The E-M1 events in UK (Source: Facebook Olympus UK).
–
I finally got a correct translation of the OMuser report. The source got the info at an Olympus meeting. Here it is:
1. E-M1 is still 16MP.
2. 12-40mm has no power zoom.
3. EM1 has ISO low setting like the E-P5, i.e. below ISO200. There will be only “LOW” indication, but we don’t how low it actually goes. Sources say the camera will set the low ISO according to the condition, e.g. it may set ISO160 during daytime, and ISO100 during nighttime etc.
4. E-M1 has a database of all ZD and MZD lenses, including their max apertures and center resolution spec. As a result, over sharpening will not happen during digital corrections/enhancements. ISO performance in general is better than E-M5 by one stop. E.g. E-M1 ISO800 = E-M5 ISO400
5. E-M1 new feature: Fully automatic HDR (NOT Art10) in Natural and Vivid modes. We think that the camera simply takes multiple exposures in one go to form an HDR image. But during exposure, we did not feel/hear that the shutter is being triggered multiple times. We won’t rule out the fact that it uses some sort of electronic shutter. This type of HDR exposure is only recommended for static objects, just like other types of digital cameras.
6. Another big advancement is during C-AF, hybrid AF will be engaged. Hybrid AF = Contrast AF + Phase Diff-AF being engaged at the same time. Under S-AF conditions, the camera will automatically use either Contrast-AF or Phase Diff-AF, depending on what lens is put on. Hybrid AF is engaged only in C-AF mode. (MY NOTE: I believe the author meant Phase Detection NOT Phase Difference)
7. In the future M43 lineups will be:
OM-D Series: For pro/advanced amateur, therefore E-M5 will have a successor.
PEN Series: E-PX is for simple and stylish advanced users. E-PLX is meant for beginners. E-PMX is for simple and stylish beginners.
8. I want to re-emphasize: there is no plan for an E-5 successor, and there is no plan for any new ZD lens. But the current ZD lenses will continue to be manufactured.
9. 40-150 f2.8 constant aperture zoom will be out by next year. It looks like a mini version of the Nikon 70-200mm f4.
Thansk Jerry for the translation!
118 Responses
1 stop ISO improvement is not little and very welcome.
1 stop of JPEG ISO improvement is very nice, given the already great performance of the E-M5.
Sounds like overhype. If its 1 stop cleaner then it simply cannot be the em5 sensor, if its jpeg improvement its useless and if its real RAW improvementthe em1 wohld have the same noise as a 5dmk3. Ill believe it when I see it.
I won’t say 1 stop of JPEG ISO improvement useless. One of the advantages of Olympus cameras is its JPEG, which can be so easy for many types of shooting.
It simply cannot be 1 stop of RAW ISO improvement, that’s impossible.
Yes, JPEG 1 stop is very welcome – I shoot Jpeg and Raw, with Raw as an backup in extreme cases – but rarely needed the raw since the Jpeg is already awesome.
It’s not impossible for it to have a 1 stop improvement in RAW noise. I agree it’s probably not the case here, but it’ll definitely happen eventually.
The OM-D sensor is more pixel dense, yet nearly 2 full stops better in ISO performance vs the old 12MP sensor in the E-P1 through E-P3. It outperforms early FF sensors too. It’s only a matter of time before a 4/3 sensor is better than the 5D3. Of course by then the FF sensors will be better too. However, there comes a point where things a re good enough for most anything. For me, that has come with this latest batch of mirror less cameras, from the OMD to Fuji X.
Why ist a 1-stop-improvement in jpg useless? People shoot RAW because their converter deals better with noise than the camera. If the jpg engine features algorithms of similar quality, this would reduce the need to shoot RAW under low-light conditions.
Fuji goes this route – that’s one reason why people praise the High-ISO-capability of their cameras so much. The jpgs Lightroom delivers are hardly better (noise and detailwise) then the Fuji ooc jpgs, whereas with E-M5 files you can achieve at least a one-stop difference in post-production.
For a further example look e.g. at the difference between Oly E5/Oly E-30-jpgs on Imaging Resource. The improvement ist remarkable, though only in jpg.
Fuji cooks its RAWs. Sorry but that’s a NO NO for me. I want to know that I can get the bells and whistles (in-camera JPEG) for saving time, but when I need it I want to count to “real-RAW” files. That’s my take on it. So, any improvement is good.
JPEG “improvements” in high ISO are always at the expense of detail.Uncontrolled NR is seldom to the liking of the photographer .As for the imaging resource samples the comparometer uses default settings the only difference between the E-5 and the E-30 JPEG is down to more aggressive NR on one with resulting mush.
Check out fine detail such as the pepper pot or the fabric on both images the higher NR looks terrible
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
@Anonymous
sounds a bit Jim Stirling…
wouldnt surprise me at all
Sorry, Declan it is not me. I post here under this name signed in,if it does not have the pic it is not me. Hopefully when Admin gets the software updated it will prevent anonymous posting. It is pretty crazy that one can post using any name even names used by signed up members.I have made several posts in the E-M1 threads over the last few days not hard to find. Hopefully there will also be a feature to ignore users.
I do not need to make guesses about the old 12mp sensor in the E-5/E-30 etc as I still have my first mFT camera the GF1 which shares the same sensor.
As for you Rob maybe you would do better giving Mike an email I had an interesting exchange of photos with him. Not having an AA filter will not give you a 10% gain in real resolution this is easily demonstrated by looking at the resolution numbers between the D800 and D800e with the exact same sensor only difference being AA .
The only reason I am on this forum is to look for info about the new Olympus it looks to be a real winner only possible issue for me is MP count ,it would have been sweet to have a bit higher resolution. If you are both hunting for my post I have left a handy pic next to my ID to make it easy for you. See you both around real soon .
Not good detective work Declan.My comments have this ID and this pic ,no pic no ID not me.
Stirling whenever you say things that people already know is not true you just look like a liar.
At the posting of your stolen image from dpr, http://s6.postimg.org/xxr75uj4h/compare.jpg
which is the time you cleared your galleries and pretended ‘jim stirling’ wasnt your name presumably to avoid ‘just, right and worthy’ prosecution as a copyright thief; you appeared using several aliases, yet apparently didn’t notice you were posting with other nicks. You can refresh your memory here:
http://www.43rumors.com/ft3-high-end-omd-price-around-1-500-euro/comment-page-1/#comments
Ive watched you stalk and harass ‘YouDidntDidYou’ for months using various nicks, and I have seen others point out that particular trolls were you in disguise. And I have to admit they sure had your writing style and talent for being an obnoxious olympus hating cxxx.
as the thief you are you can deny it all you like, but there it is in B&W
Hi Rob Scott why don’t you get in touch with the supposed owner of the photo you say I “stole ” hence why I suggested you contact Mike or Paul.My name is indeed Jim but the Stirling part is my Mums maiden name which i have always used in my online activities.Your problem is due to the fact that “you” messed up and used your real name online { ego 🙂 } which I was handed and posted in a forum filled by posts in which you freely posted peoples names regardless what they felt about it.What goes around comes around.The only reason for removing pictures was to stop stalkers like you from scraping up information.It is amazing what comes up for those interested in trawling the internet,some times its even business tax info
The list of your sociopathic activities on DPreview are enormous ranging from stalking to outright threats of violence.You are upset that your attempt at anonymity using the “RRILEY ” ID were found out , It is my name ,It is my name even my Mum calls me it those are your words.Check with the brotherhood record keeper that thread was deleted as so many others in which you attacked numerous people left right and centre.
As for Declan while I do think that many of his posts are in the comic category he is at least a decent human being anything I have to say to him I will say directly.You are simply doing your usual pitbull act from DPreview attacking the same old same old it was Raist the other day and so on.It seems an old dog cannot learn new tricks after all. Good luck finding Nurse Stirling 🙂 Now if you would kindly FO and if you want to play further it will be done on DPreview though perhaps you have used up your banning life’s . Any way Rob Scott I will see you around
Jim, Up to this point, I agree completely. Riley isn’t a sweetheart.
But the key word here is “liar”, and it is something you seem to excel at.
I know that image you used in your profile was stolen because I saw it before you took it out of your gallery. It would really help if they were actually funny, and you had an explanation or admission conducive with what I saw. But you seem to have backed yourself into a corner somewhere beyond “brave”. For me this is “profound”
You are the man who criticized Riley for having stalked people on the net, yet here you openly admit to having seek out his name and you keep posting it in an effort to enrage an already enraged man. I suspect that calling him a sociopathic stalker was derived by applying your own broadsheet of issues whether actual or potential.
I know of Riley from dpreview, and my scoresheet sees you overstate the case in the extreme to discourage him from challenging you…. because you feel it it has cost you enough. You who can no longer continue the hoax of being a professional photographer, because Riley busted that too. You have a history of your lies that goes back ten years.
You are a liar and a thief, who HAS been using other nicks, who IS lying about that stolen image, who HAS been lying about a fabricated career to impress your adversaries on an internet forum, who HAS been stalking people to prevent them doing some good. And for this you call him a sociopath? On the balance of probability you are talking about yourself.
To be on Mother Earth and to have humans leaving carbon footprints all around, I wouldn’t want Riley on my tail as he strikes me of being a capable someone who can get the job done. If him making violent threats is one of your concerns, and nobody should condone violence, I can’t see being half a world away will save you. But I would like to see the video, it’s the unashamed voyeur in me.
Marty or should I say Rob or maybe John I have suggested Saint Rob Scott email the people I mentioned.You would have to be blind or a fool to have missed the literally thousands of abusive posts he has made at literally dozens of different posters those not deleted are easy to find.
Now you think that threatening violence no matter how veiled is away to go.Rob Scott is a simple bully aided an abetted by a bunch of pathetic souls who want to be on the side of the bully.Give the emails a try and see how it goes.My worries do not include physical violence from internet stalkers. Is your actual name Marty or would you be lying and it is in fact another name
thanks Marty
it isnt the EM5 sensor
resolution is higher than EM5
if resolution is higher it isnt about NR
could it be theyre talking about DR anyway?
are we there yet?
Where do you get this? It has been said a billion times resolution is the same
spatial resolution is still 16Mp
but now it is entirely without an AA filter
the likely gain is 10% but it will also produce detail beyond nyquist
while this is to an extent false detail (but not entirely)
it still has the appearance of being sharper, clearer and more detailed
An excellent explanation of “beyond Nyquist limit”
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/39681461
High ISO is nice, but for best quality there is only one thing: use base ISO 😉 And even at base ISO there is sometimes much noise with the E-M5, for example in dark grey clouds…
Can someone post a link to a SOOC E-M5 jpeg and a superior quality version derived from the RAW version of the same file.
I am genuinely interested to see what can be done. I shoot Jpeg because I tried processing RAWs and wasn’t able to really better the SOOC jpeg.
All I do to my images is RGB level tweaking and that’s it.
My experience with the E-M5 is that it’s difficult to match JPEG noise levels in RAW, but if you need large dynamic range, RAW can offer better results.
Here, I wrote this a while back
http://e-p1.net/tutorial-center/the-raw-advanage/
I still havent found a camera that can do jpeg anywhere near as decent as a RAW file.
you dont need a new sensor to improve alot in ISO or anything else,new sensors are mostly made in order to get more MP on it. Most advances in more stops in ISO are mostly thanks to better pipeline processing, a discipline which prob cost as much as manufacturing a new sensor. Nikon is famous for spending alot of money in pipeline codes; with good result. Olympus is known too for effective improvement of exisitng sensors. Best example was the E-5 which had very advanced “fine texture” processing, as mentioned by FotoMagazin testing I believe.
it isnt the EM5 sensor
Yes indeed its very welcome. But still no real iso 100 or 50 just a low indication. Its just cheating and trying to compete with camera’s how have real 100 iso to make the low light performance look a little bit better. Disappointing………
Fake ISO 100 or 160 is still useful in some cases, e.g. in using fast apertures without an ND filter. No everybody wants to have the utmost IQ at the expense of high ISO performance.
There is a camera for you. The sigma dp2 Merrill. Incrediblen pic s that goes head to head with any ff bodies in low iso
No thanks. All those Foveon cameras are there for patience training I believe. My time is more valuable. I still have some hair left and don’t want to pull them all out.
🙂 that’s my take also. I always shoot RAW + jpeg LSF, and almost always use the jpegs. RAW’s for the occasional frame I really f’d-up myself.
Also I don’t crop much, because if you really need that (that is if you have no clue of framing) you need the highest MP camera you can get and those are often not the cleanest at high ISO too.
That’s why I also hope CAF on the E-M1 is good enough for sports and BIF. BIF can be a bit of a hit and miss and the only area I think where many photographers really need to crop rather often, because following small critters that fly need speed experience AND long fast telelenses.
Of course there is no ‘real’ ISO 100. That isn’t something the camera or sensor manufacturers can determine, it’s derived from the basic physics at play that result from the sensor design. I believe it is to do with the density of the pixels being so high. They would have to increase the size of the pixels and therefore have fewer of them to get a real lower ISO.
” E-PLX is meant for beginners. E-PMX is for simple and stylish beginners.”
So, E-PLX is meant for complicated and un-stylish beginners by comparison? ;b
I was looking at the two the other day, and I was surprised how the price wasn’t too different. I always thought that the EP-X should have a EVF a la Pen FT, the EP-L still a serious hobbyist machine sans EVF with perhaps a less-retro body in contrast to EP-X(as they have it now), and a EP-M as a brutally cheap entry model with simple and un-intimidating controls. But thats just my take on the lineup without any professional knowledge of the camera business.
Back to topic, its unfortunate that both this translation and the words from “O” in the previous post seems to indicate no advancement in the video side on EM-1. I dont shoot video myself so I dont know, but reading the posts I understand that a lot of videographers are not happy with the data options while they love the 5axis.
Pending the actual performance of the C-AF, the E-M1 sure seems to nail most of the demand of still photos plus more – much much more.
We don’t know what improvement there is for video at this time. Just because it was not commented on does not mean there isn’t any. More like the person or presenterdid not care to ask or talk about video. There is a microphone input at least. That alone saves $200, by not having to buy a SEM-1 adapter to get that on a E-M5.
I do hope there is advancement to satisfy the videographers. We have two conflicting information – that Oly is reserving the best video for their pro model – and “O” s account that Oly is still focused on stills at this moment / lack of any leaks so far about video. Hopefully the mic input is indicative of the former.
Admin phase detection is also called phase difference detection
@O
“E-M1 has a database of all ZD and MZD lenses” needs to include the popular Leica D 25mm f1.4 (see Flickr data/groups)
also some in-store events in North East England (Newcastle), Midlands (Birmingham), Northern Ireland (Belfast) and Eire (Dublin)
Want it now. Now! …. where can I preorder a product that havent been released?
”E-PLX is meant for beginners. E-PMX is for simple and stylish beginners.”
This is horrendous marketing sillyness.
E-PLX size matches the sensor. It appeals to people who prefer small and light cameras, like m43 users.
Just, please, add two control wheels on top. There is no reason those wheel would make the camera two hundred bucks more expensive. Such a camera would deliver on all m43 could promise: interchangeable lenses, small form factor, direct control, affordable.
Don’t think this “test report” reflects definitive or authoritative information about the EM1 and especially future cameras (except the comment about no E-5 DSLR successor is credible). In a couple of weeks we’ll begin to find out just *how* true the information is.
You know, could be better, could be worse. Come to think of it, based on a thousand prior “leaks”, the final product probably will be…both.
I could not agree more! Except that I would prefer 5 wheels, top left and right, front and back (speed, aperture, iso, manual focus, exposure compensation), weather sealing, and a corner evf. Hell, in fact I would like something like a lighter, smaller, weather sealed GX7, with a 5-axis ibis and more wheels… and unlike Panasonic, which seems to be getting the message (possibly because, despite the roars of forum gearheads, that huge is pro and beautiful, the strategy of going big and heavy with the GH3 did not work as well as they had hoped), Olympus, for the time being, does not, although in a year or so, when it discovers that it is losing clients from both ends (some going Panasonic, some going Sony RX100), it might have to reconsider. Mind you – I have no doubt that the EM1 will be a fine piece of equipment. I just don’t want to lug it around.
How big do you think the E-M1 actually is for you to say “lug”?
I have worked out that it is most likely the same size as the E-M5, except for the addition of the grip portion. The weight will probably be less than that of the E-M5 with the horizontal part of the HLD-6 grip added
Would not mind Either to have the flash, the tilting Evf and silent shutter of the gx7 in the em1
But since I am using 43 glass I am also happy that te em1 does have an optional horizontal grip I might get away without since I have small hands and it has a nice standard grip but even with that horizontal grip it is smaller as my e3 without will be trying
🙂 going from e3 to em1 well that is going to be a nice sensor upgrade… Oh and usable live view… Once a gear nut ….
So basically you want the camera to look like a airplane’s dashboard with just a ton of dials. I’d rather have less dials and the convenient 2×2 control scheme.
>E-PLX is meant for beginners. E-PMX is for simple and stylish beginners.”
EPLx is the baseline camera
EPMx is a smaller version with the same internals
>This is horrendous marketing sillyness.
what is silly is thinking this is by marketing
its just poor translation
I agree..EPL-5 is everything m4/3 stands for and (most likely) only m4/3 series of cameras I will buy.
This is my subjective opinion.
1 stop ISO sounds nice, but sounds like it could be JPEG engine only, not the sensor. But, we’ll see. Would be great if it’s at the RAW level. Even 1/2 a better stop would be welcome at the RAW level.
The 12-40 sounds like a nice lens. I am fine with it not having power zoom (prefer that actually).
No E-5- well surprise.
4/3rd lenses still manufactured? I am a bit skeptical on that. If they managed to do a “build on demand” that is profitable then I can totally see it, as, hey in that case, why not. Usually that just cost more money though, but maybe they figured out a process that works financially.
Would love to see the next Pen high end model (1-2 years from now) with a built in EVF and a phase detection capable sensor like this one.
I concur with you Raist – it might be one of the first times 🙂
Please convey to my ‘pals’ at 1022 DPR my sincere condoleances. There won’t be any of their bloated oversized undeperforming E-somethin cameras, and they’ll have to fork some serious money if they want to stay in the loop.
Birders will weep and I will laugh, let them know.
Explanation about E-lenses still in production is simple. Oly always produced them in batches. According to real sales, they can choose which to revamp, probably at a lesser cost than beginning an entirely new lens.
I agree also that if they don’t fit an EVF in the E-P6, they’ll lose me as a customer in that specific class.
Finally to others: I know from personal experience how fragile the E-PLx shutter is, so despite the attractiveness don’t expect those bodies to last. With the higher tiers the shutter reliability is entirely different.
I believe shutter is absolutely same part number between EPL-5 and OMD.
LOL. If you ‘believe’, then find proof. I had my new E-PL1 fail me after some 5000 shots. It was not even repaired but substituted by Oly with an E-PL3.
Those camera have shutters rated 30,000 – hopefully. The E-M5 has 100,000.
(No E-5 successor) so the mean also E-M1, not is an successor E-5 too. 😛
Agreed on all points. Especially about 4/3 lenses being manufactured.
I can think of quite a few Four Thirds lenses that would sit better on an E-M1 than the mft equivalents plus the ones that aren’t available in mft so it would make sense for Olympus (the E-M1 will create the demand) and Leica to do mark II versions like Pentax/Ricoh have just announced…
Maybe they are going to offer 43 lenses with build in m43 adapter… Just an idea
Any news on the video capabilities of the E-M1 (or lack of..)?
Video specs?!!!!! :/
JRAPDX you are a liar.
+1000 Why do we keep hearing about the same still photo specs over and over again, and there is no news about video modes and recording? Is this a Pro camera or not? If it is a Pro camera, then it will have video modes like other recent Pro or even amateur cameras. Olympus has embarrassed themselves so far by having no good video support. I’m not interested in buying this camera unless it has at least the same level of video capability as a GH2 (unhacked). Notice that I did not even say GH3, because that would be too much to ask from Olympus.
I am gonna wait with my em1 order……i have been to Sony Rumors and i think that something awesome is comming. Fu$% this small sensor department lets wait for some truly beautiful stuff.
And ye shall be eternally waiting….
At least he’ll live 43rumors and pollute oter sites with his trolls, FUD, and overall nonsense 😀
?
In other words, good riddance.
You can wait all you want.
I’ll get me 2 EM1 Bodies with a 12-40mm on one and a 75mm on the other and make awesome shots while you look miserable.
🙂
I think Olympus should also try to integrate their very popular audio linear pcm recorder as an accessory if they’re targeting the multimedia market or even better use their audio technology and know how on the omd pro cameras.
Olympus has never bothered with getting the best video or multimedia features, just the best stills quality and features. Thanks God.
“just the best stills quality ”
lol,only if you ignore Sony Nex,ALPHA APS&FF,Pentax APS,Nikon APS/FF,Canon FF,Fuji APS
I’ve never owned an Oly cam (I shoot with GH2s) but I do have their LS7 PCM recorder and it’s great for off-board sound (full bass range too). Also good as a high quality lossless music player and very small.
looks like video specs will stay the same as em-5 , i hope not
Just look at what happened with the GH3 when too much attention is given to video. A compromised EVF (to accomodate a wide aspect ratio) and poor quality as a result, also some compromise in the sensor performance for stills to get better video output, also costs of parts to support high bitrate, temperature control, … with the result of a large and expensive camera. Excellent video quality (and having to pay more) is only of interest to about 5% of people buying an Olympus camera. Even less if it is going to compromise the design of the camera and the stills performance.
the market is slowly changing from still to video, I’ve seen more people ask for DSLR for video nowadays
People wants both worlds, photo and video, all the pro company’s cameras improve a lot in this way, no excuse 😉
the biggest problem for the GH3 was that thz had to use a Sony sensor to keep DR and high ISO up to date, so it had very little of the video improvements the GH2 sensor had.
I admit I don’t shoot much video, but to my untrained eyes the movie output of the E-M5 is perfectly acceptable. It’s sharp, detailed, with good colours and wide DR. I suspect that the excess pickiness of video enthusiasts on the web is techie cattle turds.
The problem with E-M5 video is when a lot of details appears on the scene (best example, trees with leaves moving by the wind). The codec breaks apart and the image become a blotchy mess.
In not so much busy scenes, the image is indeed good.
I agree, the video output of the EM-5 is excellent, even if it is only 30p. As said, when things start to move, the video starts to look like something on a C-64 computer.
for own use, I think the video of the em5 is more then enough. I use for playback on TV, upload to Youtube and it all looks good enough. Critical aspect is the aliasing when you look close(easily fixed if set sharpness to normal on my TV, but for ). I can imagine serious videographers prefer better cameras. Soon I will do my 1st ambitious videodocumentary style behind the scene and videopictorial. I will use my omd plus a Nikon J1.I will upload when I am satisfied with it.
Depend on video specs, Em1 or the new Nex Sony, that’s all
“OM-D Series: For pro/advanced amateur, therefore E-M5 will have a successor.”
So, E-M5’s successor would be…E-M6?
And what’s this E-M1 then? The grand dad of E-M5 that hasn’t been born yet? 🙂
The E-M5’s successor may be called E-M5 II.
The E-M1’s successor could be called E-M1 Mk II.
The same PDAF sensor will be put on other Olympus cameras.
There may be an E-M7 later, a light version, with no weatherproofing etc.
Maybe it will be named e-m10. The “pro”-camera gets one digit and the “amateur”-cam two digit… 🙂
Bullet #3
Why would the camera automatically set a higher ISO (160) for daytime and a lower ISO (100) for night time?
Is the camera stupid? 🙂
Yes all cameras are stupid, but in this case the programmer too. 😉
I think the 100 day, 160 night thing is just a bad example. Day and night are far, far more apart. Basically, we’re just talking about automatic fine adjustment of ISO to obtain maximum DR, which means filling the well of the most-exposed pixel.
However, it could potentially mean ISO that is variable across the frame. That would be great in done situations. But Im not into CMOS tech enough to understand if that is possible at all.
Same old rubbish from Olympus. Here’s me hoping they could come up with something decent. What a waste of 5 minutes.
Bye bye then, don’t let the door hit you……… and so on.
Help! I can’t work out if I’m a “simple and stylish user”, an “advanced amateur”, a “simple amateur” or indeed a “user” or an “amateur”. I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what camera I have to buy and I can’t sleep at night!! HELP ME, O Great Olympus Marketing, for only thee knoweth The Truth!!!
Guess Olympus has ruled out any need for a “stylish professional” category, though. That’s going to wreck Thomas Hayo’s day (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7nZlUhGePQ)
Or indeed “simple professional”…
Maybe Admin could hold a poll – what kind of Olympus customer are you ? 🙂
Hi David, Perhaps you are one of those inbetweenies who should either get an old E-P1 with the new 12-40mm lens or wait a while and get the E-M1 with a new body cap lens.
>Maybe Admin could hold a poll – what kind of Olympus customer are you ? 🙂
well I guess we can already figure out where you’re at, what else is important?
Does anybody ever mention about the focus peaking on the E-M1, i hope Olympus can make a significant improvement of focus peaking on the new E-M1 ,compare to E-P5, and wish we can use the Focus peaking on a Video mode too coz the E-P5 can’t do focus peaking on video
“E-M1 has a database of all ZD and MZD lenses, including their max apertures and center resolution spec. As a result, over sharpening will not happen during digital corrections/enhancements. ”
Database is bad, the info should be added to m43 protocol, otherwise you have to update firmware with each new lens.
Well, at least you can update the firmware…
Would be nice if it included all known 43 m43 lenses not only oly. Pana has great stuff sigma made some
em-5 bwtter than full frame hahhahahhah fan bois
Just because its 16mp doesnt mean its the same sensor as the em5
“some sort of electronic shutter”
No way.
The HDR is done using ISO bracketing, no electronic shutter.
>4/3rd lenses still manufactured? I am a bit skeptical on that.
i mean, ricardo is sceptical well, who would care
>If they managed to do a “build on demand” that is profitable then I can totally see it,
sure they have a camera on every shelf,
when they see one disappear they get the little old man to make another to replace it
>as, hey in that case, why not. Usually that just cost more money though, but maybe they figured out a process that works financially.
or maybe theyre still making them like it says
what part of that is less plausible?
oh wait, reality vs fantasy
Might be a nice cam, but that grip looks even uglier from above …
I find strange that nobody has commented that 4/3 lenses are legacy lenses in a m4/3 environment:
– their focus is noisy so they can’t be used in Movie.
– since most don’t have CDAF, they can’t do tracking, and possibly are not even good at doing CAF.
In other words they are just a stop gap. Does someone want to clarify?
The reason why few comment on any failings of these lenses is the almost guaranteed venomous response by certain denizens of 1022.Give them a moment they will be along.
The SHG lenses especially are certainly truly excellent lenses; unfortunately they are huge in relation to the sensor size. They are in fact the very antithesis of the attraction of mFT to the vast majority of users, namely a small lightweight yet competent system. In the UK and most of the EU one can assemble a superb FF kit for less than the equivalent in FT glass and with little gain in weight.
I hope AF of the FT glass is as good as hoped, there are a lot of people with heavy money invested in FT glass and it is good that they will hopefully have a get out of jail card. However I have serious doubts that the hordes of mFT users who constantly sing the praises of the weight saved using mFT compared to their old DSLR set ups will be interested in these lenses. SHG lenses were a niche within FT and will be a smaller niche within Mft.
There are many users who really make these lenses sing, Erik Aaseth has posted literally hundreds of wonderful images taken with these lenses. The problem is nothing to do with quality simply size and weight.
That argument always points out how SHG lenses are waaaaay big for what they do, which is true for the 14-35 and 35-100 (through, if you want the kind of near perfect optics in a zoom that those lenses have, it is going to be big, that is a simple result of physics). That concerns.. a whopping 2 lenses!
How about the 7-14? Yes, it is bigger by quite a bit then the Lumix 7-14, but the later can sit much closer to the sensor which makes for a very significant size advantage at the wide end.
The 150/2 or 300/2.8 being very big for what they do? I’d like to see a significantly smaller 300/2.8…
But its not the SHG glass that is interesting for most people, with the exception maybe of one of the tele primes. It is the HG glass that is very interesting in price, size and performance.
As to m4/3 users not wanting those lenses because of wanting a small but capable system, sorry, any longer tele zoom that has a fast aperture is going to be relatively big, that is simply unavoidable. The question is how big it is compared to other setups that one could use for the same applications. Big/small is rather relative.
As I have previously mentioned I am genuinely happy for the guys who stuck with FT and own some of these wonderful bits of glass. It is good that it looks like they to have a way to move forward in sensor and tech while still utilizing they lenses they own.
I am making a not unreasonable point suggesting that many FT lenses not just the FF sized SHG glass are excessive in size for many mFT especial those of us who are looking for a smaller lighter backup/replacement to our DSLR kits. These lenses are all significantly larger than their mFT alternatives, the 7-14mm you mention weighs 2.5x as much as the Panasonic as well as costing £500 more in the UK/EU. The Olympus 300mm F2.8 {and it is a 300mm lens not a 600mm} weighs in at 3.3kg the Nikon 300mm with the added 2xTC brings it up to 3.2kg , then there is the price issue even with the teleconvertor added in the Nikon set up is £1300 cheaper. Though the short flange distance of mFT obviously gives more of an advantage in size reduction for wide-angle lenses a 300mm F2.8 could be quite a bit shorter and lighter.
The HG glass is of more interest to more people than the SHG .However they are still far from compact relative to mFT options. I am aware how good a buy they are I had the 50mm ,12-60 and have the 50-200[ hence my interest in the E-M1}.These are not small lenses { relative to the sensor size} the 12-60 variable zoom is thicker than the Panasonic 35-100 f2.8 , the same length and 60% heavier. I simply do not see the imagined stampede for HG and SHG glass from the bulk of mFT users.
No surprise. Again it shows that most people buying Olympus are not interested in video.
You’re just teasing your dpreview friends. These lenses are not legacy from a 43OBS perspective. Focus noise of some popular m43 lenses (20mm/1.7mkII – just released) is not apt for video. But that’s not that relevant: manual focusing is very valuable for video and remember that serious photographers rely on MF often.
> since most don’t have CDAF, they can’t do tracking, and possibly are not even good at doing CAF.
Sounds like mere conjecture. I don’t follow the reasoning, but naturally these lenses allowed for good C-AF on 4/3 bodies. On the E-M1, why shouldn’t things be better overall with CDAF assist?
LOL. Because CAF never worked well on 4/3 in the first place – by which token it is clear that you are an ignoramus.
So FO.
Define ‘worked well’
When properly configured and used, it works quite fine on my E-3, somewhat better on the E-5, but not as good as on a D300s (for example) by far.
It is however lightyears ahead of any currently available m4/3 camera.
Your approach here is the exact same as that of the format trolls, it must be the best in theory, regardless of if the differences matter (hint: sometimes they matter a lot, oftentimes they are totally and utterly irrelevant)
Oh and on another note, take your silly dpr fights somewhere else, there is a very very good reason for many serious photographers to completely ignore the dpr forums.
Yes, and yet you stay cowardly anonymous. it adds a lot of credibility to you, Mr. 4/3 – LOL.
Lenses which stopped being made 5 yrs. ago, and with a system left dying henceforward, must certainly have had the latest technology years ago – LOL! But even then people complained.
You 4/3 last tycoons certainly never had any sense of ridicule…
“Yes, and yet you stay cowardly anonymous.”
That is because people like you love attacking the messenger instead of the message.
“it adds a lot of credibility to you,”
If you think the validity of a message depends on who is saying it, there is a lot in life for you to learn still.
“Mr. 4/3 – LOL.”
See, shoot the messenger instead of the message.
No, you didn’t even start on the message, which is that even 5 years old 4/3 technology, that wasn’t very good for the standards at that time compared to competitive systems, still runs circles around anything m4/3 does with regards to continuous focus, and that unlike what you claim with your total lack of experience, it is actually usable.
Now.. I’d say its useful to add that to the m4/3 system, your response is the typical ad-hominem.
Have anything remotely resembling an argument?
Oh, and go learn some manners someday, if you are capable of that at least.
QED – Just smoke and mirrors, and the vapours – like an old 4/3 hag.
A rancorous one 🙂
The problem to me was a logical fallacy: having CDAF support would somehow be crucial (“probably”) for proper C-AF on E-M1. But with all the raging emotions inside, I gather one shouldn’t expect too much. Let’s hope it adds up to more than mere trolling in the long run.
How touchy you are these days. You ironically lack the aura of a true winner. Just keep your paranoia in check: you’re seeing ghosts.
And C-AF on 4/3 wasn’t all that bad, dear. Matter of skill, maybe? 😀
C-AF works quite fine at least on the 30, 3 and 5, its the tracking that isn’t very good and that indeed takes some skill and proper settings to use well.
Now we’ll have to wait and see how the E-M1 fares in this, but combining phase detection for distance and data from the imaging sensor for tracking should allow for significantly better tracking then any slr can do, without requiring the lenses to support ‘cdaf’.
Olympus’ history with this doesn’t make me expect any wonders here, but technically the potential is very good.
amalric, you are not only an ingnoramus, but also an ignoranus.
Just curious as to whether there is any news on whether the E-M1 has wifi built in? I believe the E-P5 (model no. ??) has wifi built in. I know Canon, Panasonic and Nikon (via adapter) have wifi and apps to allow remote shutter etc, would seem to be somewhat of an oversight if Olympus haven’t built in or allowed for this functionality on what will be their flagship m4/3 camera.
Ok… just located posting that mentions wifi built in. 🙂