Miquel Àngel Garcia, manager of Olympus Spain (Image courtesy Quesabesde).
I am really surprised to read a clear statement like that! Miquel Àngel Garcia just said in an interview at Quesabesde (translation here) that the E-5 successor will be a hybrid FT and MFT model capable of using both lens ranges with their full potential! So there will be no “Normal” Four Thirds E-7 but rather a native Micro Four Thirds cameras with a 100% compatible FT solution. He didn’t specify if there will be a sort of integrated or external adapter or a modular approach. The camera is definitely coming in late 2013 (he said!). Miguel didn’t unveil the name and the specs. He says that this is a camera for “those who want the feel of an SLR and at the same time take advantage of a small system“.
In summary:
1) no “classic” Four Thirds E-7 coming! You should expect a hybrid high end MFT camera with full FT support.
2) That camera is coming in late 2013
3) Development started back in 2009 and the camera cannot be compared to anything Olympus released before that.
UPDATE: Also DSLRmagazine (translation here) got a confirmation from Olympus(!) that the info about a hybrid MFT and FT camera is correct!!! They also added that the project name started back in 2009 is “Kasei”. And a selcted and secret group of 13 members worked on the project!
Sounds amazing!
Now let me enlarge the discussion to some key features I think that camera should have:
1) Full compatible AF for any MFT and FT lens. This means have phase detection AF…likely on sensor like the latest Sony NEX-5r and Sony NEX-6 cameras
2) I am still one of these guys in that like to use optical viewfinders. E camera aimed for both FT and MFT users should in my dreamworld have a hybrid EVF and OVF solution like (and if possible better) the Fuji X PRO 1.
3) A pro camera has to feel like a pro camera. So it shouldn’t be too small.
4) The FT component of the cameras should be detachable. A modern version of the [shoplink 31778 ebay]Leica Visoflex (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
What are yout thoughts? Comment your posts with your suggestions and I may start a poll on this soon…
—
Olympus E-5 at [shopcountry 17163].
Leica Visoflex auctions on Slidoo.
166 Responses
I’m sure it will be a stunner just like the OM-D EM-5. It has to be bigger to accommodate the mirror and pentaprism though. Mirror will flip up and stay up when m43 lenses are mounted and the LCD screen and hybrid viewfinder activates. In classic 43 mode, mirror flips down and the viewfinder switches to optical. Live view is possible in classic mode.
Now I’ll make way for Almaric’s thesis on what the E-7 is going to be…..
I’m thinking it will be bigger too but not that big. Around the size of a OM-4ti. Probably will look like an OM-4ti too!
Would a hybrid FT/MFT really have to have a mirror?
No it shouldn’t need a mirror. It should be a mFT camera with FT extra parts.
But please NO OVF, that should keep size and weight down.
Improved EVF tech to nihilate the wish for OVF.
Bigger dedicated buttons for better outdoor use. Small grip, just a little more pronounced as OM-D, with optional battery grip.
I fully agree that would be perfect.
but what I would like even more would be mft versions of the high quality ft lenses.
I agree. It will not have OVF, but newly developed EVF. Therefore, no mirror or pentaprism. Hopefully about the size of OM4-Ti which is along the same design language of the OM-D, with the E-M6 nomenclauture?
You people are complicating things.
Why do you think there is going to be an OVF? If they use Phase Detection from a Sony sensor, the FT to mFT adapter only needs to be a proxy for 9 of the 11 mFT pins.
Between loosing 1/3 of the optical signal and WYSIWYG DOF in a SLT design, or having a 120Hz EVF I’d go for the later in a split second.
I think thats true
no reason we should expect an OVF
however theyre doing this it has to meet the needs of mFT lenses and register, and there is no room for a mirror within that
But one thing I dont expect is an SLT, and for 2 reasons
an SLT device wont fit into a mirrorless
and Sony seem to be moving away from SLT anyway
I could be wrong but, I dont think we have an SLT in our future
Neither do I expect a SLT design.
My phrasing needs rephrasing.
Almarite
It has to be modular, not bigger. Allow bulking up, but let the user choose.
Absolute agree.
something like an OM-D but with beefier version of the HLD6
There is no place for mirror behind the m43 mount. It’s either on-sensor PDAF (most reasonable) or adapter with mirror and PDAF sensors like the one Sony makes for NEX.
On further thought, there might be room for a mirror inside the MFT box if you angle it at 60 degrees from the sensor normal instead of 45 degrees.
So that must be the time for the “magical” new viewfinder with a new hybrid sensor in a compact body for large hands
Hmmm.. I’m not realy interested in u4/3 lenses. Gives an upgrade path for u43 users wanting to upgrade to better lenses though.
Hope the cost is not too high. As a 43 user I don’t need to pay for the u43 compatibility.
Yeah, but the M4/3 community is paying to keep 4/3 users and 4/3 gear on life support. Except for some stellar lenses, it’s a dead, and dead-end, format.
If Olympus wasn’t wasting their precious resources on 4/3, just think where their M4/3 offerings would be now?
What resources?
Olympus probably hasn’t done any real DSLR development since early 2009 (when E-600 was finalized) because E-5 was just existing parts slapped together to make E-3 MkII.
Mirrorless cameras will never challenge domination of Canikon DLSR unless they’ll get proper focus tracking so hybrid focus system capable to actual focus tracking is needed anyway.
And sensor, processing electronics and image processing engine all need to be kept up to date already for mirrorless bodies to be competitive.
Leaving only possibility for wasting resources if they were making new DSLR…
Who said anything about DSLR development? I was talking about Olympus doubling down on M4/3 and DSLM development.
There’s no reason for M4/3-DSLM to ape DSLR abilities, when they already are host to a range of their own advantages.
Doesn’t change a thing if you call it DSLM like Panasonic.
That’s actually lot more better describing name for mirrorless cameras: Viewfinder image is through the lens type just like in Single Lens Reflex design but instead of that analog age design system is Mirrorless.
m4/3rds outsold all of canon slr’s in 2011
Interesting news! While I know owners of the E-5 and various 43 lenses will really appreciate this, personally it doesn’t interest me very much. The E-M5 is already a great size and has a range of lenses (which I hope they will continue to add to). I always found the 43 lenses to be far too big and heavy, defeating the reason I bought into the m43 format.
Still, the DSLR style addition to the lineup is pretty much the only model Olympus has yet to put out for m43, so it’s a welcome notice. I just hope we get all the new features and advancements on a m43-only E-M5 sized upgrade too.
It sounds like it could end up looking something like the GH3.
Neat. I will most likely be buying.
Attaboy. They love your wallet.
… and I like their product.
Behold! The free market at work.
Next, tell them how much you are willing to spend. 😀
While I’m sure that they have plenty of market research on price points, I’m willing to spend up to 2 or 3 thousand dollars on the right camera.
Oly thanks you for your willingness to divulge your price range, and they will consider a 2-3 thousand dollar body for your particular target group. 🙂
When I was a little boy, on the way from school back home I’d go into a store that was selling stationary, candy and toys. Most of the items didn’t have a price on the, which was at the time legal. I’d usually buy something there, maybe some gum, ice-cream, or a toy. I’d always ask the shop keeper, “How much is it?” He would promptly ask me, “How much you got?” Then I would say, “You didn’t answer my question.” He then would grudgingly name the actual price. I saw him pull off his stunt successfully with other kids.
The joke is on Olympus then. I’m willing to pay $5k.
(Damn, I hope they’re not still reading.)
This is all good. Oly have to keep faith with the FT user base, but not upset their new MFT buddies by introducing a range topping camera that doesn’t work with their lens investment. MFT has been around long enough now for many users to have a good collection of lenses, I for one wouldn’t like to see a new Oly camera I couldn’t ever aspire to without switching into a whole new lens mount.
That might be true, but think of the 4/3’s owners where some lenses cost 3 or 4 times (or more) as much as the good M4/3’s lenses out there so far.
That Leica Visoflex looks like my grand mother’s coffee grinder.
That will be great because those 4/3 lenses were some of the best lenses made. They need to improve their video capabilities though.
$2500 body, no built in flash, no battery included sounds fair to me
So, will this be the high end OM-D or another line?
So what’s coming out in January 2013? Presumably not a high-end OM-D, or have I missed something?
Nope, something else…I will soon post about this!
Thank you! Can’t wait. OMD with better video capabilities?
I think it is E-P5 with Rangefinder style EVF like Nex6 and nex7
agreed! 🙂
Sounds likely
That’s wonderful news! Almost too good to be true!
Hail Hail! OBS is coming – and faster than expected. My 50-200 SWD will be delighted to get back into action.
So no more lenses next year. It’s all about saving for the new cam.
Sounds sweet!
I have no second thoughts switching to a pure EVF model either, provided it is better than the EVFs as of now. And m4/3 owners should not be envious, there are plenty of Pens and more OMDs to come for them. Such avarice is not in place. This is a modular cam initially catered for those already having native 4/3 Zuiko investments (the only reason to make it). And it’s even better if it comes with m4/3 compatibility to boot. I believe the loyal 4/3 customers deserve this, without the whining of people not having invested in such gear. They are still well taken care of with the full m4/3 lineup anyway. If this really is true, my long term loyalty to Oly will still go on – hopefully way beyond the end of the world that allegedly is scheduled for tomorrow! 😉
So far, whenever some Oly head honcho from OUTSIDE Japan has prophesized specific features, Oly HQ in Japan have discounted the claims within a few weeks. “Maybe, maybe not.”
It suspect this is just another delaying tactic. Keep 4/3 users’ hope up so there’s more time to prevent them jumping ship and grandfathering them into m4/3 instead. I hope I’m wrong.
Yeah, there is just something about Olympus that I don’t trust. I guess that’s not exactly true, there are many things about Olympus that I don’t trust.
Anyway if the new camera not have an 3mpx EVF, and is on size so GH3, need i buy a E-5 to. 😉
cant see how they think they would benefit
there isnt an updated 43rds product to buy
what exactly are they competing with in SLRs
so I dont think its true that its a delay tactic
Start saving your money to get one NOW 🙂
Thank GOD I have a year to save up for it!
Killer, if true! My old lenses could find a new home 🙂
I hope they also add the ability to properly use full FT lenses to smaller body styles too.
A mirror adapter would likely be preferable (like Sony) as the sensor based PDAF systems have too small photosites to gather enough light to allow PD-AF in anything but good light (e g Nikon 1 with PD-AF above EV 9 at f/3,5).
I see this as essential in giving users of both 4/3 snd m43 the confidence in the system to invest in expensive lenses. Remember that users of OM, cameras with SM cards and buyers of Oly OM-AF cameras were left up the creek. It would be a big mistake to also leave 4/3 users in the same way.
This is the camera I’ve been waiting for!
Due to a seemingly uncertain 4/3 future I sold off several of my 4/3 lenses, sold the e5 and some other stuff and kept only my best lenses and the e3 to keep 4/3 on life support, then partly migrated to m4/3 and a fuji x-e1 with and a couple lenses with some of the acquired funds.
I was willing to wait until the end of 2013 for a hybrid camera because a classic e5 style camera would in my opinion be just a rehash of parts and leave us in the same uncertain predicament regarding where 4/3 is going without a lens roadmap or guarantee of another body.
Now? This is a certain path as far as I’m concerned because m4/3 is a success with even the biggest sceptics jumping on the OMD bandwagon. This is a m4/3 body that is a high m4/3 camera and an e7 in one! It invites and solidifies the 4/3 lens collection and reaffirms the m4/3 line up whilst joining both in harmony as one system.
I believe this is the only viable path for Olympus both financially and from a marketing standpoint. Spending R&D dollars on a mirror based e7 for just a few of us 4/3 users is something that could hurt Olympus financially and I don’t want to see this happen because I’d rather see Olympus cameras well into the future; however R&D on a Pro spec m4/3 based camera that perfectly phase detects the 4/3 lenses and does everything an OMD camera does plus more is R&D that Olympus can eventually use in other bodies in a trickle down strategy.
4/3 zooms + m4/3 primes + OMD Pro! What a killer system indeed.
Just one question. Why did you ditch the E-5 and keep the E-3? lol
Probably because E-3 is unsellable and he could recoup $500-700 on the E-5. Speaking from experience…
Hmmm… Why I’m not surprised at all? 😉
Most mft lenses have larger diameter than four thirds mount, so i think four thirds component must be detachable. While it seems like there is space for a mirror to be permanently mounted, I am not sure how you would protect it from dirt when using mft lenses. Also, a permanent mirror housing would interfere with zoom or manual focus of mft lenses, so I think that if you have a mirror, it must be part of a detachable adapter.
With on sensor phase detection, there is more flexibility.
Or you could do both, a big mirror adapter if you want it, a smaller (maybe even the existing) adapter using on sensor pdaf.
I hope this new cam (E-M7?) will be only slightly bigger than E-M5, perhaps with a built-in grip like the optional one.
This will be the best of both worlds because one will be able to go smaller with m43 lenses, or bigger with the range of 43 lenses, but in any case not losing any AF performance.
I only hope the sensor will be the same 16mp as E-M5, or an improved one, but not with more resolution. 16mp is plenty enough.
> I only hope the sensor will be the same 16mp as E-M5, or an improved one, but not with more resolution.
Because of physics it’s impossible to even get any more real resolution when lens is stopped down to f/8.
And resolution is actually starting to decrease after f/5.6… at which focal ratio Airy disk diameter is already two pixels.
And that’s for clear high contrast details.
> Because of physics it’s impossible to even get any more real resolution when lens is stopped down to f/8.
And resolution is actually starting to decrease after f/5.6… at which focal ratio Airy disk diameter is already two pixels.
And that’s for clear high contrast details.
—
you problem is that you do not understand that while absolute resolution will be decreasing the sensor w/ more MP will still out resolve the sensor w/ lower MP @ f5.6, @ f8, @ f11, @ f16 and so on… and at wider aperture w/ more MP you have lesser need for AA filters to fight moire… albeit w/ Olympus shaking sensor IBIS is already acting like AA by blurring the details
> albeit w/ Olympus shaking sensor IBIS is already acting like AA by blurring the details
I see that besides laws of physics (smaller pixels also giving noisier less information containing signal) you don’t like Olympus.
Only thing which matters is relative movement between sensor and image and ILIS shaking the image projected by lens does exactly same.
You don’t actually study physics do you?
According to a certain Nyquist, you need about double the sample frequency of the smallest details you want to resolve, so airy discs about the size of 2 pixels will be fine. Any details captured beyond that are at best inaccurate representation of real details, and more often just artifacts.
As an owner of both an E-3 and an EM-5 with som nice lenses for both systems I see this as perfect. I had hoped that this new camera would be on the available sooner than the end of 2013. I don’t like waiting.
I have to disagree about the optical finder. This is not a time look back to old technology, especially if it will add needless complexity.
I think Sony has it very nearly right with the NEX adapters – though if it is possible to get quick focus of older lenses without a mirror and without compromising the sensor that would be even better.
End of 2013? So time to sell my E-M5, I need good lenses next spring/summer, not in 2 years.
??Logic??
I think maybe they will go with no mirror and native m43 mount with some kind of extendible twist and lock 43 mount.
That and pdaf sensors on sensor.
All in a GH sized body.
Will the AF for old 43 Lenses be still restricted??
A Nikon 1 has hybrid Sensor AF and adopted Nikon AF-S Lenses will onyl work with centered S-Autofocus. No C-AF.
“Will the AF for old 43 Lenses be still restricted??”
it seems like it wont be restricted, that the camera has pdAF
again we see the Canon and Nikon people running scared – i love it – keep bashing 4/3rds you have us laughing
““those who want the feel of an SLR ….”
Boo Hiss !
Only amateurs and photojournalists need that.
Evidence to back up that statement?
Why? he’s right. Why put a matchbox into a shoe box?
Could that be bad for the further development of m43 lenses if classic 43 lenses (and their possible sales)are revitalized?
IMO, you hit the nail on the head. Exactly why this will never happen.
Until we know the secret, we can go on arguing till kingdom come 🙂
I am skeptical about the PDAF on sensor for the same reasons Frederic mentioned.
I also argued elsewhere, with Lenstip, that 4/3 lenses have *less* resolution than the most recent mirrorless ones, so the advantage is only for those who still own them:
http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=183
In other words it will be a transition camera. The real pro one, might well be a FF 135 made with Sony. With cheaper FF sensors it makes more sense. Initially it could even make use of OM lenses.
The bold part of the announcement is that there won’t be an E-7, so that there is really a shift of paradigm towards mirrorless.
If the two leaks are true, Olympus is really spreading its wings and becoming a major manufacturer. That might be the net result of collaboration with Sony, providing the innards.
I wonder if Sony consents and what it gets in exchange: Perhaps lenses for a new FF 135 mirrorless system, with a new mount shared in common with Oly?
THAT would be mind blowing 🙂
which SHG zoom has the least resolution amalric ?
7-14/4, 14-35/2, 35-100/2, 90-250 ?
It’s not my province as you well know. But I have been making my case here:
http://www.mu-43.com/f38/how-long-until-af-4-3-lenses-fixed-38158/index3.html#post373335
Lenstip does the measuring not I.
Since DPR’s 1022 deletes my replies, can you suggest them they have a year to change again the forum’s name?
LOL
well ok, it would be the 7-14/4, and here it is with the PL 7-14 on EPL1
http://www.h2hreviews.com/article/Head-to-Head-DSLR-Lens-Review-for-Micro-Four-Thirds-Digital-Cameras-Olympus-Zuiko-Digital-ED-7-14mm-f4-vs-Panasonic-Lumix-G-Vario-7-14mm-f4/Resolution.html
find the page on resolution
Do you know what an AA filter is?
No FT rating? I’d give it FT3. A dual lens system body is certainly possible with a lens adapter and a dual focusing mechanism. But it is years late to invest limited resources into an expensive body that will appeal to a small segment of an already small portion of the market. It would also take some sales away from the premium MFT model.
So it will be a GH3 with hybrid focus. No more four thirds.
There are methods to get PDAF without PDAF-on-sensor OR the mirror/pentaprism approach of SLRs. It will be interesting to see if they go the easy route of on-sensor PDAF, or go with something more novel like a small AF-only mirror in the adapter.
A patent was shown here once with little mirrors inside the camera, allowing both PDAF reckoning and issuing light to a hybrid OVF/EVF.
That would be a quite expensive solution though.
PDAF on sensor would be cheaper, but I wonder if precise enough. And it would be EVF only. Which is the reason I suspect dSLR diehards won’t have anything to do with m4/3.
Now an interesting question: will this preclude Oly from making fast m4/3 zooms?
I dont think there is enough room for a mirror in a mFT body.
You begin with 20mm for register
the mount and electrical lens connection take up 5mm
then the sensor stack takes 8mm
you still need a shutter and you have 7mm left between the lens connection and the front of the sensor, you need 13mm
…………..it isnt possible on a micro body
If you have a mirror just for a central AF point, it could be quite small. You don’t need a full-sized mirror like for an OVF, you only need to cover a mm or so. You could still use the main sensor for the EVF, you would just get ring-shaped bokeh (like from a mirror lens) until the mirror flips out of the way.
that also has the effect of making the mirrored part darker
then you have the problem adjusting the exposure, and you still dont have full time AF that on sensor AF offers. Ive thought about it, and its a lot less than perfect
It doesn’t have to be perfect. Fast, accurate PDAF for just a center AF point would be enough for most users, and much better than what they have today with FT lenses on MFT bodies.
Sounds very good OMD Pro .
If that highend Oly camera retain the size of OMD or little bigger then I might consider to have a try .
Pana just can’t catch up & is behind now .
Give it a rest!
Panasonic can’t catch up with what?
Panasonic has better zooms. Olympus has better primes.
Both offer bodies with different styles and ergonomics… pretty much something for everyone. That is, except for a camera with true rangefinder form factor, but supposedly that is coming. My guess is that both will offer one.
So, it’s win-win-win for all of us.
Great comment.
I hope Panasonic doesn’t follow Olympus in this 4/3 m4/3 venture. It sure sounds expensive. I just want them to increase the sensor size, compatible with m4/3. Waiting for the TRUE successor to the L-1.
I’m looking for Panasonic to compete with what Fuji is doing, not what Olympus is, which is screwing their Fanbase -I mean their customer base.
Can someone tell me why Oly and Panny fanboys hate each other? You’re all playing for the same team idiots. Why would you pledge alliance to a corporation anyway? Make photos not politics.
+5,000,000
It’s because some people have this weird need to feel as though their purchase was the best choice and have to spend time convincing themselves of that fact.
It’s because Olympus Fanboys have this weird need to feel as though their purchase was the best choice and have to spend time convincing themselves of that fact.
Fixed.
Just read the replies, no body was saying anything like “Panasonic is better”, it took a Olympus Fanboy to say something.
They love getting jerked.
It’s about time!
Oh no, we only have the end of 2012. So one year to wait and speculate.
I was just thinking yesterday how much I want to use my 12-60mm and that I shouldn’t sell it because as soon as I do, Oly will make a new a camera that can use it. That lens is the most useful lens ever IMO. Short mfd (a feature missing on too many lenses), reasonably bright, unmatched range and quick focusing.
LOL what does “hybrid 4/3 – µ43” mean?
Isnt any µ43 camera capable of using 4/3 lenses 😉 so its a kind of hybrid as well. Oh I like this marketing stuff.
End of 2013 means beginning of 2014. Another year for my e-520 … Hmm considering the huge price tag of this “new” thing I would say the e-520 needs to last another 6 to 12 months. In the end mayve around x-mas 2014 I can get one. Do I want to wait so long and still pay a lot for something really nice but IQ-wise always behind the competitors … Lets see
Oh I forgot to say that nobody knows what full potential of lenses means and how it works in the end …
As of now the bad news is no E-7 is coming!
It means that the CDAF and PDAF will work. Yes you can pop an adapter on, but it is manual only, so its not a hybrid AF camera
my E-520 can also do CDAF and PDAF! It was never called Hybrid.
Why worry? The world ends tomorrow …:-)))
The only thing they have confirmed is, there will be no E-7.
The rest is aspiration.
So once again: 4/3 system is end of life, and m43 will slowly get better at using legacy lenses.
No new news, really.
Exactly. Weve got adaptors already. This will just have better compatability whilst hooking onto a bigger camera…
I wonder if they could use something similar to the light meter I have in my Pentax LX for pdaf on mirrorless camera: basically, fitting reflective surface on the blade of the shutter that could be used as small mirrors for a pdaf unit… would be a quite complex solution I guess in term of AF calibration, but quite elegant :D. 4 years to develop such system seems just about enough!
Please, no optical or hybrid view finders anymore. It is a waste of development effort. EVFs are already better than most optical finders. Olympus should concentrate improving their EVFs instead of trying to do this hybrid stuff.
I prefer optical
Do you have evidence to support your lofty claim, Sir?
Why should an “E-7” the next FT camera anyway? I know camera makers don’t like 4 as model number because it sounds similar to “death” in some asian languages, but is there a reason why Olympus would avoid a E-6?
E-X cameras have always been odd number.
E-1
E-3
E-5
Its only logical what is next.
I have it, i think the name is E-H5 not E-7, and E-H5 is not a Pen, not a OM-D but a Pro camera so is FT/MFT hybrid. 🙂
That’s fantastic news, I finally buy the OM-D tomorrow as a carry all , and now know what lenses to buy with it, as I will keep my 12-60, 1.4TC and 50-200
Why is it people discount a future camera’s capability based on current technology? Saying that on sensor PDAF is inadequate: maybe right NOW, but not necessarily a year from now. I’ve watched as over the years people keep saying this sort of thing about any sort of improvement. “It won’t work because…” then of course Olympus or some other company comes out with a version of that tech that DOES work. People didn’t think the latest m4/3 cameras could focus as quickly as they do with m4/3 lenses.
So while I know people love to conjecture, I suggest anyone who does not take themselves too seriously in this. In my experience, many people don’t know enough about how camera design works to make accurate conjectures anyway. They tend to rely on taking what is already in place and assuming it will be adapted to the new camera, rather than allowing for an entirely new solution to be used.
Precisely.
Just how many years did it take for SLR PDAF to become actually actualyl fully working and trusted by photographers?
First iterations no doubt had problems even for stationary targets and getting focusing speed good enough for moving targets surely required lots of R&D.
And now it’s really easier because question isn’t about developing something entirely new but existing knowledge can be utilized as base.
My God, if that new cam really can use my FT SHG lens collections at full potential (focusing speed), it’ll be a camera of the year 2013!
I have it from good sources that the lens mount cap, flash socket cap, and battery and card doors will not be included in the package and you will have to pay $200 extra for them. There will also be a shortage of batteries for a year.
🙂
All I hope is the size is bigger than the OM-D. I like the camera dont get me wrong but the feel of the larger brother is so much better in my hands. i feel like Im playing with a toy everytime I use my OM-D. 😛
“A pro camera has to feel like a pro camera. So it shouldn’t be too small”
Dear God, why, oh why should we continue to encourage this marketing ploy of associating “pro” with “big”. It’s a camera, for heaven’s sake, not a male porn-star!
The selling point of the m4/3 format is its small size, and the smaller the better. If you don’t believe me look at the sales numbers of the RX100: high IQ and big sensor that can fit in a small pocket, that’s the whole point about it, and in fact that’s the reason why Sony accepted so many compromises with the lens – without harming its sales. I do hope that Olympus will listen to those sales numbers, not to the boys with toys.
Do you know what differentiates a “pro” camera from an “amateur” camera?
Control.
Please observe the number of buttons, as well as their placement, on pro cameras.
My E-3 has 7 buttons on top, 1 on the front and 14 on the back, plus an LCD display on top. The buttons are all placed in such a way that I absolutely cannot press any of them by accident.
The RX100 has, I think, 6 buttons total (plus a zoom rocker).
There is no room for control on small camera bodies. It’s a simple matter of functional design and usability.
You are right but this is not the best place for common sense 🙂
High-end M43 is like a 1 litre engine on a high-end car: it is marketing bullshit. How many suckers will buy it? I mean real suckers, not marketing ppl abusing “photography” forums. I am not touching it with a bargepole myself.
A “pro” camera needs better battery capacity than the E-M5, at least twice the capacity. I just picked up my Nikon D300: I have not touched it in more than 2 years: AMAZINGLY, there was still soe charge in the battery!!! And its atery used to give 700-1000 exposures.
Better battery capacity means a larger body. At the same time, I favor small bodies: I love how small the E-M5 is in comparison with the D300. Some compromise would be ok, e.g te need for a battery grip like in the E-M5. But I do think that a new OM-D shoud have a better capacity than he E-M5.
I completely agree on the need for ring/dial controls, which even supposedly “enthusiast” cameras sorely lack (how many single purpose dials does a Canon Rebel have?). On the whole, I must say, I find the ergonomics of digital cameras far worse (and random) than those of the old film cameras (and canicon has a lot to answer for that mess) – that’s probably one reason for the popularity of the fuji “retro” styling: manual controls are far easier to operate. But if there was enough room for manual controls (focus, aperture, speed, iso, or rather asa) on a tiny Rollei 35, surely there is enough room for controls on a similarly small digital camera – although, admittedly you need a few more controls for white balance,metering method, choice of focus point, nd filter (if any) and colour schemes.
> that’s probably one reason for the popularity of the fuji “retro” styling
You need to stop eating those poison frogs.
Fuji is small niche even in mirrorless segment which itself is only small part of interchangeable lens cameras.
And single purpose dials are waste of limited and valuable real estate.
Besides cameras show values of settings in viewfinder… if you’re actually using camera to take photographs and not admiring it as some fashion decoration.
I am an old dog and I am not happy to learn new tricks. Dedicated dials, properly positioned, mean that I can adjust simultaneously 3 to 4 shooting parameters, using the thumb and index of each hand, while I keep the camera steady, hugging it properly with both hands, the way I did with my Nikon FE2, back in my younger days (and as an ex-FE2 shooter I am also familiar with the concept of fast manual focusing – do you remember the days of split screen/microprism? – and with seeing values in the viewfinder – how do you think I chose speed and aperture?). Multiple function dials mean that I have to adjust settings sequentially, pushing buttons, to adjust the function of each dial. That’s slower, much slower; it is one reason why we rely more and more on automatic settings and only tinker with exposure compensation, something I never needed to do, back then; it is also a source of all those complaints about the size of the camera, the size of the buttons, and their position: small buttons are more difficult to manipulate than dedicated dials. Oh, and it is one reason (the other is of course Leica glass) why Leica shooters are so proud and smug about the “rangefinder experience” – there is nothing special about digital Leica bodies, except the intuitive simplicity of their manual controls.
And just in case you ask – why am I constantly complaining about size, if I have cut my teeth with an FE2 (which is more or less the same size with an EM-5 and not much heavier): I am no longer young and I don’t enjoy lugging around a big camera bag. Plus,I am in a profession that forces me to wear a suit and tie all day, except on holidays. I need something small and inconspicuous, that I can carry in my pocket, when I go around and that I can keep in my briefcase, together with my papers and ultrabook, when I travel. Plus, even during holidays, there is the WAF to consider: when we divide loads in our rucksacks, before going out for a long walk, or before boarding a plane there is no way I could convince here that the bulk and weight of a digital behemoth should be taken into account. In fact, even during the pre-digital days, the Nikon, having had to compete with baby bottles, books, a cuddly, and associated parafernalia, ended up staying at home and I had to make to with my wife’s compact (an Oly, if you must ask).
Is this special pleading? No, I don’t think so. I suspect I am just a member of a silent majority, whose needs are simply not taken into account by gearheads. I need, I want, a camera that will travel with me, in my pocket (jacket or coat pocket will do), just as the first Leicas did in the 20ies, not a camera that I will admire in a shelf. It’s time to remember that SMALL SIZE SMALL FORMAT high IQ cameras (that’s what Leica was back then) turned photography into a popular hobby.
… end of 2013 – it’s not amazing. Nearly one year in addition to get full availibilty for the stuff. I couldn’t understand…
But if it’s not an adapter, then people who buyed an E-M5 (or PEN) have to buy another camera to use FT lenses? Not a good idea for the customers, only a good idea for Olympus to make money.
I would really like to see Olympus but the 5-axis technology to use and release a Camera similar to the GH3 that is specifically designed with video use in mind.
They have this amazing stabilization technology that if done properly could give them a major competitive edge in the sense that no steady cam or similar rig is required and also lenses that don’t have OIS can be stabilized.
With the OMD-5 they have manage to completely hobble this cameras from a video perspective. This makes absolutely no sense.
Bring out a killer camera that does amazing video that rivals that of the GH3. Once word get’s around they will sell a gazillion of them.
What’s so hot about some more overpriced crappy cameras?
Finally the wait is getting smaller. I have an E510 with 14-54 and 50mm. It will be great to be able to use these lenses on a new camera, and still be able to make the camera smaller to work with the panasonic 20mm. Its the ideal solution and will give micro four thirds users access to older and better lenses.
This will triple the lens inventory!
This will be the “professional” MFT model the chatting class has been speculating about. As an aside it will also be FULLY compatible with FT lenses (new MFT/FT adaptor included as a kit option). More importantly, it will have new wizardry to allow phase detect AF; the professional photography world would scoff at anything less.
be cool.
I don’t believe this intervew.
It’s not Tokyo main branch talk. (that’s all)
CEO talked in the Japanese magazine, a littlbe bit, but definitely differenct things.
Anyway, just wait for CP+ at the end of Jan. ’13. It must be clear at the show. Olympus must announce something there.
They should just keep it simple: PDAF on sensor, 4/3 lens compatibility for all future models. The adapters are there, the sensor technology should be ready by late 2013…
Project Kasei.
http://www.eudict.com/?lang=japeng&word=kasei
It could be this, that or the other!
It’ll be kasai = section system (modular?)
or kasai = honor of the family (best camera ever or the design team die)
“those who want the feel of an SLR and at the same time take advantage of a small system.”
I have been waiting a long time for a company to get that logic, so simple.
DUH!!
Cant wait to see it.
“I have been waiting a long time for a company to get that logic”
Might want to saunter over and visit Panasonic-Land…
Panny didn’t even make the effort of adapting 4/3 lenses. I saw today a 12-60 selling for 350 EU and I was tempted, but it’s a big beast to carry around compared to the 12-50. So There you have it, miniaturization has carried on and m4/3 is the true inheritor of 4/3, the last thing traditionalists wanted.
Interesting to see how at Fuji they ended up accepting an EVF before they got zooms.
If the hybrid has going on since 2009 there is some possibility that the mirrored sensors for AF are inside the mount. They are very small and I wonder what sort of dim image they could convey to an OVF. So chances of having a dSLR redux are really very dim. Sizewise I Can imagine it like an E-M5 with a fixed grip. Perhaps it could carry the 12-60 naturally, but am I interested in such a camera.
In a way I participate do a mobile society by documenting a city, so a smaller RF like camera with small lenses is better adapted. A bigger camera for specialised tasks and studio work, perhaps. But then a FF mirrorless, a small one, might even be better adapted.
In this mess (Riley) the problem becomes which lenses to keep. My aim is to buy as little as possible, Oly has the opposite interest, if it wants to survive. So we are exposed to the sirens of marketing which obfuscate the issue by presenting always more seductive shining objects. I still believe in a cropped format dedicated to stills so the E-M5 is really a watershed.
Oly found itself, in its misery, with all the keys for the doors to open, like Alice. Each door leads to a different part of the story, but this is true for all Japanese makers, that might be at the verge of extinction, if they meddle too much with prices and bodies. Retro and tradition work like a compass, but they still have to open the right door at the right moment. m4/3 was a good choice, it will keep on for quite a while.
“Panny didn’t even make the effort of adapting 4/3 lenses.”
Panny had no need to adapt lenses. All the lenses they produced for 4/3 were cdaf optimised from the beginning.And work just fine on micro,with the exception of the original 14-50mm f2.8 I have them all. The 14-150 is one of my favorite lenses. Panny was ahead of Oly from the begining in this regard. That is why they were first to produce a mirrorless camera and Olympus exibited a wooden block mock up for a year until their first effort which was panned for it’s painfully slow AF. Panny had no worry about Zuiko’s and the anchor of 4/3….that’s Oly’s problem. I’m happy with my OMD. And have all my 4/3 camera’s tucked away where I don’t have to carry them around.
12-60 for 350 euros? Where?
mm by end of 2013 FF Nikons will sell for under $1000,so Oly better price this cheap enough,or who will buy it?? If its as overpiced as the E5 is,what market is there? except for the few with 4/3 glass who haven’t moved on..must wait and see..anyway hard to sell my 4/3 glass so better to keep it for now…
Will it be silver?
Sad in a way, and a relief in another way. That is, I don’t have to wait for that E-7 anymore… But it’s also a fact that I have to make some decisions for the future, Nikon or Canon… Beside the E-3 I also use a GX1 and it’s a wonderful camera but it can never replace a real DSLR when it comes to wildlife photography.
No news this morning? Has the baby arrived?
Nope! But I had a long night with friends 🙂
E-M5 almost camera of year in dpreview for users,
vote for this please to win the D800:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/12/19/best-camera-2012-poll
That would explain the lack of fast zooms from Olympus 😉 they already have ’em in FT 🙂
Basically I agree with Anonymous (why don’t you get a nick? It’s confusing). M4/3 thrives with lighter cameras, Western populations are getting older, more urban, we’ll need less car driving, hopefully.
4/3 was part of a different world. I can visualise a redneck with his cars full of long zooms shooting a deer from his car window, and then riding on.
Those beautiful lenses are almost useless now. Will you stick your 50-200 under the nose of a gansta in the metro? 🙂
Instead the old Leica design of a pocketable camera with pancakes enjoys a new life. So for me the rumoured hybrid camera, is just paying back the debt to those who spent thousands for now obsolete lenses.
I am not really interested, much more curious is a RF type of camera comes at the end of Jan 2013. I am not a birder after all, I don’t want to put a distance between me and my subject. A 300 mm eq. is more than I will ever need.
Can you imagine HCB shooting teles? In the end I think that m4/3 will keep proving its worth like an ‘always with you camera’. Other formats will cater to more specialised tasks.
Having an additional 30 lenses in one stroke however is no mean thing. It’s good however that Oly never forgets what made 4/3 a flop and m4/3 a success story.
I suspect you refer to me. Should be obvious that it was a response to the replies to my previous comments – but still, I should not have forgotten to add my nick. Sorry!
I rather like the compact e-m5 and the wide array of primes, but to suggest there is no need for long lenses is maybe true for you personally, but absurd in general.
See, people get kids, those then go to school and at some point often take part in school sporting events, musicals, theatre shows and such. Most parents want pictures of such things, to just find out that all the advice they got for buying a camera made them buy things that won’t do the job.
And no, that is not a cornercase, but an extremely common situation.
See, long lenses have more uses then birding, and actually have good uses also for city dwellers.
And on another note, many do not agree with your opinion on why 4/3 wasn’t a success, and your opinion isn’t exactly a fact.
There has been a paradigm shift also in sales. Mirrorless penetration in the highest in Japan and South Asia countries, urban people who couldn’t care less about American School sporting events, pets (they eat them) and other niceties of the American Way of Life (AWoL).
I am afraid that you are still not realizing what is happening to you, and your very limited view of reality.
We couldn’t care less about AWoL 🙂
Blahblah, sorry Amalric, but I’m European, living in a city, and talking purely from a European city-dweller perspective. See, schools overhere also do sporting events, musicals, theatre shows and such. So why the need for your ridiculous argument about Americanism, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with anything.
I could spend a day a week just taking pictures of the kids of my collegues during their swimming exams, sporting events etc. Some of the collegues I trust borrow my E-3 and 50-200 for that. And this is in a company with less then 200 people.
Yes there has been a paradigm shift towards mirrorless, and I wasn’t anywhere saying that that wasn’t happening
I was SPECIFICALLY AND EXCLUSIVELY commenting on your absurd statement about people no longer needing long lenses just because more people live in the city, and if you ever get out of your mother’s basement and go mingle with people who have real lifes, you’d be able to find out yourself why your statement is totally ridiculous.
What is more, the mantra that most people only need a 28-105 equiv approx has been around for way longer then those mirrorless systems, and it was already wrong 20 years ago, something which many people found out to their frustration.
Couldn’t care less about your unphotographic family life, it’s not my family and it’s not the readership’s either.
I only notice that you are stalking me, as if you were offended. Let me therefore ignore you, as your poor social graces deserve.
See Amalric, as soon as someone points out that your argument doesn’t work as you present it, you get personal and start making bad assumptions about the person you talk to.
In this case, I was not talking about my family life, as I don’t have kids myself. This is just as silly and unfounded an assumption as your previous one about me being American.
It so happens that people with children are a somewhat huge demographic worldwide, so it might also be good for someone who wants to sell stuff to keep their existence in mind. You are absolutely brilliant in missing the point here.
Congratulations on also missing the ‘example’ part and your total failure to see other pretty easy to understand cases.
When talking about selling cameras and what people need, you need to look quite a bit beyond your own little world, and try to imagine what OTHER people might need, and try to draw the ‘big picture’ based on that and your own preferences. Not everyone needs the same thing, and no, not everyone needs what you need.
So… try again princely ruler, lets see what bad assumptions you come up with, and what ‘creative’ ways you find to become insulting this time.
whoah this blog is great i like reading your articles. Stay up thee good work!
You already know, a lot of persons aare seearching aroound for this info, you can help them greatly.
Alarmic, you make broad sweeping assumptions. Your broad assumptions are broader than your bald forehead. Asians eat their pets? So, Robin Wong is asian and eats his pets? You have a very limited view on reality. Perhaps some travelling to far away places might be of educational value to you. Get an education before you start playing forum guru. Broaden your views to match that legendary forehead of yours. You post some valid points but the rest of your post show your ignorance. The world does not revolve around America Alarmic.
I was joking, not everybody eats their pets. However in Shangai or other big city of the coast I saw the pictures of pet restaurants, there was a whole street of them.
And my comment was not so much about people who do it , but about people who all they ever do with their camera is taking portraits of their brats and pets.
What I know is that LiveView was never a success with 4/3 users, perhaps because Oly never took the radical step of conveying to an EVF. It is presumably doing it now, and see the absurd resistance that dSLR fanboys put up, at DPR’s 1041.
Some will always take innovation as a personal offense.As if the money they had invested guaranteed immortality to them and their pyramids. Unfortunately AF systems have proven to be the most transient things.
Therefore I understand people who invest on CV and other Leica-like lenses. They at least cannot fail as investment, especially if they have a universal mount. Leica has been there for over 80 yrs. and it is still alive and kicking, despite it has only MF lenses.
If one kept to HCB’s maxim that one only ever needs a good lens, think of the savings! Mirrorless additionally makes very easy to use MF lenses, and thus conquer piece of mind.
Today every noob behaves as if he was a pro. But pros have very specific needs, very often limited to a studio. And they can recoup the investment in 2 or 3 yrs.
What we see really is people that overspent, and then are left stranded by a change of technology. Do they deserve any sympathy? I am happy that Oly will offer a hybrid alternative, but I am afraid it won’t be cheap.
24p or mine is going in the river
It’s gonna sound quite silly but I can not resist anymore and I must say this: Miquel Àngel Garcia looks alike Jaws (from James Bond movie series): http://bond.neoseeker.com/w/i/bond/9/9b/Jaws.jpg
Well, IMOP, the only key question here is :
Do you need to frame and made pictures via prisms and lenses with the “real” light coming into your eyes to judge and decide if you will shoot or not ?
I do, at least most of the time.
The image on an screen, what ever the quality of the screen, is not the light of reality, it is a recalculation of reality. I just cannot capture a part of the reality that I cannot evaluate as such.
Photographers who can take pictures by judging light and pictures out of a screen are undoubtly happier and better served today.
All the historical reference “pro” camera whatever their size (i.e. including the small ones leica M, contax G) did allow such a “real life” view thanks to quality “real life” viewers. it is obviously the case of the Leica M, refered hereunder.
How we will be able to further use the excellent FT lenses is mainly a marketing question, not a key concern for most “pro” photographer. Indeed the FT lenses are excellent, but there are plenty of excellent lenses everywhere, including a huge choice of legacy prime lenses like the Zeiss, Leica or even Zuiko. Nor is key the question of the rapidity of the AF, it is note central for most pro protographers who still need the control of their focus and depth of field. The key question is how far we will be able to made the shooting decision looking at the real light through excellent lenses, like the FT ones.
I am really sad to read that the chances of having a real new pro DSLR are now very thin. Olympus has been used by some for decades and was rated, for some pro users, to the same level as other “great” photographic brands like Contax, Leica, Canon or Nikon. Without this “high grade level” image even the chance of evolving as a consumer, or prosumer, brand only are just reduced.
When someone writes an article he/she maintains the idea of a user
in his/her mind that how a user can know it. So that’s why this post is amazing.
Thanks!