[shuttertalk]

The rumour mill is in full spin again, with Olympus doing a "teaser" campaign by taking out a full page ad at the back of a digital photo magazine. The rumour is that it will be called the OM-D (or perhaps that is the series name), which they have registered as a trademark at the start of Jan.

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/olym...ra_teaser/

The main rumour is that it will break all AF records, faster than the EP-3, and will have a 3 inch tilt screen.

http://www.43rumors.com/?s=OM-D

[shuttertalk]

More news and photos to substantiate this rumour. Apparently the camera itself is going to be called the E-M5.

Full sized photos:
http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-first-full-s...-the-e-m5/

New accessories and lenses, including a 75mm f1.8, 60mm f2.8 macro...
http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-new-image-and-more-specs/


Apparently the announcement is coming this Wednesday!

[Zig]

My, a camera without an "X" or a "10" in it. Looks vaguely like I'd imagine a 1970s Russian-copied Nikon F4 to be.
Sorry, but I'm failing to see the point of this camera...:|

[Toad]

Sorry, but I'm failing to see the point of this camera...:|

Well, the point as I see it is that they are starting to market m43 as a proper "system" camera now, rather than as a handful of throw-away point and shoots. Look at this photo of the new m43 system and tell me that it isn't starting to look like it is the real deal:

http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-new-image-an.../#comments

Weather-proofing and a new line of accessories and lenses. With the E-M5 (OM-D whatever), Olympus is starting to get serious...

[shuttertalk]

Well, the point as I see it is that they are starting to market m43 as a proper "system" camera now, rather than as a handful of throw-away point and shoots.

That's quite a good point - below is a presentation of the OM-D that Olympus did to the various photo journos. Slides are included in the link - and are squizz-worthy, especially the speil at the start with some interesting graphs.

- The demand of mirrorless cameras is increasing all over the world
- The unequivocal leadership of Canon/Nikon is beginning to collapse in Japan
- Micro Four Thirds cameras are capturing the largest share of the market in Japan

It goes on to show the various consumer "gaps" or feedback that they are trying to address with this camera - such as weather sealing, lack of viewfinder, lens line up - in short, a more robust system as Rob was alluding to.

I find it interesting that their roadmap also places the OM-D in a new class of "Finder Shooting Style" M43 camera, whereas the PM/PL/EP systems fall into the "No Finder Shooting Style".

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/olym...sentation/

[NT73]

I thought they would call it the OM-G in todays unchristian market.

[Pavel]

OM-D is a kind of camera I may want a few years from now. Lightish and smallish, good manual controls, good lens selection, decent sensor, good viewfinder. It hits on all the issues I am looking for. It seems like a perfect good light (low to modest ISO) camera - the kind that would work for me 80%-90% of time. I imagine myself with it and a few primes (fisheye, wide to ultrawide, normal and a modest tele (4 lenses in all). Assuming lenses at around 150g, the whole package with accessories and a bag would be at or under 2 Kg. Walk around weight well under 1 kg. Not bad even if I grow more decrepit.

[Toad]

OM-D is a kind of camera I may want a few years from now. Lightish and smallish, good manual controls, good lens selection, decent sensor, good viewfinder. It hits on all the issues I am looking for

Congratulations to Olympus. Seems like the OM-D's "system" focus is giving m43 much needed street cred. Most of their marketing up till now has targeted point and shooters.

[shuttertalk]

DPreview have finished their review of the Olympus OM-D EM-5.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/

Apparently they were very impressed with the image quality of the EM-5 - the best yet for any M4/3 camera, and very close to APS-C. In fact, they say:

The E-M5 can't completely overcome the light capture disadvantage brought by its smaller sensor, compared to APS-C, but it reduces it to the point that it's irrelevant for almost all practical purposes. At which point we think its size advantage, in terms of both body and lenses, will outweigh that difference for most uses. If you're absolutely unwilling to compromise on image quality then spending twice the money and moving up to the bulk of a full-frame is the only way of gaining a significant step up from the E-M5.

That last sentence in particular is an amazing claim - and they unreservedly give it their Gold Award.

[Toad]

I had the fortune to play with an OMD last night that a friend had bought. Its a lovely little piece of gear - feels solid and professional. If I was buying another compact camera right now, that is the one I would buy...

[shuttertalk]

I had the fortune to play with an OMD last night that a friend had bought. Its a lovely little piece of gear - feels solid and professional. If I was buying another compact camera right now, that is the one I would buy...

How did you find the EVF? Also, how was the AF speed?

[Toad]

EVF was decent - better than I expected. Identical resolution and brightness to the eternal EVF that Olympus sold a few years back.

AF seemed fast compared to my M9. Hah hah. Plenty fast enough anyway. How fast does it have to be? I have a hard time telling the difference between various small fractions of a second...

[shuttertalk]

AF seemed fast compared to my M9. Hah hah. Plenty fast enough anyway. How fast does it have to be? I have a hard time telling the difference between various small fractions of a second...

Ha ha, reason I ask is that in engadget's review they say "When the camera works, it's peerless, but you won't have to wait long before stumbling on a scene it can't master". Mostly around scenes with low contrast - although that's probably true for most compacts...

http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/01/olymp...ra-review/

[Kombisaurus]

There's no question the OM-D looks to be a lovely camera, and I'd love to have one.
But...
I just pulled the trigger on a GX-1 instead!

The difference in cost was a big factor (over $1000 for body only OM-D versus $650 for a GX-1 with Power-Zoom 14-42 lens), and the GX-1 is a smaller body without the external viewfinder taking up space. But, as with the GF-1 before the GX-1, one of the main selling points for me was the kit lens. The new Power-zoom 14-42 provides good results in a zoom lens around the same size as the Pany 20mm pancake lens. It appears to be as revolutionary as the Pany 20mm pancake lens was when it was released, simply due to its size. But the benefit of this cannot be overstated for me. I *need* a camera that fits in a jacket pocket.
If I want the best quality photos without compromise, then I'll take my 5D MkIII out shooting. For me, the M43 system is not about maximum quality. It's about good quality and maximum convenience. Gaining 30% more convenience is worth losing 5% image quality (and saving over 50% of price). If I don't get that convenience, the whole system is a waste of time.

So I'm not bashing the OM-D at all. Far from it. If I could buy an OM-D with the Pany 14-42 Power zoom for under $1000 I'd snap it up. If I didn't have my Canon gear as my rig then I'd also probably go the OM-D. But paying $650 for GX-1 and 14-42 means I'm essentially only paying $300 for the body... which is an absolute steal for a camera that is almost as good as the OM-D (and in fact shares the same sensor). If I wanted an OM-D and the same 14-42 Power zoom then I'd have to pay around $1500, and I'm not going to spend that kind of money on a camera system that I own purely for convenience.

I think Panasonic have finally managed to re-capture the spirit behind the killer combo of GF-1 body with 20mm pancake lens beatifully with the new GX-1 and 14-42 X lens. They again "get" what a photographer like me wants from a CIS camera (they seemed to forget it from the GF-2 to GF-5).
I can't wait to be walking around with the GX-1 with 14-42 mounted in one pocket, and 20mm pancake in another pocket. Maybe an Olympus 45mm f/1.8 in a third pocket... or an old Canon FD 50mm 1.4 and an adapter... or a CCTV lens and adapter, etc..

Having said that, I think Olympus have also tapped into something crucial with their new OM-D. I think it will be remembered as an important camera.
The M43 future is looking brighter as each day goes by.

[Toad]

...in engadget's review they say "When the camera works, it's peerless, but you won't have to wait long before stumbling on a scene it can't master".

That may well be. I didn't have the time to shoot with it for real. Focus hunting is very annoying (remember the EP-1?). AF doesn't have to be instantaneous, but a lens moving bac and forth in an a=endless hunt is no good. IMO, if the focus is as fast as the GF1, that's fine with me.

[Toad]

...the GX-1 is a smaller body without the external viewfinder taking up space.

Aye, there's the rub. The GX-1 and X zoom are a very nice combo *except* for that particular point. I would happily exchange a wee bit of bulk for the viewfinder - that is why I sold my GF-1 after all.

I also find the jacket pocket size a bit of a myth. Only a few months of the year I wear a jacket with that size of pocket, and I found the GF-1 and attached 20 lumping about in my coat pocket not really acceptable - especially given as the pocket didn't really protect the camera at all. As soon as I accept that I am carrying a small bag, I want the viewfinder.

No argument about the price differential though...

[Kombisaurus]

Interesting Toad.
I guess we're just into different things.

I don't miss not having a viewfinder and I would only use it occassionally if I had one. On the other hand I always manage to squeeze my GF1+20mm into a pocket somewhere... jacket, hoodie, backpack (front pocket with wallet and phone), glove compartment of my car, etc, etc.... It becomes a no-brainer when riding a motorbike where space is crucial and there have been numerous reportings of DSLR lens failures due to vibration (where smaller lenses seem less affected).
I've been longing for ages for a modest zoom that isn't any bigger than the 20mm lens. And being able to upgrade my GF-1 to GX-1 at the same time is icing on the cake.

But that OM-D sure does look nice. When I'm actually taking photos I'm sure I'd love to be using it.

[Toad]

I can certainly understand your motorbike point - and I think the X zoom is a very nice concept realization. Your jackets must have much bigger pockets than mine, though.

My biggest concern about no viewfinder - other than the obvious ones about bright sunlight, use in darkened auditoriums, etc. is that I just don't like using an LCD to compose. For me, the LCD takes me out of the "decisive moment" and I tend to start operating in snapshot mode. I do realize that is a personal preference thing, however, and that your mileage may vary.

I will be very interested in your impressions of the X zoom once you have had a chance to put it through its paces.

[Kombisaurus]

I feel that looking through a viewfinder takes me away from the real world and inside the camera, while shooting with an LCD allows me to look around the camera and stay connected to the real world. It also makes it a lot easier to see things that are going on outside the frame.
It's an interesting distinction though. I mean I'm quite happy looking through a viewfinder, but I adopt a slightly different approach when I'm not.

I'll be sure to share my impressions of the X zoom. I haven't actually used one personally yet so there's a chance I may end up hating it for some reason.

[Toad]

...shooting with an LCD allows me to look around the camera and stay connected to the real world. It also makes it a lot easier to see things that are going on outside the frame.

I hear you. That is one thing I like a lot about using a rangefinder.

I'll be sure to share my impressions of the X zoom. I haven't actually used one personally yet so there's a chance I may end up hating it for some reason.

I've heard some grousing online about "focus by wire" and "zoom buttons", but I still think that the size and convenience of the X zoom make it a must have m43 lens. Not every lens in a stable needs to be a Zeiss.

[matthew]

Not every lens in a stable needs to be a Zeiss.

I know what all of those words mean individually, but strung together like that they look very strange.

[Toad]

Not every lens in a stable needs to be a Zeiss.

I know what all of those words mean individually, but strung together like that they look very strange.

How about this then: A stable not in a Zeiss needs to be every lens...

[shuttertalk]

Wow I just found out that my sister in law has an OM-D on order!

Apparently her GX-1 has a bit too fiddly / hard to use so it's going on eBay. She says the OM-D is way friendlier to use. I didn't probe further so just taking that at face value.

In other news, my Dad's D7000 finally arrived and he's stoked!

[shuttertalk]

Dpreview have also published their review of the EM-5:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5/