Olympus will soon revamp the PEN line…at least that is what they claimed in one of their latest financial reports. In the meantime the E-PM2 got marked as “discontinued” or “no longer available” at BHphoto (Click here). You can still buy it via third party resellers at Amazon US (Click here).
Current US deals reminder:
1) Save up to $900 on lenses & $100 one audio recorder:
Runs at GetOlympus. $200 kit savings on Amazon.
2) $600 off on E-M5 12-40mm kit. Use that additional $100 mail-in rebate (pdf file):
At Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus. Qualifys for an additional $300 in savings on the M.12-40mm f2.8 PRO lens (after $200 instant savings and $100 mail-in rebate). Ends 7/19/14.
3) $100 off on MFT lenses:
Olympus 12mm f/2.0 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Getolympus.
Olympus 75mm f/1.8 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
Olympus 12-40mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
Olympus 12-50mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
4) More deals from GetOlympus and Amazon:
Up to $200 off on MFT cameras at Amazon.
Up to $100 Off Recorders with OM-D or E-P5 Purchase (Click here).
Up to $800 Off Lenses with OM-D or PEN E-P5 Purchase (Click here).
PEN E-PL5: FREE Wi-Fi Card (Click here).
PEN E-P5: Over $479 in Savings! (Click here).
VF-4: Only $99.99 with E-P5 Body Purchase at GetOlympus and Amazon.
92 Responses
Excellent. Now let’s see that weather sealed, EVF packin’, button pushin’, dial turnin’, high ISO crunchin, pocket-portable, “pro” PEN replacement!
I have an E-M5 that I love, but still the E-PMx is my most used camera. Because it’s pocketable, I learned to shoot without an EVF. Although limited, IBIS allows me to shoot freestyle. Absolute IQ is not even important if you can shoot undetected very near your subject.
My true experiment will be shooting with a red camera, hoping that they take it for a toy camera 🙂
I just bought for 150 Euros a red E-PM2. Never had it so good. Same quality of my E-M5 but pocketable. I couldn’t care less for what comes after 🙂
BTW I’ll keep shooting Jpeg only and found this for the killjoys and headless chickens of this site:
http://discovermirrorless.com/hybrid-photography/top-5-reasons-why-i-shoot-jpeg-over-raw/
Thank you Sciorio: Italians Do It Better 🙂
Great article. JPG makes so much sense for so many reasons and the vast majority of situations.
Yes, especially in view of people feeing orphaned of Aperture, and slaves of Adobe. It is perfectly possible to do without with in-camera processing.
Not Everybody is lazy. I for one Enjoy tweaking my RAW files. I get better looking photos from any jpeg I shot.
Yeah, I find the RAW work kind of fun as well.
I’m just an amateur, so from my perspective a photo that is worth having is worth spending 5 minutes on tweaking in Lightroom to get stellar results.
There are plenty of options for RAW editors. I actually don’t even like Lightroom as I find it cumbersome compared to ACR in Photoshop.
That’s interesting, I find everything else cumbersome compared to Lightroom. I guess that’s why variety is a good thing.
I am beginner but had/have the same thoughts when I folow recomendation to shot raw ……I then ask myself why to shot raw and then play with Lightroom to get same output as jpg ….
Do a test at high ISOs (1600 and above). Then, use Lightroom or whatever RAW editor you wish and post process the image. Do the same with the JPEG. You will then understand the value of RAW over JPEG.
Personally, I prefer zero luminance noise-reduction and the expanded dynamic range I get from shooting RAW. If I want good noise-reduction, I’ll use something that lets me get it legitimately smooth like Topaz DeNoise, rather than a grumbly blotchy mess that out-of-camera JPEGs give (at least on a file that really needs NR, so generally north of ISO 800 in very low light).
Then again, maybe it’s just because I have a GX1, and Panasonic has terrible JPEGs but phenomenal RAWs…
I own an EM-10 and, JPEGs at 1600ISO or greater exhibit some weird, mini-galaxy looking artifacts that cannot be sufficiently removed through post (I have all NR turned off too). Shooting RAW, those artifacts never surface. I used to just shoot JPEGs until I did a comparison that consistently showed this issue with shooting JPEGs but not from shooting RAW. RAW really does give your camera extra ISO sensitivity due to the more sophisticated ways of dealing with noise from those files vs. JPEGs.
I don’t care. The argument of Sciorio here is that Jpeg is good enough.
Also the archival problem is not little. You need 5 times the room to back up RAW files, with no advantage you can see in respect to Jpeg.
As I’ve said elesehere I’d prefer .DNG like Leica, because it’s losslless, but I’ am Not going to go BACK to RAW ever again. m4/3 is far too good , as it is OOC.
I agree on the Archival issue. If jpeg quality is enough for you then cool. I actually delete the vast majority of my RAW’s after I post process and then save the final image as a 100% JPEG.
So you see, there is an archival problem 🙂 It’s not only the disk space, it’s the time it takes to move those files. Nowadays Flickr is my main archive, and for may ir’s an online resource.
There is the fun factor too: one doesn’t lose hours at PP, and that’s time you can use for shooting and have fun.
Yeah, I just started using flickr but I haven’t really properly done my archiving there. I would be annoyed if I had to work with 36MP RAW files for sure.
I actually find post work quite rewarding as I am a graphic designer by trade and I do photography mostly for fun but also for work when I just need a specific type of shot. So, pixel pushing for me is sort of therapeutic. I understand it’s not for everyone.
Agree to that. Post processing has its own rewards and creativity options. Its a crucial part of photography you just cant ignore.
I guess. I’ve only shot about 14,000 frames at this point, but given that I’m at zero risk of filling of a 2TB hard drive, which costs less than $100…
Considering all the things photographers like to buy and think nothing of, spending $100 on storage for high quality RAW files every few years seems beyond trivial.
Different strokes.
I have begun shooting 4K with the GH4 . . . the files are huge (up to 4.2 GB)! If I were taking photos in RAW my 1TB drive would fill up very quickly. Then there is post-processing which is somewhat overwhelming with just the video let alone post processing every still photo in RAW.
Video is a whole other kettle of fish. I couldn’t imagine shooting RAW video. Photos are tiny by comparison…
E-PM2 was my introduction into the MFT world…it is a great little camera
At launch it wasn’t small enough or cheap enough compared to the E-PL5.
But once the prices dropped, bang for the buck there was nothing that could touch it.
I hope the next iteration is modeled after the GM1. Drop the hot shoe & port, make it as small as possible while keeping the flagship sensor.
The most interesting part, ione is to believe the rumor here, is that the successor will have 2 wheels like the OM-D. I shoot in P like Program, but it is still a welcome feature.
Keeping an interface for VF-x is essential, I find.
I love my e-pm2 image quality for the price- I agree it is tough to beat. I’ve been looking at fixed lens alternatives, and even large sensored options like the G1Xii and rx100 just don’t match the IQ I can get from my cheaper pm2/20mm combo.
Going forward, I think it makes sense for Olympus to merge the pm and pl into one model. Make it as small as possible, but keep the tilt screen and mode dial from the pl, they don’t add much size. Lose the hotshoe but add a pop up flash. (The mode dial and flash are the two things I miss on my pm2.) If they could make the pancake kit lens more affordable, even better!
Then they would have a high end and lower end model to compare to Panny’s GM1 and GX7.
Pity! The greatest m43 camera ever so far. ISO champion – see DXoMark. At a great price. If Olympus do not turn out quickly a PDAF on-sensor camera, I quit.
DxO aside, have you ever been able to demonstrate improved low-light ISO performance from the EPM2 compared to any other modern M4/3 camera?
I have seen it with my eyes in other people’s “modern M4/3 cameras” – used with my PanaLeica 25mm 1.4. There IS a difference. A minor difference, indeed, but it is a shame for a serious company to try to sell you an E-M1 for more than four times the price of a E-PM2, while E-PM2 is better in ISO terms, although slightly. I have three E-PM2s each with a different lens, and I am more than happy – I can use the three simultaneously. For my old 4/3 glass and for good light I keep using (and taking good care of) my three old E-series cameras. I hope they will last for some time. And I will NOT buy the infuriatingly expensive E-M1. I will probably buy the more than twice “cheaper” Sony A6000 to use it with a Sony 50mm 1.8 (75mm in 35mm terms). A focal distance not covered by Oly or Panny. The FF Sony A7 is also less expensive than the E-M1. This is extraordinarily ridiculous, revealing incurable vanity, I am afraid.
In North America, the basic A7 is $300 more expensive than the E-M1. Different markets are different…
Just grab a slightly used EP5 for under 600 dollars. I mean, it’s fantastic and has all the advantages of the overpriced EM1. Its a bargain and the lack of EVF doesn’t matter.
I am sure the EP5 is a great camera. But so is the E-PM2. I use one of my three E-PM2s with the PanaLeica 25mm and the EVF4. Killer combo for not much money (for what you get).
If you usually shoot in auto I agree, the PM2 is the best value.
Manual shooting is much much quicker with the E-P5 (or M1, or M5 or M10) though.
Also, the EP-5’s IBIS is actually worth using whereas, on the PM2 it really is more of a hindrance.
I agree – the E-PM2 has everything for manual shooting but it is more difficult to find and get accustomed to.
Just replace the Pen Mini line with 14mm/1.8 & 20mm/1.8 pancake fixed lens Trip-D compacts. Done. I really liked my EPM1, especially with the crappy 15mm BCL lens (with Grainy B&W it’s superbly lo-fi and gritty). But I’d take a fixed lens Trip-D over it anytime. The Pen Mini is just a very basic camera, anyway, not really worth having interchangeable lenses beyond say 45mm.
I disagree. It has all the manual control you could want, just fewer actual buttons than most cameras. The super control panel and some button mapping gets you pretty far. I’ve taken some of my best photos with the Oly 40-150 @150.
Unless they introduce a completely new sensor- I won’t be upgrading next generation from my EP5. I don’t want more resolution either. IT would have to basically add more DR which Olympus needs to figure out. They should be looking to see what Fuji is doing with their sensors in order to stay competitive.
Fudging the ISO numbers, you mean?
I jest, but only a little. Impartial reviewers (i.e. DPReview) show that Fuji overestimates ISO by about 2/3 of a stop in their cameras, and also perform RAW noise-reduction that can’t be turned off.
So while it’s true that Fuji enjoys perhaps 1-stop of better high ISO noise (when comparing at print size, with comparable detail) than a modern M4/3 sensor, it’s no more than that. In other words, it’s exactly the gain you’d expect given the increase in sensor area. I’m beginning to think that X-Trans is more of a liability than an advantage, given how well conventional Bayer APS-C sensors (i.e. in the D3300 and a6000) are performing.
C’mon, Everyone overestimates, even Olympus with their ISO’s. And I believe it’s more than just one stop.
And everyone messes with their RAW data as well, don’t just call Fuji out on it.
Liability? I just picked up a XE2 and I don’t see it as such. I see better IQ, -And MUCH better in low light.
Forget the graphs, just look at an XE2’s RAW at 3200ISO on the dpreview’s image comparison against the EM-10. Here, I actually already did this with the EM-10 and the XT-1:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/124149010@N02/14393408821/
You can download the full res version and then decide for yourself how much more practical IQ you are or aren’t getting from Fuji’s sensor over m43’s.
Wow! I think you’ve been a bit too aggressive with the sharpening on the E-M10, which especially shows up in the skin-tones. But it’s impressive how much more detail is retained by the Olympus – the text on the paint tubes and swatches shows it quite clearly.
Yeah, I do get a bit aggressive with sharpening as I rarely print anything over an 8×10 and most of my images are just shared on the screen. It’s a subjective thing, but I’ll trade some IQ for some perceived sharpness in most of my shooting.
Well, that just proves it. 8×10 and computer screens are your limit. And you’re willing to sacrifice IQ.
Well, that’s why I brought a Fuji in the first place, better IQ over any M43 camera. I want to print much larger than 8×10 and in color or B&W.
but I’m not going to go any further, this IS 43rumors, so regardless, the masses here will pick the 43 side, regardless.
But i own both, and can Clearly see the difference and can easily put Fuji IQ over any M43 camera.
Haha because I personally choose to not print that large means Fuji magically has better IQ? Again… I don’t think you actually looked at the 100% crops I posted. You just read my comment and started to get all frothie.
Fact remains is that Fuji DOES have better IQ than any, and I repeat, ANY M43 camera. Why do you find that so hard to understand?
Keep over sharpening your jpegs and enjoy your colored noise. In fact, make that your style.
MrALLCAPS: are you willing to put your stand behind the quality of your photographs and provide a link to your Flickr/Google +, etc, photo page? I’m sure we’d all love to take a look at these Fuji shots of yours.
I just got the XE2, so I have nothing to show at the moment. Plus, I tend to stick to a 40mm or 50mm, which I have neither.
As for my photos, I’ve already posted a link to my photos long ago, I don’t have to prove myself, I know what I want out of a camera and I’ve own/ed M43 cameras from 12mp to 16mp, from a L-1 all the way to a GX7, Not to mention a FF Canon 6D. I’ve shot street with them all.
Which is my reasoning for going Fuji: Better IQ than any M43 camera and still have a smaller size than my FF camera. Lenses are just the right size, the control is excellent and they have the same lenses I use for my M43 cameras. It’s a near-perfect compromise.
No disrespect, but showing me a overly sharpened comparison with gaudy colored noise is laughable.
To me it appears that Fuji is adding NR here in the pre-post photo. It seems pretty obvious to me- just look at the guys teeth. In the post photo’s I see the paint brush with the EM-10 having finer detail. Who shoots at 3200 ISO anyway…I think they both kind of suck. I rarely go above 400 for anything which is the point. None of this matters until you add in context as a reference point.
Unless you shoot only in broad daylight, or a studio or carry a legion of speedlights with you, its very easy to go to ISO1600 and even 3200. Sometimes you don’t want to shoot at f1.7 because you want it to be sharp edge to edge (so you stop the lens to 2.8 or higher), or the lens you are using isn’t that fast. Often you’ll want a quick shutter of 1/100th or faster to make sure what you properly freeze the motion of what you are shooting. In these scenarios, which happen all the time when you are trying to candidly shoot people, your ISO will go up much higher than 400.
I shoot in similar scenarios and still rarely find myself at 1600 ISO. I also tend to stop down to around 2.8-5.6. I also don’t have a problem using a tripod now and then. I get what your saying…but no freaking way would those test charts sway me either way. I definitely wouldn’t be dumping my Olympus for an XT-1 anytime soon.
Exactly my point ;). The Oly image resolves more detail because Fuji’s X-TRANS demosaicing seems to muddy the details abit at higher ISOs.
I just pulled out my EPM2 to test a basic, real world shooting environment. I am in a very well lit office that gets alot of natural light. Shooting at 15mm f3.6 and 1/100th shutter to make sure people aren’t blurred while moving puts the ISO between 1250-2000 for a proper exposure. I personally don’t carry a tripod around as it to me, sort of defeats the purpose of m43’s portability.
You’re kidding me, right? I mean, look at all the colored noise in the Olympus files. Plus the Fuji Files are sharper, with much less noise.
The Oly Blacks are not rich and the Fuji blacks are darker. If you are claiming that the Olympus is close or even better, you either need glasses or a higher res computer screen. It’s not even close which one is better!
You must be trolling son because, in no way are those Fuji images sharper from this test. For example… can you even read what the paint tube says on the 5th crop down for the Fuji? Not even after post processing in ACR could I make out viridian hue. I only know that’s what it says because the Olympus actually captured that detail.
Also, do people really care that much about color noise vs. luminance and detail? Color noise is so easily removed that it is trivial. The point was to show that after processing, the Oly just has more detail retained vs. the Fuji, even though the original RAW may look better in terms of noise for Fuji… it comes at the cost of detail.
Well…it’s Viridian Hue, not White, but your point is made!
I agree that color noise is such a trivial removal that Lightroom does it automatically by default with every RAW, and it’s entirely innocuous. Luminance noise and detail is much trickier…and the Fuji does not put in a good showing there!
Fuji OOC JPEGs do look better at high ISOs, though, to give credit where credit is due. And the noise difference starts to become somewhat irreconcilable after 3200…I imagine that a Fuji 6400 ISO shot is usable, whereas with M4/3, I don’t know if that’s true. B&W yes, probably not colour, though.
So why is the color noise there in the first place? The sharper the Olympus files are, the noisier they get! It’s no contest!
And yeah, people DO care about noise, unless you’re looking at a 4×6 pic on a computer monitor, or even a smaller smartphone pic! To even ask that, is saying you might as well stick to Jpegs and smaller files. Don’t go past 4×6!
You are equivocating my statement about COLOR noise with noise overall. Stop that, it makes you look more like a fool than you already are.
I am sorry if I also equivocated your statements. I hope I don’t look even stupider than I already am.
Do you realise it’s a lot of bollocks right? And that you could stick to a compact camera, and your photos would not suffer?
I take it you are looking at the pre-post RAW files, not the ones that he processed.
Getting darker blacks is a slight tweak of a single slider away in Lightroom…
And I’d bet More Noise for the Olympus too.
I mean, it’s not even debatable really, after iso 400, M43 gets very noisy in low light.
Darker blacks is an indication of lower dynamic range. In other words, it’s a negative.
The question is, could it “more better” if it had a conventional Bayer array. You might love the shooting experience with a Fuji, but did you cross-shop a Sony A6000 on pure image quality? I guess the IQ evens out a bit when you factor in Sony’s lenses…
AHA- well, maybe that’s why many Fuji users state the files look cleaner than the Olympus ones even at base ISO. I can’t figure that one out. I shoot often in low priority mode or 100 ISO and they look extremely clean to me. I can’t see any noise even at 400% cropped in. I just don’t get it.
DR isn’t really that much of a problem with the current gen of m4/3 sensors, and its certainly an upgrade over the previous 12mp models. Not cutting edge, but still adequate. Just look at the G1X DR with its comparably sized sensor to see how far behind Canon is in that aspect, and you won’t feel so bad.
Well, DXO rates it at 12 but I can’t seem to get that. I have a FF rated at the same and they do not perform the same in terms of clipping. But, you are absolutely right, I don’t find it that big of a deal. I’m easily able to work around it. Love this system.
How can Olympus figure that out? They use Panasonic/Sony sensors. They are a self-described optics company. They are at the mercy of others for sensor tech.
If the PM/PL line is going to be reworked, at the very least Olympus needs to add EVFs like the GX7 has. I know they don’t want to ruin their EVF add-on sales, but I give up my hot shoe if I want an EVF, and I do use flash units often enough. I may just go buy a GX7 and be done with it…
I can’t agree. I thought the same thing until I bought the EP5 and EPl1. It doesnt’ matter- it’s just a different shooting experience. You don’t get that ugly eyecup sticking off the back either. Your not walking around with the freakin camera glued to your eye- your looking around where your eyes should be. It’s a personal choice, but EVF’s are way over rated. You still have the add on and shooting waste level usually means your casting a shadow on the screen half the time- sunlight isn’t that much of a problem.
You forgot to add “IN MY OPINION”, Because in MY opinion, not having a built in VF SUCKS.
I don’t mind a clip on VF, but if I can find one with a built in VF instead, I’d buy that.
Agreed. Integrated VF is essential to me as well. The rumored Panasonic LX8 could be the ultimate carry along, even if it has a slightly smaller (one inch) sensor.
I agree. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve pulled the GM1 up to my face to take a shot. Great little camera, but unless it’s on a tri-pod I prefer the EVF.
I used to think the same way — we need a premium Pen with built-in EVF. But then. I have just bought a used Nikon V1 (for video, mainly) which has the box-like design people like to call “rangefinder” these days without really understanding what that even means. Anyway. It has a built-in EVF. To my surprise, I find that I shoot with the LCD most of the time because it is faster, more convenient and often more discreet (the V1 autofocus is insane and the metering is spot on).
I use the EVF only very occasionally. In bright light. Or to conserve battery life, mainly (which is not necessary because the V1’s battery lasts a whole day — it’s a compact P&S that uses the D7000 battery!). So I’m not sure anymore that a built-in EVF Pen would be that attractive. It’s a nice feature to have, no doubt, but I probably wouldn’t pay extra just to have one.
Actually, all they need to do is to build an OMD with a PEN design. If I had to decide now I’d go for one of the OMDs instead of the GX7 though. When I tried it, I was rather underwhelmed by the quality of it’s EVF.
Something tells me that even if you Liked the EVF of the GX7, you STILL wouldn’t buy it, because it doesn’t say “OMD” on it.
The EVF is great on the GX7, what are you talking about?
The GX7’s viewfinder is definitely not as good as a VF-4. I’ve done a side-by-side comparison.
A GX8 with EM1 build quality, weather sealing, buffer, and Gh4 focus speeds and 4K would be my ultimate camera.
Soon Mini Four Thirds will no longer be available. No more noisy, blotchy images where, apparently, only the aperture value matters and not the size of the tiny sensor. No more insecure Tiny Four Thirds fanboys screaming in the bizarre little community. Your time is nigh.
*sigh*
And until now the actual photographers were all having such interesting discussions in this thread, even if we didn’t all agree with each other. Oh well…
Which actual photographers? The fangirls or the paid marketing trolls?
Hey, sparky, how’s the eight grade going? Do you think you’ll pass this time? You know what say. Fiftieth time’s a charm.
This guy is funny. I like him 🙂
You can almost smell this particular troll’s underwear. Yikes.
Wow SD, we were enjoying the boards without you. I thought you finally got banned.
Did you actually leave the house for a few days?
It took him a few days think of what to say. He has to spell check each word so it takes him a bit of time.
Great, now you annoyed a bunch of useless geeks, see them go off… LOL I like it.
I wonder if Olympus has been looking at what the EP-2 sells for, what the GM1 sells for and is thinking that they should make smaller camera. Adding IBIS will require an Olympus camera being a little thicker than the GM1 but some competition in the very small camera body area would be nice.
The size is not that much different, considering neither is pocketable:
http://camerasize.com/compare/#491,387
The GM1 is certainly a mini marvel, but the Pen seems to prove that tiny isn’t the magic bullet it might seem, unless it can get even smaller and into a shirt pocket. If a little bit of extra size can accommodate premium features (tilt screen, EVF, weather sealing, IBIS, better video heat dispersion, etc.), it may prove a better strategy. I love the idea of small too, but not at the expense of ergonomics and controls. I think Fuji’s X20 and the RicohGR get it right.
Here’s a good comparison of the GM1, RicohGR, Pen, Fuji, LX7 and RX1:
http://j.mp/1kfXI7C
What do you mean the GM1 is not pocketable? With the 14mm/2.5, it easily fits in a trouser pocket (chinos) and just about squeezes in a jeans pocket. Even my EPM1 with that 14mm lens fits in a trouser — or even more so, cargo pants — pocket. With the BCL lens attached the EPM1 even squeezes into my jeans pocket.
They won’t fit into a “shirt pocket.” But my point is that their size is likely NOT what has kept the Pen from being a huge hit. It is very compact. What’s missing are premium features. They deliver on size. Size alone seems not enough.
I don’t think the GM1 belongs in a trouser pocket I checked it out and it looks embarrassing
The jpeg engine on the E-pm2 (my first m43-camera) is the best I have ever seen, well at least up to iso 800, higher then that its raw. But I could travel world with this camera and shoot jpegs only and be more then pleased with the results. Just hope Olympus will introduce global shutter soon, because the shutter-shock issue is really annoying. Yes, even with “anti-shock 1/8” enabled.
admin, you must have at least some rumors about the replacement at this point.