What will happen to Olympus now??

Started Oct 20, 2013 | Discussions
Marty4650
Marty4650 Forum Pro • Posts: 14,851
The FF Endoscope?

They say it is quite painful... but produces fabulous bokeh and razor thin DOF shots of your polyps.

 Marty4650's gear list:Marty4650's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +12 more
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 3,348
Re: Worth repeating

Marty4650 wrote:

CFynn wrote:

Body price is only a small part of the equation. Sony charge relatively high prices for lenses and other things - that soon mounts up if you want to build a whole system.

There seems to be a euphoric hysteria caused by the fact that the Sony A7 is a couple of hundred dollars cheaper than a Nikon D610.

This euphoria is based on two assumptions that I think are false:

  1. FF buyers are value shoppers
  2. The size, weight and cost of lenses doesn't matter

There is also a real question as to whether these "value minded" high end users will be satisfied with a very limited lens selection of very expensive lenses, or if they will buy small cameras that require the use of large lenses paired with large, heavy, and expensive adapters?

WTF IS that thing?!

You would certainly look pretty foolish lugging that around - and it looks like the sort of thing that costs a fair bit and breaks easily.

Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,057
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
1

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

They are also substantially different in build.

How?

The E-M1 has more of a "pro" build. Shutter life is longer, weather proofing extensive, the whole camera can be dropped, it can be roughed up, take years of abuse.

How do you know all this? How many years of abuse has any E-M1 taken?

All within limits of course, but it's clearly targetting the pro segment with its build. Oly is also sending a message to resilient 43 DSLR users that the E-M1 is a suitable replacement to their E1/E3/E5 which were "built like tanks".

The A7(r) is more... fragile.

In what way is it more fragile?

It looks quite substantial to me

E-M1 build

As you can see. Quite a substantial difference. The A7 is somewhere around an EM-5 in terms of build.

I see no substantial difference there. What about them do you propose is 'substantially different'?

Wow. Are you blind.

Here's the metal body components of the A7(r).

As you can see, in the case of the A7r, you get a metal subframe, topplate and front plate. In the case of the A7 you get a metal subframe and top plate. The rest of the body is plastic.

As I said. In terms of build, these are around the E-M5, or lower.

Did you seriously expect a pro-level build FF mirrorless for that price?

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 +7 more
bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 57,380
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
3

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

They are also substantially different in build.

How?

The E-M1 has more of a "pro" build. Shutter life is longer, weather proofing extensive, the whole camera can be dropped, it can be roughed up, take years of abuse.

How do you know all this? How many years of abuse has any E-M1 taken?

All within limits of course, but it's clearly targetting the pro segment with its build. Oly is also sending a message to resilient 43 DSLR users that the E-M1 is a suitable replacement to their E1/E3/E5 which were "built like tanks".

The A7(r) is more... fragile.

In what way is it more fragile?

It looks quite substantial to me

E-M1 build

As you can see. Quite a substantial difference. The A7 is somewhere around an EM-5 in terms of build.

I see no substantial difference there. What about them do you propose is 'substantially different'?

Wow. Are you blind.

No, I understand mechanical construction.

Here's the metal body components of the A7(r).

As you can see, in the case of the A7r, you get a metal subframe, topplate and front plate. In the case of the A7 you get a metal subframe and top plate. The rest of the body is plastic.

Seems to me the front panel is also metal on the A7r. When you look at the exploded diagram, there is a metal sensor carrier which screws on the sub fame. In both cameras the back panel is plastic. So, in both cameras the substantive 'chassis' is metal, the back cover is plastic. Without the evidence from some detailed strutural analysis, I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that one is stronger than the other.

As I said. In terms of build, these are around the E-M5, or lower.

You have no information on the 'build', you're just making non-analytical assessments on the basis of some publicity photos. Sure, Olympus would like to promote the idea that the E-M1 is super tough, but just looking at pictures of metal castings tells you nothing.

Did you seriously expect a pro-level build FF mirrorless for that price?

What does 'pro-level build' mean? How much would it cost, and why? Is not 'pro level' mainly a marketing spin, and generally priced at much more than it costs the manufacturer.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,057
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
1

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

They are also substantially different in build.

How?

The E-M1 has more of a "pro" build. Shutter life is longer, weather proofing extensive, the whole camera can be dropped, it can be roughed up, take years of abuse.

How do you know all this? How many years of abuse has any E-M1 taken?

All within limits of course, but it's clearly targetting the pro segment with its build. Oly is also sending a message to resilient 43 DSLR users that the E-M1 is a suitable replacement to their E1/E3/E5 which were "built like tanks".

The A7(r) is more... fragile.

In what way is it more fragile?

It looks quite substantial to me

E-M1 build

As you can see. Quite a substantial difference. The A7 is somewhere around an EM-5 in terms of build.

I see no substantial difference there. What about them do you propose is 'substantially different'?

Wow. Are you blind.

No, I understand mechanical construction.

Here's the metal body components of the A7(r).

As you can see, in the case of the A7r, you get a metal subframe, topplate and front plate. In the case of the A7 you get a metal subframe and top plate. The rest of the body is plastic.

Seems to me the front panel is also metal on the A7r. When you look at the exploded diagram, there is a metal sensor carrier which screws on the sub fame. In both cameras the back panel is plastic. So, in both cameras the substantive 'chassis' is metal, the back cover is plastic. Without the evidence from some detailed strutural analysis, I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that one is stronger than the other.

What are you talking about. The EM-1 has a metal back. What pics are you looking at? The A7 is like the E-M5. The A7R is lower still.

I'm not sure why you find this so upsetting. It's not that uncommon. eg: APS-C 7D has a higher build spec than the FF 6D.

As I said. In terms of build, these are around the E-M5, or lower.

You have no information on the 'build', you're just making non-analytical assessments on the basis of some publicity photos. Sure, Olympus would like to promote the idea that the E-M1 is super tough, but just looking at pictures of metal castings tells you nothing.

Did you seriously expect a pro-level build FF mirrorless for that price?

What does 'pro-level build' mean? How much would it cost, and why? Is not 'pro level' mainly a marketing spin, and generally priced at much more than it costs the manufacturer.

-- hide signature --

Bob

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 +7 more
CollBaxter
CollBaxter Forum Pro • Posts: 12,724
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??

I does here.

-- hide signature --

Collin
(Aficionado Olympus DSLR )
http://collinbaxter.zenfolio.com/
http://www.pbase.com/collinbaxter
http://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/gallery/showgallery.php?ppuser=21652&username=collin
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. (George Carlin)
New Seventh Wonder of the World.
http://www.pbase.com/collinbaxter/image/95297052.jpg

 CollBaxter's gear list:CollBaxter's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX230 HS Olympus E-5 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-620 Olympus E-500 +15 more
boggis the cat Veteran Member • Posts: 6,329
Re: The FF Endoscope?
1

Marty4650 wrote:

They say it is quite painful... but produces fabulous bokeh and razor thin DOF shots of your polyps.

They say that you have to suffer for it to really be art.

 boggis the cat's gear list:boggis the cat's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-5 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +7 more
Toccata47 Senior Member • Posts: 2,800
Re: Obviously, they'll implode

Eric Nepean wrote:

Toccata47 wrote:

These cameras can not possibly coexist. As soon an the first m4/3 adapter is available everyone will instantly use them on their new a7. Olympus will have no choice but to take the honorable way out.

It may be that a m4/3 adapter to the A7 requires a glass element, and isn't so simple or so cheap.

The M43 lenses are designed to cover only the size of the m43 sensor with a sharp image, no value or other incentive to cover a larger sensor area.

to cover the entire A7 sensor with an m43 lens, another lens element is required, similar in function to the old style teleconvertor. But this will increase the focal length, and also has the effect of making the F number larger.

So now one has a bigger, heavier slower lens assembly, and then we still need to deal with the electronic interfaces to make autofocus and aperture control work.

It may be that such an adapter product will be considerably delayed in its appearance.

Sorry, I should have made it more obvious I was joking.

rovingtim Veteran Member • Posts: 8,644
The Sony NEX system will dominate m4/3rd
2

Because the Sony NEX have bigger sensors, m4/3rds doesn't stand a chance. We were assured.

And now that the NEX system so completely dominates the market, the Sony FF system will now take over from NEX's undisputed superiority.

Anytime now.

bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 57,380
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
2

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

They are also substantially different in build.

How?

The E-M1 has more of a "pro" build. Shutter life is longer, weather proofing extensive, the whole camera can be dropped, it can be roughed up, take years of abuse.

How do you know all this? How many years of abuse has any E-M1 taken?

All within limits of course, but it's clearly targetting the pro segment with its build. Oly is also sending a message to resilient 43 DSLR users that the E-M1 is a suitable replacement to their E1/E3/E5 which were "built like tanks".

The A7(r) is more... fragile.

In what way is it more fragile?

It looks quite substantial to me

E-M1 build

As you can see. Quite a substantial difference. The A7 is somewhere around an EM-5 in terms of build.

I see no substantial difference there. What about them do you propose is 'substantially different'?

Wow. Are you blind.

No, I understand mechanical construction.

Here's the metal body components of the A7(r).

As you can see, in the case of the A7r, you get a metal subframe, topplate and front plate. In the case of the A7 you get a metal subframe and top plate. The rest of the body is plastic.

Seems to me the front panel is also metal on the A7r. When you look at the exploded diagram, there is a metal sensor carrier which screws on the sub fame. In both cameras the back panel is plastic. So, in both cameras the substantive 'chassis' is metal, the back cover is plastic. Without the evidence from some detailed strutural analysis, I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that one is stronger than the other.

What are you talking about. The EM-1 has a metal back. What pics are you looking at?

The ones you posted. The EM-1 has a plastic back. Here is the back of the E-M1

Notice that the shape is different from the metal panel in your shot, the back itself is plastic mouldings applied to the plate in your picture.. Acuually, it doesn't ,matter because the 'back' is not structural. How many cameras, plastic or metal, do you see with back failure? Do you have any evidence anyway that the metal plate results in a more damage resistant assembly than a steel frame with a plastic cover?

The A7 is like the E-M5. The A7R is lower still.

The A7R is the same as the A7.

I'm not sure why you find this so upsetting.

I don't find it upsetting. I just comment on people making claims that they can't justify.

It's not that uncommon. eg: APS-C 7D has a higher build spec than the FF 6D.

A slightly higher 'spec', but is there any evidence that it's actually more robust, weather resistant or anything else?

-- hide signature --

Bob

Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,057
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
3

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

They are also substantially different in build.

How?

The E-M1 has more of a "pro" build. Shutter life is longer, weather proofing extensive, the whole camera can be dropped, it can be roughed up, take years of abuse.

How do you know all this? How many years of abuse has any E-M1 taken?

All within limits of course, but it's clearly targetting the pro segment with its build. Oly is also sending a message to resilient 43 DSLR users that the E-M1 is a suitable replacement to their E1/E3/E5 which were "built like tanks".

The A7(r) is more... fragile.

In what way is it more fragile?

It looks quite substantial to me

E-M1 build

As you can see. Quite a substantial difference. The A7 is somewhere around an EM-5 in terms of build.

I see no substantial difference there. What about them do you propose is 'substantially different'?

Wow. Are you blind.

No, I understand mechanical construction.

Here's the metal body components of the A7(r).

As you can see, in the case of the A7r, you get a metal subframe, topplate and front plate. In the case of the A7 you get a metal subframe and top plate. The rest of the body is plastic.

Seems to me the front panel is also metal on the A7r. When you look at the exploded diagram, there is a metal sensor carrier which screws on the sub fame. In both cameras the back panel is plastic. So, in both cameras the substantive 'chassis' is metal, the back cover is plastic. Without the evidence from some detailed strutural analysis, I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that one is stronger than the other.

What are you talking about. The EM-1 has a metal back. What pics are you looking at?

The ones you posted. The EM-1 has a plastic back. Here is the back of the E-M1

Notice that the shape is different from the metal panel in your shot, the back itself is plastic mouldings applied to the plate in your picture.. Acuually, it doesn't ,matter because the 'back' is not structural. How many cameras, plastic or metal, do you see with back failure? Do you have any evidence anyway that the metal plate results in a more damage resistant assembly than a steel frame with a plastic cover?

You numpty. You're looking at the foldout screen. The back is the same as the metal shell.

The A7 is like the E-M5. The A7R is lower still.

The A7R is the same as the A7.

No it isn't. The low spec A7 has a metal subframe, but no front metal body.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3561571

I'm not sure why you find this so upsetting.

I don't find it upsetting. I just comment on people making claims that they can't justify.

Well, yeah, if you're going to ignore the actual pics posted, that's your problem.

It's not that uncommon. eg: APS-C 7D has a higher build spec than the FF 6D.

A slightly higher 'spec', but is there any evidence that it's actually more robust, weather resistant or anything else?

-- hide signature --

Bob

So, how exactly do you determine build quality?

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 +7 more
tecnoworld
tecnoworld Veteran Member • Posts: 7,208
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
4

I hope it won't disappear at all. The omd-em1 is one of the nicest cameras in the world, even if I'm not into m4/3, I like it very much.

 tecnoworld's gear list:tecnoworld's gear list
Samsung TL500 Samsung NX200 Samsung NX100 Samsung NX300 Samsung NX1 +15 more
bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 57,380
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
2

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

They are also substantially different in build.

How?

The E-M1 has more of a "pro" build. Shutter life is longer, weather proofing extensive, the whole camera can be dropped, it can be roughed up, take years of abuse.

How do you know all this? How many years of abuse has any E-M1 taken?

All within limits of course, but it's clearly targetting the pro segment with its build. Oly is also sending a message to resilient 43 DSLR users that the E-M1 is a suitable replacement to their E1/E3/E5 which were "built like tanks".

The A7(r) is more... fragile.

In what way is it more fragile?

It looks quite substantial to me

E-M1 build

As you can see. Quite a substantial difference. The A7 is somewhere around an EM-5 in terms of build.

I see no substantial difference there. What about them do you propose is 'substantially different'?

Wow. Are you blind.

No, I understand mechanical construction.

Here's the metal body components of the A7(r).

As you can see, in the case of the A7r, you get a metal subframe, topplate and front plate. In the case of the A7 you get a metal subframe and top plate. The rest of the body is plastic.

Seems to me the front panel is also metal on the A7r. When you look at the exploded diagram, there is a metal sensor carrier which screws on the sub fame. In both cameras the back panel is plastic. So, in both cameras the substantive 'chassis' is metal, the back cover is plastic. Without the evidence from some detailed strutural analysis, I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that one is stronger than the other.

What are you talking about. The EM-1 has a metal back. What pics are you looking at?

The ones you posted. The EM-1 has a plastic back. Here is the back of the E-M1

Notice that the shape is different from the metal panel in your shot, the back itself is plastic mouldings applied to the plate in your picture.. Acuually, it doesn't ,matter because the 'back' is not structural. How many cameras, plastic or metal, do you see with back failure? Do you have any evidence anyway that the metal plate results in a more damage resistant assembly than a steel frame with a plastic cover?

You numpty.

No need to get personal.

You're looking at the foldout screen. The back is the same as the metal shell.

Actually, it isn't. Look at the shape round the right hand side, completely different from the emtal component.

The A7 is like the E-M5. The A7R is lower still.

The A7R is the same as the A7.

No it isn't. The low spec A7 has a metal subframe, but no front metal body.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3561571

OK, turns out we're both wrong, since it is the A7r that has a metal front skin. The explanation in that post in rubbish though, look at the construction, the mount doesn't attach to that front skin, it attaches to the subframe behind. The skin is cosmetic, a piece of spec engineering.

I'm not sure why you find this so upsetting.

I don't find it upsetting. I just comment on people making claims that they can't justify.

Well, yeah, if you're going to ignore the actual pics posted, that's your problem.

I'm not 'ignoring' the pics posted, I'm telling you that they give no direct evidence of what is the relative damage resistance, weather resistance or anything else. Just because it's metal one place and plastic another doesn't make it of itself stronger. In fact, metal bits can be less durable. One metal chassised camera apparently suffers from cracking of the metal frame, while its cheaper plastic framed sibling doesn't. Mag alloy is brittle, plastic composites much less so. So, while the pictures look nice from a marketeer's point of view, they don't tell you which is more robust.

It's not that uncommon. eg: APS-C 7D has a higher build spec than the FF 6D.

A slightly higher 'spec', but is there any evidence that it's actually more robust, weather resistant or anything else?

-- hide signature --

Bob

So, how exactly do you determine build quality?

I don't. I think the way it's use it's a pretty meaningless term, like 'image quality'. I know how you do stress testing and environmental testing of electronic products (I used to design marine and avionic equipment) and have a lot of experience working with industrial designers identifying the best design and materials for products. I've also worked with automotive designers from VW, BMW and Ford. The professionals in the trade never use the term 'build quality' about their own work, and in fact are quite cynical in application of materials, surface finishes, etc to give a (bogus) impression of quality.

-- hide signature --

Bob

lazy lightning Regular Member • Posts: 174
New Nikon FF OVF/EVF Hybrid coming...
2
Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,057
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
2

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

They are also substantially different in build.

How?

The E-M1 has more of a "pro" build. Shutter life is longer, weather proofing extensive, the whole camera can be dropped, it can be roughed up, take years of abuse.

How do you know all this? How many years of abuse has any E-M1 taken?

All within limits of course, but it's clearly targetting the pro segment with its build. Oly is also sending a message to resilient 43 DSLR users that the E-M1 is a suitable replacement to their E1/E3/E5 which were "built like tanks".

The A7(r) is more... fragile.

In what way is it more fragile?

It looks quite substantial to me

E-M1 build

As you can see. Quite a substantial difference. The A7 is somewhere around an EM-5 in terms of build.

I see no substantial difference there. What about them do you propose is 'substantially different'?

Wow. Are you blind.

No, I understand mechanical construction.

Here's the metal body components of the A7(r).

As you can see, in the case of the A7r, you get a metal subframe, topplate and front plate. In the case of the A7 you get a metal subframe and top plate. The rest of the body is plastic.

Seems to me the front panel is also metal on the A7r. When you look at the exploded diagram, there is a metal sensor carrier which screws on the sub fame. In both cameras the back panel is plastic. So, in both cameras the substantive 'chassis' is metal, the back cover is plastic. Without the evidence from some detailed strutural analysis, I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that one is stronger than the other.

What are you talking about. The EM-1 has a metal back. What pics are you looking at?

The ones you posted. The EM-1 has a plastic back. Here is the back of the E-M1

Notice that the shape is different from the metal panel in your shot, the back itself is plastic mouldings applied to the plate in your picture.. Acuually, it doesn't ,matter because the 'back' is not structural. How many cameras, plastic or metal, do you see with back failure? Do you have any evidence anyway that the metal plate results in a more damage resistant assembly than a steel frame with a plastic cover?

You numpty.

No need to get personal.

You're looking at the foldout screen. The back is the same as the metal shell.

Actually, it isn't. Look at the shape round the right hand side, completely different from the emtal component.

Another pic for you then.

The A7 is like the E-M5. The A7R is lower still.

The A7R is the same as the A7.

No it isn't. The low spec A7 has a metal subframe, but no front metal body.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3561571

OK, turns out we're both wrong, since it is the A7r that has a metal front skin. The explanation in that post in rubbish though, look at the construction, the mount doesn't attach to that front skin, it attaches to the subframe behind. The skin is cosmetic, a piece of spec engineering.

Whoops. I got that right originally (A7r, not A7).

I'm not sure why you find this so upsetting.

I don't find it upsetting. I just comment on people making claims that they can't justify.

Well, yeah, if you're going to ignore the actual pics posted, that's your problem.

I'm not 'ignoring' the pics posted, I'm telling you that they give no direct evidence of what is the relative damage resistance, weather resistance or anything else. Just because it's metal one place and plastic another doesn't make it of itself stronger. In fact, metal bits can be less durable. One metal chassised camera apparently suffers from cracking of the metal frame, while its cheaper plastic framed sibling doesn't. Mag alloy is brittle, plastic composites much less so. So, while the pictures look nice from a marketeer's point of view, they don't tell you which is more robust.

It's not that uncommon. eg: APS-C 7D has a higher build spec than the FF 6D.

A slightly higher 'spec', but is there any evidence that it's actually more robust, weather resistant or anything else?

-- hide signature --

Bob

So, how exactly do you determine build quality?

I don't. I think the way it's use it's a pretty meaningless term, like 'image quality'. I know how you do stress testing and environmental testing of electronic products (I used to design marine and avionic equipment) and have a lot of experience working with industrial designers identifying the best design and materials for products. I've also worked with automotive designers from VW, BMW and Ford. The professionals in the trade never use the term 'build quality' about their own work, and in fact are quite cynical in application of materials, surface finishes, etc to give a (bogus) impression of quality.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Well, for the same reason I prefer unibody laptops, I'd prefer the E-M1.

If you want to wait for 4 years of usage so you can assess which is more durable, then be my guest.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 +7 more
bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 57,380
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??

Mjankor wrote:

Well, for the same reason I prefer unibody laptops, I'd prefer the E-M1.

If you want to wait for 4 years of usage so you can assess which is more durable, then be my guest.

Your right to do so, but you might be paying extra money for nothing, or even less than nothing. Typically, you'd put these things through accelerated wear tests, using shakers and drop hammers, environmental chambers and the like. You can simulate the culminated effects of years of use in just a few weeks. I'm surprised that none of the test sites have made any serious attempt to test fro robustness, weather sealing and the like.

-- hide signature --

Bob

sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 11,479
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
2

People keep saying the IQ is the same. BS. FF gives you 2 stops advantage. That's 2 stops less shutter shake. Or 2 stops lower ISO. Whatever you want- take your pick. FF gives you that choice.

People keep bringing up "MFT has constant 2.8 zooms"... So??? There are point and shoots with zoom lenses that start at 1.8. Nobody is comparing those to FF because they have F/1.8 capability. Likewise 12mm 2.8 is hardly anything to brag about.

Even with equivalent lenses, FF will give you a stop and a half more ISO etc. So even if the IQ isn't leaps and bounds above the added flexibility is appreciable.

The MFT crowd has always seemed somewhat insecure and defensive about their platform, and for good reason. There's nothing about MFT that can't be done with APS-C and as the Oly flagship shows there is pretty much no price advantage for the drop in sensor size. Oly and Pany are dead men walking company-wise as well... for all the talk of the MFT revolution it doesn't seem to have born fruit in volume and profitability. And now with these, which will no doubt get cheaper and spawn cheaper FF mirrorless bodies, the high end MFT market is pretty much dead and done. People talk about lens sizes... you aren't putting any MFT camera + lens in your shirt pocket either, aside from the essentially useless Pani 15 F/8. Now if stuff like IBIS or cheaper lenses is a priority, fine... but on IQ and flexibility? No contest

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
NEX-5T Sony Alpha a7R II Rokinon AF 50mm F1.4 FE Samyang 14mm F2.8 IF ED MC Aspherical Rokinon AF 35mm F1.4 FE +3 more
Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,057
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??
2

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

Well, for the same reason I prefer unibody laptops, I'd prefer the E-M1.

If you want to wait for 4 years of usage so you can assess which is more durable, then be my guest.

Your right to do so, but you might be paying extra money for nothing, or even less than nothing. Typically, you'd put these things through accelerated wear tests, using shakers and drop hammers, environmental chambers and the like. You can simulate the culminated effects of years of use in just a few weeks. I'm surprised that none of the test sites have made any serious attempt to test fro robustness, weather sealing and the like.

We can do two things.

We can observe that the E-M1 is built in a similar fashion to other high end cameras, such as the D800/D4/1D, with a full metal body, and a lens mount attached (or actually a part of) that body. We can observe that the A7/A7r is built more along the lines of a 6D (or if you prefer you can propose others).

We can then look at other cameras built using similar methodologies in the past to see how they held up and use that to predict the long term results.

As you have a lot of experience with this type of thing, perhaps you'd like to proceed.

Also, the E-M1 gets regularly dunked during reviews, so it's not totally being ignored.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 +7 more
rovingtim Veteran Member • Posts: 8,644
Yep. Just like the EM5 flopped (nt)

stuff

Jay Ell Regular Member • Posts: 256
Re: What will happen to Olympus now??

Mjankor wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Mjankor wrote:

Well, for the same reason I prefer unibody laptops, I'd prefer the E-M1.

If you want to wait for 4 years of usage so you can assess which is more durable, then be my guest.

Your right to do so, but you might be paying extra money for nothing, or even less than nothing. Typically, you'd put these things through accelerated wear tests, using shakers and drop hammers, environmental chambers and the like. You can simulate the culminated effects of years of use in just a few weeks. I'm surprised that none of the test sites have made any serious attempt to test fro robustness, weather sealing and the like.

We can do two things.

We can observe that the E-M1 is built in a similar fashion to other high end cameras, such as the D800/D4/1D, with a full metal body

Full metal body means quite little when it comes to durability. A good example is Apple iPhone va. Nokia Lumia 920. The latter is plastic, but it trounces the iPhones in numerous youtube videos.

Also, body is not a structural weight carrying part, but just a thin protective layer. Plastic is as good as metal for that role, if not often better.

-- hide signature --

Copyright © Jay Ell

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads