The Russian site Kroupski (google translation here) interviewed Mr. Michael Guthmann from Olympus. And these are some of the key info:
1) It’s not possible to add the 40MP High resolution feature on current cameras via simple firmware upgrade. It”s not just algorithms that is needed. ON the E-M5II Olympus improved the positioning accuracy of the stabilization system. Mechanical components were changed and optimized.
2) Olympus is not sure if they will add the 40MP feature on future low-end cameras too.
3) Olympus recognizes there is a request for 4K on Olympus cameras. But they cannot guarantee the E-M1 successor will have 4K. Olympus does not see great potential for 4K at the moment. Once the market is ready for it, they will make 4K. Panasonic, Sony, Samsung are “forced” to add 4K on cameras to create content for their 4K TV’s.
4) Olympus is not worried about the fact that Full Frame cameras are becoming cheaper. Because they think what matters is the camera+lens performance and size.
218 Responses
I always new Olympus had some pragmatic and disciplined thinkers at their HQ.
They also have a lack of engineering talent in the video area, so their talking heads are covering their assess.
Great. This is practically confirming users to not expect 4k capability in the E-M1 II, despite the larger body and heat dissipation potential. All this at a time when it was thought that Olympus was finally about to the video seriously. I guess it we will have to wait another decadence so before they finally decide to be on the forefront of the times.
“Once the market is ready for it”, that’s basically Nikon’s answer to the 4K question, too. In the interview that Imaging Resource just published, they said almost the exact same thing as Olympus.
It seems that it’s only the electronics giants who are pushing 4K at the moment.
I have a 4K camera. Even if it is only used to edit and crop to 1080p it is great. There is no going back…
Because the have 4K TVs to sell.
It would be silly to say a camera coming out in a year will have any feature that is desired by anyone, it will hurt current sells.
Absolutely agree with you. They’ve just launched the E-M5II with the HD video frame rates everyone has been asking for. If they say they’ll up the game to 4K in the next E-M1, who’s gonna spring a grand for the E-M5II?
Well, do you really want 4k in an OM-D? I mean even the 1080p look ridiculous, compression artifacts all over the image and not sharp at all. Olympus is 5 year behind Sony and Panasonic in terms of video quality. I cannot imagine how crappy 4k would look out of an OM-D. Seriously, my cellphone produces better 1080p videos.
If you want 4k, then go for a GH4 or LX100.
Lol!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9jwfxpSUwk
What’s so funny about that? I was not talking about the stabilizer (which is great). But the IQ is just crap, sorry…
What’s funny is pretending that stabilisation isn’t a valid aspect of video quality. The video quality produced by the E-M5 II is not crap. It may not be as good as what a GH4 is capable of, but it certainly isn’t crap. There are several professionally shot and produced videos that put the lie to that.
For GH4 footage to not appear crap, you need to stick it on a tripod with a fluid head or spend large sums of money on external stabilisation gear.
Yes, it is great that Olympus does not follow every hype. 4K isn’t ready for prime time and as soon it becomes mainstream in the homes, Olympus will have the necessary products ready.
Do the current 4K compact camera’s have weather sealing? Could it be that the weather sealing + small body is conflicting with the heat dissipation that is needed @4K processing?
GH4 has excellent weather sealing. LX100 is not bad. I can’t speak for Sony, but I’ve heard excellent things about the NX1’s resistance to weather also.
I don’t care at all about 4k. I’d much rather they fix/improve the current video quality.
+1 “fix” current models is the key word and with better bit rate and frame rate options.
I agree with most of that – it is indeed the size of m4/3 which makes it attractive. Sony FF mirrorless lenses are still FF size, so throw away most of the advantage. Also I’d much rather have very high quality 1080p with great dynamic range and a robust codec, and 10 bit out than 4K right now.
+1
Well, not only the FF cameras are becoming cheaper they are also becoming smaller. The A7 is about the same size and weight as E-M1 (I realize they are different build but still).
Some CSC FF lenses are and will be huge indeed but some are pretty small and with similar sharpness to m.zuikos – such as 35/2.0 and 55/1.8. The pricing is not very steep (about the same as higher quality m.zuikos) and Sigma is still to step in with lower prices… so this alone is very tempting for many when choosing between OMD and A7. The OMD line is more grown up and have all the lenses in range, but not everyone needs to have 14-600 equivalent.
What FF will never get is something like GM5 + sharp 12-32 but otherwise I am not as confident as Oly thinking they are the only one that can do high performance and small kits. Sony doesnt need to do complicated F1.0 lenses to get thin DOF (35/2.0 would have the same) and still there is the 2 EV advantage.
Anyway I am keeping fingers crossed for Oly so they do smart decisions in the future as the comptetition is getting much harder.
I would add OMD could have a big advantage for people shooting wildlife and sports thanks to crop factor and smaller lenses (if they fix the CAF).
For people wanting normal range of about 28-90, and landscape shooters A7 is tempting especially if Sony manages to get more out of their 5 axis IBIS.
If you thing that Olympus have to fix their CAF Imagine Sony ! My EM-1 Track lot better than my A7 II ( and touchscreen ). The new EM-5 II 40 Mpix resolution equip with a 12-40mm and 7-14mm f2.8 , is gonna be perfect for Landscape and architecture shooting, nothing in Sony is better right now than that trio for the job. The Zeiss 24-70mm is no good for shooting Landscape it is soft in the corner at any F stop. The new E-M5 40Mpx even surpass the nikon D800E in moire effect, on a tripod with fix scenery of course… like Landscape ! 🙂 … I forget, the EM-1 as better dynamic range then a FF 5D Mk III ( DXO test ) which is better suitable for Landscape than high ISO Performance. Imagine When Olympus fix the CAF and 40Mpix handled, It will be a better system for both Sports and Landscape !
Yan, how bad/good is the a7ii in af? Can it match the old em5? I am intrigued to buy that as my Leica m backup. I will use it mostly for m lens but just hoping sony will produce some good small primes in the future (the recent announcement destroyed that hope though) .
Yes it can match old E-M5 for CAF, still close to E-M1, but it don’t match the GH4 in tracking, neither the EM-1. The Zeiss 55mm f1.8 FE is a marvellous lens by the way ! I will never go back with the panaleica 25mm !
The thing is I tried the 55mm on my a7, and the af was unusable in ok to decent lighting. Don’t know whether that has improved in a7ii. If so, I would consider. I have the Leica summicron 50mm f2 for my m240, which I find fantastic. I also use my Pana Leica 25mm f1.4 a lot less because of that. For manual, I will stick to the summicron.
So I guess, the a7ii is a good option after all.
Derreck ! Even if i like more the 55mm Fe for shallow DOF, did you find that the panaleica 25mm f1.4 as more a character feeling to the image, less clinical image then the zeiss 55mm ?
I didn’t try the zeiss 55mm enough to comment. I did like my Pana Leica 25mm until I saw what my summicron can do. Rectilinear, sharp at f2, at lots of characters. That is why I still keep my Leica m240.
Since i own both the zeiss 35mm f2.8 and panasonic 15mm f1.7 , even if the zeiss have a negligeable more shallow DOF , the bokeh and rendering of the tiny 15mm is much better, sharper wide open, more contrast and 3D. same goes when you compare the zeiss 24-70mm ( IMHO not usable at f4 ) to the olympus 12-40mm f2.8. The only lenses worth to me in alpha line is the 55mm and the Loxia’s and maybe the 35mm if you don’t own a Olympus camera. Wait to see the huge 35mm f1.4 FE lens by zeiss with a filter threads of 72mm, Ouch ! that will be big ! And just compare the small and perfect wide open panasonic 35-100mm f2.8 to the huge and not so perfect wide open zeiss 70-200mm. I Know because i use the 2 system professionally. I’m selling my zeiss 24-70mm and 35mm because there not worth it since i have the 12-40 and 15mm, i will buy the Loxia 35mm because the Distagon FE will be to big and unbalanced on a A7 , but when Olympus will release a 17mm and a 25mm f 1.0 or f1.2 I will definitely sell my Sony equipment just for the sake of ” camera+lens performance and size. “. Olympus are right about that statement.
I prefer my Zeiss 24-70 to my Olympus 12-40mm. I disagree that the Olympus is sharper, and moreover, I strongly prefer the Zeiss pop and rendering. I even suspect that you are trolling.
I too am using both systems professionally and I could never imagine returning completely to micro four thirds. I keep using both systems side by side, but I never ever grab the Olympus where I own a Sony or Zeiss equivalent focal length.
And I’ve never heard anyone describe the Panasonic 35-100 as “perfect wide open”.
I’m not trolling, Look at any reviews ! the 24-70mm is really soft wide open at 24mm and 70mm is the worst ! Just look the 24-70mm full extend, the interior empty space GAP before the light reaching the sensor is about 2 inch ? the 12-40mm still stay close to the sensor at any given focal. The advantage of miroirless is to keep the last lens close to the sensor, Zeiss miss this point on that lens ! But you’re right it still gives a good Zeiss Pop rendering. But the Panaleica 15mm f1.7 gives a better pop rendering than the zeiss 35mm, believe me ! Sharper and better bokeh IMO ! I try the 70-200mm f4 and was not impress at all wide open, plus is too big for what it is when you have the 35-100mm very very useable wide open.
I know the reviews but still think my final images are sharper with the Sony than with my Olympus 12-40 lens. Perhaps the lower resolution of the micro four thirds lenses is more forgiving in test charts. Either way I hate zoom lenses, strongly prefer primes, and the Zeiss has some redeeming qualities for me. It is extremely sharp in the center of the frame wide open, and the rendering is really nice compared to most zooms.
I haven’t tried the 15/1.7 yet but I believe you. The 20/1.7 is already very good in those respects. Even though the 35/2.8 is not bad. But wait till you get your hands on the 35mm Loxia. That lens is just amazing.
I have to agree with Yan in the areas that I have experience. The zeiss 24-70 f4 is pretty rubbish. I sold my a7 because of 2 reasons, poor af (being the main) and lack of quality glasses. The 55mm is the only one usable. The 35mm… Mehh. I still haven’t sold it. But I have the Pana Leica 15mm. That lens always go with me when I am on a trip. The 15mm f1.7, 45mm f1.8, and the 35mm-100mm f2.8 are my favorites. There are not sufficient good af glasses to even make the A-line a viable system. Using it for manual glasses is a different story. The latest announcements on lenses from Sony don’t impress me either. The lenses are huge. I may as well go back to Nikon (I used to shoot Nikon). Panasonic and Olympus provide the system with the most flexibility (not the best iq).
” Panasonic and Olympus provide the system with the most flexibility (not the best iq “. I’m not with you on that ! Lenses are really more important than sensor size ! … If you shot under 6400 Iso with a well made post prod of course you don’t see the differrence. But because you can shot wide open every good lens that M43 can allow you to there is no need to go higher than 6400 ISO.
Difficult to argue either way. The ibis allows me to shoot at least 3 stops below what I would shoot with other cameras except a7ii. And the fast glass give me an extra half to 1 full stop. So, yes iq are comparable or better in most cases. But someone is going to start an argument about putting the camera on tripod, which is common for many. Then iq and dr for those cameras, especially for landscape fotos (closing down the aperture) will be better for ff.
Just to share a few of my photos with you:
500px.com/yatbond
Wow Derrick Good Work ! You make my point that the leicapana 15mm is a wonderful lens ! With the 40Mpix res of the E-M5 Mk II the DR color and moiré rendition is improve i’ve heard and for landscape you need Deep DOF so with M43 you don’t need to closing down aperture as much as you do on a FF so you gain in lowering the ISO … So if Olympus keep their promises of offering a handheld 40 Mpix in the future it will be difficult to beat the IQ even with a Fullframe.
Mike , I”m gonna go try, next week, the loxia 35mm , but i will not sell the leica 15mm for it evan if i buy the Loxia , cause sometimes i need AF and pair with GH4 is blazing fast ! The 15mm still cannot be compare to the good 20mm f1.7. Like even if i have the zeiss 55mm I’m keeping the zuiko 25mm f1.8 cause sometimes i need Fast Af, touchscreen selecting af and sony don’t deliver yet !
Look At these reviews ! don’t tell me i’m trolling when i say the 12-40mm is sharper than the zeiss 24-70mm wide open http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1654
http://www.photozone.de/sonyalphaff/867-zeiss2470f4oss?start=1
Maybe you’re the troll saying the opposite.
I don’t understand what you are trying to say. If I look at your Photozone link and then compare the sharpness of the Olympus 12-40 on the same site, the Sony is significantly sharper in the center, and still a little sharper in the corners.
SLR Gear specifically states that their method cannot be used to compare across systems.
I have not found any Sony FE 35/2.0, so I suppose that you meant 35/2.8.
These are the real numbers (based on cheapest e-shop prices in Austria):
35/2.8 is indeed slightly lighter and shorter (but has bigger diameter) than the closest match in m.zuiko line (25/1.8). But it is also quite a bit slower (even when considering equivalence) and nearly 3-times more expensive.
55/1.8 is 3.6-times more expensive than its closest match (45/1.8) and 2.4-times heavier, it is also somewhat bigger (but this time it is nearly a half stop faster when including equivalence).
The reality shows that you are not right about the prices: FE lenses are immensely more expensive than similar m.zuiko ones and no direct equivalents exist at all to the more expensive m.zuiko primes (like the 75/1.8 and 12/2).
Weight and size is similar only if the FE lens is slower (darker).
You are right that today’s the hugest micro four thirds cameras are as big as the tiniest today’s FF cameras. But there are plenty smaller/lighter mft cameras, who really wants/needs those hugest ones?
I am sorry, I have mixed up the equivalence (somehow I still thought I am comparing MFT to APS-C). So in reality both FE lenses are faster that their m.zuiko equivalents. But still they are much more expensive.
200 $ more than the Equivalent M43 voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95, but lighter and smaller.
Zeiss Loxia 35mm is f2.0 … but no AF
Nonsense. Similar lenses have similar sizes across all systems. Taking abstraction of light gathering (because one can argue about this forever), equivalent lenses will have equivalent sizes.
INB4 anyone starts nagging about light gathering equivalences keep in mind that light gathering is measured in T-stop and not F-stop, so hold your annoying light gathering horses. The final light gathered is a combination T-stop, sensor surface and sensor efficiency. None of those are ever equal among lenses and cameras, so yapping about light gathering is futile. That said…
The Sony 35mm f/2.8 is roughly the same size as the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 (34mm f/3.6 equivalent). I own both. The images produced are very similar. The price is also very close.
The Sony 24-70mm f/4 is roughly the same size as the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 (24-80mm f/5.6 equivalent). I own both. The images produced are very similar. The price is also very close.
The Sony 70-200mm f/4 is roughly the same size as the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 (80-300mm f/5.6 equivalent). I haven’t used either but both are said to be excellent. The price is also very close.
The Zeiss Loxia 50mm f/2 is roughly the same size as the Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 (50mm f/2.8 equivalent). I own both. They do similar things but the Loxia is in another league of IQ. Makes sense because the Zeiss is almost 2x the price. You get what you pay for.
People keep perpetuating the myth that full frame lenses are larger. I’ve been using Sony A7 and Olympus side by side for over a year now. There’s no size difference.
I’m not sure if Sony will release more f/2.8 primes, but I think they should because in size they can compete well with Olympus’ f/1.8 (f/3.6 equivalent) primes. Until then I will continue using my Olympus 12/2, 45/1.8 and 75/1.8. But when it comes to 35mm, 50mm and zooms, I’m grabbing the A7 because the boost in IQ is so worth it.
The price isn’t “very close” in all markets. Here in Sweden the Sony lenses are considerably more expensive. For example, the Sony 35mm f/2.8 costs 7490 kr ($900), and the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 costs 4490 kr ($540).
I paid $500 for my Sony 35/2.8. You just need to look a bit because the lens is more recent.
The panaleica 15mm is in another league than the zuiko 17mm by the way ! If you thing that the zuiko 17mm and zeiss 35mm produce similar images, you will be surprise at the 15mm 3D pop rendering, bokeh and sharpness wide open. So if you have both system i think you should go make your test with the 15mm , i’m pretty sure you’ll sell the 35mm … like i did.
If I’ll get it soon, I’ll test that 40 megapickles resolution mode against my new dp2 Quattro super fine jpeg.
3) Yes, thank you Olympus, focus on stuff I need!
Now a 17mm f1.2 would be nice
Oh Yes ! and a 25mm f1.2 Both lens sharp wide open and built like the 42.5 and 75mm ! I don’t care about the price ! Please please
25 f0.6 please Olympus. Compact, weathersealed, and must have BOKEH!
I think 17 f1.2 is realistic, it would be the perfect indoor lens.
For 25mm we have the f1.4, it will do until we have some other faster primes.
In a more serious note, i would love 25 f1.0, compact, all metal build like 75.
I wold love a full prime series with f/1.
Given the size of the VLs, I would say a series of f1.2 primes would be the perfect speed/size.
Maybe, but an F1 lens series wold sound better. 🙂
Or the .666 series!
Better a f/0,64. I don’t like the “number of the beast”. 🙂
If zeiss can do a 55mm f1.8 for FF this small and sharp
, I’m pretty sure that Zuiko have the technologie to make F1.0 AF lens smaller and sharper wide open than the VLs … but not cheaper , perhaps the same price.
Its important not to make them too big for cameras like the E-M5. VL 25 is ok, but the 17.5 is a bit on the big side IMO
Yeap Ivan ! I’m with you on that ! Can you imagine 17mm f1.0 , 25mm f1.0 , 42.5mm f1.2, 75mm f1.8 , 7-14mm f2.8, 12-40mm f2.8, 40-150mm f2.8 and a E-M1 Mk II with a prefect CAF and handhelded 40Mpix ! … My dream system kit ! After that no need to have FF …for landscape to portrait to sports !
Funny how dream kits can differ.
My dream kit is a GM5 with collapsible 12-32, collapsible 35-100 and pancake 20mm… together with an A7S and Zeiss Loxia 21mm, 25mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm. The first because it is small enough to get the shot where others can’t bring their camera, the latter because it is basically a digital Zeiss Ikon: ultimate IQ in a comfortably compact package.
Hehe, yeah, Yan, i own 12-40 2.8, 40-150 2.8 and a 75. Different, but beautyful lenses on its own. I am very happy. Fingers crossed on new Oly gems to deliver 🙂
If you have two more lens to own i will suggest you the PanaLeica 15mm and the 42.5mm ! both marvellous lens
Heard many good things about these lenses, especially about 42.5, the photos took with it look fantastic. But i prefer Oly glass, and build in lens stabilizer bothers me, such rudiment make lens much more expensive and weight more mounted on Oly body.
I Own the 25mm f1.4… I need a little bite more shallow DOF and a bit sharper in the corner wide open
Then you need aps-c, or full frame then.
OR, you can go the manual Voightlander route…
Personally owning the lens and seeing that it’s sharp enough in the corners for my taste, you sure are asking for a lot.
If we get f1 or f1.2 with the wide open center and corner sharpness of the 25 f1.4, I will sell my car and buy two of every lens 🙂
Go full frame..
That’s why i have the zeiss 55mm FE and wanna buy the Loxia 35mm f2.0 . For all the rest ( zuiko 12-40 , 25 f1.8, 75 f1.8 and Pana 15 f1.7, 42.5mm , 35-100mm ) GH4 and soon EM-5 Mk II I’m really happy with my M43 gears ! I Will never need those lens equivalence in Full Frame they have utilities in the work i do, they are small, fast af, sharp and beautiful bokeh wide open.
Medium format maybe?
Btw: If you keep the corner out of focus, then it cant be very sharp.
And almost for free! (Sarcasm..) 🙂
Ofc! it will come as a kit lens with the new EM-1 MKII.
🙂 I’m sorry, but when talking about lenses: image quality delivered, aperture and size: you can only choose two out of three as a pro. The third voice will be a con.
For example, a fast lens with good/great IQ will be big/heavy (see Voigties f0.95 NoktoN for example)
A fast lens with bad IQ can be smaller.
And so on.
Add a fourth voice, price, and with two or three qualities it will be a con (too expensive).
I believe next Sony RX1 will have a smaller 35mm f1.8, no doubt delivering a good/great IQ, thanks mostly to the new curved sensor. And it won’t be cheap. 😉
But…but…but…Oly have OM Zuiko 50 1.2, which is very tiny and beautiful 🙂
It is little soft wide open, but is still very useful lens for a 40 years old lens design, which stopped down a little will give you razor sharp images.
I also have OM Zuiko 24 2.0, it is unbelievable how small that lens is, and images it produce – pure goodness, with great close focus ability. My Minolta Rokkor 28 2.0 is 3x of little Oly.
Oly have great experience designing small fast lenses.
Remember These are old lenses designed for film, something you adapt on modern sensors. Are we sure these resolve digital sensor at full resolution? We are not talking about a “moody” lens: everyone buying a new lens today wants it to be sharp wide open (see Nocticron f1.2).
Again, we can dream on, but then we don’t have to feel disappointed when our long wished f1 17mm costs 1299 euros (still a good price if it had AF also)
Exactly Marco, these are premium lenses, they were not cheap back in 70-s, they wont be cheap today.
If you need them, buy them.
Ha. Ha. Ha.
As long as the 40 MP feature can’t be used handheld, there’s no point in having it in a low-end model.
There is 5k already with new iMacs and Dell’s, as technology evolve you can now get a very good IPS 4k monitor with 100% sRGB coverage factory calibrated for less than 600$.
I a not talking about huge 60 inch 4K tvs where you can sit with your family and watch daily news in 4K.
But if you are a photographer / videomaker, interested in watching your work in high beautiful clear resolution, there are plenty of choices already, which is not a secret.
I have one, images look impressive, i spent two weeks browsing my photo archives, photos i took few years ago look so alive-like, 3d’ish, and i thought they were crap when watching on them years ago on my 1280×720 cheap TN panel. I even printed few.
Yay! 4K, so you can see every jiggle, shake and movement in even better detail.
4K is so 2014, give me 8K Olympus!
If they did, you would swear and curse when you realised the size of the loan you would need to get to be able to buy the computing power you would need to edit the footage. 😉
Not to mention your new monitor would be instantly obsolete and of no use.
If Olympus is claiming that they only don’t have 4K on their cameras because “there is no need for it” why have their cameras always been considered poor video quality cameras versus the competition? That seems like a cop out to say their video quality continues to lag because “4K is not important” when Olympus has always been behind. This is just a continuation of their past trend and if this statement reflects their thought process, you can expect them to always have poor video versus the competition because this proves that they do not care about video at all no matter what their customers ask for.
They have said something similar about the number of pixels they think are sufficient and since they are still in business, I guess some people agreed with them.
Well from my (very limited) understanding, increasing megapixels for the sensor size means that the low light quality of the cameras will decrease (I believe the pixels will need to be smaller to fit more on the sensor and that affects its light gathering ability). The push for higher megapixels makes sense if that rationale makes sense.
However for video from my (again limited) understanding, 4K video can be “downgraded” to 1080 and it ends up looking better than video that was just shot in 1080. I remember seeing videos about this when the GH4 came out. So in this regard, Olympus’ stand on video does not make sense because they are not doing something that makes the output better for the user like they are with keeping pixels the same.
Sure and they told the truth about why they are in the business a while ago. This likely explains why they don’t want 4k consumer products yet:
“The company needs to stay in the camera business so it can also use the innovations for its health-care business, Sasa said. There’s no reason for Olympus to exit the market, he said”
Pump out the minimum to consumers and use the real tech for the medical market.
It’s a shame Olympus does not care about video. Their IBIS would be a killer feature for video. The M5 Mark II has at least upped the bit rate to 77 Mbps, but it will never be used for serious video due to lack of log gamma curve. Luckily I can use the excellent Olympus glass on my BMPCC.
No, it is not a shame, it is very good.
They brought the new body up to Panasonic GH3 capabilities, but with IBIS, and with a better viewfinder.
The lack of certain profiles is problematic for the GH4, as well.
Their video IQ is nowhere near the GH2, let alone the GH3.
Their sensor readout is dismall. All they have is the higher bitrate, but that can’t help you if your IQ is terrible to start with.
I haven’t seen anything else particularly negative about it yet.
Somebody has to explain to Olympus that it’s not just about selling TVs, 4K offers a lot more to work with in post, it’s a big jump for color grading and video quality, even more if it’s a 1080p output, you get more info, more DR, less artifacts, there are true and considerable benefits, much more than being forced to sell a new tech.
I guess Olympus still doesn’t get it or it has been significantly out of step with market trends. So long as Panasonic continues to release lower end bodies with 4K video, Olympus will continue to lose out on marketshare.
If Panasonic weather sealed the next G7X update and added 4K then Olympus might finally wake up. It seems like Olympus and Panasonic purposely don’t step on each others shoes too much on their counterparts strengths to keep a market for both cameras. My guess is there is a little collusion going on.
They probably have something like that. But I don’t think that the way is to Panasonic to provide 4K in the GX8 or something, but they have to develop the IBIS in video, that’s on Panasonic because not just Olympus continues to get better at that but Sony already provides that in a FF body!
Panasonic is lagging behind on that, the only reason there is this kind of pressure on Olympus is because of their IBIS tech and the great benefits for video, if Panasonic can provide something similar so people can use adapters, metabones and still have IS, people won’t bother so much if Olympus doesn’t do so.
And yet Panasonic is the one who has lost market share, not Olympus. At least in Japan, according to the latest BCN report.
He said it wrong, by not adding 4K and better video Olympus is not losing market share but losing a big opportunity to expand their market share, had they offered it, they would expand even more.
Regarding the market share, it would be necessary to look outside Japan as well, but nonetheless, the losing opportunity part holds true independently from that.
Thanks, I did say wrong.
Actually, Olympus also lost market share.
At least in Japan.
There would be no Olympus if they relied on just Japan. However, the Japanese market is declining also. Olympus design and marketing is what is winning over Japan and the OMD wold-wide helped keep their company afloat. Doesn’t mean they have the better camera.
Also sales of all cameras are down because the number one camera in the world is the iPhone.
Olympus meanwhile has a declining market share and must rely on its consumer base which they have not been doing a good job of keeping. Olympus will lose brand loyalty if they don’t listen to their current consumer base and push firmware updates and improve the quality of the product consumers have in their hands from the last cycle of updates.
They both lost market share actually.
“Olympus also recognizes there is a request for better 1080p and frame rate options on Olympus cameras. But we cannot guarantee the current E-M1 or successor will have better 1080p.” “Olympus does not see great potential for 4k at the moment but we have been testing the firmware on the current E-M1”. “Once the market is ready for it, we will release the firmware on a future model”.
Sure, I understood about not being able to add 40mp since we heard and now confirmed there is updated hardware on the E-M5 Mark II. However, Olympus won’t add better video or 4k because they don’t have to? So none of your consumers use Sony or Panasonic 4k displays to view Olympus content???? And anyway is that the only basis for 4k video? So Olympus, when are you coming out with your 4k TVs?? Never. This was a non-sensical argument.
Given the same sensor, you can’t even keep up with Panasonic, oh right, you said you don’t need to right since your competitors are “forced to”. In other words, if you want those things, go to our competitors.
So many here seem to think this is like an “on” switch… Why wont they just “add” it.
They have a couple of choices, they can maybe license the tech adding cost and reducing profits (and the camera division doesn’t have a lot of profits already), or they can try to develop their own way of dealing with the video off their m43rds sensor, processing etc.
My assumption (and it is a good one) is they recognize that for the number of video shooters out there, and the number of video models (Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, Canon), just another me-too spec with 4k is probably not worth the cost… right now.
However developing unique, in-camera technologies, improving the IBIS, creating a new high res mode (which has more detail than the D810 for static subjects) live-composite and live bulb for all types of long exposure, improving their CDAF AF speeds, VFs, producing new lenses… These all have a much larger market than video users… and therefore that is where they have chosen to spend their money first.
Lets face it, they will never catch up to Panasonic’s video quality, would it be great to have? Yup, but it is clearly more difficult to implement than just “adding it”. I am simply glad that if I want video I can have reasonable video from my EM5s and if I want to upgrade 1 can choose from Black Magic or Panasonic and have full functionality on my lenses.
That is a win for me!
Olympus are doing all the right things for me, Im upgrading from the Mark I to the Mark II and eagerly await the Mark III
huh?
huh?
It’s Olympus fanboy talk, for “I am a Tool”.
Eagerly awaiting a camera that probably isn’t even sketched on paper yet… Sad.
This site is made to be a fanboy magnet, you make it sad.
I just didnt quite understand. Doesn’t mean I want to label anybody. There is nothing wrong with enjoying things you own or participate or practice in life… If it does no harm and you find it fun, more power to you!
IMHO 4K is a indeed a gimmick.
But proper 1080p IS NOT !!!
Olympus has addressed 2 of it’s biggest 3 handicaps in video: codec and frame rates. But without the third (sensor readout) it’s still 2EV stops behind my GH2 in video and 20-30% behind in resolution, just to begin with.
My GH2 was launched in 2010 !!!!!! It’s 2015. You simply cannot skip lines like it was 2010! The E-M5 Mk2 looses at least 2EVs to my GH2 (ISO800 is reported as the Iimit for reasonable video IQ), gets plagued with moiré and a lot of resolution loss.
Sony sensors are doing full readout, Panasonic also, why on Earth can’t Olympus follow suit? I mean, if the underlying the hardware does it…
Could it have something to do with heat and the IBIS?
I would vote for IBIS before video any day. Maby they are waiting for the tech to give them less heatproblems? just speculating..
I dont think we would have had things like the 40MP option (and everything that will bring in the future) if the Oly engineers had been giving video and 4k all their attention.
They made a step in the right direction and created a camera that I for one will buy.
I don’t believe heat is the issue. I think they probably have more advanced readout/binning modes available but they just haven’t licensed them from whoever gives makes them the sensors.
But that’s just a theory.
If that is the case, the sensor provider must be demanding a ridiculous amount of money.
Something interesting from DPreview forum:
“Anybody know what heat management scheme Panny uses in the GH4? Is heat the reason they only put IBIS in the GX7?
Correct. That’s what Panasonic have said. Right at the moment, a 22mm floating sensor and 4k video are incompatible. One day to come it will be fine — probably when sensors can run 4k with less heat than they produce today.”
4K is not a gimmick .. 4K makes it possibel to make more complex post production stabilizarions, pans and all sorts of usefull things.
You just said 4k is gimmick as you need to stabilise the video and do pans, what you do rotating camera!
And post stabilization isn’t even close what real stabilization in camera is. You can’t even fis basic simple waving but just small jittery in high shutter speeds.
Even if all you could do is crop, 4K would be worth it. But there is much more.
I know all that and you could also add that 4K 4:2:0 gives you true 4:4:4 1080p output.
But I’d take proper 1080p over 4K anyday. That’s hypothetical of course because if you have 4K you automatically have decent 1080p.
40MP upgrade on older cameras is illogical even if they could do it. It is THE marketing feature gimmick camera has.
I can understand where they are coming from regarding 4k, there just ain’t large enough consumer base (TV’s monitors) sold to make them jump on it. And thing’s wont get a whole lot of better in the next 1,5 years in time for E-M1 II
Even though it is a simple upgrade to do probably and that it would bring them a few hundred video enthusiasts they will wait so they can market it with more success.
I hope they will include x265. 🙂
You can buy 4K television below 900€ these days. Or 4K computer display below 550€.
It is here now, but benefits are really only in desktop use where you get more content on screen at once. 6 browser windows instead 1.5!
Yes you can, but people will upgrade to it even more slowly than they did to 1080p. Hence Oly’s 2-3 year from now thinking about 4k.
As for the benefits of only in desktop, i see it just the opposite.
If content is displayed just resolution, raster based, meaning higher resolution smaller icons, smaller windows that would be a huge drawback IMO
I remember looking at those Silicon Graphics workstations way back in the day and everybody were drooling how it looked Pro because icons and tools were small and it looked awesome. And I just thought, wow such a great machine and they couldnt even get around the problem of making icons and tools look readable. Fail.
You cannot add high resolution 40MP feature via firmware upgrade but you CAN add video upgrades via firmware! E-M1 users are still waiting for that video firmware update Mr. Michael Guthmann!
I pre-ordered the EM5 II for its improved IBIS…. and I will buy the next Oly cam that will produce 40mb picture handheld.
I’ve been using mirrorless cameras since the Panny GX1, Oly EP1, and Sony’s NEX-5… not once did I ever need HD video as priority. I didn’t need it then, and I don’t need it now. Most videos that I produced were unstructured family activities posted on Facebook, or shown on my 50-inch HDTV. None of my videos were played on a big screen tv ever again. All my friends and family (including me) insist on posting it online so they can watch it on their portable devices. NONE OF THEM OWN ANY 4K HDTV, nor 4K-capable smartphones.
40mb picture handheld would be a FULL-FRAME killer, in my opinion. I love taking portrait shots of my friends, my kids, and their cousins. Portrait keepers in 40mb size would PLEASE EVERYONE & can be easily produced on large format prints!
Keep the photography revolution, Oly. I’ll be there to bite the bait.
The problem may not be “now”, what happens when your videos are played on 2k or 4k devices as standard in a year from now. They will all look like crap given the technology exists now and being sold by competitors. For me, a camera is not intended for the price to be a cycle item that it is turning into with Olympus dreams that we will want a new camera every year. I’m sure there are people that buy a new model TV ever year or a new car or whatever the case. I’m not convinced that this is the reality for everyone.
Should we all be satisfied with 480 or 720 by your statement. Statistically not all smart phones are capable of 720p! Why do you need 40mb picture if only viewed online by your standard, the same as video? What if Olympus didn’t add that feature and the new E-M5 came with smaller image sizes?
Some people want 4k and/or higher IQ video as you want larger portrait keepers.
Your logic fails.
720p is enough today for most use (Facebook, mobile devices etc) as long you are not below 1500kbits bitrate.
480p is enough for most use, mobile devices and even movies.
1080p is where you see demand if you have over 32″ television and sit close.
4k, not really.
You dont see benefits from smartphone, you don’t see difference to 1080p from movie theater further than first 2-3 rows and you definitely don’t see at home from <55" television watched from 2m distance.
The best benefit you get is with higher birate than YouTube or vimeo or Netflix offers = about 3Mbits. But even then after 6Mbits the quality doesn't improve anymore much as h.264 was designed to low bitratres. With h.265 you can either half bitrate or add resolution by 50% with same quality, in expense of CPU. But with same bitrate and resolution you can gain better quality, but not much.
You can talk how 4k is future.
To me 4k has been daily life for 4 months now.
2x 4K 28" 10bit displays in computer (single panel, DP1.2 etc)
55" 4K television and a another just last week bought 50" Full HD television as secondary to basement.
I can shoot 4K with GH4 or even with my smartphone.
But I dont care because the 4K is gimmick… Yes, you read correctly, gimmick.
The only real benefit is to do panning and cropping. Requiring heavy post processing and lazyness in shooting.
4K is nothing as what you really want is less compression and better contrast and especially stable video. Neither is 4K offerings.
Dream on. Unless you are taking a portrait of a dead person, you will be disappointed. 40mp not 40 mb file only works for stationary objects which will not move a mm. It takes 8 frames for a second. Good luck with your portraits.
Also. Because you and your friends watch movie on Facebook doesn’t mean no one else cares about good video quality.
Olympus should note the GH4 4K is 1:1 pixel so NO moire/aliasing, and much higher quality picture when publishing at 1080. And, 4K on a 1080 timeline gives great options in post e.g. pan/zoom across the frame etc.
Olympus video has moire/aliasing making it generally unusable (unless you like dancing moire patterns in your shots).
Video cameras use the full sensor 1:1. Stills cameras need to shoot video in 4k, 5K, 6K, or whatever the MP of the sensor is, in order to deliver decent video, even to publish at 1080.
Heavy PP on huge 4K files to do pan/zoom, you got to be kidding me. I bet for those that demand 4K, only a few % take their time to actually do that.
I think that for those that demand 4K, which is a small proportion of overall video producers, probably more than a small % are interested in taking advantage of it…
And you say this with exactly what professonalism to prove your words. (lemme guess there are 0 reasons why need to listen to you and your lack of merits.
They all want it, especially on high budget productions.
Don’t find it heavy PP with the GH4 4K files (FCPX on a MacbookPro i7). A bit slower yes, but not a problem. Pan/zoom/crop no problem.
It lets you do more static shots on location, so saves time there, and gets you out of trouble now and again e.g. in an interview I forgot the close up, no problem just punch into the 4K. I’m not talking Hollywood obviously, just you’re average video jobs for clients type of work. I’ve found 4K really useful.
Sounds like you are a pro that has a lot of equipment with you on location for HQ video, so GH4 sounds like a good tool for you.
I shoot mostly pictures and some random video of my children, and never bring anything but a few small lenses. At home, PP of my RAW files is what I do mostly, for video I need stable shots with minimal or no PP. I think there are more people like me out there than people like you, and I think thats what Olympus is aiming for (and maby some pro photographers?).
If it was no problem to add 4k they would have, if its a heatprolem with the free-floating sensor, thank G** they put their IBIS first.
This olympus guy is in denial. buy LX100. The video will Blow your Olympus mk2 video away. 4k out of LX100 is amazingly sharp.It has 4 times resolution, you can extract 8mp images out, you have way more flexibility in cropping and when you create 1080p from 4k, the video is much better than sensor one.
people who are looking for 4k video, try LX100. It is a great little camera with 4k and the lens is very good in all focal length. Olympus seems to drag their feet and make stupid comments like there is no potential right now for 4k. WTF Wake up!
Its about IBIS on ALL the great lenses out there, WTF is LX 100?
It has a pretty good 24-75mm equivalent f1.7-2.8 lens…
If you want telephoto, you can also get the great 4K FZ1000. If you treat both of those cameras as lenses for an interchangeable system (they just happen to come with a built in camera), you’ll find that they’re both very good value at their price points…
Just buy a $20 camera hand stabilizer rod on Amazon and it is good enough with LX100 stablization.
WTF is LX100. It is amazing little camera with amazing little lens and amazing 4k. Buy it and try it. It is worth $700 and fits right in your pocket.
Yes. Lx100 lens will not compare with Olympus 75mm f1.8 quality but it is better than Olympus 17mm f1.8.
I know what the LX100 is. My point is it will not stabilize my VLs or any other lens I have. Any LX of FZ will not help with that, so they will never ever be considered even with 400k video
this will help you – it is $6-12 and you can certainly afford it, pick the one which is more comfortable.
http://www.amazon.com/Mudder-Stabilization-Mirror-less-Camcorders-HDR-AS100V/dp/B00LASIDGY/ref=sr_1_17?ie=UTF8&qid=1424382013&sr=8-17
http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-Professional-Camcorder-Stabilizing-Handle-/dp/B003PBB4ME/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1424381892&sr=8-3
Buy it and then try it? That is stupid. First try it and then buy it, but it would probably not be so good as you proclaim.
no, buy at Amazon, if you don’t like it return it. amazon gives you full refund.
even as a still camera, LX100 is very good. Go to flickr and see the shots.
Well with 5k Imac, 4k tablets and phones on the horizon and phones that film in 4k I think Olympus is not going to be a the leading edge for the younger generations; I worry about their future, they are really a lens manufacturer that makes some cameras.
And when they compare shaky 4k video from their phone with stabilised video from Oly..?
OMG – there is $2-3 app Emulsio which will stabilize your shaky iPhone videos. Works vey well, try it out.
Also, FCP X has a great stablization if you want to process your videos.
IBIS in camera is great to have but if you want to stabilize other camera videos, you have other options than Olympus.
If you think that method is as good as Oly’s in cam 5axis, go right ahead and use it.
The fact is Oly’s 5axis is a great tool and us video shooters would LOVE to have great resolution to go along with it.
It’s that simple. No need to make excuses or claim there are alternatives. Those of us out here actually doing stuff on these cameras are well aware of what’s available…or not.
I am not making excuses. It’s a fact that you don’t need Olympus camera for stablization. You can get non shaky videos without Olympus body. Yes, non shaky videos on a non a olympus body.
I am happy using LX100 for videos. I have em1 and em5, they are not even close to LX100 when it comes to video quality.
And that Olympus guy is in denial.
Shooting good video is not the issue.
I shoot “non-shaky” video all the time with numerous cameras; professional and consumer gear. It’s what I do for a living.
I also use the EM5 and love the freedom it allows me to shoot fast and shoot handheld. But the frame rates and quality of the video is inferior.
I’d like Oly’s great stabilization system with a competitive quality of video IQ.
When they make it, I’ll buy that camera.
“who cares about Olympus video – we’ve got the GH4” that’s what I thought…. until I saw the new video IBIS in the Em5 ii…
Now I want decent Olympus video…
4K or 2K… just get rid of the moire and aliasing!
That is stupid line of thinking if one can get it all in a Olympus body. You can go and buy even 5 different cameras for all I care.
m4/3 is a great format, partly because panasonic has specialized on the video side and olympus on the stills side. Since both companies have finite resources, this is to our benefit.
And if anyone thinks that it’s just a coincidence that one half of the Four Thirds partnership has focused on stills and the other half on video, you’re kidding yourself. Oly has stayed away from 4k because that’s what they agreed with their partner to do.
This is basically gauging for customers pocket’s. One needs to read this Olympys rep speak as it is “we want to first sell you OMD E-M1 II then later OMD E-M1 III … since we want to milk every bit possible from your wallets. “We dont care that much about your needs and we will definately not improve our products via later firmaware upgrades”.
Good to know Oly will have 4k once the others move on to 8k.
Or 16K?
I find it logical and necessary for the e-m1 mark 2 to have 4k stabilized video. There is already 4k content (youtube for example) for the many 4k televisions that are already for sale. Yet the missing 4k content can be provided by the camera’s like e-m1.
There is definitely a hole in the market, but much less next year. Olympus should grab it and not sit idle.
But I think Olympus is not able to build one this year..
Ah, corporate arrogance always gets in the way of sales…
You don’t need a 4k display to take advantage of 4k video. Too bad they’re rationalizing not offering such spec.
I’m desperate to buy a camera with 5axis stabilization, but better IQ still trumps that feature.
Those 4K video people are becoming annoying whining after each post. The demand for 4K is so low at the moment, even on photography forums. I am more than fine with 720P youtube videos, too many details from videos sometimes is also a distraction.
Haha. That sort of attitude is as arrogant as this Oly corporate dude.
“I don’t need it so it doesn’t matter.” Really?
Add good 4k video to the camera and increase sales by even a few percent…that’s a huge difference! –and beneficial to the health of the company. You’d think more people would embrace a company to be more innovative than not, but whateva’
Totally agree!!! They buy a 4K camera and then want all the market to go this way. 4K at the moment is a gimmick to sell 4K TVs, that’s how the companies see it. I would rather have a decent 1080 over a basic 4K. I shoot a lot of video but don’t want 4K anytime soon…
Wait until you shoot 4K. There’s like a quantum leap in quality improvement even when downsized to FHD for YouTube, or just played on your HD screen.
It’s like shooting raw, there’s just so much more data.
Nobody is buying 4K tellies because nobody is broadcasting 4K. It seems the broadcasters are waiting for 5K. So no gimick there
A 4K camera has a darn sight more than decent 1080 FHD, very high quality but the 4K is better again. Not sure what you mean by basic 4K because it is surely better IQ than even the best 1080 FHD
It’s much easier to live in such a simple world.
Why bother coming out with new cameras at all when people could just use their smartphone, am I right?….
Gosh, everyone I know wants 4K, also for stills.
Demand for 4K is actually rather high. We’re talking high end cameras here not webcams.
Fact is, the Olympus IBIS system shoots great stills but stinks at video, and there’s nothing they can do about it, there’s no engineering fix other than bolt the sensor down to a heat sink.
Oly need to start developing some long lenses with optical image stabilisation 😉
…and if Oly cam out with a stills camera that shot 3x less resolution than their competition, what then?
“Hey it’s good enough for the web, that’s what most people use anyway! What are you complaining about!? 800×450 72dpi is fine! Look at that dynamic range!”
Sorry, I call BS on that.
Point is, these consumer cameras get used for a lot of semi-pro VIDEO stuff these days, and there’s a healthy niche market to be exploited. I just wish they would. Take my money Olympus!
Exchange IBIS for 4k? No way.
Something interesting from the DPReview forum, may or may not be true:
“Anybody know what heat management scheme Panny uses in the GH4? Is heat the reason they only put IBIS in the GX7?
Correct. That’s what Panasonic have said. Right at the moment, a 22mm floating sensor and 4k video are incompatible. One day to come it will be fine — probably when sensors can run 4k with less heat than they produce today.”
I’ve heard that as well in some forums, that you can’t have IBIS and 4K at the same time right now. I don’t know why it is but that could be true.
Sensor heat is not an issue – think about what live view does, for instance. The heat comes from the video encoding and processing hardware which would be located off the IBIS platform.
In a B&H video preview of the GH4, when it came out, a Panasonic rep who says that the reason the GH4 doesn’t even have the same basic IBIS as the GX7 is because of the sensor heat produced when recording in 4k.
So with a GX7, you couldn’t take a one hour exposure, for example, because the sensor would melt and form a little puddle in the bottom of the camera?
You may have a point, but I dont think live view is All-I 4K..
Sensor heat sink is a problem. Live view is short term
Shoot video for a couple of minutes on M-IS (which is not IBIS) and you will see quality degradation, shoot longer and you get a mauve tinge.
The sensor does get hot during use. The IBIS sensor cannot be fitted to a heat sink, the processor hardware can and is. It is the sensor getting hot that introduces noise, the processor is well under control.
You can’t have IBIS and FHD at the same time let alone 4K
C4K is 4096×2160, nearly 9Meg whereas FHD is only 1920×1080, just over 2Meg: 4K is four times bigger on the sensor than FHD. Four times as much heat generated and IBIS cannot cope with FHD.
Olympus do not use IBIS during video, the sensor is frozen still.
You really don’t have a clue, do you?
That’s just BS, they could put a $2 fan in there if it was really a problem. Or, make the whole case into a heat sink.
The GH4 frame is a heat sink
Fans have been fitted to astro cameras, they introduce other problems.
Needing an external power supply being just one of them.
EMF interference from motor spitting out in all directions and needing shielding being another.
All fixable mounted on a telescope but very Heath Robinson and not the sort of thing you want to carry around.
Even sticking a Peltier pump onto the wobbly sensor is not doable because it has to be as light as possible to keep inertia very low
No, there are lots of fans on lots of cams, and no problems. No, you do not need an extra power supply.
No, EMI is not a big problem here.
However, you don’t need one, because this problem has already been solved. But if you wanted to make a cheap version, without the heat sink, you could, just like in Panny camcorders–for years.
It’s all been done, and done well, just not by Olly.
mainlybacon: Get ready to move to Japan, Olympus is about to call on you with an offer to relocate, in order to work with their best engineers on improving the fundamentals of their camera designs. While you are at it, see if you can straighten out that lazy R&D department.
I’ve had many job offers, but I prefer self employment. I don’t think that’s a particularly good job, making heatsinks. Panny uses a fan and it works, along with a billion+ CPUs & GPUs. Panny also solved the heat problems on their other cams with passive cooling, so this is like really old news. Seriously old news. Tired, boring news that was not even news the first time. They will opt to save the $2, plus they money they make when they finally offer the feature–which they will, when their accountants tell them the optimum time.
やすらはで
寝なまし物を
You cannot shoot video with IBIS, Olympus turn it off for video and use M-IS instead.
The GH4 frame was designed as one great big heat sink. This keeps the sensor cool,
The back of the GH4 doesn’t even get warm after continuous video shooting for 30 minutes. The back of the E-PL7 gets hot to touch after a couple of minutes. So does the GX7
Yon cannot cool the sensor unless it is attached to a heat sink and that precludes moveable sensor body stabilisation; the body stabilisation sensor has to be moveable and cannot be fitted to a heat sink.
IBIS is not in operation during video shooting, Olympus implement a digital method “M-IS”, the sensor is frozen for the duration. This Movie-IS is good but not that good, the IQ does degrade after a couple of minutes. The GX7 relies on lens stabilisation and produces a better picture but even so its sensor soon gets hot.
IBIS is not compatible with FHD let alone 4K
I’m led to believe that the GH4 heat sink was improved over the GH3 even though their cases are the same externally. The GH4 squeezed in a quad processor which also needs cooling but being able to work faster drops the noise floor.
well.
I love how lots of these comments claim or imply that oly is simply choosing not to include 4k, when they could if they wanted to. Its as if there’s no thoughts about engineering trade-offs, R&D budgets, etc. and instead its oly is arrogant, oly is milking customers, oly is stupid, etc.
I seriously doubt a single one of these posters grew up using film, in the days before high IQ got handed to anyone who wanted it, on a silver platter. We have it plenty good but somehow, its still not enough for those that seem to have lost any sense of relativity. Then again, it is a rumor board.
The fact is that Oly is not being truthful in their statement. They are the ones claiming that the they are not putting 4K in their cameras because it is not needed. The fact is that Oly has always been behind in video and likely does not have the right capabilities internally (engineers, patents, know how, etc) to catch up.
However, many companies lull themselves into complacency which is how their statement comes off. If you read articles about Blackberry when the iPhone came out most of their thoughts were “people don’t need this so it is not important”. Technology moves very quickly, companies need to be able to adapt. I would have preferred to hear Oly admit that they are behind in video capabilities and that they are working hard to catch up, not to make a statement that 4K video doesn’t matter.
They are being truthful, in the sense that it doesn’t matter to them, at least not at this point in time. I don’t have a problem with that, as my expectations are set by what I can reasonably expect them to produce, based on their track record. They are very predictable, in a very good way. As I pointed out below, people who have advanced video needs are much more likely to see them met by panasonic.
Probably the japanese can’t lose face thing :- they do admit in the user manual that prolonged video shooting picture will degrade; hot pixels.
You can’t build a good video camera with a moveable sensor because you cannot cool it. Great for stills, stinks at video
Gosh, I grew up using film, but doesn’t that just mean I’m old?
1. We don’t believe you, but whatever 2. Samsung ate you lunch. They just up and ate it. You can pretend it didn’t happen, you can hide your head in the sand, but you lunch is gone.
Samsung? You mean the guys that make washing machines and copy iphones?
I believe they make a lot of things, including an APSC sensor camera that is several years ahead, in terms of video, of Olympus’ best efforts. They also have made some of the highest rated TV sets for years–we use them for screening because they can be calibrated and also they play 4K files through the USB port. Olympus has no expertise in this field.
And BTW, the washing machine argument is, well, I mean, let’s just say it, irrelevant. Except maybe they had clean clothes after they ate Olly’s lunch.
In fact, anyone in the market for a vid cam is going to go with almost any brand ahead of Olly, but the NX1 (and presumably the 500) are game changers. Many of us only went with m4/3 because that was the best option available, and we accepted the limitations of the sensor. Now there is something better. Olly is good a stills cam, but way behind on the video.
Admin, any rumors on the GX8 or any new upcoming camera from Panasonic? Thanks.
Panawho?
yeah,you right this site rule by Olympus ,about 90% of post all about Olympus.
I know i can find a lot of good examples already online,but can someone of the posters in here be so gentle and give me a link of THEIR work with the magnificent 4K ( be it from LX100, which i have) or Panasonic GH2-3-4 @ 1080/4K?
Asking because, as Ming Thein as recently clearly show, ther’s a LOT more than buying a camera behind the results one can achieve.
So, what YOU have done with your gear? May i see?
Or you’re just happy that Oly video sucks and Panasonic,Sony,Samsung is wonderful because other people (pros & not pros) said that?
Thank you.
Show your awesome photo or video work first.
He has several times, that’s why it’s such a beautiful tarp 😉
Never said that MY work is awesome and i’m not a pro. I’m browsing the web because i’m always
eager to learn.From who know.
Anyway here few recent examples:
http://youtu.be/YneS03z9S0U
http://youtu.be/I-rc2RQc-hk
http://youtu.be/tszjsd9kTAY
i don’t have my Zenfolio updated with recent work.
If you don’t mind see on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/giorgioparrucchieri/media_set?set=a.216834128392391.53196.100001974168439&type=3
Good job Paniko!
Can’t be good. It has been done with a OMD E-M1 😉
Those look bad, not 4K, 10-bit colors, no 200Mbit bitrate and 24fps. I could easily see artifacts and compression from my smartphone while watching it from 3x2cm video screen over 256kbit connection.
Seriously, I don’t see any problems in those. As I dont want to be a pixel peeper.
That’s why the first question I ask to people who want me to shoot is “are you a pixel peeper?” They don’t even know what does that mean, but they enjoy what i do.
Strangely not a single poster in here, other than Jeff, has show any of their own work.Seem to me that a lot of people in here, although being right on many aspects, does not even use the gear that they have.
Maybe they just love reading the specs online and watch online what other people can do with it.
Anyway, having a fast supercar in garage does not make you a great driver, but surely make you feel proud of owning it.
Shooting in 4K on the GH4 I have always the downsized to FHD after editing. Analogy is rather like shooting in raw for post edit; better quality. Editing here is largely just top and tailing clips and splicing a few together, simple stuff. Synching it with 4-track audio is proving to be a bit of a pain though.
I find the GH4 shoots far better looking video this way than it does simply as FHD. However its FHD looks better than that from our FZ200, G5, GX7 and E-PL7.
The noise level in the GH4 is very low, FZ200 is 12Mp 1.2/3 bridge/super-zoom, G5 is older (B-cam), GX7 and E-PL7 have wobbly sensors and cannot shoot several minutes of video.They’re not all personally mine and they have (many) other uses besides video.
Shooting in 4K has little or no drawback except the amount of time it takes to downsize convert the file and then upload onto the web, even on a big fast pc and ultrafast broadband, these files are that big that I can easily fill a 64GB SDXC and have to swap over; 128GB are not yet available at necessary 280Mb/s.
Cannot say mine are “good videos” but some are available on my FB wall and YouTube.
I’m learning to shoot rock bands, with a little help, still having finger trouble. Big problem seems to be getting the sound level gain low enough to avoid clipping. The camera only goes down -12dB, not enough by half. That means needing external recording system such as Tascam DR-60D, I cannot afford a yacht. An Panasonic bless’em make mics that are incompatible with anything else.
Thanks. I’ve watched (and enjoyed) a couple of your videos, especially the Riotus Brothers Miss You. Is that one been shooted with the GH4 in 4k then resized?
For audio may I suggest you just cheap Tascam DR-5.It works like a charm.Just put it on the middle of the scene on a mini tripod or a stand.Alternatively you could buy a Videomic Stereo Pro and put it on the hotshoe. It has a -20dB switch that added to in camera level setting would do extremely well too.
Thank you again to be brave enough to show your work.
“Olympus is not worried about the fact that Full Frame cameras are becoming cheaper.”
They better get on with making they wares cheaper too. Not many will pay the price of FF A7 for E-M5 II.
Well, don’t forget a standard 55mm sony is still 1k $ …
But FE 28-70/3.5-5.6 is $300 in the kit, the same Olympus wants for 14-42EZ 3.5-5.6, which is insane, given that it gathers only 1/4 of the light.
Rather blinkered, “Olympus does not see great potential for 4K at the moment. … Panasonic, Sony, Samsung are “forced” to add 4K on cameras to create content for their 4K TV’s”
But, but Olympus are part-owned by Sony and Mitsubishi (Nikon) …
Imo not quite telling porkies but :- 4K tellies are as rare as rocking horse poo; 4K cameras are produced because there is a market for high quality video e.g. for broadcasting and reportage; even downsized the quality is superior to normal FHD, therefore record at highest quality and downsize for publication. Plus Panonysung do make pro video cameras. Plus Olympus is a tiny company and Panasonic is bigger than Sony, it may simply be lack of resources. The pro market is quite small, they all make money selling pro kit to enthusiast amateurs.
Reading between the lines there (and from what is stated in Olympus User Manuals) not going for 4K is more probably because the mobility of Olympus sensor is not conducive to shooting good video. Noting wrong with the sensor per se but that by having it mobile it is not possible to cool it sufficiently for video shooting other than very short clips. The vids take on a mauve tinge after a couple of minutes: the sensors go get quite hot, this can be felt through the back behind the monitor, the sensor inside is a lot hotter. Fyi semiconductors have their worst temperature coefficients around room temperature 10°C to 40°C, slightest change in temperature and their response is all over the place; keeping the temperature stable is key.
Sorry, but your guesswork is irrelevant.
As for cooling, well the sensor can easy do a 30 min bulb shot or is practically always capturing images when its on but it cannot do video because of overheating of the sensor?
Wrong!
That urban legend has been proven wrong long ago.
Now the possible overheating of the processors in the camera because they are too slow and inefficient is an entirely different matter, but that has nothing to do with the sensor…
The heat of the sensor is just a myth for them to explain away the lack of features. They have solved that problem and can solve it gain, easy enough.
I don’t mind that 40MP stills or even 4K not being in their older cameras but it sure would be nice to see them add more frame rates and more codec options to the E-M1/E-M5.
Such as?
Seemed obvious to me so I guess I’ll clarify.
24, 25 and 60fps along with anything higher than 24Mbits. Different frame rates alone would make a lot of video folks happy when paired with their IBIS. It’s nice to see that this is finally an option in the EM-5 II but one can’t help but wonder why the E-M1 flagship is still locked at 30fps.
Sorry, you are quite correct, It was late and I misread and thought you were referring to the 5 II
Are all video solutions determined by firmware – as in, are there hardware based solutions that are chip based and so fixed, i wonder?
That is the question! Can we get better video framerates (24Mbits is more than enough for high quality), as we need 25fps and others are just “nice to have”
Sorry it took me over a week to reply!
To my knowledge, It’s not uncommon for manufacturors to add more frame rates to older hardware via firmware. For example, I have a Panasonic AG-AC160 camcorder that Panasonic graciously added 59.94p and 50p with a firmware update: http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/sales_o/news_info/news111116/111116.html
I also know that Fuji recently added more frame rates (50p, 25p and 24p) to the X-T1 with their recent 3.0 firmware update:
http://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/software/firmware/x/xt1/
“Olympus is not worried about the fact that Full Frame cameras are becoming cheaper”
Arrogance and stupidity in the same package, how efficient.
Sales numbers are stupid & arrogant too.
this shifting-highres would implement by no-produce image sensor company,
on others site i found Pentax will use shifting method for high resolution on next model(camera).
but i bet no shifting-highres on Sony,Panasonic,Canon or company that they can produce their image sensor,because they will improve high-res method on image sensor such as multi-layer,shift-color on circuit.