X.

Click to expand...

Well which is it? Literally the E-M5 Mark III or the E-M5 Mark III with the E-M1 mark III's processor and some features from the E-M1X?

You think they just unplugged the processor and plugged the new one in?

MJ_Photo38 said:

It's more Olympus than it is OM Systems.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that OM Systems is more Olympus [camera and audio division] than we assume. I think they have said as much but we don't believe them. I'm not sure what to believe.

[skipping repetitive responses about USB and menus. Both are minor issues, at best. My posting about that was intended to tongue in cheek. I can't believe I hooked so many people with it.]

MJ_Photo38 said:

It breaks easily, had a couple of phones I had to trash because of that port.

Click to expand...

You must be clumsy or unlucky. I've had must be hundreds of devices with that port and can't recall anything I had to trash because of the port. On a camera, I basically never use it.

Why in the world would you tie your camera down for charging? The only reason it makes any sense at all on phone is because the battery is so small and custom fit that it isn't removable. That is the only reason it even exists.

MJ_Photo38 said:

Think of it like power steering in a car... "unpowered steering was fine and suddenly it's an abomination?" Yeah, it wasn't when we didn't have anything else. Nowadays, it's the clear inferior option, that's all.

Click to expand...

Realizing that there is no such thing as a perfect illustration, I think you still should make SOME attempt to have a decent illustration.

Steering is the major interface to a car, along with the pedals. You're saying that the USB port is equivalent to that? The port on a camera that you don't even have to use ever is equivalent to the thing you absolutely must use constantly to drive a car?

fail.

USB-C would have been nice. If you had two cameras that you liked equally and one had USB-C and the other didn't- sure... Pick the USB-C one. If you had a solid camera that happened to have a fiddly port that you don't even have to use. Who cares? Enjoy the camera.

chrishurley said:

MJ_Photo38 said:

Neither. The OM-5 is litterally an E-M5 mark III with the "Olympus" logo at the front replace by "OM SYSTEMS"

What the OM-5 is, is an E-M5 mark III with the E-M1 mark III's processor and some features added from the E-M1X.

Click to expand...

Well which is it? Literally the E-M5 Mark III or the E-M5 Mark III with the E-M1 mark III's processor and some features from the E-M1X?

Click to expand...

When I said "it's literally the E-M5iii" I should have added "when it comes to the external body design and molds, as it's identical to the E-M5iii"

chrishurley said:

You think they just unplugged the processor and plugged the new one in?

Click to expand...

No, I think the PCB design of the E-M1iii and E-M5iii weren't that different (same kind of power delivery, same kind of control modules, same kind of chip ect, so dropping the newer processor on a similar PCB with minimal modification to the original design isn't that bad of a idea (and it's way cheaper than making a completely new camera).

The E-M1X and E-M1iii had the same processor. Implementing E-M1X features in the OM-5 was only a matter of firmware.

chrishurley said:

chrishurley said:

It's more Olympus than it is OM Systems.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure that OM Systems is more Olympus [camera and audio division] than we assume. I think they have said as much but we don't believe them. I'm not sure what to believe.

Click to expand...

I meant the OM-5 is more an Olympus product than an OMS product, as it's using the processor, body design ect all coming from Olympus-era cameras.

Only the OM-1 is, to me, something completely new that came after Olympus sold their camera / imagning division.

I'm not saying that OM Systems is in fact Olympus (even though I'm sure a lot of people stayed in the entity after the name change)

chrishurley said:

MJ_Photo38 said:

It breaks easily, had a couple of phones I had to trash because of that port.

Click to expand...

You must be clumsy or unlucky. I've had must be hundreds of devices with that port and can't recall anything I had to trash because of the port. On a camera, I basically never use it.

Why in the world would you tie your camera down for charging? The only reason it makes any sense at all on phone is because the battery is so small and custom fit that it isn't removable. That is the only reason it even exists.

Click to expand...

Umm.. I don't know because pretty much all brands don't include a charger in camera boxes now? Only a cable to recharge the battery through the camera with USB? Just a guess, huh.

Also, recharging my camera with a powerbank on the field when all batteries are dead can be a life saver (and has been for me a couple times)

chrishurley said:

chrishurley said:

Think of it like power steering in a car... "unpowered steering was fine and suddenly it's an abomination?" Yeah, it wasn't when we didn't have anything else. Nowadays, it's the clear inferior option, that's all.

Click to expand...

Realizing that there is no such thing as a perfect illustration, I think you still should make SOME attempt to have a decent illustration.

Steering is the major interface to a car, along with the pedals. You're saying that the USB port is equivalent to that? The port on a camera that you don't even have to use ever is equivalent to the thing you absolutely must use constantly to drive a car?

fail.

Click to expand...

You're taking this a little too seriously, bud. That was a metaphor for technological advancement, not something meant to be analyzed. The example I took was over-the-top, for the sake of the metaphor itself.

I stand by what I said. Because it was fine 10 years ago doesn't mean that it's not worthy of any criticism today.

chrishurley said:

USB-C would have been nice. If you had two cameras that you liked equally and one had USB-C and the other didn't- sure... Pick the USB-C one. If you had a solid camera that happened to have a fiddly port that you don't even have to use. Who cares? Enjoy the camera.

Click to expand...

Who cares? I don't know, people that use that port maybe? What's the next step, not include USB ports on cameras at all? "Why are you complaining about? You don't even use it !"

Besides, I do use the USB-C port on my camera all the time to transfer to clients and backup images on the field.

--
(G.A.S. and collectionnite will get my skin one day)

MJ_Photo38 said:

The E-M1X and E-M1iii had the same processor. Implementing E-M1X features in the OM-5 was only a matter of firmware.

Click to expand...

Didn't the E-M1X have two processors? Didn't it run off two batteries instead of one? Seems like that would be a significant redesign.

With a totally different body size, and ports in a totally different place, I'm guessing Olympus didn't just click "reshape" and have a new camera pop out of the other end of the machine.

I'll agree that it was easier than starting from zero but isn't that most camera releases that aren't the first in a series?

MJ_Photo38 said:

Only the OM-1 is, to me, something completely new that came after Olympus sold their camera / imagning division.

Click to expand...

I would think the OM-1 was they clearest cut case of a camera that was almost 100% designed before the transfer.

If OMDS designed the OM-1 completely new AFTER the transfer, why has there been basically zero significant output from them after that?

MJ_Photo38 said:

I'm not saying that OM Systems is in fact Olympus (even though I'm sure a lot of people stayed in the entity after the name change)

Click to expand...

I'd love to know more about all of that just for curiosity and no, they don't owe me anything. People would be comforted if they knew (FOR EXAMPLE) that basically the whole group was simply carved out and of course some restructuring occurred but that could have happened (and probably did from time to time) when it was part of the larger Olympus.

I suspect that camera divisions are almost like a pride / heritage project for a lot of these companies. They seem to make their real money from medical stuff.

chrishurley said:

MJ_Photo38 said:

The E-M1X and E-M1iii had the same processor. Implementing E-M1X features in the OM-5 was only a matter of firmware.

Click to expand...

Didn't the E-M1X have two processors? Didn't it run off two batteries instead of one? Seems like that would be a significant redesign.

Click to expand...

Not really. Two processors doesn't mean both processors are used equally, or that their computing power is exactly doubled.

They also operate both at the same voltage, two batteries are only giving more capacity. If the voltages are different, they are withing the safe use of the transistors inside the silicon, which means it's most likely very close.

chrishurley said:

With a totally different body size, and ports in a totally different place, I'm guessing Olympus didn't just click "reshape" and have a new camera pop out of the other end of the machine.

Click to expand...

Never said that it was the same PCB. I said that the architechture of CPUs, their pin-out, their I/O ports are all wired the same. Dropping an E-M1iii processor in an E-M5iii body, with a slight redesign of the E-M5iii's PCB is most likely what happened for the OM-5.

chrishurley said:

I'll agree that it was easier than starting from zero but isn't that most camera releases that aren't the first in a series?

Click to expand...

That means absolutely nothing. A Nikon Z6II is probably only a minor redesign from the original Nikon Z6, adding a processor and SD slot but keeping everything else the same, down to the amount of RAM.

A Nikon Z6III on the other hand is most likely a completely new PCB, that sits in a completely new body. It's not because it's part of the "Z6" line that it's not starting from zero.

chrishurley said:

chrishurley said:

Only the OM-1 is, to me, something completely new that came after Olympus sold their camera / imagning division.

Click to expand...

I would think the OM-1 was they clearest cut case of a camera that was almost 100% designed before the transfer.

Click to expand...

Not what I said (again). I said that from a consumer perspective, I said that the camera that came after the switch to the OM Systems brand name had a completely new menu system, new design (mostly), largely all new hardware with new CPU, new sensor, new panels on the camera ect.

The OM-5 really feels like what an E-M5 mark IV would have been : same menu as before, same sensor as before, same body as before. Only thing changing is the logo on the front.

MJ_Photo38 said:

Umm.. I don't know because pretty much all brands don't include a charger in camera boxes now? Only a cable to recharge the battery through the camera with USB? Just a guess, huh.

Click to expand...

I am able to admit that I don't have your use case and don't live in your skin- you're entitled to disqualify the camera for your use based on it not having a USB-C port.

I guess I can feel lucky that it isn't a problem for me because it means I can just enjoy the camera.

I'm sure there are lots of things that I won't use based on some particular characteristic that other people are fine with. I can think of a couple right off the top of my head.

MJ_Photo38 said:

The OM-5 really feels like what an E-M5 mark IV would have been : same menu as before, same sensor as before, same body as before. Only thing changing is the logo on the front.

Click to expand...

no further questions your honor.

MJ_Photo38 said:

chrishurley said:

Is it an indication that the OM-5 was already designed before the OMDS spinoff?

Is it an indication that Olympus still designs stuff for OMDS after the spinoff.

Click to expand...

Neither. The OM-5 is litterally an E-M5 mark III with the "Olympus" logo at the front replace by "OM SYSTEMS"

What the OM-5 is, is an E-M5 mark III with the E-M1 mark III's processor and some features added from the E-M1X.

It's more Olympus than it is OM Systems.

MJ_Photo38 said:

On an unrelated note: I was delighted to see that the OM-5 had the convenient micro-USB adapter for which I have many cables instead of the old mini-USB style that was prone to breaking and I can never find cables for. I have some arduino microcontroller boards that use mini USB and it is always a hassle.

Click to expand...

Mini USB is an obsolete standard... and the Micro-USB type B port is also an obsolete port (it's also one of the most prone to breaking USB ports in history of USB ports...)

When the E-M5 mark III was released in late 2019, it was already obsolete as nearly all brands had moved to the USB-C standard. As a result, there was cameras that could be charged through USB pretty quickly when the E-M5iii took 6 to 7 hours to do so because of the power limitations of the USB 2.0 standard this port uses.

You might see a nice compatibility, I see an obsolete port that makes it not compatible with any other device I own.

MJ_Photo38 said:

I also appreciated that the OM-5 had the menus I'm so familiar with on the E-M1 Mark II. I was able to go right to the stuff that I've used for years. Kudos for not senselessly changing things, Olympus or OMDS- whichever did it.

Click to expand...

Actually, it would have been the opportunity to get the newer (and actually excellent) menu system that was introduced with the OM-1.

But no, they kept the old one. Meaning that a camera released after the OM-1, still had the same menu system as a camera released in 2016. Menu systems aren't a big issue but that was clearly a little weird to see.

Overall the OM-5, as nice as it is, is very much the last "Olympus" camera, while the OM-1 was the first "OM Systems" camera,

Click to expand...

Even that is arguable. The OM-1 was as far as we know entirely designed and developed by Olympus, albeit perhaps not manufactured until the transfer to JIP ownership. OMDS has not designed any new camera yet.

MJ_Photo38 said:

despite the logo stamped in the front.

I'm looking forward to what the OM-5 mark II will be, hoping for the return of a full metal body like in the days of the E-M5 mark II.

I guess we're still waiting for a Pen-line continuation and an E-M10iv (OM-10?) replacement.

Click to expand...

--
Roger