[shoplink 47249 ebay]
[/shoplink]
There has been a new price drop on the Olympus E-M1 and it now sells for a new low record price of $1,049 on [shoplink 47249 ebay]eBay US (Click here)[/shoplink].
All current Olympus deals can be seen on that Amazon page and on that GetOlympus page.
Those are all current Olympus deals at GetOlympus:
Save $50 on Fast Prime Lenses for OM-D & PEN
Save $50 on Zoom Lenses for OM-D & PEN
Save $100 on the Award-Winning OM-D E-M1
Get a FREE Camera Grip with OM-D E-M10 Purchase
Up to $900 Off Lenses with OM-D or PEN E-P5 Purchase
Up to $100 Off Recorders with OM-D or E-P5 Purchase
FREE Wi-Fi Card with the E-PL5
92 Responses
You can have the GX7 for $579.00 at http://www.42photo.com…image quality is the same…even the image stabilization holds up to the EM1…don’t waste your money if you’re not shooting outdoors or with heavy 4/3 lenses.
I find it strange that you would own a camera and not use it outdoors.
I’m obviously the opposite to you as I pretty much never take any photos indoors other than setting up a camera with the manual.
Otherwise it gets used when I’m hiking or travelling almost exclusively and as I avoid staying in cities as much as possible I never take photos in the street.
sorry…outdoors I mean “in the elements” i.e. rain or freezing temperatures.
I understand now. Unfortunately I live in a country where it rains on average 180 days a year where I live and even more where I go hiking. So weather sealing is important
In the world of MFT the GX7 and the EM1 are in completely different hemispheres. Totally.
I agree in many cases, but the image quality is on par. So, like i was saying, if you want to save $500 to eliminate the weather proofing then go with the GX7.
Thanks for the link, I’m considering getting the GX7 or EM-1 but I wanted to know if there is a noticeable difference in image quality between the GX1 and these 2 cameras for low ISO shots. Any idea?
Much greater dynamic range for the newer cameras compared to the GX1. Up to 2 stops better at low ISOs. It’s the main/only reason I would consider upgrading from my GX1 from an IQ point of view.
Except that the E-M1 has a much better view finder, better performance and better build quality. To me that is worth the extra money.
Olympus needs to get into 4K video to succeed. M43 has smaller sensor area to be really professional unless it is for those newspapers that do not mind for print quality, Nevertheless, the sensor size is just right for 4K video.
You can get equally “professional” images from m4/3 sensors as you can get from larger sensors with more resolution. Professional grade images have nothing to do with sensor size.
Print is probably where the money is. I am no expert in photography but my sister recently got married and she went to one of those studio for webbing photo and video and they paid like 4k for package but the print for the photo isn’t very good and I think it won’t take advantage of FF camera alike.
Strange, a lot of professionals are happily using m43 and especially Olympus gear nowadays.
Overhe in europe i have seen THE first em1 in Holland drop below THE 1249 euro Mark, still have to think get it together with an mmf3 to Use with my 12-40/50-200swd or sell THE entire set and get a canon 650d with a tamron 16-300 which Will give a do it all set with less quality but still weatherproof and with 24-480 reach…. Bridge travel cam on steroids…. And still 1,5kg less to Carry around
It really sounds like Olympus is getting ready to blow our doors off with an E-M5 successor at Photokina this year. Or at least I hope so. But they really do need a new sensor to move the goalposts ahead of Sony’s and Fuji’s very capable and affordable offerings with the a6000 and X-T1.
Why? The E-M1 sensor is very competitive even in comparison with the X-T1. AThe X-Trans sensors do not have more resolution and do have their own problems. If a A6000 photographer can really utilize the sensor’s resolution advantage depends much on the lenses in use, and here E-mount fails miserably, with only a few exceptions. So the nominally lower resolution does not make much of a difference.
As to dynamic range, there is not much the E-M1 leaves to be desired.
The sensor is smaller so it’s going to take time to improve tech. They could really improve processing and jpeg engine a lot and that could yield some big gains. And improve those menus.
Yeah, Olympus really does have awful menus. I was starting to psyche myself up about replacing my GX1 with an E-M10, until I actually got my hands on one. Just figuring out how to access basic functionality was really frustrating. I’m sure if I plunked myself down with the user manual for a few hours I would be fine…but compared to how easy Panasonic cameras are to use, it was a big disappointment.
Now leaning more towards the GX7, except for the lack of Auto ISO in M mode. 🙁
I got used to the menu system in that… once the camera was set up the way I like it, I rarely if ever dive into the menu on my EM-10 😉
Oly’s super control panel is really well laid out as are the physical buttons/dials. Once you start digging into the menu system though, things get a bit hairy.
When will these prices hit Germany and the rest of Europe?
And here in Germany still EUR1.428,00 ~ $1920.00 for the body only ^^
Potential buyers should note that the $1049 deal is not from an authorized Olympus dealer. So if you ever need warranty service on your new toy, Oly may / may not honor the warranty.
Ths author of 43rumors repeatedly posts these types of “interesting” deals. I guess he has done the research of the vendors and stands behind every purchase made from them. Otherwise, I can’t imagine why he would be promoting them.
Presumably as a service to people for whom relatively-low price outweighs the lack of warranty coverage (you pays your money and takes your chances…).
$1049 (~ € 780) is a fair price for this decent, but not great, photographic tool. Those who were lured into buying it at a much higher price were cheated. And its entirely their fault. Too high a price to pay for vanity.
There was nothing hidden in Olympus’ price at original release. The buyers knew the price would eventually drop but chose to pay the intro price for their own reasons.
That’s not being cheated.
Surely, it is hard to know exactly how E-M1 first buyers feel now. But it seems to me that they do feel cheated. Or will soon feel cheated when the stiff competition from Sony A6000, A7, Panasonic GH4 and FZ1000, the expected arrival of the Sigma dp2 Quattro, etc., etc. will push the price of the E-M1 even lower. Had I bought the E-M1, I would have certainly felt cheated.
What I did was the following. Instead of spending €1500 for a single body, for exactly the same amount I acquired three E-PM2s (a camera with a higher ISO capacity than the E-M1) and three terrific lenses, Panasonic 20 & 25mm and Sigma 60mm. All these items, three cameras and three primes, either new or almost new! I carry them around with no pain in the back and cover 20 to 60mm (= 40-120) with great sharpness, little or no distortion, etc, and at f1.7, 1.4 and 2.8, respectively. While Oly would have me buy the bulky and heavy 12-40 (= 24-80), f2.8 only, for another €1000. LOL …
You are missing the point entirely: It is about handling the camera and settings. Thats why the e-m1 is leagues ahead of the e-pm2. Besides the 1/8000 shutterspeed gives much more headroom.
The e-pl1 was my first camera and the e-m5 second and last. The latter obliterates the first one due to electronic viewfinder and quick-to-reach dials for especially exposure compensation.
That gives me a lot more freedom for much better photo’s.
Fyi, the “bulky” 12-40 smashes the cheap equivalent offerings from Olympus because those cheap lenses excel in purple fringing.
Thank you AFGNCAAP, CaverDave, Zeikon, RakSiam, CN, ever hopeful, mahler, DingieM, eight people in all, for your comments. I do honour everybody’s right to love his girlfriend – whether she is beautiful or not quite, to spend their money as they wish and to love the E-M1 or any other camera for whatever it is or is not. The problem is, the E-M1 is very heavily overpriced, as acknowledged by the overwhelming majority here and elsewhere.
CN: “The LCD clarity is horrible and there is no viewfinder”. The LCD does the job perfectly (for a LCD) and for two of my E-PM2s I bought the VF-3 and VF-4 (both overpriced but not as heavily as the E-M1 – bought them at a discount anyway).
ever hopeful: EPM2 “[..] does not have EVF. So who are you to tell other people how they should feel? [..] DxO mark classes them as virtually identical regards ISO. As already mentioned, my two E-PM2s have EVF.I do not tell other people how they should feel. I try to help them understand their mistakes in order not to make them again. If I had net been wrong, I wouldn’t have the reactions of eight people explaining how well they feel with the price of the E-M1. According to DxO Mark: E-M1 has a ISO score of 757 and E-PM2 has a ISO score of 932, i.e., an almost 20% (TWENTY PERCENT) difference, which translates into much better opportunities (even if not 20%) for shooting in bad light. This is a disgrace! A €1500 camera DOES NOT have a 20% lower ISO capacity than a four times “cheaper” camera. Simply, the E-PM2 Sony sensor is better than the Pana E-M1 sensor – meaning that Oly have cut very sharp corners in making savings, at the same time charging their customers exorbitantly for a product with a lower-grade sensor.
Zeikon: “if you’re shooting manually or with manual focus lenses there is no comparison between the OMD series and a PM2 [..] I often rely on focus peaking when shooting manual focus. That’s not available on the PM2.” Second statement simply not true. The E-PM2 HAS FOCUS PEAKING, although obtainable by tweaking. Time for the tweaking: less than 5 minutes! Hence, first statement also not entirely true. If what is presumed is that manual focusing on the E-PM2 is not good because of the lack of a EVF, an EVF for the E-PM2 is easily obtainable.
DingieM: “12-40 smashes the cheap equivalent offerings from Olympus”. The 45 mm “cheap equivalent offering” from Olympus smashes the 12-40 at the 40mm distance of the 12-40. And the “cheap equivalent offerings” from” Panasonic 20mm and 25mm smash the 12-40 at the relevant distances even further.
Boy boy boy… a camera isn’t just about large sensor or Iso score on benchmarks… if you’re happy with your pm2’s, smile and don’t complain on what others are buying… btw, I don’t own an em1, but an em10. And I want to use it for taking pictures. Therefore, I need time. So I don’t spend it thinking and complaining about what others are buying, or on the commercial strategy of Olympus or Panasonic…
AFGNCAAP: “smile and don’t complain on what others are buying”. I do not complain on others buying the E-M1 – I sympathize with them 🙂
I complain on Oly not producing a DSLR with the new Sony sensor. They could have done it – they were implored by thousands of Oly FT owners around the world. And they didn’t listen. Well, things like these do not normally go commercially unpunished.
The discussion about the 12-40 zoom is against other cheap zoom offerings. I have the 45mm also and its smashingly good. I didn’t use it for a long time though because I needed the versatility of the zooms (12-50 and 40-150).
Primes have only very special needs on special situations, at least for me anyway. And because they are primes those lenses need to be changed for others if in need for other focal lengths.
I have the FT 12-60. And after Oly did not turn out a DSLR with a new sensor I started using primes instead of the versatile 12-60 – although I can still use it on E520 & E600 in good light. Primes are sharper – or much sharper, depending on the particular prime, and unlike the 12-60 offer almost no geometric distortion. Primes are much more fun (to me). Being a tourist photographer, if I go to a mundane place that has to be photographed, I use the 12-60. If on a visit to a heavenly place, primes enter into action. Especially the PanaLeica 25.
I do not change lenses. I carry three or four cameras – with three or four lenses… And if the relevant companion (wife, friend…) agrees to shooting with another two, things settle more than perfectly…
Jankoff, if those people don’t consider their purchases mistakes, why should you?
Some people would think that you buying three copies of the same camera is a waste of money, but they’re not pushing it down your throat.
And yes, I tried the PM2 focus peaking trick. It’s not the same, believe me.
I bought the E-M1 in October. Why should I feel cheated? The E-M1 served me well for over eight months now. To me a very good bargain. Best camera I owned so far.
I don’t see quite how you can put yourself in the shoes of the buyer of a camera you’re not interested in at any price. I have no interest in a GH4, but I understand why others would.
Your love of the PM2 is well documented. I own one myself as a back up along with those same three lenses.
You may recall the last time we talked about this… if you’re shooting manually or with manual focus lenses there is no comparison between the OMD series and a PM2. You just don’t have the controls readily available with the latter. And I often rely on focus peaking when shooting manual focus. That’s not available on the PM2.
That’s not a knock against the PM2, it’s a great a camera, but it just doesn’t have the features of the OMD series. It’s apples to oranges.
“Had I bought the E-M1, I would have certainly felt cheated.”
Well you didn’t did you so its a pointless comment you are making. You decided to get 3 cheaper cameras instead, other people bought the E-M1 knowing the price would drop but wanted it anyway. That is not being shceated, it is a rational choice. Nor does it make you any smarter – personally I would not touch the EPM2 because it does not have EVF.
So who are you to tell other people how they should feel?
As for your other 2 points: even DxO mark classes them as virtually identical regards ISO and mention of the 12-40 is irrelevant because the above price is for body only. Methinks you are trying too hard to justify your decision and are secretly jealous.
You are insane to think your e-pm2 is a substitute the e-m1 I own the e-pm2, and it’s a great little beach and bar camera but it is essentially a point and shoot with some controls that are meant to be accessed sporadically. The LCD clarity is horrible and there is no viewfinder. And you bought 3 of them!!! Lordy Lordy. Plus you have chutzpah to lecture others on smart buying? That talks gonads my friend.
I bought an E-M1 when it was first (finally) available. Don’t regret it for one second. It’s probably the best handling camera I have ever owned. The perfect camera for me for traveling and for events where I don’t feel like taking a giant kit along. I’ve never experienced any “pain in the back” with my E-M1. I could afford it. And the notion that the 12-40 is “bulky and heavy” seems laughable to me as well. Coming from Nikon DSLRs and big lenses…now those were heavy and bulky! Certainly the 12-40 is heavier than the primes, but by no means would I consider it heavy.
Would you feel cheated when the price of E-PM2 drops further after a few more weeks?
I brought my E-M1 back in late October. So far I have used it for 9 months and 30,000 photos. I have barely used my E-M5 sine getting the E-M1. I love all the direct controls, the evf, C-AF that actually works, the faster shutter speed and more fps. It has been a wonderful camera to use and I am happy to be an early buyer. Now if Olympus could just get out the other Pro lenses to go with this great camera.
Take a look at the price drop of the wonderful (though not full frame…) Nikon d7100… don’t you feel cheated ?
Tried it twice….I found the Em10 better. Smaller, lighter and still a great build. Some features are missing I get that…but the price of the EM10 is simply crazy.
One advantage to the E-M1 is that it’s geared for bigger lenses. I have the E-M5 and found the 12-40 too big to hold easily. “upgraded” to E-M10 a week ago for $600
I have the optional grip for the M10 and just for fun over the weekend put my Photodiox thumb grip (that I originally bought for my PL5) on the M10.
It looks kind of odd, but it actually works pretty well if you’re one handing shots from the flip screen. Just make sure you get the long grip if you’re going to try it.
Here that. I don’t use zooms, but if I did I could see your point. However, with the grip the EM10 is pretty good for the bigger lenses I thought.
Of course, the main advantage is that FT lenses are fully usable, which they aren’t on any other current Olympus (or Panasonic) camera. While people might choose a mirrorless body for its compactness, there are things you can’t do with the existing MFT lineup. FT lenses can substantially extend what you can do with such a camera.
I alway suspect deals like this on ebay. This is $250 under B&H’s current price, which just does not happen often unless there are hidden details.
Must be the new silver E-M1 coming this fall that’s driving down the price. Yes Sheldon, that’s sarcasm. I agree, E-bay and new unit less than B&H, what’s the catch.
The catch is, the seller isn’t authorized (who knows where they get these units?), and so Olympus may not honor the warranty if you buy one of the cameras.
I’ve raised this issue before. I am sure that by posting this the author of 43rumours stands behind every purchase made for these vendors he is promoting,
Still overpriced. $1000 is a fair price for an APS-C body, but too much for a 4/3″. The E-M1 shouldn’t cost more than the Sony A3000.
Sensor size is not everything, if you still don’t know.
It’s the most important characteristic of a digital camera, and should be the main determinant of its price.
You’re kidding. E-M1 has TONS of features over a3000, which is a cheap plastic camera. And the glasses…. oh the glasses…
LOL, whay tray to compare them? a3000 is a shity camera, you can not even check the sharpness of the photo taken with it, because the screen and EVF resolution are abysmal. Sony tried to put a lower speck sensor in there but unfortunately their sensor are to good LOL.
EM1 and GH4 are flaghip cameras, both have tones of features and extraordinary AF, comaprable to flaghsip Nikon and Canon. O ye, I’ve tested my GH4 with 12-35mm f/2,8 lens aganst Nikon D4 with 24-70mm f/2,8 lens and gues what? GH4 focuses much quicker (almost instantaneous in comparison). Others reported the same thing about GH4 and Canon 1Dx.
So I want to see a comparison price between a3000 and Canon 1Dx LOL.
Totally agree. That’s why I expect the Canon and Nikon $6000 flagships to be going for $1500 as soon as digital medium format camera start hitting the market.
But the A3000 is an APS-C body, and it costs $300. So… that means that $1000 isn’t fair for an APS-C body either?
And if it weighs the same as a duck… it’s made out of wood…. and therefore… IT’S A WITCH!
Sorry, but I don’t follow your logic.
Basically, I think that a high-end MFT camera should have the same price as a low-end APS-C camera.
Pardon my Monty Python, but this feels like similar logic. To get the larger sensor, you’d accept a larger body, cheaper build, fewer features, and inferior screen and EVF?
If the M43 flagships (E-M1/GH4) should cost $300, how much should the M10, M5, PL5, PM2, GM1 and GX7 go for?
Yes, I would accept that.
The cameras you mention should cost $250 (M5, GX7), $200 (M10), $150 (PL5, GM1) and $100 (PM2). Cameras are vastly overpriced IMHO.
Cars, too. A Ferrari should cost more or less 1000 $, imho.
No, but $20000 seems reasonable for such a car.
Are you a politician ? I’ll vote for you !
Wait… no. That means I should work for peanuts !
If the E-M10 cost $200, I’m not sure Sony or Canon or Nikon would ever sell another body. At least not until Olympus went bankrupt for selling them for hundreds under cost.
lol – you’re a silly man
lol, priceless!
FT: 225 mm², APS-C: 370 mm², FF: 860 mm². Even if your “thoughts” were sensible in any way which they aren’t, you still have your math wrong, too, since APS-C only is 1.6 times as large as FT. And considering FF, how could $1000 be a fair price for an APS-C body, if you can get an EOS 6D for less than $1600, with a sensor 2.3 times the size?
I never said that the price should be directly proportional to sensor area, but I think that a high-end body with a sensor of a certain size should cost roughly as much as a low-end body with the next sensor size up in the hierarchy.
So, how much would you sell the upcoming x30 by Fuji ? 40$ ?
Yes, we know that you think so, but is there a rational reason for thinking so? As of now, your only reason is “I think so”, which, in grown-up discussion, is no reason whatsoever. What is the reason for assuming an FT camera, compared to APS-C, should be even cheaper than the sensor size relation would mathematically account for? (And what is the reason for assuming an APS-C camera shouldn’t be as much cheaper compared to an FF camera, even though there’s an even bigger sensor size difference?)
Perhaps you don’t know that prices don’t come as you wish, but are the result of production costs and market properties and supply and demand? An APS-C sensor, that’s for sure, does not nearly cost that much more in production as to justify your suggested price difference, (and its value in use isn’t that much higher, either, for that matter).
“I think that a high-end body with a sensor of a certain size should cost roughly as much as a low-end body with the next sensor size up in the hierarchy.”
I’m sorry, but that’s ridiculous. You’re completely discounting the value of other high-end features like top-range EVFs, weathersealing, IBIS, high build quality, more direct controls, blah, blah, blah.
It’s doubly ridiculous where MFT vs APS-C is concerned: the difference in IQ is minuscule in all but the most extreme conditions – so where’s your rationale there?
You’d better write an angry letter to Hasselblad. They’re totally screwing up your economics.
I can’t see how the headline would be correct. There would have been a “price drop” if Olympus had lowered their recommended price, which they did not, as far as I can see, at least not in the US and not in Europe, either.
It seems, though, that the street price in the US has now dropped further than in Europe, where most retailers still demand the full MSRP (€ 1499). I wonder whether those $1049 offerings are legitimate imports, though.
Who cares if they are legitimate or not, if you are interested in the camera then it is a deal. If you buy a camera form the States and you live in Europe, legitimate or not you don’t have warranty only in the States.
It’s of no significance for the case who cares about what. If someone violates trade laws or evades customs fees or taxes in order to sell stuff cheaper than legitimately operating retailers, that may be not enough reason to stop buying from them, the less so as a customer cannot even be sure that something illegal is going on, but still their cheap prices alone do not yet constitute a general PRICE DROP for the item.
By the way, someone who lives in Europe and buys gets two years European warranty. If they buy a grey import or if they buy anywhere in the US, they don’t, even if Olympus Europe would grant warranty for an item produced for the Asian or US-American market.
I personally care about warranty, but if I didn’t care, the gray market does not sound so bad.
Quite right… Given my budget, the price difference might very well be the difference between (just) affordable and definitely not affordable. Then again, if you look at eBay, you may likely find used or refurbished cameras in the same price region or even below, and if you live in Europe and they originally have been bought in Europe, too, they all will still have more than one warranty year to go, so that’s where I’d probably rather be looking – as a European, that is.
The problem I have is that no warranty is worth half the price of the camera. Grey market from Korea you can pick up E-M1 + 12-40mm for £950. Amazon UK is still selling for £1899. Even if the camera totally self destructs I can just by another one and it will have cost me the same. Or I just get decent insurance…
Quite true.
I love M43 but its still to expensieve. For example a Sony A6000 costs 600 euro with lens and is in every way better than the EM1. The EM1 is fun for what it is and a tat ugly. But you buy a camera for its pictures and the ones from the EM1 are not even close in quality to the ones from a much cheaper APSC camera.
In every way? Not if you care about build quality and weather sealing. Ergonomics too is arguably better in the E-M1, but that’s a very subjective thing.
Trolling again? Nobody here takes you seriosly. EM1 like Gh4 it happends to be better than most APSC out there at any given ISO. M43 lenses are far superior in sharpness etc.
Please go trolling somewhere else we know you stories by heart by now.
Except for the the viewfinder, ergonomics, direct controls, buffer, responsiveness, image stabilization, fastest shutter speed, touch screen and LCD resolution, weather sealing, lens selection and quality, and accessories like battery grips…
You’re right. Except for those things, that don’t matter to any photographer worth his salt, the a6000 is better in every way.
(1) E-M5, E-M10, GX-7 would be a better match for the A6000, and they sell for similar prices. As of now, there is no Sony E-Mount camera which would offer all the features and options of the E-M1 (EVF quality, weather-sealing, professional user-interface, fully functional with DSLR lenses including perfectly fast PDAF).
(2) Every serious test shows no significant difference in image quality between current MFT cameras and current APS-C cameras.
Well, on the #1 point, all of Sony’s E-mount cameras can take advantage of Minolta/Sony’s huge catalogue of A-mount lenses with an (expensive) adapter that includes a translucent mirror, allowing full phase-detect autofocus in the adapter (not on the camera). It’s actually a pretty great accessory, since many of the Maxxum lenses are dirt cheap these days, and Minolta made quality glass.
If I had an Sony, I’d be pretty strategic about which of the E-mount lenses I was going to get, and probably focus on the legacy stuff.
That’s true. I’d be more likely to invest in E-Mount, though, if the SLT mirror wasn’t needed which reduces the APS-C size advantage to something like nil by taking away 1/3 EV stop of the light. Another problem is that because Minolta invented IBIS no A-Mount lens is stabilized, while E-Mount bodies do not include a stabilized sensor.
By the way, right now I’m using a NEX-C3 for my old Minolta SR lenses, and while I don’t really enjoy shooting without a viewfinder, I do like very much what I get out of it. Because I have some decent Four Thirds glass for my Olympus DSLR, I’ll probably be making the switch to the E-M1 in the foreseeable future, but I don’t know yet whether I might upgrade the NEX, too, maybe to a NEX-6 or A-6000. On the other hand, I might get myself a Minolta-M43 Speed Booster adapter which would give me 1.4x crop for my Minolta SR lenses on M43…
Were you dropped on your head as a child or something? Just curious.
So what are you shooting with?
He is just trolling, not shooting….LOL
To be fair he can’t answer because his back hurts from hauling all that full frame equipment around.
“[the Sony A6000] is in every way better than the EM1”
You’re a joke.