[shoplink 28222 ebay]
[/shoplink]
Image on top.: [shoplink 28222 ebay]OM-1 film camera[/shoplink].
I can confirm the new E-M5 successor will NOT have PDAF. Not yet 100% confirmed are the rumors that the camera has 4K recording and that’s weather sealed.
The E-M5 successor will be announced the first week of February!
—
For sources: Sources can send me anonymous info at 43rumors@gmail.com (create a fake gmail account) or via contact form you see on the right sidebar. Thanks!
For readers: Don’t miss any news. Join our group on facebook and follow our tweets.
Rumors classification explained (FT= FourThirds):
FT1=1-20% chance the rumor is correct
FT2=21-40% chance the rumor is correct
FT3=41-60% chance the rumor is correct
FT4=61-80% chance the rumor is correct
FT5=81-99% chance the rumor is correct
239 Responses
They’ll have to artificially tone down some other features to keep this one from being the flagship model then. Odd.
Less configurable buttons, weather sealing less effective.. I don’t know what it could have less than Em1.
isnt the E-M1 much more solid compared with the E-M5? I think specs wise it is always a problem compared with older topmodel, only important details like buffer size etc you still see differences (plus the build quality). I guess the EVF will be upgraded too?
Yes, the Em1 construction is better than that of Em5: sturdy, wheels have the perfect resiistance, buttons feel less “rubbery”, not to mention the better handling and pleasure of use.
I have friends who were really suprised by the Em1 handling. It’s not an exageration to say that it’s a pleasure to use: every button it’s at its perfect place and the camera, while not pocketble still stay small but not so that your fingers will suffer after a whole day session.
I agree that the EM-1 is a joy to use. It feels just about right and that large grip (some say ugly) really helps with its balance when using larger lenses.
Sadly though, the EM-1 still lags behind DSLRs when it comes to shooting things that move. Even models strutting down the catwalk at less than a brisk pace stumps it.
The PDAF implementation is just not quite there yet. I’m really counting the days when u43 can C-AF like a DSLR. I’m not expecting Nikon D4 or EOS-1 levels but something like a D7100 or EOS-7D would be good enough for me.
I really want to ditch that big, bulky and unwieldy DSLR for good. I really do.
You should buy the 12-40mm and 40-150mm. The CAF for models should be pretty d..rn adequate, it is already for soccer so don’t tell me those models of yours move quicker!
I have the 12-40 and 50-200SWD and strangely the EM-1 does ok, not great but just ok with faster moving subjects such as a soccer player, cyclist, or a car at say 60KPH.
But for slower moving subjects the C-AF pauses and kinda gives up until you lift your finger and half press the shutter button again to restart the C-AF. This is very frustrating as you never know when the camera stops focusing as it’s quite random.
Hi Marco, I think this tells us more about what the E-M1 successor is likely to offer us.
Maybe not if the upgrade is close to the topmodel pricewise.
I can imagine it will be the new flagship until the e-m1 successor.
Agreed, the E-M5 was the flagship for a while.
Olympus intent should be to leapfrog the E-M1. Anything less will mean falling behind the competition.
Canon and Nikon can do hold-backs because of their marketshare. The rest of the camera makers should be pulling out all the stops!
When they brought the E30 (DSLR) out it had features & improvements over the E3, but not the essential things like buffer size & OVF size etc & this is most likely what they will do here. It (E-M5 replacement) may still only have a maximum 1/4000 sec shutter speed & a smaller buffer than the E-M1, as well as having less direct controls as it is still only meant to be an enthusiasts model & not a ‘Pro’ model like the E-M1.
Is it possible to use PDAF with micro 43 lenses like the 45mm f1.8 or 20mm f1.7?
Yes, with CAF, where PDAF is used to determine in what direction the lens should move to focus. CDAF then nailed the accuracy.
Not with C-AF, PDAF only works with C-AF+Trk.
It’s been quite a while since I tested this but my memory and some “googling” says otherwise.
waiting for more specs 🙂
Exactly, many comments not based on any firm information. The few bits of info makes it sound more like an update on both the E-M1 and the E-M5.
The E30 was an update on the E3 but was still a lesser camera.
If it has a maximum shutter speed of 1/8000 sec. and the a viewfinder that comparable to the EM1 it’s mine. Otherwise it will be the EM1 and I have to live with the ugly bulky grip.
1/8000 sec & high resolution VF in EM5 successor are almost guarantee .
Such are small features , time to sell off that ugly EM1 .
I think it was rumored that Olympus has a new shutter that does 1/16000 sec and 1/32000 sec in electronic shutter mode. If that’s true let’s hope it’s coming to the EM5 successor.
Love the E-M1 grip.
If it’s not weather sealed it’s not an e-m5 successor.
Exactly! If no weather sealing, no buy for me. I don’t understand why they would not have it though. Why downgrade something like that? Fingers crossed they’ll keep it!
Interesting move in my opinion. For people who want to upgrade, this one will have to compete with old E-M1’s on the second hand market. And if specs are on par with E-M1, that could mean Oly will come with something big when replacing the flagship…
If true, a big BRAVO – for the first time in years.
We, FT glass owners, have been waiting for this for such a long time.
I take it you have not heard of the E-M1
I heard about E-M1 price.
I have three e-pm2 bodies each of which takes better pictures in low light than e-m1 (see DXoMark). And each costs FOUR times less! Now hopefully this e-m5 successor will not be as drastically expensive as the e-m1.
Who cares about DXO? Have you shot them side by side?
Answer to Pappy: No, it doesn’t, hence I use FT on E-520 and E-600 – but they are bound to die and I am looking forward to the E-M5 successor.
Answer to Steve Novosel: I do. I believe DXO. Haven’t checked this particularly but whatever DXO say and I check it, it turns out true. The E-M1 sensor is Panasonic, not the powerful Sony on E-PM2, and is furthermore burdened by the PDAF function.
I think you are full of … You haven’t tried them next to each other. I have the E-M5 and E-M1 and there’s very little difference if any in the files. The PM2 just scores higher due to their testing errors, it even scores better as the E-M5, you’re making me laugh.
So you are able to use FT glass on your E-PM’s then, I can do it as well on my Pen but it does not work to well with Four Thirds glass.
PDAF as EM1 for EM5 successor .
This strongly indicate the EM5 successor likely to have same sensor as EM1 , maybe slightly better .
If my prediction is true means Oly is playing around with that 16 MP old sensor , no new generation sensor ( 18 MP++ ) for EM5 successor afterall therefore no buy for me .
Possibly a slightly different sensor, the one used on the E-M1 can only PDAF in one dimension. Two-dimensional PDAF (cross pattern) would remove the occasional focus problem (I’ve not encountered that issue myself). We will have to wait for more info.
I don’t really mind about PDAF , if got it’s much better .
What I want to see is new generation sensor & not that one from EM1 undergo refinement & reuse .
Sadly it seems to be so. Problem with E-M1 is that it’s sensor is inferior to E-P5. It is quite visible for long exposures. But even at base ISO normal shooting you get a bit higher noise levels (whenever you push shadows).
That’s why I own E-P5 and not E-M1.
Cheers
I don’t own EP5 & EM1 so can’t comment on both cameras .
One thing is for sure here is if the EM5 successor using a refinement EM1 sensor , it can’t hold it’s feet once GX7 successor
No buy for me either if its the EM1 sensor! Maby they will come out with a new sensor on the next EM1 II?
Im not buying a huge EM1 uprade either, so Ill have to wait for EM5 III.
This does not look promising 🙁
i never buy with sensor as nr one reason, for me it would be total over the top if i would want a new sensor, besides that its a question if newer would be better.
Definitely .
PDAF along doesn’t justify a 2.5 years old EM5 replacement without a new generation sensor support .
Why not hold it further just to get that new sensor ready ?
I would expect a sensor with latest PDAF solution from Sony. But its just a guess.
Chance is slim here .
If the sensor is from Exmor family then likely the A6000 alike tracking focusing will come in play as well .
No idea. It might have basically same sensor as the E-M1. But having PDAF certainly doesn’t imply that it won’t have a different sensor. The 24mp Sony APS-C sensor used in the A6000 has it.
Excellent, it’s time to get rid of all the MFT lenses!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but none of the MFT lenses can take advantage of the phase focusing. So what is the real benefit of the PDAF? Reuse of old lenses?
Yes, you are wrong. PDAF is used for CAF and CAF + tracking, with the MFT lenses.
Only for CAF+Trk. E-M1 doesn’t use PDAF at all in S-AF or C-AF. Tracking is required functionality for it to be used with any m43 lens
I am a bit confused as well – the Sony A6000 has a hybrid sensor – with contrast and phase detect and all their E-mount lenses work – so if Olympus puts some phase detect sensors on their sensor which is primarily a contrast detect why would the M43 lenses not work? Same with the Fuji X-T1 –
So yes for some reason although the EM1 has Phase Detect as well as contrast and is therefore hybrid one had to use their old Four Thirds lenses – otherwise Phase detect would not work – Can anyone explain
If it can cook, change diapers and hoover the floors then I’m in. Otherwise no buy for me. 🙂
Wow just wow….its amazing how big the steps are that M43 is making. I hope that pdaf is not making the camera any bigger.
@Ulli Bürer is that a mock of your ID?
what?
Yes, it is a troll account.
he is prob a fan of me
change your handle to “Oily Bugger”
Will they call it an E-M2?
Seriously, what benefit does PDAF offer those of us with zero FT lenses?
Usable CAF.
But sadly the EM-1 is not much better than the EM-5 at C-AF even with PDAF.
No, I own both and the E-M1 is quite a bit better in CAF.
That and the improved ergonomics is why I prefer the E-M1 to E-M5.
My experience is that The E-M1 is far from excellent but the E-M5 CAF is utterly useless (I have the E-M5 myself but have only occasionally had the chance to shoot with the E-M1)
I own both and the C-AF is actually useable with the E-M1 and totally worth less with the E-M5. Still there is room for improvement.
wrong person sorry
Well, it better have PDAF, even smarphones have that now 😉 I just hope it’s gonna be a step up from E-M1.
wasnt pdaf dedicated to the FT lenses only? and would pdaf work efficiently with a standard mft lens? just wondering here
IIRC with 43 lenses PDAF is always on, with m43 lenses only in AF-C mode.
thanks!
PDAF and CDAF requires different optics to be good. It comes to AF motors and design too.
The PDAF has benefit being fast without bracketing the focus, as it knows the focus difference. But the problem is that it isn’t accurate (even if being on sensor) as the metering isn’t so sharp, and it has terrible functionality to focus on subjects _behind_ obstacles. Like if you have a high grass, tree branches or metal grid wall between you and subject, PDAF easily focus to it instead background. While CDAF can work behind the obstacle as it only does very small contrast bracketing on the subject.
i was asking about the specific pdaf in E-M1 and if the E-M5 followup could work with standard mft lenses. but thank you
and, will it have the same problem with long exposure noise as the E-M1?
E-M1 doesn’t have a problem, it has normal quality with long exposures. E-M1 just doesn’t have a Sony sensor that does dark frame extration via software by algorithms that are stored to sensor itself.
And with any other camera you can do the same thing. Just take a dark frame before and after you have been shooting stars and then do it in post with special software and you get at least identical quality as with Sony sensor (more likely a better).
It is just false to claim that E-M1 panasonic sensor has a problem, but it doesn’t have latest proprietary technology as Sony does.
I’m not sure why they even considering removing the weather-sealing.
With the climate change, bad weather now is the norm of life. No real summers, no real winters anymore. And long periods of cloudy weather, unexpectedly breaking into the rainy weather.
Majority of new smartphones have at least basic weather sealing. Cameras, even entry-level ones, as products of a premium price bracket, need it even more. My next smartphone would have the weather sealing and I’m pretty sure that would contribute to me using it as a camera more.
Climate change is driving the need for weathersealed cameras. Now I’ve read it all.
We had probably only 3 month of decent summer over the last ~4 years here in Baden-Wuertemberg, Germany. Cloudy most of the time, often breaking into the rainy weather.
I’ve been in Germany from the 4th july this second week was one of the worst ever.
Bad weather might be the norm for you, but it certainly isn’t where I live. If every camera was weather sealed they’d be selling even fewer of them than they are already because the cost would be excessive in relation to their true value. Entry level exists whatever sort of technology is involved and it makes sense for everyone involved.
Well, they might do it to differentiate the top of the line “pro” model from the midrange. Back in the day the E-30 in many ways was higher specced that the E-3, but the midrange E-30 wasn’t environmentally sealed. It would be a way of keeping costs lower on the midrange camera while differentiating product lines. I’m purely speculating.
Lol. Come up to Canada, we’ll show you a real summer and a real winter, believe me.
Exactly what I wanted. Not remotely interested in many of the features that made the E-M1 relatively expensive. Phase detect autofocus however is another story and Olympus still has a stack of superb Four Thirds lenses it would like to sell. Buyers will be very pleased with them, as I have been.
I had the same reaction exactly. I’ve said before that I wanted a smaller, slower, cheaper E-M1. I can’t think why I would want anything else; it’ll be the perfect camera.
Hello J! Yes, it’s a good feature to have. However I keep hoping for a RangeFinder Form Factor, like the E-P5 with EVF. Why don’t they give it a chance? It is above my understanding…
why is it so hard to understand, jut reread the concept behind the pen & omd . and we still have the option of the panasonics.
Couldn’t care less if they call it Pen, Montblanc or OM. GX7 showed it can be done, and I htink that people are pretty happy with it. There is no need of THREE OM-D with exactly the same shape, except for the peabrained.
in other words, you still dont get it why the new omd will never be a faux RF concept….
Above your understanding? It must be a really tough nut then.
E-P5 + VF-4 exist so be happy and use it.
My guess before was that Olympus engineers don’t have noses.
Now I’m thinking they don’t have any cheek bones. You need good cheek bones to steady a rangefinder-style camera. Especially if you wear glasses. Otherwise, you need the nose to do the job, hence VF in the middle. Of course, one could use both hands to steady the camera, but, then, you can’t simultaneously load your shots on to Facebook.
What I don’t understand is why Olympus wouldn’t put the EVF in the middle without the hump. That should take care of their cheekbone problem (and the alleged parallax problem). In the old days, I imagine, the flash would then have to have a hump so we don’t get zapped with every shot, but that’s not an issue any more, is it?
I know that this might sound like a troll post, but I´m shooting mft from the start and until I see some noticeable improvement in image quality I am not going to buy anything. Heck, I would even go so far to say that all models that don´t show improvements in IQ are a waste of resources for Oly/Pana and a waste of money for the consumers.
If that means that I´ll have to wait till early 2016 – well then, I´ll just wait.
imho: everyone who is waiting for more IQ are wanting more while the IQ is already up to many tasks, should ask themselves: would i really take benefits of the improvements or :am i just wanting too much? the last one i ask myself always after i ordered at the snackbar.
It’s just that people keep expecting technology to fix what ever they think is limiting their growth as a photographer. Sure, good gear is nice, but the current lot of m4/3 is so good already that even big advances in tech are not visible in all but the largest prints. The fact is that the medium we use to view and distribute the images is the biggest limiting factor. Most screens don’t show more than 2MP, so any noise that is visible at 100% becomes a non-issue.
Exactly, years ago the E-1 served me fine, professionally, and I didn’t have less business since I jumped ship from Canon to (m)43.
There are quite a few office buildings with print of pictures of my E-1. And I mean Big prints, I’m talking meters width and hight!
You’ve got this backwards— that’s what they’re asking for out of Olympus if they want Olympus to get them to drop a grand on a new camera body. They’re saying that a small revision isn’t going to get them to part with their already up to many tasks EM5.
maybe you could with another big upgrade instead? I could imagine other things instead of more MP or other IQ quality enhancing stuff. a camera consists more of just that sensor. I know people might get excited about an orgasmic sensor but after a year or two, the same people need something else again. I know companies are forced to jump into this race, it makes sense they are doing this. It’s just about our demands , why cant we be satisfied with a sensor generation for more then 2 years.
I sort of agree.
there was the first, 12MP sensor, generation (for Oly, everything before the EM5 ), where IQ improvements were very minimal.
now we’re in the 16MP sensor generation (everything since the EM5), which was a good step up from that, but again, within this generation IQ improvements are minimal.
I’m waiting for a real step up in IQ – meaning a new sensor.
If you’re still on a 12MP sensor body, it would make sense to get one of the 16MP ones, otherwise yeah, no need in buying new body just yet.
About new models with same IQ. Well, they have to turn out new models all the time, because people are going to buy something which is relatively new. If they would release only a new model every 2,3 years when they upgrade the sensor, they would be losing business in the meantime. Doesn’t mean that you as a consumer have to buy each new model.
But which manufacturer has a noticable improvement in image quality?? Canon hasn’t, nore Nikon, not Sony, not Samsung, nore Fuji.
I don’t expext an improvement this time. May it is the same Sony or Panasonic Sensor. And even in 20MP from 24MP APS-C Sony it won’t be that much better. Only slightly more resolution.
Not Sony? Have you used their 36MP D810 or A7r sensor? Or the 12MP A7s sensor if you’re a low light guy?
Those things are revolutionary.
You are certainly right. But the average user gets no more than an endorphine boost holding latest tech while not gettig better results in terms of art. I found to gain expanded creativity with the precision, speed and size of my EM1. Improved IQ: nobody would refuse, this will never end up until medium format. But I do not see this well thougt out handling in Sony or Nikon cameras I have with the OMDs.
They’re not revolutionary, and if you saw a professional magazine quality print from an E-M1 and the same scene, same print of the output from an A7r you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. The average viewer sure as heck wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with not upgrading to the newest and greatest. Even if there will be an upgrade in IQ, is that really such a good reason to spend money? The answer of course will depend on the person. If you’re not satisfied with the camera you use now, then probably yes.
So, are you satisfied with you current camera?
BTW, I actually expect this upcoming camera to have some kind of upgrade to the sensor, that might give some boost to image quality. But I don’t expect such a huge jump as when switching from old 12 mp Panasonic sensors to new 16 mp Sony ones. I for one am not going to be buying this one, I’m perfectly happy with what I got. I’d rather spend my money on lenses. But improving my photography skills is even more important for me.
Let´s say that I´m satisfied with what I have. The things I´m not so fond of are the things that I learned to work around or just live with them (DR actually is quite ok if you´re used to Canon sensors and I seldom use high iso´s – the ibis safes me a lot of trouble – so, it´s just small things – like the “look” of the images (raw) is not as nice as with the old 12mp sensor and often I would like a to have more malleable raw files).
I might end up buying one or two lenses but here I´m still not so sure whether it is a good idea to buy the hyper expensive Oly 7-14 2.8 (a lens I´m dooling over since it´s announcement) when I´m not sure if I´ll stay with mft – maybe Sony will come out with something more appealing or even Ca-/Nikon are going to surprise us. I´m just not convinced enough to spend some big money on mft stuff although I like it and am quite satisfied…. weird, isn´t it?
Not weird at all. I don’t think that we, as consumers, owe our loyalty to any manufacturer or need to put any faith in them. And in case of photography gear, we are talking serious money and possibly a long running investment. So I’d say not being fully convinced to spend your cash is perfectly reasonable. It is the manufacturer’s problem, not yours. They need to convince you to part with your money. And if they fail, well, it’s their problem even more.
I really like m4/3 as a system, I feel it matches my needs and wants pretty well (but I still get annoyed at lens prices and lack of affordable options). I really hope that Olympus and Panasonic get better in earning confidence of their users. Panasonic lately seems to be doing a good job with firmware updates for their flagship cameras, for example. This is something I can appreciate. Oly is not bad with updating E-M1 either.
I’m pretty sure Olympus is capable of delivering a solid update to E-M5. We’ll know in 3 months.
So it’s the em1 sensor, just optimized for 4k. Woo hoo.
I think it is clear that cameras like the EM1, GH4, GX7, A6000 and XT1 have proved the value of mirror-less – smaller/lighter but although having blazing fast auto focus on still objects the object tracking has not been as impressive – Both Sony with the A6000 and Fuji with the XT1 have shown that they can mix CDAF and PDAF to improve tracking focus – Panasonic with DFD has improved their CDAF but I think that a hybrid sensor is the key like what Fuji and Sony have done – but still seems to be improved to match the likes of some DSLR’s
It is hard to fault the EM1 or GH4 except in fast tracking AF –
So in this new EMx I hope they can still retain their 5 axis IBIS and have contrast and phase detect on the sensor – at least to match the A6000 –
also although I know that they are squeezing a better low light performance then some of the FF sensors I still think they can do more like a full back lit sensor etc –
Also Panasonic with their DFD that they can maybe produce more shallow depth of field with that processing as the DFD has all the info for all their lenses like their F1.2 –
also hope the Emx will have full Touch LCD including menu items – and larger buttons vs the EM5 – and a bit better grip – maybe not as large as EM1 but a bit larger then the EM5/10
question: can you explain me please, how its possible to get more shallow depth with DFD?
I think he’s suggesting that because the camera knows what the out of focus area is, it could apply a computational Gaussian blur to simulate shallower depth of field. The same way Google or Nokia might do it on smartphones these days.
maybe not possible – but with DFD Panasonic has measured and stored the DOF from all their lenses and so they have the info for example what the blur is with the F1.2 – so possibly processed/replaced with that blur – just a thought as of course m43 users would like to see more shallow DOF sometimes –
Canon in their G7X has a option to create a bit more background blur – the camera takes 2 shots and then processes – and yes image has a bit more background out of focus look – as the weakness of M43 is low light performance and shallow DOF and fast object tracking
Sorry, but photographers who give me the DOF is a weakness of the m43 format just don’t understand photography or shouldn’t be with this format at all. Shallow DOF is a disadvantage in many many situations and many area’s of photography.
Shallow DOF is an advantage in oudoor portraiture and art photography.
The last mentioned area’s are, or were, the exclusive terrain of Medium Format (MF). Since the evolution of digital 35mm and increased resolution with these cams it’s much much cheaper to use a 35mm digital to do the job. If MF wouldn’t have been so expensive and or the digital developement would have been faster than more photographers would own MF gear than only the very fortunate or the ones already earning their money in that area.
For amateurs and enthousiasts it’s much to expensive to own this MF gear and expensive digital 35mm might be more in their reach.
Any amateur buying a 35mm line would be stark raving mad if he/she would switch gear often, or they just have the money to burn.
The sports arena is only owned by 35mm (Canon / Nikon) due to gear lease (by employer) and a good service network that is most consistent with Canon and Nikon.
I dare say that the minute, or second, m43 is as capable as 35mm in CAF/tracking, like the 1Dx’s and D4’s are, and are backed by a similar network, pro’s will switch.
They are working pro’s, whose only worry is to get the situation on card and to the “presses”. The exclusive picture of goal, action, or stunt, and the would be much more mobile than today to get them to the right spot etc.
Freelancers have to buy their own gear and buy according to their line of activities, so are inclined to buy a system that is like a swiss knife to them, hence a lot are with 35mm systems and camera’s like the D1x,D4.
I’ve been there but I realised that if I really need the “artsy” look, renting a camera for a few days is much more profitable to my business then owning all gear. But YMMV ofcourse.
I think it will be sony pdaf/cdaf senzor in it – like one in a5100/6000 ( just 4/3 size ) and that would be great !!
E-M1 PDAF ist truely faster and more precise in low light (-4 EV). And I would like a 43-compatibility in AF. Sony for example is bad in low light conditions (only 0 EV). No way for me.
Cool. Pretty soon the em5 will be $200
Besides new features I think this new OMD will bring with it a more reasonable pricing policy.
I believe that since braking in the enthusiast market with pricey E-M5 almost 3yrs ago Olympus has more way competition for new buyers into m43 system, especially from Sony.
This new E-M5 should cost 30% more than what the E-M5 is going for at this time.
Not the 1000$ or 1200$ former price.
3yrs ago it was the first, now its one of many many. Price reduction of 20% for price is realistic if you want new buyers to feel the need to buy.
Besides, it won’t be anything revolutionary in regards to E-M5. Just expected evolutionary features and a disappointment or two so that we can whine about something.
It would need to cost same as E-M1 now.
That would mean 20% increase…
Wow, a new iny sensor every bit as good as today’s. It could be OK below 400 USD.
Speaking of iny, I read the new Canon sensor is every bit as good as 2008’s.
The two distinctive features, apart from sensor and FW of the E-M5 are weathersealed, and add on grip.The latter is important because it allows the E-M5 to stay smaller than the E-M1.
Hope they keep the feature, while improving the rest.
To Admin: OV everybody would like to know now if there is an increase in Mpx.
This can’t be reveal by admin at this moment because it definitely point to a straight answer that every readers is waiting for .
A brand new sensor
To gain meaningful difference next upgrade would need to be 32Mpix or you don’t see difference. And that would need updated glass. To get a noticeable difference, it would need to be 2x update from 16Mpix, meaning a 64Mpix sensor. That would give a two lines instead one per detail. But to get Mpix 16 to 64 requires a miracle. Totally new glass and far more improved software and hardware to process huge files.
It would same time make depth of field 2x shallower because allowing twice the cropping or enlargement.
That’s a pretty arbitrary definition for what’s a “noticeable difference.” You say it needs to be 32MP or 64MP, but even 20MP or 24MP is “noticeable.”
You notice if one line is in one pixel width, that it is now 1 pixel and no more when upgraded to 20MP?
Read again what she writes and you *migh* learn basic geometry.
Basic geometry:
Details that are displayed with 4 pixels on a 16MP image would be displayed with 5 pixels on a 24 (well, 25MP) image. Thus, 20% more detail.
Not every detail is 1 pixel width.
And regard that your eye is limited to 6 Lp/mm. So you might not be able to see a doubling in resolution.
Hey 43 it’s dead sony just finished it oly and pany will be just for selfies and Asian girls
If it come true. you have no playground to troll.
not so quick – compare a 70-200mm f2.8 Panasonic ( 35-100mm) to the F4.0 Sony 70-200mm – when Sony can create FF lenses the same size and weight of M43 then I would agree – Sony has a long ways to go to match the m43 lens selection
Also why is Sony producing the RX100m/2/3 then ?? size and weight – so M43 still as a good future – so neither will the Panasonic GM5 will not finish the Sony RX100m3 –
m4/3 is really hanging on for dear life if slightly smaller f/5.6 telephoto zooms are the only advantage these days.
Sadly he has a point. Unless your a telephoto wildlife photographer, the little extra weight for a FF IBIS at $1600 is a pretty dam good deal on release. We will have to wait and see the Full Sony lens line up. If it ends up like the Nex lenses, that would be a shame. Oly/panny really should not have sat on their butt juicing M43. Should of went FF mirror-less 3 years ago, instead of ep1, ep2, ep3, ep5, ep6, out of business.
There is a nugget of “truth” in your comment. “Juicing M43” whilst I would differ in regards to the FF route, I’ve never been able to understand how such a technology 5 axis Ibis and not utilise it to a greater extent. I mean look at the impact that the Canon 5d mark II had, as well as Panasonic’s iteration. The golden egg has gone to Sony, I personally believe that this will have a major effect, unless Olympus got something major in return but that’s open to debate. I have a EM5 and have yet to utilise it to its fullest potential (can’t afford lenses yet).
FF=BIG Lenses, there is no way around it, it s not just the body.
I love FF but I also love my tiny Oly 45mm 😉 on a tiny/inconspicuous E-PL5
I wonder if the next camera with PDAF will add it for video.
And PDAF means?
PDAFPriority Development Assistance Fund
PDAFProbabilistic Data Association Filter
PDAFPlatelet-Derived Angiogenesis Factor
PDAFProvincial Department of Agriculture and Forestry (Taiwan)
PDAFProgram Development Assistance Fund
PDAFProfessional Development Accreditation Framework (UK)
PDAFProfessional Development Assistance Fund
PDAFPostdoctoral Aerospace Fellowship (program)
PDAFPowys Domestic Abuse Forum (UK)
PDAFPhilippine Development Assistance Fund
PDAFPhysicians’ Donor Advised Fund
PDAFPhysical Disabilities Action Forum
PDAFPembrokeshire Domestic Abuse Forum (UK)
PDAFPreliminary Departmental Application Form
PDAFPeriodic Distributed Approximating Functional (method for surface functions)
PDAFProposal Development Assistance Fund
PDAFPaid Date Accept Full
PDAFPhase Detection Auto Focus (digital photography)
PDAFPhase Detection Auto Focus (digital photography)
And while PDAF is good tracking objects, it isn’t accurate 100% times like the CDAF is. More often PDAF does lag the fast moving subjects but it can quickly enough capture good few shots. Same thing is with CDAF these days. And the PDAF is very vulnerable to back- or rear focus that requires calibration of each lens in both zoom ends (if zoom) that requires lots of labor work. Even E-M1 has a PDAF focus correction functions for each PDAF sensor that are stored to each lens firmware then.
So even the on-sensor PDAF is vulnreable to rear- and back focus problems. Because the lens motors wear up in time.
Personally I don’t care about legacy lenses, but I do care about fast AF and CAF – I don’t want to see them just load old tech in, I’d want to see new improved tech not just hand me down from an older (even if it is pro) body.
i understand but lot of geeks ask the same
I’ll be in for 1 if the sensor is new, 20+ mpx, 1 more stop clean ISO, and more DR. Oh and the video codec is solid. That’s a TALL order, but it needs to be to get me to add another body. The EM-1 is great already.
The E-M5 successor will have to be crippled in key areas compared to the E-M1. Which features will be sacrificied in the middle-of-the-line product?
weather sealing
1/320 x-sync
1/8000 sec
swivel/articulated screen
No really… it does not have to be lesser than the EM-1 which is now about 1.5 years old. It can easily be the flagship model again like it was BEFORE the EM-1 came out. Then the EM-1 mark 2 can come out a year later and be better than the EM-5 mark 2.
Also, in terms of pricing, there really is no room to be lesser than the EM-1 as it can be found for $1,000. I guarantee this new EM-5 body will go for at least $1,000.
That is the problem with two lines where A is always best and B is always behind A. The E-M5 is the B and E-M1 is the A.
The B can’t ever be better than A, requiring that both will be released and updated simultaneously so B is always better then previous model, but A is always better than B.
Who says that is how it has to be though? There is no precedent for this in the OM-D line, and Oly has to fend off serious competition in this space (Sony A7000 on its way, the Samsung NX1 is a beast and wlll have all its tech carry over to the smaller Samsung formats, etc.) and a camera today that is lesser than one they made 1.5 years ago will be financial suicide.
I agree with fri. Olympus needs to keep EM5II lower specs than EM1 or update both models where EM5II is same level as EM1. Otherwise olympus does destroy its OM-D lineup and it is better to have just one camera that is being updated than have three (1, 5 and 10).
There is only one flagship that is most expensive and giving all features. Then there is one for entry-level that has some nice features. And then the middle level that is good for most amateurs and enthusiasts who doesn’t have money or need to get the flagship model.
If the middle level camera oversees the flagship model, there is no need markets for flagship then and in future. The middle level is the middle level and it is the flagship and it is same time the entry level as it is best worth for a buck, so no sense to have entry level.
Olympus needs to eliminate EM1 and EM10 at once on the time EM5II will hit markets or it can’t sell a cameras anymore.
Except… the flagship (EM-1) is now down to roughly $1,000 for the body. What do you think a new EM-5 mII body should cost at retail? Exactly… $1,000. If it is lesser than an EM-1 Oly will sell literally NO new EM-5’s. Its financial suicide to run a business like you are suggesting. You are, again, completely forgetting the fact that the EM-5 WAS the original “flagship”. I believe Olympus did this with previous 4/3’s cams as well, leapfrogging their “best” camera with a new one.
didnt it happen before, B specced better then A?
I mean the E-30 vs the E-3
True. Here it may make sense, effectively trialling 4K video and may be some other new tech before putting a refined version in the EM1 replacement having learn’t lessons from real life users with the EM5mk2/EM6.
I think at the very least it will lose embellishments like the dedicated HDR/etc. buttons as well as the pronounced grip. Other than that, I don’t foresee it being technologically inferior to the E-M1 in any realistically relevant way.
Same weak sensor, same junk. Sell your m43 junk while you can.
Can you expand on that and perhaps give some reasoning?
Of course he can’t. Same troll, different holiday.
But happy Thanksgiving.
it’s called physics. bigger sensor means more DR and high ISO capability which means more shooting envelope in tough light + bigger enlargements, more depth of field, more image bit depth…the list goes on…
honestly people here are deluded: puny sensors = puny images. I feel it is my public duty to inform ignorant masses about four-thirds deception.
“Stop The Delusions” is only pretending to call m43 “junk” in the hopes that this will drive the price down and they’ll be able to get a decent used camera and some lenses for not much money.
Which is actually a great idea. So all you m43 girls who can’t lift a real camera and are stuck with your puny sensors with DoF something something high ISO noise something something should sell your m43 junk! (to me)
The sell-off is already happening. Go to the mu43com forum, half the new topics are For Sale threads with people selling off all their gear. Sad thing, the people selling their gear keep having to bump the threads and lower the selling price, since no one wants the gear…
And most of the other threads on that forum are FF vs m43 comparisons, with m43 clearly losing. LOL.
Quick question for you, anonymous-internet-poster-with-a-name-nobody-has-seen before;
What would you expect to see for sale in the buy/sell portion of an m43 site?Microwaves?
Thanks in advance for your thoughtful response.
.
Lot of m/43 slamming since A72 announcement. Alpha FE system isn’t filled out enough yet to meet the needs of many m4/3 users. Even if it was, how many telephoto shooters want to jack up weight, size and cost mainly for high ISO gains?
For street & travel with minimal gear – that’s another story, the Sony is a real temptation. My kit consists only of the 17 and 25mm, so the Zeiss 35 and 55mm are a perfect upgrade path. Weight difference would be only about half a pound more with the A72 + 55m vs. E-M5 + 25mm/half-grip, and would fit in the same bag. Biggest consideration is price and a few minor issues that I still have to research.
I’ll probably switch, but I don’t think m4/3 is in real danger until the megapixel/price gap changes more significantly. In two years, if FE is filled out and Sony is offering a weather-sealed 36mp, 5-axis body for $1299, and the equivalent Olympus is at 20mp for $999, that would be a real problem. But these companies are invested in each other, so that scenario won’t happen.
But m4/3 will need a significant jump in sensor performance very soon or it’ll have to go downmarket in price. Since both Olympus and Panasonic are trying to move upmarket, they must be confident that their next generation sensors will be big enough leaps to keep them viable. Organic? Non-Bayer? Something completely unexpected? Whatever it is, they’re not going to sit back in 2015 and let the ship sink.
Everybody will dump m43 eventually. The sensor is already beaten handily even by APS-C offerings, and now full frame cameras are all getting smaller and cheaper. You’d have to be brainless to buy into m43 now.
You guys can spend your money on stuff you never need. Me for my part like efficiency and that starts with knowing what I want.
the m4/3 (E-M1) beats Nikon D800 and D810 (in real world large print samples, comparison by price, size and weight to get identical image quality (identical != equivalent)) and you claim that APS-C is handly beating m4/3, while APS-C loses clearly to Nikon D800 and D810 level cameras.
Just doesn’t make any sense to be full brainless framed idiot to buy Half-Frame or Small Format cameras when m4/3 gives best results now on current generation and next generation will again improve image quality!
Sure, the EM1 beats the D810. What are you people smoking?
You can’t imagine with fastest lenses what you can do and what an amazing quality (m43)…. yes it’s a challenge sometimes but m43 can match with high-end dslr like 5DmkIII …. D800 D810 D750 are the best camera in the world for enthusiast and some pro.
even pro’s confirm this, it is a fact
No M43 toy beats any Nikon DSLR camera in any respect. The cheapest Nikon DSLR setup will humiliate the dearest M43 setup. M43 needs to offer some extra value if they want to survive, but they consistently failed at that. I smell bankruptcy.
You’ve been repeating that for a couple years now.
Check your Nikon. It may be oil you’re smelling.
M43s matches my d7000 in iq. It also smokes my d7000 in focusing accuracy, video, useability (ie a real live view with articulating touchscreen, focus peaking, ibis), and my m43s is significantly smaller too so it goes with me everywhere.
Or to believe vague generalities by anonymous trolls.
coming with “the bigger one is better” is for the john holmes syndromians.
“Everybody will dump m43 eventually”
I agree. In 10 or 15 years when we’re all out taking photos with our 1″ (or smaller) sensor cameras, you’ll still be telling us how much better the “full frame” camera that you don’t actually own is.
Good post.
How many amateurs will actually be able take advantage of the FF sensor once the A7 system matures? And by then what will m43 (and APS-C) look like?
The ‘m43 slamming’ is by a few anonymous trolls that don’t even own an A7, so they’re easy fodder, but I bet the canikon apologists are the ones truly scared by the A7.
facts are facts and micro four thirds is just too small when the going gets tough. puny sensor = puny pictures.
Hard to argue with the temporary name you’re hiding behind. Isn’t your Hasselblad expensive though?
PS – Sorry to hear your going is tough.
lol at the only choice being a Hasselblad. Any Nikon entry-level APS-C since 2011 destroys your m43 at every ISO…
I guess you didn’t read closely enough. Bigger is better.
Why are you playing with those APS-C toys?
Execpt they siluck to use with a poor ovf wonky focusing and no where near the featureset of todays m43s cams. Sure you can shoot a better gretag macbeth chart at 100%, but that isnt the only feature needed in taking pictures.
True, superior af also helps. One good reason to discard n43.
“puny sensor = puny pictures”
So are you saying that m43 is superior for macro photography, or that people producing photographs for the postal service to put on stamps would be better served by m43?
Or both?
Yawn. Learn the basics or shut up.
Harrydicktom! I’d recognize that desperate tone anywhere.
Hey, let’s get this direct from the troll’s mouth; Speaking as a well known canikon apologist, does the A7 scare you?
Honestly, these next few years are critical for sonys continued success. If they dont flesh out their lens library with some stellar options they will likely lose marketshare in mirrorless to canon and nikon once they put forth the effort. Hell samsung is going for broke in the aps-c fight with arguably the best overall mirrorless cam body… And their zoom lenses stomp all over sonys.
I don’t want to take anything away from Sony, but I tend to believe that the sensor disparity is over done. In most shooting conditions, outside of the pixel peepers realm the difference has become hard to tell, when possible at all.
Sony’s sensors may allow to push the limits a notch further and without questioning that fact (lets take it for granted, shall we?) I’ll say that sure, its not irelevant. ….for how many keepers in one’s portfolio?
…I often take pictures of oil paintings -which can be tricky- and when the image is not to my taste, the last thing I blame is my sensor…
I agree about sensor disparity. I was thinking in terms of marketing. FF still has a high perceived value even if it won’t help 99% of photographers get a better picture. For years now, getting into it would cost 2-3 times more than a decent crop sensor camera. Now, first gen A7 is currently the same price as the E-M1. Even though E-M1 is a lot more usable and feature-rich, there’s the pyschology of people thinking they’re getting more for their money with the bigger sensor even if they won’t actually benefit from it.
The main reason I prefer the 24x36mm format is that lenses designed for it generally have less native distortion than lenses for crop systems. I like the Oly 25mm because it’s well-designed without relying on software correction, something I am not a fan of. Lenses with more than about 2.5% barrel distortion start turning things at the corners of the frame into a funhouse mirror when corrected. Also, this typically results in unwanted cropping and loss of sharpness. This is why I’m not so happy with the 17mm, it’s a heavily compromised design, unfortunately.
I hear you. But I am not sure that its a virtue of the crop sensor rather than the paradigm m43 is in. When m43 came out, it was all about minimal size and a higher threshold of distorsion was deemed acceptable.
There is a history of 43 lenses to prove my point: high optical standard is not incompatible with crop sensor. But lets keep to m43. We are having more choices, there is a growing list of lenses that has less than 2.5% optical distorsion, starting with the PL25 (you did talk about the m.zuiko counterpart after all 😉 ) On top of my head, I can also think of the m.zuiko 75, m.zuiko 2.8/40-150, PL42.5.
…And on the cheaper budget, all three Sigmas actually makes the cut!
Can’t wait for the new 14-42 kit zoom they’ll release with it! 😉
🙂 That must be a 12-50 II and with the E-M5 III they can release the 12-50 IIR….
yes waiting for this faster 12-50, the original is so great !
Maybe I don’t remember right but didn’t we talk about a 12-40/2.8-5.6 patent from Olympus here?
Thought its f4.0 at the long end.
We can agree on a compromise in size and price between the kit lenses and the constant f2.8.
People Who come here to mindlessly tell everyone how M43 is crap – Are Total Losers!
Seriously, what kind of dull crap life do you have where that is what you do?
I don’t even find your opinions annoying, I find having to scroll past them without fully reading them annoying.
Go away and get a life.
It’s not “crap”, but it’s not Lays-on-a-satin-down-filled-pillow-when-not-in-use-$uper-camera, either -like most fanboys here think.
MFT has its place, just not as a primary camera for most uses, especially not in dark areas.
Terada said last year tjhat there is no plan yet to add phase autofocus on future low end MFT models
http://www.43rumors.com/more-terada-interviews-no-silver-e-m1-coming-we-do-not-exclude-a-full-frame-future/
the e-m5 is no low-end body
phase detect for old 4/3 lens,but cdaf slow still work on m4/3 lens,
it’s nonsense ,
why someone think good,you will think about anyone who had zero 4/3 lens,
and me too.i start on 2009 mirrorless cam with m4/3 system only.
That was over a year ago and doesn’t apply any more.
doesn’t really matter what focusing system it has, the sensor is much too small. even your cat pictures won’t come out looking nearly as good as they would using the sensor of a grown up camera.
See below.
M43 SENSORS ARE NOISER THAN A ROCK CONCERT! LOL!
The day you have pain in your back, calle me please… FF = very big lenses
4/3 sensor is just the perfect system for people and more than one photographer you think about.
I agree, i also have tiny hands and a weak body. M43 is perfect for us.
Those who have small “epnis” should get 35mm, even when it is too heavy to carry.
Suggest you start lifting. Start with a D750. Motivation for the new year are sharp pictures.
Were there any rumors about ab silent shutter mode? That would give the smaller “gripless” body even more streetshooting capability.
silent shutter in street situations sounds kinda funny 🙂 unless you are bugged with the harsh clicking sounds of some older SLR or MF body.
Backstreets or marketplaces aren’t always that noisy. There are a lot of situations where I draw the attention of the subject, just by a tiny little clicky sound.
its still funny, i mean in public places . But i have no experience in streetphotography , but i guess most mft bodies are quiet enough? I just wonder if its wanted in a situation where you want to take a shot of someone in close range, hard to imagine if further distances. Sorry to mention this but i have the streetphotographer who wants to be stealthy in black and without sound in my mind, thats why the attitude.
Off-topic: Why hasn´t admin posted anything since two days? Same on SonyAlphaRumors. Something happend or nothing happened?
i think just lack of incoming info from his sources
That never has stopped Admin, though 😉
Something did happen: a few newer posts (one of them was ‘a bit of everything’) have disappeared.
No, wait, that is not true, a few newer posts are on the second page. The order of posts has become mixed up. Maybe there are even some newer posts hidden in the archives.
Its called vacation?
Simply “No”.
I wonder about the first rumors about the soon to be announced E-M5 replacement where admin said it shoulf have something completely different in it? Or did i remember it or read it wrongly?
“..Highly trusted sources confirmed that Olympus will launch an “exciting” new OMD camera in January! The camera will be displayed at the CP+ show in Japaan in mid February. I have no specs yet but the sources told me that this isn’t an evolution of a current camera. It’s something VERY(!) different. Sounds damn good to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!…”
Just finished a great shoot at an equine hospital with the em5 and ep2…. Pictures looked great shooting at 1600 and 3200 with the 17 1.8 and 25 1.4
Those that claim you can’t shoot high iso with m43rds have a lot to learn.
u cannot in dim light! I know coz I shoot events in conference rooms with awful mixed lights that are not strong enough!..Everything above 800 is too grainy..u can get away with high isos in good light though, but thats not really when u need it the most.. and if u work on removing noise u lose sharpness, its a vicious cycle..maybe I am doing something wrong, enlighten me.
Hey ED,
The only time FF cameras exhibit better noise performance is when you can exchange focus depth for noise. So shoot F2.8 vs f2.8 on FF and m43rds and yes your FF image will look better. However shoot f2.8 (m43rds) vs f5.6 (FF) for the same shutterspeed and most FF cameras will look worse than m43rds cameras.
Indeed, you cannot. These pics suk, even in this extra small size. You can see it, I can see it, only our paid shill cannot.
Shill, 🙂 look it up Harry.
Unpaid shill? Fanboy? Fangirl? Naive? Pick any.
Anyway, the pic below has distracting highlights and distracting detail in the background (the nurse). I would reduce that dof and, more important, I would try walking two steps left and turning the cam further right to cut off the large highlight. I would also try to get closer but that’s just me. The surgeons are looking into the dark and a little light on their faces would really help make sense of the picture. Missing this, they just look distracted and the photo does not tell why. The blue channel is clipped and produces more annnoying distraction – that may be the jpg rendering or the bad sensor, which is clearly struggling.
At the end, I don’t know where I should look or why, so I am not seeing any story, and the colours and patterns are confused, so I see no beauty, either. Some of it is the comp, some of it is the light and some of it is the (really pricey) camera.
In concls, you could do much better for the money.
Harry, You can be all 4 if you like.
Some interesting points:
1. you have no idea what was to the left of me
2. You have no idea what was in front of me, or the limitations of being in a sterile room during a surgery on a multi-million dollar racing horse
3. Reducing DoF would have made the horse head in the background a blob
4. Your idea of moving the highlight out of shot would simply have put it behind the doctors head.
5. I cannot shine a light in the doctors eyes from the direction of the TV they are looking in during surgery, that is a retarded comment.
6. As the shot of the back of the head demonstrates you can either have their faces OR the TV in shot
7. The blue channel is not clipped and your inexperience is Showing. It is simply the cold light from the TV on a blue jacket, maybe you need a better monitor.
8. You dont get a story from one picture in this scenario, these were shot as a photo essay on my part and to use in marketing materials on their part.
9. The “nurse” in the background is the Anesthesiologist. But sure, lets blur her out, who wants to be distracted by her 🙂
Finally, when you are invited to bring your FF gear INTO a surgery with a racehorse fire me off a message and show me your work. Withstanding that you are just a bag of hot air.
Abraham, drop the confrontationalism for a moment. There really is no need: you are a beginner trying to learn, which is fine. Just avoid teaching, it makes you look silly.
I appreciate you had some constraints, that’s part of your hobby, but overcoming constraints is the hallmark of a good photographer. The wrong choice of gear is only one of several mistakes here.
Some more advice:
Is it a “multi million” (LOL) horse shot? And where is the horse? Haven’t you got some horse props, either? A saddle?
The slant background lines make the pic look untidy.
The pic looks oversharpened and unnatural. That’s the camera trying to make up for its compact-sized sensor, but you must fix it in post.
Buy some manual flashes and learn to use them. If you get a proper camera, it will have its own remote flash system.
If you don’t know where to point your lights, use the ceiling or the walls or a large reflector or shine them through a blanket. Large lights are a lot less annoying to people and animals alike.
I cannot believe “multi million” horse people need to resort to a beginner. No offence meant, but it begs some questions.
🙂 that was actually quite funny. Have a good morning at work.
The correct thing to say is, it’s good enough for you. Having a lot to learn, one day you *might* understand the advantages of real cameras.
Harrydicktom, It’s cute when you try to patronize. Especially under this name since you always sound like you’re wearing an ascot.
Of course it’s an act since you won’t share your ‘real photos’ taken with your ‘real camera’.
Or are you finally ready to show us all the way?
Shut it and learn, nincompoop…
Thanks for your typical clever response Harrydicktom. You make canikon proud.
Hey, as long as you’re here, AL gave you a very thoughtful explanation of his statement with examples.
Can you put up some of your ‘real camera’ art for comparison?
Sorry Harry, I understand you are a paid troll, but at least speak for yourself and not for me. I didnt make any comparisons to other cameras, however I do understand exactly the tradeoffs between systems but let me explain it to you:
When shooting a large creature such as a horse in close quarters with the EM5 the challenge is to keep the doctors and horses in recognizable focus. So while shooting during surgery settings were as follows:
F1.8 ISO 3200 at 17mm SS ranging depending on the shot, but generally arounds 1/60 up a bit, down a bit etc. One couldn’t go much slower as the doctors movements would get blurry.
To achieve the same Focus depth I would be shooting roughly f3.5 and ISO 12800… And your precious FF cameras would look awful (except the D4 which would only be a little worse)
And here is a shot from the shoot as well.
Given the grade school mentality of “Harry’s” responses, I can’t imagine canikon pays him to troll. He may work for them in some capacity, but he does nothing but damage their brand here.
In any case, thanks for the interesting post on how FF may not always the best solution. You lead by example.
Thanks Zeikon,
I sometimes find it hard to believe someone would spend so long disparaging something without getting paid for it.
I used to shoot full frame, and funnily enough those wide apertures can really work against you tempting you to open up, and next thing you know you have a series of images where next to nothing is properly in focus.
The differences only get more exaggerated with 6400 vs 25600 etc.
Not a bit.
Everybody can try this, let’s see if we can put a plug on those marketing myths. You and zeikon like plugs right?
First, you must compare the raws.
Second, you must resample the pictures to the same size.
Never mind which ff camera you take, it will clearly have 2 stops better noise and carry a bit more details.
It also seems that Olympus cook the raws. Maybe they look a little smoother? Neih, it’s just extra details being sacrificed for the sake of looking good, to the cost of pp latitude. My my my you guys never stop cheating…
Nevertheless, I am sure your shots have come out “great”. LOL.
Try to read before you type, I know you can!
Those are raw files, no noise reduction. That is your base. Maybe with some judicious NR and downscaling the 5Dm111 may look as good as the EM1, but why bother? More work for the same results… no.
The D4 has no resolution to downscale, the 5dm111 have little to no resolution and the Sony A7 while it DOES have the resolution has the poorest of all performances.
You can clearly see there is less detail in the D4, clearly see less detail in the A7r and less detail in the 5Dm111… So which pictures were you looking at?
The DPR comparometer is one of the best tools for this, as like my shoot, a lot of the image is dark, and would therefore show the horrific read noise of the A7r (sony has always had this problem).
It is borne out however by DXO if you care to check. This is why so many m43rds shooters dont see the advantage of going Full Frame, it does not exist for their style of shooting, and in fact leaves them WORSE off.
But I know you are a paid shill, you are repeating the mantra that FF has 2 stops blah blah blah. Simple marketing tactic, so simple even politicians use it.
Obviously, you see what you want to see, and hope someone pays you for that. The reason is, nobody pays for pics like yours and you (or Zeikon) cannot get a decent job otherwise.
People don’t like cheats, so they do set your nonsense straight.
It’s fun when you refer to yourself as ‘people’ and ‘they’. We know there’s only one person as awesome as you. We can’t forget since you keep reminding us.
Our of curiosity, how much do you make on your ‘pics’? Just round to the nearest thousand.
Marketing? AL discussed settings and provided examples.
And you responded with… blather. As usual.
You’re the first to criticize anyone outside your little fantasy canikon world, but so afraid to show everyone your work. Will you ever have the spine to ‘lead by example’?
What a shame.
Shut up and learn nincompoop… Aren’t you the loser who hid her flickr account? You are a waste of space.
Another snappy rejoinder. And more gender confusion. No judgements.
We’ve discussed this many times, but I’ll be happy to remind you. Plenty of people can see my Flickr account, just not my stalker (that’s you). That’s what happens when you troll. And stalk.
But the big question is (again), when are you going to follow your own advice and lead by example?
You pontificate constantly, so you must have amazing photos to back it up. Right?
Differences are minor. I have the 25mm 1.8 and just bought the Sony A7 along side my Zeiss 50mm 1.4 for A mount. I find both have similar contrast and sharpness- at least to my eyes. You’re paying for the shallow DOF and your preference in out of focus rendering. Noise though is there at 250 for the Olympus but in practical terms- whatever. It’s not a big deal at all. Now DR- that’s a bit of a different story.
Can we get an update of the 10.5 Voigtlander. I want that lens in a really bad way.
UPDATE
In case you don’t see any newer updates:
http://www.43rumors.com/technical-note-please-clear-browsers-cache-or-reload-page-to-get-rid-of-a-cacheing-issue/#disqus_thread