You can now have some fun with the Four Thirds Matching simulation to see how the new E-M1 looks paired with a MFT or FT lens. The image on tops shows the camera with the massive [shoplink 25119 ebay]35-100mm f/2.0 (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
And now back to E-M1 reviews:
Luminous Landscape (Click here) just started their Rolling E-M1 Field Report. And that’s what they write about the E-M1 for now:
“I’ll close today’s entry by mentioning that when I wrote my Panasonic GX7 review a couple of weeks ago I called it “…the best MFT camera yet”. It’s fair to say that this claim to fame only lasted a short while.”
More E-M1 news:
Ongoing E-M1 review at CameraLabs.
Olympus OM-D E-M1: Big Brother or Successor? (Byrdphoto).
E-M1 Flickr Group.
E-M1 manual for download on Olympus website.
Touch and Try events in UK (OlympusUK).
Hands-on review by Amateur Photographer.
Preorder Links:
Dedicated page at Amazon.
Olympus E-M1 body at Amazon, Adorama and BHphoto, Amazon DE (via DL), Amazon UK (via DL), Amazon ES (via DL), WexUK, Topshot FI, CameraWorldUK.
Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO Lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, AmazonDE (viaDL), Amazon ES (via DL).
Olympus E-M1 with 12-40mm Lens kit at Amazon DE (via DL), WexUK and CameraWorldUK, Amazon UK (via DL), Amazon ES (via DL).
Olympus E-M1 with 12-50mm Lens kit at Amazon DE (via DL), WexUK, CameraWorldUK, Amazon UK (via DL), Amazon ES (via DL).
Olympus EP-13 Eyecup for E-M1 at Adorama and BHphoto.
Olympus HLD-7 Battery Grip for E-M1 at Amazon, Adorama and BHphoto.
Olympus LC-62D Metal Front Lens Cap for 12-40mm at Adorama and BHphoto.
Olympus LH-66 Lens Hood for 12-40mm at Adorama and BHphoto.
135 Responses
Too big, too much, too expensive, too Ugly and in the same time too good
you must be on auto-trolling :p
Auto-trolling 🙂 lol.
Olympus OM-D E-M1 and E-M5 user Flickr group: http://www.flickr.com/groups/om-d_user/
There are several groups like this. There’s also a 43rumor (this site) group, check to see other (non troll) readers (m)43 pictures.
There is no 43rumor group on Flickr.
Please give me the exact spelling, otherwise I can’t find it!!!
Thanks!!
http://www.flickr.com/groups/43rumors/ it’s nice to be nice 🙂
Many many thanks 🙂 I was a little frustrated at Flickr’s stupid group search feature.
Yes, the above must be the filthy mod that invites and bans at will. Don’t feed the thought police.
..To you all the time!! Haha!!!
I mean, you’re so bad, yoh can start your own forum, and you’d Ban YOURSELF in less than a week!!!
Get over your fascination with Mods…
This picture clearly shows why 4/3 has no future.
This combo is simply way too big. No 35–100 should be such ridiculously huge, despite of its brightness.
You are right. It think that it is those 43 tele lenses (have to be big), maybe that 50mm F2 macro (it is pretty small, sharp and pretty fast) and the 2 standard zooms (12-60, 14-54II) are the lenses which will remain in use and might be bought in future, Maybe that 7-14mm as well.
Personally, I think the 14-35-100 have no chance against the 12-35-100 or 12-40-150 combos (either ridiculously small + extra wide angle or much more range + a bit smaller in comparison). Of course those who still own them will stick to them.
The laws of physics can’t be overcome.
Wrong.
It has to do nothing with law of physics.
A 35–100/2.8 COULD be smaller. Of course if you have shorter flamge back distance, allow software-based corrections (distorsion etc.) and so on. Just look on Pana 35–100/2.8! I bet Pana would make a reasonable small thing even for f2.8, w/o compromising quality…
Of course it could, but a 35–100/2.0 CAN’T be made much smaller, f-stops add a lot in size!
Actually the SHG f2 zooms could be made smaller, optically they are actually f1.4. This can be verified on any m43 body by mounting them with a dumb adapter and metering, you’ll find they meter about 2/3 of a stop faster than f2
This is easy, SHG lens is not for M43, an only look here, the lens on near 2000g with MMF1 and an litte camera on under 500g, but of course you can use this on tripod realy comfortable. 😉
Zuiko Digital ED 35–100/F2: Ø96.5 × 213.5 mm
Lumix G X Vario 35–100/F2.8: Ø67.4 × 99.9 mm
More than TWICE in length for a gain in brightness from F2.8 to F2! It’s incredible. And both of them are pro lenses and weather sealed.
Gimme a break!
You do realize that f/2.0 is twice as bright as f/2.8 … ?
Anyway, why would expert lens designers like Olympus make them larger than necessary? It makes no sense.
This shouldn’t mean more than TWICE in LENGTH.
The Oly lens is a ‘little bit’ over-engineered. The really smart design, which makes really good compromises and sill gets an excellent result is the one from 35–100/2.8.
One uses no digital correction and is f2.
The other uses digital correction and is f2.8
The panasonic doesnt even compare well to the 12-60 or 50-200 for IQ. However what it does very well is be small and good enough. ‘Small’ was not a consideration for the SHG lenses, it was for the uncompromising individual. If you wis to compromise be thankful you have the option.
Even the 12-40 sacrifices range, as does the 40-150 f2.8 lenses.
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH DIGITAL CORRECTION?
The only thing it counts is the final result. And currently the best zoom (at least the already released ones) for micro 43 is the Pana 35–100/2.8!
Haven’t you asked this question repeatedly, and hasn’t it been answered each time? You just don’t comprehend.
What’s wrong with Digital correction is that it is basically making an educated guess as to what the image ought to look like.
It might be good most of the time but it’s still just guessing. Would you like your bank to just ‘guess’ what your account balance is?
Man just forget it. The only thing you need to understand is that here nothing panasonic can be better than something olympus.
YOu need to learn what is written, and stop reading what is not. I didnt say anything was wrong with digital correction. But that doesnt change the results. The Panasonic lenses are not even as good at resolving as the 12-60 and 50-200 swd lenses.
They are however very compact and that means a lot.
Claiming the 35-100 is too large is ignoring what it was built to do.
Guys, PLEASE!!!
The reason why native 4/3 lenses are corrected purely optically (and not by software) is rather the simple fact that you cannot correct the live image via software through the optical viewfinder than the claim that 4/3 would be far superior to m4/3.
Is that so hard to understand?!
What the hell is wrong with you that you have to ask the same question over and over and over while people already took their time to give you a serious answer repeatedly? What the fuck is wrong with you that you cannot accept the entire world isn’t like you? What the fuck is wrong with you that you are totally ignorant about optics but make all kinds of claims, ignoring corrections based on laws of physics? What the fuck is wrong with you that you have to start screaming at people when they don’t instantly agree with you?
Well it does make some sense. I bet that the image circle is bigger than the four thirds sensor which explains excellent corner sharpness low vignetting etc etc.
I remember reading that some of the size of the 43rds lenses came from ensuring telecentricity which ensures that light exiting the tail of the lens hits the sensor as much at a 90 degree angle as possible.
From Wikipedia:
An exit pupil at infinity makes the lens image-space telecentric. Such lenses are used with image sensors that do not tolerate a wide range of angles of incidence. For example, a three-CCD color beamsplitter prism assembly works best with a telecentric lens, and many digital image sensors have a minimum of color crosstalk and shading problems when used with telecentric lenses.
Image quality of early sensors were greatly affected as the angle of incidence of the light increased. Micro lenses were added to more recent designs to counteract that effect, but it is very possible that the telecentric design of the good 43rds lenses remains one of the reasons they are considered some the absolute best ever made for digital cameras. If you remove that design constraint, the lenses could probably get a lot smaller.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/31873502
There is at least some info indicating that telecentricity is still a design goal in m43 lenses:
http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microftmerit/merit2.html
Well, you don’t want the lens a little bit smaller, you want it a lot smaller, right? The 35-100 is a 70-200 with FL reducer. The laws of physiscs do determine lens size to large degree, based on focal length and maximum aperture. Besides, Oly’s uncompromising, optically corrected design of their high-end lenses requires a bit more glass and also contributes to size and weight. That large size is a penalty you are unwilling to accept is really your problem. What’s keeping you from buying fast Panny zoom, if you don’t mind software correction, which according to yourself, you find quite acectable?
Spell-check this yourself. 😛
Ololol
I’d love to see you designing a lense with those specs, that is notably smaller 😀
I wonder why some people dont understand that there is no problem with some big lenses, if there are also smaller ones with more compromises.
Yes that’s a big lens but it’s an SHG i.e, a professional lens, it’s 100% focussed on IQ! Anyone complaining about the size has missed the point entirely and probably don’t need to concern themselves with SHG lenses.
Also, have compacts and phones made everyone forget how to hold a camera? Far too many comments regards lenses being too big, you’re meant to support the lens! Lots of talk regards camera ergonomics but lenses are integral to that — NEX pretty much forces you to hold them correctly.
I agree with you Tom. Too often I see people holding dslrs in such strange ways..
Those coming from smartphones usually treat them as point and shoot cameras.
Is the same filter size as the canon 70-200 f2.8L and 1cm longer. Same effective fov, but it’s f2.0. That’s a big deal.
When was the last time you’ve seen monster lenses on Canon bodies that make the body look tiny. I really don’t think you understand quality lenses. There are such things as lenses that are better than kit kit lenses & this is certainly one of them,BY FAR.
Yeah, I don’t understand quality lenses. Except for the cabinet full of them that I get paid to use.
My reply was to kesztió & his ignorance.
Dude, this is the 50-200 f/2 constant zoom, not the 35-100 f/2.8.
Sorry 35-100, not 35-200.
So small ! Almost same size of ca nikon 70-200 f4 so what’s the point ?
More dof when shooting nature, full weather sealed, sharp wide open.
Umm… F/2 vs F/4 or 4x the brightness, duh.
It may be too big, too small, too ugly, too tiny sensored, too expensive or too Olympus for your liking, but consider this: every single person who has actually tried the E-M1 loved it. Hasn’t happened to an Oly camera since the E-1, I think.
Been a reader of LL for a long time.
Their writing of m4/3 system is consistently one of the better out there. (In fact all of their writing is very good)
I am impressed how Olympus been able to put out such impressive cameras and lenses considering their financial difficulties and corporate turmoil. Tried the Ep-5 this weekend with the 12mm/f2, 45mm/f1.8 and 75mm/f1.8 and was very very impressed.
If Olympus would “fix” the video part, I would give up my NEX-7 tomorrow.
Panasonic has some 4k video goodness coming soon and maybe 120fps
I would be happy with a PAL version and a decent codec.
Combine that with the SEMA-1 external mic (which works great).
If Olympus also could make the flash bounceable again – which worked with previous versions –
that would be it.
The E-P5 is a lot of camera. I only shoot stills…so I bought one. VERY pleased.
Luminous L. Is very informative and intelligently written….but I personally think that the GX7 and the M1 are not really aimed at the same market.
They definitely have a lot of the same boxes to check…but in the end are meant for two different users.
Many will buy both bodies.
YES! The E-P5 and the M1 !!!!!! 🙂 Then they will own two incredible cameras, (and one less-than-great menu system!).
Seems like a lot of people forget the “I” in ILC. There are plenty of people that love the fact that the image in this post is reality. And then when it does not suit they’re needs they will I-N-T-E-R-C-H-A-N-G-E it. Simples. Why such complaining or grinding of very worn out axes?
Apologies for my awful gramma.
Because many of these people are intellectually deficient and selfish, they think because it isn’t what they want, nobody else should have the option. Or in all likelihood haven’t extended their thought process to consider such things.
The E-M1 with 35-100 f2 is quite pocketable 😀
It all depends on how you define the best mft camera. In pure terms of performance I have no doubt that the EM-1 beats the GX7. At that price and size it certainly should. But does that make it the best mft camera? Definitely not for me. The reason I use mft is for the small size, light weight and discretion. EM-1 is not a competitor in that aspect, it rather competes with my Nikon D600 and there I prefer the latter. If you go all in for mft then the EM-1 is obviously a great addition, but the GX7 style cameras are what the system is all about.
No one is qualified to state what M4/3 is ‘all about’. It’s a system withe a wide range of capabilities to suit the needs of a wide range of users. The GX7 is not the epitome of M4/3, it’s just one of several possible cameras people can chose from.
Let me put it this way. If all mft cameras looked like the beast on the picture, no one would convert from Nikon or Canon to Mft. The appeal with mft is primarily weight, size and a more discreet camera that don’t intimidate your subjects. As I said it is great with a pro camera like EM-1 in the system for people who go all in for mft but you have to see that EM-1 is the odd beast in this system. It is the small but great cameras like GX7, EP-5 etc that are the soul of Mft. If all mft cameras become big beasts the system dies.
Thus it irritates me to read people conclude that EM-1 is the best mft camera without any consideration of its drawbacks. It is the most powerful camera in the system yes, but for most people it is not the best mft camera for everyday use. If I went all in for Mft I would probably get one GX7 and one EM-1. The GX7 I would then bring everywhere and the EM-1 I would bring for event shooting and some other photo jobs, but since I already own a Nikon D600 I don’t need the EM-1 at the moment. However my GX1 soon to be GX7 is the camera that travels with me everywhere. It is for these kind of cameras that I and many other choose to buy into mft in the first place. They definitely are the soul of the system.
You nailed it Johan. As soon as you take away the discreet shooting of m4/3 you have lost all advantage of the system. Then you have a compromised sensor size, and no benefit!
Don’t get me wrong, I’m certain the E-M1 will be a stellar performer. But if I want something that big I’ll just get an APS-C or, dare I say it… FF. Keep the bodies small, keep the lenses small (where did all the pancakes go??), and we have a great system.
(Also, this is coming from a current E-M5 enthusiest…!)
My hands are always the same size, and I like to hold a camera in comfort. My willingness to carry more or less heavy and bulky gear depends on various factors. If you have an E-M1, you can choose and conveniently use small, or comfortably use large lenses, depending on your needs – what’s the problem?
“As soon as you take away the discreet shooting of m4/3 you have lost all advantage of the system.”
Talk for yourself and not for others. If thats the only point for you for owning m4/3, thats totally fine, but for others, the reduced weight and size do still count as major advantages even when the camera is less discreet. This weight/size advantage only increases with the number of lenses you want to carry around. Yes it matters when a camera and 3 high quality zoom lenses easily fit the same bag of an aps-c body with one quality zoom for many people, even if it doesn’t matter for you. I’m sorry, but is it too much to ask to look even a fraction of an inch beyond what you’d do? Is it that you are incapable of it? or?
Luminous Landscap;
I’ll close today’s entry by mentioning that when I wrote my Panasonic GX7 review a couple of weeks ago I called it “…the best MFT camera yet”. It’s fair to say that this claim to fame only lasted a short while.
well at least we gave them a taste of victory as the best M43 camera even just for a short time,..Please GX7 ,.dethroned ,.a new King is coming,..welcome E-M1
Last I checked, I got into M43 because of the SIZE and PORTABILITY. My first lens was the compact 20mm.. So I have to disagree.
LL is kinda reaching on their comment as well. Funny that they don’t even mention video quality with their decision.
M43 is about size, period. The above pic is a joke. Wanna use a lens that big, get a DSLR.
Sure, its nice to have options, but give me a small camera, that I can have around my neck, ALL day, EVERY day, with a decent lens. That’s why I went from a GF2 to GX1 to a G5 to hold me down until the GX7 shows up in the mail, slap on my 25mm P/L lens and I can hit the streets.
And guess what, genius – now that the EM1 is out, you can still use a small MFT body with a small 20mm lens!
Anyway, why do you assume someone “may as well use a DSLR” just because the pictured combo is large? The EM1 is more capable than most DSLRs, with IQ to match any APSC camera (i.e., close enough to the best APSCs that it doesn’t matter).
And, omigawd, some people actually prefer EVFs…
The only thing that is a joke is your post. Several times a week I am using lenses bigger than the Olympus(in the graphic that started this shitstorm)on my GH3s. The reason to choose m43 over other systems is because it does so many things well for its form-factor, but even without taking form-factor into consideration the flagship cameras from Panasonic and Olympus are capable in the right hands of totally professional results.
There is a great thread over in FM right now where the ‘experts’ were completely off the map trying to tell which photograph was made with which sensor size. Talk about ‘The emperor’s new cloths’ LOL.
“Last I checked, I got into M43 because of the SIZE and PORTABILITY.”
Which tells us what?
Oh… why YOU got into m4/3.
You speak on behalf of everyone else? Since when? Who authorized you?
“M43 is about size, period.”
And who are you to determine this beyond your own situation? Oh wait, I know, some loud mouthed egocentric moron incapable of imagining anything beyond his own tiny little world.
Huff YAWN 😛
Could somebody explain why some Panasonic owners and Olympus owners feel the need to prove that “their” brand is better than the other on an anonymous internet comments page? Is it possible to explain this without resulting to insults?
I’m sure photographers stumble across this site interested in the m43 system and the great new cameras/lenses that Pany and Oly keep releasing. Yet they get to read a bunch of comments that sounds like two children in the back of a car on a long journey. Is that really a good advert for the system? Would you want to be associated with it?
It’s psychology. People are frustrated about their low budget and being able to buy only one camera, and they need to justify which one. So if they decide for one they need to put down the other brand out of sheer frustration at their own lack of money.
Because Panasonic doesn’t have the “Rich” photography history, it constantly gets attacked here, as well as other sites. Yet, if it wasn’t for Panasonic, Olympus and M43 might have been History… most pros/semi pros jumped on the GF1/20mm combo, and started a small boom in the format. We all know this, that’s what made me sell my cameras and get into M43. The fanboys hate the truth.
That’s exactly what I did… loved that combo:)
Yes thats why there is a whole bunch of idiots constantly attacking Olympus (you being one of them). You suffer from Panasonic Persecution Syndrome, please go visit your shrimp for some serious help, paranoia is a serious issue that will seriously disable your abilities for social interaction.
Its no different elsewhere, goto a Nikon forum and you’ll find people who claim that every other brand sucks, but especially Canon.. goto a Canon forum and you’ll find the same thing.
What Tobias Giesen says is correct, regardless of how loud you scream and how many capital letters you use.
I find them equally good in their own ways and have no trouble swapping between Oly and Panny bodies, Leica, Oly and Panny lenses etc the folks that have a problem are a tiny vocal minority.
The full answer to your question would require a book or two. The short answer: cognitive dissonance makes people behave like idiots. Fighting for one’s favorite brand is a symptom of insecurity and fear.
+1
pff it is a bit like my soccer team is better (though they never played in that team themselves).
For me i like olympus jpeg colors, for holidays i want a sealed camera/lens combination and not to much to carry. At that moment i ended up with Olympus E3 12-60/50-200, which is to be honest still to heavy, but does deliver great quality. I would not mind trading in some of that quality for lighter/smaller.
Now i would end up with a Em5, or Em1 or a panasonic. Would have loved a sealed GX7 (flash and tilting evf) combined with a sealed Panaleica D 14-150 in m43. But both do not exist.
So in my opinion both make great cameras and lenses (as do some other not to mention brands overhere else i would be T….)
I simply buy what i can/want to afford for what i do with a camera. And sometimes you end up with a so called semi-pro setup for uh holiday snappies. Strong enough to bash a thieves head in and still make the photo. At least you are less concerned about your expensive gear this way.
Quite interestingly, most brand bashers as well as those on a mission to promote a specific brand, they typically haven’t don’t the hand on experience to back up all their verbose
O/T. My black GX7 was just delivered in Germany. Just realized that I do not have a single SD card in the house. Neither my PC has a CD drive to browse the included software/documentation.
Amazon.
😉
Congrats! I am in Australia and Still waiting for my GX7 to be delivered. Can’t wait!!!
I agree “best” is subjective. To me GX7 is best for the form factor and design as a versatile all-arounder.
Am considering the E-M1 plus the 35-100 F2 for low light street shoots. Currently use Nikon D800 plus the 70-200 F2.8 which is a great combo : lots of detail (36 Mpix) and low light sensitivity (often use ISO 3,200 and 1/160 sec, of course F 2.8). Am open to the new Oly E-M1 which looks great and is way smaller etc. However, I am quite of puzzled by the very large 35-100 which is even bigger/heavier than the Nikon 70-200. Is this due to the fact that the smaller sensor advantage is negated by the better aperture (2.0 vs 2.8). Altough the E-M1 is just out, could some experienced (m)43 users comment on whether such E-M1 / 35 – 100 combo would give me similar or better low light street photos, I guess it comes down to lens advantage (Oly) vs sensor (Nikon). Another important advantage of the D800 is the fact that its crazy 36 Mp makes it in effect a 70 – 300 (or so..). Often I crop a lot without loosing much quality. Thanks for all your input. This forum has taught me a lot about the great 43 – world with so many enthusiasts.
You are doing street shots with such a heavy combo?
srsly?!
Shenkie get out of this body!
The E-M1 + 35-100 f/2 will NOT be at the same performance level as a D800 + 70-200 f/2.8, it will also not be realistically any smaller or lighter because of the size and weight of the lens.
Don’t get taken over by the fanboyism here.
With a one stop faster lens and a five stop IBIS advantage, he’s got a potential five stops advantage given the D800s about one stop high ISO noise advantage.
hmmm, the difference between E-M5 and D800 is closer to 1.5/2 stops depending on the parameter (SNR, DR, TR, CS). IBIS is great but works as far as you are not taking moving subjects…(or don’t want movments to be blured)
And the 70-200 f2.8 he is using may be stabilized anyway, so there wouldn’t be a huge advantage to Oly there.
Besides, at low ISO the Nikon would be better, and it allows more croping than the 16 MP E-M1.
m43 is a winning combination in many scenarios, but I think that in that case, FF makes more sense (size is the same, cost is almost the same, IQ is slightly worse on m43).
I agree when using that combination but he can also add a small lens like the 20mm F1.7 and then have a much smaller camera as well.
First of all, you’re day-dreaming. The Olympus combo doesn’t even touch Nikon.
Secondly, IBIS only as good as the in lens stabilization of the Nikon, and anyway, if I was taking pictures of static objects with this kind of a setup I would likely have a tripod anyway.
The main advantage of m4/3 is SIZE. Size of cameras and lenses as a combo. If you mount a 1.5kg lens then that advantage GOES AWAY and all you are left with is a full frame sized lens in front of a sensor 1/4 the size.
Stop thinking in such a 1 dimensional space. The REAL advantage of m43rds is flexibility, not size. This system has matured into one of the most promising systems out there.
Of one wanted to use fast wides for the specific DoF effects we now thankfully have VL lenses (they are not small), small primes, small zooms, bigger zooms with fast apertures like the 12-35/12-40 35-100/40-150 small bodies, larger bodies… video bodies still bodies, professional video bodies (panasonic AG line and Black Magic line)… Lenses from god knows how many manufacturers etc etc etc.
And now we have the potential of using the HG and SHG lenses a well at almost full functionality. You can pick up a 12-60 for around $500 plus a ebay adapter and you have a very very nice lens on a very very nice body.
As this technology matures, the flexbility of this system will almost be unmatched for a single mount.
Thanks everyone for the input. I should have stated though that I exclusively shoot (moving) people on the street, i.e. need very fast AF and shutter speed. Superb IBIS is (given the high shutter speed – day time : 250 – 500/sec, night 100-160/sec) not so important then I guess, negating the great stabilisation of the E-M1. So, can I conclude that the E-M1 / 35 – 100 F2 combo would a) not give me meaningfull size/weight advantages (D800 is bigger than E-M1, but Zuiko 35-100 is bigger than Nikon 70 200) and b) the larger D800 FF sensor would (strictly for my purposes) be better in terms of low light performance. Still wonder about DoF (bokeh), I usaully use F 2.8 also during daytime to isolate the objects form their surroundings. The F 2.0 of Oly is better then Nikon’s F 2.8, but the FF sensor of the D800 would (again) negate that, right? Nevertheless I am greatly interested in the E-M1 plus the 40-150 F2.8 as a second street photo combo for travel purposes. Cant wait to see it live.
You should get the Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 which is really small!
Also some bright primes, especially 45mm F1.8 and maybe 12mm or 20mm or 25mm
> I am quite of puzzled by the very large 35-100
Literally all users say that it is the best zoom made EVER. Typical comment is that the 2.0/35-100 is a collection of prime lenses, packed into single zoom.
What I’m getting to: Olympus “overdid” it on the optical IQ side. The IQ is near perfect.
Lets be honest, 4/3 was a DUD. if it wasn’t, we’d all have FTcameras. Even though I have a L-1, it was more for the History for me. For the price, it was WAY too much for what it was, and compared to other cameras of it’s time, it really couldn’t compete.
I feel it’s still the same today. As much as I love the format, or should I say “loved”, my Canon 6D SMOKES anything M43 can put out. But even at its size for a FF camera, I don’t like carrying it with me on my daily commute, which is why I loved my GX1.
I feel like if M43 makes a move to larger bodies like the E-M1, without the video qualities of a GH3, M43 will die a slow death. And when that happens, I’ll jump to Fuji.
Still keeping my M43 kit though, I have no reason to sell it.
Perhaps you should try loving stuff for what it is and not what it isn’t. Might make you less shouty.
And yeah, I don’t like what it isn’t… SMALL. I’m simply stating with a lens that big, you’re better off with a bigger body. It just doesn’t look right, downright laughable to be honest. I’d rather a 35-100.
Panasonic just released the *small* GX7 and you state that the whole m43 system “makes a move to larger bodies”? How high is your point of view?
The typical user of 35-100 f/2.0 is an insecure fanboy, who needs to justify why he bought a 1.5kg lens that is the same size as a full frame equivalent, only to mount it on a sensor that is 1/4 the size of a full frame. That’s why all the comments about how amazing it is.
I dont get this fanboy conversation.
Myself i have both lenses (Nikon 70-200) and (Zuiko 35-100).
They both are superb lenses which i get very similar results (fantastic) from both.
Only differences i would say is that Zuiko seems sharper at corners especially in large apertures. And overall combo is a bit lighter compared to Nikon.
I use Nikon when i want to have lens in situations where 6400 or above ISO is needed, there Olympus combo is losing.
What i feel though is that Zuiko has more potential to offer with new bodies.
It is definitely over-engineered (in good and bad)
But anybody who is saying that sensor zize would result into different IMAGE QUALITY between these combos have not tried them both parallel. In my eyes both contrast, rendition, sharpness and lack of distortions are in top level in both lenses.
People please TRY these combos with thought.
Don’t own either. Just saying it’s a better deal.
If you want small I would prefer the stellar (never tried but that what everybody says…) 75 mm f1.8 but it’s a prime so not as convenient as a 70-200…it’s smaller, it’s faster, it’s sharp !
The 35-100 F2 shown above is an original 4/3 lens which can be used on an m43 body via an adaptor. It was not specifically designed for m43. It is larger because of the longer flange length and the F2, instead of F2.8 aperture. It is also an incredibly sharp lens, built to the highest optical, physical and durability standards. If you can get by with F2.8, the Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 is much smaller, lighter, very sharp, and weatherproof with built-in OIS for panasonic bodies or can be used with either IBIS or OIS with Olympus bodies. Also coming next year is an Olympus 40-150 F2.8.
The EM1 was designed to work fully with both 43 and m43 lenses to bridge the old and new systems, as the original 43 lenses were pretty slow on previous m43 bodies. The old 43 system is/was renowned for their HG (high grade) and SHG (super high grade) optics, which while larger provided premium optical quality, even from wide open.
m43 is not a single system but currently 2 systems, Olympus and Panasonic, soon to be three with the addition of JKImaging’s new Kodak m43 line that have a high degree of interchangeability, especially with lenses/flashes. The systems are competitive but also symbiotic. The end users get more choice, innovation and flexibility.
My little suggestion: use primes, have fun with them, and improve your skill to compose your street photography.
Then stop cropping. 🙂
The advantage of the E-M1 is when you use the smaller lenses. The IQ you will get with the 35-100mm would be superb but it would not improve on your current setup very much except for camera body weight. When the 40-150mm f2.8 comes out then you can use that instead of the 35-100mm although you lose a stop from f2 to f2.8 which is not bad of a compromise if you want a lighter setup
Anyone else having trouble registering as an E system owner (to get the free MMF3)? I keep receiving e mails asking me to register that I have registered.
Do they want to sell these cameras or not?
It’s just a security check. After you have registered they send you an email and you click the link.
That’s all you have to do. Don’t register again even though the option is there.
Olympus web site incompetence is sadly legendary. Give up, and try emailing customer service. Good luck, you’ll need it….
I’m sorry you appear to have had issues with Olympus Customer Service, while I can empathise with you to an extent I think it may have more to do with different locations. Having used Olympus service in the past I can say I have no issues with UK or with Prague, emails to UK or Prague are dealt with quickly and efficiently as are telephone calls. However the same cannot be said of Germany, where calls are not answered or if answered you are treated with contempt (seemingly for being unable to speak German), I signed up for the E System Club (run from Germany) and only ever received about a third of the issues published in my time as a member, Prague tried to correct this but said it was a German publication and that there was little they could do about it. So to say incompetence is legendary is not exactly a fair comment to make.
Olympus have now confirmed that I have registered the registration of my registration!
Admin have right, Olympus reader 43rumors. 😀
Admin: Your childlike infatuation with Olympus is charming but editing a quote from Lula to support you prejudice is not on.
For the record I own and use both Olympus and Panasonic M43 equipment. A more complete quote is below
“OK – How does it Compare to the Panasonic GX7?
Good question. Glad you asked. I was expecting it.
Since I have already have spent a couple of weeks with the GX7 and recently published my field report, it should be straightforward to compare it and the E-M1. Yes? Well, actually not so much.
Firstly, I no longer have my review sample of the GX7, and so a side-by side, and an ability to compare operation and results isn’t possible at the moment. But, by mid-October both cameras will be shipping and a chance to spend some time with both of them in hand simultaneously will likely present itself. In the meantime I’ll comment on those things that I see as being pros and cons in both cases as they come up.
I want to note that in my GX7 review I called it the best MFT camera thus far. True at the time. But only a few weeks later Olympus announced the E-M1 and now the playing field has become more complicated. I’ll touch on some of the differences, but also note that the US price of the GX7 will be $999 when it starts shipping on Oct 1, while the E-M1 will cost $1,399 when availability begins three days later, on October 4. That’s quite a significant differential for two cameras which in many respects are eye-ball to eyeball (or sensor to senor, as it were) in the marketplace.”
If you actually read the Lula post and get to the end you will see that he is not editing a quote at all. For the record a complete quote is:
“I’ll close today’s entry by mentioning that when I wrote my Panasonic GX7 review a couple of weeks ago I called it “…the best MFT camera yet”. It’s fair to say that this claim to fame only lasted a short while.”
Why take a pop at admin?
Its simple, you posted it, admin didn’t.
You haven’t read the original linked article that admin was quoting from have you, pause for a minute, go back, read it all, or skip to the bottom and find what admin quoted in it’s entirety. The statement itself is pretty much throw away but I thought that it is somewhat off to accuse admin of editing a quote when he had not.
“The best” is a pretty subjective term, especially where there are so many aspects to a comparison. I respect Luminous Landscape a lot, but this kind of statements doesn’t seem to fulfill any objective.
maybe it’s simply a mft system statement? The improvements are coming in fast and heavy. while calling the newest model best, it’s easier to see that the system itself is evolving and expanding. mFT has always been a system. That includes a wide range of bodies and lenses to tailor all needs.
Admin is such an Oly fanboy he did this GX7 preview video:http://www.43rumors.com/gx7-magnum-photographers-will-use-it-and-uk-tour-from-panasonic/
Now get back in your pram.
That is one ugly setup, but on day the camera will get so small that you are just going to hold the lens only like a bazooka, now tell me how cool is that?!
Haha!! That pic IS funny though…
Doesn’t look large to me, it does look small. What is the weight compared to FF 70-200/2.8?
Sorry, for what FT WAS, it was a cruel joke.
What about F/2 aperture?
If that makes you piss your pants why not try the 90-250 f2.8 for size – at £5000 just think of all the shouty posts you can make – what a hoot. Alternatively why not pop outside with your L1, GX1 or 6D (all of which are great cameras in their own right) and see if you can focus your excessive energy into taking some pictures?
Zuiko Digital ED 35–100/F2: Ø96.5 × 213.5 mm
Lumix G X Vario 35–100/F2.8: Ø67.4 × 99.9 mm
More than TWICE in length for a gain in brightness from F2.8 to F2! And both of them are pro lenses and weather sealed.
Gimme a break!
The Panasonic is a great lens
The Zuiko is an outstanding lens
You know, there’s always a price to pay
It’s simple really. The m4/3 lens was designed with size and weight in mind. The 4/3 lens was designed with optical performance in mind.
Oly’s 35-100 is over-engineered. It’s retrofocal (therefore the length) and telecentric (therefore the diameter). Still, the Panasonic 35-100 is almost as good which is a great achievement considering its size.
BTW, “pro” is a marketing term. certainly not a standard.
Many people here miss the point, because they look only at their own needs.
Let’s see the m4/3 panorama according to potentital people needs (non exhaustive, of course)
Want a cheap camera with good IQ : E-PL1, GX1, E-PM2, G3…
Want a rangefinder-styled camera : GX1, GX7, E-P5, E-P3
Want a DSLR styled camera : GHx, Gx,E-Mx
Want a outstanding hybrid video/stills : GH2, GH3, G5, G6, GX7
Want an integrated viewfinder : GH2/3, G3-5-6, GX7, E-M5, E-M1
Want very small camera : GF2,3,6
Want a large camera : GH3, E-M1
Want a camera for long lenses : GH3, E-M1
Wan the best size /IQ ratio : E-M5, GX7
Want a Panasonic : get a Panasonic
Want an Olympus : get an Olympus
and the last iteration :
Want a camera that focus with 4/3 lenses : E-M1
We can make the same exercise with m4/3 (and now add 4/3 lenses). Soooo, there’s something for nearly everybody in the m4/3 system, and that’s it’s BEAUTY!
So stop with stupid comments like : “It’s too big” or “too expensive” or the likes.
If you don’t like it, look elsewhere. And if you cannot find your needs in the impressive m4/3 panorama, well,…
I like the E-M1 form-factor better than the GH3 but not better than the GX7.
I like the 5-axis stabilizer better than any Panasonic stabilization.
I like the E-M1’s PDAF for video but I don’t like its video quality.
At the present time, there’s not one camera in the m4/3 camp that does it all.
Why can’t Olympus deliver on video?
Well, sorry to say that, but you’re likely to be forever dissapointed.
The is only one thing i like with E-M1, the is E-M1 look just as OM-2sp with motor dive 2 from -86, and also have focus peaking, so i kan use old manually focus OM lens on this camera.
Does anyone know why Olympus is not selling the new OM-D E-M1 with the new 12-40mm f2.8 lens as a kit in the US? I only see kits being offered via links to non-US sites. In the US, retailers only seem to be offering the items separately.
Man, it’s the same old GH3 thing again. I though Oly learned from Panasonic’s errors. They are going to keep making their cameras and lenses biggerw and bigger, and then we will ask why not just get an APC or FF (you know those sensors will eventually get beeter, and they are bigger also).
Here we go generalizing again… Newest cam from pana is the gx7, would you call it BIG?
Don’t let Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt alter you judgement…
I like the front view of E-M5 + 90-250 – the camera is completely hidden behind the lens 😀
Optically corrected means that THE CAMERA applies corrections, NOT THE USER. Forget Em5 curves and menus, we’re talking about distortion, aberrations and sharpness.
What you wish is not a rule: there are several lenses to buy around here, now those heavy fantastic lenes can be used at almost their full power, why do you complain?!