To those commenting on the image quality, there seem to be several factors at play here:

1. the JPEG engine. Open the RAW files and most of these are already much less washed out.

2. Looking at the RAW files, you may also see (e.g. via RawTherapee’s raw histogram) that many shots are quite underexposed (at least in ETTR terms), several of them by at least two stops. (For some shots, it’s visible already in the JPEG, but maybe that’s an artistic choice.)

3. (Probably a more minor issue) some of the shots use quite small apertures (e.g. f/9 for image 18/150, presumably for depth of field?), apertures at which the lens used stops being at its best, if only because of diffraction: https://www.lenstip.com/497.4-Lens_review-Olympus_M.Zuiko_ED_12-100_mm_f_4_IS_PRO_Image_resolution.html
https://dofsimulator.net/en/?x=EF8C1iwDAAAAJ1Nxk8fzkMSQoTg

Please bear that in mind when assessing the quality, before blaming it all on Micro Four Thirds and sensor design.

Not particularly impressed by what I see I must admit. OK but not impressive by any stretch of imagination. Hard to say, maybe the "photographer(s)" were too busy being entertained (it would seem) by Olympus USA to focus on the photographic opportunities offered upon them. It's one of the most beautiful site in the world, and that's the best they could come up with? Looks like a swan trip to me, where do I sign up?

For its price, technical quality of these photos is quite low. Nothing is really sharp, detailed and colors look faded. More like phone camera look than a natural high quality look. It is ridiculous how muddy these are even in daylight!

Great photos - but why are the skin details smeared and plasticky, and the majority of the pics slightly soft? Presumably this must due to using the default ooc jpeg settings?? I have never experienced this with my OMD EM5 mk ii and 12-100mm combo.

I've had a lot of M43 gear, and still have my Pana GM5. But OMG... ...these jpegs are terrible - noisy, mushy - look at those portraits, in daylight and low iso. Something must be wrong?

The photograph -- of the elderly photographer with a big heavy camera around his neck -- using an iPad to take a picture...... is hilarious.

Really nice gallery. I viewed the whole lot which is not something I do very often on DPReview galleries.

Doesn't really matter what they were shot with, very nice photos.

As to the camera and the price, if people want a small light system I never really understand the expectation such camera can be produced at vastly cheaper cost to aps-c or FF cameras. The body, mount, controls i.e. the physical aspects of cameras are similar across all three formats so production costs will be similar.

Presumably people buy these cameras for their compactness and if you want a small DSLR like camera then you pay your money and teaks your choice.

Pictures look soft, low contrast, noise in the shadows.

Oh dear what are you doing Olympus? Great camera but what ridiculous price. I've read it's £1499 in uk. This will not help Olympus current situation and sales.

I know from experience how good Olympus lenses can be but that 40-150/2.8 is amazing! Great gallery, thanks.

I presume Mr Fro hasn't been invited to the hands-on experience organised by Olympus?

I loved the photos from Utah. Wonderful landscape. Never opened those full res, no need, pics are good whichever the size.

Always like shots from the Olympus cameras.Colors and look are real nice.Real deal price.

Olympus, like Canon and Pentax, makes cameras for photographers rather than for the Philistines whose ambitions stop at one-upmanship.
Consequently, this camera will be hated by reviewers across the internet but they'll have to invent reasons to hate its gorgeous colors, exquisite rendering, and not-outrageous price.

Nice series of images. I know they tend to stick with default settings, but I'd turn noise reduction down a couple clicks and add a click or two of sharpness.

Beautiful gallery. But is it really worth getting over EM1ii, which costs the same but has better ergonomics and specs.

Photo 11 is solid gold

This camer is the OOC JPEG king.
Canon and Fuji move over.

Terrific gallery especially the Moab images.

I have to say this is a terrific location to build up a beautiful gallery if the camera is in the right hands. And here it definitely is. I love this gallery and the quality of the pictures. I don't know what some people are complaining about but i like the colours, the sharpness (look at the portraits), the DOF and the dynamic range (considering the pictures are taken in harsh light). I might even consider buying the camera. My compliments.

Good job by the photographer. Very nice gallery. As for the camera itself, are these final firmware jpegs? I've shot in these conditions with an old D600 in raw and I have to say I think the IQ was better. For sure the D600 is bigger and heavier but it's also older and you hope technology has caught up. IQ is subjective of course and I hope raws PPed in DXO will be much improved.

Great gallery! And I have no problem with the quality of the images, especially considering the harsh light under which most of them were taken.

Good eye Dan!

Nice photos. I'm not sure I'd let a photo gallery decide whether I bought a camera or not though. I don't think image quality within certain expectations for a format are ever going to be bad. I mean image quality is as good as can be expected from most new cameras

The pictures don't impress me...Maybe the camera has a 'bad' RAW-to-jpeg converter.

Not a bad gallery.

Olympus finally sends the press to a sunny location. :)

Definitely THE BEST GALLERY here in a long-long time.
Bravo Dan for these great shots.
Bravo to the Olympus' PR-team that selected this amazing location.

Very nice gallery!

Okay, I think I will upgrade from the Mark II. Lightweight travel body grabs me. But why pair the 14-150mm lens with it? Surely the 12-100mm is a better bet giving dual stabilisation? THough the Panny 50-200mm is also rather attractive.

I dislike the colors and especially the lack of contrast. But those are easily fixable with RAW.

What doesn't seem to be fixable is the mush. Is it just me or does none of these pictures look at least decently detailed? This looks more like a Canon 1 inch gallery than the recently released Nikon Z50 gallery.

All three of those cameras have "just" 20MP, but somehow even here the Olympus doesn't hold up. What is the problem? Lenses, slight AF misses, AA filter, base ISO noise?

Darn, this gallery is super-high quality. Excellent work, and many results are breathtaking. You persuaded me to get at least two new EM5Mk3.

I like the colours from this Oly! Sensor from Sony (?) but not the colours :)

Nicely shot images but - in contrast to fPrime and Alex Hanin - i can see a loss of fine detail. Check the fine details of grass, bushes or leaves ... I had an OMD EM1 Mark II and compared it (in terms of image quality) with my Pen F - for me the Pen F resolved and kept more detail in the images. Now the situation seems similar: The EM5 performs like the EM1 II ... ?