Photographer Nozomi Tanaka is well known in Japan and well connected to the Japanese companies. In a tweet (Click here for the translation) he confirmed that Olympus will keep the Four Thirds system well alive. And he hopes the rumors about the end of the Four Thirds system will soon quite down. Rumors about new E-xx or E-X models are spreading the web since a while but I got no confirmation from my sources yet…let’s see!
Meantime the E-5 has a $200 Instant rebate and sells for $1499 at Amazon and Adorama.
89 Responses
Lol…
Survive under artificial ways…
“lol”?
What’s so funny?
Please do not be that condescending, it’s just plain silly!
What if you had invested in some serious lenses, and not just in a plastic kit lens?
What if you have invested like 25000$/20000€ into native 4/3 HG/SHG glass?
Would you be happy if you were left without any new 4/3 PDAF compatible camera bodies anymore?
Guess we would have heard you screaming then!
Get real, we are not all carrying a pink camera in a purse, you know…
I don’t think it’s condescending, I think it’s humorous when companies or marketing companies try to lie or sugar coat something which everyone can see through.
The issue here is what is the definition of “alive”.
It’s true that they can release a new 4/3rds camera every 2 or 4 years or so just to keep the 4/3rds users going. I think it would be a nice thing for them to do given it wouldn’t take much R&D. By this I mean just upgrade the sensor / cpu / connectors, i.e. no real R&D, just reassembly of what is being R&D-ed else where. Honestly I think this is what olympus’ definition of “alive” is.
There’s a difference between that, and micro-4/3rds. m4/3rds has active R&D and new ideas and new concepts and new form-factors being worked on. i.e. you’re not likely to see a 4/3rds video camera, you’re not about to see a pocket-able 4/3rds camera, you’re not likely to see anything new in 4/3rds unless it came from m4/3rds R&D and is easy to move over. (except possible phase focus stuff because they have to).
So I think they’ve taken some liberal license with the word “alive” and I think most people would refer to that as on long-term-life-support, not quite alive.
This of course comes back to one of my previous posts about the cost of lenses. You say you’ve got 20-25k worth of 4/3rds lenses. I hope you’re either rich, or a professional photographer who gets well compensated for the photos you take with those lenses. If you are, then you can complain but you’ll get little sympathy. If you are not… then the question becomes what are you doing with those lenses.
Some one previously mentioned that olympus isn’t forcing me to buy their expensive lenses… true statement. (although in self defence there are sometimes no cheap alternatives… find me an auto-focus lens around 10mm, there’s about 3 options all of which cost about $700) It’s always a hard task to question myself about my need for more equipment. I guess your plight is good for the rest of us to recognise that nothing is forever and the word investment is often misleading – it’s a depreciating asset is what it is. We better think long and hard about the cost of equipment v.s. the photos kept. At 20k worth of lenses… some one would have to ask themselves how many photos are keepers (or sell-able if you’re a pro), and then work out the value of each photo given the cost of the lenses.
I think you’ll be very surprised at what Olympus has up it’s sleeves and the impact they will have….
I have no insider info, but I think the same.
Olympus are not stupid to reintroduce what didn’t sell (in 4/3 format that is). They shure must be comming with something really new and interesting if they have decided to come back.
I won’t put any guess here, but whoever is following recent tech developments within Olympus, and other manufacturers too, can get the idea.
New and interesting? Like the E-5 was when it was launched?
We’ll see when the E_7 is announced. If it has true R&D put into it it will be obvious. If it’s a sensor refresh it will be obvious too.
even a sensor change would mean changing the mobo too, and my first expectation is that is what it would be. That and I have this idea that Ex owners would rather not duel with another interface, and actually expect it to be the same. That worked ok for E3-E5
the real effort is the price which relates to costs, making an expensive camera cheaper doesn’t come for free, it takes research and effort. This after all was a key ingredient of the recent paper.
so will it be cheaper….
Just a sensor refresh is probably what everyone wants. The design of the E-5 is just fine as is: the viewfinder is nice, the autofocus works well (held back by lenses usually), the ergonomics are good…
I would expect to see 16×9 HD video in 25p for the first time too
“What if you have invested like 25000$/20000€ into native 4/3 HG/SHG glass?”
What if you have more money than brains?
@NotReally:
“What if you have more money than brains?”
Thx, smartass.
Some are obviously more of an enthusiast than others.
Good lenses normally lasts, provided camera body development doesn’t halt all of a sudden. Hence buying glass is normally not a bad idea. I’m not the only one following that logic. And living outside US, prices are far higher for such an investment. So no need to be that cocky. Are you smarter than others you think? Well, I guess your nickname is the answer to that…
>It’s true that they can release a new 4/3rds camera every 2 or 4 years or so just to keep the 4/3rds users going
isnt exactly anyones idea of dead is it
either that or you have some ‘interesting’ relatives
@Anonymous
“This of course comes back to one of my previous posts about the cost of lenses.” what kind of crud is that if you have left an “ANONYMOUS” comment!!!!!!!!!
This is just “humour noir”. I invested in E system for the size in 2008 with E-510. I bought several more lenses and an external flash. And Oly announced that they stop low end bodies. So I bought a second-hand E-620 one year ago for the future. And now? I’m not interested in high end body (too big, to expensive). And I can’t imagine Oly producing new low/middle end body. Which market? So for me, 43 is dead.
Photography equipment is not an investment. An investment is something you buy hoping that it will increase in value. We buy cameras because we enjoy using them, not because we think they will yield a profitable return.
Speak for yourself some of us making a living from.our equipment.
Olympus is barely meeting the demands of OM-D, it should build on its success and move forward, rather than trying to keep the dead system alive.
Other than those current FT owners, who else would buy another FT cameras??
I don’t know… anyone who currently buys APS-C DSLRs? Seems fairly straightforward to me…
I don’t know… anyone who currently buys APS-C DSLRs? Seems relatively straightforward to me…
E5 instead of em5 for $1499
> In a tweet he confirmed that Olympus will keep the Four Thirds system well alive.
IIRC he shoots with E-3/E-5. In other words, he says that we can expect E-6 or E-7.
To me it sounds that 43 is alive, but only as pretty small group of 43 owners is concerned. For the rest: 43 is dead.
And that is pretty much what we knew well already.
P.S.
/me hugs 12-60, weeps in the corner
Actually that reminds me of the 650D. Waiting for reviews how the on-sensor PDAF would perform.
Alot of pople would if Olympus would start promoting it again . I have had the Nikon d90 and the Mark 11 . i wouldn’t trade my e-5 for either
Pretty much tough I think an E-7 with minimal R&D with the new sensor is not a bad camera for the 4/3rds owner.
They either need to build a Micro Four Thirds version of the 12-60mm or they need to build a new Four Thirds camera to mount on this lens onto for fast auto-focus.
The 12-60mm is a special special lens and as a Micro Four Thirds user (not a Four Thirds user), the only reason I would ever buy an E-6 would be to use the 12-60mm in all its glory. (There are a few other unique and amazing Four Thirds lenses, but the 12-60mm is the one I truly love.)
You give me hope again.
Thanks, mr. Tanaka!
2 Chris.
Yes, You absolutely right, only FT users need new FT cameras. But as FT user I cant change system, because I have many Pro ZD Lenses. This lenses is not new, but its more sharper and faster, than newest lenses of other systems.
That why I need new Pro FT camera, may be one time in 5 years.
oh my God 4/3rds is the best camera ever made – why doesn’t Olympus Promote it . For 2 years all we heard is 4/3rds is dead – then guess what E-7. No other lens is really needed all they need to do is upgrade the camera every two years. Take the E-m5 put a mirror in it and 4/3rds goes on .
Considering the superb quality of many of the 43 lenses it would be a damn shame if there wasnt an E7 just when Olympus have got a sensor that will finally get the best out of them.
yes it would be a shame, but times are tough for Olympus, and i sense they are looking to scale back. Counterpoint is, an Exxx and Ex combined might sell 100,000 cameras making a considerable contribution to sales.
It would really like if the e-7 was the size of the e-4xx/6xx, maybe a little bit bigger, or make the e-7xx weathersealed.
Lol……..i think mr. Tanaka still thinks Santa Claus is for real.
In a way, he is: Santa Claus, or rather Saint Nicholas (270-343), was a bishop in current Turkey; there is a museum about his life in Anthalia on the Mediterrean coast of Turkey — a popular tourist city. So he is for real, but may differ from the modern, fat Coca Cola guy :-).
The Name of the city is Antalya.
FYI
Real, but even less alive than FT.
I’m really confused by all this “keeping 4/3rds” alive. Olympus officially announced in 2010 that it would cease developing 4/3rds lenses. Even if they produce another body to protect peoples investments for the short term, the system is essentially over, right? Or am I missing something!? 🙂
You’re basically right, but mFT bodies can alreday use FT-lenses with an adapter. The problem is that AF-performance on mFT-bodies varies from usable to horrible depending on the lens an you requirements. If Olympus can solve this problem then mFT could replace FT bodies and provide an upgrad path for FT-users without forcing Olympus to make more FT-bodies which they can’t really sell in large enough numbers.
There’s no alternative to certain FT lenses and combos.
m43 is all and well for short lenses (which are again worse than 43rds ones), but it’s not nearly as tough as E-X and lenses are very flimsy compared to HG and SHG 43 ones.
I see no reason why Olympus can’t offer 1 or 2 new 43 bodies – tech is there, Olympus has currently the best (m)43 sensor and processing rivaling APS-C with the “small” exception of ZD lenses trampling over any Canikon lens in the same focal and price range.
There are a lot of people with HG and SHG lenses and they don’t want to switch systems or go micro because they appreciate their lenses too much for that.
As an owner of the E-1 and E-3 bodies, along with numerous high grade and Panasonic/Leica 4/3 lenses, I can tell you without exaggeration that the E-M5 cannot touch those cameras in regards to their capabilities with still photography, ruggedness, and superior ergonomics. There is very much a need for for those big, old DSLR’s for users like me, and many others.
Micro 4/3 cameras are wonderful advanced compact cameras, but there’s no way on earth they’ll ever replace a DSLR, not even an entry-level model, except in regards to video. When it comes to video, the Panasonic GH series beats everything, including whatever crap Nikon and Canon are passing off now-a-days. But then at $1000 to $1500 USD a copy with a lens, it should.
– Olympius.
I own two E-M5 bodies, an E-PM1, and ten m43 lenses. But I also still own and use my E-5 with what remains of my 4/3 lens collection: 12-60, 14-35, 35-100, 50-200, and Bigma. As much as I love my E-M5, and as much use as it gets, I simply cannot part with my E-5 kit, and if an E-7 comes out, I will likely get one.
There is just something special about the HG/SHG 4/3 lenses. People who have never used them may make fun of 4/3 owners, but Olympus owners of HG/SHG lenses know what I’m talking about.
These lenses are so good that, given how far the 4/3 sensor has progressed, I think an E-7 with the E-M5 sensor and HG/SHG glass could attract new 4/3 users, not just existing ones.
+1
You are absolutely right. The images look real. Not real pictures; they look like real life. The resolution of the lenses caries through to the final image in a way that can’t be compensated for by computational manipulation.
Regards,
Alan
You are right…if this mythical E-7 becomes reality, and is as good IQ wise as the E-M5, I can see non-Olympians going for it to get their hands on lenses like the 14-54, 12-60, 50-200, and 50 macro. Those four lenses blow away anything that Nikon or Canon bring to the table, and the SHG lenses are on a whole other plain of existence. The E-M5 will get them in the door, but the 4/3 glass will get them to stay.
Bodies are here today, gone tomorrow — look at the silly 9 month upgrade cycle of the Pens. But good glass, that will last forever. Olympus 4/3 has the best glass of any system camera, and I willingly include Leica M-mount into that mix.
That alone is enough reason to keep the E system alive.
– Olympius
I’m waiting for an MMF-3 to try my 14-54 on my E-M5 to see how well it performs. I’m sure the IQ will be nice but will see how well it can focus on it. I’m not getting rid of my E30 as it still has it’s uses (even though it doesn’t produce the same sharpness of the E5).
It focuses about as fast as the Panny 20mm. It’s a very nice combo, but pretty big on the EM5.
I owned E-510+50/2 and 12-60 and switched to Canon (60D) about year ago when it came probable that Olympus is not going to release E-530 or E-50. In my opinion, 12-60 and 50/2 can be replaced quite well with 15-85 and 60/2.8 macro. The build quality is not the same, e.g. they are not weather sealed – but neither was E-510. AF works considerably better in 60D+60/2.8 combination than with E-510+50/2 – less hunting. ISO 3200 in 60D is better than ISO 800 in E-510:-)
I know that with E-5 many of these differences would disappear, but I have never seen E-5 in a local camera store (or other non-m4/3 gear for several years, and even with m4/3 the selection is VERY small). With all the accessories the delivery estimate was 2-4 weeks…
I have not seen E-M5 in my local camera store too. 😀
Panda9 – excellent post. I agree with you completely. I also have the E-M5, E-PM1, etc., and I also have the E-5 and E-620 (with great 4/3 lenses). The ones on this forum who are not 4/3 users are completely clueless. These are all wonderful cameras.
Agreed.
As long as there is a body to control them, I will never part with the Zuiko HG 50mm f2 nor the Zuiko SHG 150mm f/2 lenses.
One thing I have noticed, is that looking through the optical path is less stressful on the eye than looking through an electric view finder, on longer photo shoots.
Honestly, I own both 4/3 and m4/3 systems. I prefer 4/3 for all day photo work while I prefer m4/3 for video work. I like the handling of 4/3 for long shoots. I like m4/3 (GH2) for it’s superior video abilities.
I especially like that the systems are somewhat compatible and work well together.
Can you post some examples? I am not taking the piss.
> Micro 4/3 cameras are wonderful advanced compact cameras
Every single mirrorless body maker is guilty to cameras being comparable only to various compacts and struggling to be in class of entry-level DSLRs without additional grips.
Even eight years old fixed lens Minolta prosumers have far more advanced ergonomics… and those challenge GH2’s compactness in other directions except depth!
Such shame that Minolta’s imaging division got bought by consumer electronics/game console maker.
I can see that there is a lot of anger and hate againts m4/3 system. I can’t agree with you. Old OM-2 film camera didn’t have good ergonomy either and I still use it. Small size is always trade off from ergonomy but I’m willing to take camera with me rather than leaving to my home.
OM-D with HLD-6 grip is great, but without a grip it is just bad as any other compact system camera.
I don’t hate mirrorless. In fact I’ve been waiting from 2008 for someone to figure out making mirrorless interchangeable lens body resembling highest end prosumers before worser ergonomics entry level DSLRs replaced them.
M4/3’s claim was that of only higher image quality camera not much bigger than compacts but with apparent increase of sensor size in many coming fixed lens compacts that claim is going to be shot down.
And problem of small size only is that camera is still another device to carry beside cellphone and with lens mount always bigger than it or fixed lens compacts.
4/3 sensor has gotten to level where it can challenge APS-C which has been for years deemed as good enough for most and could do also in actual high end body to diversify range. If I can’t have also good ergonomics body in same mirrorless system I could as well skip whole m4/3 to go for DSLRs (/Sony A77 SLT would be better for my use) for proper ergonomics needing use and have fixed lens compact as that carry always camera.
So what is it that so many here are afraid in possibility of m4/3 becoming first mirrorless system to offer body which can actually challenge enthusiast DSLRs in ergonomics?
Is it that you want to compromise in ergonomics for enabling smallest size and don’t want those willing to compromise in size to have body better in ergonomics?
Mirrorless system should be all about getting rid of limitations of analog era’s camera classes.
I think that they might be afraid of putting the m43 e-m5 internals in a m43 DSLR body of a similar size to the e5, e30 or 620. They are afraid they would be accused of growing the m43 to the 4/3 size and that did not work for some the first time around.
yes KM 5D and 7D had great interfaces, slowly but surely Sony is leaving the best parts of them behind.
Though sensor wasn’t the highest performing Dimage A2 was real design masterpiece for its combination of features and size/weight. (spot AF fixed most focus problems)
Better ergonomics than in all entry level DSLRs and in some areas I rate it higher than E-30 or any DSLRs: Body cut straight after lens to have EVF close enough edge to avoid nose hitting body.
Would gladly pay 1500€ without slightest hesitation for similar ergonomics modern feature m4/3 body. (E-M5’s sensor and IBIS, Sony’s OLED viewfinder and Panasonics integration of video with 50/60p+bitrates of GH2 hacks)
Never had a E-x but owned a few E-xxxs and the 12-60mm as well.
Undoubtedly the 4/3 lens are great but Olympus simply don’t have the capability to market this format to where it needs to be. Instead of investing resources to revive something, use it on keeping what they currently have winning (m/43) on top. IMHO most (if not all) the people that would buy into a new E-X would be current glass owners.
Can any of your readers do a ‘human’ translation of Nozomi Tanaka’s tweet I think the deveil is in the nuance of his message
“Rumors” were floating around that Olympus would be phasing out the E series. That had me a bit worried, so I asked Olympus some questions, and the answer was clear: “We won’t stop the E series, there’s no change from Ogawa-san’s statement last year.” Relief!
An E7 is probably in the works. The development of the EM5 paves the way for this.
I love the E5 and hope the E7 is a monster. In some ways it is better than 5D2. Problem is that that for the same size kit and price I can get FF. EM5 plus a bunch of primes is how I’ll relive the magic of Oly one day.
Must be tough to go through life with a girl’s name, Mr Tanaka 😉
Anyway I only care about the E system insofar as much as I can use my PDAF lenses. I won’t even think one second about E system if I can somehow use them on an OM-D body. That’s all Olympus needs to do, make the HG/SHG lenses relevant again.
I thought Olympus publicly stated about a year ago they are discontinuing the 43 cameras in favour of M43. I though they also said there will be one more body to replace the E5 to see current users through. In saying this, I can’t find an article to back it up, so not sure if my memory is failing me.
It would be nice to see an update to the E5 though. One of my biggest dislikes about the 43 cameras is the small viewfinder. If they were to follow a similar route as Sony by using a high resolution EVF that would essentially eliminate that problem.
My only other dislike is the fact it’s harder to achieve a shallow DOF. Every camera has a short coming and I suppose this would be it. I do really like the Olympus lenses.
> One of my biggest dislikes about the 43 cameras is the small viewfinder.
That’s why good enough on sensor PDAF would be important step besides improving focus tracking of m4/3.
While I don’t believe EVF to be ready to replace OVF at all levels other bodies except E-5 could be replaced by introducing more ergonomical m4/3 body.
Lack of mirror box and bulky optics of OVF would make it even lighter than same class 4/3 body.
I have been using the E3, E5 and the E-M5 and I love them all.
E3 is really good but mostly for good light only. I have to be very careful with the exposure to get the best of it. Then came the E5, and low light situation becomes easier to deal with.
When I got hold of the E-M5, it brings great joy to shoot. Especially with the battery grip attached, which is still very light relative to the big DSLRs. It has more details in its images (using the 43 lenses) than the E3 and 5. In high ISO, the bigger siblings cannot touch it. In places where flash guns are not allowed, this really make my work so much easier.
Having said that, the CDAF though is fast, can be fooled. If the subject has less contrast relative to the background, the E-M5 will most likely to grab the wrong subject. PDAF has the advantage in this area.
I will think that the next E7 or E6, will most likely be a mirrorless body with 4/3 mount.
I agree with a lot of the comments here, both ways. A mirrorless body with full AF support af the 43rds line would be great, AND keep a top of the line OVF model.
Lets see what happens.
You want a mirrorless OVF body?
Nope, you misunderstood. It would be great to have a mirrorless body that AF the lenses, as it will help CAF to have some PDAF support. AND I hope they keep an OVF model as an option.
Ab
E-5 in the topic not em-5
Me think some 4/3 owners are as delusional as Leica owners based on some comments above.
Comments such as “The images look real. Not real pictures; they look like real life” and “Those four lenses blow away anything that Nikon or Canon bring to the table, and the SHG lenses are on a whole other plain of existence” are just sad. I guess they are stuck at denial, anger, bargaining stage and haven’t move on to depression and acceptance yet.
4/3 is dead and if Olympus decided to ruin its financial and bring a corpse to life no one sane would buy it. It was the most inapt DSLR system conceived. Low quality sensor, tiny view finder, full size body and exorbitant price. It was so bad that Olympus has to come up with the great m4/3 to save the company.
Anyone waiting a DSLR would be much better served with a D7000, K-30, A57 or 650D.
I’d like to add that every m4/3 user should beat down 4/3 old guards’ demand for a new body and lens. Olympus should not divide its attention on two system when m4/3 still needs so much work. A new E-PL4 would be welcome.
Just so you know, the article title is addressing him “Tanake” while his name is Tanaka.
I’ve never owned an Oly camera until the OMD (geez what a crappy lettered name) and its cute little 12mm f:2 and I’m totally smitten. It does not replace a single Canon 1Ds mklll or 5d mklll I use for jobs let alone the MD Hasseys but it is ground breaking and even Michael Reichmann loves the thing.
Oh. I used the 75mm f:1.8 last week and the camera is so light it was very hard to hold steady at low shutter speeds. Very.
Meh – even Reichmann loves OM-D
Well, whatever he said, is nothing new. This guy just collects cameras, and uses them until next toy comes buy. Using even medium format digital back (among others) to publish smallish casual pictures on his website, and call them fine art… and then videos how he uses cameras…
In the past there were many interesting articles published on his site, but the quality is definitely going down
It would be truely great to have an E-7. It would keep the E-system alive. Besides, I doubt that it would cost Oly too much of their attention on the mFT-system, as most of the technology is already there. And when I hear some mFT-users arguing that Oly should abandon FT, I think that this is completely foolish. If the wonderful HG- and SHG-lenses are kept alive, they might be used on future mFT-cameras and that would make the mFT-system truely invincible.
It’s human nature to badmouth what you don’t have, cannot afford or haven’t tried. If someone has an expensive car, “he has a small peen”. If a woman is attractive, “she must be easy and a gold-digger”.
Likewise with 4/3. The hatred mostly comes from people with entry-level Canikons or m4/3. Doubly so if they switched systems and lost money in the process, while getting something optically worse. Few – if any – people who have handled the E-x with a 12-60, 50 or 50-200, much less SHG glass, would badmouth the likelihood of an E-7.
It all basically comes down to *being scared*, because the badmouthers *know* that the E-7 is going to run capability and IQ circles around all mirrorless cameras and lenses for them, while at the same time being much easier to actually *use* due to better ergonomy and bigger size. A simple fact of the matter, for example, is that the new E-M5 IBIS had to be developed by Olympus to reach the IBIS levels of the 2007-era cameras, which due to their size, shape and weight are a lot easier to hold steady and carry around than a mirrorless, gripless soapbox.
I’ve already heard from an acquaintance that his E-P3 “isn’t pocketable”. No shit, Sherlock – if you wanted a pocketable camera, you should have bought a pocketable camera, or one of the newer mobile phones.
Bring on the hate if it makes you happy, but come autumn, I’ll have an E-7, a reliable, rugged workhorse, and it’s going to be good enough for the rest of my life. You, on the other hand, will keep purchasing a new incrementally-minor-improved m4/3 camera body every year and pining for fjords and better lenses (which won’t even come with a bloody lens hood, ffs).
@Boooo!
yeah all this hate and trolling is a good sign, shows the competition is running scared and on the backfoot 🙂
@YDDY
Yes, I’m sure fear of an E-7 has the competition, including Canikon, worried sick. The dread that it could dominate the market even more than the E-5 is palpable. 🙂
@MKJ
E-7 won’t need to dominate it just needs to another part of the unseating of the canikon duopoly.
+
++
+++
fingers crossed on the new e-7, really hope its something special.
Weathersealed E-xxx with the new omd sensor and is for $1000.
Thanks hlbt, yes relief
A question to all the m43 proponents who are saying 43rds should be killed off:
What if in couple of years Olympus and Panasonic make a new standard (call it nano43rds with even smaller cameras and lenses and faster AF and better video AF implementation), but with worse lenses and worse build quality and ergonomics.
Will you rush for the nano43 then as well? Selling all your micro43 gear for peanuts just so you can have newest sensors and smallest cameras possible over better lenses, build quality and ergonomics?
Your way of thinking is wrong (I have the same …). Most of DSLR owners only have one lens, the kit lens that they bought with the body. When they change the body, they buy (nearly for free) the new kit lens with it. No fidelity to any brand and no matter on compatibility. Only a fraction of users have several lenses, mostly high end users. E-x branch is maintained for them. For middle end users like me (E-xxx with 5 lenses!!!), peanuts.
You may think other brands behave better. You can still use old lenses but you will get better results with new lenses for AF speed, video, silent…
@Mar
I’d had exactly the same thought…
Did 4/3 rumors have trouble or applied new policy regarding comment? My comment is being moderated and yet after several hour did not appear. Is there something wrong?
You probably posted too many links in that comment.
during a meeting of photographer the italian oly importer said that within the end of the year will arrive the new DSLR.
he said that almost surely it will be a pro DSLR tropicalized like E5.
maybe just a restiling with some innovations beyond EM5.
in fact,very frankly speaking the actual E5+4/3 lens is much better than EM5+micro lens.
oly is still full of semi pro and pro lenses,adorama,bh&co the same.
they have to sell it….
sorry for my bad englishhhh
Well, what can I say.
I love my E-5 and my FT lenses (14-54 II, 50-200 SWD, 50 2.0 and 9-18) but I love my E-M5 even more.
And the only reason for me to by an E-7 would be a massively improved C-AF. If this wouldn’t be the case, why should I buy it. The E-5’s C-AF ist fast enough for – for instance – normal dogs running flat out but when it comes to sighthounds, it doesn’t really shine. But that’s exactly what I still need a DSLR for.
For anything that doesn’t move that fast, I can use my lovely FT-Zuikos on my E-M5 too – and in addition, I’ve got quite a bunch of those nice µFT primes.
So Oly, if you really are planning to launch a successor to the E-5, equip it with a state-of-the-art C-AF. Otherwise, don’t count on me buying one. After all, the IQ provided by the E-M5 will be just as good.
So, I’s prefer if you’d finally made the ‘one beautiful system’ come true instead.
0n the other hand, I wouldn’t mind if you kicked some Canikon ar*es with a top-notch DSLR that delivers in all areas. So bring on the fast and reliably C-AF-ing DSLR and I’ll be among the first to pre-order it. Although I’m convinced that the end of the DSLR era is near.