The E-P5 and this means that I have to work on the next bunch of rumors. So what’s going to be announced as next? According to the info we got we can expect plenty of new stuff. Here are the four new cameras:
1) The new OMD camera
2) The new E-x Four Thirds camera
3) The Olympus high end compact camera (not MFT but a fixed lens with (hopefully) large sensor (unlike the just announced Panasonic LF1).
4) A brand new and completely “different” Panasonic MFT camera.
I already got some info about some of these cameras and I am working to double check the early rumors I got. All I can share for now is that all that stuff is coming from late August till early September. That’s only 3-4 months from now. I know it’s hard to say without knowing specs and design…
but (instinctively) can you tell us what is the camera that interest you more?
[poll id=”190″]
—
For sources: Sources can send me anonymous info at 43rumors@gmail.com (create a fake gmail account) or via contact form you see on the right sidebar. Thanks!
For readers: Don’t miss any news. Join our group on facebook and follow our tweets.
Rumors classification explained (FT= FourThirds):
FT1=1-20% chance the rumor is correct
FT2=21-40% chance the rumor is correct
FT3=41-60% chance the rumor is correct
FT4=61-80% chance the rumor is correct
FT5=81-99% chance the rumor is correct
187 Responses
Thanks Admin! Keep them comin’
Thanks Admin,
So at least we learn that we are not likely to get a PEN with corner EVF for quite some time…..
As far as the next OM-D and E-X go….it would be great if they bring out both at the same time, with identical specs as far as image processing/sensor etc. goes. If they manage to “crack” the dual AF issue, it would be really cool to also have that on the E-X, so that in effect you have triple AF: CDAF and on-sensor PDAF in live view, classic PDAF in SLR mode. If they managed to implement a hybrid VF (a-la-Fuji), they would have a very exciting camera on their hands, one that would breathe new life into the 43 format.
Since it’s neither likely that they’ll reduce the price of the E-x nor that they will sell both models wih the same specs but different prices I prefer an OM-D model which is a little bit spec’ed down compared to the E-x over an OM-D model that is priced around 1700 Euro.
Great idea. A hybrid viewfinder would be a really effective and elegant way to blend the 4/3 and m4/3 fans. Provide a camera with this, along with effective handling and focusing speeds for both 4/3 and m4/3 lenses, and the gap would be bridged. We would then be dealing with a single unified system, with an instantly doubled lens catalog.
Oly- DO THIS!
I doubt if 99% of mFT fans ( the rest already own the FT glass) in the FT lenses that while many are excellent weigh as much and cost at least as much as their FF rivals. if you are prepared to cart that kind of weight why waste time on small sensors
Is it sure now that the new OMD and the E-x Four Thirds camera will be two separate models? So no full Four Thirds lens support in the new OMD model?
So I guess there won’t be an OM-D Pro like was suspected in the past. Just one and only one model in the OM-D line?
OMD Pro is in the works, it was always intended
I do have to wonder if the E-7 is going to have an EVF…
thats the big question right now I think
The most intriguing camera this year will surely be the Panasonic GX2. It is almost certain that this camera will finally bring us the rangefinder-style camera with an integrated viewfinder! Hopefully, all of its other specs will be top of the line as well.
It’s a “brand new” camera not GX, but I’m interested to see what it will be.
I hope so. Then again, if it turns out that it does not have a built-in EVF, the price on the E-P5 may have dropped enough for me to consider buying it.
What about rumored Olympus f/2.8 zoom?
+1
Olympus gonna be Sony ,they will released to much camera but don’t release new lens 🙁
If the new OM-D gets phase detection AF, do you really need a new E-x?
Wonder what Panasonic is up to. “Brand-new” probably means “Panasonic hasn’t done this before”, but this can be so many things. GL-1 with corner evf. Yes please. Android based camera. Yawn. etc. I don’t expect a completely different type of camera or new technology.
Yes. m4/3 is unlikely to ever have a real pro camera.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51457695
“What shocked me most of all, upon picking up my E-5 again, is the dramatic build quality difference between the two. It’s not subtle – it’s absolutely evident. I’m not only talking of “superficial” measures such as heft/weight, but every aspect of operation – from the buttons to the articulating screen – feels industrial-grade by comparison the E-M5’s flimsy, wobbly little dials and buttons. If you think an E-M5 is built “well”, you have never used a properly-built camera before.”
+1000 🙂
Try a GH3… as good as E-X
Except for being very slow to focus 4/3 lenses, lacking IBIS, being of lower build quality, and Panasonic’s current reputation with regards to dust and splash proofing being rather underwhelming.
Of course, a GH3 does get you a much better sensor with the resulting improvement in image quality, and much better video features, but that is compared to the now more then 2 years old E-5. An updated E-x would address the IQ difference, but likely not the video difference.
So no, the GH3 is not better unless you are only interested in video, or only compare to something from 2 1/2 years ago instead of looking at what a current E-x with current technology would be able to do.
Obviously, there is no updated E-x for now, so in that sense the GH3 is most certainly better, but, that was not the argument being made, it was about a future E-x containing current technology.
What??
We sare all witness to the EM5’s poor build quality. small, rubbery buttons and cracking screen.
And what MFT camera focuses quick or quicker than the GH3 with Four Third lenses with adapter??
GH3 has better Ergonomics, better button layout, better menu, it’s just better.
Lower BUild Quality??? Underwhelming Dust/Splash protection? Link, Please??
I think you need a new pair of glasses. The post you replied to was about the E-x models, not about the E-M5.
Look who’s talking!
Lack of build quality? Panasonic? Yeah right. Returned my Olympus EPL3 due to build quality issues, EM5 has had issues with cracking screens among other quality issues. Returned to Panasonic and very happy. Panasonic may be slightly behind in terms of sensors and image quality, but they are also more reasonably priced and put together. I will never touch another Olly.
Ya, and I’ve had 6 Olympus cameras over the years, all of them still working, which proves exactly nothing, just like your anecdotal ‘evidence’ proves exactly nothing.
Matter of fact is that any consumer electronics firm gets a percentage of their products returned due to failures and production faults. That includes Olympus and Panasonic, and has totally zero to do with ‘build quality’ and everything with a process called quality assurance.
Are you sure it is not just a matter of mass the E-5 is way oversized for its sensor size in fact it is in FF size and weight category ,
http://camerasize.com/compare/#202,290
Considering the tiny number of FT uses left the camera would need to cost a fortune to make any money for Olympus if it is an FT DSLR as opposed to a very high end mFT with high performance lens adapter. Even with a market probably 10 times larger than now , and using a warmed over E-3 body ,using a sensor that came out in 2008 with the E-30 Olympus still charged $1700 for it in 2010 .
With all these factors diminished market ( worse still the FT users left who would consider an E-7 will already have all the Olympus glass they need ) . Plus a new body will surely be needed to accommodate new tech ( 5-axis , better LCD and critically better C-AF a real weakness compared to NIkon or Canon) .Honestly wasting resources on designing and marketing to a tiny user group is pure folly , for every potential sale of a high end FT camera they could sell a 100 high end mFT. The appeal of this would be only to the small diehard group of current E-5 users. The E-510/E-620 users are hardly likely to decide to jump up to this what must be a very expensive option. To those who doubt this think about the $ 999 for a Pen model with no EVF or even weather sealing .
A pro build quality FT body with all the latest bells and whistles and low potential target market, would have to cost a considerable amount. I have never seen the sense in the high end FT , if you are going to carry all that weight and bulk you might as well just go to Nikon and get FF . This would be a seriously dumb move.
Pick an item. Any item. Your watch, your cereal, your cereal bowl, your car, your laptop, your dog’s food, your floor tiles.
There’s a luxury version of it.
And the company is losing money producing that item, even though it the top end has some buyers.
You should take a short marketing course to learn the basics of categorization, product placement and loyalty.
> And the company is losing money producing that item, even though it the top end has some buyers.
I don’t think that’s right. The margin is almost always higher for the luxury versions. The “loss-leaders” are usually in the low end.
Luxury goods are not loss leaders, quite the opposite in fact as they are sold in smaller numbers at much higher prices with a far higher per unit price /profit margin.Thats why all the companies try and entice people into the system with low end bargain models , hoping that they will gradually move up the price/ profit margin league.Obviously simple business models dictate that high grade low volume products will be significantly more expensive for all sorts of reasons including material cost, and critically the lower the sales volume the less units you can amortise costs over.
The e-5 was £1500 in 2010 the D600 is £1400 in 2013 , the E-P5 is £899 ( body only no EVF) so what price while an E-7 be ? it is obviously going to cost more than the E-p5 with its EVF ( the E-5 has an excellent OVF for its format size ) so now we are at > £1150 , the potential market is going to be truly tiny , niche demand for a high grade product guarantees high cost it is unavoidable , unless you seriously think a company whose imaging division lost 18 billion yen last year is in a position to sell it at a loss
Any research into prices at official dealers or amazon for example show the exact opposite of what you claim with regards to prices. The links demonstrating this have been posted to this discussion already.
E-5: $1699
6D: $1999
D600: $1996
All body only amazon prices, all showing a price around $300 lower for the E-3. Now, if we consider street prices, a new E-5 is actually about the same price as a second hand D600.
That doesn’t even get to the ‘slight’ difference in build quality, functionality, ergonomics, weather sealing and such.
So.. either prices are really weird there where you live, or the picture you present is a bit ‘colored’ by the point you want to make…
As I’ve commented before, I think it is actually entirely a function of the camera size relative to one’s hand size.
http://camerasize.com/compare/#289,202
I have small-medium hands, and the E-M5 feels perfectly solid to me. It gives me that “If someone tries to mug me I can take them out with my camera” feeling, although more like a nun-chuck than a sledgehammer. To me, it’s the larger SLRs that feel unwieldy and clumsy, and the light-weight SLRs feel like heavy, empty boxes. For people with large-ish hands, the E-M5 will feel like a toy. It’s not the camera that is built poorly; it’s their large hands that feel clumsy trying to juggle the smaller surface area. Leica R8, conversely, feel awkward and fussy and stiff to me because my hands are small. (I actually have the worst of both worlds because I have very wide thumbs, making a lot of the small buttons tricky.)
Everyone who comments on a camera’s build quality, handling, etc., must disclose their hand size. Actually, everyone who complains that the E-M5 feels flimsy (or unusable without the grip) probably have large hands.
tell that drivel story to Nikon, who’s D300 and variants was larger and heavier than Ex, larger and heavier than 5D
The next Ex is a smaller body anyway, this much we already know
That article nowhere says that m4/3 will never have a ‘pro camera’, it merely points out that the E-M5 is NOT a pro camera. Unsurprisingly, Olympus agrees and markets it as an ‘advanced amateur’ camera.
The difference in build quality is indeed quite evident, tho it is not as simple and absolute as that poster suggests. To witness, take a close look at the way the display of the E-5 is put together. There are 4 tiny screws, and the ones opposite to the hinge have to take a lot of pressure. They probably solved the construction flaw of the E-3 so it won’t break under gentle use, but I did get to see multiple E-5s with a ‘split display case’ problem over the last 2 years.
Regardless, the build quality of the E-5 may not be totally perfect, it is totally superior to any current m4/3 camera, including the E-M5 and even Gh3.
This all says nothing about if a pro m4/3 camera will ever be released by Olympus or not, except for that it clearly points out that there is room for such a camera above the current offerings.
Be it build more like the good old OM, the E-M6 might be great. The build quality, the ergonometrics, buttons and dials – you know… and of course the same size to make it more gripping without the em5 battery grip. OM1: 136 × 86 × 83 mm. OMDEM5: 121 x 90 x 42 mm.
Yep, my OM-D takes great pics and, in all fairness, seems reasonably weatherproof. However the build quality is decidedly flimsy. I have kept one film camera, a Nikon F5, I never use it but I keep it to remind me how a pro camera should be built.
There is no reason why an MFT camera can’t be well-built and once the sensor technology can convince pro’s that the system is viable then the cameras might follow. It’s all down to perception. There are pro quality (in terms of build) 4/3 cameras – and lenses to suit, so why not MFT.
Yes, because the OM-D will never handle the big SHG lenses as well as a full sized E-X… And to make the OM-D that size would ruin it for everyone else.
So yes, there is still room for both lines. (and maybe even a small E-xxx?)
never handle ? I wouldnt make that call
they basically operate right now on m43 anyway
but they do need pdAF to have effective focus speeds to widen shooting potential
I suggest you read more carefully before answering someone.
for SHG lens i agree current m43 lens cannot compare,
but how about Oly will announce E-7 or E-5 successor ?
they make it for old lens that deteriorate(mechanic&electronic) !!!
and they never talk about new 4/3 lens,(for retro and no future)
let they plan and focus on M4/3 system and upgrade to PRO-Level.
Of course I am interested in the new OMD…who isn’t?….but I am curious to see if Pany may finally release that range-finder “style” (of course it would have an EVF) camera the we have all lusted after for years now within the MFT offerings. Between Pany and Oly this fall should be quite interesting…but we need MORE info admin!!! LOL!
Better late than never for rangefinder style,.
It will make Mft more complex system,.
Well..I am not exactly counting on the fact that Panasonic is ACTUALLY going to intro that camera..but we can hope!!
Completely new mFT camera from Panasonic ?
Does it mean a RangeFinder type ?
Could be this the very highend camera everybody eager to know . What about GX2 ?
Things getting interesting now .
This could be my long await stuff .
..but there will be no IS…and it will be too expensive, so you won’t buy! 🙂
– speaking generaly MFT could be barely considered as large senzor …
– for compact(fixedlens) …m43 is large…but smaller is not large
anyway..interesting to see the the upcoming summer will be full of rumours !
KEEP GOING ADMIN!
PS>voted for Pana MFT as New OMD cannot surprise me(I believe)
Pany released GX1 before OM-D EM-5 about 1 year,
and now new OM-D will appear but new GX or new RF from Pany still quiet.
what something wrong ,Pany
For the successor of the OM-D,. I wish :
-It must have New sensor,.with better DR and better High ISO noise
-1/8000 shutter speed
-Same EVF resolution like the VF4
– Better Screen
-Better IBIS technology
-better lay out button, especially the on/of button,.
-better video format
-Please comes up with better Kitlens,.14-54mm f2.8-3.5
-Built in Wifi
-Built in Flash,..
anybody want to add ,.please,.
Tiny fountain to relax 🙂
GPS already
Sensor cannot be upgraded every year, its not reasonnable. However, a new engine and new chips can help pull more juice out of the sensor.
– Modern style body, not retro body
– mic input / headphone outputs
– lanc -> start/stop, aperture/iso, focus.
– ISO 50, 100
– Pro video codec -> 50 Mbit 4:2:2 25p/30p, – 100 Mbit 4:2:2 50p/60p,
– 650 shots-per-charge battery
– Native corp video
– 2x SD cards slots
I think you’re more likely to get what you want out of Panasonic anytime in the near future…
Not so sure about low ISO, tho. GH3’s base ISO is 200.
When I shoot an artwork from a tripod, I use lowest ISO possible. ISO 50 is welcome anytime!
“I use lowest ISO possible. ISO 50 is welcome anytime!”
The difference between iso 50 (as a base iso) and iso 200 (as a base iso) is that with the latter you use 2 EV smaller aperture opening (with the same shutter speed). However, if you have iso 200 then you can use an ND4 filter to make it just like as if it had base iso 50.
OTOH, if you have base iso 50 then there is no way to make it like base iso 200.
And no, you don’t have to put on/take off that ND4 filter all the time — since you want base iso 50 then just leave the ND4 on at all times and you have your base iso 50 equivalent setup with your base iso 200 camera. That ND4 filter will transform your camera’s iso 200-12800 into iso 50-3200.
Gh3 has iso 125
Admin, weeks ago you replied to me saying that the newcoming Panasonic camera would be the best one: can you share your opinion about it? We know and accept that these will be a roumor, of course.
I’m more interested in new OMD, and use the “old” one as second body when working.
BUT I’m really curious to know why the next GX2 will be so good (personally, a rangefinder styled camera is cool, but not enough to turn a camera into the best camera).
Thanks!!!
yes, I will post about the Panasonic soon.
Thank you! (And keep up with your good work!)
MarcoSartoriPhoto: You seem to be assuming that the GX2 and the new Panasonic camera are the same camera. Admin, are they one camera or two? Thanks.
MarcoSartoriPhoto: You seem to assume that the GX2 is the camera Admin was referring to. Admin, is there one camera coming or two? If two, is the Gx2 is coming later? Thanks.
Sorry for duplication. My original post disappeared for a while.
We need to know if the next OM-D is the lesser model or the Pro.
In any case since there will be another E-x, I am beginning to think that there won’t be Phase detect, but just a further jump of processing power with the Pro, which will work well enough with the CDAF compatible 4/3 lenses, and improve marginally those who aren’t.
People don’t get that there is only so much that you can do with old motors and external focussing.
pro.
Thanks! Now what about the f2.8 zoom(s)?
So definitely no PD, hence the need for a new e-x (with optical VF. We’ll have to wait for a high end MFT / FT (?) until the technical issues with on sensor PD are resolved, just like we are waiting for a rangefinder styled Pen.
It’s only a guess, but I am beginning to think that if the processing is fast enough there might be some sort of simulation of variation of contrast that tells the lens in which direction to move. It would be a v. elegant solution, because it would allow a general improvement of the camera and good performance of some 4/3 lenses.
Faster processing of course improves also tracking, and so would internal simulation of direction. Personally I am v happy with the just bought E-M5 so I am not a taker, but technical evolution is interesting in itself.
It could also give in camera HDR, which has been missing until now, although DR is already v. good.
Edit: shape recognition and/or variation of contrast
whatever assists 43rds AF will also assist m43
remember there is still the final bridge to cross, the conundrum of CAF to resolve
incamera HDR less of an issue
everyone thats tried this so far has found it sometimes/often has issues
a good clean sensor will produce good ISO bracket files (like your EM5 does)
merge them together in a propriety app like Oloneo, it will exceed expectations
“In any case since there will be another E-x…” Says who? It is just a rumor. Rumors are rumors, some will be and some will never be.
-p-
I hate to be a barer of bad tidings to the FT guys many of whom have spent a lot of cash in the system. But,attempting to design and launch a camera aimed at such a small now niche market .The e5 was £1500 body only at launch.In a market where you can get a FF DSLR like the D600 with excellent image quality for £1400 . How much can they realistically charge for it . Though with the £899 body only E-P5 , Olympus are not shy at charging, but I don’t see how they can make a body to match the quality of the E5 ( a tank of a machine ) , with new sensor , new 5-axis IBIS , better AF, upgraded LCD and in all likelihood a new body to contain it at a price that can be competitive in a market where there are excellent, weather sealed cameras like the D7100 with better sensors than anything we have that sells for £930 . I don’t see how it could make money .
Maybe prices in the UK are special… but eh
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D600-FX-Format-Digital-Camera/dp/B0099XGZXA
$1996,95
http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-E-5-12-3MP-Digital-Body/dp/B0042X9MNM
$1699,99
So no, there is about a $300 price difference, when looking at Amazon. When looking at actual street prices, the difference gets even bigger.
Not to mention, when the E-5 was released, there was no D600, there was a D700, which was almost $1000 more expensive at the time.
Sure, the E-5 was expensive for what it offered, but that is mostly due to its outdated sensor, and its by far not as dramatic as you try to suggest here.
So.. a new D600 for $1999,95, or an imaginary new E-7 for 1699,99. When only looking at the body, the D600 is clearly the better deal, but that comparison fails as soon as you factor in having to replace lenses.
With all respect, your comparison is ignorant (literally, as you ignore a very important consideration, and are comparing between things that didn’t exist at the same time).
Does this all mean Olympus is going to have a huge hit if they release an E-7? I strongly doubt it, but, that isn’t because of a comparison between body only prices, but because of considering the system as a whole, and the future outlook for the system. It would take a very dramatic change in strategy and marketing to make the system attractive to NEW customers. That however plays absolutely zero role in if an E-7 would be interesting for CURRENT 4/3 customers.
For the Pice of that Olympus Camera, you can get a FULL FRAME Canon 6D for that price that Dwarfs the FT sensor.
It’s not worth the price. FT is dead and would be foolish to revisit.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-20-2-Digital-Camera-3-0-Inch/dp/B009B0MZ8U
$1990,-
That is a $290 difference, so not ‘same price’.
But but street prices! yes, and those are also lower for an E-5, and after a while would also be lower for an E-7.
Not to mention, your argument is just as ignorant as the one from the poster above, as you also fail to factor in the cost of replacing lenses. Your argument only works for someone starting from scratch, and for that I already pointed out how such people would be better off looking for something else.
cheap FF will always have lower spec to differentiate between other FF bodies in the same line. That would mean compromises in the shutter, the OVF, flash handling and sync, and I would expect AF.
Cheap FF is cheap for a reason, its ‘less’
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D600-FX-Format-Digital-Camera/dp/B0099XGZXA
$1996,95
http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-E-5-12-3MP-Digital-Body/dp/B0042X9MNM
$1699,99
YOU JUST DID THE SAME THING!!!!!
Y’know, I’m wasting my time with you… Stay with a defunct system and its Huge glass.
“but because of considering the system as a whole, and the future outlook for the system.”
Yeah, keep begging for a replacement for your “Extinct” System. THERE IS NO FUTURE OUTLOOK FOR FOUR THIRDS… IT’S DONE.
So, pointing out that someone is actually misrepresenting things makes that I want to cling to a specific system?
Your logic is amazing really. Do you actually believe that spreading lies is a good way to make a point when there do in fact exist actual non-lie arguments? Or could it possibly be that plainly lying about things makes the lier look untrustworthy if not stupid…
yet what they are talking about is the E5 replacement, see up ^^^
but ok, the world needs ppl who cant read for jobs in porn and prostitution
But the thing is…43s shg glass is in some cases equally expensive or more expensive than ff glass. Soooo, hes right, theres no point buying into 43s
But the thing is, my comment concerns people who already have 4/3 glass and not at all people who don’t. The other thing is that you are obviously incapable of reading.
Very easy, i need only FT camera to my FT lens, not APS and FF camera. 😉
I can see the reason why people put their hope that olympus would revive their D-SLR camera,.its just simply because,.The Glass,..43 Glass is optically have better quality,.even compare to Canikon Glass .and thats is like a bond for olympus user,.
Hey Pekka,
Since you seem to be a bit closer to the mind of Olympus than the rest of us, I’ll make the leap of faith that when you tell us “It is just a rumor. Rumors are rumors, some will be and some will never be” in regards to a possible new E-X, that we are not going to see one.
I think the most that 4/3 users can hope for out of Olympus is an OMD that can focus the old 4/3 glass through the incorporation of phase-detect focusing. And that’s about it. You’ll still need an adapter, and the lenses will dwarf that tiny little camera body.
As for a new E-X, it’s just a dream that will never be realized.
– Olympius –
I think there is still this object of trying to merge both lines
I would say the Ex and OMDPro would be equals, just differing capabilities
one day they will be engineered from the same format, obviously mirrorless
just not right now
I concur. Why make a v. complex hybrid machine, when they can sell two simpler ones? The other factor is why damage the sensor with non imaging pixels, and why trow themselves at the mercy of a sensor maker?
I think that Oly aims at creating its own patent proprietary base. Concerning CAF + tracking, did you try any recent one? Because there too it’s a matter of pattern matching and fast processing.
Perhaps I am wrong and there will be PDAF-on-Sensor, but if they can avoid it, they will.
After all YOU should be aware that SHG owners, most old geezers, will never be happy with a m4/3 camera. They want a plain big brutish 4/3 dSLR, and hang the rest 🙂
Are SHG lens users even older geezers than you?
E-P6 with build-in EVF.
I dont think there will be integrated view finder on the PEN line,.it will never whatsoever ,.especially olympus after The VF4 release,.
When i read the specs of the VF4 ,.its just simply show me that ,.forget about,.integrated view finder inside an E-PEN body ,.it has never come for olympus ,.to put A SUPERB quality of EVF like VF4 built in on a PEN body series,.;its Final
the add on of built in EVF on a PEN body,.would create much bigger PEN camera than The OM-D line
I dont think there will be integrated view finder on the PEN line,.it will never whatsoever ,.especially olympus after The VF4 release,.
When i read the specs of the VF4 ,.its just simply show me that ,.forget about,.integrated view finder inside an E-PEN body ,.it has never come for olympus ,.to put A SUPERB quality of EVF like VF4 built in on a PEN body series,.;its Final
the add on of built in EVF on a PEN body,.would create much bigger PEN camera than The OM-D line
Maybe you need to go and look at a Sony Nex-6. Same res VF as the VF-4, in a compact body with a pop-up flash. Whatever the reason, they didn’t want to put that built in EVF in the E-P5…probably because that would mean the eventual OM-D Pro model won’t look so hot in comparison.
It will be wonderful if Pana can provide alternate ( On / Off ) IBIS to make full use of Zuiko lenses & most important , MCS sensor in this brand new camera .
I would seal the deal without doubt should Pana fulfill the criterias above .
PANASONIC are not going to have IBIS , they have lenses covering from 24-600mm , a macro and on the horizon a 300mm equiv and an F1.2 lens all with OIS. IS is by far the most hyped feature in cameras , it works in such small niches that the way folk go on and on about it makes me wonder if they are just OLympus fans stirring the pot.IS does nothing once the shutter speed gets beyond the focal length reciprocal , and even when it works for many situations that include a moving subject it does nothing so it use is limited to start with. Nikon and Canon who dominate maybe 95% of the pro market seem to get buy just fine without it in body. In fact looking at the companies who do have it OLympus,Pentax and Sony it hasn’t done much for the spreadsheet now has it.
Call us back when they have f/1.8 zooms at least…
No, the 12-35 set to 25mm and f2.8 and with OIS enabled is totally no match in ‘low light capabilities’ for the 25/1.4 with IBIS. Not only does the later get you 2ev more light, the stabilization is also notably more effective.
You are right that Pana isn’t going to do IBIS, but you are wrong in that the current range of OIS enabled lenses makes up for both IBIS working better and available primes providing faster to much faster apertures. In the worst case the difference is about 1 stop, in the best case it is more in the order of over 3 stops.
Not having ibis will not prevent me from Putting my cold hard cash on Panasonic’s Latest and Greatest.
I plan on getting both the 12-35/35-100 anyways, so I’ll be ready once Panasonic drops the new camera.
And if all you are going to use are the Panasonic zooms, there is very little reason to look elsewhere. Yes, 5 axis IBIS does work a bit better then OIS on the 12-35 for example, but the difference isn’t so dramatic as to be a huge factor. From experience it is in the order of 1/2 to 1 stop depending on subject distance and focal length (12-35 with v1.2 firmware,
But that ignores the huge difference in fast apertures you can get when using primes. If you don’t plan on using those anyway, then that is not a relevant argument for you, but for those of us who do, a 1-3 stop difference is pretty huge.
Not to mention the exquisite pleasure to use a Jupiter 9 85/2 with full stabilisation in the VF too. Or the possibility of doubling its range with Oly v. good digital teleconverter.
IBIS is for the connoisseurs, not for the peasants 🙂
And lets not forget those nice Rokkor 135/2.0 and 200/2.8 and and and.. yes, for those of us using legacy glass, that is also a pretty big argument.
But lets not fool ourselves, most people who buy cameras, including ILCs, don’t get to buy extra lenses, so if their kit zooms are stabilized, then all is fine (with regards to having IS when they need it).
no future camera maker will revisit in lens stabilisation
IBIS is the present and the future
They still use IS in their lenses, buddy… Try harder.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF35mm-f-2-USM/dp/B00A2BVBTG/ref=sr_1_1?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1368629044&sr=1-1&keywords=canon+35mm+is
That one dropped late last year..
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CQGF8H6/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00CQGF8H6&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20
This one is a little extreme, it’s not out yet and has IS..
So you were saying??
Canon is a legacy camera manufacturer, their choice for lens based IS has been dictated by the requirements of analog film cameras that simply had no sensor to shift so there was no choice.
Try again, this time with a manufacturer that doesn’t have decades of legacy to protect, and while at it, learn to actually read the things you reply to.
same thing I just said, but as we both learned you cant read
no F U T U R E camera maker will revisit in lens stabilisation
IBIS is the present and the future
feel free to make a dick of yourself all over again
yeah,but ibis is not mean “Must” “NEED”,
CanoNikon still great camera manufacture,they has huge consumer ,variant requirement,
they still make their cams is balance,
ibis is good feature but unnecessary to use all cam,
you think it good that not mean good to all people,
and when you go to CanoNikon webboard and talk about IBIS they will kick your ass to back here , >_<
stabilisation is an advanced feature
there is a provable need for stabilisation
if there wasnt, they wouldnt charge a premium on stabilised lenses
There is a provable need for stabilization? Bull shit
No prime from any company has stabilization an shooters use them just fine. Youre right on one thing, its a gimmick to charge you a premium.
So Homer, what are those?
http://www.neocamera.com/search_lens.php?stabilization=1&prime=1&by=feature
Those are the 20something ultra premium primes (not counting the 1 and 2 versions) that have iS which pros mount on a tripod and turn the IS OFF. The canikon fans themselves call it useless feature on a lens like these. But its there, for people like you, who see IS or VR and instantly think its better, and suddenly think youre gonna hand hold your 500mm lens. While you where there, did you see the other 309 primes that DIDNT have IS? They must be useless huh? Scrap?
Say the mantra: no ibis no buy
@homer
“Those are the 20something ultra premium primes (not counting the 1 and 2 versions) that have iS”
In other words, there are primes with IS in other systems and your claim about those not existing is bullshit.
“which pros mount on a tripod and turn the IS OFF. The canikon fans themselves call it useless feature on a lens like these. But its there, for people like you, who see IS or VR and instantly think its better, and suddenly think youre gonna hand hold your 500mm lens. While you where there, did you see the other 309 primes that DIDNT have IS? They must be useless huh? Scrap?
Say the mantra: no ibis no buy”
You forgot a few things there…
ALL primes on a Sony alpha are stabilized
All primes on Pentax DSLRs are stabilized
Do you think IS is at times useful on the 12-35/2.8?
Then why wouldn’t it be useful on a 25/1.4?
Oh, and where did I say anything unstabilized is useless? please point us to the exact post where I say that. You can’t because I never said anything suggesting that and you are a rather dishonest moron trying to put words in other people’s mouth just to obscure the fact that you are clearly wrong.
Delirious…
No other camera manufacturer has an interest in ibis, yet you claim its the future
huh? both Sony and Pentax have IBIS systems
others are trapped due to their prior investment in stabilised lenses
Even sony moved to lens is in the nex system and pentax…well the sales numbers says it all
And sony and pentax are two out of how many camera makers?
this is incredibly silly fanboy rhetoric
“No other camera manufacturer has an interest in ibis, yet you claim its the future”
did that turn out to be true?
these 2 makers revised their camera lines and went IBIS
having stabilised lenses means your lenses are more expensive
or you have to offer both stabilised and non stabilised versions which is less profitable due to each type having less volume.
This would be why the stabilised 70-200/4 is almost 2x that of the non stabilised version of the same lens that Canon offers.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183198-USA/Canon_2578A002_EF_70_200mm_f_4L_USM.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/457678-USA/Canon_1258B002AA_EF_70_200mm_f_4L_IS.html
Cost outlays are a significant reason why manufacturers would find IBIS the more attractive option. Thats why its the future.
Wish list…
1. Latest chip please not another Panny rehash.
2. BASE ISO OF 100 and to make me VERY happy 50 too!!!!!
3. RF style with a very good VF please.
4. In body IS.
5. Max shutter speed of 1/8000.
6. Articulated screen please (OK, I know it just wont happen with an RF style body but I can dream…)
You can be VERY happy either with low ISOs or high ISOs in mFT, not both at the same time.
-p-
Maybe you can switch it once, with a toggle switch, such as the new E-P5 …
“You can be VERY happy either with low ISOs or high ISOs in mFT, not both at the same time.”
Well, the Nex 6 has ISO 100 and quite high values too but personally I’d settle for 100-3200. To me the lower values are more important as I like to use wide apertures even in good light. Lovely wide aperture lenses are… lovely and I don’t want the experience spoilt at least to a degree by messing on with ND’s.
I seem to recall that base iso for the nex 6 is 160. That means that ISO 100 is just over-exposed base iso with an exposure correction applied during raw conversion, something you can also do yourself in pp without any need to fiddle with ND filters.
“personally I’d settle for 100-3200”
So take a 200-6400 camera and put an ND2-filter on it and it’ll be the same as a 100-3200.
However, if you have 100-3200 with no ND filter then there is no way to make it into a 200-6400.
Thus I really, really, really don’t see any point in making base iso 100 (or 50!), it would just limit your options.
Why do you want base iso 100 (or 50!)?? If it’s too bright just use an ND filter. Base iso 200 is good.
“Why do you want base iso 100 (or 50!)?? If it’s too bright just use an ND filter. Base iso 200 is good.”
Because you have to fit the ND (or ND’s as I have two and often need to stack them) for one shot and then may have to take them off for the next if the ISO rises too much or the shutter speed falls too much.
I know I’m picky, but I’d rather be taking shots than juggling lens hoods, ND’s, cases and bags.
I think I’m going to give MFT another year and may then jump to Nex (Nex at least have ISO 100) if neither Oly or Panny bring out anything that’ll suit me. I mostly use legacy lenses so changing will be no great pain.
“Because you have to fit the ND (or ND’s as I have two and often need to stack them) for one shot and then may have to take them off for the next if the ISO rises too much or the shutter speed falls too much.”
No, you don’t. Have your base iso 200 camera and put an ND4 filter on each lens of yours and it’ll be the same as if you had a base iso 50 camera (or use an ND2 filter for a base iso 100 one).
However, by having the ability to take off the ND filter you get more flexibility than you would if your camera was base iso 50/100 to begin with. Higher base iso doesn’t have the downside you think it has, but lower base iso has the downside of the reverse.
Sigh…another comment based on fantasy..
If itsso bright out that you need iso 100 then im assuming youre at 1/4000 of a sec at iso 200, even with a 2 stop nd (which is iso 50, better than 100) whats gonna happen that your shutter speed is gonna suddenly drop to 1/15 of a sec (from 1/1000) and your iso go to 6400 (from 200)? The apocalypse? Why is your next shot 11 stops darker?
Now that Magic Lantern has enabled raw recording on the 5D III, let’s hope that Panasonic and Olympus finally does some real innovation and announce cameras with all the features they know their cameras and sensors are capable of, instead of just minor adjustments with or without an integrated viewfinder.
any mirrorless is in a far better position for video than an SLR
I think that the mFT bodies with fully articulating LCD are the best tools for video though I am mainly an Olympus camera user I bought a used GH2 for a bargain price and I am delighted with it for video.I do not like my Pen body for video ,I am an old fart and don’t like the holding a camera up to your face like a mobile . I imagine using a DSLR like the D800 or Canon 5dmk3 handheld would be pretty funny to see lol
… with all the nice and long expected bodies, it’s been very quiet about the “Schneider” prime-mft-lenses 2.0/14mm, 1.4/30mm or 2.4/60mm macro. Is there nothing new to?
I think an important question is: Will we get a true PrOM-D above the M5 or just a successor of the M5.
An M5 successor should get at least the P5 features as wifi and hi-res-evf but also phase-detection-af with full support of the FT lenses.
A true PrOM-D should also get a heavier, more robust and more bulky body.
Nevertheless I want to get a 2.8 zoom lense for the new OM-D!
So maybe the next E-X will be the announced professional mirrorless camera with PhaseAF Addon for FT lenses.
Size, looks and functionality like a smaller E-5 (or like GH3).
That would be my next dream camera after the E-M5.
An updated version of the oldschool looking OM-D series would not be a real reason for a camera update to me.
I’m also curious about the new fast Olympus Zoom lense(s), why no news there?
Admin, any news on video improvements for the new OMD?
Lenses!we want more lenses!enough with the cameras, we have plenty of them…
olympus on top of the poll! Shocking!
And could the morons please finally understand panasonic is not gonna do IBIS? or am I asking for too much?
Why don´t you just make an empty post with your sig on it? Everybody knows that you are going to post Oly hate, on and on and on and on and on again. It would save both time and space on the board.
the posts here are exactly the opposite of what you suggest by a long way the worst excesses of fanboy ism here or in other forums is from the Olympus user base ( and I speak as an e-m5 user )
None of the systems are perfect but the tedious if only Panasonic had IBIS gets real old. If only Olympus had sensors as good as Nikon, if only Olympus had decent video , if only Olympus would include basic accessories with £700 lenses , if only Olympus hadn’t used the same 12 mp sensor that was behind the times the day it came out from 2008 -2012 , if only Olympus hadn’t charged £200 more for a black version of an average lens .I could make just as long a list about any maker but whining about stuff that is never going to happen is idiotic.
“If only Olympus had sensors as good as Nikon,”
Complaints along that line have been made for quite some time, and rightly so because the sensor tech was holding back the cameras.
“if only Olympus had decent video ,”
Oh, they do, but they lack 24/25p support at the very least, and better codecs would also be very welcome. Often heard complaint on this forum.
“if only Olympus would include basic accessories with £700 lenses ,”
Again, an often heard complaint on here, and rightly so.
“if only Olympus hadn’t used the same 12 mp sensor that was behind the times the day it came out from 2008 -2012 ”
That is just a variation on the first complaint, still, yes, it would have helped to get a newer better sensor much earlier, and I strongly doubt you’ll find many people here thinking otherwise.
So no, valid list of complaints, but all of those have been discussed quite extensively here, and while at times people will offer an explanation of why things are the way they are, there is little disagreement on those points really. It doesn’t demonstrate at all the point you are trying to make, rather the opposite actually, it demonstrates that certain people, presumably including you, only read the things that comply with their point of view, and are blind to other things.
A few posts up, I pointed out why the ‘but there are OIS enabled zooms covering 12-300mm” argument doesn’t work as well as you seem to think, it actually once more demonstrates how you only see the things that confirm your point of view, but fail to see anything that goes against that point of view.
as time goes on those DxO DR calcs will be proven faulted
I don’t need DXO and their tests to tell the difference in IQ between a D700 and an E-P3 (or E-5 for that matter). I don’t need DXO to tell the improvements made with the E-M5 and later cameras.
Actually, I don’t need DXO for this at all, the differences are pretty evident as soon as you start looking for the limits of what the sensor can do in low/bad light conditions, or with regards to preserving hilights and shadow detail in good light. All it requires is taking pictures.
Hey, Bart
I am an Olympus camera owner E-m5 and the E-P3 along with a mix of Olympus and Panasonic glass. My only point was to demonstrate tha Olympus fanboys whining about the lack of IBIS in Panasonic bodies is downright silly, I was making points to show that no system ticks all the boxes. I was not intending to make unique complaints list, every point I made is correct in the broader competitive market ,Panasonic does have better video than Oly, Nikon have better sensors than anybody lol, in fact if I wasn’t so happy with the size and weight of my mFT , the D7100 would be very appealing.
One doesn’t need to look at charts and graphs like DXO , I like to play about with Raw files from many cameras , and some like the D800/E are truly awe inspiring, though its too large , too heavy and too bloody expensive for my blood. The need to defend ones own choice by attacking everyone else’s is what ruins all camera forums. I do not post here often but I read it often , I must have seen literally hundreds of Panasonic should have IBIS .
As to your comments about lenses , the 12-300 ( 24-600mm) which includes two high grade F2.8 lenses along with the 45 macro and soon fast portrait prime and fast 150(300mm) tele coming covers an excellent lens . There is no longer native lens for the system , I am not interested in legacy glass which is typically poorer , heavier and larger as well as being manual focus.As you get wider (7-14 ) the benefits of any kind of IS fall, with the fast primes like the 25 mmf1.4 let’s say you are wanting to shoot at 3 stops less than the reciprocal you are now shooting at 1/8th which effectively prevents you shooting anything moving faster than a glacier . The longest lens in the system without OIS is the 75mm 3 stops under reciprocal gets you to 1/15th which gets you up to shooting snails . It is a feature that while no doubt useful in certain niche scenarios is wildly overrated by some.
Dave
david, I didn’t anywhere disagree with those points, I merely pointed out that if you look a little bit better, you will find MANY PEOPLE HERE ON THIS FORUM agree with them, despite all the silly ‘olympus fanboy’ calling. All it takes is ignoring the few who indeed are blind to anything where their brand of choice might not be ‘best’.
Eventho I point out that I agree with your points, you are still trying to argue them, why? didn’t you understand that in fact, I do agree with those points?
Is it wanting to drive them home so hard that anyone who doesn’t screamingly agree should be accused of not agreeing?
What really is it?
And with regards to your IS point, YOU may only be interested in zooms (and I own one of those ‘high grade’ zooms, the 12-35, so I DO know their value really), but many people are interested in all the nice primes that exist for m4/3, like the 12, 14, 17, 20, 25, 45, 75mm ones that don’t have OIS. No, that isn’t about legacy glass at all, its about native m4/3 lenses. Maybe you are only interested in the yet to be released 42.5 and 150mm lenses, but I want something I can use right now, like the 45/1.8 and 75/1.8, both providing a clear 1 1/3 stop low-light advantage and dof control as well as size and weight advantages over the in itself excellent 35-100/2.8. You can keep ignoring such things, but that is still no reason to just dismiss such a clear difference as irrelevant in general, rather it limits the choices you have.
Oh, and btw, I’m likely to get that 150/2.8 once it hits the market 🙂
Hi Bart, I am not so much into longer lens the 35-100 is great for me and I have the 100-300 when I need something longer ( not very often) .On the other hand I love portrait photography ( my long suffering family and friends will confirm this lol ) and I am champing at the bit waiting to see how the 42.5 F1.2 shapes up . At least we know where our spare cash will be going lol
Dave
David, that is all fine, but only explains YOUR personal needs, and it still totally ignores that there are 12, 14, 17 (x2), 19, 20, 25, 30, 45, 60 (x2) and 75mm AF primes which all give advantages over the available zooms, being it just size and weight at times, but more often also brightness and quality. Those are totally valid choices for people to make, and especially let you take much better advantage of the size advantage m4/3 can offer. Many of them being brighter also means better low-light capability, but, if you are using a Pana body, it means no stabilization. This doesn’t even concern all the nice and even brighter MF native prime lenses or legacy lenses at all.
That YOU do not use such things is totally fine, and if you only need the 12-35, 35-100 and 100-300, then you won’t miss anything by not having ibis either. But, that really really limits your choice, removes the possibility to take full advantage of the smaller size that m4/3 offers and limits your low-light capabilities. Acting as if those things are not relevant arguments in general is just ignorant or stupidly biased.
The point is not that your choice is invalid, its not. The point is that you are acting as if it is the only valid choice, and that it is not, rather, there are other choices that have clear and proven advantages, which you may or may not desire. That is why choice is good, you can get what you need, others can get what they need.
So what bart? So effing what? This why I am like I am here. Primes are not stabilized ON ANY system, yet people seem to be able to take photos just fine. But you people really want to make the world believe primes are useless without ibis, that you actually CANNOT use oly primes on pana bodies. Its like you shoot only static subjects outside in the middle of the night. Thats the only reason I can think of as why you are so shit crazy obsessed with ibis. So every chace you get on every single post you people thrash pana or everuthing else with the ibis argument. And then get sensitive when youre called on it.
What about canon? Nikon? Sigma? Nex? Samsung? Leica? Panasonic? How are people using their primes with no ibis? Why arent the people clamoring cor ibis on their bodies?
Both panas ois and olys ibis are overrated, theres like 3 oit of 100 shots where ibis or ois actually made the shot, yet ive read idiot statements here that go “I will never buy a camera without ibis”.
Stabilisation is generally not required on wide and standard prime lenses used in daylight. However as most cameras are now sold with zoom lenses, the longer focal lengths may need help. They may not. That depends on how you shoot and the light available.
The modern stance to take pictures with the camera at arms length is a real need of stabilisation for most except the shortest focal lengths or bright light. Remember the complaints from reviewers of camera dip when using the first m43 cameras at arms length? Improved stabilisation has made most of that go away from comments today.
If you don’t require stabilisation fine. But me, I am one of the ” “I will never buy a camera without ibis”.” guys. I have shots that are nice crisp and sharp hand held at speeds that would be impossible without stabilisation. If its there it can be used, if its not there it can’t be. Go out without a brolly, you get wet if it starts to rain. Again your choice. Not a case of banning brollies if your one of those who prefers not to carry one around.
Maybe we should ban all forms of AF. After all it was not on cameras I had in the 1960s so it must be some newfangled idea that ruins photography and one cannot be a real photographer if one uses it!!!!!!!!
Oh look, our Pana fanboy objects to someone not agreeing that OIS in zooms will be enough for everyone..
Lets just start with pointing out that your statement about no primes in any system being stabilized just being a huge pile of crap.
Primes are stabilized on any system that provides IBIS, and usually not stabilized in systems that don’t provide IBIS, with the exception of more expensive longer primes that do provide OIS.
That you can take pictures without IS, absolutely, if you think the point was that you can’t then you are either just incapable of reading, misrepresenting what is being said on purpose, or just totally stupid, make your choice.
Additionally, if we were to follow your totally broken line of thought, we should not have AF or AE either, people have been taking pictures for like a century without those, so its clearly possible to take pictures without, and those things are just useless tech for fanboys, right?
Who needs digital, for that matter, who needs roll film, sheets will do totally fine! People used them to take good pictures, so the proof is out there, noone needs such things, and wanting them is just hilarious and a sign of fanboyism, right?
You know Homer, the simple, absolutely simple point is this:
IS is a useful tool, useful enough that people spend extra money on getting lenses with IS on systems that only provide lens based IS. Now, a system with IBIS will allow all lenses to be stabilized instead of only a few select lenses. Yes, that includes all primes for such a system. Now, if you still can’t understand how that is an advantage, you really need to take a visit to a brain care specialist. If you are arguing that YOU do not need that advantage, that is an entirely different matter, but that you do not need a certain advantage doesn’t mean it isn’t an advantage objectively spoken. The only actual case of ‘fanboyism’ here is people not needing this advantage and then screaming that it isn’t an advantage and how anyone who still wants it is a ‘fanboy’.
Also, if you read that as ‘everyone needs IS all the time, and noone can do without IBIS’ then you need a reading course, it does not say that, it does not mean that, so stick your stupid misreading there where the sun doesn’t shine.
If all you use is a kit zoom (like most consumers) this is all a non issue, either your kit zoom will be stabilized, or the camera will provide ibis, it doesn’t matter.
If all you use are zoom lenses, then there are lenses covering 12-300mm with OIS, so it is a non-issue.
If you want to make use of all the nice primes, then you have a choice: no IS but free choice of body, or IS but you are limited to bodies that provide IBIS.
But but stabilization is useless for normal/wide primes in regular daylight…
So if you shoot everything in plain daylight, and don’t ever have another reason for wanting a slower shutter speed then sure, you won’t need any form of IS, but that is merely because your photography is rather limited.
I’ll just point at smoothing out flowing water as one of the many possible reasons for wanting a slow shutter speed at full daylight. Maybe you always carry a tripod for this, but most people don’t, and why would I want to carry at least half a kilo of extra stuff when I can make do with a few grams of extra stuff.
I’ll point at panning shots where a lower shutter speed is desirable for ‘effect’, and stabilizing any shake that isn’t in the panning direction provides a clear improvement
Longer focal lengths usually mean requiring higher shutter speeds for reducing the risk on camera shake, so make it more desirable, but that doesn’t mean at all its useless for shorter focal lengths.
Bottomline, your argument about no primes being stabilized is totally wrong, and your refusal to understand an advantage eventho you have no use for the advantage yourself is just plain stupid, its not like it hasn’t been pointed out to you a million times or it is so amazingly difficult to figure out.
David, one additional thing to keep in mind, the ‘reciprocal (35mm equiv) focal length’ is a rule of thumb, and not some kind of absolute.
What it means is that on a 35mm camera with a 50mm lens, an average person, using proper 2 handed technique, won’t get many pictures blurred due to camera shake at 1/50. It does NOT mean that camera shake will not blur any pictures whatsoever at that shutter speed. It is very easy to demonstrate that even when shooting at the reciprocal of the 35mm equiv focal length, IS will still cause an increase in the number of keepers, so even in that case it does help.
How the rule of thumb works out in practice depends on your technique, on the actual camera being used, on how tired you are, and generally on how well you feel. Its different for every person, and it will be different at different points in time for the same person.
Then you should consider that it is actually about magnification, not about focal length as such. The consequence is that with close-focus, you will need a higher shutter speed then when your subject is far away. The rule of thumb only works for subjects that are reasonably far away.
So assuming a subject at a few meters distance, an average person and good camera handling technique, for that 25/1.4, IS is already useful at 1/50, possibly at 1/100. Its probably more useful at 1/25 and 1/12 (thats 2 stops). Depending on the IS implementation it might also be useful at 1/8 or 1/4.
For that 75/1.8, its already going to be useful at 1/150, or even higher. Its definitely more useful at shutter speeds below 1/150.
It isn’t a matter of IS being useful in very specific corner cases, and not useful at all outside those corner cases, rather, that is a ‘false dilemma’ fallacy. There are many more options then ‘totally useful’ and ‘totally useless’
Get over yourself bart, now youre trying to tell me you werent being condescending when you post really was. Now youre telling me to re read. I did, youre saying how “limited” we all are without ibis, you even went to say that if he didnt see it your way he was ignorant or stupid. You go and re read your post.
Im wrong? Ok Theres like 30 stabilized primes out there, most of them in the thousands of dollars category, and people who actually buy them turn it off anyway. What about the other hundreds of non stabilized primes? Theyre thrash right? Only useful with an adapter on a oly body?
Then you go and talk about shooting at 1/4 of a sec handheld…hahahaha my omd must be broken. Then again I print my photos, you probably just show them to your facebook pals and never view your photos at more than 25% cause youre not a “peeper”. Then by all means go shoot a 3 sec exposure handheld, itll be fine for your purposes
Homer, there is nothing condescending about saying that if you don’t need something like IS that that says more about the limitations of your photography then about the usefulness of IS.
Its no different from how I don’t have much of a need for continuous AF. That says a lot about a limitation of my photography and nothing whatsoever about the usefulness of continuous AF.
If IS is useful on the 12-35/2.8 (not all the time, but enough so to make it worthwhile having) then it is totally absurd to argue that it isn’t useful all of a sudden on prime lenses in that same focal range. Thats a simple matter of logic, and has nothing to do with calling everyone who doesn’t agree with me ‘stupid’.
Panasonic has something they call “Hybrid OIS” which has been in camcorders before but is now in the ZS30. It offers 5 axis stabilization, which means that it must incorporate sensor shift (something hinted at by the name, too).
It might not be as versatile as Olympus’s 5 axis IBIS (in terms of effective stabilization of unstabilized lenses), but I expect it’ll offer better performance when in full force (particularly at telephoto).
Ibis is only used to swirl the pot, to persuade newcomers to side on Olympus cameras and to degrade Panasonic products. Meanwhile Panasonic cameras/lenses sell and keep MFT alive, while Olympus nickels & dimes it’s fan base, all while sitting on a warehouse FULL of overpriced Four-Thirds product.
So no, the Ibis drivel will never stop, unless Panasonic adopts it, which I hope the don’t. I like reading the comments…
Haha, yes, Panasonic is the underdog, and the whole big mean world is against them!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calimero#Influence_in_popular_culture
last item seems rather appropriate.
Just this site and it’s Rabid, Infested Olympus Fanboys.. You should know this, you’re one of them.
Or, are you in Denial???
You make such an amazing argument, I’d like to subscribe to your newsleter!
it’s nonsense.
The amount of olymous fanboyism here? Yes I agree, its nonsense
yeah
IBIS is a good feature in some Olympus cameras, not so much in others. Some prefer it, others not so much and are happy with in-lens OIS. This is a bit of a dead horse that can be – and has been – beaten to death.
I can see Panasonic putting it in a future camera, but it is not a pivotal, deal breaking issue for me.
Panasonic will not come out with a GX-2 in name. The new design will not be simply a rangefinder style. The new design will be geared towards an entirely different crowd than the typical photography enthusiast. I’m placing my bets on it being a semi-to-professional model camera/camcorder.
on schedule ,Sept they will announce GX line Replacement (that is GX2 or not),
before December new PRO-LEVEL cam will appear i don’t know cam body style,
i guess it will has superb specs ,fast video coded ,body look like G series.
Well and what about new lenses? These are more important to expand the system. I am lacking new pieces this year. Whats coming apart from Olys fast zoom?
And is the Oly fast zoom coming at all? It has been rumored for more than one year now…
But I agree, we need more info on lenses. There is still a lot to be covered: fast long tele (primes), fast UWA prime, fast tele zoom, etc.
Fast UWA prime pancake please – 17 or 18 35mm equiv.
Firstly the new E-x four third camera, secondly the new OM-D and thirdly a fixed lens compact.
So mr, can someone please tell Olympus to put its new larger sensor in this body with a fixed lens?
http://taunusreiter.de/Cameras/PenFT_00_m.jpg
Or the Pen S that was dedicated for photojournalists..they are just so damn beautiful.
Need Ibis in new Panasonic MFT with more fast prime pancake and a zoom 14-45 1.8…
A brand new and completely new Panasonic m4/3 model to me means only one thing and that is the long waited for rangefinder with EVF. The question is will it be more like the chunkier more pro Panasonic model depicted in their patent with a swiveling EVF or more like the very small LF1? I hope Pany produces both in time.
The LF1 with full sized 3″ 3:2 screen and 0.2″ EVF shows what can be done in a camera body only 2.44″ high and 3.1″ wide or smaller than any existing m4/3 without EVF! I hope they will use at least the small 1.3 mp EVF from the FZ200 and a mid size high rez EVF if a larger pro model?
Please release any information or rumors you might already have on this new Pany model.
+1
There is a 10% difference between those wanting a new Panasonic Camera and those wanting a new E-X… Judging by this poll, there is no demand for a new Panasonic camera 🙂 As people here seem to claim there isn’t enough interest in a new E-X…
Huh, maybe they are wrong.
With respect to m4/3rds cameras in the poll, it offers a choice among two specific and clear choices- the M6 and a FT E cameras – and a vague unspecified Panasonic camera on the other. Apart from any other factor, that represents neither an attractive choice nor a level playing field. All the same, the mystery camera still came second.
Maybe E-x users are more interested in spending time taking photos than reading forums & voting in polls. 😉
Then what are we doing here?
e-m6? if it had decent continuous autofocus maybe…… but I’d not buy a camera that I have to fit a grip to to make it useable.
the Panny? again decent continuous autofocus and a built in view finder…..
How about a OM-D with a built-in comfortable grip, a built-in flash that can be tilted (like on EPL1/2, FUJI XE1/ SONY NEX-7), a viewfinder that is to the side so there is not a huge bump at the top, larger buttons, and 24MP sensor? I’ll pay up to $1299 for such a camera.
What the hell, give me zooms like the FT 14-54, Olympus, don’t need a new camera!!!
Just get something out already. I lost one of my two E-3s and I don’t feel like replacing the shutter on a 6yo camera…
Waiting eagerly for the next E-x body. Hopefully very soon…
Current E-5 works nicely but could have better ISO performance. Once a year I check the other side of the fence and it is hard to find a compelling delta on price + performance on any camera manufacturer.
Currently own 14-35 f2.0,35-100 f2.0, 12-60mm, 50-200f2.8-xx, 70-300, 9-18, 8mm fisheye, 50 f2, 35 macro, Sigma’s medium size macro lens, Panasonic leica 25 maybe some others. The first two lenses (which I saved for for quite some time) are most of the time on my camera and I am very very satisfied with their performance.
To trade “up” I think I would need to trade to Canon EOS 5d Mark III or the Nikon’s monster fullframe. The trade is quite expensive (even trading to only Canon’s 35-70/70-200 f2.8’s would leave quite a lot of money to put in between). Lens renting is pretty much non existent in the corner of the world I live in so I would need to let some lenses go unreplaced.
Would I get SO much better quality that it would be worth it and really noticeable in the circumstances I shoot. Doubtful. For professionals – maybe.
So a new body for FT please with a bit better ISO performance.
Now jumping out to take some photographs 🙂
Cheers
I think you just confirmed my comment above. E-x users spend more time taking photos than on forums & polls. 😀 I think I should try that myself. 😉
Those SHG lenses actually cost more than the NIkon equivalents here in the uk and I think the EU.
http://camerapricebuster.com/Olympus/Olympus-SLR-Lenses
http://camerapricebuster.com/Nikon/Nikon-FX-Lenses
For the life of me I cannot see how the7-14 F4 costs £150 more than the FF Nikon 14-24 F2.8 ( a lens reported by many as the best UWA zoom ever made ) .
As to what you gain with the Nikon D800/e it is 4 stops higher colour depth, nearly four stops better DR and two and a half stops better high ISO compared to your E5 .Due to the size and weight of those SHG lenses and the E-5 itself you wouldn’t even have a heavier loa to carry.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/814|0/(brand)/Nikon/(appareil2)/682|0/(brand2)/Olympus
Yes cause dxomark and reality go hand in hand right? Ive yet to see the 14.5 stoos of dynamic range on the k5, you think mine is broken?
So where are the Nikon 300/2.0, 180-500/2.8 and 600/2.8?
It is telling that interest in the new Panasonic lags behind the new OMD. Is it because the OMD has inspired strong following? Or is it the unique features offered by Olympus, e.g. IBIS (only notable CSC offering), great lens (performance & aesthetics), signature colors & design? Panasonic once had a trump card which is Lecia branded lenses and now they have butched that. They need to get back to basics like creating tactile, crafted cameras like the L1 and not another consumer electronic product.
I believe that the unique features offered by Olympus, like IBIS, great prime lens and signature colors are making a difference. My first MFT camera was the Panasonic GH1 because it had swivel screen, integrated EVF and built-in flash. Coming from the Canon S3IS, this was important to me. Then I upgraded to the GH2 because it kept the same features plus got a better sensor than Olympus. Now I have more Olympus lenses than Panasonic because I love f1.8 primes, and I need IBIS for these lenses (specially for video). I’m hoping that the new OMD has swivel screen, integrated EVF and built-in flash plus the other features in the new PEN EP-5. But even if not all of these features are implemented in the new OMD, I’m right now inclined to buy the Olympus camera in order to get IBIS and a better sensor than the GH2. The GH3 was more focus on video and I hesitated to upgrade since I shoot a lot more stills than video.
I’m not interested in any new m4/3– way too small for my 2.0 2.8 Olympus lenses(eg35-100,14-35,300mm)Ive done everything imaginably with my E-5 but would be nice to be able to take pics in very low light w/o tripod and little more DP w/o using plug in enhancement. The E-5 is an amazing camera even with that old sensor–I can’t wait for the new and improved model…..
I’m glad Olympus is planning a large sensor compact. Preferably with 4/3 sensor. LF1 sensor is too small. Don’t care for EVF, although the XAs had OVFs. Fast fixed 35mm equiv. lens, built-in flash, full-flip screen, IBIS and the latest PEN features. That’s all I want. Hey Admin – any chance that the “high end compact” will be a “digital XA”?
Probably wont happen but:
I would love an Olympus Cinema OM-D with 2K-4K Raw and Pro Res recording (Interchangeable) version based on the new Aptina 4K S16 sensor. It could be a real competitor to the BlackMagic Pocket camera if you added dual CF slots that can take the new 4K Toshiba cards as well as a dedicated audio module containing, audio inputs, headphone jack, three-level High Pass Filter, Dual mono/split 0db and -10db, +20db for auto safety, and physical audio control dials, as well as direct control function buttons and a dual battery grip (keeping the current internal battery) and finally a custom mount containing 3/4 stage ND filters like the Red Motion Mount with a Hdmi 1.4 port. Although the Aptina sensor is rated at 14Mp I feel most video professionals would be purchasing it for the 2K and 4K Raw Video and extra DR, along with its’s compact size.
Sorry all FT dreamers, but that was and is a failure.
No Ex camera will ever take market shares from CaNikon.
M43 is the way forward: main benifits being weight and size. – making cameras useful for some pro’s and purposes. And a very good alternative for us enthusiasts. We are a more important and profitable group than pro’s.
The combination IQ/size with the Oly 75mm lens is amazing. (A Nikon d300 with the 85/1.8G is still sharper, but that is four times the volume and twice (?) larger sensor.
What PanOly ned to build on, at the m43 high end is sensor and lens, Oly being in the lead in lenses.
And: I NEED “RF” style camera with BUILT IN VIEWFINDER!!!!!!!!! 🙂
M43 and RF style camera with built in viewfinder? LOL you is a dreammers 😛
A lot of cameras are wasting money. The industry is drip feeding a lot of rubbish.
Somebody po poed me saying that a new Panasonic was coming a few months back, because the gh3 had only just arrived. Pity they didn’t realise that like the gh3 and gh2, Panasonic does a major release in September that hits some markets te next her. So it looks like for this camera.
Keep up the good work with info about upcoming Olympus cameras/lenses !!!