Dpreview (Click here) just published the full E-M1 review. The camera earned the “Gold Award” with a 84% rating. In short that’s their conclusion:
Bottom line: if you want to feel like you’re shooting with a DSLR, but still want the size and agility of a mirrorless camera, you’d be hard-pressed to find a better option than the E-M1.
Great camera, really.
—
E-M1 Preorder Links:
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.
110 Responses
WOW! They really like it! Best M4/3 camera for sure.
Yeah! Olympus has done it again! I can see all the COTY awards this year going to it. (Camera Of The Year)
definitely in the running for biggest
But it is not a big camera for what it offers.
so the full review of the EM1 is online about 2 weeks after the one from the EP5. (which is nearly half a year older)
Dpreview are wankers. (read: they advance products they personally like)
Yeah, but the thing is they never liked Olympus.
This camera is like 3 years too late. Sony A7 is here with a full-frame sensor at roughly the same price.
757 DXOMark ISO score for the E-M1 vs. 2534 ISO score for the RX1 (A7 can’t be worse). Same for the dynamic range and color depth, about 2 stops difference.
Really…I’m not sure what is the point of this camera. It’s like Pentax releasing a Q1 pro camera with 1/2.3″ sensor.
The m43 cameras should be small and light…but they don’t seem to get it.
5 stops stabilisation with all lenses – advantage Oly; 2 stops better ISO – advantage Sony. Much more lenses, less expensive and good quality (almost on par with the Zeiss ones – advantage Oly); better ergonomy – advantage Oly, freezproof – advantage Oly. A less expensive sistem overall – advantage Oly. Should I go on?
Well, 2 stops of stabilization, but the rest still applies.
No, it’s 5
It may be 5 stops in Olympus’ marketing dreams. But in real life it is more like 2-3 stops.
5 stops would let you hand hold a 1 second exposure with the 17mm lens on a regular basis.
5 stops according to Olympus and 4 according to CIPA. It’s the same with the other manufacturers: 4 stops for Canon/Nikon means 3 100% stops; 3 stops means 2 100% stops!
Considering the Canon/Nikon primes are mostly non-IS/VR the E-M1 has a big advantage! Plus double DOF vs FF which for interior architecture shooting is great (for exterior everybody knows it’s better)
The E-M1 is small and light, too much so to be used with several Four-Thirds lenses, for which it is intended, but it is also isn’t huge when used with micro Four-Thirds lenses.
holding side-by-side the difference is simply the attached grip, other than that they feel the same footprint. Of course you can measure and fiddle, but real world they are equally compact. The e-M1 give a much better feel and will add to larger lenses, especially with the battery addition. But it will also work very well as a compact system with primes. My purchase followed handling …
Seems like the shutter sound of the Sony A7s is about 2534/757 dB compared to that of the E-M1 :-). See Kirk Tuck’s first take on the “small” A7s…, http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.no .
“…In fact, if you are using legacy glass from Sony along with one of the adapters your shooting profile (where the lenses are concerned) is bulkier than with the larger a99 body. And that just doesn’t make sense.” — Kirk Tuck on the A7s.
You can also use the Zeiss 35mm and kick some compact a ss 🙂
yeah maybe you will beat a P&S with some zeiss glass.
But if you’re only using the 35 mm, why not just get the RX1? 🙂
And the lens is 1 stop faster too.
I agree that the A7 is a fantastic camera. However, you should not
be so “body-centric”. The lenses are what matters for a system camera
and there I don’t see the advantage of a mirrorless FF. The lenses will
be either big (which lets the A7 compete more with DSLR systems), or they
will be slow (which eats all the advantages of the FF sensor).
mFT is certainly not the best system in the world for everything. But the point of mFT is the best compromise between size and quality. Whoever spends 1500$ on a body will likely also invest in lenses. Let’s say the average User will have 5 lenses, which brings us back to my first paragraph.
The E-M1 is a great camera and a real improvement over the E-M5. I have both. They are basically the same size. I consider them small cameras, especially when compared to the 7D or D300s. The A7 is an interesting camera, but other than a FF sensor it doesn’t really compare to a true “pro-level” camera. Plus for FF the lenses will be bigger and more expensive. Anyhow once passed the threshold of more than good enough in IQ and the E-M1 is way passed this threshold then there is other just as important factors.
@CaverDave
Anyhow once passed the threshold of more than good enough in IQ and the E-M1 is way passed this threshold then there is other just as important factors.
That to me is the most important statement in summation about the em1 so far on this forum.
I’ve been getting sharp shots with my em1 and 90-250 at a 60th of a second at a 500mm effective focal length. Try that with your a7.
Your idea of “roughly” is not the same as my idea of “roughly.”
Both of you have roughly the same idea 🙂
That’s hilarious!…let me understand this clearly, you actually believe a camera is nothing but a sensor?
Did you wonder why at dpreview last year’s camera of the year award went to the omd em5 just edging out the D800 DR oozing, pixel pumping behemoth?!
Guys shooting 35mm were voting for the em5 because OVERALL it represented the best camera experience and the criteria and basis by which the voters judged wasn’t solely based on one single thing like a sensor or AF but everything including size, weight, lenses, performance, bang for buck, image stabilisation, enjoyment factor etc….
We all know the em1 isn’t necessarily the best camera at high iso but if we were to talk about what the a7r camera is best at the conversation woukd be very short indeed because other than being the first 35mm mirrorless camera and having that sensor it starts to look very ordinary with what it can’t do and what it lacks.
“This camera is like 3 years too late”… Well, your mother said she was three weeks too late. She still regret that you were born.
DOUCHE!
“757 DXOMark ISO score for the E-M1 vs. 2534 ISO score for the RX1”
That’s a tad below 2 stops, which is as expected for this sensor size difference.
But then the E-M1 has IBIS which gives it a bit over two stops, and the lenses are 1 to 1.3 stops faster
(Oly 17mm f/1.8 vs Zeiss 35mm f/2.8; Oly 12-40 f/2.8 vs Zeiss 24-70 f/4)
Hmm.. lessee.. E-M1 with a few primes is nicely small and light. Certainly not as small and light as a GM1 with the same lenses, but smaller and lighter then an APS-C or 135 format alternative with equivalent lenses (yes, even when those would have the same absolute aperture, so f/3.6 at 90mm to match f/1.8 at 45mm). The difference only becomes larger when adding more lenses, especially if that is to include somewhat longer lenses.
Of course, the 35/2.8 is nicely small, but if you are only going to use that lens, you could as well buy an RX1 and gain 1 stop due to a faster lens.
At least it’s not as big as the GH3.
Have the stores been able to fully unload that lumbering monster on Panasonic fanboys yet?
Sony FE 70-200mm F4: 840g, Panasonic 35-100mm F2.8: 360g.
I dunno what is the point of 70-200mm, it is heavier than Canon 70-200mm F4.
DPquote:As a system camera, the E-M1 offers more than enough to keep an enthusiast or hobbyist happy. That is a good conclusion. Its not a pro for pro’s thus way to expensive sitting in pro range market.
Pro range compared are the next 7d mk 2 and D400 which are 2000$/euros cameras! E-M1 is much cheaper. Be realistic!
@Viezevure: what is the purpose of such sloppyness with quotation? Where does your quotation start? Where does it stop? Does dpreview really say “Its not a pro for pro’s thus way to expensive sitting in pro range market”? [Whatever that means…]. Or is that your appended personal view?
—
Here is dpreview’s conclusion of the conclusion: “Bottom line: if you want to feel like you’re shooting with a DSLR, but still want the size and agility of a mirrorless camera, you’d be hard-pressed to find a better option than the E-M1.” And that is after they say the difference in image quality compared to APS-C cameras is more or less negligible. Yes, they say that cameras with 24×36 sensors have better image quality. But most buyers of m43 cameras know this, and still choose m43 cameras due to the smaller size of camera + lens.
to expensive for a tiny m43 sensor.
but ist oly so it will cost 800 euro in 3 month…..
You are so smart!
will olmypus make a dime this years?
And will you learn how to spell? Really dumb for a twelve year old.
DPR mentioned slow AF… that´s dead on arrival for me anyway.
when DPR says soemthing like that then it´s really bad.
Yes. Dead on arrival! Eh — which camera are you referring to? Probably not the E-M1?
He was referring to the A7.
While I really like the camera image quality and feel, I was a 4/3 shooter and only have 4/3 lenses at this point. AF performance is sad. It stutters and behaves very much like a fast Contrast detect autofocus. I don’t know why the lenses go back and forth. It’s not anything like phase detect. Anyways. It just goes to show that a certain Olympus blogger is getting paid heavily to mislead people about certain aspects of Oly camera, because all he said was completely untrue. Focus with 4/3 lenses is not close to what they are with the E5, in speed and reliability, and that just multiplies in low light.
Also, the viewfinder is garbage. I can’t have all the features unless I shrink the view or use 3/2 aspect ratio? what’s the point? I’ll take optical, thanks.
so why have the pics made with the E-M5 more sharpness and details? because of pixels used for pdaf af at the sensor of the E-M1?
The test on E-M1 was made with 45mm lens, on E-M5 was 50mm f2.0.
Unfortunately I have 2 SHG lenses and 3 HG lenses from 4/3. Yesterday I have compared the E-M1 and E-5 with a lot of lenses, 12-60mm, 14-35mm, 50-200mm and 35-100mm and I have to say that I’m a little disappointed. The focus is hunting on the surfaces that are not in clear contrast and even fail sometimes, at the same scene the E-5 is doing the focus very well on very high speed.
12-60mm – not good – hunting and fail
14-35mm – good enough – faster than 12-60 but still hunting
50-200mm SWD – good – can be used for normal activities but not for BIF
35-100mm – very good (but slower than E-5)
This week I will buy the E-M1 with 12-40mm but I’m not so happy with my decision. My hope was for E-7 release, but Olympus is going away from 4/3 customers due to financial priorities. I hope I will not regret my decision to remain with Olympus.
My ZD 14-35mm seems to hunt a lot. It’s best on the E-5 and reasonable on the E-M1 and I manually focus it on the GH3 and E-1.
I noticed that my 2004 50-200mm did quite well, and the 35-100mm was quick. I should have tried all of my lenses.
@Paul
Thanks for that run down on your findings with the em1 and fourthirds glass.
I held on to my 12-60, 50f2, 50-200swd, 40-150, ex25, ec14 and the leica branded 14-150 to be certain and not hastily jump ship while I slowly built up my m43 kit.
Those findings don’t seem ideal but may pass as adequate for some.
I need the em1 to be extremely competent at caf for wildlife with my 50-200swd or that lens will have to go.
If the fourthirds glass won’t perform well for me I’ll end up keeping the 14-150 leica, 50f2 + ex25 and sell the rest with the e3 and invest the rest in m43 glass of similar spec but probably end up buying a 7dmk2 and one telephoto lens strictly for when I want to shoot wildlife requiring demanding caf and nothing else. For all other photography
I’m very happy with m43 and see the em1 exceeding my expectations at travel, portraiture, macro, landscape and street types of photography with some wildlife shooting to a lesser extent.
I haven’t yet received my em1 + 12-40 and when I do I’ll be testing it thoroughly with my 43 lenses and then making a tough decision.
Ultimately, Olympus will for me be delivering m43 equivalents to my lenses except for the 50-200swd but I was really hoping for the amalgamation of all my 43 and m43 glass on one body.
I agree. I’ve only really tested my 12-60mm and 9-18mm. Much more hunting than on the E-M5 in low light. In better light… not so bad, aside from the juddering. And if you’re shooting scenes that have primarily horizontal features then the lack of cross-type sensing becomes painfully obvious – switch between landscape and portrait orientation and see the difference.
It’s a damn fine camera, but they’ve done only the half the job they should have done for 4/3 users.
Gold Award for OMD again .
What about GX7 review ?
DP should finalize the review for GX7 before go to EM1 .
GX7: Garbage In. Garbage Out.
EM-1 is already obsolete, we have GM-1, lol 😀 just kidding…
The fact is, Dpreview will hardly finish GX7 review, because as they said, majority is reserved for Canikon, and because they did EM-1, they hardly find workforce for GX7 in near time.
The question was asked on DPReview and they explained that they were given a review copy of the E-M1 before the GX7. The GX7 review is being worked on. It is not a conspiracy!
Everything is a conspiracy – or did you forget what forum you posted to?
panny do not paid to DPR ,no full review for GX7 likes G5 😉
Really excited about this camera. One day I’ll pick up this and the 12-40 and bring it everywhere like the beach, even in the winter when it’s freezing. I’ll have fantastic quality images in situations I never would’ve brought a camera.
As an extensive user of both NIkon FX and OMD system I prefer my OMD in most instances. The only instance for me I feel the need for using my Nikon if you feel you need the shallower DOF when using fast standard zooms. OMD primes can achieve similar DOF but if you need to shoot an active event with zoom lens and need shallow DOF both the panny and oly 2.8 zooms while sharp gives ‘flatter looks’ than on the 24-70 f2.8 of a full frame.
All other uses even studio and landscape I am happy enough with the omd. I can go on for hrs in studio where with the NIkon I get tired and bored after a while. With landscape I’m be of a trill hiker I can get to places with the omd that I otherwise wouldn’t dare to go to when carrying the Nikon.
Major bummer that the 12-40mm will be significantly delayed…….
the good news for me,.my 12-40 is in the stores and i will pick up this tuesday morning
Not sure how relevant the OMD series is.
The price ($1200!) is too high. You could buy a used D7000 for half the price.
Weathersealing? Professionals use weather sealed cameras for sports and wilderness wildlife. Where’s the 200-400 or 800mm lenses?
Using the OMD for landscape? Are you gonna carry the exposed camera while it is raining?
Need splash protection? Buy a $50 jacket.
You really are an idiot.
I have shot with the weather-resistant Oly E-5, and the weather-resistant 4/3 12-60mm and 4/3 50-200mm SWD lenses in the Arctic and Antarctica. I have been on fast moving zodiacs with spray flying everywhere and just kept on shooting with my Oly system, while the Canikon folks had to keep their cameras in their back packs. I got the shots that all of them missed.
I will have the same success under adverse conditions with the E-M1 and weather-resistant 4/3 and m4/3 lenses.
I also do a lot of photography in cold, wet, muddy, natural (wild) caves. Yes, I shoot under adverse conditions. I currently use a weather-resistant Oly E-M5 and 12-50mm lens combo. And have NEVER had a problem.
So, you can take your BS and shove it.
Sorry. I would prefer to use the D3/D800/D300 in the wet. Easier to get rentals and loaners. Does that matter?
he build quality of E-M1,.is not in the class of D3/D800/D300,..but is much higher ,.is in the same build quality league as D4/1DX Canon,..you just don’t know nothing about E-M1 build quality
The weather sealing of D3 is the same as D4 and meets the highest Japaness standard.
Here’s the D300 getting the splash test. Repeatedly
http://nikonrumors.com/2011/04/22/nikon-d3-hail-torture.aspx/
Here’s the D3 getting the mud test
http://www.doobybrain.com/2011/04/09/nikon-d3-dragged-through-the-mud/
No your uninformed excuse for an opinion does not matter.
No, it doesn’t count.
You’re a pathetic troll at DP, you’re a pathetic troll here.
It does matter to pro photog.
I was right at DP just as I am rite now. At DP, I told you guys that MILC wasn’t good enough to displace DSLR. That it had to be smaller AND better AND cheaper.
Time has proven me right. Rather quickly too!
What is Oly’s first priority. It is to return to profitability.
It won’t do that going toe-to-toe against Canikon pro cameras. Oly has to focus on volume from consumer MILC. Smaller, better AND cheaper.
We await the financial report of your very successful imaging corporation, I mean, with all that knowledge and your superb predictions of the future, you should not be wasting your time here, you should be getting extremely rich and not worry about all this stuff.
Professionals also use weather sealed cameras for news and event photography. Especially news and big events are not going to wait until the rain stops, and those silly ‘plastic coats’ are a PITA when you actually need to operate your camera.
Don’t get me wrong, go use your D800 or whatever if thats what you like, its an excellent camera, and an interesting compromise, but please go spend some time on learning that first of all EVERY camera is a compromise, and second, the best compromise depends heavily on your exact use, and third, other people may have other needs then you, and hence may prefer a different compromise.
It may have slipped past your notice. But, agency and big media photog have been using Canikon for many years. Why?
Because of the ecosystem and Canikon pro service.
With Canikon, digital photog can use the same lenses for APSC and FF. Canikon offers a full range of lenses including 200-400, multiple fisheyes and fast zooms. Lately, Sigma and Tokina are turning out great and affordable lenses.
Then, there is the pro service with loaners and quick service.
Let me end with this observation. Just because Oly and its fans call the OMD a pro camera doesn’t mean that it is versatile enough for agency work.
Which has what to do with what I commented on (the use of weather sealing by news and event photographers)?
And eh, most sports photographers shoot canikon as well, shall we just leave the market to them? Silly argument really.
Regarding loaners and ‘pro’ service, considering that you can easily buy 2 E-M1s for the price of a 1Dx with some money to spare for more glass, and considering the weight of it all, you don’t generally need those loaners, not to mention, canikon don’t have a service engineer and a spare following you all the time, so a camera that breaks means missing the news pictures.
Many freelance photographers already do such things and don’t count on loaners or such, they simply know that not having a spare with you runs the risk of missing important pictures.
You are right about many agencies, but that has everything to do with conservatism (don’t change a winning team) and investments in legacy equipment. Yes they need the pro service, but that has to do with how they have been running their business and nothing with it being the only posdible or even best option.
Your comment seems a bit irrelevant- maybe you mistook this site for something that supports Canon-Nikon DSLR owners?
Yup price is too high – thta’s why they cant keep up with demand – LOL.
Yup – really good weather sealing – up there with C and N pro level, not like the APS amateur models.
Lenses already exist to cover up to 600 fro O and P, and Sigma.
You dont seem to understand what weather sealing is for – I carried my weather sealed E-1 while wading in saltwater while fishing. What’s the point of WR if you bury your camera in a back pack ? Doh
Your plastic jacket doesnt work very well if you are actively moving around and compromise using thumbwheels or even zoom rings.
Obviously you are are not the target market!
Is the weather sealing of the Canikon pro cameras better than splash-proof???
You Stupid,.
take a look at this,.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cia2dRP9cww
btw ,.i also have a nikon system,.so don’t just bullshit with your reply,.,i never seen anyone with nikon,.underwater showering the camera,.
Yoshihisa Maitani will be proud that small camera can do something big.
Video “falls significantly below the resolution we’d expect from the camera shooting 1080p…giving footage that falls rather short of consumer level standards – let alone the expectations of semi-pro videographers.” Yep, this camera is a disaster. Video is as important as stills in a camera anymore, and Olympus is clueless.
A disaster for videographers. So… they can buy a GH3.
…or a gx7. and end up with an extra 1″ of space in their coat pocket.
Only an uniformed person would suggest GH3 as a substitute for an Olympus camera with IBIS and good video. Olympus needs to step up video because IBIS makes video much better all other things equal.
Yes, a disaster. One brand has awesome image stabilization, so you don’t need to carry around a big rig which does not fit in any pocket. The other brand has awesome video quality without stabilization in the body so your lens choice is rather restricted. As a keen hobbyist, we have no good choices, which is rather strange. The GX7 seems to be the winner in this regard.
And again, for the vast majority of hobbyists (the main market) video and stills are both important. Nobody wants to carry around 2 separate units anymore.
“The other brand has awesome video quality without stabilization in the body so your lens choice is rather restricted. As a keen hobbyist, we have no good choices, which is rather strange. The GX7 seems to be the winner in this regard.”
GX7 also doesn’t do IBIS on video mode. So prime lenses gets the SHAKY reception.
Damn, you neither tested the GX7 for its AWFUL/MINISCULE EVF, nor even tried to do video, firsthand.
You’re not a ‘hobbyist’… You’re a fake!
WORSE PANNY FANBOY… EVER.
You really are an idiot. Until the EM-1 came out, the GX7 EVF was considered the largest and the best on the MFT cameras – so if the GX7 is awful/miniscule, I suppose that makes the OM-D EVF absolutely antedeluvian crap?
Uhm no, the GX7 EVF is not better then the VF4 according to about anyone who seriously looked at both. That VF4 was available way before the E-M1. Very first issue with GX7 EVF is it being annoying as hell for people wearing glasses due to its extremely short eyepoint.
And eh, there is no such thing as “THE OM-D”, there are 2 (two) OM-D models, the E-M1 and E-M5.
But hey, VF4, OM-D, none of that says Lumix, so I suppose its not something you’d ever try to inform yourself about.
full review is not mean EVF only ,
and all around photograph site business is real,
i don’t trust these site .
But the post I replied to was specifically about the EVF.
From my numerous friends and known photography hobbyists, for none of them video has any importance. The claim that so many take both video and stills important, is utter nonsense. Only a reaction of hobbyists do video as serious as stills, so they don’t need more than the E-M1 offers.
The E-M1 is right on being oriented towards the stills photographer, unlike the GH3, which introduces too much compromises due to its hybrid character: most notably the relatively disappointing view finder.
+1 on that. i never missed video options, too. in fact, it upsets me, when there is a dedicated video button, which can’t be reassigned!
No, what the E-M1 offers is not enough, it would be if it supported different frame rates (25p specifically).
I agree Mahler. I’m not interested in video at all, that function is always turned off on my cameras and I use the botton to change light metering.
I know many would like to buy the perfect video/still camera, perhaps for few money, but it’s not there. M43 is a great system, in my opinion the most versatile available, and people can actually choose from a wide range of bodies from two big companies, depending on interests.
Thus the “war” between fanlittleboys is something stupid.
While I was at the Venice Film Festival I had a chat with a photographer, she said she asked Canon to do a camera that could only take stills. No videos, no whistles, no bells. Just photos. She said she would pay 4000 Euros for it.
Now Nikon is showing us a dedicated still camera (DF): I’d be interested in it, but basically it will be a d800, big, and bigger with its lenses.
I’d like a camera from Olympus aimed at photography, and E-M1 is the best thing I can consider right now.
At the same time I wonder if people would be interested in a videocamera with m43 mount from Panasonic.
I think you need to look at how mega popular the Panasonic GH line is on the various Vimeo groups and various video forums…
Which merely shows that a video camera with interchangeable lenses for a somewhat reasonable price is desirable. It doesn’t show this must be a hybrid.
Not my experience, video as important as stills to everyone I know. GH, Blackmagic, A7r, 5DM3 are not great options without IBIS. Nothing matters if shot not steady. If Olympus took video seriously the world would knock down its door to get the camera.
Good high end camera. Expensive for m43 though. No major improvements in IQ above E-M5 etc. Not quite the successor the 43 DSLR users had hoped (focusing in dim light with some 43 lenses seems to be not so good according to DPR review). But still a good overall package and flagship product.
I think GX7 will not get as good a review from DPR. They did not like the viewfinder from the GH3. Cameralabs did not like the viewfinder on the GX7 either. Will also lose points due to no mic input and no IBIS in video. GX7 should get Silver from DPR. But may get Gold for being the first m43 RF styled camera with builtin viewfinder. 84% for E-M1 sets a high bar and will be tough to match for a long time.
i guess no gold, no silver and no bronze for GX7 but … like G5/G6 and GF6
Let’s compare it to the 70D: for 200$ more you get stabilization with all lenses (5 stops vs 3 or 4 in IS lenses), freezeproof, better weather sealing, better viewfinder (70D viewfinder is a joke compared to the E-M1 one), premium body feeling (like a Mercedes dashboard compared to a Fiat one).
Not to mention the great Olympus glass which is superior to the EF-S glass from Canon (remember L lenses are for FF not for APS-C).
L lenses can quite be used on APS-C cameras, so simply count as yet more available options for a Canon APS-C camera owner. That they are intended for a larger image circle merely makes them a more interesting option for those who imagine they’ll move to ‘full frame’ in the future.
Agree with the other points, and the 70D is simply no competition at all
L lenses can be used on APS-C but goodbye wide!
True enough… but hello tele 🙂
You see the positive side of things, that’s good! 🙂
I don’t buy the “option for those who imagine they’ll move to ‘full frame’ in the future” anymore.
35mmFF is a niche, not more than that. It serves a specific purpose, like MF and real FF already do for years.
With mirrorless (m43) getting better CAF almost every iteration, it won’t be long before even CAF is up to par with the pro DSLR’s.
The image quality of m43 already is more than good enough for >95% of the time.
So 35mmFF is just there for the very few who need absolute highest pixel count and latitude for a fast reacting machine, MF and FF are too slow (shooting and handling) for high speed occasions.
In that light an upgrade path to 35mmFF is just marketing talk!
I think most people who think they’ll move to FF ‘in the future’ won’t, through I do know more then a few that already did.
But I can quite imagine why people leave the option open, especially if it gets them an extra argument for buying that more expensive, more impressive and better lens!
On another note, yes, in a few years, m4/3 will offer the similar performance to the very best ‘full frame’ cameras available today, but in those few years, larger formats will benefit from those same improvements, so the relative difference stays. The more important question is if m4/3 can provide the quality and performance to cover the very large majority of applications to an extent that it is satisfactory for professional users. For a number of relevant applications, we already are at that point, but certainly not for everything.
Indeed, that is the law of diminishing returns.
At some point, sensor improvements become irrelevant.
FF will reach that point first, then APS-C, then m4/3, then 1″, then maybe smaller and smaller sensors.
(For my needs, we’re already there)
They can be mounted ok, but are far from ideal.
Admittedly the APS-C sensor will crop out the sweet-spot from the L-lenses, but as those are designed for an FF sensor w/ a bigger image circle, you loose a lot of light, that is not projected onto the sensor surface, but simply ends up as stray light scattered around inside the camera, outside the sensor itself. hence you’ll also lose lens brightness, so an F2.8 L-lens is effectively no longer really F2.8 on an APS-C body.
“you loose a lot of light, that is not projected onto the sensor surface, but simply ends up as stray light scattered around inside the camera, outside the sensor itself.”
This is correct, through almost all lenses cover an image circle larger then the actual sensor, and most cameras have baffles around the sensor to deal with this (reduce the amount of light that gets bounced around). The simple result is that you get more stray light, with the potential of introducing flare and reducing contrast.
“hence you’ll also lose lens brightness, so an F2.8 L-lens is effectively no longer really F2.8 on an APS-C body.”
Sorry but that is just totally wrong.
First you do not lose brightness, brightness is light intensity/area, and while you throw away light, you also reduce area with exactly the same factor, and end up with the exact same brightness.
Also, relative aperture is diameter of the entrance pupil/focal length. It is a physical property of a lens that in no way depends on what you put behind the lens, hence, an f/2.8 lens is an f/2.8 lens is an f/2.8 lens, regardless of the format or sensor size.
What is true however is that due to the smaller sensor area, you also use less of the light passed by the lens. This is no different from cropping an image, you also end up using less total light for the resulting image. Also, its no different from using a lens for a smaller image circle but with the same relative aperture.
Whatever you argue technically, I am beginning to think that the motivations behind this sweeping love for 35mm are mainly psychological.
http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/full-frame-v-micro-four-thirds/
They come from young unwashed who understand only size and quantity, and that never had 35mm film, and therefore don’t understand the limitations.
They don’t understand also that to build a system they need to spend at least 10,000 $ or perhaps they don’t care, being the sons of banksters. They are therefore the ideal marketing fodder, since no site like this one will warn them in advance, but push them further to buy.
What can be done? Weather the storm, and just see them come back with broken bones.
Rational arguments are long past, camera buying after all is a sort of alienation, and very often a consumerist neurosis.
Ugh. Generalize much? You really do love the sound of your own voice.
Here’s some friendly advise. Don’t attack other brands. Focus on what M43 needs to survive.
M43 is badly losing market share even in Japan. Last year, 4/10 of the best selling cameras was MILC. This year, maybe 2/10.
http://www.dslrphoto.com/dslr/space.php?do=jranking&view=all
Bad for M43 is that this week there is only one M43 in the top 20.
At amazon USA, M43 has only 3/10 of the top MILC.
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Compact-System-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/3109924011/ref=zg_bs_nav_e_4_3017941
Yes. This is sad, but also true.
But it does not involve only m43 and mirrorless, but also apsc cameras of any kind and brand.
Japanese mass market is quickly switching to smartphone-photography only. Those who bought the epl1s-epl2 heavily discounted a couple of years ago are not going to buy new cameras in the future, as they appear not on par with what cellphones offer. We are not talking quality, but convenience in use: 90% of people take pics for posting on facebook, and at the moment any smartphone is more convenient at that (i.e.: faster in the shooting – uploading process) than any expensive camera on the market.
Very sadly, few days ago a student of mine (here in Tokyo) said that I am a “strange person” because I still use a dedicated camera. And this student is not a young one, she is more than 30. Cameras are becoming something for photo-otaku, not for mass-market anymore, as it was until last year.
I know Japan: these changes happen quickly, involve everybody (’cause here people always want the last fashonable item, and very few opt for the “peculiar” one) and are often irreversible. I do not see a bright future for cameras in general, unless they quickly become more integrated with software and internet-cloud services (and mind: Canon and Nikon are faaar from being ok from this point of view)
Actually, I don’t quite agree.
IMO, the features, controls and IQ of premium compact cameras is significant enough to ensure their survival. As long as the price is under $500.
Similarly CSC and DSLR will manage nicely because there is a core group of users who do need these features.
IMO, the compact and ILC markets will stabilize.
The problem is this. There are profits for the industry #1 and #2 in a smaller market. There isn’t for the smaller brands.
So, we are seeing the consolidation of Canikon as the last men standing. At the moment, there is a proliferation of CSC products from the smaller brands as they compete against each other, not against DSLR.
Perhaps, there is only room for two long term players (minumum 2 million cameras each) in CSC. Unless CSC starts growing again.
Who will the last men standing in CSC? What will happen when Canikon starts looking for sales from small cameras? Stay tuned. The future is not as clear cut as you may think.
According to the noise comparison sample by dpreview. E-M1 high ISO noise performance is poorer than E-M5 and GX7. Why doesn’t dpreview point it out in the article?
EM-1 has better ergonomics, better control, and better continuous AF. However, it looks like an entry level D-SLR camera, very ugly, and its noise level is higher than other competitors. Why do I pay more for a camera with more ugly appearance, heavier and poorer noise level?