What Olympus actually promised:

Started May 27, 2013 | Discussions
OP erichK Veteran Member • Posts: 6,511
Re: What Olympus mean for DSLR
2

Franka T.L. wrote:

I must say I am still skeptical. Not about Olympus exiting the market, but the DSLR part. Do know, in Olympus past and present, the like of OM-D are considered DSLR too,

Not really.  Watanable etc. were quite explicit that the OM-D was not meant to be a "professinal" camera, that they recognized tha something more serious - particularly in the AF/CAF and viewfinder was needed, and that they were working on it.  What they were careful about was any explicit statement about whether it would have an optical viewfinder.  The part of my OP that is most speculative and possibly wrong is my assumption that, there having been no great progress with on-sensor hybrid AF, the statement was indeed promising further dslr's.

All  told , I am optimistic we will have a E-M6 ( or whatever it might be called ) but I am skeptical about another decent 4/3 body as in the old school Digital SLR ( with a prizm, mirror box and that optical VF build up ). That also goes with the 4/3 lens lineup. Let's be frank, I had yet to see " their continuous commitment to develop new lens for 4/3 " as they have promised over and over again in the interim years past. -

We'll see.  But they are still very aware of the damage to their rep that abandoning the OM line cost them.  And they did produce that for nearly three decades.

-- hide signature --

erichK
saskatoon, canada
Photography is a small voice, at best, but sometimes one photograph, or a group of them, can lure our sense of awareness.
- W. Eugene Smith, Dec 30, 1918 to Oct 15, 1978.
http://erichk.zenfolio.com/
http://www.fototime.com/inv/7F3D846BCD301F3
underwater photos:
http://www.scubaboard.com/gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/5567

 erichK's gear list:erichK's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-5 Olympus E-620 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus E-M5 II +25 more
rovingtim Veteran Member • Posts: 8,644
Words, actions and facts
2

Now, I simply listed the facts about what Oly did verses what Oly is saying. I did this because the Olympus letter says one thing while Olympus action says another. After stating the facts I asked if there is another interpretation available other than the one common sense dictates.

From these responses, my interpretation is that the clash between me and you is I would like to see the truth that actually is out there rather than the truth as I (or you) wish to see it. All I have been doing since 2007 (when I started noting alarming developments) is stating the facts as I see them. I also note that events in 4/3rds have logically followed the facts as I have been stating them since 2007.

While I don't like the demise of 4/3rds, I do like my ability to see the facts as they develop. It seems to me that that is why I am so despised by a group of you on this forum.

Am I wrong in this interpretation? If so, please correct me.

Messier Object Veteran Member • Posts: 8,096
Tim
1

rovingtim wrote:

Now, I simply listed the facts about what Oly did verses what Oly is saying. I did this because the Olympus letter says one thing while Olympus action says another.

Tim, the Olympus statement is regarding what they are intending to do, NOT what they did in the past.  Now if you have just come back from the future and can tell us that they did not follow-up on their stated intentions then please tell us now. Otherwise your just guessing what they might do or not do based on what you believe to be some 'track record' of  misinformation or broken promises.

After stating the facts I asked if there is another interpretation available other than the one common sense dictates.

When it comes to public statements by large corporations the obvious common sense interpretation is usually the one (normal) people will and should go with . Otherwise there might be some action against the company on the basis of misleading shareholders and the market. I'm sure Olympus has had more than enough exposure on wrong-doings over the past few years.

I find it strange that you and so many others consider these facts to be 'doom and gloom'. Facts are facts, they are not our children.
 
Personally, I put more weight on action than words. Your reaction suggests that you (and some others) lean the other way:  Olympus words dictate the future far more than their actions.  From these responses, my interpretation is that the clash between me and you is I would like to see the truth that actually is out there rather than the truth
 
as I (or you) wish to see it. All I have been doing since 2007 (when I started noting alarming developments) is stating the facts as I see them. I also note that events in 4/3rds have logically followed the facts as I have been stating them since 2007. While I don't like the demise of 4/3rds, I do like my ability to see the facts as they develop. It seems to me that that is why I am so despised by a group of you on this forum. Am I wrong in this interpretation? If so, please correct me.

Well as I read it, the OP was intended as a "leaning the other way" post with POSITIVE speculation about a new DSLR coming.   Is it really necessary to tell  the +ve posters in this thread that there is no Santa and Olympus is not bringing them a DSLR for Christmas?

Peter

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 38,579
I didn't say it was a mistake per se...
1

erichK wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

erichK wrote:

For me, the appearance of the E-5, after all our doubts and hand-wringing, was a pleasant surprise. Experiencing all the small but very useful improvements that it incorporated was even more pleasant (as tends to be reflected in its retention of value.)

So, I remain optimistic.

- The appearance of the E-5 to me was proof positive the system had gone off rails. The E-5 came at a very high asking price in a competitor's market that had moved on with lacking performance - yes the sensor.  Lack of DR, lack of good high ISO performance and worst: terrible banding.

If that were true, then the E-5 would hardly be retaining its value as well as it has.

The reason the E-5 retains its value is because it is a camera that Olympus has no pressure to lower in price. No one but the remaining 4/3rds crowd that have 4/3rd lenses have a big incentive to buy it with some very rare exceptions.

I didn't say the E-5 per se, as a concept was a mistake. What I said is that it was a sign the system had gone off rails. The concept of an upgrade from an E-3 being something like an E-5 is not a mistake. The model was missing something very important, that's not necessarily a mistake per se.

While the sensor could certain;y be better, its real market value tends to confirm my point that it is a capable photographic tool and about as effective an upgrade as Olympus could come up[ with the resources and sensor available to them.

Not really.  As I said, Olympus has zero incentive to lower it. In fact you could say that the fact it hasn't lowered in price at all means Olympus is simply not competing in the same market at all with this camera as the regular market.

They now have - according to every objective test - a much better sensor available to them.

Yes, that's now.  But we are talking about the E-5. The E-5 sensor was lacking in all the areas I mentioned above at the time it hit the market place in a camera that self billed itself as pro with the asking price to match.   You really don't think that was a problem?

-- hide signature --

erichK
saskatoon, canada
Photography is a small voice, at best, but sometimes one photograph, or a group of them, can lure our sense of awareness.
- W. Eugene Smith, Dec 30, 1918 to Oct 15, 1978.
http://erichk.zenfolio.com/
http://www.fototime.com/inv/7F3D846BCD301F3
underwater photos:
http://www.scubaboard.com/gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/5567

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 38,579
Re: Not a mistake, but the 'theorists' didn't like it
1

boggis the cat wrote:

erichK wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

erichK wrote:

For me, the appearance of the E-5, after all our doubts and hand-wringing, was a pleasant surprise. Experiencing all the small but very useful improvements that it incorporated was even more pleasant (as tends to be reflected in its retention of value.)

So, I remain optimistic.

- The appearance of the E-5 to me was proof positive the system had gone off rails. The E-5 came at a very high asking price in a competitor's market that had moved on with lacking performance - yes the sensor.  Lack of DR, lack of good high ISO performance and worst: terrible banding.

If that were true, then the E-5 would hardly be retaining its value as well as it has.

The price should drop on any remaining stock when the 'E-7' (or whatever) appears on the horizon.  The fact is that there is no better available option to use the FT lenses, unless you can make do with the limited AF from MicroFT bodies.

Also, it is worth noting that Olympus had supply issues with the E-5 due to heavier demand than expected.  (They didn't have such issues with the E-3, or E-1 before it.)

Olympus "supply issues" with the E-5 boil down to the amount of models they made and a press release. There's hardly any evidence to suggest the E-5 sold in droves.

While the sensor could certain;y be better, its real market value tends to confirm my point that it is a capable photographic tool and about as effective an upgrade as Olympus could come up[ with the resources and sensor available to them.

I bought an E-5, and have had no issues with it.  You will get some blocking up in shadow areas where you have high DR shot (even at base ISO), but there is no 'banding issue' as could arise on earlier bodies such as the E-510 or E-620.

Actually there are serious banding issues with the E-5. This has been noted by several people at this point, not just me. It's pretty easy to see. Even a lot of Doug Brown's shot had them.

The resolution is excellent for the pixel count, and I have not run into any problematic 'colour moire' issues, either -- another much touted 'theoretical issue' by those who have never owned an E-5.  (Strangely, now that all manufacturers have moved to very weak or no AA filters we don't see that issue discussed.)

Oh we can certainly discuss it. Surely you didn't hear that from me.

Raist just has an attitude problem when it comes to the E-5.

No, just facts.  Everything I said about the sensor is true- the DR is the same as the e-30/e-620 sensor.  There's banding (let me know if you want me to post the images or prove it, it's rather easy).  High ISO performance is sub par with the market at the time the E-5 came out. It inherits the described by many reviewers as "design by committee" of the E-3 ergonomics.

They now have - according to every objective test - a much better sensor available to them.

Ah, yes.  But if they put an 'old' sensor in an expensive flagship body then we will get a re-hash of the same arguments aimed at the E-5.  Baseless arguments, in my experience.  The E-5 was improved over the E-620, regardless of having 'the same sensor' -- not by a lot in DR and noise at high ISO terms, however, as it was effectively the same sensor.

The DR and ISO was pretty much virtually the E-30's.  The question is not whether you have "the same sensor" but if that sensor is competitive in the market and asking price at the time of introduction with what the rest of the market is doing.

For the record: I did try the E-5 personally, it's hardly any "theory."   The camera itself was ok, but the sensor wasn't.  Nothing could have been made more clear on that point than the EM5 new sensor did.

I will certainly consider the upgrade from the E-5, but if they intend on releasing a high-end MicroFT body that will work properly with my HG lenses then that may be a more sensible option for me.  (I have an E-M5 and 12-50 plus 45 f/1.8 lenses, so now straddle the FT / MicroFT systems to some extent.  It would be good to be able to reduce down to one high-end body replacement every few years.)

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

sderdiarian Veteran Member • Posts: 4,229
Re: Going forward
2

boggis the cat wrote:

I will certainly consider the upgrade from the E-5, but if they intend on releasing a high-end MicroFT body that will work properly with my HG lenses then that may be a more sensible option for me.  (I have an E-M5 and 12-50 plus 45 f/1.8 lenses, so now straddle the FT / MicroFT systems to some extent.  It would be good to be able to reduce down to one high-end body replacement every few years.)

I agree.

I also find it interesting that the ideas bandied about in "the other thread", somehow turned on its head here as negative, that a true "Pro" model developed with mFT at its base but having capability to properly handle and AF HG/SHG lenses is somehow heresy.  Forget about "true believers", what I'm sensing is a kind of litmus test for belonging in this forum.  Not that that's anything new.

The efforts by some here to chase away E-M5 users as "not belonging" have indeed largely succeeded, to the point where we now see posts from a week ago appearing on the first page of this forum.  For myself, as one who still owns an E-620, E-510 and various 4/3's lenses, this is a shame.

At this point, Olympus appears to be focusing its limited resources on a pro-mFT that can also properly support 4/3's lenses.  They made a decision to go where the sales are several years ago, meaning mFT, while offering up a minor update to the E-3 for short money (yet sold at a premium price) to calm those who had bought into their premium SHG line of lenses.

It would have been nice for HG/SHG lens owners had Olympus simply released an E-5S with what for their line was a ground breaking Sony sensor a year back along with minor updates.

But I'm sure they did the calculus looking at where the competition was going, FF cameras with superior AF systems at close to the same price, and realized a premium 4/3's model would have no appeal beyond their dwindling group of SHG lens users.  As a responsibly run business they had to follow the market.  The likelihood of their reversing direction and releasing such a camera now is I'd imagine pretty slim.

I personally have moved on but stayed with the brand, having used Olympus cameras since the mid-80's (OM-2S).  I'm now using an E-M5 as my primary camera, and while I'd prefer it were a bit larger for easier handling (try saying that in the mFT forum!), it does so many things really well that this is just a minor quibble easily solved with an add-on grip.

My hope is that Olympus does come out with a new "Pro" body between the E-M5 and E-5 sizes that makes us all happy and also brings in an expanded group of users.  My sense is that they've been working diligently away at this since the E-P1's release; we'll hopefully see some results in just a few months.

-- hide signature --

Sailin' Steve

 sderdiarian's gear list:sderdiarian's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 Mega OIS +1 more
rovingtim Veteran Member • Posts: 8,644
Peter, I'm not against the positive

Messier Object wrote:

Tim, the Olympus statement is regarding what they are intending to do, NOT what they did in the past.

Peter, their statement "the company will continue to offer DSLR cameras as in the past without any changes," literally means they will continue to offer the E5. The clue is 'without any changes'.

The only other interpretation is they are using 'past' is the long sense ... ie when they had several lines of 4/3rds cameras. If this is true, then it immediately puts a lie to their first claim of "not drastically reducing".

I'm assuming Oly is not lying. Therefore, I am assuming the E5 will continue to be available. That is what they are guaranteeing with this statement. Nothing else.

If they are developing a new DSLR, why not say so? How hard is it to say, "We are developing a 4/3rds DSLR body to replace the E5." But they don't. They say they are developing a replacement and they realise that the viewfinder and focus performance is important. If it's a DSLR, then why even bother mentioning this? According to this forum, the E5 already performs well in these areas. Are they concerned they are accidentally going to deliver a poor optical viewfinder in a newly developed pro level DSLR?

Now if you have just come back from the future and can tell us that they did not follow-up on their stated intentions then please tell us now. Otherwise your just guessing what they might do or not do based on what you believe to be some 'track record' of  misinformation or broken promises.

Well, if they stop making the E5 available then they will break their promise.

Well as I read it, the OP was intended as a "leaning the other way" post with POSITIVE speculation about a new DSLR coming.   Is it really necessary to tell  the +ve posters in this thread that there is no Santa and Olympus is not bringing them a DSLR for Christmas?

Peter, I'm not against positive.

Here is positive: Oly has been saying for years now that they are trying to get an m4/3rds body that will competently focus 4/3rds lenses. That means they are NOT abandoning 4/3rds lens users. This is good news. If they succeed, I think they will deliver an awesome camera. Based on their last two major released, they've got their mojo back.

Why not celebrate the facts instead of fantasy?

Forgottenbutnotgone Senior Member • Posts: 1,140
Re: What Olympus actually promised:
3

Messier Object wrote:

Erich

I didn't take long for the gloom squad to take over your thread.

Peter

It has taken surprisingly long though for some people to realize that the reality is a WHOLE LOT of people are GLOOMY right now. In spite of that, there are a small group of people who insist on blaming the symptoms rather than the cause. The so-called gloom squad makes up a large majority of what is left of this forum. People who have always loved Olympus but are getting fed up with what the company is offering them.

Robert

Forgottenbutnotgone Senior Member • Posts: 1,140
Re: Anyone else did?
2

pris wrote:

Craig from Nevada wrote:

They certainly didn't commit the company to build a DSLR forever.

I am sorry, is that supposed to be a some kind of beef with them? Please show a statement from any other camera manufacturer stating "We hereby assure you that we are going to offer DSLR forever and ever, as long as Earth is tracing its orbit around Sun."

For someone so quick to accuse others of being disingenuous, you surely have no problem being blind to your own inconsistencies of thought. Never mind promising to manufacture DSLRs for "as long as Earth is tracing its orbit around the Sun, why don't you please show another MAJOR DSLR manufacturer that given so much indication that they might STOP bulding DSLR's NOW, that they felt it necessary to make a public statement saying otherwise. Point out another current manufacturer who's actions have caused enough doubt in so many of their previously loyal following that their most expensive lenses are suddenly flooding the used markets at such unheard of prices. How about pointing out another current manufacturer of DSLR bodies and lenses that a such a large majority of people can't PURCHASE EXCEPT online.

Come on, there should be some sane limit on what demands are made to Olympus, or any other brand for that matter.

There should also be a sane limit to what demands Olympus or any other brand makes to their loyal following. If not to you, it's clear to a vast majority that Olympus has exceeded that limit.

Robert

pris Senior Member • Posts: 2,191
Facts and interpretations
3

rovingtim wrote:

...

While I don't like the demise of 4/3rds, I do like my ability to see the facts as they develop. It seems to me that that is why I am so despised by a group of you on this forum.

Am I wrong in this interpretation? If so, please correct me.

How about this:

- because of all possible interpretations of events you pick the most negative one;

- because you go to any lengths to hammer everyone to death with endless repetition of your interpretations;

- because you interpret Olympus "failure" to deliver your pipe dream camera (pro body of E-400 size) as broken promise;

- because your anti-Olympus bias shows at each and every turn (Canon 5D being 9 mm longer than E-5 is no biggie, but E-5 8 mm difference over E-1 is a deal-breaker).

- because of the lengths to which you go to disparage the camera you "detest" (your word). Remember nonsense claims like "every E-5 image is full of artifacts?"Or blowing image up to 700% to find a flaw? Or making a huge deal out of non-existing issue with moire - thread after thread, an issue that never was mentioned by anyone else ever since? Or ranting about thin AA filter, which was since then adopted by other brands? Oh, and in all these cases of being wrong, had you come back any single time and said "hey folks, I was wrong about this or that, moire really never became a problem I made it to be?"

- because you are merrily engage in ridiculing brand and its users in the most disgusting manner, as in that recent, unfortunately edited out, exchange between three of you where you showed your real attitude, instead of this innocent "ah, I am merely pointing the facts, and you don't love me."

- because even now when we approach the release of a new flagship, you just can't stop blessing us with all kinds of negative statements, which in your imagination somehow turn into facts. Can't you wait for the actual camera to appear, and then disparage it? Also, why don't you answer the question about what it is you actually expect, asked up the thread?

We could continue, but hey... you got the drift. Unfortunately, you will continue claiming that you are an objective and unbiased one, "only facts ma'am," while "a group of us" doesn't like you because, you know, you are saying the truth... Or maybe you could re-read all above 5 times, give it some good thinking and realize why exactly you invoke such reaction? Would be nice, but now it seems I am in pipe dream territory.

pris Senior Member • Posts: 2,191
Re: Anyone else did?
3

Forgottenbutnotgone wrote:

pris wrote:

Craig from Nevada wrote:

They certainly didn't commit the company to build a DSLR forever.

I am sorry, is that supposed to be a some kind of beef with them? Please show a statement from any other camera manufacturer stating "We hereby assure you that we are going to offer DSLR forever and ever, as long as Earth is tracing its orbit around Sun."

For someone so quick to accuse others of being disingenuous, you surely have no problem being blind to your own inconsistencies of thought.

I was wondering where my stalker was. There you are, and immediately starting with personal attack. That alone excludes any possibility of our further exchange, because, you know - we've been over this before, never ended well.

Come on, there should be some sane limit on what demands are made to Olympus, or any other brand for that matter.

There should also be a sane limit to what demands Olympus or any other brand makes to their loyal following. If not to you, it's clear to a vast majority that Olympus has exceeded that limit.

I consider demands on me to wait 3 years for an E-5 update quite reasonable. But demands on you are obviously too high, so you are still here why??

SirSeth
SirSeth Veteran Member • Posts: 9,962
High Angst always precedes the typical 3-4 year upgrade.
1

... and after it's announced, the angst just becomes a different kind until people get used to the idea.

Olympus has said over and over that there will always be a body for the 4/3rds ZDs. What form it will take, Olympus is not saying. Their upgrade cycle is pretty predictably long--it seems like an eternity. Before the E-3 came out there were tons of naysayers and angst. Before the E-5 came out it was the same story.

Carry on.

-- hide signature --

What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
--
wallygoots.smugmug.com
wallygoots.blogspot.com

 SirSeth's gear list:SirSeth's gear list
Olympus E-1 Fujifilm X-T1 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +5 more
kuaimen Regular Member • Posts: 306
Re: Man I want to buy that 7-14 at that price too!

pris wrote:

kuaimen wrote:

pris wrote:

davebailey wrote: ... looking at some of the crazily high prices for good quality second-hand Olympus lenses...

Direct opposite experience here. Over the last two months I was able to get 50-200 for $400 and 7-14 for $800. Both are absolutely clean and very little used. This is the lowest I have ever seen. I've no idea where does "crazily high prices" come from.

Where can I find one? 150F2 sounds extremely attractive too when the price is low

A few sites where used gear is sold, monitored daily for new offerings, for a few months. While $1,000 was available more or less, I was hoping for a better deal while being ready to get it at 1K if prices started going up. One nice morning a $800 deal popped up and I believe I saw it within 5-10 min after it was posted. A bit of luck and a lot of patience...

Thanks for tips!

pris Senior Member • Posts: 2,191
Re: High Angst always precedes the typical 3-4 year upgrade.

SirSeth wrote:

... and after it's announced, the angst just becomes a different kind until people get used to the idea.

I'd say, until those who actually use camera get their hands on it and start getting actual results, vs. those who read specs and thought they knew everything there was to know about it. At least that's how it went in E-5 case.

Olympus has said over and over that there will always be a body for the 4/3rds ZDs. What form it will take, Olympus is not saying. Their upgrade cycle is pretty predictably long--it seems like an eternity.

This is another puzzling part. Who needs new camera more often than every 3 years? (Sure, this is where the choir chimes in pointing out that E-5 wasn't all they wanted so it's more than 3 years for them... but heck, it was their decision that it wasn't enough of an upgrade for them. It was for many others. Someone always will be unhappy no matter what. I seem to remember the latest Canon iteration being widely accused of being a lame warm-up with nothing to show and intended just to keep the price high. I'd say E-5 over E-3 was much more than that.)

Before the E-3 came out there were tons of naysayers and angst. Before the E-5 came out it was the same story.

Yeah, let's look forward to the day of an announcement... gonna be fun

pris Senior Member • Posts: 2,191
Re: Man I want to buy that 7-14 at that price too!

kuaimen wrote:

pris wrote:

kuaimen wrote:

pris wrote:

davebailey wrote: ... looking at some of the crazily high prices for good quality second-hand Olympus lenses...

Direct opposite experience here. Over the last two months I was able to get 50-200 for $400 and 7-14 for $800. Both are absolutely clean and very little used. This is the lowest I have ever seen. I've no idea where does "crazily high prices" come from.

Where can I find one? 150F2 sounds extremely attractive too when the price is low

A few sites where used gear is sold, monitored daily for new offerings, for a few months. While $1,000 was available more or less, I was hoping for a better deal while being ready to get it at 1K if prices started going up. One nice morning a $800 deal popped up and I believe I saw it within 5-10 min after it was posted. A bit of luck and a lot of patience...

Thanks for tips!

Sure thing, and btw, one of those $1K deals is still out there: http://www.keh.com/camera/Olympus-Digital-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-DO07999093550K?r=FE

carizi
carizi Veteran Member • Posts: 9,225
LMAO!

Let's make it an everyday thread!   Good one, Peter....

 carizi's gear list:carizi's gear list
Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD +4 more
OP erichK Veteran Member • Posts: 6,511
Re: theorists flumoxed... more or less agree
1

boggis the cat wrote:

Ah, yes.  But if they put an 'old' sensor in an expensive flagship body then we will get a re-hash of the same arguments aimed at the E-5.  Baseless arguments, in my experience.  The E-5 was improved over the E-620, regardless of having 'the same sensor' -- not by a lot in DR and noise at high ISO terms, however, as it was effectively the same sensor.

I will certainly consider the upgrade from the E-5, but if they intend on releasing a high-end MicroFT body that will work properly with my HG lenses then that may be a more sensible option for me.  (I have an E-M5 and 12-50 plus 45 f/1.8 lenses, so now straddle the FT / MicroFT systems to some extent.  It would be good to be able to reduce down to one high-end body replacement every few years.)

Like others, I was very skeptical about EVF's, but it is no longer a make or break issue for me. While I do fiind even the the pretty good EVF one on my OM-D's colour casts, slight lags annoying, I also find the way that it shows me what changes in exposure and WB, etcetera a godsend.

As already said, I am speculating that there well could be another dslr or even two - as rumours have suggested - simply because of the problems with AF technology.

But like many - likely most - I will be perfectlly happy with a "pro" body using an EVF the qualityt of the E-Pen 5's add on.

-- hide signature --

erichK
saskatoon, canada
Photography is a small voice, at best, but sometimes one photograph, or a group of them, can lure our sense of awareness.
- W. Eugene Smith, Dec 30, 1918 to Oct 15, 1978.
http://erichk.zenfolio.com/
http://www.fototime.com/inv/7F3D846BCD301F3
underwater photos:
http://www.scubaboard.com/gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/5567

 erichK's gear list:erichK's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-5 Olympus E-620 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus E-M5 II +25 more
esco Senior Member • Posts: 1,807
Re: Anyone else did?

Where do you see any of these high demands? What he said isn't a lie btw. . Its all happening and its easy for anyone to research. Whether you ignore those facts or not do the research is another matter.

I remember us having similar exchanges where youve taken the liberty to make your own personal assumption as someone elses theory in this thread as well! Often words that never left that persons mouth!
--
Oldschool Evolt shooter

pris Senior Member • Posts: 2,191
Re: Anyone else did?
2

esco wrote:

Where do you see any of these high demands?

He said demands on many are/were too high. I answer that. What's so hard to understand here?

What he said isn't a lie btw. . Its all happening and its easy for anyone to research. Whether you ignore those facts or not do the research is another matter.

I've no idea what you mean.

I remember us having similar exchanges where youve taken the liberty to make your own personal assumption as someone elses theory in this thread as well! Often words that never left that persons mouth!

Care to point it out? I had no exchanges with you in this thread thus far.

Just how irritated you folks are by anyone who doesn't accept your negative attitude, to jump in with these vague "let's just duke it out" posts, one after another...

Forgottenbutnotgone Senior Member • Posts: 1,140
Re: Anyone else did?

pris wrote:

Forgottenbutnotgone wrote:

pris wrote:

Craig from Nevada wrote:

They certainly didn't commit the company to build a DSLR forever.

I am sorry, is that supposed to be a some kind of beef with them? Please show a statement from any other camera manufacturer stating "We hereby assure you that we are going to offer DSLR forever and ever, as long as Earth is tracing its orbit around Sun."

For someone so quick to accuse others of being disingenuous, you surely have no problem being blind to your own inconsistencies of thought.

I was wondering where my stalker was. There you are, and immediately starting with personal attack. That alone excludes any possibility of our further exchange, because, you know - we've been over this before, never ended well.

What personal attack? If nothing in the post in red below (one example) was a personal attack on rovingtim, surely nothing I said to you is.

pris (so eloquently and non personal attackingly) wrote:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51542889.

- because of all possible interpretations of events you pick the most negative one;
- because you go to any lengths to hammer everyone to death with endless repetition of your interpretation

- because of the lengths to which you go to disparage the camera you "detest" (your word). Remember nonsense claims like "every E-5 image is full of artifacts?"Or blowing image up to 700% to find a flaw? Or making a huge deal out of non-existing issue with moire - thread after thread, an issue that never was mentioned by anyone else ever since? Or ranting about thin AA filter, which was since then adopted by other brands?

You've opened the floor up for discussion of people rather than equipment, I just chose a different person than you did. My post is relevant to your topic. Surely you can't have a problem with that. You've accused rovingtim of several things, after which you prodded him to answer your question:

"Also, why don't you answer the question about what it is you actually expect, asked up the thread?"

Well, how about you not being hypocritical and obliging me in the same fashion.

I plainly asked you several questions. I think these would be them:

" Never mind promising to manufacture DSLRs for "as long as Earth is tracing its orbit around the Sun, why don't you please show another MAJOR DSLR manufacturer that given so much indication that they might STOP bulding DSLR's NOW, that they felt it necessary to make a public statement saying otherwise. Point out another current manufacturer who's actions have caused enough doubt in so many of their previously loyal following that their most expensive lenses are suddenly flooding the used markets at such unheard of prices. How about pointing out another current manufacturer of DSLR bodies and lenses that a such a large majority of people can't PURCHASE EXCEPT online."

You so ingenuously failed to respond to them, bravely choosing instead to cut them out of your reply while gallantly hiding behind the claim of being persecuted in a fashion you have no problem inflicting upon anyone else in this thread.

And as a show of good faith, even though you ignored mine. I'll answer yours first.

I consider demands on me to wait 3 years for an E-5 update quite reasonable. But demands on you are obviously too high, so you are still here why??

Because at this point, for ME it is the most viable alternative. I've invested in lenses that I happen to like the performance of, and that at this point deserve a body of commensurate performance. I expect the demonstration of good faith I made when buying into Olympus' 4/3's mantra to be reciprocated in their timely support of the product I bought.

Ok, as in all of our previous exchanges, I've taken the time to answer you. How about you being a big boy and doing the same?

Robert

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads