OMG! Look at the EM-1 aka the now official E-M1 Thread
- Thread starter hammeryou
- Start date
rhino123
Senior Member
Yes, Olympus is using Sony made sensor. But was that a matter to anything? Even some models of Nikon and Pentax are using Sony made sensor too.
ageha
Senior Member
Nobody claimed it would matter.
not necessary comparing to an Oly DSLR... i am using the A57 and w/o lens is around 530g.
yes, if incl the sensor size, they are diff.
for those still deciding... when we are getting better technological advancements, it does not necessarily mean same weight, and it can be heavier... so if weight is an issue, no choice but to look elsewhere... unless the design masters the craft of miniaturization... to side track a little bit, we can see this similar effect when the FF-Nex comes up next...
Yes, thanks for the info. Just wanted to make sure that the sales guy wasn't trying to pull a fast one.
wackykid
New Member
Last edited:
You mean "unless the designers masters the craft of miniaturization"? In any case, there's still limits, both physically and, I guess logical? I don't know how to explain, for me personally, the E-M1 is as small as I'll go if I have no choice, if it becomes any smaller, I would just give up entirely
Might mean sony reserves the better sensor for their own camera. Several videos comparing rx sensor with other FF cameras and u can see the difference
Yeah... That's right....
In some shooting situations, small form is not favorable... That's y we have a few cams n formats for diff purposes... But for the general users, is new release is 1 of the few best they can go for n should decide which they want based on their preference, weight? IQ? Lens available? Handling? Etc...
Maybe, maybe not. My D3 has the same sensor as their A900 (IIRC), yet the quality differs a lot
Wah, not everyone got money for a few cams and formats lei lol. If I'm shooting for leisure personally, the mirrorless cameras are ok for me, but when comes to work, no thank you, I don't want my camera to drop in the sea or be burnt to crisp by fire, literally hahaha
wackykid
New Member
there is also canon's EOS100D... which is a mere 407g and dimension of 117 x 91 x 69mm... in comparison E-M1 is slightly heavier and not smaller...
regards,
wacky
Think us being guys (mostly) , sometimes we overwhelm ourselves with too many technical stuff.
Sensor wise , it's most likely that Oly had shared Sony's expertise from the EM5 onwards. But why not, it's good news when the company I support gets better and better. Oly , Sony and us consumers are all happy.
Apple's been happily using Samsung Hp screens for iphones for years too.
Users of MFT and FT especially should understand that sensor size doesn't determine everything. The lens family , the handling , the chip , software etc etc all matters. We r bright enough to drop the dumb chase for larger and larger sensors , be proud of this.
And even with the EOS1000 or EOS M , Nikon J2 , V2 ; yeap , my choice still stays with MFT because Oly manages to deliver what I wan in a camera set.
Sensor wise , it's most likely that Oly had shared Sony's expertise from the EM5 onwards. But why not, it's good news when the company I support gets better and better. Oly , Sony and us consumers are all happy.
Apple's been happily using Samsung Hp screens for iphones for years too.
Users of MFT and FT especially should understand that sensor size doesn't determine everything. The lens family , the handling , the chip , software etc etc all matters. We r bright enough to drop the dumb chase for larger and larger sensors , be proud of this.
And even with the EOS1000 or EOS M , Nikon J2 , V2 ; yeap , my choice still stays with MFT because Oly manages to deliver what I wan in a camera set.
rhino123
Senior Member
No. First... Sony didn't have any micro 4/3 camera, so they don't need to reserve any good sensor to themselves. Second, Sony owned a large shares in Olympus so, it make no sense for Sony to keep good sensor (or best sensor) from Olympus. Third, this is not a defense industry whereby a nation keep the best of their weapons from other nations and only sell them second rated one. This is a consumer electronic product industry and Sony is not the only sensor producing company, so if a company... say Nikon, who buy the sensor found that it was not really as good, will easily change their supplier source to other sources easily (trust me).
Plus, I believe many of Nikon and Pentax sensors are made by Sony and are actually same one as those used by Sony's camera itself. Result... well... I will not comment in case I bring another brand war into this thread, but you can read easily from the net... But in my opinion (my opinion only), I like Nikon's quality better.
Finally... like I says before... sensor is only part of the camera... not the whole thing... there are other components that are as important... things like processor... and that made a whole lot of difference.
maldito
Senior Member
the most important is the eye behind the camera
rhino123
Senior Member
http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/the-e-m1-versus-the-e-m5.html - The E-M1 versus the E-M5
E-M1: US$1400
E-M5: US$1000
For that extra US$400 you get:
A bigger, heavier camera
Lower battery life
A better EVF
Slightly better LCD
Slightly better build with slightly better sealing
WiFi
A built-in grip
Better 4/3 lens focusing, better continuous AF with m4/3 lenses
1/8000 shutter and 1/320 flash sync
If I think of anything else when the meds wear off, I'll add it to the above list.
I'm pretty sure you all know I'm a huge fan of the E-M5. After all, I gave it the Serious Mirrorless Camera of the Year award last year. Certainly so far this year, the E-M1 would have to be one of the candidates for that award this year (the Panasonic GX7 and Fujifilm X-E1 also come to mind).
That said, I'm a little worried about the price push on the E-M1. Coupled with the yen depreciation, the bump over the E-M5 is considerable, perhaps as much as 45% depending upon how you account for the currency differences over the time period between the two cameras. This is pushing the E-M5 upwards to a price above cameras like the Nikon D7100 (remember, that's a 24mp camera with proven autofocus performance, longer battery life, and a bigger sensor), so that first bullet up there is something you don't want to ignore. The biggest difference between the E-M1 and D7100 is weight (D7100 is only 54% heavier than the E-M1, while it is 91% heavier than an E-M5). In size, they're nearly the same width, the D7100 is 14% taller (but has a flash up there that the E-M1 doesn't), and the mount differences make the D7100 20% thicker than the E-M1.
More than one person yesterday sent me an email with a David vs. Goliath reference. But this new David is bulking up and the original Goliath wasn't all that big to start with (about 6'9" in the original texts). Moreover, it wasn't size that was the reason David won the battle, but rather using a tool that Goliath's armor didn't protect him against.
So I'm having a little trouble reconciling where Olympus is trying to go here. No doubt they'll get plenty of early takers for the E-M1 at the US$1400 price, as most of us who partake of m4/3 want even modest advances in our tools. We want to win back some of the ground we give up with the smaller sensor. But count how many of those bullet points gain ground against the less expensive D7100. Arguably, none. (I wrote "arguably," not "absolutely," so don't bombard me with fan boy accusations. I'm trying to play Devil's Advocate here.)
They gain ground against the E-M5, for sure. But is it US$400 worth of ground? That's where I'm having a bit of difficulty. Moreover, that difficulty is compounded by the prospect of an E-M5 update, which some at Olympus have hinted is in the works. Does that mean that the higher modeled number goes down scale, or is it going to leap-frog the E-M1 in performances, features, and price?
As a clue we have the updated lens roadmap: nothing new except the Pro line of lenses, which will be an unspecified wide angle zoom, the 12-40mm f/2.8, the 40-150mm f/2.8, and an unspecified "super-telephoto."
Hmm. Olympus is seeing themselves as a high-end, enthusiast-only maker maybe? That really doesn't square with all those E-PLs and E-PMs they sold and the seven Plain Jane lenses they've introduced. Moreover, I'm not sure why I would want the US$1000 E-P5 now that the E-M1 is out. For US$400 extra cash in my pocket I lose the EVF, lose build quality, and lose the grip, plus lose 15% of the weight and some size (more than added back if I buy the optional EVF). The E-M5 seems a better tradeoff at that same price, for the most part.
All that said, the initial feedback from the E-M1 launch has all been positive from their most likely customer base. I look forward to trying the camera myself. Maybe then I can better rationalize its price.
E-M1: US$1400
E-M5: US$1000
For that extra US$400 you get:
A bigger, heavier camera
Lower battery life
A better EVF
Slightly better LCD
Slightly better build with slightly better sealing
WiFi
A built-in grip
Better 4/3 lens focusing, better continuous AF with m4/3 lenses
1/8000 shutter and 1/320 flash sync
If I think of anything else when the meds wear off, I'll add it to the above list.
I'm pretty sure you all know I'm a huge fan of the E-M5. After all, I gave it the Serious Mirrorless Camera of the Year award last year. Certainly so far this year, the E-M1 would have to be one of the candidates for that award this year (the Panasonic GX7 and Fujifilm X-E1 also come to mind).
That said, I'm a little worried about the price push on the E-M1. Coupled with the yen depreciation, the bump over the E-M5 is considerable, perhaps as much as 45% depending upon how you account for the currency differences over the time period between the two cameras. This is pushing the E-M5 upwards to a price above cameras like the Nikon D7100 (remember, that's a 24mp camera with proven autofocus performance, longer battery life, and a bigger sensor), so that first bullet up there is something you don't want to ignore. The biggest difference between the E-M1 and D7100 is weight (D7100 is only 54% heavier than the E-M1, while it is 91% heavier than an E-M5). In size, they're nearly the same width, the D7100 is 14% taller (but has a flash up there that the E-M1 doesn't), and the mount differences make the D7100 20% thicker than the E-M1.
More than one person yesterday sent me an email with a David vs. Goliath reference. But this new David is bulking up and the original Goliath wasn't all that big to start with (about 6'9" in the original texts). Moreover, it wasn't size that was the reason David won the battle, but rather using a tool that Goliath's armor didn't protect him against.
So I'm having a little trouble reconciling where Olympus is trying to go here. No doubt they'll get plenty of early takers for the E-M1 at the US$1400 price, as most of us who partake of m4/3 want even modest advances in our tools. We want to win back some of the ground we give up with the smaller sensor. But count how many of those bullet points gain ground against the less expensive D7100. Arguably, none. (I wrote "arguably," not "absolutely," so don't bombard me with fan boy accusations. I'm trying to play Devil's Advocate here.)
They gain ground against the E-M5, for sure. But is it US$400 worth of ground? That's where I'm having a bit of difficulty. Moreover, that difficulty is compounded by the prospect of an E-M5 update, which some at Olympus have hinted is in the works. Does that mean that the higher modeled number goes down scale, or is it going to leap-frog the E-M1 in performances, features, and price?
As a clue we have the updated lens roadmap: nothing new except the Pro line of lenses, which will be an unspecified wide angle zoom, the 12-40mm f/2.8, the 40-150mm f/2.8, and an unspecified "super-telephoto."
Hmm. Olympus is seeing themselves as a high-end, enthusiast-only maker maybe? That really doesn't square with all those E-PLs and E-PMs they sold and the seven Plain Jane lenses they've introduced. Moreover, I'm not sure why I would want the US$1000 E-P5 now that the E-M1 is out. For US$400 extra cash in my pocket I lose the EVF, lose build quality, and lose the grip, plus lose 15% of the weight and some size (more than added back if I buy the optional EVF). The E-M5 seems a better tradeoff at that same price, for the most part.
All that said, the initial feedback from the E-M1 launch has all been positive from their most likely customer base. I look forward to trying the camera myself. Maybe then I can better rationalize its price.
milez
New Member
And the hand that press the shutter button at the right moment
For most camera makers, the combination of sensor, processor, lens, buffer size, and the software/firmware that bind all these together makes the whole camera unique.
Many camera makers use Sony sensors. Similarly Sigma makes lenses for many camera mounts. And the result they get from all are more or less the same, with differences mainly due to firmware or processor tuning.
Just like many smart phones uses Nvidia's Snapdragon processor, but with different result in benchmark measurement because of firmware/software tuning, and other hardware component's composition.
