m43's is a system, not a camera

Jeff wrote:

The purpose of this post is simply to remind folks that m43's is a *system*, not a single camera body. As a reminder, here are models currently available on manufacturers' web sites ...

• Olympus E-PL9
• Olympus E-M10.3
• Olympus E-M5.2
• Olympus E-M1.2
• Olympus E-M1.x
• Panasonic GH5
• Panasonic GH4
• Panasonic GX850
• Panasonic GX85
• Panasonic G7
• Panasonic LX100 (ok, not ILC, but still 4/3 sensor)
• Yi M1
• Blackmagic Pocket Cinema
• DJI Zenmuse

(Did I miss any?) In particular, how can anyone possibly claim that EM1.x does anything other than add another option to those already available in a very cool ecosystem of interchangeable camera and lens offerings from multiple manufacturers?

In case you're wondering, the post is motivated by a thread bemoaning a lack of 'vision'. on the part of Olympus. Hardly.

I suppose when reviewers and critics engineer an m43 camera I’ll stop and take note of their broad criticisms of other camera systems, philosophies, and vision. Until then, it’s their struggle to accept what is until they can do better, not mine.

Auf Reisen wrote:

To play devil's advocate: of course it's a system and there are other choices of camera bodies. But opportunity costs are a thing. Olympus could have used the R&D resources spent on the Emix to develop a camera with a smaller footprint. People are suggesting that Olympus should play to its strengths. That is, exceptionally feature-rich, small and light cameras with great weather sealing.

For me, EM1X aligns with this statement of strengths when compared to the alternatives I had before its release. Especially, if you remove the absolutes - small & light - and see it as 'smaller and lighter' than the other camera\lens combinations in its targeted category. I don't think Olympus ever confused the EM1X with a 'street camera'.

I currently use an EM1.2 and 300 F4 (+ 1.4 on occasion). I also have an EM5.2. 12-100 F4 and TG 5. I will keep all when I get my EM1X because it is intended for places and conditions that are at the limit, imo, for the EM1.2. But still fits into my requirements for portability and overall gear package weight. It's nice to have a high-performance, long reach package that fits in my kayak and backpacking and preserves my investment in glass and understanding of operations.

I think the EM1X clearly does what Olympus clearly stated it is to do - provide an affordable, portable, reliable, high-performance alternative to the 'enthusiast' adventure\expedition\ecotourism traveler abandoned by the big boys.

I also don't think that Olympus wasted all of the R&D money they spent on the EM1X. They surely learned a lot about computational photography, the boundaries of mechanical performance, ergonomics, etc. Why not learn your lessons, and take risk, on a new market in which you have little downside (your market share can't get any lower), but lots of potential upsides and then take those lessons into 'most people needs markets'.

The EM1X is proving to be an interesting probe into photography's conventional wisdom.

DLBlack wrote:

Pixnat2 wrote:

Jeff wrote:

Pixnat2 wrote:

Jeff wrote:

The purpose of this post is simply to remind folks that m43's is a *system*, not a single camera body. As a reminder, here are models currently available on manufacturers' web sites ...

• Olympus E-PL9
• Olympus E-M10.3
• Olympus E-M5.2
• Olympus E-M1.2
• Olympus E-M1.x
• Panasonic GH5
• Panasonic GH4
• Panasonic GX850
• Panasonic GX85
• Panasonic G7
• Panasonic LX100 (ok, not ILC, but still 4/3 sensor)
• Yi M1
• Blackmagic Pocket Cinema
• DJI Zenmuse

(Did I miss any?) In particular, how can anyone possibly claim that EM1.x does anything other than add another option to those already available in a very cool ecosystem of interchangeable camera and lens offerings from multiple manufacturers?

In case you're wondering, the post is motivated by a thread bemoaning a lack of 'vision'. on the part of Olympus. Hardly.

You misunderstood the subject of the thread.

It is not at all about the lack of vision, but the evolution of the vision. That's different. And it wasn't bemoaning, just sharing opinions and asking for others.

That said, of course m43 is a system, and a superb one!

Indeed, it's about evolution. Here's what you wrote "But recently, Olympus seems to divert a bit from this vision: cameras get bigger and more expensive. They seem to leave their "what people need?" mantra besides, and made a flagship that very few people need. I may be wrong, but the recent Olympus strategy is a bit confusing."

I don't think it's confusing at all. What's on offer now is a full lineup of cameras from affordable ILC's (EM10.3 for $449 right now) up to the high-end sports/nature shooters. The pitch to those high-end shooters is the same ... an affordable, lightweight, option with excellent build quality (compared to the 1DX) .

Folks may not find the offerings particularly compelling, which, of course, is their option. But, respectfully, I don't see how this can be criticized from the aspect of a long term strategy or vision.

What can be criticized is that instead of releasing "what (a lot of) people need", ie the long awaited EM5 update, they realeased a camera "(only a few) people need".

I find it confusing, and I'm not alone, apparently.

But OK, to each his own .

I am guessing the E-M1X was released before the E-M5.3 was mostly do to moving manufacturing from China to Vietnam and all the start up issues with a new camera manufacturing facility. A small limited production for the initial new facility makes some sense and it was stated by an Olympus official as a reason in an interview.

Make sense, that's true. It could explain why Olympus postponed the EM5.3.

Thank you for this great post, kind of explain things to me.

Not everyone will agree, but I wanted to get that point of view out there as a counterpoint to a commonly expressed opinion.

Guess I didn't have enough to do today.   So I made a list of the 23 different m43 system cameras that have been announced by Olympus since 2009.  I created a decimal value for the date of the announcement, then fit that to a line.

There's no evidence Olympus is slowing down the rate at which they introduce new mFT cameras.

DLBlack wrote:

Pixnat2 wrote:

Jeff wrote:

Pixnat2 wrote:

Jeff wrote:

The purpose of this post is simply to remind folks that m43's is a *system*, not a single camera body. As a reminder, here are models currently available on manufacturers' web sites ...

• Olympus E-PL9
• Olympus E-M10.3
• Olympus E-M5.2
• Olympus E-M1.2
• Olympus E-M1.x
• Panasonic GH5
• Panasonic GH4
• Panasonic GX850
• Panasonic GX85
• Panasonic G7
• Panasonic LX100 (ok, not ILC, but still 4/3 sensor)
• Yi M1
• Blackmagic Pocket Cinema
• DJI Zenmuse

(Did I miss any?) In particular, how can anyone possibly claim that EM1.x does anything other than add another option to those already available in a very cool ecosystem of interchangeable camera and lens offerings from multiple manufacturers?

In case you're wondering, the post is motivated by a thread bemoaning a lack of 'vision'. on the part of Olympus. Hardly.

You misunderstood the subject of the thread.

It is not at all about the lack of vision, but the evolution of the vision. That's different. And it wasn't bemoaning, just sharing opinions and asking for others.

That said, of course m43 is a system, and a superb one!

Indeed, it's about evolution. Here's what you wrote "But recently, Olympus seems to divert a bit from this vision: cameras get bigger and more expensive. They seem to leave their "what people need?" mantra besides, and made a flagship that very few people need. I may be wrong, but the recent Olympus strategy is a bit confusing."

I don't think it's confusing at all. What's on offer now is a full lineup of cameras from affordable ILC's (EM10.3 for $449 right now) up to the high-end sports/nature shooters. The pitch to those high-end shooters is the same ... an affordable, lightweight, option with excellent build quality (compared to the 1DX) .

Folks may not find the offerings particularly compelling, which, of course, is their option. But, respectfully, I don't see how this can be criticized from the aspect of a long term strategy or vision.

What can be criticized is that instead of releasing "what (a lot of) people need", ie the long awaited EM5 update, they realeased a camera "(only a few) people need".

I find it confusing, and I'm not alone, apparently.

But OK, to each his own .

I am guessing the E-M1X was released before the E-M5.3 was mostly do to moving manufacturing from China to Vietnam and all the start up issues with a new camera manufacturing facility. A small limited production for the initial new facility makes some sense and it was stated by an Olympus official as a reason in an interview.

Not everyone will agree, but I wanted to get that point of view out there as a counterpoint to a commonly expressed opinion.

Here's a list of Olympus OM-D announcements.  See how they go on an alternating long/short cycle?  If this holds, then we should expect to see a new OM-D yet this year. Certainly seems likely that will be an E-M5.3.

Proves the old adage yet again, Pete:

The pen is
is mightier than the sword

...

absquatulate wrote:

Jeff wrote:

The purpose of this post is simply to remind folks that m43's is a *system*, not a single camera body. As a reminder, here are models currently available on manufacturers' web sites ...

• Olympus E-PL9
• Olympus E-M10.3
• Olympus E-M5.2
• Olympus E-M1.2
• Olympus E-M1.x
• Panasonic GH5

• GH5s

• Panasonic GH4 (discontinued)

• G9

• Panasonic GX850 (Only available as a continuous model in some region)

• GF10

• Panasonic GX85 (discontinued)

• GX9

• Panasonic G7 (discontinued)

• G85
• G95 (announced)

• Panasonic LX100 (ok, not ILC, but still 4/3 sensor)
• Yi M1
• Blackmagic Pocket Cinema
• DJI Zenmuse

(Did I miss any?) In particular, how can anyone possibly claim that EM1.x does anything other than add another option to those already available in a very cool ecosystem of interchangeable camera and lens offerings from multiple manufacturers?

In case you're wondering, the post is motivated by a thread bemoaning a lack of 'vision'. on the part of Olympus. Hardly.

You missed the G9, other than that I agree completely. The hysteria around the E-M1X is quite bizarre, it's just another choice for those that want this kind of camera. If I was shooting wildlife professionally it would definitely be a great option. Neither Olympus nor Panasonic are going anywhere, these companies are producing cutting edge cameras, just enjoy the fact they exist and we have these choices. If you don't like M4/3's or they're not producing what you want then buy something else, but don't imagine any other manufacturer is perfect either, because they're definitely not in my experience.