Will be a good camera but not earth shattering and won't induce new shooters to Oly as it
seems pricey for the specs.
I think you're right, it will most likely appeal to existing Oly shooters, but I don't see anything to draw them away from the other guys...
Last edited by monza; 14th September 2010 at 06:15.
I do not understand the lukewarm reception, although it doesn't really surprise me.
- The E-1 is still a brilliant camera that I use quite a lot despite being years out of date.
- The E-3 is a solid, very well designed performer that I've wanted since I first saw one.
- The E-5 improves on the E-3 very nicely. An SD card slot instead of the xD, the latest sensor with a weaker antialiasing filter for more resolution coupled with improvements in the image processing engine, improvements in the Live View and autofocus system, inclusion of video capture ...
In other words:
They changed nothing that was already excellent, they improved on things that are what photographers ought to care about.
I value continued, on-going, incremental development on things that matter way over any kind of fancy feature additions or major changes. I have all the FourThirds lenses I need: this camera extends their value by a fair increment. And I still use the E-1. Really. :-)
I've been waiting for the E-5 release to buy an E-3. Now I'm considering waiting for Lightroom 3 to handle the E-5 and buying that instead. The change from an xD to SD second card slot alone might be worth the cost difference for me.
I might also add that the reaction to the Panasonic L1 was similarly lukewarm. I bought one at half its normal price in 2007, purely because I thought the lens alone was worth the cost of entry. It was, and the body was FAR better than any review I read of it. It paid for itself three times over in the first week of shooting with it, and has continued to earn bread and butter ever since.
Looks like it will appeal to existing shooters. Those incremental improvements are not what will draw people away from the big dollar marketing of Canonikon, though. Just IMHO.
It is really only bringing their flagship up to the IQ level of the m4/3 (unless there is something magical in the new files). In addition, they haven't clearly articulated a strategy for the future of the dslr line (i'm not talking about giving away their secrets but will there be other dslrs?). Their 4/3 lenses may be great and you have all of them that you need which makes your decision different. The luke warm part of this is that they have done nothing to make others take notice and say wow maybe I should consider Oly. If they can thrive as a company with their current position in the market that's great....but debatable.
1. A lot of those people are gear-heads more than they are photographers, so the camera specs compared to other camera specs matter. Frankly, and unfortunately, that describes a large portion of the photo consumers out there (yes, the marketing folks at these companies have done their job well).
2. For the others who share your point of view it's a matter of recognizing that a company's strength in sales comes from selling to the folks mentioned in 1. above, so it's a legitimate concern to raise when staring at a camera that for all outwardly impressions seems about two years behind current technology. It's fair to assume that a company's self-described flagship product should impress and portray that company's technological and marketing prowess, and if this is what they come up with as their flagship it does raise some questions regarding their direction.
Panasonic GH1/G1, Canon FTb(n)/F-1, Mamiya C330F/RB67 Pro SD, Chamonix 45N-2, Nikon F5 + Assorted Lenses
... bringing the flagship up to the IQ level of the m4/3 ...
...?? by whose measure?
The obsolete E-1 produces image quality on par with the current Micro-FourThirds otherwise I wouldn't be continuing to shoot with it. The current E-3 produces better photographs than anything I've used in Micro-FourThirds. There is a difference in the quality of the sensor ...! The E-5 should net an improvement on that.
I invested in Olympus because of the quality of their lenses. I'm delighted to see my investment continuing to have great value. If I didn't feel it did, I'd sell all of it and move back to my old standard, Nikon.
The brand of equipment I choose to use is the smallest part of what I need to do to be successful in my photography.
I just don't understand why they put "art filters" into a professional camera. I'd rather they give me a second battery instead. ;-) :-)
To me it seems as the consensus in Olympus DLSR forums is that the new Pen cameras deliver better IQ than the E-3. The E-5 also seem to use the same sensor as all µ4/3 cameras (with the GH-1 as the usual exception).
Seeing that I don't know how the E-3 would be better than the µ4/3 cameras and then the E-5 once again better.
Whatever better is... and consensus is obviously the wrong word seeing your opinion. Vast majority?
I depend upon my own judgement from testing and use of cameras. My "claims" are derived from my direct experience using and evaluating these cameras, and working with their image output. I've evaluated *all* of the Micro-FourThirds bodies and the E-3, as well as used the G1 and E-1 extensively for several years.
Saying "the E-5 uses the same sensor as all Micro-FourThirds cameras" seems to carry the implication that there is nothing else in the camera significant to the camera's image quality. That is an incorrect notion, nor are the sensors in the mFT cameras identical either: camera to camera differences are apparent, even if they are small/subtle. The best that could be said is that the sensors are all from the same sensor model line with *similar* supporting electronics in the mFT cameras ... but I think we can be certain that the E-5 has completely different supporting electronics for the sensor (likely a different/new AA filter, different A-D converters, new image processing chip, etc etc) encased in a far different body structure (which also has its influence on the electronics).
Anyway, I look forward to the E-5. I'll likely buy the E-3, according to my usual plan of buying the last top of the line: it is a known excellent performer with superb build quality, etc etc. And buy the E-5 a little later when it is more a proven thing than a fresh out of the box product announcement.
The only thing I can say is that I was right moving out of the E system some years ago. For me this is not really an impressive improvement - sorry.
Life is an ever changing journey
Saying the E-5 uses the same sensor as the µ4/3 breed do is a bit sloppy. Still, it is the usual way to express it. Looking more into detail I share the way you look at it. There is however a limit for how far you can come using "the same" sensor again.
Buying an E-3 is something I don't understand at all. If prepared to carry around a camera that size and weight means to me a camera with a bigger sensor. Read a 5DMkII. It's fully possible to find good lenses matching what's available for the 4/3 system (for my needs that is).
No "consensus" then. There will be some finding the E3 "better" than the µ4/3 cameras, speaking about IQ. So it is.
Shadow noise... That's typically something one needs to evaluate oneself. Well, let's hope everything works well. Time will tell.
Your nick marlof makes me think of somebody posting over at DPR from time to time. Is that you?
For travel and field work, E-5 and E-3 will make a very attractive combo with the excellent Olympus glasses. I will buy an E-5.
I like the sound of a weak AA filter and I have to give Olympus credit, for at least stating that they will be making only Micro 4/3 from here on out, or at least that's how I understood it. They could have not said anything and sort of suckered people into continuing to buy 4/3 stuff.
With the small sensor size, I've always wondered why they made bodies larger than the E420 or E620. I thought the promise was always about smaller capable cameras, yet the E3/E5 are nearly the same size as the full frame D700, so I don't really get it. I'm sure it will be a nice camera and Zuiko glass is really good, but I think it's just to big to lug around everyday, for me.
Now if they would just make a M4/3 rangefinder and a portrait lens that doesn't do double duty as a slow macro, then I would be happy.
I miss Olympus, particularly their excellent build quality, and this seems to be an excellent camera. Not revolutionary in any way, and far to big of course, but I borrow the E-3 of a friend occasionally, and it's a very solid performer.
The biggest difference between camera manufacturers these days is the marketing budgets. Unfortunately, that's the key to success, not the quality of their products. We can only hope that we'll see brands like Olympus and Pentax in the future also.
My current camera is D700 and assortment of primes.
I also have most of m43 bodies and glass. Plus M8 and glass.
I have been hoping for the past two years to unify and standardize my lot, sell two out of the three systems. Because of Zuiko SHG glass, the (m)43 Oly was the prime contender. I also like the Oly "look" best.
I was hoping for the E5/Zuiko system to serve me 3-5 years and:
-body cost not more than D700 (in Europe 1700 euro)
-have better resolution and comparable IQ (DR, color , noise) to D700
-be a bit smaller/lighter (10-20%) than Nikon
...then I would go for it. So far price and size are on the spot. Let's wait for IQ tests. Somehow I am not holding my breath any more after learning about the 2 year old sensor (not the 12 MPix--this is really enough, and only 25% less lw/ph resolution that FF 24Mpix).
I'm still puzzled.
The E-5 doesn't seem to offer anything more but a so-so update of the E-3 plus adding the standard video capability.
The camera has the same size and weight as a FF camera, it costs nearly as much, the SHG lenses are also the same size and weight as FF stuff, just more expensive, it's built on last year's technology. This won't make many enthusiastic.
The camera is aimed for the camera enthusiasts more than to professionals or newbies - so the target group is well aware of what's offered by other companies. Will anyone at all not already owning 4/3 lenses buy it? I don't think so.
I feel a bit sorry for current Oly users. I just noticed the new Nikon offer called D7000. Guess which camera anyone looking for an advanced DSLR is looking at today?
I predict a quick price drop and then a system drop.
I wonder whether someone will introduce lens adapters so that our 4/3s lenses can be used on something like the D7000? I have EOS and 4/3s systems and would like to be able to use my 4/3s lenses again. I currently have an E620 so won't be buying the E5 unless Olympus has some way of increasing resolution tremendously? Perhaps there is something in the way of HDR processing that will provide what the sensor can't?
Panasonic GH1/G1, Canon FTb(n)/F-1, Mamiya C330F/RB67 Pro SD, Chamonix 45N-2, Nikon F5 + Assorted Lenses
There is nothing stopping Olympus from making a mirrorless camera in a dslr format that fully utilizes their excellent lens line up. They could make a camera like the Sony A55.
As a photographer, the only voice from which I speak in this or any other forum, I don't care about what "drives the market" or "bells and whistles" that I don't need to do my photography. I care about sensible, well-reasoned, ongoing development of cameras that add value to my work.
If you prefer to be bidden by vox populi, fine. It is of no interest to me.
This camera is the professional grade model for working professional photographers using Olympus equipment, of which there are many. Olympus has a good-sized professional following, they just aren't the "celebrity photographers" whom Nikon and Canon have chosen to market as using their products.
Plenty of enthusiasts and advanced amateurs use Olympus gear too. But this camera is targeted for professional use, and is quite well suited for it. Not for everything, of course ... but then no camera is suited for every kind of use.
What about this one:
Agree? Disagree?Will anyone at all not already owning 4/3 lenses buy it? I don't think so.
I understand what you are saying, as a particular individual you primarily care about what the camera does for your photography. That is really all that should matter in an individual's purchasing decision. In that context, why even bothering contributing to this thread - no one cares but you and you already own a camera system that does a functional job. No further discussion needed, go out and take pictures.
What many others here are discussing is what the impacts of the market reaction to the E-5 will be on there ever being another camera beyond the E-5 or any further lenses for this system. Belittling those looking further ahead than you with trite lines like "bidden by vox populi" isn't adding to the discussion, it only reflects negatively upon yourself.
I don't pick equipment for my work based on what the hobbyist marketplace likes. I pick equipment for my work based on what I find works well for it.
If Olympus equipment dead-ends tomorrow, for the work I'm doing now it will continue to be perfectly functional and return an income for several years to come. When I need new equipment for something beyond what it can do, I'll evaluate what's available at that time, pick what suits me, buy it and use it.
I don't care what brand that is. I don't care what happens to the brand I currently use. I care about the photography.
Last edited by Godfrey; 15th September 2010 at 12:51.
I know quite a large number of professional photographers using Olympus equipment. I believe the Olympus professional services organization in the United States has over 2000 members, and to be a part of that organization requires you prove to them that you make more than 70% of your income using Olympus camera equipment.
While a drop in the bucket compared to the enthusiast marketplace, that's quite a solid professional group.
Godfrey of course it is always about what you want and same with everyone else. Problem is your needs may not fit what sells and without sales it is never going to go any further in the market or nothing will be produced which may fit your needs. Oly will not make camera's that the majority will not buy. I don't want 99 percent of what is made out there either but it is not about ME or YOU it is about what sells. That is what everyone on this thread is saying but you stubbornly think it is about YOU. Sorry bud no one is going to make what you want, you have to decide what will work and what will not just like everyone else. There simply may come a time when whatever is out being made will not fit your shoes. Adjust or get out of the game.
Godfrey I'm a working Pro for 35 years and trust me their has never or will their ever be a camera that totally fits my needs and i tried them all. Its like marriage you have to settle in and make compromises.
This new cam is simply not blowing many folks skirt up. Nothing wrong with that but it may not sell as well.
Before this gets out of hand lets get back to the cam itself folks.
Olympus have shown many times that they are willing to take a chance on a product that talks to a dedicated few rather that the market as a whole. If one looks at one product only, it may look like a failure, but this exercise has been repeated so many times now that I suspect it's simply the way they run their high-end business. They obviously must know that there's no way the E-5 will compete commercially with a Nikon D7000 or a Canon 7D.
But they do have a following, and if I could afford an additional system, I would buy one too, simply because there's nothing out there at this price point that can challenge the ruggedness an reliability of the Olympus cameras, and I'm talking from experience. I don't treat my cameras nicely, and most of them have had several visits to various service departments. The exception was the E-1 that needed a serious motorbike accident to stop breathing (I landed on the camera, breaking my collar bone in the fall).
If a large share of my photography was rain forest/offshore/mountain climbing etc., I would clearly have an E-5. If it was smaller, like a K7 or a D7000, I would consider it for travel, but unfortunately, it's almost the size of a D700. That is something that I can't really understand. Why can't Olympus make a weatherproof E-620 with a large viewfinder?
I don't see the point of discussing marketing bs ad nauseam on a PHOTOGRAPHY forum. I'd rather discuss THE NEW CAMERA and what that means in terms of PHOTOGRAPHY, the appropriate province of discusson on a PHOTOGRAPHY forum.
That was my entire point. I wish the discussion had been about THE CAMERA in the first place, not whether it was "blowing anyone's skirt up".
All it takes it a jet of air to blow up someone's skirt.
If you want a large, bright optical single lens reflex viewfinder with a 13x17.3 sized format, it requires a very large (relative to the format size), expensive prism and top-notch optics to do it. Which is out of the price bracket of an E-620 class camera.
The E-30 is a watershed in this regard. It has about the same size and magnification viewfinder as the E-1, a little brighter, and costs substantially less than the E-1 did when it was new ($1100 vs $1800). Note that the camera is about the same size as the E-1. You can't fit that optical system into a camera the size of the E-620 without raising its price and enlarging the camera substantially.
The E-3/E-5 reflex optical system is substantially larger, more efficient, and much more expensive to manufacture than the E-1/E-30's reflex optical system. It's the reduction in cost of the other electronics components and the lack of a weathersealed, magnesium body/chassis that allows the price of the E-30 to be so reasonable.
(I've just about made up my mind to order the E-5 instead of the E-3 I was going to buy now, even though it will cost a hefty premium. Just have to wait for RRS or Kirk to have the tripod plates and Adobe to update Lightroom and Camera Raw before I buy.)
BTW since I am the OWNER of this forum we talk about about whatever we want to talk about and this is a very good subject and if it is NOT to YOUR taste my friend than don't participate in the discussion. You are borderline insulting a lot of folks here including me. Maybe it's time you READ the RULES again.
Godfrey, as there is very little to discuss about the E-5 per se it wasn't hard to predict a discussion touching "the market" here. You could have avoided taking part in the thread.