Rethinking stacked sensor in om-5

[Raist3d]

As I imagined. If you look at most sensors heading into 40+ MP territory are all BSI pretty much. (By that I mean consumer camera sensors).

Loading…

www.ephotozine.com

 

[DLBlack]

Stacked sensors are still too expensive to be on mid level cameras. Canon even used a FSI sensor and not a BSI sensor in their upcoming R7. For the mid level OM-5 we can hope for new BSI sensor and the newest processor.

---
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3571/3380136992_7c5a0986ea_m.jpg

 

[DeepSilence]

OM-5 can have a BSI sensor:
https://www.43rumors.com/ft1-totally-unlikely-rumor-om-5-has-41mp/.

 

[Raist3d]

I doubt it.

 

[Interceptor121]

The fact that a sensor is stacked doesn’t mean it costs more. Stacking is a method to increase integration and many mobile phones have stacked sensors

Low volumes instead drive higher not lower prices

Do you have sources for that claim? If the stacked costs the same as non-stacked sensor, I don't see why every manufacturer wouldn't put them in every camera since there would be no benefit [in] using the older non-stacked sensor. I think it's reasonable to assume that there must be some higher costs associated with stacked over non-stacked sensor, though exactly how much more, I'm not sure.

Why exactly do I have to provide a source when the op doesn’t provide one and has already changed his position as it was wrong?

It might occur to people that AlmostDoctor wants to educate himself/herself by reading the source(s) you supply. If you view asking to supply a source as combative, then AlmostDoctor seemingly was very perceptive to make the ask.

James

But he didn’t ask the op did he? So on which basis he doesn’t have to provide a source but I do?

Perhaps the case that you mentioned as a faulty example mobile phones having stacked sensor in the lower price context raises more questions about your claims since mobile phones also have much cheaper to build sensors due to being smaller/higher yield and vastly higher volumes?

the op has no idea as prices are on B2B sites which am not going to provide to you

by the way sensors are low cost the EVF instead is very expensive on this camera so this goes to show the amount of misinformation and assumptions people make

 

[DeepSilence]

I doubt it.

I think it is possible given the intention to release the Fujifilm X-H2 camera:
https://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm...-not-video-vs-stills-but-resolution-vs-speed/.

 

[Raist3d]

The fact that a sensor is stacked doesn’t mean it costs more. Stacking is a method to increase integration and many mobile phones have stacked sensors

Low volumes instead drive higher not lower prices

Do you have sources for that claim? If the stacked costs the same as non-stacked sensor, I don't see why every manufacturer wouldn't put them in every camera since there would be no benefit [in] using the older non-stacked sensor. I think it's reasonable to assume that there must be some higher costs associated with stacked over non-stacked sensor, though exactly how much more, I'm not sure.

Why exactly do I have to provide a source when the op doesn’t provide one and has already changed his position as it was wrong?

It might occur to people that AlmostDoctor wants to educate himself/herself by reading the source(s) you supply. If you view asking to supply a source as combative, then AlmostDoctor seemingly was very perceptive to make the ask.

James

But he didn’t ask the op did he? So on which basis he doesn’t have to provide a source but I do?

Perhaps the case that you mentioned as a faulty example mobile phones having stacked sensor in the lower price context raises more questions about your claims since mobile phones also have much cheaper to build sensors due to being smaller/higher yield and vastly higher volumes?

the op has no idea as prices are on B2B sites which am not going to provide to you

by the way sensors are low cost the EVF instead is very expensive on this camera so this goes to show the amount of misinformation and assumptions people make

Not faulty correct the technology doesn’t cost the same and sony wants to phase out the old process only MFT and their APSC are left on it

I say faulty example because you are comparing much smaller sensors. Sensor pricing varies with size quite a bit.

however the volumes of their new MFT sensor are tiny so prices are higher and will stay until volumes ramp up. OM systems on their own do not move enough volumes so as long as nobody jumps in ot won’t drop in price

the rest is already either stacked for compact and video cam or back illuminated for security applications

so the idea that a stacked sensor per se is more expensive to make is flawed

You can argue it with Sony. That's what they claimed. Please note again that you are making the mistake of comparing different sensor sizes- as if that made no different to cost. There's a huge huge difference in cost to make a stacked sensor with a phone small sensor vs bigger sensors.

Also the claim made about BSI sensor and pixel counts was incorrect, just making sure we are on the same page.

--
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.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

 

[Raist3d]

I doubt it.

I think it is possible given the intention to release the Fujifilm X-H2 camera:
https://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm...-not-video-vs-stills-but-resolution-vs-speed/.

Funi is not Olympus. And Fuji has done this before in the past (way back in tamest he Fuji SR and Fuji HR super CCD sensors).

But well find out soon enough. I agree it's possible, I just dont' think it's likely.

 

[Interceptor121]

Here

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...re-of-autofocus-plus-expect-more-aps-c-bodies

"

DE: As time goes on, will the cost of stacked technology come down enough that it will fit cost-wise into consumer cameras?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price.

DE: Yes. And of course, the stacked is just a more complicated technology. There's a lot going on there ,so it's going to be always more expensive than not stacked. But on the other hand, the cell-phone sensors that Sony makes use stacked technology, so that also helps drive the cost down. It sounds like, really, there's no way to tell how much it's going to come down over time, and whether that will be enough for entry-level models too."

 

[Raist3d]

Here

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...re-of-autofocus-plus-expect-more-aps-c-bodies

"

DE: As time goes on, will the cost of stacked technology come down enough that it will fit cost-wise into consumer cameras?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price.

DE: Yes. And of course, the stacked is just a more complicated technology. There's a lot going on there ,so it's going to be always more expensive than not stacked. But on the other hand, the cell-phone sensors that Sony makes use stacked technology, so that also helps drive the cost down. It sounds like, really, there's no way to tell how much it's going to come down over time, and whether that will be enough for entry-level models too."

looks like you don’t understand your own sources?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price

the price are high because volumes are low

the other sentence is the interviewer making stuff up

Everything that has more complexity in build or design costs more. And yes, of course volume is a problem. But I still highlight that you are comparing smaller sensors with bigger sensors and that's a very known variable for cost difference - in addition to the volume difference.

In either case the claim was that stacked sensors are more expensive than the other type. That's how it is today, that's not a false claim. OM-5 announced next month is necessarily implying today as a context right? Of course tech and cost march forward and down.

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

Sure, I never said that volume/ecnonomies of scale are not a factor. I don't know why you are trying go portrait that on something I said- I never said that. But I also highlight you can't compare phone sensor sizes with bigger sensor sizes- that's a variable that changes pricing.

the discount on the whole sale market for any components increases significantly as you hit 1000 and 100000 or millions

Of course, that's a factor. I never said it wasn't.

In any case the cost of the sensor is the smallest part of what you pay. Currently you can buy sensors for $150 that go in cameras with $1500 RRP

So, at this point I must join almost doctor asking for a source for your claim that stacked sensors aren't more expensive to manufacture. Can you please provide a source for your claims the claim you made?

Also can we agree that BSI sensors do not imply small pixel counts?

thanks again.

--
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.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

 

[Interceptor121]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

I think it has go one way or the other. Either the same sensor that's in OM1, or a non-stacked, higher resolution BSI sensor to cater to different needs. I don't think 20mp non-stacked sensor will be that appealing, given that it'll be competing with EM1III and EM5III in that price range, not to mention other m43 and APSC offerings in that range. But whether we see higher resolution sensor also depends on how well the current lenses can resolve the additional detail. OM doesn't seem to prioritize spec sheet bragging as much as real world improvements (e.g. they improved IBIS in OM1 even though it makes zero difference in CIPA rating since CIPA does not test for rolls) so I think it would happen only if they believe that there's real image resolution gain from higher res sensor.

There was a low credibility rumor about OM5 having higher resolution sensor. I think it's actually possible they would go for a higher resolution sensor. It will differentiate OM1 and OM5 in a way that will make them more appealing as a set, using one for wildlife and the other for nature

back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

Please explain to me why the Fuji APSC of 26MP then is BSI and 26 MP? That doesn't make sense. Also the Fuji 26MP is a relatively fast sensor (close to EM1.2/.3 readouts) in its class. Of course doesn't compare to the super fast stacked sensors but that's beside the point.

Evidence the Fuji 26MP is BSI and has been that for a while now:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/54716...s-with-a-26mp-x-trans-sensor-and-4k-60p-video

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination

Update: BSI enables actually bigger pixel counts without sacrificing image quality vs some degree of lower pixel counts. No, I am not going to bother looking where this piece of knowledge came from but I am pretty sure you can find it if you look for it. I already gave you evidence.

Hope you now return in kind.

 

[DeepSilence]

I doubt it.

I think it is possible given the intention to release the Fujifilm X-H2 camera:
https://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm...-not-video-vs-stills-but-resolution-vs-speed/.

Funi is not Olympus. And Fuji has done this before in the past (way back in tamest he Fuji SR and Fuji HR super CCD sensors).

But well find out soon enough. I agree it's possible, I just dont' think it's likely.

I think Fujifilm is OMDS's main competitor and therefore OMDS has to respond to its movements.

 

[Raist3d]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

I think it has go one way or the other. Either the same sensor that's in OM1, or a non-stacked, higher resolution BSI sensor to cater to different needs. I don't think 20mp non-stacked sensor will be that appealing, given that it'll be competing with EM1III and EM5III in that price range, not to mention other m43 and APSC offerings in that range. But whether we see higher resolution sensor also depends on how well the current lenses can resolve the additional detail. OM doesn't seem to prioritize spec sheet bragging as much as real world improvements (e.g. they improved IBIS in OM1 even though it makes zero difference in CIPA rating since CIPA does not test for rolls) so I think it would happen only if they believe that there's real image resolution gain from higher res sensor.

There was a low credibility rumor about OM5 having higher resolution sensor. I think it's actually possible they would go for a higher resolution sensor. It will differentiate OM1 and OM5 in a way that will make them more appealing as a set, using one for wildlife and the other for nature

back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

Please explain to me why the Fuji APSC of 26MP then is BSI and 26 MP? That doesn't make sense. Also the Fuji 26MP is a relatively fast sensor (close to EM1.2/.3 readouts) in its class. Of course doesn't compare to the super fast stacked sensors but that's beside the point.

Evidence the Fuji 26MP is BSI and has been that for a while now:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/54716...s-with-a-26mp-x-trans-sensor-and-4k-60p-video

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination

Update: BSI enables actually bigger pixel counts without sacrificing image quality vs some degree of lower pixel counts. No, I am not going to bother looking where this piece of knowledge came from but I am pretty sure you can find it if you look for it. I already gave you evidence.

Hope you now return in kind.

There are back illuminated non stacked sensors typically used for low pixel count cameras like sony And panasonic 24 megapixels

You brought up the GH5s as an example of low pixel count BSI.

those read slow cant do 60 fos without crop

The Fuji 26MP ASPC sensor being used is not slow even if it's not hitting 60fps. It's definitively a step above the average CMOS sensor that was done until that time.

then there sre backilluminated stacked sensor with high pixel count those don’t do equally well in low light and are what goes in full frame high megapixel sensor.

This is a new claim. What you claimed was

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination"

So looks like the pixel count isn't limited. I gave you quite the example with the sony 61MP sensor. There's others around.

Am not familiar with fuji sony apsc stack uses traditional front illuminated sensors that are still very high performance.

? They are BSI.

Why don’t they change to stacked? Not sure but probably dont want to make a 32 megapixel apsc eating into their full frame

? Fuji just announced a 26MP Stacked sensor camera.

sony strategy is to get a winning full frame product and apsc is a commodity product

I was giving you the concrete example of Sony 61MP and Fuji's 26MP BSI sensors.

With more companies using high megapixels high speed full frame also those sensor will become mainstream

For MFT is a bit tricker especially if panasonic no longer uses sony so it will be hard to drive volumes

it would make sense for OMS to move all cameras to the new sensor to reduce purchase price instead kod getting other products

 

[Raist3d]

I doubt it.

I think it is possible given the intention to release the Fujifilm X-H2 camera:
https://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm...-not-video-vs-stills-but-resolution-vs-speed/.

Funi is not Olympus. And Fuji has done this before in the past (way back in tamest he Fuji SR and Fuji HR super CCD sensors).

But well find out soon enough. I agree it's possible, I just dont' think it's likely.

I think Fujifilm is OMDS's main competitor and therefore OMDS has to respond to its movements.

I certainly think Fujifilm is a competitor to OMDS, hands down. Particularly with the latest moves. I just wonder if OMDS could get better pricing by focusing on one sensor, and try to fill resolution gaps with HHHR even if HHHR can't be applied to all situations.

But yeah. I still bet no, you bet yes, let's check for fun next month if they announce.

 

[Interceptor121]

Here

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...re-of-autofocus-plus-expect-more-aps-c-bodies

"

DE: As time goes on, will the cost of stacked technology come down enough that it will fit cost-wise into consumer cameras?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price.

DE: Yes. And of course, the stacked is just a more complicated technology. There's a lot going on there ,so it's going to be always more expensive than not stacked. But on the other hand, the cell-phone sensors that Sony makes use stacked technology, so that also helps drive the cost down. It sounds like, really, there's no way to tell how much it's going to come down over time, and whether that will be enough for entry-level models too."

looks like you don’t understand your own sources?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price

the price are high because volumes are low

the other sentence is the interviewer making stuff up

Everything that has more complexity in build or design costs more. And yes, of course volume is a problem. But I still highlight that you are comparing smaller sensors with bigger sensors and that's a very known variable for cost difference - in addition to the volume difference.

In either case the claim was that stacked sensors are more expensive than the other type. That's how it is today, that's not a false claim. OM-5 announced next month is necessarily implying today as a context right? Of course tech and cost march forward and down.

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

Sure, I never said that volume/ecnonomies of scale are not a factor. I don't know why you are trying go portrait that on something I said- I never said that. But I also highlight you can't compare phone sensor sizes with bigger sensor sizes- that's a variable that changes pricing.

the discount on the whole sale market for any components increases significantly as you hit 1000 and 100000 or millions

Of course, that's a factor. I never said it wasn't.

In any case the cost of the sensor is the smallest part of what you pay. Currently you can buy sensors for $150 that go in cameras with $1500 RRP

So, at this point I must join almost doctor asking for a source for your claim that stacked sensors aren't more expensive to manufacture. Can you please provide a source for your claims the claim you made?

you can go on distributors website yourself use the 1 or 1/1.7 or smaller format and see it for yourself

Also can we agree that BSI sensors do not imply small pixel counts?

no stacking is a primary way to increase pixel count and fill factor

If your pixel count doesn’t need to go up there is no need for stacking

sony own texts

By this stacked structure, large-scale circuits can now be mounted keeping small chip size.

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

for compacts the migration from front to stack didn’t improve IQ at all it is not a magic bullet it has been already discussed here long time ago

the primary benefit is increased fill factor and no loss of speed compared to back illuminated non stacked sensors

thanks again.

 

[Raist3d]

Here

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...re-of-autofocus-plus-expect-more-aps-c-bodies

"

DE: As time goes on, will the cost of stacked technology come down enough that it will fit cost-wise into consumer cameras?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price.

DE: Yes. And of course, the stacked is just a more complicated technology. There's a lot going on there ,so it's going to be always more expensive than not stacked. But on the other hand, the cell-phone sensors that Sony makes use stacked technology, so that also helps drive the cost down. It sounds like, really, there's no way to tell how much it's going to come down over time, and whether that will be enough for entry-level models too."

looks like you don’t understand your own sources?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price

the price are high because volumes are low

the other sentence is the interviewer making stuff up

Everything that has more complexity in build or design costs more. And yes, of course volume is a problem. But I still highlight that you are comparing smaller sensors with bigger sensors and that's a very known variable for cost difference - in addition to the volume difference.

In either case the claim was that stacked sensors are more expensive than the other type. That's how it is today, that's not a false claim. OM-5 announced next month is necessarily implying today as a context right? Of course tech and cost march forward and down.

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

Sure, I never said that volume/ecnonomies of scale are not a factor. I don't know why you are trying go portrait that on something I said- I never said that. But I also highlight you can't compare phone sensor sizes with bigger sensor sizes- that's a variable that changes pricing.

the discount on the whole sale market for any components increases significantly as you hit 1000 and 100000 or millions

Of course, that's a factor. I never said it wasn't.

In any case the cost of the sensor is the smallest part of what you pay. Currently you can buy sensors for $150 that go in cameras with $1500 RRP

So, at this point I must join almost doctor asking for a source for your claim that stacked sensors aren't more expensive to manufacture. Can you please provide a source for your claims the claim you made?

you can go on distributors website yourself use the 1 or 1/1.7 or smaller format and see it for yourself

Wait hold on. You were asked for a link to provide evidence to your claims. I provided evidence for mine. Can you please return in kind? Keep in mind again, this is ignoring sensor size which is again a big variable in sensor expense.

Also can we agree that BSI sensors do not imply small pixel counts?

no stacking is a primary way to increase pixel count and fill factor

If your pixel count doesn’t need to go up there is no need for stacking

I am not talking about stacking here. I am talking about the claim you made here:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66214031

Which is on BSI sensors:

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S"

Clearly this claim is false given there's BSI sensors around with high megapixel counts?

sony own texts

By this stacked structure, large-scale circuits can now be mounted keeping small chip size.

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

for compacts the migration from front to stack didn’t improve IQ at all it is not a magic bullet it has been already discussed here long time ago

the primary benefit is increased fill factor and no loss of speed compared to back illuminated non stacked sensors

thanks again.

--
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.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

 

[whumber]

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

There were multiple generations of 20MP 1" sensors before Sony started introducing stacked versions.

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

The first stacked sensor available in any MILC was the 24MP A9.

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

DJI is using the same sensor in the Mavic 3 line, I suspect they will drive far more volume than the OM-1.

 

[Raist3d]

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

There were multiple generations of 20MP 1" sensors before Sony started introducing stacked versions.

Thanks for catching that. You are absolutely right I just stopped reading because I felt it was irrelevant to the BSI sensor claim, but yeah- sony had 20MP non stacked sensors for sure in the 1'' / RX line first.

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

The first stacked sensor available in any MILC was the 24MP A9.

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

DJI is using the same sensor in the Mavic 3 line, I suspect they will drive far more volume than the OM-1.

 

[Gary from Seattle]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

I think OM Systems is likely rethinking their whole line of cameras and what bodies they want to target what type (and budgets) of photographers. The OM-1 is certainly a top end camera but not as much of a Pro Camera as the EM-1X as far as ergonomics and performance go.

Will they produce a new upgrade to the EM-1X that would help push the top end telephoto lenses. What would the market be for this camera given the apparent strong success of the OM-1. Would such a camera be likely to be a driver for pulling more top-end Pro or Pro level sports and wildlife photographers from other brands and would that drive top end lens sales sufficiently to warrant such a camera.

What level of performance would they need to provide at a more moderate price level of a successor to at least the EM-5 series. Would this new camera help as a stepping stone to future purchases of Pro lenses and perhaps even of a top end sports/wildlife camera and lenses of that aim.

What will they use as an entry level camera to get people into the door of their system. What level of performance and price point would that entail. Would that camera be profitable at a lower price point given diminishing industry-wide sales. Certainly the Japanese enthusiast is part of the equation if not the driver for this entry level camera.

 

[Raist3d]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

I think OM Systems is likely rethinking their whole line of cameras and what bodies they want to target what type (and budgets) of photographers. The OM-1 is certainly a top end camera but not as much of a Pro Camera as the EM-1X as far as ergonomics and performance go.

Will they produce a new upgrade to the EM-1X that would help push the top end telephoto lenses. What would the market be for this camera given the apparent strong success of the OM-1. Would such a camera be likely to be a driver for pulling more top-end Pro or Pro level sports and wildlife photographers from other brands and would that drive top end lens sales sufficiently to warrant such a camera.

What level of performance would they need to provide at a more moderate price level of a successor to at least the EM-5 series. Would this new camera help as a stepping stone to future purchases of Pro lenses and perhaps even of a top end sports/wildlife camera and lenses of that aim.

What will they use as an entry level camera to get people into the door of their system. What level of performance and price point would that entail. Would that camera be profitable at a lower price point given diminishing industry-wide sales. Certainly the Japanese enthusiast is part of the equation if not the driver for this entry level camera.

I would really prefer if the OM-5 is the EM5 line successor, that they do it right even if the MSRP has to climb. I think a fast "pro" OM-5 in that vein can command a higher price by virtue of being unique of offering the capabilities in that size.

If the OM-5 is not a successor to EM5 and it's more of a cheaper to buy OM-1 with key features, I think that's clever in saving R&D and resources, but definitively I want to see what OMDS does with the rest of the line, and at least the Pen which they said continues.