So, the E-M5 III is coming at end of summer....

Raist3d wrote:

I do think the EM5 MKIII has a pretty good chance of being really good.

And I agree completely on that point.

Olympus sometimes struggles with marketing or managing, but their engineers and designers are arguably the best in the industry. They have proven this time and time again by innovating and executing. They have proven that they are capable of creating some pretty outstanding cameras and lenses.

When the EM5 III appears it will be an outstanding camera. I think there is an absolute certainty of this. And all the complaints will involve some highly subjective individual preferences, like:

• it is too expensive
• it is too big, or too small
• it is too heavy, or too light
• the sensor is still too small,
• the grip should be bigger, or smaller
• it doesn't compare well with the best APSC and FF cameras
• it isn't improved enough over the EM5 II
• it is missing some feature that the EM1 II or EM1X has
• it isn't as convenient as an Apple iPhone

But absolutely no one will be able to say it isn't a nice improvement over the EM5 II.

No matter what this new camera has, someone will find it lacking in some way. Which will prove my point that Olympus cannot seem to please everyone. And neither can any other manufacturer today.

JaKing wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

JaKing wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

NCV wrote:

It has got much more difficult to get people to upgrade.

The pictures from my old EM5 I still delight, so Olympus really need to do something special to get me to upgrade.

They need to do something special to attract new users. The EM1X I think is being bought by existing users mainly.

The Canon RP, the Nikon Z6 are very compelling cameras. They are slowly falling in price with the discounting that is going on.

M43 is caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot compete in the same price regions as FF. Most people would rather just spend their money on FF. But at the same time the low end of the camera market is dying fast. And on top of that I'd say most M43 users are either happy with their equipment or looking at other formats. So the light at the end of the tunnel might be an oncoming train

As usual, and totally predictably, you can be relied upon to trash a system you don't own ...

How did I trash the system?

Bolded above, just for starters. Does the phrase "Damning with feint praise" mean anything to you?

So anything short of unbridled praise = trashing the system? OK

There are a lot of happy M43 shooters, and it's a great system for certain people.

Here you go again ...

The same is the case for every system... no system is perfect.

But business wise its future prospects are bleak.

This is based on your enormous experience in big business and accountancy, I suppose ...

I have very considerable experience in both, and would not be comfortable making such a sweeping and baseless statement ... However, in the long run, we are all dead. I should be so lucky as to make the long run ...

Plenty of experienced business and accountancy folks have been wrong... I doubt many folks working at these camera companies would say the camera market would have fallen by 1/2 in 2012.

But yea, Olympus is having a particularly bad year compared to others in its imaging division by business/accounting metrics. In Q3 of 2018 revenue and profit was down 19% & 84%, respectively. Sony grew in both. Nikon was down but nowhere near as much. Canon's revenue shrank but its profits grew. So even by your metrics of choice M43 is doing worse than others.

There is little incentive for its happy users to upgrade

You are speaking for all users, I assume. What do you (or I) know of what is in another's mind, let alone to be able to speak for a whole lot of others with such confidence ...

I'm just going by what I hear here. Maybe M43 forum isn't representative of the average M43 user... but I doubt it.

and there's not much interest from outside now that there are larger format MILC options.

Ditto. You are talking the system down in every sentence. Now, it may well be that all formats are doomed by the relentless march of the idiot sticks and their smartphones, but I do not think that either your crystal ball or mine is quite so prescient ...

There's no crystal ball, just data and observations. Smartphones have definitely impacted camera sales... some cameras more than others.

That's not an indictment of the system... just a statement of where the market is

From your vast knowledge and experience as mentioned above ...

Sorry, but you, and some like you, are like flies on a not yet dead corpse ...

By definition corpses are dead. M43 isn't. But I'm struggling to see a way forward.

007peter wrote:

LarsPolarBear wrote: So, the E-M5 III (most likely) is coming at end of summer.... However, I am asking myself more and more if it is really worth waiting? The best we can expect is that Olympus finally puts the 20MP PDAF sensor from the E-M1 II & E-M1X into the M5 III with some additional gimmicks, but nothing earth shattering on the DR front or spectacular AF like the new Sony a6400... ...and that is the best case scenario, considering that Oly's marketing team seems totally out of touch with reality, they might even go for the interior of the PEN F with lousy AF and slow operations... If history is any guidance they will price it above the a6400 and the Fuji X-T30... and then tell everybody that there is no market below the PRO level...

I'm happy for see any new Mid-Range M43 camera. I think M43 has been on the wrong path: chasing Bigger, Bulky & Expensive PRO camera body that is antithesis to Micro43 being small & beautiful.

It is nice to see more m43 Mid-Ranger making a come-back in 2019. But I agree that $899 Fuji XT-30 and $899 Sony A6400 are quickly becoming a problem; these are incredibly ultra-competitive camera that offer amazing video with stunning Continuous Video tracking. EM5-III will have its work cut out to beat them.

Had Olympus release EM5-III earlier in 2018 without the 2019 fuji XT-30 & Sony A6400, it would have been an absolute killer. But now, it will be difficult as competition is very intense for mid-ranger.

People select M4/3 for reasons other than "best value." If they just wanted the best bang for the buck in an ILC, then APSC is the clear winner with budget DSLR kits with lenses selling for as little as $349 (like the Canon 4000D).

They select M4/3 for things like

• very good image quality,
• much better lens options,
• wide selection of body options,
• smaller overall size and weight,
• outstanding IBIS,
• or even for 4K video.

Everything except "lowest price."

If anyone wants cheapest or best image quality at high ISO, then they need to look elsewhere. For the rest of us, there is M4/3.

These cameras come out every year or so (I bought the original EPL1 in 2010).

Seriously, if it's the EM5III, I'm ready for an upgrade: I've used the mark II to its limits. Sure, my personal skills can always improve regardless of the camera, but having a camera packing a bigger bang can't hurt.

While I doubt the IQ side will improve much (based on the Pen F/EM1II), there can be many, many performance upgrades with the mark III.

bluevellet wrote:

These cameras come out every year or so (I bought the original EPL1 in 2010).

Seriously, if it's the EM5III, I'm ready for an upgrade: I've used the mark II to its limits. Sure, my personal skills can always improve regardless of the camera, but having a camera packing a bigger bang can't hurt.

While I doubt the IQ side will improve much (based on the Pen F/EM1II), there can be many, many performance upgrades with the mark III.

The sole reason I am still using a six year old EM1 is because I don't see much improvement in image quality in any M4/3 camera made since then. The sad fact is that the Four Thirds sensor has pretty much gone as far as it can go around six years ago. The 20MP sensor being only slightly better.

There will not be a noticeable improvement in image quality until we get a newly designed and much better sensor. Perhaps a BSI sensor with 22 or 24 MP. But that isn't likely to happen any time soon since the Four Thirds sensor is used in so few cameras today. The cost of development would be pretty high, and the improvements derived might be too slight.

And IBIS has pretty much topped out at 5.5 or 6 stops. Do you really need anything more? What would you be willing to pay to have 7 stops?

However there are plenty of other things that could be improved. Things like faster and more accurate AF speed and tracking. Better 4K video. More features. Better weather sealing. Better build quality, dual cards slots, faster image processing etc.

And those things may not be cheap to do, especially with a shrinking market, so the dream of a much better camera at the same price or less may remain just a dream.

M4/3 will never be the cheapest system, or the system with the best possible image quality. But it might always be the best compromise for many of us. My six year old camera is still good enough for my needs. And I suspect for a lot of other people too, which is why newer models have been few and far between.

Marty4650 wrote:

bluevellet wrote:

These cameras come out every year or so (I bought the original EPL1 in 2010).

Seriously, if it's the EM5III, I'm ready for an upgrade: I've used the mark II to its limits. Sure, my personal skills can always improve regardless of the camera, but having a camera packing a bigger bang can't hurt.

While I doubt the IQ side will improve much (based on the Pen F/EM1II), there can be many, many performance upgrades with the mark III.

The sole reason I am still using a six year old EM1 is because I don't see much improvement in image quality in any M4/3 camera made since then. The sad fact is that the Four Thirds sensor has pretty much gone as far as it can go around six years ago. The 20MP sensor being only slightly better.

There will not be a noticeable improvement in image quality until we get a newly designed and much better sensor. Perhaps a BSI sensor with 22 or 24 MP. But that isn't likely to happen any time soon since the Four Thirds sensor is used in so few cameras today. The cost of development would be pretty high, and the improvements derived might be too slight.

And IBIS has pretty much topped out at 5.5 or 6 stops. Do you really need anything more? What would you be willing to pay to have 7 stops?

However there are plenty of other things that could be improved. Things like faster and more accurate AF speed and tracking. Better 4K video. More features. Better weather sealing. Better build quality, dual cards slots, faster image processing etc.

And those things may not be cheap to do, especially with a shrinking market, so the dream of a much better camera at the same price or less may remain just a dream.

M4/3 will never be the cheapest system, or the system with the best possible image quality. But it might always be the best compromise for many of us. My six year old camera is still good enough for my needs. And I suspect for a lot of other people too, which is why newer models have been few and far between.

Hmm.....my experience is a lot different from yours, Marty. When I went from my E-M1  to the Mark 2, I saw a marked difference in image quality. I attribute a lot of this to the better sensor technology of the Sony sensor and the advances in the firmware. I also noticed the same difference with my Pen F. Sold the E-M1.

LarsPolarBear wrote:

So, the E-M5 III (most likely) is coming at end of summer according to 43rumors.com (https://www.43rumors.com/), but is it really worth the wait...

Like many forum members, I have been waiting for an upgraded/updated E-M5 III for some time, specially since the E-PL9 and E-M10 III have been dumbed down.

However, I am asking myself more and more if it is really worth waiting? The best we can expect is that Olympus finally puts the 20MP PDAF sensor from the E-M1 II & E-M1X into the M5 III with some additional gimmicks, but nothing earth shattering on the DR front or spectacular AF like the new Sony a6400... ...and that is the best case scenario, considering that Oly's marketing team seems totally out of touch with reality, they might even go for the interior of the PEN F with lousy AF and slow operations... If history is any guidance they will price it above the a6400 and the Fuji X-T30... and then tell everybody that there is no market below the PRO level...

Well, anyway... thought you might want to know that our wait will be over in 4-5 months...

Lars

I may be summarizing, or totally missing the point of your post, but we shall see right now.

I agree that Olympus sort of boxed themselves in.

If they give us too many specs, they "cannibalize" the higher end models. If they lower the specs, it's less appealing. If they decide to "not care" and give us the farm, so to speak, they may raise the price, surpassing that A6400.

Even if they pretty much match the EM1 mark 2 specs, it will still be hard to justify, compared to the 6400. I was eager for its release, but I cannot see how they can dig themselves out of this.

Either it will spec'd out, and too expensive, or it will go the Canon route (I know, I know...you can roll your eyes) - and only have an incremental update. I guess we will see....

sanjaykool wrote:

glassoholic wrote:

The EM5.3 could be Olympus recharging the m43 market... a new BSI 24mp PDAF sensor with an Olympus surprise or two in features (cant think what but if I could it wouldn't be a surprise)... and most importantly a killer price. Good luck with that Olympus!

If my understanding is correct Olympus will not prefer BSI sensor for the reason of floating or levitating class leading technology they use in their stabilization. It won't be wiser because of structural strength issues of the BSI vis a vis normal sensor. - Sanjay

Isn't Sony inbuilt IS (IBIS) very similar to Oly though Sanjay and they do use BSI. Not sure if it still applies, but maybe BSI just doesn't benefit a small sensor as much compared to a FF sensor. Probably totally wrong there, I'm sure that's the way it used to be with BSI. Mind you, times have changed and development carries on for sure.

All the best Sanjay.

Danny.

James Pilcher wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

From what I read, however, Olympus cameras command less than 5% of the global camera market, so is already a pretty insignificant player. Add to that, that the Imaging Division financially accounts for less than 8% of the overall Olympus corporate picture, and one gets a picture of a camera brand that is not ever destined to be a “mass market leader”, nor perhaps does Olympus care for it to be. Olympus has already heralded their camera strategy to target the “high margin, specialty “ market segment. No mention of Best Buy or Costco shoppers in that statement.

So...… Olympus doesn't have to be, and has obviously has chosen not to be, competitive in the larger mass market arena. If a buyer is fearful of not being a mainstream camera company shooter this is not the choice for them.

For me personally, I have never had a moments angst at not being a mass market buyer, and Olympus fits my shooting style and produces images that are currently way better than (the oft touted but in my opinion, outdated) “good enough”. I am looking forward to whatever “high margin/speciality “ goodies they have planned for the E-M5 III.

I agree with your comments Gary. I’m happy to be an Olympus shooter since 1973. Olympus has never been mainstream, has always been innovative, and never really disappointed me. I think I agree with your observation that Olympus is content in its niche role. Its cameras are a matter of corporate pride that I do not think Olympus will allow to slip away.

Jim Pilcher
Summit County, Colorado, USA
Living above life in the Rocky Mountains

I think you are right about Olympus having corporate pride in their camera division. Recently I had the pleasure of researching Olympus’s complete history and the chronology of their camera philosophy and design. It was very enlightening to me personally, and gave me new insight into why I have come to think of my Olympus cameras as having some sort of a special “soul” that I had not felt since back in my film days with a Petri 7s.

NextShowForSure wrote:

wolfie wrote:

mg_k wrote:

and over priced lenses as well

There are bargains to be had. Just don't get sucked into so-called "PRO" lens from Olympus.

Yeah get the Zuiko Pro - some the best glass on the market, let alone M43.

I'm totally happy with just the 12-40 Pro and the 40-150 Pro on my E-M5 MkII. Still plenty smaller (and cheaper) than any equivalent from other brands - very well sealed and both of my copies have survived for 3 years in rain, sand, saltwater. Fast AF. Close focus to near macro level. Manual pull-focus. Oh, and great image sharpness from full open aperture across the frame.

If you want tiny lenses then you buy those, but then they aren't "Pro" gear :))

A totally unprofessional but adequate shrunken 12-40 would be nice though for less demanding cash strapped beings like myself. The message will be lost here though I think.

15 zoom lenses in that approximate range have been produced for m43, of which 9 are current models. But no, you want a 16th variant.

Please go to the end of the long queue of commentators who, year after year, seem to be demanding cameras and lenses that exactly suit them personally.

I am glad that DPR is a gear nerd forum, because the complete lack of practicality and utilitarianism would be subject to open derision on any photography-centered forum.

LarsPolarBear wrote:

Olympus is not there to please anyone, they are in business to make money and in a larger scheme to provide employment. Therefore, they have to make products that sell at a price that is expectable to the market in general and that covers their costs. Which they have been very bad at in the past years as the losses demonstrate.

Marty4650 wrote:

When Olympus creates a very high end camera for sports/action shooters (the EM1X) some people are outraged, and say they have missed the plot by making a camera that is too big and too expensive. Even though it is still smaller and cheaper than similar cameras for this niche, and probably has a huge profit margin for them.

The profit margin is hugely dependent on the number they sell, since the components are all relatively cheap, its the moulds and factory setup that costs money and its mostly fixed cost or sunk cost. Considering that they already offer a discount of US$500, it doesn't feel like that there is massive demand...

When Olympus announces that it will discontinue a three year old model that never sold very well (the Pen-F), despite it being very popular with a small group of users, then some people are outraged. They will demand that Olympus keep producing cameras that lose money for them.

Well, again, perhaps it was just over priced and too big for what it was able to do...

I have one and IMO it's definitely not too big; I find the smaller GM5 a conveniently tiny camera for travel but too small to hold any medium size lenses like the 12-35/2.8

The PEN-F has just a little more space for controls and a grip and handles the 12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8 quite nicely. And ut still fits into my smaller camera bags.

When Olympus announces an update of their MOST popular mid range camera series (the EM5 III), other people are now outraged because Olympus still can't seem to make a smaller sensor perform better than a larger one. Or... at least as good if you pixel peep.

I don't think that the expectations are, that the m43 sensor needs to perform at par with APS-C or FF, but the expectation is that we see some development, and that includes the AF as well as low light and DR performance at higher pixel count. The other manufacturers have shown the way, it would be stupid to ignore what is out there because one is fully fixated on Oly products (not suggesting that is your case). Furthermore, Oly has brought this on itself, by making larger and larger products, instead of creating smart solution to miniaturise products (e.g. the path of collapsable lenses has been totally abandoned for monster PRO lenses). Therefore, its clients and potential clients will automatically look at larger sensor products like the APS-C models of the competition.

We don't yet know whow big the E-M5mkIII will be, nor what its sensor performance will be.

Its a little early to prejudge them for errors that they haven't made yet; Ill wait for the specifications and reviews before I form my opnion.

nzmacro wrote:

sanjaykool wrote:

glassoholic wrote:

The EM5.3 could be Olympus recharging the m43 market... a new BSI 24mp PDAF sensor with an Olympus surprise or two in features (cant think what but if I could it wouldn't be a surprise)... and most importantly a killer price. Good luck with that Olympus!

If my understanding is correct Olympus will not prefer BSI sensor for the reason of floating or levitating class leading technology they use in their stabilization. It won't be wiser because of structural strength issues of the BSI vis a vis normal sensor. - Sanjay

Isn't Sony inbuilt IS (IBIS) very similar to Oly though Sanjay and they do use BSI. Not sure if it still applies, but maybe BSI just doesn't benefit a small sensor as much compared to a FF sensor.

It's the other way around, actually. All small sensors in compact cameras and smartphones had been using BSI for a long time now, because it was the only way to get decent performance. But it seems that already at 1" sensor size those benefits arent as big. Even less so on an FF sensor. At least since sensor manufacturers figured out how to do gapless microlenses.

But basically, the smaller the "pixel", the greater benefit from using BSI. A 44mp 4/3 sensor would probably have to be BSI, or use another technology that increases "fill-rate" (like Olympus' own stacked sensor design, which is even better than BSI).

Astrotripper wrote:

nzmacro wrote:

sanjaykool wrote:

glassoholic wrote:

The EM5.3 could be Olympus recharging the m43 market... a new BSI 24mp PDAF sensor with an Olympus surprise or two in features (cant think what but if I could it wouldn't be a surprise)... and most importantly a killer price. Good luck with that Olympus!

If my understanding is correct Olympus will not prefer BSI sensor for the reason of floating or levitating class leading technology they use in their stabilization. It won't be wiser because of structural strength issues of the BSI vis a vis normal sensor. - Sanjay

Isn't Sony inbuilt IS (IBIS) very similar to Oly though Sanjay and they do use BSI. Not sure if it still applies, but maybe BSI just doesn't benefit a small sensor as much compared to a FF sensor.

It's the other way around, actually. All small sensors in compact cameras and smartphones had been using BSI for a long time now, because it was the only way to get decent performance. But it seems that already at 1" sensor size those benefits arent as big. Even less so on an FF sensor. At least since sensor manufacturers figured out how to do gapless microlenses.

But basically, the smaller the "pixel", the greater benefit from using BSI. A 44mp 4/3 sensor would probably have to be BSI, or use another technology that increases "fill-rate" (like Olympus' own stacked sensor design, which is even better than BSI).

Thanks for that, sort of thought I might have that mixed up. Well in that case, bring it on

All the best and a good read thanks.

Danny.