Micro 4/3 DPRs preview of the E-M1

wt21

Hall of Famer
Aug 15, 2010
123
And another comment from DPR
"The biggest difference between the E-M1 and the E-M5, though, is the degree of direct control on offer. We really liked the E-M5's twin-dial control system, but the E-M1 goes beyond that by providing button-and-dial combinations for quickly changing almost every imaginable setting on the camera, quickly. It's the kind of approach you don't usually get until the very top of manufacturers' lineups - it means you have to get used to where every function is, but can shoot fluidly once you have.

However, this direct control doesn't come at the expense of the potentially slower but easier to find touch-screen interface. The E-M1 can be operated pretty much however you fancy."

I'm sure, however, that this will lead to people saying the camera is confusing. The degree of control Oly gives you over their cameras has always been comprehensive, which has led some people to shy away.
 

wt21

Hall of Famer
Aug 15, 2010
123
1/320 flash sync, 1/8000 ss, focus peaking, PDAF on a chip, in-camera HDR, mic and flash sockets.

But can they make it better build quality than the EM5 -- i.e. will the buttons stay on, and the bezels not crack?
 
Mar 3, 2013
123
John Griggs
Sheesh. Now that there are two can we PLEASE dispense with calling these camera's "The OM-D". There are two now. It wasn't accurate before, and it's doubly inaccurate now!
 

Luke

Super Moderator
Nov 11, 2011
214
Milwaukee, WI USA
Luke
Sheesh. Now that there are two can we PLEASE dispense with calling these camera's "The OM-D". There are two now. It wasn't accurate before, and it's doubly inaccurate now!
AMEN. There are PEN cameras and OM-Ds, but from this day forth if someone is talking about a specific camera, they really should use the model name which is the E-M1 for the new one and the E-M5 for the older one.
 

S Noel

All-Pro
Oct 5, 2010
124
Casey County, KY (Liberty)
Stephen Noel
Olympus Loyal

I have owned and used Olympus, for nearly 25 years. Was my favorite body and lens design, of the film era. But since the early E- series, the perceived build quality, has deteriorated, to the near unacceptable level (at least at the mid level).

These Oly Pens (1,2,and 3, that I have owned) are really nice little cameras. But the buttons, doors, etc., are just too fragile for everyday use. I use mine almost every day outside, mostly on small tripod, with focusing rail, and ball head. Works great, but I have to handle it with "kid gloves". I mostly handle my pens by the lens barrel, or focusing rail, to minimize wear and tear on the shiny fragile body.

Come on OLY, TOUGHEN UP! :clapping:

Rant over. :)
 

Gubrz

O.* Gonzo's & Bentley's Dad
Jun 5, 2012
103
Austin, TX
Eliot
Sheesh. Now that there are two can we PLEASE dispense with calling these camera's "The OM-D". There are two now. It wasn't accurate before, and it's doubly inaccurate now!
OMG this drives me nuts!! That and the "-" being put in the wrong spot within the name. Lol! :D
 

Luke

Super Moderator
Nov 11, 2011
214
Milwaukee, WI USA
Luke
OK....to get everyone up to speed. The OM camera name originated with Olympus Maitani.....even though the new one is not a Maitani design, it was "inspired" by it, so OM, then slash and model number......in our case, just "D" for digital..... OM-D

I'm embarrassed to say that I don't know what the "E" stands for in the Olympus "E" system, but all E system cameras use the same naming convention. They all start with an E, and then are followed by the "type" (P for Pen, PL for Pen light, PM for Pen Mini, M for OM) and then a hyphen followed by the number of the iteration or model.
 

krugorg

All-Pro
Sep 26, 2011
123
Minnesota USA
Kyle Krug
Is tracking focus, hybrid CDAF/PDAF, the killer feature that will have more people giving up their DSLRs?

It seems like most of the mirrorless mfg's are heading this way and you are giving up 1 out of every 16 pixels to make this happen (at least with the Sony sensor-based implementations).

Is there a limit to where CDAF can go on C-AF? There sure has been a ton of progress here over the past few years.
 

stratokaster

Top Veteran
Dec 27, 2010
103
Kiev, Ukraine
Pavel
I'm looking at their test chart and frankly I can't believe how utterly awful the E-M1's JPEGs are. They are oversharpened and overprocessed to the point of absurdity, the overall appearance is very "plastic" and unnatural. The skintones are garishly saturated. Ugh...

Even the E-M5 doesn't look as oversharpened and "blotchy" as the E-M1.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympus-om-d-e-m1/9

As a side note, Panasonic GX7 still has the same subtle shift to green all their cameras have had in the past.
 

Andrewteee

All-Pro
Jul 8, 2010
123
JPGs are defined in-camera via a myriad of settings. Would not trust a camera's JPG as an example of what it can do since there's no real way to know how it was configured. In my experience the only way to know what a camera is capable of is to use it and use it for what one shoots in real life. I take any new camera of my forest photo walks and shoot RAW. JPG is a convenience, but even for "soccer dad" shots I still prefer RAW. I have yet to find an in-camera JPG that pleases me. I must be a tough crowd.

I'm looking at their test chart and frankly I can't believe how utterly awful the E-M1's JPEGs are. They are oversharpened and overprocessed to the point of absurdity, the overall appearance is very "plastic" and unnatural. The skintones are garishly saturated. Ugh...

Even the E-M5 doesn't look as oversharpened and "blotchy" as the E-M1.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympus-om-d-e-m1/9

As a side note, Panasonic GX7 still has the same subtle shift to green all their cameras have had in the past.
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom