The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
New Olympus E5
- Thread starter monza
- Start date
Godfrey
Well-known member
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- The E-1 is still a brilliant camera that I use quite a lot despite being years out of date.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.
Decisions, decisions.
---
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.
- The E-1 is still a brilliant camera that I use quite a lot despite being years out of date.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.
Decisions, decisions.
---
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.
Terry
New member
Godfrey,
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.
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.
Godfrey
Well-known member
but why are people on these forums obsessed with worrying about that rather than considering the tangible and excellent improvements Olympus has made in the camera???Looks like it will appeal to existing shooters.
photoSmart42
New member
Two reasons that I can think of:
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.
Godfrey
Well-known member
I'm neither a camera salesman nor a corporate analyst. I care only whether the gear that is available does the job I want to do. When new gear appears, my concern isn't whether the company is going to introduce something new next month ... I'm interested in what the new gear does to add advantage to my photography.
... 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. ;-)
andrewteee
New member
I'm happy. I'll buy one. I did not expect the E5 to push new ground - Olympus has been doing that with mFTs. But from what I've read they took a formula that worked and improved on that. I'm excited to try it out.
These are strange claims.
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?
/Jonas
'Obsessed' is a rather strong word. This is simply an 'opinion.'
Godfrey
Well-known member
As always, I see absolutely no value in the "consensus of opinion" in on-line forums. Camera enthusiasts are the worst people in the world to depend upon when evaluating a camera.
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.
marlof
Member
Don't know about consensus. I know I have an E-3 and an E-P1, and I prefer the images from the first (and the portability of the latter). For instance I find the PEN gives me more shadow noise. I hope the new processor in the E-5 can deal with that. I just don't care for the banding in the high ISO of the E-3, but I hardly ever shoot over ISO 800. I for one am curious about real life user experiences and resulting IQ with the E-5.
RichA
New member
Honestly? It's an Olympus E-3s. No point in having a 2lb body for a 4/3rds sensor. They should have gone the Pentax route, K7 or smaller. I think this will likely be the last Olympus DSLR.
Our opinions have been the opposite many times during the years. You should of course go by your own judgment.
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).
Hi,
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?
regards,
/Jonas
V
Vivek
Guest
Harsh.
Do not rule out Olympus churning out E635, 636, 637, 638,.....in the next few months. One model every two weeks. Competing against each other.:sleep006:
I am in agreement with you about E-3 and M4/3 comparison. I have been using both E-3 and EP-2 and I much prefer images from E-3. I've also seen more shadow noise from EP-2. I am hoping that E-5 will have better dynamic range than that of E3.
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.
Cheers,
clay stewart
New member
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.
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.