–
Today Olympus itself leaked the E-M1 price info on Facebook page. And full images of the cameras are already circulating for days now. So here are the prices of the new Olympus stuff that will be announced on Tuesday September 10.
Price in USA
OM-D E-M1 Micro Four Thirds Digital Camera Body $1,399.00
OM-D E-M1 Micro Four Thirds Digital Camera with 12-40mm Lens $2,199.00
12-40mm M. Zuiko Digital ED f/2.8 PRO Lens $999.00
HLD-7 Battery Grip for OM-D E-M1 Micro Four Thirds Digital Camera $199.00
LH-66 LENS HOOD $44.99
LC-62D BLACK METAL CAP $12.99
EP13 BLACK EYECUP $19.98
Price in Japan
OM-D E-M1 Body 144,800Yen
OM-D E-M1 12-50mm 169,800Yen
OM-D E-M1 12-40mm F2.8 219,800Yen
HLD-7 19,740Yen
GS-5 2,980Yen
EP-12 525Yen
EP-13 1,848Yen
PFUD-EP11 2,520Yen
PT-EP11 99,960Yen
CBG-10 24,800Yen
CSS-P118 3,480Yen
CS-43 2,480Yen
CS-42SF 6,980Yen
LH-55C 3,990Yen
M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO 89,880Yen
LH-66 4,620Yen
LC-62D 1,050Yen
PRF-D62PRO 3,780Yen
PPZR-EP04 7,140Yen
23 Responses
This could well be my first mirrorless camera to use along my medium format film madness 🙂 It will be hard to wait for the reviews.
At these prices, the Sony FF launch price might actually appear reasonable, considering the sensor disparity. However, my experience with Zuiko 43 lenses suggets this zoom will be superior to anything Sony is likely to come up with.
I dont get this:
LH-66 LENS HOOD $44.99
LC-62D BLACK METAL CAP $12.99
EP13 BLACK EYECUP $19.98
Ok lens hood was expected, but what now we must buy lens cap and camera eye piece separately?
I believe all those price is only displaying how much the price for every item just incase you lost them and want to buy another one ,. but all the eyecup, lens hood it comes in a package
e-m1 looks really good, but.. At that price you can almost get Nikon FF body. Absolutely too pricey.
Sure you can get a D600 with a cheap plastic body, no weather sealing, a slow frame rate, a small buffer, a flipping mirror to blur your photos/break/make noise, a dim viewfinder for low light shooting, back/front focus issues unless one shoots at small f/stops… Sure the Nikon has live view for those who want to use it at an arms length point and shoot with all the usability issues that causes. And Nikon’s live view (at least on my D300S) is so badly implemented that it is almost useless.
Then factor in the cost/quality of lenses. The equivalent to the Oly 12-60 f/2.8-4 is the Nikon 24-120 f/4 which is 30% more expensive and with lower optical/mechanical quality. At the longer end, the differences are even more dramatic. The Nikon 200-400 f/4 is over 5 times the price of the Oly 50-200 f/2.8-3.5, and over 3 times the weight with a smaller aperture; at least this time the Nikon is of comparable optical and mechanical quality. And Nikon has nothing at all like the Oly 90-250 f/2.8.
And I won’t go into Nikon’s abominable quality control.
I’m waiting for the specs but this $1400 Oly seems to be superior in every way to my $1700 D300S (except the lack of dual memory card slots) and superior to the D600 in all but high ISO IQ. I expect to be putting my Nikon and 5 lenses on the block very shortly.
Disappointments? Sure. The lack of a macro around 100mm (yes the Zeiss can be adapted but it is rather clumsy and lacks a tripod socket, inexcusable at that weight) and the lack of a truly long zoom such as the Sigma 50/500 though the 2X extender on the 50-200 somewhat compensates.
Bill – it sounds like you have convinced yourself, and you should enjoy it.
(I enjoyed my E-PL5, until it was stolen while on loan – but it was only at its best with the 14-54 II, which kind of defeated its size advantage.)
But, you forgot to include the fact that the d600 has nearly 4 times the sensor real estate, which, for folks who print, adds up to much more than just “high ISO IQ”. Different strokes…
I would not expect a discernible difference between print from D600 and E-M1 up to at least A3.
You are right, Matus – I just printed and hung a dozen d600 B&Ws at ~34-38 x ~53-58 cm – and a single µFT, at closer to A3, which compared quite favourably. As I have access to an Epson 7900, I am planning to try some at full 60 x90 cm. Now I am curious to see how the Oly file holds up at larger dimensions.
@Matus–No difference unless you shoot in different and uncontrollable lighting situations like weddings, public relations, corporate parties and events, sports, wildlife, birds, etc., etc., etc.
If you shoot on a tripod and good light, you don’t even need m43 as a point and shoot at base ISO also provides equivalent results (even match FF and MFD), in which case just save yourself $1000 or more and travel really light. If you don’t believe me just check:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
Bill great comparison… so great to see smart people writing useful comments here. BRAVO!
“At that price you can almost get Nikon FF body.”
And use it with heavy bulky Nikkor FF lenses? No, thanks – there are cheaper and lighter ways to scare people off.
Oly charges what it can charge. I would have been mildly interested at $1000 price point and very interested at $700 price point.
Overpriced it is, but then many cameras are overpriced this days. D800 being my favorite example. Yes, it is sort’a cool and exclusive, but still it is a cam and it makes pictures. Unless one really really needs the 36MP, then it is very very overpriced. Ditto 5D3. There are better alternatives, giving you an overall better and *lighter* package.
the camera and lens itself seems quite big for a small sensor. (one of the advantages of smaller sensor is the ability to reduce camera and lens size, no?)
the price is pretty steep as well, there are other cameras i’d like to try in that price range. perhaps it’s for those who already have a plethora of cameras at their disposal.
I don’t get all this enthusiasm for this camera. Probably I’m limited.
I hear nothing about the 4/3rd lens adaptor – Dose it come with the camera
@Kevin, I guarantee you that if you get to see the camera and hold it, you’ll find it smaller than it appears. As for the lens, imagine that 24-80 constant 2.8 to fit a 35mm sensor.
+1.
The f/2.8 lens looks smaller than I expected. And it is interesting to see it bundled with the camera.
I have changed 2 month ago to fuji xe1 fron omd and i am more than happy. The lens are far better than the oly pana lens and i was really unhappy with the oly philosopy to sold first all primes before to produce a lumnous zoom (around 7 years?). And in order to keep every body on the wave, build zooms for small sensores is fairy easy and cheaper than produce lens for apsc or ff sensors. (If you do not beli e ask oana and his 24-600 2.8 for 400 euros mounted in the latest semireflex)
Expensive it is. The only hope to me that the sensor tech trickles down to the E-PL/E-PM PEN bodies. For as long as Oly would keep the tech exclusive to the E-M1, I’m not interested. At least in the past, Oly allowed the new tech in entry-/mid-level bodies. I hope the pattern holds. If E-PM(3) or E-PL(7) would feature the new CDAF/PDAF tech, I might very well pick it up for my (remaining) 43 lenses.
Give it 6 months to a year and the new Pens will use the same sensor.
Tiny sensor camera for $1,399 .. May I laugh. FF sensor pro cameras are priced almost the same? .. and with FF sensor you get decent image quality at the same price.
1/4 sensor and no mirror (cheaper to build) should equal 1/4 price.
This camera should cost $500 seeing that Sony is charging $400 for the A3000–WITH kit lens AND APS-C sensor (2x the size of m43, with resulting improvements in high ISO and DR). If I really wanted this camera, I’d wait for the eventual Olympus fire sales in 12-18 months.
APS-C sensor is only 71% larger than 43, not 2x.
Truth is, that they don’t sell you just hardware, they sell you right to use it. You cannot install software of your wish to the camera. And Sony’s software is inferior (AF and jpeg, but not only them).