Godfrey
Well-known member
I think in many ways it comes down to how difficult it is to make a better SLR in the Olympus chosen FourThirds format. The basic design of the SLR has been very thoroughly developed over many years of constant improvement, since the middle 1930s, and is locked to certain physical constraints of the optical and mechanical systems necessary to implement it. In some ways ... the most important ones with respect to an "SLR" design (the viewfinder and reflex mirror system) ... the E-5 is very close to as good as you can get. While you can improve the sensor, the electronics, etc, there's really not much you're going to be able to do to improve the optical viewfinder performance given the size of the format....I dont understand why micro 4/3 is pushed so much and 4/3 is not.
While I find m4/3 small size nice for some things (parties, bycicle tours, casual stuff) I find a nice OVF and more important a certain size and weight of a camera body just the better tool. More stable in the hands, buttons better to reach without looking at it, better viewfinder, faster lenses.
Maybe I am old fashioned but m4/3 still does feel to small with too many buttons and video-camera-like viewfinder for me as an overall camera. Even without owning one a E5 is - IMO - much more camera than a GH2 or G3 or EP3.
size, amount of mp and high ISO noise are the most overrated features IMO today.
Changing the sensor format is not a great option because that implies re-developing the entire line of lenses. The Olympus Zuiko Digital lens line represented by the HG and SHG lenses is top notch and really does have all the lenses that a photographer needs, plus or minus one or two based on your particular predilections.
The SLR's moving mirror also puts serious constraints on the development of lens designs ... a mount register that's nearly twice as deep as the 'normal' for the format makes designing normal to ultra wide lenses much more difficult. This is indeed the biggest advantage to Micro-FourThirds over the SLRs: the short mount register possible without a moving mirror means that it is possible to design normal and wide lenses of better quality that are simpler and less expensive.
Smaller than 35mm film formats are basically not the best basis for a 35mm format derivative SLR ... and this is why Nikon and Canon, with a HUGE lens range in their portfolio and a vast user community with tens of thousands of dollars worth of lenses that they don't want to replace, have been so strenuously developing and marketing for "full frame" (aka, 35mm sized sensor) formats.
These are just some of the things that comes to mind when I think of why Olympus might not want to push further with an SLR system, and why Panasonic only went to two models before putting all their investment money into all electronic cameras. The pro-line bodies and lenses Olympus has produced have all been very good to excellent products, the lens line for them is effectively very complete and top notch ... to go further down that path and produce better can only be done with very large investments, to which there are substantial risks. Meanwhile, the short mount register, modest size and shrinking price of producing quality electronics makes moving towards all electronic system cameras pretty appealing from a development standpoint. The compact size and low weight achievable is also very appealing to the consumer market standpoint too.
None of the current Micro-FourThirds or NEX cameras are marketed as pro-grade cameras with performance and durability on par with the pro-grade offerings from Olympus, Nikon and Canon. There's nothing that says that a larger form factor, pro-grade mFT cannot come along ... and I speculate that this is precisely what Olympus in particular is working on, with the assumption that they want to maintain their professional market (which is still a healthy piece of their business). They've implied so much themselves: in several interviews and press releases they've indicated that the E-5 is their professional camera model until an all electronic model with comparable or better performance can be released, and that all the rest are superceded by the Micro-FourThirds line due to the performance they've achieved there.
Whether all this is right or wrong from a marketing and business perspective is not mine to judge, but whenever that day comes, if it comes, I am pretty sure that it will be a fine camera satisfying to all who enjoy the quality and performance of the current E-5.