another video by Jamie MacDonald about the opportunity to provide feedback to Olympus engineers in Japan.
The GX7 vs the OM-D E-M5, battle for my affection, Round 3 – IQ, Interface, Features and the Final Decision (tysonrobichaudphotography)
Voigtlander 42.5mm f/0.95 Nokton Lens Review at ePhotozine.
Olympus 17mm f/1.8 lens review at Soundimagesplus.
GF6 review at Der Spiegel.
Olympus PEN E-P5 Offer (ePhotozine).
Panasonic GM1 image samples by Mapcamera.
E-M1 vs E-M5 image stabilziation test by Pekka Potka.
Olympus Stylus 1 Hands-On Preview (ePhotozine).
Olympus stand in Paris by OpenPn.
Win An Olympus Camera With Olympus Impressions (ePhotozine).
Photo Ninja – Some comments from Jim Christian, the developer at Soundimagesplus.
GX7 review at Neocamera.
The top 10 cameras of 2013 by Photographytalk.
GM1 test by DCfever.
2013 Rueckblick by SystemKameraForum.
24 Responses
Here’s the only 3 things I would want to get answered by Olympus:
A) Is the next Pen flagship going to have a buil-in EVF ?
B) Are you planning to expand AND improve the body cap lens line?
C) Are we ever going to see a wide T/S lens (now that we have a pro body, this is one application that some Pros require)?
The due date on this vid was 1 Nov … so this whole idea is old by 2 weeks plus at this point =(
I would if they have plans to revamp their UI and make it simpler, logical and user friendly
Links in text don’t seem to work…?
Never mind, now they do. Weird.
Why is everyone comparing the GX line with the OMD line?
GX competes witH E-P. GH with OMD.
Compare the body of the GX7 with the EP5.
The E-M5 doesn’t really compete with the GH3. It competes with the GX7, as does the E-P5. The E-M1 competes with the GH3 more directly because they’re both oriented toward professionals.
what does it say about the GX line, that it competes with both the E-M5 and the E-P5?
Exactly. Olympus produces 3 high end models, while Panasonic has only two, so GX7 is Panasonic answer to both EM-5 and EP-5 at the moment. However, when G7 gets the new sensor, we could say G7 goes against E-M5.
Well, if he ever gets another chance to ask them anything, can you find out if they can change something with the EVF/LCD auto switching in image review? As it is right now, if you hit the image review arrow button with you eye NOT to the viewfinder, the playback images are displayed on the rear LCD. That’s fine, but if you then want to examine them closely in the viewfinder, when you put your eye up to the EVF, it goes back to shooting mode, and you have to hit the playback button again, WHILE the camera is up against your eye. This is a real pain in the butt. (Panasonic got this right…once you are in playback, it will allow you to switch back and forth between the EVF and LCD at will, and to get back into shooting mode, you can touch the shutter button. It is much easier to use than the way Oly has done it…)
Interesting. I did not encounter this situation because I don’t even remember trying to put my eye next to the EVF while in playback mode. But now that you mention it, I think Olympus implementation is more intuitive. If I look into the EVF, it means that in most cases, I am ready to shoot some more.
I am often switching to the EVF during playback, simply because it offers the more brilliant, more contrasty, sharper, and larger image, i.e. is miles ahead in all dimensions when it comes to inspecting the image. The Panasonic implementation is the only reasonable one: Lightly hitting the shutter button is a very intuitive concept for sending the camera back to shooting mode, which, btw., does work homogeneously both in LCD playback and EVF playback. The Oly implementation, on the other hand, strongly reduces usability.
I’m impressed with the GM1 (with 12-32mm lens) images on Mapcamera
I think DXO mark revues are way too much overrated.
I find idiotic this pitting of cameras with similar features one against the other. Let people decide with their own taste.
What would be fantastic would be a minimalist camera the size of the GM1, but with an EVF, and IBIS.
The strength of m4/3 is classy miniaturization, not imitation of bigger formats. That ‘always with you camera’ with the full Monty is still missing.
+1
GM-1 with PASM, ISO and maybe White Balance, as the vast majority of users never adjust it anyway, leaving it on Auto. Nothing else just a simple old fashioned camera.
The whole point of the GM1 is minimal size. If you add a viewfinder you have to add the components it comprises and thus have to add to the volume and size. Even more than just the space the components occupy, they have to be sited such that they are usable, which likely would add a volume overhead.
Add a viewfinder and you defeat the point of the exercise in minimalism that the GM1 represents.
I am not really inventing anything, there is the Panasonic patent showing the concept. Then of course there is the execution: all the life cycle of m4/3 is one of further miniaturization, each year showing what was not possible before.
Other makers do the same: Sony showed that it can do FF35 in the shell of an E-M5, therefore it is expected that m4/3 can do a WHOLE camera in the shell of a P&S.
At the moment I find I use my E-PM1 a lot more than my E-M5, no matter the difference in IQ, so crucial size is. The GM1 is a step in the right direction, but why prevent to imagine the next one? Epson keeps miniaturising just like the other makers, and so Panasonic, If one remembers how big EVF were for TV cameras just a few years ago.
I might be wrong but in the patent the camera with EVF doesn’t look tall, but it looks especially shallow, so there’s hope.
The bulk of the evf does not come from the lcd, it comes from the magnifying lens in front of it. I am not sure whether the current state of the art allows building a collapsible (like the pancake zooms) pop-out evf (popping out from the side of the camera), which is the only way to add an evf, without making either the back screen smaller, or the body of the camera taller, or both. Even so, it would add to the size of the body (compared to the GM1), since it would take valuable space, which is now used by the electronics and the flash. So would an IBIS. Having said that, I would not mind, something bigger than the GM1 (but still not bigger, and preferably smaller than a PM2, if that’s the price for a 5-axis IBIS. And I must agree that even the GM1 has enough space for more manual controls: the focus selector could go to the front (as in the RX1), to make room for a 2nd dial (with a central button) on top, a button could be added to the center of the pasm dial, and there is enough room for one more dial and one more button on the back (as in the lx7) and one or two more dials (as in the old rollei 35) in the front. An only slightly bigger body might even allow for a ring (as in the premium compacts) round the lens mount!
On the other hand – the GM1 is already such a miracle of miniaturization, that, even though greed is a natural instinct, we have no right to complain!
One way is to accomodate a smaller lens i.e. less magnification.
PS&Shooters underestimate EVF but I find it’s the only way to take advantage of WYSIWYG, the critical advantage of mirrorless.
My E-PM1 has light IBIS, it should be possible to improve on it. Small cameras are v. susceptible to handshake, so GM1 is really a beginning.
You can’t miniaturise ad infinitum. There is a point past which usability declines in terms of usability and the human interface.
Apple have twice had to learn this the hard way. They took the already tiny iPod Shuffle and made it even smaller – so much smaller that there wasn’t even room for buttons on the device itself as it had become too small. They shifted the buttons to the headphone cable meaning not only couldn’t you use alternative headphones but you had to memorize an overly complicated patterns of clicks of the buttons on the cord to reproduce the necessary functions that previously had dedicated buttons.
Not surprisingly the stupid thing flopped and they went back to a larger more sensible design.
They did something similar with the iPod nano. They had the perfect form factor in the thin and rectangular ‘candy-bar’ style device then took a step backward again and introduced a much smaller square device. It wasn’t something you could hold well or easily in your hand. You could mount it on a strap and load a watch app and use it as a watch and I belive more of this model were used as watches than iPods.
Once again, they went back to the previous form factor which was ideal.
The lesson is that just because you technically can make something smaller, it doesn’t mean you should or that doing so is necessarily an improvement.
Have a look at a rear view of the GM1: https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRTLDv3k1a_JYP3PyJ6lamdVhFj-cYLv72dd800SnR6Zyfv25FK
You couldn’t put a viewfinder on it without significantly reducing the size of the rear screen – and not by just a little, but a lot! Given it’s already tiny size, I would say a screen sized to allow a viewfinder would be next to useless.
Maybe a model without a rear screen and only a viewfinder would be possible, but I think it would appeal to only a very small minority as you would be restricted to reviewing shots via the viewfinder, not to mention the awkwardness of displaying settings etc.
As for IBIS. that’s not really a Panasonic thing and even if Olympus could shrink their system to feasibly fit a camera as small as a GM1, they couldn’t do much about the power requirement to run it and I think you would end up with something with a very limited number of shots possible on a charge.
I love these “shootouts at the OK corral”. It really spurs R&D at the manufacturer’s labs and we get very significant product improvements out of it. Thanks Tyson Robichaud! Just taken possession of a GX7 and a GM1 to arrive next week (so I’m told). Also just taken possession of the gorgeous 12-35 and 35-100 f2.8 X lenses. I see a big step up from the GH2 and Panny AF zooms I have been shooting. Well done Panasonic!
With the EM1/EM5, GX7/GH3 we are close to “the full Monty” for most people, sacrificing very little in function or image IQ. Given the compactness that m43 affords, I just cannot see much of a future for FF MILCs, and m43 is way out in front of APS-C now. dSLRs are dead, dead, dead (and in my view have been for a couple of years – I feel sorry for the dumb-ass consumers who have been sucked in by the price point).
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/compactsystemcameras/129439/1/olympus-om-d-e-m1-review
Can Olympus provide the option for EXIF data on 16-bit TIF created from ORF using the Olympus Viewer version 3 software.