You want let the glory to Fuji alone? Olympus is also going to make a super quality old-styled body but unlike Fuji they will take the inspiration form their own OM camera history (). I will give you all the specs and than you can start to discuss if that camera is really going to be the first “serious” or “pro” Micro Four Thirds camera.
Olympus OM-D specs:
16 Megapixel m43 sensor optimized for High Dynamic Range
ISO 200-25.800
Built-in 1.44 Million dot electronic viewfinder (placed in the middle of the body)
Five-axis image stabilizer in body.
packed with an GN10 flash.
FAST AF and 3D tracking
610.000 dots 3 inch OLED swivel screen
Weather sealed magnesium body in classic
two kinds of leather style. black ones is more artificial, and silver ones is more natural.
Two dial button left and right beside central penta part,and another dial button side at release button.there have other one small button in left of release button.
Grip curve looks like Olympus E-P3,but this one continues to the bottom of camera,paste with leather.Leather has also paste at both side of lens mount.
Width 121mm, weighs 425g
Price: $1100
Worldwide shipment in late March
At a first glance it looks like the Olympus OM advantage over the X PRO 1 lies in: Built-in IS, weather sealed body, cheaper price, swivel screen, probably faster AF.
Fuji X PRO 1 advantages: Image quality, hybrid viewfinder.
Hot times!
—–
Fuji X PRO 1 preorders: Expansys USA (Click here), Expansys Canada (Click here), Henrys Canda (Click here) and Expansys UK (Click here). You can get notification at Amazon US (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
85 Responses
I don’t get it: why would one style a mirrorless camera to mimick an SLR, rather than showing off with pride that the ugly hump is no longer needed?
I am currently selling my GH1 (of course not or not only because of the look) but will switch to a NEX-7 because it (beside its inner quality) shows how a mirrorless camera could look like.
agree.
+1
I see one reason for the placement: Dominantly left-eyed people.
The specs don’t say it will have a hump, however I can’t see how there would be enough space for a screen without a hump.
I hope for you Sony will produce some nice lenses to go with that NEX7.
+1
I’ll also pray for you regarding the lenses. Maybe Sony will listen to mine and your prayers 😉
The left-eye excuse doesn’t make any sense. So instead having your nose hit the screen, it is now touching the controls on the right of the camera. Sound like a worse scenario to me.
“…shows how a mirrorless camera could look like”…”
you mean ugly?
I honestly don’t care how my camera looks. I only care about how my pictures look.
I agree. How about form follows function?
NEX reminds me to think of a tool that I used when I was in a physics lab. It doesn’t provide any feeeling like a camera at all for both its look and its control. I suspect that its designer may be a technical geek rather than a photographer.
The OM-D is just an ep 3 that looks like an slr and has an EVF. Olympus Management must be Drunk or they’ve completely run out of ideas.Look for 3 other cameras with missing features until you end up with an OM-D lite, which would of course run parallel to the epm 1. So basically all the cameras are essentially the….SAME.
You are right- there is no need for mirror box in a mirror-less camera. The mirror box is not the center of OM-design. Rather, (simplicity), compactness, good build quality, good handling and low weight were the major advantages of OM-system.
If I could have a good quality FF sensor in my OM10, I’d do it and never wish for any alternative camera… Buy OM10 for peanuts on eBay and see what I mean.
Bad sensor…
And you have already tested the new sensor? Piss off troll!
A micro four turds sensor with 16MP… that more or less smells like a blurry disaster.
Seriously, how can you tell that image quality will be lower than Fuji? The Fuji has not been released yet, no proper test has been done and you have no idea about the futur OM-D sensor either. You could be more cautious in your assertions sometimes.
Thanks for the info though. I was about to buy a Sony NEX-5n, but I’ll wait for the OM-D announcement.
yeah the admin is sometimes just like a kid who sees a new toy.
There is no doubt the Fuji will trump the Oly in image quality. APS-C will always win over 4/3 sensors.
True. APS-C will also always mean a larger camera and lenses, compared to m4/3.
Lens diameter yes, but Fuji’s XF mount has a shorter flange distance than m43, so in theory it could actually produce a shallower camera than m43.
All things being equal in the sensor pipeline, the APS-C will be better than the Four Thirds sensor. However, when things aren’t equal, they aren’t equal. Samsung’s APS-C sensor in their NX cameras is no great shakes when compared to even the 12mp sensor that Olympus has been using for over three years.
doesn´t fit into a pocket…
i can carry a fulframe DSLR around my neck…so why buy this smaller sensor camera?
one adavatage of mFT is gone with this camera.
i think oly should focus on making smaller mFT cameras and lenses not bigger ones.
> i can carry a fulframe DSLR around my neck
And how about with enough optics to cover range from 14mm to 300mm?
(for ten days up to 5½ km)
two lenses.. i think i can carry that.
one ultrawide one travel superzoom.
Yeah, expensive fullframe body and cheap superzoom. That makes perfectly sense 🙂
LOL!!!!
Barely any superzoom lenses for FF sensor and only actually even remotely good (above generic Sigma/Tamron consumer level) superzoom for bigger than 4/3 sensor is EF 28-300…
Weighting “only” 1.7 kg which is enough for whole package with 4/3 sensor as Leica D 14-150mm which also optically beats the crap out of that Canon superzoom weights one third of that.
EF 16-35mm is the closest wide angle (no fisheyes) and weights 0.6 kg (Pana 7-14mm 0.3kg) and 5D II is 0.8 kg while high end mirrorless m4/3 body should fit into 0.5kg when designing plainly for ergonomy and functionality instead of marketing gimmicks. (0.4kg GH2 spoiled by too little and too much in wrong places: too small grip and too big rear LCD)
So that’s ~3.2 kg vs. ~1.3kg meaning with m4/3 you could easily throw in say 100-300mm (0.5 kg) for occasional long range landscape detail and still be carrying notably less weight.
Nikon doesn’t even have good FF ultrazoom because that AF-S 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR is just way too undersized design for good optical performance. (Photozone has proper tests of most lenses)
And while bigger sensor gives better sensitivity shallow DOF means in landscapes often lot more stopping down of that big heavy optics.
Every camera system is compromise of lot of various factors. Only brain dead zombie or religious fanatic (well, where’s the difference?) would think some single system as perfect.
because ff body weighs a kilo and the other..400grams. You want an interchangeable lens system that…fits in your pocket? Should all the lenses fit in there too?
If it uses the same m4/3 sensor as other modern m4/3 cameras, it’s very clear that the quality will be much worse than anything with an APS-C sensor.
And new cameras are ugly, the old ones are beautiful. Bad argument, Karsten. It’s all a matter of taste.
Agree with you N.R.
There is no magic Olympus sensor that will pull rabbits out of hats. G3 or GH2 is as good as it gets. Maybe they tweak it a little, but this is playing a game of inches when your competitors are leaping ahead with yards. Fuji has runs on the board with the X100 sensor, panoly can’t even match that and it’s been out for a year already – the XPro1 has innovation written all over it’s sensor. Even the prototype cameras have given us a taste of that.
The new OM camera _might_ be a nice upgrade for those with GF1’s that haven’t already jumped to the GX1. Probably the same sensor anyway.
Olympus is milking their brand and the sheep are queuing up. Baaaa!
the good thing is the “tiny sensor” shooter can always buy new lenses.
this year they buy mFT… next year they sell all the gear for 40% on ebay and buy NEX. in 2014 they buy into a new fuji mount.
makes the companys happy…. im sure.
i stick with my 35mm camera and lenses…. i know when i buy a 70-200mm f2.8 this years for 2000 euro i can still use it in 4 years on the latest and greatest sensor technology.
who knows if olympus is still there in 2012?
with all the troubles and 310 million minus in 2011.. who knows.
canon and nikon are making a profit… olympus not!
and im not sure if fujis camera business is looking so good either.
of course i meant to say : who knows if olympus is still there in 2014
Wait a couple of years and every company will go completely mirrorless and then see if you can use the same 70-200 f2.8. Change is inevitable in technology. No matter which brand or system you use. Especially now when we are at the cross roads of technology. Lets see what Canon and Pentax do with mirrorless by the year end. Then you will know which way to go.
Agree with NR. Modern cameras look dull and boring. I used to hate the look of SLRs like the Olympus OM or Nikon F, but in comparison with modern crap (X100 and X10 aside) they looked super stylish.
“Grip curve looks like Olympus E-P3,but this one continues to the bottom of camera,paste with leather.Leather has also paste at both side of lens mount.”
It amazes me that it’s taken this long for a camera manufacturer to start including paste as part of the basic spec. First thing I do with a new camera is apply my own paste. Only time will tell what flavour olympus’s paste is and how well it adheres.
Hopefully pana will show us in the future a rangefinder styled m43 cam…a GF1 with a NEX-7 styled viewfinder.
SLR styled body makes me happy only with FF sensor.
Bahhh i have my 5dMII and i really love ergonomics , do you know how awfull is try to use a x100 , not mention their so damn slow Af , is really huge that camara , in ottherwise my EP3 with 12 mm is GOD , so damn easy to use , so ergonomic, awesome fast af, and i really love it in my hand, not to mention U NEVER CAN COMPARE OPTICS FUJI TO OLYMPUS , zuiko is a legent DAMN GOOD optics , that i why the ep3 beats in color all the mirrorless ( and if u think sony nex 7 has better color WRONG !!! ) the color in the sony is cold , i tried one and not liked !!!!
“U NEVER CAN COMPARE OPTICS FUJI TO OLYMPUS , zuiko is a legent DAMN GOOD optics”
Yeah, and Olympus can hide behind Fuji as Fuji is the manufacturer of the Hasselblad lenses. So much about legends. (Ok, OM had fine lenses, but Fuji beats it anytime.)
Another point: Who has seen (or can imagine) an Olympus OM or Nikon FM2 with built in flash? Ugliness factor! Such a shame!
So how many high quality zooms your beloved Hasselblad has?
You can’t compare some entirely different limited optics system made for specific purpose.
And definitely agree with Ernest that this obsession of some to push back to 50 year old design of analog mechanical era from ergonomy and controls of modern DSLR is like some al-Qaeda of photography.
Definetly more then I need. (I dont use zooms) 🙂
If you need a zoom, get a bridge camera.
nice one 😉 and also Fuji produces lenses for film industry (BBC uses them too), saying that Fuji doesn’t know much about lenses or their glass is inferior just makes me want to scream – go do your homework kids 😀
well you would be surprised how much faster you are with direct access to aperture/shutter speed/exposure compensation – having aperture ring on the lens is huge plus and feels completely natural. That’s why I bought X100 – but I use my camera mostly in full manual, sometimes in Aperture priority mode.
And that’s the problem of 50 year old analog mechanical era control design: It was designed for fast access to ONLY those things.
Two control dials of modern high end DSLR provide fully same, direct availability of aperture and exposure compensation in A mode, shutter speed and exposure compensation in S/T mode (which ever mark is used for that) and both aperture and shutter speed in M mode. (you don’t need exposure compensation in that)
In addition they can provide fast access to most settings which might be needed during shooting by having button for activating change of particular setting like ISO, WB, metering mode, drive mode, IS mode (with IBIS) etc. With two flexible function dials you can even do whole drive mode selection without single menu: After activating drive mode selection one dial changes primary mode (single, continuous, bracketing, self-timer…) and second possible sub modes like different frame rates in continuous shooting or between 2s and 10s self-timer.
So did Fuji forget something or why X100 has drive mode settings including self-timer settings spread into unnecessary complex menu hell?
You film era fossils are so obsessed with looking into past I wouldn’t wonder if you drive your car rear first. If you even have car instead of horse wagon of the “good old times”…
@ Eda Tuunanen – matter of preference. I’ve had DSLR and I prefer direct access, seems more natural to me to control aperture on the lens, can’t explain why, and I’m not that old!!! 🙂
That’s why I’d buy X-Pro1 and my friend would buy NEX-7 – purely based on what controls suit us, see? 2 different people, two different preferences.
Drive on X100 is via direct button access and use wheel to choose what you like and self-timer is the first item in the menu when you hit menu button (I don’t use it at all, I have cable release).
Don’t think of it as a “built-in flash.” Think of it as a “built-in wireless TTL commander.”
Wireless TTL flash is Olympus’ biggest feature advantage over Panasonic. I HOPE it will be included in the OM-D!
Not sure if trolling or just really stupid.
Sadly, definitely not the digital version* of my OM2/4 bodies… 🙂
EVF / four thirds / built in flash – no thanks
*Only expected for real once an FF sensor and electronics can be fitted into the film + cassette + take-up spool space
It’s still going to take a few years before that can be done within a 1000 euros price range. And they’re probably afraid to have to compete with Canikon FF bodies if they would aim for more than that.
Sadly, we have reached an age where function follows form.
In many ways it is indicative that some of the camera makers today have lost their way. Fuji might have had some success with their retro design, but it wasn’t the design that brought them the sales: it was image quality.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but if I would buy the fuji X100 over practically any other camera it would not be for minsculous improvement in image quality that I would hardly notice in the prints I do. No it would be for one thing and one thing only; the viewfinder!
I actually prefer old school bodies like the OM to modern small cameras like the GH2. The problem I have with smaller cameras like the GH2, Nikon D5000, etc is that they seem to be designed simply to mimic full size DSLR’s instead of giving serious thought as to whether or not that is the best shape for a smaller camera. IMO on small scale cameras such as m4/3’s bodies “soap box” shape cameras are far more comfortable to use…and look better too boot.
Why “…Olympus is also going to make a super quality old-styled body but unlike Fuji they will take the inspiration form their own OM camera history.”?
The Fuji X-Pro 1 is based on Fuji TX-1 and TX 2, outside Japan better known as Hasselblad X-Pan, and Fuji’s 6×9 rangefinder, the so called “Texas Leica”.
dont take drugs!!
+1
beautiful example of Fuji’s MF camera: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-fuji-gf670-medium-format-film-camera/p1521329
Meh, more like a digital Contax G2 to me.
As long as it’s 4/3, I think I’ll stick to my full frame interchangeable-sensor FM2N
Ha, those fancy automated 35mm cameras are for lazy amateur wimps. If you were a REAL photographer, you’d mix up your own emulsion out of dangerous toxic chemicals and coat it onto glass plates in a portable dark tent and then expose it in a 16 x 20-inch camera, like William Henry Jackson. Now THAT was quality photography!
and what are you?
some gay faggot who thinks he knows something.. exactly!
is this really necessary?
It bemuses me how so many of you are NOW wildly enthusiastic about “rangefinder style cameras.” Where were you all when actual rangefinder camera were widely available?
Rushing off to buy SLRs, that’s where!
I learned photography on RF cameras, and it’s still my preferred type of camera. But “back in the day,” people constantly whined about the difficulty for left-eyed viewers and the small size of the viewfinder image (even though most of those were still ‘way larger than the tiny 0.37x viewfinder of the Fuji X-1 Pro that you all are salivating over.) People deserted RF cameras in droves to buy SLRs with large, centrally-located viewfinders.
Now it seems that what everybody wants is what I have dubbed the SOLE (Stuck on Left End) viewfinder! Where were you all when we needed you?
we were out taking photos instead of rehearsing an “I told you so” that was 40 years in the making.
You seem to have some serious issues with people’s desire for rangefinder style bodies. It’s not the rangefinder people want, just the shape. As a former Voigtlander Bessa owner I know full well I love the shape of rangefinders, but I found the rangefinder itself far too limiting. I personally don’t like using external view finders to shoot wider than 28mm’s, and I occasionally want to do a macro shot or a telephoto shot. Limitations were the downfall of rangefinders, not their physical design.
I have no idea why you post something negative on almost every single rangefinder-related blog post, but I hope you seek mental help.
Original Olympus OM-2 width is 136mm VS. OM-D width 121mm.
I suppose the mirror box is also gone in OM-D?
Olympus will only “take the inspiration form their own OM camera history”.
Unless Olympus is going to a larger sensor I just don’t see it mattering much outside of a few markets. I love the 4/3 aspect ratio, but until sensor technology moves forward a good bit I don’t see me buying a m4/3 product anytime soon.
Paul
I agree. Image is everything.
oly just cant compete with the bigger sensors
I don’t agree. Ergonomics and simply having fun taking them is already half of it. I’ve used a few camera that either frustrate or bore me to death, which doesn’t exactly inspire one to take good images. A digital OM sounds like it could do the trick, if it goes by the same mentality as the original.
Before getting images there’s the process that leads to them. Saying “image is everything” is like saying a pianist will play a black Steinway the same manner as a pink Steinway. It doesn’t work this way. Everything inspires everything because we’re artists, not machines.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse620/
New sensor in only major change.
Why not produce E-650? For set price to $1100?
Centered viewfinder = DOA to me.
I loath center viewfinders, nothing is more terribly inconvenient on a camera than a centered viewfinder; it forces one to turn their head at an extreme angle or break their nose, to such a degree that they’re then basically peeking out of the extreme corners of the eye; it’s tiresome.
The single greatest improvement that can be made to cameras today is moving the eyepiece to the corners.
Not to mention nose smudges on the LCD!
I would not be able to fit mine there 🙂
Funny thing. Olympus is Japanese, if you know what i mean …
Sounds like the viewfinder will be much faster than the slow x100 and nex 7 refresh. Fuji will be the better camera. But much bigger and more expensive. Hope the om stays thin. Nex 7 only has one good lens, it and fuji end up $2000. And end up thick. Om could have its place.
So this is where all the Pixel Peeper geeks hang out! And the point of photography is how your cats whiskers look in a 100% crop…
The only sense is an olympus om-digital with a full frame sensor
If it is possible to make a camera as the leica m9. It must be possible to make cameras like the olympus om or a rollei 35 or any other analog 35mm in a digital version with the same sensor size.
Infact olympus should be use apc-c sensors in the pen-serie instead of the 1/4 sensor the pen cameras and also any other 3/4 is infact an digital version of a 110 pocket camera like the pentax 110 or minolta 110 cameras.
All this talk about Olympus fitting anything other than a 4/3 sensor with a m43 mount is silly.
They are just too deep into the mud with the 4/3 sensor and the m4/3 mount. They abandoned the 4/3 mount for the m4/3 mount and are just trying to do their best now to convince 4/3 users to migrate. If Olympus releases a full frame sensor today in their OM-D, they immediately desert a whole generation of photographers sold by their marketing on the 4/3 sensors. The outcry would be immense. You would need to buy a whole new set of lenses.
Just ain’t going to happen. I find it amusing they are releasing a 16mp sensor – wasn’t it one of the Oly heads who famously said we don’t need more than 12mp just a few years ago?
It’s easy to predict what this OM-D would be: it’s an EP3 with a built in EVF, with retro styling and an unnecessary faux hump prism. Weather sealed using their extensive know-how with their tough E series SLR.
In other words, something like a Panasonic G3 but with OM styling and weather sealed. This is the most cost effective way to launch a new camera without much innovation. And people will buy it cos of the strong OM association.
To me, Fuji is the real innovator with that hybrid viewfinder and to a lesser extent, Sony with that super high res EVF….