[shoplink 21666]
[/shoplink]
Last week the chinese website Tech.sina.com posted a short interview with the ex chief of Olympus Akira Watanabe. ePhotozine (Click here) wanted to be sure that the translation from chinese to english is correct and asked Olympus to confirm the correctness of the text. Olympus confirmed that “We will replace E-XXX by PEN series.” and that “E-X and E-XX DSLRs will continue as long as mirrorless systems can’t fulfill SLR users demand. We don’t know when we will have technologies that will be able to substitute this camera class.” It sounds like the [shoplink 21666]Olympus E-30[/shoplink] could be replaced by a newer model. Anyway we didn’t receive any rumor about a possible E-40 or E-50.
Fact is the E-30 is almost impossible to find in Stock (Check [shopcountry 21666])
P.S.: I found a japanese patent (Click here) showing a new Olympus lens. Some japanese reader can help me to find out the specs of the lens?
55 Responses
E-30 come sudden, when he come, but many wait on a E-XX model wild come.
My question is: if PEN will replace Exxx, where does the PEN pro fit in? Does it replace E6xx? How much effort will they put in to their pro m43 lenses if Ex and Exx are still top of the line?
And also, how many M43 lines will there be from Olympus? Two or three? Two: Pen lite and PEN pro (so the the E-Px will be the pro line). Or will there be three: E-PLx, E-Px, and E-P(pro)x (like E4xx, E5xx, and E6xx)? Another way to ask the same question would be to ask what we are expecting next: the E-P3 or the E-P(pro)1, or are they the same camera?
My guess is that a PEN pro would be a first attempt to replace E-xx series.
If it includes weather sealing and improved AF speed (like GH series). Olympus should keep EVF as a seperate add-on, but must improve it with some sturdy locking mechanism and add a connector for some kind of x/fp or dedicated connector for flash, or even wireless..
This would leave the E-x series survive untill in the future a 2nd PEN pro will replace this one also.
btw,I expect the PEN-3 to be this first attempt
> Olympus should keep EVF as a seperate add-on
The problem here is that optional VF costs too much. (If only Oly opened up the interface for 3rd parties…)
I’m on the fence.
On one side I like that VF-2 can flip up. But €200 is bit too much of a price to ask. And if they make VF-3 more sturdy/etc, it would definitely cost even more.
Obviously, for the VF-3, they should first implement autoswitch from LCD to EVF. The button on VF-2 is a kludge.
Format’s Dead in the water, F U Olympus you used to be my favorite company
I SO Wanted an e530 1-2 years ago, then heard that news last year about PEN only type strategy FU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FUTURE=BLEAK w/ Olympus, I would rather give SONY my money at thois point, that is how bad it is, I’m mulling things allright (but of course it will probably be Pentax)
The VF2 is very nice, but adding $250 (list) to the price of any compatible camera, pushes it too far. Olympus really should offer a camera with a built-in EVF… Or are they afraid their DSLRs will lose sales to an M4/3. I bet!
I wish Panasonic and Olympus used a universal accessory port! It would be a boon for customers of either company’s cameras to be able to share accessories and GOOD for the platform!
I think a built-in EVF while maintaing the PEN compact format is not easy and prob not possible right now for Olympus. I do not agree about the VF-2 being too expensive, its just that on the used market they still cost the same as a new one. About an VF-3, for me it should have much cleaner view in lowlight, in order to be qualified as a pro accessoire. The auto switch option sounds cool too.
I thinking E- serie and Pen serie wild living side by side soon.
I would say the answer to your question is obvious. If you require a fast focusing camera to capture action then the PEN will not do the job yet. However if your requirement is for high quality still life then a Pro PEN would be just the ticket. I see both lines existing together for 10 years or so unless there is a quantum leap in technology. For me a PEN EPL2 would do most of my photography, but it’s that last 10% that drives me to save for the E5. Also I could not live without my 50-200, the best all-round telephoto on the planet.
+1 absolute 😉
There needs to be an integral EVF for a “pro” level camera. It’s too hard to do MF in bright light on the LCD. In any case, many folk in the target demographic would not buy a serious camera without an EVF.
Seems like the Olympus are putting their strategy through the same translator as Inge-M uses !!!!!
Sorry Inge – your posts are usually understandable, but the translations make me chuckle sometimes. What’s your native language?
Brod1er “wild living” is maybe not i mean, but google translaltion is mabye more excellent than i is 🙂
native tongue crazy norwigan 😉
I’ll believe it when I see it.
“E-X and E-XX DSLRs will continue as long as mirrorless systems can’t fulfill SLR users demand. We don’t know when we will have technologies that will be able to substitute this camera class.”
Panasonic GH2 (focus speed) and Sony SLTs (PDAF compatibility) have shown that low and mid level DSLRs can be replaced. What is there to invent, Olympus? Roll up your sleeves and make your versions of those technologies. There’s no need for another E-XX DSLR.
Yes there is a need for a replacement E30 as many of us still prefer that to a mirrorless camera but cannot afford an E5. So with respect, speak for yourself, & don’t pre-empt others like myself.
My point was that it does not have to be a DSLR. I’m not disputing a need for replacement ( every Olympus DSLR needs a replacement, E-5 including 🙂 ). A camera with 4/3 module with semi transparent mirror and m4/3 mirrorless module could do the job and it doesn’t have to be too large – just take Ricoh’s lead. But, faced with all the criticism from people that invested in 4/3 lenses, it seems to me that Olympus will do the same thing as with E-3: put a newer sensor, a bigger LCD and video mode in E-30 body. Oh yeah, and more art filters :). Fast, easy and cheap for R&D department 🙁 . And there will again be fears and doubts about the future of 4/3 DSLRs. By completely merging 4/3 and m4/3 they’d make all of their users happy by showing them both systems have a future.
there was also other improvements in E-5 (lenses optimization), but they were applied to E-3 also in firmware upgrade
It is clear that DSLR is hard to improve, because it is nearly at the end of the evolution cycle: it is visible for exmaple in E450: only processor change.
Senzor upgrades and signal processing upgrades (ex: HDR) is the only thing what really matters now in DSLR.
I think an E40 (or E50) done to E5 standards (light AA filter etc) but with typical cut backs & in a plastic body that it would be welcomed by present E520, E620 users etc wanting to upgrade to something better without spending the full amount on an E5 & also with it not being as heavy. I still think there is a market for it (if Oly marketing does its job) & I don’t know if Olympus will go down the path of a translucent mirror or not as Sony has a patent for that. It may also come with a new sensor which could be improved on again in an E6 or E7 later.
Exactly.
For me, the GH2 beat out the D7000. Easily. Especially when I looked at them side by side and picked the up! The E5 was the same, though I would never buy 4/3.
4/3 sits in the same no-man’s land of compromise as APSC cameras: Too much to carry for negligible benefit. If I go that far, in terms of size and weight, why not just take a small step further and get a full-frame camera like D700?
Yeah, I could afford it, but not enough to pay a Sherpa to lug it.
I got into micro 4/3’s to have a lightweight, quality kit to augment my full-frame kit (Canon 5D Mark II). Micro 4/3’s is never going to replace my full-frame kit. When I need that I need it. When I got into Micro 4/3’s I had a lot of hope for the format as a lightweight alternative with compromises..but promise for steady tech. impovements…both Panasonic and Olympus seemed to be putting out a cameras that could grow into something substantial system-wise etc. (GF1, EP1)… since those initial offerings and some great lenses on the Panasonic and third-party (Voigtlander, etc) side of things….it would seem that both companies have turned completely toward average-consumerville. Not what I had hoped. We keep getting these promises about stuff down the road but right now I can’t even buy a GH2 body in the USA. If I cannot buy a product (that I think is overpriced to begin with), that was released months and months ago…what hope is there in the near future for substantial tech improvements for “real” photographers? Add to that the uncertainty of manufacturing (even steady supplies of electricity in many areas of Japan)…and the prognosis is very uncertain. Olympus’s “talk” of a pro Micro has just been talk and there micro lens offerings to date are way lacking compared to what they have produced for 4/3’s. I will not buy an Olympus Micro 4’3’s lens.
For now I am turning my attention back to my full frame kit. The lens selection and IQ I get are compelling. For me right now..micro 4/3 really needs to figure itself out.
It has become a disappointment for me. I will not be buying a GF3 or G3 any time in this century. They are really just point and shoot cameras not something in the realm of a pro tool.
A+
When I read you have a Canon 5D MKII, wouldn’t the compromise you made for going m4/3 be smaller size and giving up some IQ? So didn’t you get exactly what you expected? Or what else you were expecting?
I don’t think buying a GF3 or G3 will change your opinion on m4/3. m4/3’s weakness has always been lenses, so if IQ is not there for you, buying GF3 or G3 won’t change a thing, so your focus back on FF is right for you (just don’t assume everyone is exactly like you). I don’t think carry both 5D MKII and a m4/3 camera is lighter than just carrying a 5D MKII, so unless you’re willing to let go, there can never be a situation where you are only carry your m4/3 on a casual trip and be content of the result. It’s a state of mind, rather than the camera is falling short of your expectation.
Pro m4/3’s lenses are supposedly to close the gap between 4/3 and m4/3 and we’ll see if the promise delivers.
What I would like to see with micro 4/3’s is a serious improvement as one would see with a DSLR in the next generation. I would like to see better high ISO performance and wider dynamic range, ie…put the improvement in the sensor…the image quality, not touch screens and wango tango colors…. To a photographer these cameras are not moving forward..they are stagnating. The format has sooo much promise and it isn’t moving ahead technologically. That is my disappointment. It will not compete with my full frame…but it can be so much better than it is. So much better.
Well, if that’s the case, then you could just sell your Canon 5D MKII. It won’t be a second camera for you, but a replacement. That’s too much of an expectation from a small camera.
m4/3 is marketed to fill the gap between P&S and entry-level DSLR, though we are seeing it expanding its territory, but by no mean it’ll replace a FF. They’re just too different…. Even if IQ is approaching that of a FF, how are you going to address the problem of differences in DoF? They have very different usage even if their IQ are identical.
If wider DR and high ISO performance is what you’re looking for, then you should get a camera with the largest sensor you could find. Stop looking at m4/3. I use Olympus E-620, and what I did to squeeze the most out of its sensor is to under expose than compensate, which later I learned is exactly what film photographers do, since films (especially slide films, which is positive, exactly what digital sensor is based on) have smaller dynamic range. What we do is under expose it by 1/3 stop, then bring it back up with software. Film people are not so lucky, they have to go through dark room to do the same task, much messier and more time consuming. Remember to spot meter for the preservation of highlight (exactly the opposite when you shoot with negative film). If you understand this theory, then you don’t need extra DR, unless the situation is really exceptional, because you’re moving the middle gray yourself, rather than let the camera decide. Lower the contrast will also save some highlight (and you can bring the contrast up with software). Yes, you have to work extra hard when you shoot, but you’re using your skill rather than treating your DSLR as a point and shoot. The result will look professional, even with 4/3 sensor.
Many street photographers use crap lenses and they still come up with interesting photos. I shot with Holga before, and the lens is made of plastic. Sharpness? What’s that? Vignette is intentional…. Resolution is so bad you can’t even know if CA is there…. BUT the result is still professional. It’s really how you shoot it and how you push your medium to the extreme. Trust me, it’s much more fulfilling when your photos come out right because you worked your *ss off to achieve it.
43 format is a dead man walking.
Still far more competent and with better lenses than any mirrorless out there.
And my 5D is better still
define better
How about this — has a resale market? Not throwing my money down a hole when I buy a Canon lens, lol.
Go ahead and spend on 43 format. You are just gambling with time. The format’s dead, even if there are 43 zombies still walking around.
It’s a shame, but Oly did it to themselves with underinvestment, lack of innovation, and then majorly fumbling their market direction/communication in the last 12-18 months.
You’re talking BS.
Check the resale prices – they’ve never been higher for 43rds gear.
The only good thing about 5D is it’s sensor, everything else is sub par, even compared to old E-3. It’s a flimsy plastic camera with a crappy screen, slow like hell, has huge shutter delay and it’s a dust magnet.
If you manage to clean sensor well and have a 1500-2000$ prime it’s capable of very good images of still life.
I have both, use both at weddings (E-5 and 5D) and E-5 just murders 5D, especially taking “equivalency” into an account.
“Go ahead and spend on 43 format. You are just gambling with time. The format’s dead, even if there are 43 zombies still walking around.”
That isn’t really so. There are mirrorless cameras out there like the Sony and the Ricoh that have incredible image quality. I don’t like the fact that the Sony has no viewfinder…dumb..dumb..dumb…and I am not a fan of the Ricoh in terms of its modularity. I love the basic hands on of a GF1…give it a better sensor than the GH2…keep the dials and size…maybe offer a high-rez viewfinder….and you have a winner.
Some people will always need big cameras, fast machine gunning, carry their weight with a wheelbarrow – who am I to argue against the American Lifestyle?
Those E cameras probably have a market in the US, however they’ll never guarantee Oly the market share it needs to achieve, especiallly in the rising Asian markets.
It’s not even that dSLR is dead, it’s deadlocked by C&N.
I am puzzled by Oly not getting the technology for AF E-System lenses, Fuji demonstrated it with PDAF on sensor, and there is one or two patents for mirrored adapters.
So why not be bolder in mirrorless advance?
Can’t the image blackout be solved by faster processors, and so predicitive focus in CAF?
I think that Panny is taking bolder steps there, unencumbered by the past reflex system.
Meh still says nothing…
this is how i see it…
ideally i’d like a camera that is small enough for me to want to take everywhere, that includes lenses of course.
the lenses should be sharp and contrasty, and produce good colour.
the overall system should allow for flexibility for the photographer to have full control over settings which includes shallow DOF, flash/studio and weatherproofing, sports-grade AF, good high-ISO
the only way i see this happening is in something like an M9 with zoom lenses, and GH2-esque (D3s preferably) autofocus.
of course this doesn’t exist and if it did would be well about my budget.
the next best thing is what micro four thirds could be:
size? check.
lenses? … on the way.
auto-focus? …on the way.
High ISO? needs work! (hint: black silicon)
add weatherproofing and (personally) an optical/hybrid viewfinder and it’s the perfect camera system no?
if this is the way olympus/panasonic are thinking then it’s no wonder they’re slowly getting out of the Exx Ex series.
unfortunately all that lovely LOVELY 4/3 glass gets wasted
Yes, the E-5 is indeed very interesting. But it becomes a lot less interesting whenever I remember that for a hundred euros more I could get a full-frame DSLR. (Well, €107 to be accurate.)
And it is difficult to trust in the future of the 4/3 -system.
Sure & how much will you be spending for top glass for that?
If priced right and if it is basically an E-5 minus weather sealing, I’d be interested in an E-50. I’ve got the E-3 if I need to go out in bad weather, but an E-50 with the same photo quality of the E-5 would be fantastic.
Maybe they’d even get a clue and put in a wifi or bluetooth transmitter/receiver. Is anyone ever going to get smart and do this?
No 😀
I believer E-50 would few a 16 mpx sensor, like E-P3.
i had no idea that the e-5 i just bought was a walking zombie! it was working fine, until i read this! same with all my oly lenses. they just magically stopped working because somebody on the internet said they were dead!
OM4 and lenses in the back of my closet: “Braaaiiins!”
LOL!!!
LOL. I’ve just bought a used E-30. Fantastic picture taking machine, couldn’t be happier! But now that everybody says it’s dead I’ll have to go and check! 😉
Let me tell you how sick I am about all that whining/BS about 4/3 being dead and being technically inferior, high iso, DR etc. I decided to go 4/3 (E-500) five years ago because Olympus (well maybe also Pentax) was the only company that took small-sensor DSLRs serious, making NICE lenses for them. Two weeks ago I decided buying another 4/3 body (E-30) for the same reason. If you cannot get excellent pictures out of 4/3 you should go and find another hobby/profession. If noise is at all an issue at FINAL PRINT SIZE and when exposing properly it cleans up easily using any modern noise reduction plugin. If the DR of a scene is too much than you should address that (different time of day, additional lights, light modifiers, grad. ND filter, HDR) and not adapting your camera (e.g. buying a new one). I don’t know what other people are using their camera for, I use it for taking pictures and for that 4/3 still works excellently. [end rant]
Many look to DXOMark, so only test sensors by adjustable response in difference coulor, not normal standardize light.
That’s right & photography isn’t just about checking the specs with DxO.
I agree. I had an E-520, replaced it with an E-30 and am having no troubles even in candle light. I can’t shoot SPORTS by candlelight, but for portraits and landscapes it is a fine piece of kit.
I never have required greater than ISO 1600 because I plan for low light by purchasing fast enough glass. I cannot see a need for ISO 25600 because I don’t attempt to shoot moving birds at f8. On the Four Thirds system, I get f8 equivalent depth of field at f5.6 anyway, so it is unnecessary to go to small apertures.
With film, I used primarily ASA 160 to ASA 800. Once in a while I pushed 800 to 1600 ISO and developed properly for that exposure, with results similar to ISO 3200 on my E-30. That is, grainy but usable if enlarged to sizes of 8X10 and smaller.
I have a camera that is fully functional for all shots my film cameras could ever do, and I have wireless TTL flash, and even my old OM glass is image stabilized to reduce vibration. I am happy with it. On the odd occasion that extreme highlights blow out, I simply allow it if it’s a bright cloud, and decrease exposure if it’s a white gown or blouse. I have never heard a complaint generated from the print output. Once, a fellow photographer complained of highlight clipping, but he was viewing pixels at 200 percent on a large monitor, and I pointed out that his prints might not look so perfect under a loupe either.
maybe a few trolls from dpr posing as Oly peoples here, just my thoughts
Can’t agree with you more.
The trolls poke their noses in every where & it is pathetic that they put so much effort into trying to run down another brand or system. I progressed from an E410 to the E520 & have had the E30 for more that a year & love it. I hope to still get more lenses & won’t be put off by these useless, scare mongering trolls. Cameras are for taking photos, not for pixel peeping at 200% magnification. More time needs to be spent getting those photos & less time panicking over whether someone is going to tell you your system is dead. Let’s enjoy our photography. 🙂
Zombier and Troll, 😉 what is next, Hypoide and Dionsaur. 🙂
For what it is worth, I will never be interested in the PEN for the following reasons:
1) Size – the PEN is too small
2) EVF – I prefer to see what I am shooting , not what the sensor is feeding me. I have not looked into it too much, but I assume this comes at the price to battery life. There are enough addons (lenses) and am not interested in another one when better to my mind functionality already exists.
Olympus will do what it does, but I do not understand why they want to go smaller. The real concern should be lighter. Cell phones use to get smaller and smaller to the point where they were perfectly useless. Ergonomics and the ability to see what I am shooting are the key elements for me when looking for a camera. Camera advances will always come but if it comes at the expense of tactile functionality then what is the point.
And in my mind, it is for these reasons that the PEN will never be able to replace the DSLR as its mission is counter to what is important in a camera – ergonomics and the ability to see what I am shooting.
I do not begrudege anyone who has a PEN and to some extent to anyone would pay money for one, but I hope that Olympus comes to its senses and returns to making true advances in the DSLR form factor. The PEN seems like a fad and I hope Olympus comes to its senses before going down with the ship. However, it seems they and alot of people have already drank the koolaid.
I need say i come to use FT and MFT, but i use them both to different photography.
MFT to street and party photo, but also on trip for shop to neighbor city, and FT use i to my more different photo prosjekt. 😉
On that patent- looks more like a lens process than a specific lens… start w glass element, cast a resin element in place, add another glass element and cast a resin one between them…. Onless they plan on making a lens w only one group of elements.