The All Black GX7 with 20mm lens kit sells now for $999 via third party resellers at Amazon US (Click here). The same seller has the E-M5 body for $719 only (Click here).
All current Olympus deals can be seen at GetOlympus (Click here).
The All Black GX7 with 20mm lens kit sells now for $999 via third party resellers at Amazon US (Click here). The same seller has the E-M5 body for $719 only (Click here).
All current Olympus deals can be seen at GetOlympus (Click here).
*Please also check your spam folder if you don't get the confirmation mail. And mark the mail as "non-spam" to see the future newsletter.
29 Responses
they need to sell it in black, body only for $500, then I and others will buy. (already have the lenses) Too many better new camera options for less $.
Please elaborate… What M43 camera has the features the GX7 does for $500.00?? Better yet, what M43 camera has the same features for around the same price??
I think all M43 cameras need to drop down in price, but to say there’s a better M43 camera than the GX7 for cheaper, is just you talking out your ass.
I didn’t say there are better M 4/3rds cameras (the the G6) may be as good for less $$. I don’t use Olympus so can’t comment there. I was thinking you can get a Fuji X E1 for about $600 now the X E2’s for $800 (price of the GX7) the new Sony A6000 $800 for similar and they are APS-c Cameras. Oh yeah and you can get a Canon Rebel for about $500 too, not sexy but they take amazing photos and video. I have had Panasonic M4/3rds since the start but IMHO the GX7 is way overpriced.
If you prefer aps-c go and get one of those bodies. I prefer m43 as a whole system and certainly don’t feel tempted by any aps-c offer, other than a sigma dp. Being an aps-c camera doesn’t suggest it should be more expensive than a m43. This is totally nonsense.
Of course larger-sensor bodies suggest more expensive cameras. The larger sensor costs more to produce! APS-C has twice the sensor area of m43, so that should definitely matter. Cost may not increase in a purely linear fashion, but it should be a factor like anything else. If what you say is true, it would be like saying the cost of a medium format sensor is no different than the ones found in smartphones. What it amounts to is, with all other things equal, a m43 body should cost less to make than an APS-C body. If they don’t you have to question if its other offerings more than make up the premium in price.
Price not only based on sensor size. Miniaturization take lot of effort. Making small body full with magical technology contribute to cost of product. Minolta Cl smaller than Praktica B, but same 35 mm film format. Which one more expensive?
What technology in this GX7 has been miniaturized more so than any other model in this format?
Read again. Sqweezy compare m43 price to “larger-sensor bodies” and especially “APS-C.”
Hey I love the M4/3rds and APC and FF but at different price points. Sooner or later all prices of all these cameras fall by at least 50%. I bought my first 5D for 2500 and sold it for 600. My GH2 for 1300 and offed it for $500. Fact is the GX7 rocks but not for $1000, not even for $800. I can buy a Fuji for that price and would, but I can wait out the price drop on the GX7 (since I have the lenses).
What rocks horse depends on different on different things for everyone. Own 5 4/3 and 3 m43 lens. Camera body good for a few year. Need only shoot a few portfolios to buy new body. Body price no big deal.
In general a bigger sensor would be more expensive than a smaller. But the amount of APS-C sensors produced is so much higher than MFT, that this is not true or maybe even the APS-C are cheaper.
What I don’t get is why they dont use an APS-C in an MFT camera. That would be a nice multi aspect sensor and should be cheaper.
The GX-7’s MSRP is the same as X-E1/2, but the Pany has more features. Even the NEX-6 and A6000 lack certain features the GX-7 has. IBIS? Touchscreen? Tilting EVF? Tilting screen and WiFi on those Fuji’s and how’s their video?
Camera price is not dictated by sensor size alone, otherwise, a T5 would not cost any lest than a 70D. BTW, if you think Rebels take “amazing photos”, then you’ll be amazed by the GX-7 or other m4/3 with similar sensor, like E-PM2, which is only $329 and actually takes better photos than a $500 Rebel.
Besides, prices go down. So if you want it but can’t afford it, just wait or save up.
Olympus cameras used to drop prices fast in the past. I’m disappointed.
Nobody who own camera want value drop. You probably not own camera.
Isn’t that around the normal price for the CX7 with a lens? Right around $1000 when body only is around $750? It needs to come down a lot lower as its direct competition with an EVF is the Sony NEX6 and pending release of the A6000 with lens for about $800.
B&H was selling the GX7 + 14-42mm II for about $850 a few weeks ago.
I had to get my black GX7 in Canada back in October.
Mind you, this is a kit with the 20mm f1.7 lens, which at ~$400 is pricier (and better quality) than most kit zooms.
Still, the GX7 is definitely overpriced right now. A GX7 body without lens is currently $750, versus $650 for the A6000 or $700 for the E-M10.
There is guy claiming in the customer review section that this black version is the european one with 25/50p instead of 24/60p US standard. Can anyone confirm that?
That would depend on which marketplace seller they got theirs from. Black models from Canada would have NTSC framerates, but ones from East Asia or Australia or so would be PAL.
For me personally, it doesn’t matter how much this drops in price; it’s essentially worthless until they bring out some firmware to allow auto ISO in manual mode. I know us photogs get far too wound up about features being overlooked in cameras, but in this case I think it’s inexcusable. It even has some beautifully ergonomic twin dials (ala the EP-5) which are rendered useless by the lack of this feature.
I don’t get it. I use this camera every day and it produces beautiful pictures and 1080p HD video.
Camera makers have spent BILLION$ to develop Programmed, Aperture priority, Shutter priority, scenes modes, intelligent Automatic etc. For what reason? Because photographers of all stripe wanted it. Now they set the camera on Manual and complain that it isn’t automatic enough.
+1000
I’ve had my head bitten off more than a few times for saying that…
Manual should mean manual.
But really, aren’t there already enough auto-modes? Switching ISO really isn’t too painful. Maybe because I shot film for years and the the only way to change ASA speed was to finish the roll. 😉
BTW, I’ve never been able to figure WTF “P” mode actually is and why?
I have taken approx. 2000 pictures since early Oct. 2013 (mostly P, iAuto, and Aperture mode) with only a half dozen bad exposures (when I fumbled the camera into “M” and didn’t know it).
It seems like some “photographers” want to be seen with the camera in “M” mode, (but actually the camera is operating in “auto” in the background. 😉
Oh, SNAP! 😉
BTW, I shoot in M mode most the time. It keeps me focused. 😉
I see where you use Voigtlander Nokton lenses which are not AF. You are REALLY shooting in manual.
I probably use the P & iAuto modes the most due to using ONLY manual cameras in the 1970’s and missing too many “Kodak” moments while futzing with all of the controls. I was an early adopter of the Program Mode, (which incidentally works very well when shooting video).
Yep. That’s about it.
The electronic lenses I use regularly are the 7-14mm and 100-300mm. The lenses I use most are native manual and adapted manual (Nikon AI-S, Voigtländer M and L mount, Pentax SMC Takumar, Olympus OM).
I prefer using a real aperture ring and the control and feel of manual focus. For me, it’s a big part of the process.
I am in line for the Nokton 17.5mm because of the customer reviews on B&H and to rekindle my love of the old METAL lenses with the butter-smooth focus. Will most likely leave it attached to the GH3/GH4. I believe that the Voigtlander Nokton lenses are the ONLY lenses in the m4/3 system that will have enduring value.
I do plan to re-learn to use the “real aperture ring” to challenge myself a little.
BTW, most of this discussion is esoteric to video. I have shot a ton of video from a moving “tadpole” trike on Ohio’s Rail-Trails, and due to constantly changing lighting conditions the Manual Mode is not practical where-as “P” mode and iAuto work nicely.
Sorry, I wasn’t entirely clear with this. And for the record the GX7 seems like a near perfect camera to me. But there is a sizeable and growing group of photographers who want to be able to quickly and easily adjust aperture and shutter speed to achieve create effects, while the camera takes care of ISO within a certain range to achieve optimal exposure. ISO is a means to an end, not a creative feature in itself you see. This mode allows one to totally and single-mindedly focus on aperture and shutter speed alone. One finger is on the aperture dial and the thumb on shutter speed and you can react instantly to any situation. For many photographers that is THE key advantage of digital over film, the ability to change the light sensitivity of the medium giving huge flexibility in the aperture and shutter speed.
In all truth, I have found that my ratio of “proper” exposures compared to bad exposures while shooting with the GX7 is the best that I have experienced on any camera in 40 years.
Admittedly, I am not a “manual” shooter because I shoot grandchildren, and street photos where timing is critical. I am not as fast as a computer at setting all the different controls. The GX7’s computer can set, focus, aperture, shutter speed, auto ISO, apply filters etc, in less than 1/10 of second, and pretty much nail it every time.
On my best day (with the old manual film cameras, light meter etc.), I was lucky to accomplish all these settings in less than 10-30 seconds. The moment had passed. I was lucky to average 70% “proper” exposure.
I don’t wish to be contentious, but was only moved to respond due to your original assertion that the GX7 is “worthless”.