OMG! Look at the EM-1 aka the now official E-M1 Thread

is it ugly?


Results are only viewable after voting.

There goes my hope for the E-7
 

There goes my hope for the E-7

Yes, no hope.

Olympus are always doing something silly, aren't they?

Too bad I can't take everything from the E-M1 and stuff it into the Panasonic GH3 body that I already have--or even the E-1 I have.

Despite Olympus saying that the E-M1 is targeted toward Four-Thirds users, I'm not sure who those users are because the people with E-4x0, E-5x0, and E-6x0 aren't going to spent US$1399.99 on a body and the E-1, E-3, E-30, and E-5 users are going to find the E-M1 the wrong size.
 

Yes, no hope.

Olympus are always doing something silly, aren't they?

Too bad I can't take everything from the E-M1 and stuff it into the Panasonic GH3 body that I already have--or even the E-1 I have.

Despite Olympus saying that the E-M1 is targeted toward Four-Thirds users, I'm not sure who those users are because the people with E-4x0, E-5x0, and E-6x0 aren't going to spent US$1399.99 on a body and the E-1, E-3, E-30, and E-5 users are going to find the E-M1 the wrong size.

yalor... precisely... that is why i say it's ironic why they are making the camera bigger just to attract the "pro" users... :confused:



regards,
wacky
 

wah lau, make smaller ma, why made it heavier...then say it's not to replace the EM5.
 

will definitely give this a miss.......bigger body? heavier and bigger 12-40?

ill stick to my EM5 and 12-35mm :P
 

yalor... precisely... that is why i say it's ironic why they are making the camera bigger just to attract the "pro" users... :confused:

regards,
wacky

Right. I put the numbers together over in the pricing thread and the E-M1 is almost the same, except for the grip, as the Panasonic GH3, which I'm finding to be a bit small, especially for use with the ZD 35-100mm f/2.0. The 35-100mm f/2.0 isn't particularly big when you look at the 90-250mm f/2.8 and the 300mm f/2.8 which others might have. Of course, those are meant to be used with a tripod, whereas the 35-100mm can be handheld. I photograph basketball with it.
 

will definitely give this a miss.......bigger body? heavier and bigger 12-40?

ill stick to my EM5 and 12-35mm :P

If your Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 is anything like my Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8, it's a very average lens sold at a very high price. The 12-40mm will likely be better, but the filter size is only 4mm difference (62mm vs 58mm), right?
 

If your Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 is anything like my Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8, it's a very average lens sold at a very high price. The 12-40mm will likely be better, but the filter size is only 4mm difference (62mm vs 58mm), right?

Actually, I think the 12-35 is optically better than the mediocre 35-100.
 

Actually, I think the 12-35 is optically better than the mediocre 35-100.

the 12-35 is definitely sharper than the 35-100. i rented a 35-100 to try once cos i was thinking of buying it.....optically the 12-35 was sharp throughout with some softness at the corners. the 35-100 was just....meh.

just saying that as a current EM5 owner, the features in terms of focus points and focus system and new image processing seems great but i wont be spending 1k upgrading to it.
 

Actually, I think the 12-35 is optically better than the mediocre 35-100.

the 12-35 is definitely sharper than the 35-100. i rented a 35-100 to try once cos i was thinking of buying it.....optically the 12-35 was sharp throughout with some softness at the corners. the 35-100 was just....meh.

just saying that as a current EM5 owner, the features in terms of focus points and focus system and new image processing seems great but i wont be spending 1k upgrading to it.

Everything I've read about the 12-35mm said that it was equally unremarkable. My first impression was that they were great US$750 lenses, except that they were twice that much. I kind of figured by a filter size of 58mm (vs 77mm on the ZD 35-100mm f/2.0) that the lens was average at best. Somehow, I've got some good low light sports photos with the combination, but they're not incredibly better than the E-5/ZD 35-100mm f/2.0 combo. It's just that the GH3 will work a little easier in lower light.

Had I not bought the GH3, I'm sure I'd be buying an E-M1 now. I think I'll wait for the next one.
 

Think a bigger body will fit my bigger hands better. Found the em5 slightly too small until the battery grip was added.
 

What interests me is the :

40-150/2.8 !!!!!

I can foresee B n S gonna have higher numbers of the 35-100/2.8 soon.

12-35 vs 12-40 , hmm , no hurry. Wait for reviews first.

I wouldn't see the development of the EM1 as a 'weird' direction. Like what's shared here , it's to cast a wider net and ensure the owners of the legacy lenses are still important to Olympus.

So now Oly will have 5 main lines

(1) EM 1 : Top grade DSLR , advanced users
(2) EM 5 and EP 5 : Top quality, compactt package, advanced users.
(3) EPL and EPM : V.Gd quality , casual users.
(4) XZ-1/2/10 : Gd quality , casual shooters
(5) Others

Not a bad marketing strategy I guess.
 

odd cos what i read said the opposite. haha i guess we can agree to disagree in this case, esp since i got it at a bargain price when i bought my EM5 earlier this year

i like the inference of the filter size you compared to the optic equivalent...that is indeed food for though.

alas its not always the equipment but the person behind it.

like you, ill wait for the next one.

out of curiosity thought, what gear are you using?
 

Back
Top