There’s more than one person who just calls it the EM5.3

Be careful what you wish for….

What’s actually killing the camera market overall is manufactures selling the idea that FF is what you need.

Instead they could have sunk R&D into making smaller sensors with far more powerful processing that actually compete better with the segment that’s killing them. Canikon and co should be the leaders in computational imagery, not chasing the likes of apple or Samsung.

What you are seeing from the OM1 and GH6 (as healthy sales suggest) is a specialised market that sees the benefit of what smaller sensors aided with AI and computational power can deliver. Especially as It’s screen based content that dominates 99% of output. If FF is “necessary” it is only so for a very small segment these days.

fortunately - the opposite is the true :) I have tried m4/3, skeptically because all of these "oracles" and "specialist" opinions, and result is I'm buying into this excellent system more and more ...

There was never a chance that Canon or Nikon would have ever had the software engineering capacity to match Apple or Google.

I can live without electronic shutter, may be not shutter shock.
What's wrong with ergonomic? And image quality?

I had Mk I for two years. Upgraded to first E-M1-version because of improved AF. IQ was good for MFT when it came out, and is still fine. It's more ergonomic with the optional grip, but I loved the size without the grip and it worked fine for me even without the extra grip.
It's still a decent camera IMO, but a lot has happened since it was launched.

Yeah, the 5.3 has a better grip for sure. The playback and FN1 buttons on the 5.1 are a bit small but in no way recessed -- they actually protrude a fair bit and again are situated where you can reach them one handed.

I'm not saying the 5.1 is the best choice today, or a better choice than the 5.2 or 5.3, just that it's a solid camera that to me doesn't have any glaring issues. If you were considering buying one today it would have to be pretty cheap though. If you have the money a later body is a better option.

The weather sealing on the EM5.1 is very good, and the kit flash (FLM1 I think) and kit lens (12-50 PZ) are both sealed too. There is an optional sealed battery grip. I've used them in the rain and on boats and it's all been fine. If you're buying a used one rather the NIB you might want to check the visible seals on the card door, battery door etc to get an idea of their integrity. There should also be a removable cover for the hotshoe, one for the accessory port, and another on the camera base next to the tripod mount (for the grip port).

a) decent looking is question of taste ...

b) what is wrong with 1-2-3 years old "decent looking" cameras? They have stopped working?

Z-fc does not sell, fuji'x xs10 has lost its design "mojo" in my opinion and x-e4 is simply overpriced for what it does - I would rather get 2nd hand pen-f

Cameras do occasionally stop working, yes. Electronics (especially relatively cheap consumer electronics) don't last forever. Sometimes the needs of the user changes.

Not really sure why you'd consider the X-E4 overpriced while at the same time recommend a used PEN-F. The Fuji has a better sensor, better autofocus, non-horrible menus, a tilt screen and USB-C, far better video specs (for when it matters). Also, it might be different in your part of the world, but here as used PEN-F goes for just slightly less than a new X-E4 (which, again, you consider to be overpriced).

Yes, OM-D is on drugs with the E-M5/OM-5 line-up.

@Paisley Park: Why is it good news? This just confirms the mount is dying, since the company has trouble directing R&D money into making new cameras. OM-1 is basically what was supposed to be E-M1 III, caught in the spin off turmoil and postponed. The new company has not executed anything new and with this release, they don't show any sign of healthy growth.

It's from a leak. Could be true, but could as well be totally fabricated. Why worry, you will know in a week, and can complain then. Alternatively, complain now, and look a bit stupid if it isn't true...

Here I thought OM was gonna maintain or save the brand.

Do you guys realize this is a 3.5 year old model and a nearly as old video?

@Bassam Guy: We were talking about the rumors of the OM-5, not E-M5 III.

@Paisley Park The OM-1 is done in Olympus/OMDS and Sony has nothing to do with it, other than sourcing some of the electronics. These rumors are usually started by either shills or trolls who do not know how the logistics and supply chain in these industries work.

"Small" is no advantage anymore. Smartphones are small. "small" cameras are just unergonomic... Like the first Sony A7.

Err, you don't have small, lightweight cameras with great stabilisation and interesting, lightweight lenses right now?

The entire market is moving to a more dedicated segment. Consumers are lost to the mobile phone. Many that buy the bigger M43 bodies are complimenting their FF or even MF systems with M43 (or vice versa) For those that are not tribal amateurs. Understanding the real benefits each system brings to the table is something specialists understand gives them advantages over their more amateur counterparts

Second that. Those mft claims that their small cams are better because they are "smaller" is pure mft forum knowledge. My colleagues used to have mft along their big dslrs now they use their smartphones... Or use small Sony bodies.
The legend that mft is smaller is long gone. You can use an A7r and cut the 20mpixel hole out of the sensor in post...

I personally found mft bodies always unergonomic, even back when I used my OM2n or the om4ti... Which where fullframe Film cameras.

EM5.3 was made of composite as opposed to EM5.2's metal body and reduced the weight by more than 50 grams (albeit prone to cracks in the baseplate).
There are two segments in MFT: small, light and plastic or heavy, all-metal, durable. Choose your medicine accordingly.
Imagine the weight of Nikon or Canon full-frame lenses if they were made entirely with aluminum.

@LevAizik - "The problem with Olympus is that they abandoned the small and light ethos many years ago."

Did they? Of the last 10 bodies Oly/OMS has released. there have been 2 PENs, 3 EM10's, and 2 EPL's. The only "big" cameras were the OM1, EM1.3, and EM1X.

How ironic. Your story is so close to mine. I had a complete R5 setup with all the top RF L glass one end to the other. But had been experiencing some issues with the weight involved. I didn't consider any other system as it's advantages of performance/weight offered nothing in return. I like you was going over some memories in my archives of shots taken over many years. I'd come upon a series taken on a vacation to the Northwest and the San Juan Islands. I'd been in a camera shop and came upon what was then, Olympus's 1st foray into the mirrorless realm, the EP1. On a lark I took one home thinking I didn't want to lug my then Nikon D700 FF and large lenses along with the trip. So I went with the plastic kit lens, if I recall it was something like a 14-45mm and not a fast lens by any means. I added a inexpensive Panasonic 45-200 just in case I wanted to shoot longer. It worked out amazingly well. I tried an OM-1 with the 12-40 f2.8 Pro II and the rest is history. No more Canon

When you’re tired, the photos tend to be worse, that’s what i got from heavier vs lighter set ups, you get joy of it sucked out through sheer fatigue. This is mainly for longer focal lengths, wildlife where you have to trek with all of the gear, for shorter stints it doesn’t really make a difference.

@ProDude

Ok, so you sold the R5 and bought the OM-1 instead. That saved you 138 grams. (799g vs. 538g). Then you traded a 24-70 F2.8 lens for a 24-80 F5.6 lens. If you kept the R5 and traded the 24-70 F2.8 for the 24-105 F4, the total weight of the package was only 481grams heavier compared to MFT. In addition, you would have a 1 stop-faster lens, more reach, better image quality, and the ability to crop your images very deep.

I don't know about you, but I would have preferred to carry a little more weight.

The bokeh is exaclty the same as from the E-M5 line. Besides that, the term bokeh refers to the qualitiy of the out of focus areas and not to the depth of field.

Did you read the title or the summary or literally anything before you posted?

Before posting, I watched the video. This is not enough? And why they post a video that is three years old? What's the purpose?

The titsle says it all - DPReview TV Classics!

We live in an age where everyone just clicks without paying attention...
"Chris and Jordan are out of the office, so we're taking a trip down memory lane to feature another classic episode of DPReview TV"

Come on, people. Pay a little bit of attention...

Since this review mentions the EM5 III, this is probably due to their working on impressions of the new OM-5, the III's successor.

There will be fan fireworks, but the biggest beneficiaries will be sites like this one that have been reduced to running 3-year old reviews of digital cameras that have an 18-month lifespan before DPR says they're a bit stale.

There will be complaints about too much Sony and how quickly the review was done. DPR will say it's a very important camera, gold award, but we wish the menus were easier to understand.

Either that, or they missed their flight back from the Leica M6 influencer junket. Y’all know how much Chris enjoys using a film Leica, even if he doesn’t quite “get” the whole rangefinder thing..,

Generally, I find creating a completely new body for every new model is a waste of time and resources. Still I would have liked the OM-5 to have a proper grip...