He tried his 12-60mm f/2.8-4 ED SWD Zuiko and the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 ED SWD Zuiko on the E-M1 and wrote this:
So – how were they on the E-M1? In a word – terrific. The camera's built-in phase detection system (on the sensor itself) focuses as fast as I remember on the E1 and E3 of yor. The AF points are central, but still, focus speed and accuracy is there, and owners of Four Thirds Zuiko lenses should rejoice.
Sounds like, at least so far, that he thinks it works well with 4/3 lenses. Those of you here who have been moaning and groaning about how Olympus abandoned the 4/3 mount can now start feeling better.
Barry, it seems like you think cameras should be priced based on weight, sort of like at a salad bar.
Mirrorless is slow…right? The OMD E-M5 is therefore slow too…right? Err no it’s actually faster than an A77, it’s only slower at starting up.
What they don’t test is accuracy and action follow focus/predictive AF, that kind of performance really needs to be tested as well as it’s one of the justifications for buying DSLR’s.
Of the cameras I selected here the 700D is the quickest, I didn’t notice the new Oly in the selection panel, mores the pity. http://www.lesnumeriques.com/appareil-p ... tesse.html
And here we come full circle: I compare the E-M1 to the D600 because it’s the cheapest entry into full frame (and I didn’t have access to a pro DX camera; in any case, none of the current lineup match it on spec either) – and whilst the D600 still holds a bit of an advantage in image quality, it’s not as much as you might think; less in practical application; far more of the difference will come down to shot discipline and how the images are processed. And that’s assuming pixels are going to be peeped: they’re close enough that even at 100% it takes a reasonably trained eye to spot the difference. Everybody will see the composition first, of course. Even if we’d had DX cameras in the mix, the results would be even closer still – if not an even match. Even as it stands, I haven’t observed that much difference in underlying sensor quality between the GR and OM-D; at stop, at most. Most of the difference is due to the optics. Yet despite its sensor, the D600 lags behind in every other specification; it’s not until you hit the full-fat D4 that you can match frame rates or environmental sealing. Bottom line: there is simply nothing quite like the E-M1 at the moment – a very compact professional system camera.
I am not all that interested in the E-M1 for myself, but it will be interesting to see if the E-M5 replacement when it comes along (maybe called E-M6?) will have fixed some of the E-M5 ergonomic poor choices, get the new EVF, etc..
No my argument is pricing is based on sensor size right? Well to a point
But it's not just micro 4/3, some of these premium compacts are overpriced too with what they offer at least in terms of sensors.
I've said for a long time that even compact makers are going to have to "up their game" and give bigger sensors even for moderately priced compacts in order to stimulate some growth and fend off the smartphone cameras. I think that's a sound strategy.
So basically if you start charging the OM-D E-M1 at full frame prices for me I'd rather spend that money on a full frame body. It's unrealistic to get over £1000 for a 4/3 sensor, that's my take. Same way as APS-C will only be "so expensive" because it becomes quite pointless.
I think micro 4/3 could work really well as a compact camera, sensor is big enough and a lot bigger than those tiny sensors.
RX100 II, personally again I would not pay £600 odd for a 1" sensor esp not with a camera with no viewfinder either (of any kind)
It's up to folks what they buy, but situation is only going to get harder for micro 4/3 as FF drop in price. It doesn't matter how nice the camera is, or how good the build I'll go for a bigger sensor every day of the week, and I'm sure I'm not alone in that thinking either.
bfitzgerald wrote:It's up to folks what they buy, but situation is only going to get harder for micro 4/3 as FF drop in price. It doesn't matter how nice the camera is, or how good the build I'll go for a bigger sensor every day of the week, and I'm sure I'm not alone in that thinking either.
I think that is the heart of the matter. You know what you like and I can agree that you are not alone in those preferences. You then almost always seem to take a huge leap from that to thinking that what you like is what almost everyone likes though. You value big. I get that. You will pay extra to get it. Some people are willing to pay extra to get smaller. I have no clue how many value one over the other. It sort of looks like most of the various camera options are being sold to at least a few people though.
Even though a Prius costs almost as much as an F-350 it seems that some people choose the Prius over the F-350 and it probably isn't because they just can't swing a few more dollars for the F-350 that you believe they really want.
I would love it if all the gear, big and small, was much cheaper, better quality, etc. But, for the smaller size and lower weight I was willing to spend more to get it rather than bigger, heaver, cheaper APS-C gear. Or somewhat more expensive FF gear.
Henry it's not really "value big" it's purely on sensor size. I've looked at micro 4/3 and despite not being a fan overall there are some interesting options, but I really do think the EM-1 is hugely overpriced for what you get.
I still think there is some potential for a "decent compact" or even bridge type model with a 4/3 sensor size. It's the lens change part that I think most ILC makers have over estimated. Bar a relatively smaller group who travel a lot and want to cut down the size/weight (I completely get their needs) I just don't see your average DSLR user moving to ILC systems just to get a "smaller body" and lenses. Handing is very unique and personal, and 9 out of 10 times I've found small cameras to be disappointing in handling.
I'm far from a "big camera" fan, I've used plenty of the hulking FF Canon bodies grips built in and with an L lens slapped on there and a flash it's a fairly weighty bulking option. Perfect size for me is film 7, even with a grip still not too big. Medium sized camera ideal for my needs. I can go a bit smaller, A57 is "ok" size wise, A200 and 5d around the same which is fine. But smaller than that and it gets into no thanks land.
I'm sure the EM-1 will do ok even with the bad EU pricing, but it's a drop in the ocean really v what goes on Canikon land. I actually expected Sony to be able to make a FF body not hugely different from the film 7 size, it seems they got carried away with the design and bulky oversized grips of late. There seems to be some misconception in the electronics field in that "smaller is always better", we have to hold and use cameras in our hands...you can only go so small before things start to get difficult. A quick grab of the Canon SL1 and I hated it big time. Too small not comfortable in any way horrible actually not a hope I'd want to use one for half and hour.
Ok guys, I have just had a play with a friends EM-1 for a morning, local park, so nothing dramatic to photograph.
First impressions, very high build quality which impressed me, heavy-ish for a M/4/3 body, I had the budget 12-60 on it.
EVF was excellent for definition but in my opinion not as good as the A65. The menu in EVF was very comprehensive but not as straight forward to read as Sony. I did not like the 'touch' screen, yes its a quick way to select functions but some are, typical Olympus, tucked away in sub files and you have to take it away from your eye to touch it.
Controls were very sensibly layed out but very cramped in some areas and not too good for people with large fingers. Quite honestly, there are so many functions and user set parameters that it would overwhelm my simple brain and I doubt I would use any of them any way for that reason, of course a Pro or enthusiast may welcome these extras adjustments.
The body grip is far better to hold than the OM-D but why o why could they not get rid of the pretend pentaprism roof and fit a pop up flash like Panasonic have.
The LCD only hinges at the bottom, its not a problem for me as I rarely use that facility but others might gripe its not side hinged.
Picture quality, well I'm going to stick my neck out and say its really no better than your average APS-C mid range DSLR fitted with a good lens which lets be honest, most are pretty good these days. Admitedly the 12-60 is not the sharpest knife in the drawer and there are better M/4/3 alternatives from Olympus, Panasonic and Leica that will undoubtedly improve things.
Olympus have been famous for their Jpeg output so I stuck with that option for the morning.
As I have said before, unlike 4/3, M/4/3 Jpegs look over processed although not quite as obvious as Panasonic.
They look a bit 'artificial' in appearance, but thats just me, others might see it differently.
Its grossly over priced, even though there is an inititialy free 4/3 adaptor thrown in but this deal is not for long.
Its Not for me, its just too small, too expensive and rather pretentious in its market direction.
I don't think the 4/3 boys are very happy either from reading the posts on the 4/3 forum.
I don't think Canikon or even Sony have any thing to worry about as this is a high end camera at high end prices and aimed in my opinion at a small audience, the audience might get wider if the price comes down?
For the M/4/3 enthusiasts, this is one heck of a camera. If only they could see the light and bring out a budget version it just might compete with other cameras.
Hi
He paid £1.299 for the body as he already had the 12-50 EZ lens.
Current UK shop prices are:
Body £1.299
With 12-50 EZ lens - £1.500
With 12-40 Pro Lens - £1.950
Unlike Canikon,Pentax and Sony, there are never cheap deals with Olympus or money back offers to my knowledge. I suspect like the OMD E.M5, prices will come down eventually but its never as dramatic as Canikon or Pentax.
Kaf kaf £1299 converts to $2081.52 USD at current rates, for a 4/3rd mirrorless body, it might be good (it would want to be) but sorry, no cigar for this kid, not for that much dinero.
Greg
classiccameras wrote:He paid £1.299 for the body as he already had the 12-50 EZ lens.
Current UK shop prices are:
Body £1.299
With 12-50 EZ lens - £1.500
With 12-40 Pro Lens - £1.950
The word I have seen is that the E-M1 will be officially released in the UK on 10/14 so that is really surprising that your friend was able to buy and receive one weeks earlier and you were able to use it. On the dpreview forum no one has gotten one yet from any country. Some people have pre-orders though. Please give more details on how your friend was able to buy one weeks before it is available. What store? Where? Do you know the exact date he received it? Thanks!
classiccameras wrote:
Unlike Canikon,Pentax and Sony, there are never cheap deals with Olympus or money back offers to my knowledge. I suspect like the OMD E.M5, prices will come down eventually but its never as dramatic as Canikon or Pentax.
Actually, that is wrong. Here in the U.S. there have been several promotions with lower prices, free accessories, etc.. I bought my E-M5 in May 2012 right after it started to become available for $999, but that included a $170 flash so the E-M5 cost worked out to $829. Since then there have been several more promotions of various types. When the E-M5 was new last year there was a UK promotion that included the grip. In the U.S. the grip is $300 so that was a good deal for UK customers. I don't know if the UK has had other promotions.
Your larger point that demand for Olympus products seems to be pretty good for their higher end stuff so they don't have to lower their prices as fast as other makers is likely true. Their lower end bodies often get discounted a fair amount though.
My friend works in a camera store and borrowed the camera for Sunday when they were closed. He said he had reserved it to buy, but I guess it won't be that one as it was their first shop demo camera, well that was his story and who am I to argue.
Prices don't seem to drop much here for the first few Months after launch, but yes, there are goodies thrown in such as the 4/3 adaptor for first time buyers and I believe a flash gun or battery grip, not sure. The adaptor deal won't last that long from what I read.
What happens in the US market is not always the same in the European market apparently, but I really don't care, I'm not bying one for the reasons I said.
Greg Beetham wrote:Kaf kaf £1299 converts to $2081.52 USD at current rates, for a 4/3rd mirrorless body, it might be good (it would want to be) but sorry, no cigar for this kid, not for that much dinero.
Greg, I think, it would be the rare American who would fly to the UK, convert dollars to pounds at the very unfavorable exchange rate, buy an E-M1, return with it to the U.S. and pay custom taxes since the price would be much higher than doing the easy thing and buying one in the U.S. for $1299 including either a flash or 4/3 lens adaptor resulting in an E-M1 body price of about $1119. Of course, there is the occasional loaded American who might stumble upon an E-M1 at a UK airport shop and buy it on the spur of the moment for almost double the U.S. price, but probably not too many.
Oly are probably the worst offender for UK pricing, even adding the VAT and making up some import charges/transportation it's hard to figure out. They're not alone in that has to be said, but Canikon are usually better for pricing esp street prices. And the EM-5 didn't drop for almost a whole year in price, not a penny. I'd expect the same with the EM-1
I gave up on Olympus in the 90's some fab lenses, the OM series was excellent but sadly even with some nostalgia in there, the OM-D's don't really grab me much.
Greg's just pointing out the price indifference USA to European levels, even with VAT you can't get near to that figure. True to say you don't with other makers too, but the difference in this case is just huge and unexplainable bar profit gouging. Canikon won't care much they'll sell a lot of D7100's and 70d's this fall.
Not sure what Sony are going to be selling though bar 2 year old+ models at a discount
bakubo wrote:
Greg, I think, it would be the rare American who would fly to the UK, convert dollars to pounds at the very unfavorable exchange rate, buy an E-M1, return with it to the U.S. and pay custom taxes since the price would be much higher than doing the easy thing and buying one in the U.S. for $1299 including either a flash or 4/3 lens adaptor resulting in an E-M1 body price of about $1119. Of course, there is the occasional loaded American who might stumble upon an E-M1 at a UK airport shop and buy it on the spur of the moment for almost double the U.S. price, but probably not too many.
Damn you make a strong argument for buying at home there Henry, $1299 vs $2081 is certainly a strong inducement.
I’m sure almost zero Americans would think that £1 Stirling is the same value as $1 US dollar.
$1299 USD equals £811.41 at today’s rates, that’s roughly what they should be paying in the UK if all else is equal.
They seriously get reamed over there in the UK it seems, I bet it’s mostly import duty and taxes that’s making up the difference, taxes on top of taxes.
Greg
ps I see Barry has since posted, he might have a better idea about why there is such a huge difference. Speaking about the A-mount rise and fall, there are quite a few threads over at dpr of late on the subject.
for a 4/3rd mirrorless body, it might be good (it would want to be) but sorry, no cigar for this kid, not for that much dinero.