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!

Em5iii

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Ok, so the EM5III is meanwhile out and still nobody who is interested?

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8202503283/the-new-olympus-e-m5-mark-iii-is-a-mini-e-m1-ii

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m5-iii-initial-review

It is actually a small (form factor) EM1.2 and by that maybe the smallest mirrorless camera that is hugely capable.

I must say I am most likely not going to buy one as I have the EM1.2 but I could see this being a very appealing offer for many others who upgrade or want to have a second smaller camera besides their EM1 type of camera.

Any thoughts or reactions?
 

iiiNelson

Active member
Ok, so the EM5III is meanwhile out and still nobody who is interested?

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8202503283/the-new-olympus-e-m5-mark-iii-is-a-mini-e-m1-ii

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-om-d-e-m5-iii-initial-review

It is actually a small (form factor) EM1.2 and by that maybe the smallest mirrorless camera that is hugely capable.

I must say I am most likely not going to buy one as I have the EM1.2 but I could see this being a very appealing offer for many others who upgrade or want to have a second smaller camera besides their EM1 type of camera.

Any thoughts or reactions?
Generally... I’m not not interested in much of what Olympus makes. Looks like a decent offering that’s not for me. They’re really tying themselves to the choice for outdoor people that want compact size. Good for them but I am just not all that interested in their products.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Beautiful camera, great features, hate the user interface :(

Still it's a dilemma for me. My GX8 bodies won't last forever. The logical upgrade would be the G95, but this is much smaller and handier. One of each? Zuiko 12-100 on the Olympus and PL 50-200 on the Panasonic?
 

k-hawinkler

Active member
So I have someone in mind who builds furniture and is interested in taking pictures of a furniture piece by itself and in a room setting, capturing the entire room. I would be willing to let them use my E-M5.2 and some lenses.

Here is my question:

In which way is the E-M5.3 improved over the E-M5.2 feature wise?
I know about the sensor difference, so don't need that explained, as I also have an E-M1.2.

But how about focus stacking, high resolution images etc.
Especially what features would be beneficial for shooting furniture and interior designs?

TIA.
 

AlanS

Well-known member
Well I tried a Em5ii and nice camera but like Jurgen just could not get on with it. I have a Pen f now, fancied one for ages but not sure I am going to keep it! Same issue as the Em5, the damn interface! It is a shame as I quite like it otherwise.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
So I have someone in mind who builds furniture and is interested in taking pictures of a furniture piece by itself and in a room setting, capturing the entire room. I would be willing to let them use my E-M5.2 and some lenses.

Here is my question:

In which way is the E-M5.3 improved over the E-M5.2 feature wise?
I know about the sensor difference, so don't need that explained, as I also have an E-M1.2.

But how about focus stacking, high resolution images etc.
Especially what features would be beneficial for shooting furniture and interior designs?

TIA.
- Better AF (phase detect)
- Much better video
- Probably much better hi-res mode
- Smaller/lighter
- Better weather sealing
- Better IBIS
 

SrMphoto

Member
- Better AF (phase detect)
- Much better video
- Probably much better hi-res mode
- Smaller/lighter
- Better weather sealing
- Better IBIS
This is what I have extracted from the available information:
- IBIS 5.5 stops (6.5 stops with Sync IS) vs 5 stops.
- In cameras USB-C charging
- 121-point hybrid autofocus system vs CDAF only
- 2.36M-dot OLED viewfinder with 60 fps refresh rate vs LCD viewfinder
- 20Mp vs 16Mp resolution.
 

k-hawinkler

Active member
This is what I have extracted from the available information:
- IBIS 5.5 stops (6.5 stops with Sync IS) vs 5 stops.
- In cameras USB-C charging
- 121-point hybrid autofocus system vs CDAF only
- 2.36M-dot OLED viewfinder with 60 fps refresh rate vs LCD viewfinder
- 20Mp vs 16Mp resolution.
Thanks for the info. Much appreciated.
What about high resolution images?
Is that still under wraps?
TIA.
 

SrMphoto

Member
Thanks for the info. Much appreciated.
What about high resolution images?
Is that still under wraps?
TIA.
50Mp vs 40Mp high-res mode.

The EVF has now a longer eyepoint (better for glasses wearers), but smaller magnification. Bluetooth has been added.

Corrections:
- in-camera micro USB charging (not USB-C)
- equally compared, 0.5 stops IBIS improvement.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
This is what I have extracted from the available information:
- IBIS 5.5 stops (6.5 stops with Sync IS) vs 5 stops.
- In cameras USB-C charging
- 121-point hybrid autofocus system vs CDAF only
- 2.36M-dot OLED viewfinder with 60 fps refresh rate vs LCD viewfinder
- 20Mp vs 16Mp resolution.
USB-C Charging is true - BUT it is only Micro USB-C

The longer I think about this and Olympus in general the more uninterested I am getting in their products. There are so much more possibilities out there that are much better and even pretty small size.
 

SrMphoto

Member
USB-C Charging is true - BUT it is only Micro USB-C

The longer I think about this and Olympus in general the more uninterested I am getting in their products. There are so much more possibilities out there that are much better and even pretty small size.
M III has only USB Micro B connector. I have not heard of USB Micro-C.
I think M III is a nice upgrade from M II.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Since I usually carry devices with USB-C and Micro USB when I travel, I've bought an (expensive) excellent USB charger with two outlets in addition to two very high quality cables, one of each. To be on the safe side, charger and cables are bright red or red/black, so that I see them when I leave hotel rooms.
 

k-hawinkler

Active member
M III has only USB Micro B connector. I have not heard of USB Micro-C.
I think M III is a nice upgrade from M II.
I agree. Though I won’t upgrade as I have other tools.
Nevertheless the E-M5.2 is still a very nice camera to get somebody started.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I agree. Though I won’t upgrade as I have other tools.
Nevertheless the E-M5.2 is still a very nice camera to get somebody started.
Mobile phones are often accused of destroying the camera industry, but that's only half the truth. Photographers are starting to realise that buying every single model that is launched makes no sense, and it certainly doesn't make anyone a better photographer. We are moving towards a situation where most people buy a new camera because they need it, not because it's new, and production volumes will reflect that. Hopefully, the camera industry will adapt.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
M III has only USB Micro B connector. I have not heard of USB Micro-C.
I think M III is a nice upgrade from M II.
Well, that's even worse. I had hoped for a simple USBC connector same as on my Macbook Pro. In these times I think that is a serious flaw!

As I said not a camera for me.
 

iiiNelson

Active member
I think this is a natural progression for this series of cameras. It's a solid offering but I'm also of the opinion that more manufacturers should offer a wider variety of body styles. I'm of the opinoin that there are times when "smaller is better" and there are times when that isn't the case. In many ways I do believe that the marketing of cameras have pigeonholed their design in many way for MOST camera makers. I do believe that such an emphasis was placed on the fact that mirrorless design would allow the possibility of smaller cameras that many have come to expect this and shun any variance. That's a large part of the problem with what Panasonic is dealing with. Many love them but the reviews don't paint the designs in a completely favorable light which I view as an issue objectively. The cameras may not be the first choice for an everyday camera for all people but there is definitely room for a "pro design" camera just the same way there's room for a more compact camera for everyday travel or vacation. I think Fuji and the L-Mount Alliance are "getting this" better than everyone else with the release of the Sigma fp, the Leica L-mount bodies, and Panasonic Lumix S bodies... I sincerely hope Sony gets with the program as well (even if that means releasing a body above the A9) but as it stands there are options like the Tamron FE mount lenses that offer great performance at a reasonable size for the existing bodies. Quite simply it's why I never bought the GM zoom lenses (as outstanding as they are) and considered other brands more seriously the last few years. I love the existing bodies with the FE primes but I sometimes rented the zooms for certain types of paid work.


So in short I still think that this is a solid offering for existing Olympus users that want to remain with the products of the company but it's just not for me. I had a really bad experience when I briefly owned Olympus products and I'll likely never buy another one... they just aren't for me like Nikon products aren't... and I fully acknowledge that it's a "me" thing. I still push people to Panasonic for Micro 4/3 becauseI feel they're a healthier company with a more realistic upgrade path (IMO of course) plus a more expanded portfolio of "pro quality" options for photo and video.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Back in the film days, Olympus offered one and a half body styles only, the single digit OM-1/2/3/4 and the double digit 10/20/30/40. In reality, the only significant differences were the build quality/material and the viewfinders. That style lasted for 30 years.

Currently, they're making four and a half styles, the E-M5 and 10 being close to identical in size and shape. That's kind of progress, but they seem to have failed in the enthusiast market for "rangefinder style" cameras. The Pen-F was probably too expensive and had to go, which is what happened to the Panasonic GX8 as well. That's unfortunate, since Sony seems to be doing well with the equaly expensive A6500/6600, not to speak about the Fuji X-Pro Series, although I suspect that Fuji keeps them in the game more as an intellectual statement than anything else. "We are a film company so we make a camera that looks as if it's using film."

Being a Panasonic user, I agree that Panasonic has been better at offering cameras for clearly defined niches, currently with five distinctly different bodies, most of them with great ergonomics. Unfortunately, that hasn't resulted in great commercial success. Still, Panasonic seems to be in for the long term, and being the biggest company, they can probably afford to.

A varied offering doesn't necessarily seem to be the recipe for success in this market. The two market leaders, Sony and Fuji, have totally different policies here, Sony with their two and a half bodies while Fuji has nine(!) if we include medium format (and unless I have forgotten any).
 

iiiNelson

Active member
Back in the film days, Olympus offered one and a half body styles only, the single digit OM-1/2/3/4 and the double digit 10/20/30/40. In reality, the only significant differences were the build quality/material and the viewfinders. That style lasted for 30 years.

Currently, they're making four and a half styles, the E-M5 and 10 being close to identical in size and shape. That's kind of progress, but they seem to have failed in the enthusiast market for "rangefinder style" cameras. The Pen-F was probably too expensive and had to go, which is what happened to the Panasonic GX8 as well. That's unfortunate, since Sony seems to be doing well with the equaly expensive A6500/6600, not to speak about the Fuji X-Pro Series, although I suspect that Fuji keeps them in the game more as an intellectual statement than anything else. "We are a film company so we make a camera that looks as if it's using film."

Being a Panasonic user, I agree that Panasonic has been better at offering cameras for clearly defined niches, currently with five distinctly different bodies, most of them with great ergonomics. Unfortunately, that hasn't resulted in great commercial success. Still, Panasonic seems to be in for the long term, and being the biggest company, they can probably afford to.

A varied offering doesn't necessarily seem to be the recipe for success in this market. The two market leaders, Sony and Fuji, have totally different policies here, Sony with their two and a half bodies while Fuji has nine(!) if we include medium format (and unless I have forgotten any).
I think the success with Sony’s minimal bodies styles has to be qualified. A big part of their success is that they keep the older models in circulation as the value models whereas many other companies release incrementally improved new versions every year. Sony is able to do this because frankly the tech remain competitive for a much longer period. For example the A7Rii is a 4+ years old camera that is technically competitive with the newer more expensive cameras from the biggest rivals... the same can be said for the A6000 which is probably closer to being 5-6 years old. You’re right in your post above that many are buying fewer cameras and upgrading less frequently and I’m an example of that. My newest camera is the A7RII and while I did purchase it a few months after initial release, the two upgrades didn’t really address all of my biggest shortcomings of the camera - namely the base size when used with larger lenses. I won’t say that the ergonomics are bad because I don’t believe they are but I do believe there’s room for a slightly larger body along the size the the Fuji XH1. Ironically this camera received a lot of negative press for the increased size which wasn’t deserved IMO and some negative press which was deserved in the amount of unreliable units at launch. I agree that Fuji offers the most body types and has a “value” version and premium version of each style for all budgets. Theres also the fact that Olympus’ name doesn’t carry the weight it once did but nearly everyone knows Canon, Nikon, and Sony by extension of all of the other products they make. Panasonic will always have a market because of their video expertise and the GH line provided them an elevated level of “street cred” in the hybrid camera space. Fuji started the X like as an “Leica alternative” at a time when the M8 or M9 seemed completely unobtainable for the average photographer with the added bonus of AF lenses.

All of these companies cornered and attacked their own niche of the market which in many ways Olympus did not. I believe now they’re starting to accept the idea (within the last few years) that their niche can be the adventure photographer where size and weight will be of concern. They can provide IQ of a high enough nature and having the highest ISO values doesn’t matter because most are only going to use the cameras from dawn to dusk. I believe this is why their most important products are their tough series compact cameras and the OM-D line. In reality they can and should drop EVERYTHING else and focus on these lines exclusively. Keep the older bodies in production as value options and maybe cut the EM1x price to $2k while adjusting everything else to more rational pricing. As good as that camera may be, the pricing largely had it DOA commercially before it arrived to the stores. They can pretend that it competes directly with the A9’s, 1D’s, and Dx cameras of the world but I’m sure most pro sports photographers will disagree.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I think the success with Sony’s minimal bodies styles has to be qualified. A big part of their success is that they keep the older models in circulation as the value models whereas many other companies release incrementally improved new versions every year. Sony is able to do this because frankly the tech remain competitive for a much longer period. For example the A7Rii is a 4+ years old camera that is technically competitive with the newer more expensive cameras from the biggest rivals... the same can be said for the A6000 which is probably closer to being 5-6 years old. You’re right in your post above that many are buying fewer cameras and upgrading less frequently and I’m an example of that. My newest camera is the A7RII and while I did purchase it a few months after initial release, the two upgrades didn’t really address all of my biggest shortcomings of the camera - namely the base size when used with larger lenses. I won’t say that the ergonomics are bad because I don’t believe they are but I do believe there’s room for a slightly larger body along the size the the Fuji XH1. Ironically this camera received a lot of negative press for the increased size which wasn’t deserved IMO and some negative press which was deserved in the amount of unreliable units at launch. I agree that Fuji offers the most body types and has a “value” version and premium version of each style for all budgets. Theres also the fact that Olympus’ name doesn’t carry the weight it once did but nearly everyone knows Canon, Nikon, and Sony by extension of all of the other products they make. Panasonic will always have a market because of their video expertise and the GH line provided them an elevated level of “street cred” in the hybrid camera space. Fuji started the X like as an “Leica alternative” at a time when the M8 or M9 seemed completely unobtainable for the average photographer with the added bonus of AF lenses.

All of these companies cornered and attacked their own niche of the market which in many ways Olympus did not. I believe now they’re starting to accept the idea (within the last few years) that their niche can be the adventure photographer where size and weight will be of concern. They can provide IQ of a high enough nature and having the highest ISO values doesn’t matter because most are only going to use the cameras from dawn to dusk. I believe this is why their most important products are their tough series compact cameras and the OM-D line. In reality they can and should drop EVERYTHING else and focus on these lines exclusively. Keep the older bodies in production as value options and maybe cut the EM1x price to $2k while adjusting everything else to more rational pricing. As good as that camera may be, the pricing largely had it DOA commercially before it arrived to the stores. They can pretend that it competes directly with the A9’s, 1D’s, and Dx cameras of the world but I’m sure most pro sports photographers will disagree.
For me the Sony success mainly comes from really listening to their customers. If you compare e.g. the A7R3 and the A7R4 then you notice immediately that the total haptic has significantly improved over the past 2 years. It is today on a level where it is hard to complain anymore and this is just in the haptics department. But as we all know that is not the only difference and evolution, more importantly there is also the eye AF that works in Sony cameras meanwhile like in no other brand and I dare to say that others will also in the coming years not come close to that and finally there is the 61MP resolution that is currently not offered by anyone else than Sony, although that will change.

The Oly EM1X was far too expensive from the very beginning - I maybe had bought it for 2K a year ago, but today I would not even care any longer. What is really overdue is a EM1.3 with a better (newer) sensor (24 to 28MP with better DR and high ISO capabilities) and a very much improved EVF (5.7MP with 120Hz as in the A7R4. If they had such a model ready by early 2020 then I could be convinced to stay with Olympus and not switch to Sony FF. But my hopes have almost vanished and I strongly believe now that we either will never see such a camera from Olympus or if we do so then maybe around 2024 or 2025. And that time span is definitely too long for my liking as I live now and want to use such equipment now and not in 5 to 6 years.

I hope that these few thought of mine describe now one of the biggest failing points of Olympus today.
 
Top