Haider

phouphou: If this was a 14-30f2-2.8 lens for MFT system people would rave about the IQ at the pricepoint ($500)

This lens just shows how overpriced MFT lenses really are.

djimjm: Just a comparison:
Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS 'Contemporary' (for Full Frame)
20 elements/16 groups
4 stops IS
min. focus 1.12m
Weight 1.1 kg
Length 197 mm
Diam. 86 mm
Public price 950 $
Product date Jul 20

Olympus 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 IS
21 elements/15 groups
3 stops IS
min. focus 1.3m
Weight 1.1 kg
Length 205 mm
Diam. 86 mm
Public price 1500 $
Product date Sep 20

These lens seem quite similar (except for the size of sensors they aim).
But the cost of the Oly is 1.5x
What can explain such a difference ?!

angelo7859: <quote>
The E-M1 III's 20MP Four Thirds chip is one we know from previous M43 cameras: it produces some of the best JPEG and Raw files of any camera in its sensor-class, but larger sensor cameras, at a similar price point, offer better dynamic range and resoluti
<unquote>

So this camera is too high priced to compete with APS-C (Fujifilm/ Sony) and Full frame (Nikon Z5/ Z6).

Hubertus Bigend: The problem Olympus will be facing trying to sell that new 150-400 x1.25 to professionals is that the prospect for substantially higher-res sensors is dim now, while APS-C and FF have increased their megapixels substantially in the last few years, getting closer and closer in telephoto reach and thereby reducing the disadvantage in size and weight of the lenses for telephoto shooters, too. I know that not everyone needs more, and neither do I, but how does Olympus want to compete in the high-end segment with a four years old 20 MP sensor, while high-end APS-C has an excellent 32 MP sensor and high-end FF is offering resolutions between 40 and 60 MP?

Hubertus Bigend: The problem Olympus will be facing trying to sell that new 150-400 x1.25 to professionals is that the prospect for substantially higher-res sensors is dim now, while APS-C and FF have increased their megapixels substantially in the last few years, getting closer and closer in telephoto reach and thereby reducing the disadvantage in size and weight of the lenses for telephoto shooters, too. I know that not everyone needs more, and neither do I, but how does Olympus want to compete in the high-end segment with a four years old 20 MP sensor, while high-end APS-C has an excellent 32 MP sensor and high-end FF is offering resolutions between 40 and 60 MP?

Hubertus Bigend: The problem Olympus will be facing trying to sell that new 150-400 x1.25 to professionals is that the prospect for substantially higher-res sensors is dim now, while APS-C and FF have increased their megapixels substantially in the last few years, getting closer and closer in telephoto reach and thereby reducing the disadvantage in size and weight of the lenses for telephoto shooters, too. I know that not everyone needs more, and neither do I, but how does Olympus want to compete in the high-end segment with a four years old 20 MP sensor, while high-end APS-C has an excellent 32 MP sensor and high-end FF is offering resolutions between 40 and 60 MP?

PocketPixels: Cameras have been so good for so long that new, full-price models don't make the compelling case that they used to.

A 2015 smartphone often can't use the latest versions of apps and websites. Try surfing the Web with an iPhone 5s or a Google Nexus 5 and see just how many sites load only partly. See how many apps make you log in every 5 minutes because the old phone OS keeps disconnecting.

But that DSLR that took stunning wedding portraits in 2015? It's still fully compatible with 2020 weddings. And it's on eBay right now for $400, plus $9 for a fresh (3rd party) battery.

xeppelin: a digital b&W camera is nothing more than a gimmick. Nothing that cannot be done just as well with a decent hi-rez color camera and proper post processing. And at much lower cost.

well, at least i am not forced to buy or subsidize it.

BrexitDefCom3: I have a 4/3rds camera I bought to get a light long image-stabilized zoom, and to explore this sort of square format, and as suggested this new oly and the long zoom is intended to do a more up to date job. From recent results with my 1020 Nokia, i can see the POSSIBILITY that one fine day a micro 4/3rds machine will equal in image quality at high isos what a full-frame camera does, please email me when that day occurs, thankyou.

kristof93: Too little, too late and too expensive Olympus. Trying to sell a recycled camera with an eye-watering price tag in a market more competitive than ever is not going to cut it.

muppix: As an existing E-M5 mk II user (and mk I before that) I’m considering upgrading to the mk III for one feature alone: USB charging. Because when you add the bulk of an external battery charger, mains lead, and international mains adapter you’ve nearly doubled the size of your travelling camera, which is a real consideration if you spend weeks on the road with just a carry-on bag. I don’t care that it’s micro USB and not USB-C - so’s my Kindle. I don’t care it’s only rated for 310 shots - I’ll appreciate the lightness afforded by the small battery more often than I’ll grumble about having to to charge it during the day using any ubiquitous USB charger or power bank. Speaking of lightness, I am slightly worried about where weight has been shaved off. Is this an all-plastic body now?

joelakeland: The market is lot different than when the Mark II was introduced and if the most important metric is image quality the XT3 would own that for the same price, more or less. Longtime Olympus fan but this model doesn't quite have me at "Hello".

kristof93: Too little, too late and too expensive Olympus. Trying to sell a recycled camera with an eye-watering price tag in a market more competitive than ever is not going to cut it.