The upcoming Olympus E-M1X - did Olympus get it right?

Gents, why not agree to disagree? Civility rules, I trust.

...Civility rules, I trust.

 

Hmm... it had better! or

else look out...!!!

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif

As a foot note.

 

Olympus lens, which I have used, are superb in my opinion.

 

But they need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Good manners maketh man.

 

And humour is a friend of the soul.

Yes, I know, I overreact sometimes. No worries, I'm done here.

BTW, besides all the other utter nonsense you've posted, check the IQ claim here:

 

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

 

Have a nice day... ;-)

This definitely shows that at ISO 1600, you can't really separate these cameras. The Olympus is arguably superior, as it has to deal with smaller photosites.

 

I have no idea why the bigger sensors are seen as somehow a better choice for sports, travel and journalism. Makes no sense to me. For other things, yes, by all means bring out the Fuji GFX. :-)

 

I do have a hypothesis that a bigger sensor can provide for smaller systems if carefully chosen, but maybe I'll talk about that another time.

It's been long time since we had such spirited discussion. Smaller doesn't always means better, best camera to hold in hands for me, was Canon 1D3, it was big, but so comfortable to operate. Sony A72 is nice, light and relatively small , but when I put 24-70/2.8 on, all that weight/size advantage flied right out of the window and I wishing for more grip. And for recent vacation, to delight of my wife I got that Sony latest marvel, 100RX6. Man trust me, when they say size matters, they got it right. That technological marvel is really hard to operate, buttons are too small , controls buried in menu and basically you have to hold it with two fingers, that's where steady shot really shines:)

It's been long time since we had such spirited discussion. Smaller doesn't always means better, best camera to hold in hands for me, was Canon 1D3, it was big, but so comfortable to operate. Sony A72 is nice, light and relatively small , but when I put 24-70/2.8 on, all that weight/size advantage flied right out of the window and I wishing for more grip. And for recent vacation, to delight of my wife I got that Sony latest marvel, 100RX6. Man trust me, when they say size matters, they got it right. That technological marvel is really hard to operate, buttons are too small , controls buried in menu and basically you have to hold it with two fingers, that's where steady shot really shines:)

 

Funny you should mention cameras being too small. In the m4/3 community there's a hard core group who want some tiny cameras, like the old Panny GM series. I held one, and even with my average-size hands they were unusable. You can only shrink them so far before button cramp ruins the usability. Besides, as you pointed out, lenses play a big part in the size and weight of the kit.

check the IQ claim here:

On the gray background I clearly see slightly less noise and richer greens on Pentax (2013 year camera).

Consider!

We compare pro modern Oly with an amateur 2013 Pentax.

But what if we change it and compare 2013 amateur Oly (E-M5 original) with K-1 and Kp ?

Allen is right.

But if you are happy with it use it.

When the cameras get too big they will lose me. Main reason I came to m4/3rds was for the portability of them.

Big sensor, little sensor. Little blokes can only carry little cameras, big blokes can carry big cameras;) It is good that manufactures cater for little blokes who need little cameras. The little folk now feel happy.and will live happy ever after.

 

How nice is that to think of the little folk.

;))

When the cameras get too big they will lose me. Main reason I came to m4/3rds was for the portability of them.

 

Same for me. I was hauling a Nikon D8190 kit and got the Oly kit for portability. I've since sold the Nikon kit and haven't missed it. Can't beat the feature set of the E-M1.2, either. Anyway, use what works for you. I'm guessing we can all agree on that? Then again this is, after all, the internet... ;-)

Having a big camera and lenses is clearly a macho thing with some. Good luck with that. I agree with the sentiment that sizes should be kept small, but it also seems sensible to provide the lenses and accessories that will provide photographers with the tools to get what they want accomplished, and not to make something because it is "too big" seems counterproductive. A 600mm FF lens is "too big", but they are still available. One can be reasonably certain that, like-for-like, m43 lenses will always be smaller than FF lenses, and this is always surely a good thing: unless you are a masochist (or a really tough guy, like Allen).

Having a big camera and lenses is clearly a macho thing with some. Good luck with that. I agree with the sentiment that sizes should be kept small, but it also seems sensible to provide the lenses and accessories that will provide photographers with the tools to get what they want accomplished, and not to make something because it is "too big" seems counterproductive. A 600mm FF lens is "too big", but they are still available. One can be reasonably certain that, like-for-like, m43 lenses will always be smaller than FF lenses, and this is always surely a good thing: unless you are a masochist (or a really tough guy, like Allen).

 

Then again, some of us are quite secure in our masculinity and know that size doesn't matter.

 

Good God, did I just type that? :-D

"unless you are a masochist (or a really tough guy, like Allen)". Robin Red Breast.

 

Lol.

 

Robin, you forget to mention my manly physique, and rippling muscles. Of course,those Canon/Nikon folk are mostly impaired compared to me with my magnificent physique. They are akin to the"Hunch Back of Notre Dame"struggling to carry the Bells for his love.

 

Carrying any camera all day can be a bit of a struggle for some folks. I suggest a little motorized wheelbarrow for Robin and Dmantree to make them happy.

 

Lots of good deals for them on eBay;)

Anyway, my camera is better than yours.

 

So there.

"unless you are a masochist (or a really tough guy, like Allen)". Robin Red Breast.

 

Lol.

 

Robin, you forget to mention my manly physique, and rippling muscles. Of course,those Canon/Nikon folk are mostly impaired compared to me with my magnificent physique. They are akin to the"Hunch Back of Notre Dame"struggling to carry the Bells for his love.

 

Carrying any camera all day can be a bit of a struggle for some folks. I suggest a little motorized wheelbarrow for Robin and Dmantree to make them happy.

 

Lots of good deals for them on eBay;)

 

No need. I used to hump around a Hassy 500 C/M kit, them some large 35mm kits. Now, they're pointless. Honestly, I have *no* need to "compensate" like other shooters.

 

:-P

I have two brands of mirrorless, I carry them when I have no real photographic mission in mind. They do a fine job. When I have a serious project, I carry multiple Nikons and lenses - Digital or Film. I split the difference on one photo trip half Nikon FX half mirrorless. If I hadn't brought an Infrared module, I'd never have touched the mirrorless. For me, the right tools for the job at hand. I can still carry all the gear I care to all day long. Different strokes.

I think what Sandy said makes sense, although you can do everything with one camera if you prefer. The Sony A9 is great for sports - but... the A7III is arguably better for landscapes, as it has more DR. But the OM-D E-M1 would be better for wildlife (arguably). For macro, perhaps the A7rIII. For press photography, maybe an integrated camera would be better. Or, as I said, you can pick any one system and do anything with it if it feels right.

 

I know of one business that does corporate videos and they use iPhones exclusively. Would I do that? No, but it sure works.

I remember the time when they broke into digital world, DSLR.

E-1 with all those sure sharp top-pro lenses (their name for them).

E-1 had very beautiful color of its images. Coming to E-420 the color got worse but still good not it is even worse...

In the world of 6 Mp sensors 4/3 was just right.

 

Big sensors do not mean heavy weight any more (Fuji)

iPhones exclusively

Inside a dark(ish) restaurant or in twilight Iphone is pitiable. :(

I don't understand why people ever use them. :oops: If there are plenty good excellent camcorders around.

Photography:

Df + Sigma Art 50/1.4 or D5 + Sigma Art 50/1.4 rule! Sonys are no slouch also.

And of course Pentax K-1 + new ultra sharp weather sealed Pentax 50/1.4* SDM.

Edited January 9, 2019 by ruslan

Sigma Art 50/1.4 at 800+g and the Pentax at 900g for one 50mm lens. This is why the current trends for much of "boutique" full frame lens development strikes me as absurd. When you recommend such a combination, I can probably guess you don't actually own either one. The Canon 24-70 f2.8 zoom is not as heavy as the Pentax and is about the same as the Sigma and that, at least, represents 3 to 4 prime lenses. The Canon 50mm f1.2 R may be a great optical performer but it weighs 950 g. God knows who is buying these prestige lenses, but good luck to them.

There are also reports of a major firmware update coming for the E-M1 Mark II, which would not be unlike what Olympus did with the original E-M1 shortly before they unveiled the Mark II.

 

There are so many rumor floating around/being discussed on the Micro Four-Thirds forum at DPReview it's time to just wait for the camera and see what it is we actually get.

 

As far as new products, I will be interested in January hearing about the rumored new lenses that will be announced about the same time as the E-M1X.

 

 

 

Hate to seem negative...but.

 

Big camera with a small sensor .Big money.

 

Wake up Olympus the clock is ticking....soon it will be good "Goodnight Vienna".

 

 

 

We’ll see when it gets out here. I have several Olympus bodies e1 - e-m1 several lenses etc. Shot Hasselblad for years with great success in numerous areas including many weddings. Professional printer says my Olympus files are excellent. I carry a good amount of equipment in a mid sized bag that is not exorbinately heavy. Have gotten used to the convienence of the system. Using several original 4/3 lenses w/ the e-m1 and it works out well. Looking forward to the new camera debut. Plan to use more of the in camera capabilities as time goes on. Had om-1 system in college. Remember when AP went to Olympus in the 70’s I think lens capability was big in the decision besides being quite compact even then. I am still occasionally very impressed with sharpness in some situations probably aided by the in body IS system from the E-3 on. New camera should be exciting the result of much effort I’m sure.

Inside a dark(ish) restaurant or in twilight Iphone is pitiable. :(

I don't understand why people ever use them. :oops:

 

May be 'pitiable' to you, but it does the job.

And most important, you HAVE the iPhone with you, whereas you likely do not have your dSLR with you at a restaurant.

The camera you have with you to use, is infinitely better than the better camera at home in the closet that you can't use. Image or no image.