It’s almost a year now that we speculate about a new Olympus hybrid mount camera. And finally I got multiple feedbacks from sources saying that indeed Olympus will launch a High End OMD camera in September that will have 100% full support for both MFT and FT lenses. And surprise, the High End OMD also replaces the current [shoplink 17163]Olympus E-5 FT camera[/shoplink]! The High End OMD is placed a step above the current [shoplink 29074]Olympus E-M5[/shoplink]. The High End OMD doesn’t replace the E-m5 and the E-m5 will get replaced in 2014.
So what about the mount? I am still not 100% sure on this but it seems that the new High End OMD has some sort of hybrid MFT and FT mount. How this should work I don’t know yet. Hope more sources can read this post and answer that question soon. Thanks!
—
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
332 Responses
first…. and very curious how it will look like
Can’t imagine how a “hybrid mount” would work given the different flange distances. I am guessing this will merely be a “hybrid camera”, meaning it will ship with its own adapter.
A wide throat in the camera and a reversible adapter 4/3 on one side and m43 on the other quite simple.
hmmmm…good thought.
that is a clever idea
an EVF mirrorless body, on sensor pdAF (which Sony seem to now have).
All that remains to be satisfied is the mount
Im thinking via JimD there are now 3 mounts, and a single adapter
the body mount takes an adapter that isnt either an m43rds or 43rds mount, and its larger
the mount is reversible, has 43rds on one side and m43rds on t’other
the mount corrects the registration difference so both come out right
and its a sealed unit when a lens is attached
In order to do that the body must be quite thin
so that the m43rds side of the adapter sits just outside the body
with the 43rds part going inside what used to be the mirrorbox
change to 43rds lens?
detach the adapter, turn it around, lock it on the body
now your adapter has the 43rds mount on the front and the m43rds part inside, but not going quite so far into the body
This would also open the possibility of better third party lens attachment and even a larger sensor particularly if the camera contacts were a small vertical contact at the top with wire transfer in the adapters to the bottom pins. The wider throat would allow any lens to be attached and give room for electronic conversion.
a reversible adapter for m43/43
the adapter is offset, so that the registration for both come out right
but it depends on the scope of the 43rds part being able to fit within the space provided in the m43rds configuration, b/se this side projects 18mm or so deeper into the body.
In keeping with maximising internal space, the sensor stack has to be as shallow as possible, so I am thinking this camera is AA less.
Considering the light path, in 43rds config 43rds lenses being telecentric will comfortably pass through the inside of the m43rds side of the mount. In m43rds config, the 43rds throat is so wide it wont interfere with m43 light path to the sensor.
just imagine the mmf2 with 4/3 and m43 lens mounts and a ring flange round the outside that corresponds to the use of the adapter round 1 way for 4/3 and round the other for m43. The body would have a machined mount wider than the present into which the adapter fits. I would envisage the adapter fitting into the body a little way for m43 use and sticking out for 4/3 use the adapter being keyed either way round and having a lock collar that fits over the adapter locking it to the body. I would also envisage a set of contacts on the top of the adapter for camera control and hard wired to the lens contact pins. Why? future mount flexibility for larger sensors and lenses.
When I say mmf2 I mean just for visualising. The depth of the mmf2 would be the same as the new adapter but the diameter be smaller and push not twist into the body with a locking plate/disk holding it in place. Therefore electronic contacts between the adapter and the body could be quite small in surface area and spacing, maybe even a part of the keying. This would remove all the lower contacts from the body completely. Allowing an open space to be used for future development (third party adapters with integrated electronic conversion, x0.5 speedbooster, bigger lenses, bigger sensors).
sure, I understood what you meant. I had a long look at an MMF1 myself to put it together. There is a space issue though. The GH2 mirrorbox has less room than is required. Every time I measure this thing it seems to come out different, but today I got 13.2mm from the top of the sensor stack to the mount. Assuming there is no AA filter and given some other perfections you could take away 1.8mm or so but still only have 15mm room for a 18mm part.
This means the sensor & whatever part of its ibIS carriage that is close has to be within or inside of the aperture of the adapter,the sensor stack is nonetheless inside the 43rds adapter by several mm.
Given that is so, something like an MMF-x adapter with a flange on it is something like how it would look.
We should put in $5 each and start a camera company.
Maybe a four thirds mount with 11 electronic contacts and with a Micro 4/3 ring.
An adapter like the current 4/3 to m43 but a lens socket on both sides and a band around the adapter that registers (keyed) with the body and is locked in place with a collar. As the pins would reverse this could be managed in firmware or even better mini contacts at the top of the mount hard wired to contact pins. This leaving open the possibility of third party lens attachment with control.
How is that different to the current 4/3 to m43 adaptor?
The only benefit I see is that one doesn’t have to carry the adaptor as a separate item when using m43 lenses. But this comes at the cost of a larger camera (a wide throat takes up space that currently is filled with other camera components, current m43 cameras very likely don’t have enough internal space below the mount, ie, making the camera taller).
Remember the posts about no room for flash or built in EVF in the e-5m. Then the GX7 shows that there is plenty of room. True, a wider throat for a reversible adapter would mean a body larger than the e-m5 but smaller than the E5.The throat would possibly be wider than the 4/3 by 5 to 8mm. Thats not oversizing the body and gives a lot of flexibility
I hope you have that idea patented. 😉 It sounds feasible, but I always imagined a slide in adapter (similar to Ricoh) with a protective blind covering the sensor during changeover, when ‘modular’ was being discussed. I guess we will find out it due course, unless you have some insider info. 🙂
My other imagined idea was to include a grip (in two parts like HLD-6) that also provided the 4/3’s lens adapter giving a larger bottom plate that is also part of the 4/3’s lens mount making tripod mounting much more secure for larger lenses.
A sensor that moves forward and backwards?
Oh, now that’s interesting! I wonder how much z-axis range the 5-axis stabilization has?
I suggested that about 4 months ago. The main movement would need to be mechanical with sensor shift covering fine focus. But it means a bigger body of 4/3 size. Having a front adapter means size could be anywhere between E5 and E-5m.
Wonder if it will have GH3 level video – any news on that admin?
Good, so now the 4/3 haters can stop whining.
Also good to know that my OMD will be totally viable for another year with no big advancements….This is amazing!
You mean the anti-43 morons. You know, the ones who never invested in the 43 lenses and bodies, have no idea how great those lenses are and how well they work with the 43 camera bodies (translation: fast PDAF too), and can only whine and complain about something they have no knowledge of.
……now who is whinging and hating?
Thought this might happen. I was hoping for an optical viewfinder for the e5 successor but can’t see that happening now. Still a decent sensor for my 43 lenses will be v welcome after all this time!
Must have PDAF then! Exciting times in m43 world!
Incredible .
FT & mFT in the same roof .
This should be a bigger camera than the existing EM5 .
Hopefully it will be too big cause m4/3 need to be reasonable compact too .
Looking forward to see the further specs especially the sensor before going to get GX7 .
This sounds cool. I can’t wait to see the specs on it. Is this the rumored E-7/E-M7?
Hybrid MFT and FT? it’s look very interesting, i have the 14-54mm and the 50-200mm so; if this is true this lens could gain a second wind because both are great. We can assume a bigger body too?, hoping for a upgraded video options on the OM-D series.
Improving the video codec would be much desired but does not bode well for Olympus’s track record. It’s a huge shame given that it’s 5-axis stabilization is second to none.
Great, if they make it a hybrid mount they must have solved the AF somehow? And I am glad they replace the E-5 since that makes this camera bigger then E-M5. All good so far 😉
I’d guess that they’ve got permission from Sony to create an LA-EA2 adapter and that the E-M7 is actually just an E-5/professional grade camera. Which is a shame because I’ve been hoping for an OVF…
I hope that they keep the optical low pass filter because I’m not sure that 4/3s is ready for 24MPs (Coolpix A and Ricoh GR show that 16MP isn’t enough, aliasing being a big issue — even though people focus on moire).
Not as excited now that it won’t be a true E-X camera.
Good for you, Oly!
not mount adapter, but “hybrid mount”, then … it’s like a E-5. big for me.
need more info.
yeah…I bought into MFT as a complement/alternative to my large (but incredible), full-frame kit. The four most appealing aspects of MFT (over other mirrorless) was: 1. size 2. image quality 3. extensive lens selection and, did I mention: 4. size.
I shoot stills only and currently own a GX1 and an OMD.
MFT fits the bill perfectly when I do not what to bring my big kit…I own ten lenses from fisheye to tele..and the choices, especially for such a young system are just great and growing.
I am definitely not a candidate for this hybrid camera..as I think that this camera will by nature have to be large. ..and with the contrast AF as fast as it is and good in low light Phase focusing is not a big pull for me for the way I shoot….I do see this as a bridge for FT users and I commend Oly for making it, especially considering their finances as of late…
So…I am just going to sell my GX1 and LVF2 and pick up a GX7 in the meantime as the image quality should be a nice step up from my GX1 and there are some other nice enticements the new GX has (1/8000 for one) that make it a good upgrade….
It seems that a camera that I would possibly buy from Olympus is going to be a year away at least…but it is good to know that my OMD is going to be a keeper for a while it would seem.
@phred.
1) why dont you care about phase detection ?.. what kind of photography do you do ? i’m considering dumping my d7000 for m4/3 and do mostly street and landscape… If the OMD pro is gonna be big, then I, too, will pass up on it..
right now the GX7 is in my sites.
2) i wouldnt be surprised if the OMD replacement comes about 2 years after the EM5 was announced.. probably at the Photokina/CES or whatever around the beginning of February. I like you, dont want to wait another year…
s
Well..I do not do any sport photography or any real, real action stuff, where you would need to heavily follow focus….and that is where phase detection is an asset….Also, have great phase detection focus on my Canon 5DIII…so if I really need it for something I can use that kit….
I have never found the contrast focus on my MFT bodies to let me down, especially on the newer bodies ( I got rid of my 20mm f/1.7 Pany Lens because “it” focused terribly slow…apparently so do the new one? go figure.).
I say, for you…buy an OMD of GX7..try it out…if you don’t like it you can always return it.
its a myth to think pdAF wont help
it will make every AF operation quicker,
no matter what lens, or what mode
I think there is a wide range of speed differences within the PDAF modules and processors used. Cheaper DLSR’s sometimes do have terrible performance in tracking mode(lots of nonkeeper shots). Basicly the topmodel DSLR’s show a world of difference in speed compared with CDAF.
Well…I don’t know about you guys..BUT..My GX1 and OMD focus (with the ten lenses that I own) as fast as my Canon 5D Mark III…which has a very state-of-the-art focusing system. I would need some kind of instumentation to measure the difference. As I stated above..I do not shoot a lot of follow-focus sports etc… I never stated that contrast AF was better than Phase Detection…this is as per my cameras and my use…so don’t get in a huff there Riley…I am not spreading any myth.
it is a myth
pdAF will reduce or eliminate the shunting that occurs at the beginning and the end of focus acquisition. Any lens will benefit from pdAF on m43rds
Not so.
Extremely interested to see how they get around the different mount issue.
+1 Extremely interested to see.
An adaptor makes sense in terms of keeping the M43 size advantage. Unless Olympus have engineered some extremely clever and size conscious design to allow this to happen.
I guess the question is. . . Do Olympus see this as an E-5 replacement (with M43 compatibility), or a ‘Pro’ E-M5 (with 43 compatibility)
I think your second option seems favourite to me, E-M5 styled body with specialised adapter ala Sony as a complete kit. E-5 idea would be more difficult due to much shorter flange distance, only work around for that would be with added elements and I cannot imagine Olympus going that way. Only other option I can imagine would be a modular front face with optional 43 and m43 mounts, to complex an idea though.
It will be an adaptor solution.
Sure, physics cannot be fooled, but still a neat feature. I better start buying something second hand before prices go up ..
“Sure, physics cannot be fooled”
Why fool physics. Its a straight forward mechanical coupling.
OK, but I want small body. Not bigger then current OMD, and smaller then GH3. If it is necessary, there could be removable grip for better handle with 4/3 lenses, but camera with micro43 have to be small (smaller then any DSLR).
I could imagine small body (like OMD) with removable grip and adapter for 4/3 lenses.
No problem. You just have to pay for it. E.g.:
– E-M7: 1999 USD/EUR
– FT-Adapter with built-in PDAF compatibility: 299 USD/EUR
– Battery grip another: 299 USD/EUR
It’s gonna be expensive…
Expensive?? Compare to what??
To E-1 of the year 2003 😀 ?
Yes – Interesting.
Maybe it will be E-M5 sized with a large attachment for 43 compatibility? Like the grip and battery grip attach to the E-m5, the singular add-on could essentially cover the entire front of the camera including a larger grip, extra buttons and a lens adaptor. . .
I would hope that the solution is far more elegant than that, but I am having trouble imagining how this concept can be successfully implemented. Considering R&D costs and the potential market size I am struggling to believe that this new design is going to be THAT amazing. ? . .?
dreams
GLOBAL SHUTTER!!!, improve in video, 🙂
Why would they make a hybrid mount? What advantages does it bring? Disadvantages would be added size and unnescessary complexity. I’d think normal adapter would be enough as it is.
I have been told it is not a normal adapter what they use.
Admin’s right as always. Adapter is the only way to go. there’s this little detail called flange distance you know.
No, an adapter is not the only way. Pretty sure admin is right in that this won’t be an adapter solution. If you think hard enough, you should be able to figure out another way to change the flange distance. 😉
So if there is a new adapter… The AF of the 4/3 lenses could improve in the current micro4/3 cameras??
And any news about new OM-D firmware? Focus peakig, more video options…?
This sounds like a CD-AF enabled 1x adapter Oly filed a patent a while ago. So no PD-AF but CD-AF support for all 4/3 lenses.
The adaptor will be abnormal? 😉
Yet, the same people that complained about the GH3 size, will LOVE the even LARGER size of the new OMD.
Olympus is about to become the laughingstock of the industry. .
Go back to bed again, rabid Panny fanboy.
And yet, you refuse to understand FT is DEAD. D-E-A-D.
But hey, keep hope alive.
We’ll be seeing a new FT camera shortly and here you are with your crude over-the-top comments. Show some imagination, dork.
I suggest you try harder…
Your opinion is being butchered. Good luck! 🙂
How can it be dead if I have a working 12-60 and 50-200 and there is NO comparable zoom in m43?
Hmmm…by that rationale, how can we consider Oly’s line of compact, fixed-lens rangefinders to be dead when my 35SP still goes through rolls of Tri-X just fine?
Clearly, their next FLRF announcement is just around the corner!
Yes, how can we?
Simple. These cameras are no longer marketed. Olympus 4/3 is.
Yeah, it’s so dead. That’s why Amazon, B&H, Adorama, Henry’s, etc. all keep the Zuiko lenses in stock. :/
It’s also why the prices don’t come down… :-/
I wouldn’t based fact on that. Amazon has a few in stock “Two left in stock, hurry” and the NYC companies, because of limited inventory space (they are in manhattan), do drop shipping from the supplier. Truth is… stock is low because the product is not being manufactured anymore.
The people that complain about the GH3’s size, are not interested in this camera. They should leave the party and play with their tiny cameras somewhere else.
That leaves a majority of straight-thinking 4/3 glass owners and quite a few visionary m43 users that will hit ebay for 4/3 glass like crazy.
OMG it’s OBS!
“That leaves a majority of straight-thinking 4/3 glass owners and quite a few visionary m43 users that will hit ebay for 4/3 glass like crazy.”
There’s not enough of y’all to sustain the system!!! You’re talking “Like Crazy”. Really? How many “Straight Thinking” Visionaries do you think there is?? -Answer: NOT ENOUGH, NOT EVEN CLOSE.
FL lens owners begging for a new camera to call their own are the laughingstocks of the camera world. Asking for a new FT camera is like asking for Betamax or better yet, HD DVD to make a new player!
Sad thing is, Olympus has y’all hanging onto a string, because they are sitting on tons of stock and they want to get rid of it.
Sure. You know it all. Your comments have been noted. We’ll talk later.
But wait, you’re Anonymous. Nobody, really. Shame.
Just because you have a name, doesn’t mean jack. You’re just someone hiding behind a computer monitor, smartphone or tablet…
I wouldn’t be here if the other users were merely ill-mannered, all-caps blabbering, anonymous no-no’s blurting out simple rhetoric like “It’s D-E-A-D”.
This principle applies across the web (you’re just lucky on this forum), to prevent simple spamtrolls from wasting everybody’s time.
Personally, I don’t mind some fierce discussion, ideally slightly more varied or at least intelligent. But you’re too much of a disgrace. Get a pseudonym.
Logical move from oly…
Yes, improve video and I’ll buy day 1.
High bitrate / 24p / 5-axis ibis… nice to dream about…
Id anticipate that
and a more space efficient codec
Fully functional FT to mFT adapter, what else?
And of course it will be an option.
There is no need for new customers to worry about the distant past of Oly.
I plead for a rebuild solution of lenses à la Signa, combined with a phase detector application in the sensor. This seems to me to be the best and easiest solution. In addition, Olympus can not make a whole lot of sales there. Maybe this is even a general solution for more and better lenses for all users!
If thats true, I will sell my E3 with the 5 lenses and change to Nikon
what lenses do you have ? 😀
ROTFLMAO
12-60, 50-200, 9-18, sigma 1,4/35, sigma 1,4/50
I am also not interested in a hybrid camera. Why I need to pay for hybrid if I do not have any m43 lenses? It looks like definitive end to 43. In fact I never believed in E-7 so it is no surprise to me.
That must be the silliest comment in weeks, hahaha. Thanks! 🙂
Well, zooms from 4/3 and prime from M4/3, that’s the best combo!
+1
Hmm. These release season (EP5 then GX7, and now this new OMD) clearly seem orchestrated between olympus and Panasonic and certainly are bringing M43 to new (quality) levels. Very good.
So, the EP5 is for the (Oly) faithful, this new OMD will raise substantially the bar on photography for the system (i.e. stills) instantly enabling all old 43 lenses, and more importantly the GX7 is critical in blocking the enthusiast audience from jumping ship to Fuji/Sony in the short term.
What’s next? I’d like a few more quality lenses, at least for me. Let’s see what’s in the kit with this new OMD.
Hybrid Mount? Sounds like lots of moving parts to me …
Just an extra adapter, that’s all, in terms of “moving parts”.
its possible theres a third mount
adapters for both m43rds and 43rds
No. FT and MFT are not equal. Everyone knows that MFT is the future and FT is no more than Olympus history (with some faithful customers, though).
wow a genius !
thing is, they seem to be making us a solution
Yes the only logical solution is an adapter on a what is basically an advanced mFT camera with better software/hardware so that those with these often excellent FT optics can take full advantage of the new sensors,5 axis ,better video etc.With such a tiny user base a full on DLSR would have been idiotic this way Olympus get to aim at high end mFT as well as hopefully satisfying the needs of the HG/SHG users. For many the size weight and cost of these optics is the very antithesis of what mFT means.This looks like the best of both worlds for all users only possible downside will be pricing they are launching $1000 Pen’s without an EVF, God knows what the will charge for this baby
You happen to be one of the anti-43 morons I mentioned earlier.
If you want fast (aperture) zooms (longer than 100mm), then physically larger lenses are needed. They become a little too large (like the 300mm f/2 lens) for regular M4/3’s mount & this hybrid concept sounds like the best idea & that’s where 4/3’s lenses can serve us well.
We are not talking mFT large we are talking FF large!
There is no 300mm F2 lens there is a 150mm F2 this is the trick Olympus have managed to pull over you FT types. If you mount a Canon 135mm F2 lens on any mFT body you still have a 135mm the smaller sensor gives the crop factor by the way when you multiplied the effective focal length by 2 you forgot to do the same with the effective aperture.
It is interesting that people think a dimensionless number alone can describe an outcome that is not dimensionless (ie, that has units). Where the dimensionless number is the f-stop, and the ‘dimensionfull’ outcome is the amount of light being captured in the whole image.
F stop is not a dimensionless number it is a simple ratio
A simple ratio IS a dimensionless number. Divide two numbers with the same dimension (in this case, length) and you get a dimensionless number.
Example: 75 mm / 150 mm = 1/2 (and NOT 1/2 mm!)
OK, I was only trying to find an example & the 300mm f/2.8 prime is one & the 90-250 f/2.8 zoom is another (& to make them in a M4/3’s mount is unlikely to happen) & they’re not something I want to normally walk around with attached to a little PEN or E-M5. A hybrid body that’s larger & more robust than the E-M5 would be more suitable.
Compared to the average DLSR? Get real, man! 🙂
Admin, your header one part correct one part wrong.
Which part is wrong?
The sequence of my reply.
10x
O
“The sequence of my reply”
Are you looking at Flat View instead of Tree View?
Sou were apparently spot on with saying the new pro cam is m43, when admin was still saying it’ll be 43. Let’s see if your new info is correct, and you weren’t just lucky. 😉
FT5…..thats cool
Wow! OBS finally! I’m afraid it’ll be too large for me, but nice to see Oly keep its promise on not letting 4/3 users down. I hope next generations of m4/3 cameras will have fast AF with 4/3 lenses as well.
In fact with E-P5 the af for 4/3 lens is already not slow!
Any reviews to back up your claim?
Yes! http://torontowide.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/olympus-e-p5-pen-camera-first.html
And also from Olympus, “. The E-P5’s new
autofocus (AF) system enables the same world’s fastest AF speed performance as
the OM-D E-M5 and improves on it by providing up to 45% faster AF performance
with Zuiko Digital SLR lenses (mounted with a dedicated lens adapter).”
Found here: http://www.olympus.com.au/getmedia/9df6d2d1-3878-4824-9eae-235fae1e754b/PR1305001_sm.pdf.aspx
Thanks! I didn’t know there was any improvement. 14-54mm II was already fast on m4/3, though.
If Oly did it with rewritten algorithms for the E-P5 then I wish they would give us update firmware for the E-M5 as that can better handle larger lenses with the grip.
For me, the MIRROR is a great unbeatable advantage of DSLRs.
Have been hoping for E-7… and still keep on hoping.
People say “FT users will be happy”, but… don’t anybody care about a mirrorlessness?
what is for you the reason to say mirror is an advantage?
1. Mirror still gives the best quality of “a picture” possible.
2. It has no lag at all (any EVF has, though small), and
3. it does not drain batteries.
I realize pluses of EVF, but for me (1) is still unbeatable…
Are you for real???
okay i just wanted to hear your reasons. Sounds fair to me.
The detail is one thing, but the dynamic range! Just as good as my eyes. I’ve been using both types almost daily and a good VF on a good DSLR is truly a joy. Until it gets dark, or you want to shoot video…
Still, I bet you this camera will have no slapping mirror.
mirror make af error, sometimes annoying, e.g my e-5.
on 1: is simply false, the mirror causes as much problems as any other VF (here: low light, adjustments, mechanical failures.
on 2: yes, but EVF will compensate this in future (global shutter)
on 3: true, but a SLR will drain the battery even less (Do you remember the days when a cell phone worked for two weeks without recharge? And how does you recent smart phone …?)
>1. Mirror still gives the best quality of “a picture” possible.
even low contrast, upsun, or very low light
does it ever concern you if your WB is right?
>2. It has no lag at all (any EVF has, though small), and
actually it does, in order to AF it has to have the mirror down
reflexing the mirror must occur before the shutter
so there is always a little lag on firing
in that instant of firing, you are at mirror down + lag
so the AF is inherently out on a moving target
>3. it does not drain batteries.
true
The mirror was only there because there was no other way of doing it (seeing what the lens saw). Canon had the pellix but that was late on after the mirror was established. If it was all being invented now one would be called mad for putting in a mirror.
But a mirror is still there in the topmost cameras 🙂
Despite the fact that other solutions have been available for years.
its a matter of new technology
normally an SLR has a mirror & sub mirror
so far nobody has been able to crack fast AF on mirrorless, which requires phase detection
the last Canon attempt seems to also have issues, same for Nikons mirrorless
but now apparently Sony, or perhaps even the Sony/Oly collaboration, have something that works for us. Coincidentally the new Sony A mount no longer has the SLT translucent mirror solution, so its pdAF on sensor. We are thinking the two developments are connected.
Since it’s not supposed to replace the E-M5 then it NEEDS to be at least a little bigger. The E-MX can stay small and modular.
I’m interested in seeing if they will be able to retain weather sealing with a hybrid mount.
MMF-3 is already weather-sealed. If OSPDAF is properly implemented and the body style is similar to that of MMF-3, no new adapter is necessary.
That would be a major oversight if it wasn’t! We are talking about a high end camera now & that is Pro level & why would they not have it & the hybrid adapter weather sealed? If it is an alternative to the E5, then it would be.
Forget an oversized camera, this camera will use an adapter (Sony tech) and should be smaller than the (oversized) GH-3. Use of an adapter solves the flange-back issue simply and avoids the necessity of engineering work arounds…..
Hybrid mount is not possible because the diameter of M43 and 4/3 are different. An adaptor is a simple solution.
There are few possiblities how this could go.
1. Just normal FT to MTF adapter
2. Similar mirror adapter as sony has for A-mount lenses.
3. Modular mount like richoh M-mount.
I vote for 3.
I think you are right. It will be a modular mount. Admin?
hope for modular too, but not the Ricoh solution, as this involves sensor swapping too, making it an unnecessarily expensive solution.
I don’t see what the benefits of a Ricoh M-module style over an adapter are?
“So what about the mount? I am still not 100% sure on this but it seems that the new High End OMD has some sort of hybrid MFT and FT mount.”
BS. 20 mm distance in flange. I doubt they will make you haul some kind of bellows with you. Simple adapter will work and that is it.
An adapter is nothing new. I hope the engineers at Olympus have more imagination than “flagship camera that ships with adapter similar to the one you probably have already”.
Hybrid mount doesn’t make sense from a lot of points of view, but apart from the technical reasons, why would Olympus take the hassle to build this just for a few people who still use 43 extensively? They are not going to build new 43 lenses, so it’s only a service to legacy users and a select few that want to shell out thousands of dollars for the high performance zooms.
Hope you’re not saying production of 4/3 lenses has officially stopped. If not, are you saying this camera may not have a positive effect on 4/3 lens sales? I think they just went up in value.
Maybe the dreamers at Olympus hope just that. I salute them.
Producton of 43 lenses stop few years ago!
part of its spec is video mode, admin can you help?
tia
A 19.42mm adaptor to bring the focal length of the Four Thirds in line with Micro Four Thirds, it will have electronic contacts. You will only be able to use the adaptor on this so called “hybrid” camera as it will have a set of standard M43 contacts on the mount, but also the additional contacts for the Four Thirds adaptor. Phase detection & contrast detection from their new friends Sony.
Can’t see why it would need to be much bigger than the OMD, just a more substantial grip with a slightly larger battery to power the FT lenses.
+1, exactly.
bigger lenses like 100mm would rip the mount from the body if its smallerI think
The Nokton 17.5mm is a half kilo lens with a native M43 mount and hangs on to the OMD fine. I think anything heavier in FT’s has a tripod mount on the lens.
As it has to have PDAF + Sony-cooperation we should watch Sony A79 that is rumored for september. http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-chances-increased-we-could-see-some-a-mount-camera-news-in-september/#comments
very good news! I was just thinking whatb is next from Olympus and my praying was answered 🙂
I dont care how they make it possible to use 4/3 but as long as it performes good I am happy. Size should the same or a bit smaller then current E5 and everybody knows that. It would be very stupid if it would be Em5 size since will should connect both systems. Uuuuu… cant wait to buy zuiko 75mm lens! Also, video could go a bit higher in bit rate but more important is the manual control while recording. 5 image stabilization should be in!!!!! or 6 if they want xD Good step from Olympus and for those who cry about the size and getting back to take 4/3 with the new age wave… I was thinking like you until I have spoken with one Olympus reprezenter who said that these expensive ”dieing”cameras still bring a lot of money for Olympus so its not only pride and loyalty
i also hope the body won’t be as big as a mirror-ed SLR… A little bigger would be fabulous..
for me.. now its between the GX7 and this Pro-model.
i mean a little bigger than the EM5
Can’t agree any more, a body like or a little bigger than classical E-620 less than E-30 with an E-30 grip will be very nice for 4/3 lens!
Why does everyone keep talking about adapters? If that we’re the solution (and there are already adapters to use 43 lenses on m43 bodies) they would have said so, or elaborated that pdaf is now in the m43 body so adapted lenses will function at full speed. This says specifically “hybrid.” Olympus’s genius is obviously greater than the combined thoughts of all posters on this blog! ;)) Can’t wait to be amazed at what they reveal!
Exactly. Who cares about an adapter?
LOL…Hopefully you are RIGHT!
None of us have that kind of expertise OR imagination…time will tell.
Notice how vaguely-worded the rumoor is?
The camera will use a new adapter, and possibly a phase-detection sensor.
The only mystery to me is will it resemble the retro OM range, too cool for school and hard to handle, or will it follow the black E range to fit in with the big boy DSLR’s and their big and bold ergonomics.
For people who forget the past 😀
Aug 2003 : Olympus launched E-1.
Price: Body only around £1,400. With 14-54mm f/2.8-4 @ £1,800
2003??
That’s exactly (well, almost :D) 10 years.
Darn history ..
Jul 2011 : Oly gave us E-P3 (at what-a-cost!!!).
-Then-
Feb 2012 : They explode the world with E-M5 .. at what-a-cost, you still remember, right?
Now it’s present.
May 2013 : Oly gave us E-P5 (at what-a-cost!!!).
Then?
Choose one:
Nov 2013 (to celebrate 10 years of 4/3 system)
-or-
Feb 2014 (to repeat the E-P3/E-M5 saga).
I think Matt Jones has it right. Probably big as an E-30.
PDAF by way of translucid mirrorin adapter a’ la Sony OR PDAF on sensor?
Panny fannyboys won’t be able to use 4/3 lenses but they will have the consolation of the erectile EVF of the GX7.
All is well. 🙂
1) probably
2) no, Sony ditched the SLT for pure mirrorless
which means :-
3) Sony have on sensor pdAF
E-30 is a little big for me, however I love it’s weight, esp. after I sold my E-30 and E-620 then bought two E-5, NIGHTMARE!
A balance between E-30 and E-620 will be very nice.
“A balance between E-30 and E-620 will be very nice.”
E-520 is what you are after.
E-6xx line was based on the diminutive E-4xx, but with added swivel LCD. E-5xx line was slightly larger and heavier (and had larger battery), with much more comfortable grip (but w/o swivel LCD).
Yes, like E520, I was an E510 user when first time I bought Olympus!
Disappointing. Current tech of EVF cannot match up with OVF in terms of response and image naturality/neutrality. Oly should release both OVF and hybrid. Otherwise, it should offer interchangeable VF camera.
Seems like a lot of work that still leaves the same old problem – huge lenses/small sensor. There are really only a few zoom lenses, a macro and one tele to consider here, the rest being kit lenses. I used 4/3 back in the day, but got tired of waiting for good small primes and didn’t like the size/weight of the 4/3 zoom lenses. So nothing has really changed, other than M4/3 computer corrected lenses have become really good and they are small and lightweight, like they should be, for the sensor size. I guess it’s nice that Olympus has finally found bandaid for the old customers, but time has moved on. Did Olympus ever fix the Af problem with the 2,000.00$ F2 zooms? It’s been so long, I forgot.
Please have a drink with me to the deceased 1022 forum at DPR
🙂 Have one on me (I’ll be at another party)!
actually you guys will be coming over to us
so be careful who you slag off & stay frosty 😉
Please, Riley start counting how many of us will be buying 4/3 lenses from now on Perhaps a couple 14-54 II if discounted.
So *you* will come flocking at the 1041 forum, as already happening. You’ll be eating at the childrens’ table though 🙂
I want to buy some of those sweet 4/3 Zuiko lenses! 😀
“”Please, Riley start counting how many of us will be buying 4/3 lenses from now on Perhaps a couple 14-54 II if discounted.””
This would be great news for the faithful four thirds owners.But,I agree with you the whole rationale of mFT is in its size to performance ratio.If I wanted to carry and pay for monster lenses they would be attached to a FF camera.I want a small light compact system that gives me freedom to shoot how I like
not everything has to be about being as small as possible
as always, people have choices and they should make them appropriately
if you think that unreasonable, buy something else and go annoy them instead
Me Riley? Do you share Collbaxter’s deep apartheid thought against us m4/3 niggers?
Will you chase us with dangerous Australian dogs, fie?
If I were you I would consider the final ridicule where Oly put you. Bless them 🙂
I did ask you to ‘be careful’
now you have nothing to bitch about
Petty…
AH Am. I tell you what when/if this goes down why don’t you come over to DPR 1022 for a drink. Its only good manners. But that’s unlikely as you have had your butt kicked so many times at 1022 you will probable stand off and throw rocks like a adolescent.
Well maybe we we will in invite some photographers. Ah well maybe you could be lucky next time.
Oh Yes was the drink going to be Italian ‘invented’ wine with a plate of Italian ‘invented” pasta.
What the hell are you going to go on about if/when 4/3 is discontinued.?
I’ m sad for you and your planned $ 14,000 expenditure you calculated for changing brands – LOL!
Now I am sure that we can welcome you in our modest m4/3 premises for much less – worth considering…
uaz uaz uaz (inferior animal Italian laugh)
Am.
Am
There is no ways myself and a lot of others would be putting that type of money into m4/3. That type of money would be going to the 2 big guys with proper full systems. If I purchased a OMD-PRO it would be to hang my 4/3 glass on. That is assuming it can take pictures of something that is not dead or nailed to the ground or in my case perch. If does then it had better be superior to what I have got. If there is no advance well then I would have to consider plan B.
No mater how well photo shopped ordinary glass is ordinary glass. You can only BS for a short time that a Waterford crystal decanter is actually a Coke Bottle.
Your problem is not the lenses, Collie darling. It is to have enough blacks to beat the bush and send the lions towards you.
Then even a 25mm will do. No need to spend your celebrated 14,000 $, just 100 $ will do.
Try an E-PM1, now an absolute steal at 200 $. Lions will love it 🙂
Oh you mean zone focus. Every thing after 3 or 4 feet is sort of in focus. Mash the trigger and run. Actually I don’t need 25mm and a E-MP1 for that I can use a disposable camera for that.
If you used a 25mm on a charging lion you would be dead meat or have to have a pinhead of a subject in the shoot about a km head start , waterproof underwear , non slip shoes that will get you out of the gloop and a real dash of speed and preferably a very high sturdy tree mid way if you don’t have to pit stop.
Oh yes the E-MP1 is not water proof so don’t put it in your pocket as you would probably have to throw it away due to moisture damage. (Amongst other things.)
In fact I have had had lions two meters away from my Landrover in the NgoroNgoro, so don’t try no BS on me Collie-White-Hunter. During daytime they sleep and don’t give a fuck.
So where will you invest your next 14,000 $? LOL.
Well Am
A few things come to mind.
1) You where in a inclosed Land rover.
2) You had a very irresponsible Guide if you were not in an inclosed vehicle .
3) The lion had already eaten its tourist for the day.
The famous last words of a few dead tourists where . “Ah is he not cute come here kitty’. (Burp)
I tell you what forget the lions we have a few farms around here with some nice bulls ( Like they have in Italy ) , we should go bulls eye shooting the only issue might be the lack of land rovers and fences and trees.
PervertIdiot..
My large Oly lenses are still smaller (and up to a stop faster) than their Canikon counterparts. Especially the longer lenses are a great deal because of the x2 crop (no slowing down further with a TC). All we need is an E-M5 or better sensor and we’ll have the big f/2 lenses in the bag, together those little primes.
Talk about One Beatiful System.
PS: PDAF+CDAF should mean state-of-the-art in focusing for both 4/3, m43 and other MF lenses. As in: the best you can get, period.
Could be another milestone from Olympus. For myself I impose a spending freeze 😉
For how many days?
Until Olympus has gone on the record 😉
This is a stupid move. Who will buy this camera? If you are a micro user with no fourthirds lenses all you are getting is a more expensive OM-D. If you are a fourthirds user I would be surprised as most of us have jumped ship. This is too little, too late.
Panasonic makes a camera most FT users want, and Olympus makes a camera to go backwards and everyone flips for joy.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And it’s even funnier how other Forums like DPR and Mft laugh about the comments here at FT Rumors… This post is Pure Truth!!!
Are you saying the camera is no good just because it supports older lenses? That’s a bit like saying Nikon supporting AI is also silly, and any pro camera that does it (D800, D4) is laughable because of it. You see how simpleminded that reasoning was? I feel a bit cheap now. 🙂
Probably not. Let’s make it easy: the camera has a hybrid mount. Big deal for some, less for others. There’s a lot more to it. What’s you problem, baby?
Honestly, the LAST camera that supported this lens system was the E-5, correct? The camera was just as big as a Canon 7D!
-How many MFT cameras have Olympus released since then? A Lot.
-How many FT lenses have been released since then? -NONE.
-How much is the E-5 now? $1200.00 Used, $16-1700.00 New. Too Much for a Outdated camera that sucks at high ISO and low light. A EM-5 runs circles around this relic.
So lets see… A camera that has a Hybrid mount, able to use FT as well as MFT lenses.. How much is this thing going to cost? HAHAHAHA!!! We all know how Olympus loves to over charge y’all!
And what’s even MORE FUNNIER is the fact that even though y’all are clamoring for this camera, 10% of y’all are going to buy it day one, the rest will wait for a substantial price drop, Hurting your beloved Olympus’s pockets even more!!
BRAVO!!! Well done, fanboys… Well DONE!!!
Thanks for caring for other people’s wallets. You’re better off at some Leica forum, though. Anyway, you can shut up until the price is announced. Then we’ll tell you that history has shown the market prices for cameras tend to drop.
It’s getting ridiculous. The camera should be judged by other features than just 4/3 compatibility. You don’t *have* to but 4/3 glass on it, that would be silly reasoning.
Silly reasoning. Yep.
What about them? -Being overcharged for a option they’re not going to use, or even want…
Silly reasoning. Yep.
What about all the m4/3 people who want a descent long lens? If you don’t need it buy an EM5 or it’s replacement when it comes. If anything this will allow Olympus to re-enter the pro market with a series of lenses that are 2nd to none and already designed. How anyone can call this other than a positive is nuts as it gives you an option to have your small m4/3 prime kit, or the ability to have top notch zooms and long glass too.
I’ve wanted to go to 4/3 for years because of the glass, but the sensor quality at higher ISO’s has put me off. EM5 almost did it for me with it’s great sensor except it can’t track in AF-C worth a damn, and all the long lenses past the 75mm are garbage. If this comes true, I’ll be throwing all the FF stuff on ebay! I’d much rather lug around a 300/3.8 than a 600/4. I would also rather carry a 50-200/2.8-3.5 instead of a FF 300/2.8.
All-caps is swaying in the corner, about to hit the floor.
My e-5 mirror fell out whilst on holiday shooting birds,so is a mirror always a good thing ruined my week
some birds love little mirrors, you are lucky to have one for free 🙂
Can anyone answer this question for me please. Will this new camera be a lot better than e-5 in low light situations as I need a system that will work in lower lights and give me less noise.
Probably.
it would be usual for Olympus to reuse the 16Mp EM5 sensor
maybe with a few tweeks, which is the strongest option and absolutely fine
but theres also the possibility that this is the new Exmor sensor from Sony
in the first case, a very good increase in noise performance
in the second case, probably in the area of high end market capability
massive AF performance, high frame rate (10)
Since the E-M5 & latest PENs can, I would say yes.
So, yeah…
Karen, the E-5 had two things going against it: sensor performance and price, the latter exacerbated by the first, of course. For the intended audience (serious FT users), it was good enough (but hey, there was little choice save switching brands). Compared to the competition, iso 1600 and up were not impressive.
Nowadays, the situation has changed. Oly is again leading in (single) focusing speed and with the Sony sensors we finally get very competitive images (not only high iso, but dynamic range as well).
This camera should be Oly’s best yet.
Olympus is acting in a gentlemanly manner and seems to finally offer its few remaining FT customers an acceptable way out (prices for used FT glass will increase too). After the announcement next month the FT mount can be officially buried.
However, for the most part this camera will be the top m4/3 proposition for a long time. Its fate will depend purely on its sensor and features. It will not be cheap ($1700?) and I am not sure how well its price will be received in a climate where FF offerings are getting less expensive. It better be good.
BTW, I still have a few FT lenses. I will try to sell my E-5, 50 macro and 12-60 to help finance this.
which FT lenses do you have Sneye?
11-22, 12-60, Panaleica 25, 50 macro and 50-200.
FT mount can’t officially be buried until Oly makes a descent fast zoom or two and some descent long lenses in m4/3. As it is right now, m4/3 is lacking some of the most important lenses a system needs. The panny 2.8 zooms don’t count as they are mediocre, and there are no good long lenses. Since Oly already has these lenses designed in 4/3 mount, a hybrid mount m4/3-4/3 camera makes a lot of sense instead of spending years designing and releasing good lenses in native m4/3 mount.
Had my E-1 this morning in my hands, still the best feeling camera. Hope they make something like my E-1.
I agree 101% with you.
So i guess it will be simple.
Pdaf on sensor from Sony and a free 43 to m43 adapter
Improved 5axis ibis, new better evf an a boy with build in grips.
Thats more than enough to name and price it as PRO.
No way this camera will be the size of an e5. It’s a hybrid, not a traditional Ex model that’s almost a kilo with battery and card!
This camera is a fusion of two mounts and a common ground must be met which revolves around the ethos of size and weight.
Based on this reasoning it also must be considerably smaller and lighter than an e5 in keeping with m43 way to ensure Olympus doesn’t alienate new potential upgraders while still being substantial enough to handle high grade zuikos without a grip and super high grade zuikos with a grip.
It’ll be extremely rugged and weathersealed and the first of it’s kind.
One body and no lens releases in a few years spells the writing on the wall for 4/3 BUT a hybrid is a camera that offers salvageable R&D for both formats especially for the m43 format that will ultimately save Olympus’s chances in the camera division whilst effectively saving the 43 mount In a two birds with one stone maneuver.
This if you like is our refined and tested prototype that will eventually be refined even more and amalgamated into subsequent m43 cameras as a norm and than 43 lenses will be those stellar large bits of glass that current owners and curious enthusiasts will gain access to while main focus is on the m43 path.
One beautiful system indeed, if it all works and plays out well.
Well done Olympus, I’m interested and very curious. The only thing I’m skeptical about is subject tracking and CAF applications but I remain hopeful because Olympus has shown great promise and potential in the last year.
Just look at the mount size:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#202,459
There’s no way this camera will be small, nor light.
It will be a decent size larger than the EM-5 and the battery to sustain the lenses will be huge.
And I’m going to laugh if the camera is the size of a Canon 5D Mk3.
Heck, I’ll still laugh if it’s anywhere near the size of a 6D!!
Who cares how much bigger it is? considering an E-1 is much smaller than a 6D, and they can fit 5 axis IS into these tiny bodies now….. I doubt it will be bigger than a GH3 and if it is it won;t be by much. But even if it was bigger, the body size isn’t an issue. A FT 300/2.8 is far smaller than a FF 600/4, same with a FT 50-200 vs. 100-400L, same with a FT 12-60 vs 24-105L, and FT 14-35 vs 24-70 L are about the same size which isn’t big anyway.
For a serious shooter who uses and carries a wide spectrum of lenses, the over all kit will be much smaller. ZD 7-14,12-60,50-200,300/2.8,50 macro in a bag is much easier to carry than a FF 16-35,24-70,70-200/2.8,300/2.8,600/4,100 macro with the same coverage. You could even swap out the 12-60 and 50-200 for a ZD 14-35,35-100, and 1.4x TC and it’d still be an easier kit to deal with.
I carry the FF kit I just listed, except the 600/4 which only gets lugged around when needed. It’s a heavy ass bag. With the FT kit I could have a lighter bag and the same coverage as if I had my 600/4 with me as well. I could care less about how big the body is as that’s not makes things heavy.
Seems I can go home, now… 😉
Based on the patent rumored in March?? http://www.43rumors.com/patent-is-that-the-ultimative-olympus-ft-and-mft-hybrid-solution/
No, I don’t think so. I am asking all sources to see exactly how this work.
My personal opinion is that it’ll be in between a GH3 & e30 in size with a substantial grip as an add on option.
I’d be surprised if it weighed in at more than around 670g including battery and memory card. Olympus may shock us and make it a lighter and smaller than a GH3 or heavier than an e30 which I feel is a mistake.
They tried to clone a hybrid but it is neither here nor there but mostly big and expensive with lousy performance. The FT straw that broke the OLY m43 back but for the moment everybody’s happy until they have to shell out real money for it.
Now, now let’s not be so hasty and at least wait and see what this camera is all about before just writing it off as something that tries to be everything and ends up nothing. We might be pleasantly surprised than 43 lenses at worst case will be an extension of the current catalogue of m43 lenses for those keen and willing to go the next level.
It could work out as an interesting proposition to the market and a viable alternative away from all the me too mirrorless formats out there.
The answer is simple. It has a kind of variable flange distance. Thicker body for a more pro feel and look. So you have the room. Allows you to jump start a growing platform with pro glass that was always highly respected but seemed limited by the AF technology in the body. Saves immediate R&D and ramp up cost for growing the overall MFT system. We saw the same with other larger makers in their early lens designs. Buys Olympus more time. But there would have to be another creative/technological reason for this kind of approach. In that way, Olympus get a twofer. Maybe it’s related to stabilization somehow. Or some other trick.
It’s Macro. MFT gains better macro. People love macro. It’s fun. It’s marketable. And with existing stuff they already own. That’s the twofer.
Take it the opposite direction and we’d have shallower dof (without infinity) right?
A variable flange distance is not the answer the mounts are different. It requires either 2 mounts or a reversible one set to the body in a third mount or keyed hole.
E-5 successor was promised many times already and I have no doubt that it is coming. But it would be big. It would be heavy. And it would be expensive.
@Admin, can you ask your sources about mid/entry level – E-30 and/or E-520/E-620 – successors?
I hope they keep the price down but my estimate is 1500 bucks for the body.
It will be $1699, like the original E-5 price.
The problem of this stuff is price, price, price.
If this is the last 4/3 camera (Admin?) then I can see 4/3 owners forking the old 1700 $. But no way m4/3 users will, unless they are money launderers.
So in what kind of separate reality is this camera going to live. Yes, it will prolly have the VF-4 built in, and some better CAF, but that does justify the price?
In fact the GX7 is much more fitting the market today, even if I am v. happy with the E-M5.
Surely Oly should have taken stock of the coming NEX FF, perhaps even contributed to that, so they know how far they can play with price.
Besides it seems that the dSLR market is down by 43% in the US (K. Tuck quoted) so it’s a very difficult moment. At the very moment where each camera gets excellent, people drop photography – GAS not being enough of an excuse.
I always try to fence for Photography, but now gearheads are getting their retribution.
For pro users, lenses + other paraphernalia are at least half the investment. The share of the bodies in total cost can be as little as 20-25%. €500 more or less is not that relevant; these cameras need to deliver.
I know it sounds insane to some, but 4/3 as a system was intended for entry-level, enthusiast AND (wannabe) pro. There’s a good chance this camera is more suited for professionals than the D600, so it should not come cheaply.
Enthusiast users that sell their well-kept body on time, need to write off just a little more each month when a body costs 1700 instead of 1200, but the more expensive bodies tend to keep their value rather well (if not abused by a pro), especially with current sensor tech.
This will be Oly fanboy camera, not a Pro camera.
That’s OK. You ride off on you GG & leave the professionals to choose what they want. Funny, but there are pros that are using the E-M5 already.
This sounds like an interesting camera:
— “hybrid” hopefully means m43 with adapter for 43 lenses, some trick to make 43 lenses focus fast, and “PDAF”-like technique for good AF tracking. Main bonus: access to high quality 43 lenses. Extra bonus: make sure the faithful 43 users can use their investment.
— it is ok if it is slightly larger than the E-M5 to improve handling, layout of wheels, buttons, etc. But body should not be much heavier than 450 g for me to be happy. I’d like to see improved battery capacity, and perhaps a less pronounced hump compared to the E-M5.
— VF4 quality EVF is taken for granted. Hopefully a built-in flash or a radio controller a la Canon. Hopefully less fiddly covers for extension port.
— hopefully improved structure of user interface (software).
— everything on the E-P5 fine tuned (including improved time lapse tool, etc.)
— personally, I don’t have the patience for movies, but I don’t mind improved video capabilities — as long as I get a new art filter 🙂
— sensor: state of the art; should be better than that of the E-M5 and that of the GX7 :-). 16 Mpx is sufficient for me.
Olympus officials exposed in an interview not that long ago of the potential that the next camera that was to support the 43 lenses may be smaller than the e5. In a months time we’ll find out Dummy00001 if what you say about this e5 successor being that same size is true or not.
If this was a traditional e5 successor with a mirror box, I’d be inclined to agree with you but according to this ft5 it is anything but a traditional e5 style camera and on that basis I’ll stick to my humble little prediction.
Who knows perhaps they’ll release a couple of traditional mirror based e720 & e550 style cameras if the response from the sales figures are health?
What I’d like to see? A 35mm FF body with adapters for 4/3 and m4/3. 😀 Then Olympus would have to bring out a whole new line of Zuiko lenses for 35mm FF. 🙂
Just exactly what apple are you eating? It’s probably already fermented. Then again, maybe you’re smoking the peels.
Sony and Oly both going to a hybrid to unify both mounts, is that coincidence, nope.
This if all rumors are correct, don’t have any reason to believe otherwise.
Carl
GPS info etc.
————–
Personally, I’d like to see support for GPS info in the cameras/new system. But how should it be done? Read GPS data from smartphone? If I leave the GPS on in a smartphone, the battery doesn’t last very long. So what about the following solution?
* Forget setting time zone on the camera — set the time to GMT, forget summer time. Use quartz clock in camera for accuracy.
* Use a GPS “watch” such as those of Garmin, TomTom, etc.
* Import GPS information from watch into e.g. Lightroom, and let Lightroom (or whatever tool) figure out (1) where the picture was taken, at what time it was taken in the local time zone.
Advantages:
— I tend to forget to change time zone etc. when I travel, when changing to summer time, etc. This is solved with the proposed method.
— Cameras and smartphones have limited durability of battery for grabbing GPS signals. Garmin has a Fenix watch that can store GPS signals for 50 hours (1 s intervals?). TomTom will come out with a sports watch with 10 hours battery life.
— The information from such watches can be transferred automatically to Smartphone/Tablet/PC using BLE = Bluetooth Low Energy.
Disadvantages:
— Some cooperation is needed between 3 parties: camera maker (Oly, Panny, Canon, Nikon, etc.), watch maker (Garmin, TomTom, Suunto, etc.), and software developer (Adobe, Apple, etc., etc.).
There are a number of solutions for taging pictures with geo-data from a GPS log file. You can also adjust the timestamp in Exif if you forget to adjust it on the camera. A slight mismatch between the camera clock and the GPS unit isn’t important unless you travel really fast. The best soloution though is GPS-units in all cameras, they don’t cost much and you can always bring a extra battery to compensate for the extra battery drain.
Both are dead now is ll full framec
Yes, m4/3 is so dead. That’s why many professionals are buying the Lumix GH3. :/
Yes wich ones ?
I think it might have a trick mount and that the the sensor moves to accommodate the different flange sensor distance. Moving the sensor is now just a logical evolution of the IBIS.
I really don’t think Olympus’s solution involves bundling a seperate adapter. That would be inelegant.
So, all recent rumors summed up, this one will turn out FT5: http://www.43rumors.com/ft3-there-will-be-a-new-entry-level-omd-in-september/ = two new Oly ILCs will be announced in September: low end OMD model and high end hybrid FT-MFT camera.
AS long as it will have a body form factor that helps easily to support the weight of the legacy f:2:0 lenses with a grip comfortable to be hold to shoot an all day long event. (Grip of E-M5 too tiny for that, grip of E-5 just right!)
Hmmm could also be a e5 sized cam with some form of hybrid mount and the entire sensor array moving forward backward depending the needed flange distance, would by the way also give the option of a build in 0-19mm extension tube for m43…
But most likely it’s going to be a body with either a interchangeable mount hopefully or a lot easier a adapter going from m43 to 43
Though I hope they will influence pannasonic to make the same fast…
Its gonna mean it suports full control of lenses of both formats – will still use an adapto just like current m43 but will be passing PDAF commands through it as well as CDAF commands. Don’t think the wording implies anything more – just it is 100% compatible – so does require anything more inovative than using 43 to m43 adaptors.
I think this is great news, I’m holding off on switching to a full frame system until a mirrorless one takes off like m43 did (my bet is on Sony). At that point I’ll prob keep both assuming the ff larger sensor will have larger bodies so the m43 kit would be for mobility and slim down lenses. Having the option to use FT lenses would be awesome because it will satisfy my wants for a faster zoom even if the whole setup is a bit larger. This would fill a gap at least for me. If it does video well would be the ultimate since ibis is wasted on the omd’s codec and if that happens my desired kit in the near future (waiting on specials or when successors are announced) would be a gx7 and e7. I’m looking forward to how well this is implemented. F2 zooms would be so nice =) (and expensive + large). I’m finding myself getting irritated constantly switching primes and not having the right one on for certain moments. F2.8 is just not enough indoors in low light with kids b/c I need headroom for shutter speed and I want to minimize flash.
Because you have no art with flash, which is sad. Learn light placement and modifiers and a new world will open to you.
Bouncing flash off ceilings etc for indoors is very effective & I started doing that with ASA(ISO)100 to ASA400 film in my Pentax SF7 film camera with dedicated TTL flash (with swivel head). I continue to do that (& did with E520 & E30) but the higher ISO E-M5 (& PENs) spoils us more allowing more use without flash.
I don’t like the look of bounced flash .. Even pro wedding photos with flash just doesn’t look natural to me I for some reason prefer a grainy but focused shot with natural light. Not to mention shooting kids setting up flash or waiting for it to charge makes me miss shots.
I use flash to shoot macros or formal shots .. pita with kids running around. Even in post I try to make it look like it wasn’t shot with flash. Not really sad just preference.
Simply bouncing a flash often works but often fails to do a good job as well. can you get the right distances to get a decent light angle? If not, the light will be too much from the top. Maybe one can use a flash with dual tubes, one bounce and one straight on. If the ceiling is off white, the color balance goes away. There are a pile of tricks, even as far as a upwards rear firing flash bouncing off of a bracket mounted reflector if some shape. It’s rare that a single flash can replace good natural light or a couple diffused remote TTL controlled units. Too bad they need an assistant(s) 😉 But they are common at weddings, an assistant with a hand held boom flash with a moderately soft and broad reflector.
Couldn’t it have one inner m43 mount ring and around that an outer pop-up 43 mount ring? Ok, probably not pop-up like a flash but but moved. forward and backward like a lens-element?
Any revanchist thoughts of 4/3 over FF or even m4/3 are sadly misplaced. And yet you’ll see exactly that at the 1022 forum at DPReview.
Those people live in a separate spacetime.They are not even considering that the room for real cameras (vs. smart phones) has sadly shrunk by almost 50%.
So we are really sweeping the ‘remains of the day’. I appreciate the gentlemanly gesture of Olympus, but the future is completely elsewhere, Asia will decide on the future of Photography, although I am v. happy to have been invited by the City of Boston group at flickr to show my work.
Let’s discuss more photography and less gear.
I’d rather use non-plasticky, fast, sharp, weather-resistant lenses. FT is a world a hater like you does not amd will never know.
Not talking about gear should start with you. And lose that stinking ego, I bet you’re work isn’t much cop.
Post a link to some if I’m wrong.
why did they not simply use the E5 body and take the OMD processor and update the processor and ready?
for me oly is over. I switch to nikon
Wow. More than a year ago, I was predicting Oly would announce such a “hybrid” OMD in September 2013, and amazingly, it appeats that turned out to be right. (Check the archives of this forum and DPR.)
Specifically, my primary prediction was on-sensor PDAF for FT lens AF, and the FT “hybrid” achieved by using a suitable adapter for the older lenses. (It may already exist: quite possibly the current FT to mFT adapter would work.)
Note that effective OS-PDAF would also enormously benefit AF performance of current mFT lenses, and especially improve CAF. So bodies no bigger than we now have can be significantly enhanced, even if FT lens compatability were not a consideration.
But for many of us, FT lens functionality is highly desirable. I still own, and use, my original 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 acqured with the E-1 nearly 10 years ago. Sharp, fast, near-macro focus (and it came with the hood!), not too large, what more could I ask for?
Well, except AF is slow as a slug. If the new OMD solves that problem, and otherwise retains/improves the EM-5’s beneficial features (moderate size, weight, weather-resistance, etc), it will be a slam-dunk winner.
The good news is two fold:
1.) we can keep the ‘old’ 43 lenses
2.) it should be a good combination of the features from the e-5 (multiple functional buttons) with the features of the e-m5 (better sensor better ISO quality)
I hope for the next sensor generation, wifi, maybe even GPS and a grip you get on the e-m5 only with the battery grip.
Last not least the 12/60 m43 lens woul make an ideal kit.
Press my thumbs
Btw: I’ll go for the new camera !!
It’s probably no coincidence that Olympus does this now, when Sony is about to go mirrorless with the entire A-mount line-up. Obviously, Sony have developed an on-sensor PDAF solution that actually works really well. This allows them to get rid of the SLT mirror, and it allows Olympus to fully support 4/3 lenses on a mirrorless camera. Olympus gets sensors with PDAF from Sony, while Sony gets 5-axis IBIS and help with lens design from Olympus.
Yes, however no matter what Sony (and Oly) does it will sell much fewer cameras, if you believe Kirk Tuck:
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.it/2013/08/has-bubble-burst-is-that-why-camera.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheVisualScienceLab+(The+Visual+Science+Lab)
Sales of cameras are down 43% in the US, so it’s really the time to find all the synergies companies can. Who knows what the much fewer users left might buy? To me m4/3 is more than enough. But will other people decide that their (considerable) money is better spent on FF?
What do you use your camera for? That for me is the dividing line. I.e. for Street Shooting m4/3 is much better than FF – 4/3 instead was always absurd.
Kirk Tuck’s theory of the drop in camera sales: “[2012] was the time frame when I started hearing from my non-professional friends (but very competent photographers) about their hobby ennui.”
That may be, but I think it is more because digital camera performance has reached a plateau where any further improvement in sensor quality and optical quality will be incremental. Fewer of us have the motivation to buy new stuff. Camera sales had been driven by the desire to purchase the next best thing, and now, increasingly, only people who really need them are buying them. You can see this more and more in the comments here, too: more people are declaring that they are going to wait or hold off or something.
Oh, wait… he makes this very point later on in the article. Darn my impatience! 🙂
Yeah, the bottom line is that digital cameras have become a “mature” field. So, there’s less and less reason for consumers to upgrade to this year’s model every year (same thing as happened to PCs, and now tablets, and soon smartphones).
Still, film camera manufacturers managed to stay in business back in the late 1980’s / early 1990’s. The surviving digital camera companies will just have to settle back into the less heady approach they took during the previous “plateau.”
. Yes, however no matter what Sony (and Oly) does it will sell much fewer cameras, if you believe Kirk Tuck:
The same is true for all camera brands. Most cameras (including video) are being replaced by cell phones or other “appliances” that do other things than shoot photos/videos.
>To me m4/3 is more than enough. But will other people decide that their (considerable) money is better spent on FF?
Sensor technology has advanced so much (and even superior ones are getting readied for 2014 that about the only advantage of FF will be for those that need a very shallow DOF. For that, why not bring back the E-500’s focus bracketing feture and add “de-focus stacking”?
Not a bad trade-off at all. Achieving effective OS-PDAF has obviously been elusive, and if Sony has got a good solution, it’s really worth something. Oly’s IBIS*5 has considerable value, along with Oly’s established skill as lens-maker.
Of course, nothing stands still, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Oly still has a trick or two to spring on us. Not hard to imagine the new OMD will sport “6-axis IBIS”, or detachable, wireless LCD monitor or who knows what.
Getting the other guy’s current technology in exchange for one’s prior generation stuff is definitely a clever move.
@ jrapdx – “detachable wireless LCD monitor” – Sony is already making a “lens camera” that you attach to your smart phone to control it.
Yeah, I saw something about that–seemed kind of funny at the time.
But what I was thinking was just the opposite. Imagine if it was possible to move the LCD monitor off the back of the camera and view what the camera “sees” at a distance. Very handy in macro, certain studio scenarios.
Suppose it would need some way to adjust the camera, trigger shutter, etc. Could be “on-screen” controls (touch sensitive), well that’s not an entirely new idea.
Just make sure not to lose it somewhere. Replacements would cost a fortune…
Wildlife photographers are idiots.
Market Analysts are baffoons. 🙂
So long as the ISO is amazing LOW LIGHT….Oh Please dear God Olympus make it comparable to at least the Canon Mark III….oh and Dynamic Range improvement would be cool too 😉
My guess is it will be something similar in performance to that of the E-P5 (but with other pro features).
It could be far better than the EP5. Remember the difference between the early pens and the E5 the same sensor but the E5 was vastly superior in picture quality, even getting best DSLR from a German Photography web site.
We can hope! 😉
yeah, since photography ist in the mantime predominantly a nigh hobby, like star watching and so on, an amazing, 35-mm-like llow noise hi iso is absolutely essential 😉
Obviously it will be a larger and better OM-D with something like the Sony LA-EA2 smart mirror adapter. Essentially a new E-5 in tow parts. But it is still limited by the 4/3 sensor size otherwise all their lenses wouldn’t work.
really looking forward to seeing how they do this with (one?) mount!
expect it to be between GH3/E5 size
or, wouldn’t it be amazing if it was like that rumor of old, the blad box with a back and lens mount. Heck, they could even make mounts in Nikon F, OM, Pentax … that would get a lot of attention from people with some class old glass?
but back on planet earth, make the 43 lenses seem attractive all of a sudden and might go some ways to explain Oly’s complete absence in the f/2.8 zooms!!!
wonder if Panasonic will also make a 43/m43 body
“and might go some ways to explain Oly’s complete absence in the f/2.8 zooms!!!”
There may well be a lot of truth in that.
Agreed. I always figured that Oly saw no point in recreating the 12-60, 14-54 and 50-200 zooms, let alone the more expensive ones.
You can’t make them much smaller for m43 without sacrificing IQ. Then these newly developed lenses would just compete on price, but Olympus would loose its image as being able to make some the finest lenses.
Thank God you know everything and can set everyone upon the path of righteousness!
What we would all do without your bottomless pit of wisdom?
Don’t believe Kirk Tuck, believe the organization, CIPA, which keeps track of (the now declining) camera sales. The numbers are widely available. Reading real source material is fun.
Seems to me that the simplest way to accommodate a 4/3rd lens on an MFT mount is just to provide something like the MMF-3 adaptor with the camera. And, engineer it if necessary, to stay mounted on the body while you change FT lenses and support all the functions of the lens and camera. Actually, if they engineered it like a Metabones adaptor, even better. Then, when you want to use MFT lenses, you just take the adaptor off.
KISS. That would be the Occam’s Razor way to do it.
I am not at all surprised if the US numbers worsen in 2013. There are material but psychological aspects in camera saturation. Kirk and Thom are very perceptive.
As said this camera comes too late, at least for 4/3 owners. Many sold their stuff and jumped ship. Again what will you use it for? Birding? And invest thousands in it?
Thankfully GAS is not really my motivation. But it happened for me with film, and I stopped for almost ten years. The emulation factor is real, but now all cameras are good. The last 10% perhaps is different, but then?
Don’t forget that O&P should sell 2 million cameras to make a profit and they sell only one. So its a paradox that at the moment the best models appear the m4/3 crowd is demotivated, at least in the US.
But camera collection is only superficially like luxury item collection, it has a social communication role, and that is covered by smart phones. It has an Art role, and that perhaps might be covered by better cameras. But even an older camera will do most of the time. So the activity and the buying diverge.
The enthusiast crowd here is not very significant or representative of the wider world, and of what the Japanese banks might decide about O&P camera business. I really hope that light will come from the East, and not from Samsung 🙂
As mentioned above, some of us held on to FT gear, and actually some of it is still potentially useful. My 14-54mm is a great lens, and I do use it with the EM-5. Save for the slug-slow AF, it performs well.
That’s why the “Pro” OMD will have appeal, if it lives up to expectations. That is, I expect the new OMD will have OS-PDAF, not only good for old FT lenses but also helpful to current mFT AF and CAF performance.
While camera sales tank on account of phone-cameras, the issue isn’t technological competition, rather it’s “image overload”, that is, when imaging is completely ordinary and routine, it isn’t valued. Then the distinction between truly excellent photography and badly made snapshots becomes fuzzy. For many, perhaps the majority, having a “real” camera vs. “phone-camera device” is irrelevant.
Perhaps that’s what the “psychological” element refers to. In any case, I’d agree that for the foreseeable future, equipment like the upcoming OMD is going to appeal to a smaller segment of the population than anyone had anticipated.
Yes, this was the neat analysis by Kirk Tuck. There is image overload, bad money chasing away the good one. But there is also gear overload, not having better cameras to aspire to.
Now the OM-D pro could belong to the latter, or it couldn’t. I am in the same situation of Nsowon: a couple of 4/3 lenses, and I am certainly not going to unload 1700 $ to please them 🙂
I also believe that the great success of m4/3 is due to the ‘always with you camera’. So the GX7 fits perfectly, the Pro doesn’t.
Do I care about having access to technically excellent lenses? My answer depends on my photography. Do they help it? They won’t. I don’t shoot birds or lions from my car window. Moreover I find this style of photography, a’ la NatGeo, extremely boring. Technical excellence doesn’t change it one bit.
I am an urban animal first, and I am interested in people first, architecture and psychogeography following. m4/3 is perfect for that, 4/3 isn’t. Neither do I need a 50-200 to fast focus a pet or a brat 🙂
So although there will be a degree of reverse compatibility between systems, the people behind them might not have many values in common. The Cardinal Sin Oly made in the past was to try to compete with C & N in their own terms. It entirely wrecked it. So I won’t bear any revanchism.
m4/3 was a radical departure from it. If it is yet important to unseat C&N dominant position, Sony might best succeed with a small mirrorless FF – Oly is already contributing to it.
As for interesting photography I am pretty sure that m4/3 is still where it is at: so the GX7 is both more accessible and useful. Probably the cheaper OM-D will be an interesting camera too, but they have nothing to do with the once proud remnants of the defeated 4/3 army. 🙂
Worldwide DSLR sales (bigger bodies) are more healthy than mirrorless in all respects. It would be silly for Olympus to make just teeny bodies; they should take APS-C head on. They already made two wonderful small bodies, the E-M5 and the E-P5. Good enough for some pros, let alone amateurs, for years to come.
You seem to be unaware Olympus has been making bigger (OM, E-x) and smaller (Pen, 35, XA) cameras for over five decades, being a very respectable competitor since the 70ies. It’s in their blood; they compete according to their own vision, like Pentax, Fuji and so on.
And here you are apparently resenting they keep it up because of some personal reasons… Should we conclude that with you as a CEO Oly would have made an E-P5 with EVF to compete with the GX-7 and call it a day? Pretty poor entrepreneurship.
No such ambitions I am only a very modest photog, with a following which is probably many times over yours 🙂
The very existence of m4/3 proves what a monumental error was 4/3. The superiority airs of 4/3 henchmen thus doesn’t impress.
I heard that in the old Oly Board there were nostalgics of dSLR. They probably kept alive the old flame until they were kicked out.
So now we have an expensive lifebuoy for those veterans that killed a century old camera company.
A gesture, until further notice, that can only be likened to old officers and gentlemen making hara kiri, for their oldest, blabbering customers, that don’t have the stamina or resources to jump ship to a different dSLR system.
I wipe a tear or two. How noble! 🙂
PS will they get blind by using their first EVF?
your personal vendetta against the FT-user must drive you mad
I have no followers. History lesson just for you: CCD-heating makes live view hard to implement. Hence the digital reflex cameras of the 2000s. Everybody was in on it.
However, it’s clear you’re just trying to have fun. Now, it would have been great for you if the new Oly camera had no support for F/T lenses, even denying usage of the existing adapters.
Sadly, it does support these fine lenses. Therefore I conclude many (me included) are having a lot more fun than you, because you really hoped for something else, didn’t you? Hahaha. Say hello to your followers for me. Ciao! 🙂
The combination of the new Pany RF-styled camera and an Olympus replacement of the E-5 (if true) is excellent news. Full disclosure: I’m not buying either one, but the combination of Pens, OMD, Pany and 4/3-m4/3s hybrid will create an outstanding range of options. Camera makers are going to need all the help they can get, because the market is shrinking. Virtually every camera under about $400, except for the very specialized ones like the Tough series, will disappear…a victim of the smart phone.
It’s still going to be dog-eat-dog, or Canikon trying to eat everyone else, but there really isn’t a better option. I think the Oly/Sony and Pany/Fuji alliances bode well for anyone who’s interested in m4/3s.
Now…if Oly would just release those HG-equivalent m4/3s zooms, that (for me) would be marvelous. The 12-35 is a very good lens, but too short for me. I think we’ll see that Oly lens, especially if they release that hybrid.
I sold my E-400 and bought an OM-D because there was no entry-level replacement for the E-400. I only had the 14-42, 40-150 and 9-18mm, as well as an FL-36. I had no premium glass, and waited on the 100-300 and any primes because I was uncertain about the system.
So, the change to m.4/3 was relatively painless and I stuck with Oly as the kit I got had a free adapter for the lenses I had. I am now fully m.4/3 with the 12-50mm, Panny 14mm f2.5, 45mm f1.8, Oly 40-150mm and the 75-300mm and an E-PL5 backup walk-around body; the exception being the 9-18mm, which has the adapter permanently on it.
I bought my E-400 as it was the world’s smallest DSLR at the time, and the OM-D (I love a viewfinder) ticked all the boxes. I am not a pro-level buyer or user. I have no premium lenses.
How is this relevant? There are many who bought 4/3 cameras and extremely wonderful and expensive glass and it was and is the glass that they care about; as any serious photographer has done for years. Oly knows this, and they know that these people are loyal customers. Given their financial troubles and funding restraints, I’m sure they are happy to at last be offering a better body solution to these high-value enthusiasts. That they have done so will, undoubtedly, keep these enthusiasts happy with the brand and perhaps loyal to whatever future models Oly produce. If they have stock or are still making the lenses for 4/3, then the value of those will retain also.
Those 4/3 Oly owners are, generally, also very capable photographers judging by the photos I see on the sites I register with. They continue using their “old tech” cameras to produce wonderful pictures.
“Those 4/3 Oly owners are, generally, also very capable photographers judging by the photos I see on the sites I register with. They continue using their “old tech” cameras to produce wonderful pictures.”
Exactly. This is why it’s very, very strange to dismiss these photographers as a “defeated army” and simultaneously conclude with “Let’s discuss more photography and less gear”.
Thus, Amalric voted silliest commenter of the day! Jury claims to be impressed with all-out non-sequitur prowess.
amalric writes the silliest comments here since ages but I dunno why he has a problem with FT – got an E-3 on the head??
One can be a competent photog, and be no artist at all – i.e. not trying to understand the deeper layers of reality.
Commercial photogs aere like that, marriage hacks, NatGeo darlings – they are beautifiers, obliterating truth more often than revealing it.
You can’t say that of HCB and the old Magnum.
It is no surprise that HCB is so popular with inept snappers claiming badly composed blurry OOF snapshots as art just about sums it up
http://erickimphotography.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/henri_cartier_bresson_bicycle.jpg
http://erickimphotography.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/henri-cartier-bresson-gare.jpg
http://s1192.photobucket.com/user/erickimphotography/media/HCB/henri_cartier_bresson_chinese.jpg.html
http://s1192.photobucket.com/user/erickimphotography/media/HCB/HenriCartierBresson-spiral.jpg.html
It’s not OOF blurry and badly composed man, its art, ART! You peasants just cannot comprehend what it’s all about
You are pathetic. Therefore you do well to stay anonymous,wimp.
Here is an example of white trash photography:
http://www.google.it/search?q=jaywol&safe=off&client=safari&sa=N&rls=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=sfoAUrO
Hopefully this will be the camera I am waiting for. As much as I like the M4/3 size advantage it’s weak point is in long fast telephoto lenses for wildlife. The 4/3 lenses already exist for this. If not then my next camera will be a Nikon 7100. Seems they have taken notice of M4/3 and now have an in camera crop factor that’s the equivalent of 4/3 format to gain some magnification and processing speed.
So we have the “not interested in a hybrid camera” brigade now.
It might be worth remembering that the pen cameras had the same sensor as the E5 at one time. The better quality electronics and more memory and higher specs (inc lenses) enabled the E5 to deliver images way beyond the capability of the pens.
It is highly likely that this new hybrid will be of a similar quality step above the current cameras.
I think the E-M5 is actually handicapped by a lack of processing power and memory. With more of both it would improve quite a bit. But that
s the EM5 theis new one it would seem has a new PDAF enabled sensor.
Making a dual mount is quite simple. visualise the MMF2 with a 4/3 lens mount on one side and a m43 lens mount on the other. have a band around the mount that acts as the camera registration distance using a wide throat on the camera. Now have a collar that goes over the adapter and clips it to the camera. Contacts for control made through the TOP of the adapter and wired to the lens contacts at the bottom. Signal reversal in electronics or by keeping separate contact paths. Using small contacts at the top opens up a lot of ground for third party lens control and even larger sensors.
But there will be no focus peaking. You just cannot have it all.
Should read
” But that is the EM5 this new one it would seem has a new PDAF enabled sensor.”
Admin! I need “edit” back.
So do we all! ;D
OS-PDAF and PDAF on sensor is not an good choice if we look on IQ, and PDAF on sensor need we also an new sensor to.
But the i think Olympus do, is to use an 6-axis IS in this Hybrid camera so will by CDAF but to move sensor out/in so the not only give AF for FT lens but also to all MF lens to, all manuale lens so is dedicate for M43 to FT and also old OM lens too.
Yes. but that means the body must be deep enough to take the 4/3 lenses. An adapter will mean the body can be smaller than 4/3 but the same or bigger than m43
In theory, only the mount part needs to be retractable for m43 lenses. The rest of the body doesn’t have to so big, because no mirror box is needed. In practice, we’ll have to see…
The 4/3 lens still requires the same distance from mount to sensor even if there is no mirror hence the 4/3 adapter must stick out or the m43 adapter must be recessed. If the sensor moves then the body depth must be what the E series DSLRs were. But sensor moving would be double engineering as the mounts are physically different sizes and alastic metal is a bit of a problem.
If you look on E-10 and E-20, and look the mirror box on this, will you see the not is an normal mirror box, but an prism, so give an short optic fochus plan but not an short distance, so the i think is for M43 use Olympus an prism mirror box and on FT an normal mirror box.
it is possible to do this, but it does cost 1/2 stop of light (minimum)
really its an avoidance of using an EVF, but solves nothing for AF,
which on E10-20 was still cdAF
Yes, we should be interested in the “hybrid” camera whether or not owning FT lenses.
The reason is simple. The concensus seems to be the new OMD will have on-sensor PDAF which will accommodate FT focusing, a very good thing indeed. However, OS-PDAF should also boost AF and CAF performance of mFT lenses considerably, a benefit to nearly all users.
I’d guess more likely than not the new OMD will directly accept only mFT lenses. Mounting FT lenses probably will require an adapter, possibly the current FT to mFT model would work. In any case, sounds like we’ll find out in a month or so…
C’mon Admin….give us some specs!!!!! 😀
I cant wait lol~~~~
Well, this is very disappointing news for me today. As a Canon crop user who has been planning for some time to change to m43, I was waiting daily for news of the new improved OMD EM5. But I don’t want a premium body priced anywhere near the estimated prices floating around here for this hybrid 4/3 & m4/3 camera. I would simply like an OMD with the improvements of the EP5 put into it. Now the rumour is maybe not until February?
It looks like if I switch I will have to choose between the OMD, EP5 with VF4, and the GX7. I can’t abide not having a viewfinder, so it’s only one of those 3. I really want the 5 axis IBIS, and particularly the video IBIS, so that rules out the GX7. I really want focus peaking for my manual lenses, so that rules out the OMD. I’m left with the EP5, which has a questionable grip and looks ugly with the VF4 attached, but feature and controls-wise has almost everything I want except weather sealing. But who wants a camera that looks ugly? An OMD with all the new features and control layout of the EP5 would have been perfect for me.
The plan doesn’t sound quite as satisfying. More thinking to do.
Maybe it was wrong thinking in the 1st place for a professional grade body coming with an attractive price. If you could rethink about your requirements for the new body? Personally, I think the accuracy for focus peaking is overrated and is only really usefull for videography and as an alternative for zone focus style photographers. Shooting wide open, you get better results with focusing in magnified mode.
I’m yet to hear what makes OMD Pro a professional grade body other than the rumour that it can take 4/3 lenses, plus has a maybe pdaf capable sensor. I wouldn’t call those 2 features alone pro grade, or worth many hundreds of extra dollars. Certainly not in manufacturing costs, anyway. OMD EM5 already has many strong features, and could use a logical refresh with the improved features of the EP5, plus better control buttons etc like the EP5. I was ready for that, and was not expecting anything more ‘professional’ than that.
I’ve used magnifying mode before and find it fiddly. Why do you think focus peaking will not be easy to use wide open? The lines should be clear enough still I think? There may not be as many of them but still possible to see. But I haven’t tested it on the EP5 so can’t be sure. I’ve seen some review videos though, but don’t know if they were wide open.
What makes a pro body?
Reliability: water-proof metal body and durability of mechanical components (e.g. shutter)
Service: worldwide pro service with exchange bodies and lenses and fast turnaround.
Apart from that it will have the best the manufacturer can offer currently in tried and tested components but the first two are more important than the specs
There are no confirmed details about the OMD Pro yet, but concluding from the rumoured prices it should at least match the build of the GH3, though I expect it will be the same level as the older E-1/3/5 models in durability, and the shutter should last for at least 150k-200k actuations. The previously mentioned Olympus bodies are well known for the sturdy and proven sealings(though the lcd swivel constructions were sometimes prone to dew/moisture penetrating in some way.The resistance against moisture is better then any other topmodel of any brand. I just based my opinion with peaking based on my use with the Ricoh GRX plus M-mount module with my Nokton 50mm f/1.1
I am a wide open shooter, its part of my style. So I was very curious about the peaking modes: standard, which hightlights the max contrasts edges in an image, and mode2, which turned the preview in embossed style, very usefull in bright light using the lcs screen. The problem is, that at extreme wide apertures, the peaking seems to think it nails focus even when you still turn your focus ring a bit forth and back. But while doing this in normal magnified mode, you see immediately this slightly turn of the focus ring affects the the point of perfect focus. The fiddly experience is correct, but you should try it in combination with the stabilized EVF mode. I have the OMD, and its much easier now to focus in magnify mode because you EVF will not give that shacky image of a super magnified detail, but it will give a steady view when you press the shutter button halfway. Even with the Helios 85mm its easy to nail focus wide open.
Thanks for this useful info. Much nicer to read some informative stuff like that on here instead of people abusing each other. It’s my first time posting on here, by the way, although I’ve been following the site for some time. I also expect to shoot wide open on m43 much of the time. I like subject isolation, which is my biggest concern with moving to m43.
Olympus has of course the right to make any body they want. The one rumoured today is just not the one that I want. But everyone wants something different. I think Olympus needs to be very careful though to avoid going too far over $1000 – it moves it out of enthusiast $$ range and too close to very nice FF camera prices. Anyway, the problem for me is choosing which of those 3 cameras I mentioned above is worth switching to, knowing that none of them will feel just ‘right’. But they might have to do until the OMD replacement is available mid next year.
Thanks for this useful info. Much nicer to read some informative stuff like that on here instead of people abusing each other. It’s my first time posting on here, by the way, although I’ve been following the site for some time. I also expect to shoot wide open on m43 much of the time. I like subject isolation, which is my biggest concern with moving to m43.
Olympus has of course the right to make any body they want. The one rumoured today is just not the one that I want. But everyone wants something different. I think Olympus needs to be very careful though to avoid going too far over $1000 – it moves it out of enthusiast $$ range and too close to very nice FF camera prices. Anyway, the problem for me is choosing which of those 3 cameras I mentioned above is worth switching to, knowing that none of them will feel just ‘right’. But they might have to do until the OMD replacement is available mid next year.
Just saw your flickr site. Nice, & good to see some great shallow DOF and bokeh coming out of m43. I’m sure it’s not as easy as with larger sensors, but subject isolation is still very possible. Were those B/W photos taken with the EM5 straight from the camera or post-processed? I am trying to get a feel for what style of jpg Olympus produces, both in colour rendition and B/W. Not happy with the B/W out of my Canon, it doesn’t produce such punchy deep blacks.
First time poster here, by the way, but have been following the site for a while.
One way to see how Pro it is, is the number of shutter actuations.
At Oly top of the line is typically 150,000.
E-M5 is 100,000
http://forum.fourthirdsphoto.com/discussion/70508-e-m5-shutter-life-100-000-a.html
thanks for this, I always wondered about the shutterlife, I assume they got it from official source?
If you look closely the source is in Kanji (?) so one assumes that it is straight from the horse’s mouth 🙂
It’s not only shutter life, also a pro should have dual or tri processor!
i saw it it and handled it, its too awesome to describe!! thats the only thing that i can say for now. This was my reaction to the pre prod model when i tested it, “Oh My God!! I want this now!””
Damn, I’ll put my OM-D on eBay before this new baby hits the market. Prices of the old OM-D will go down, fast.