I would suggest it's purely cost-cutting. Enthusiast range cameras are very costly to produce since they can't be sold at high enough volume to bring the overall costs for the model down enough. The options are either finding cheaper ways to produce the camera or charging a lot more. Personally I'd be sort of okay with the latter. If it meant I couldn't upgrade that often, but when I did, I was getting a really attentively and superbly crafted tool, I'd pay the extra. But we all know Olympus was struggling ("flailing" might even be a better word) at the time, so I don't think they were about to challenge market trends with a camera that much more costly.
It’s funny that this company made the Pen F and then the E-M5 iii. A big change in design philosophies, especially materials and craftsmanship. I’m not saying the EM5 iii is badly made, but rather that Olympus actually bragged about the hidden screws in the Pen F. As nice as it was, it was just a bit more than many wanted to pay.
 
I'll say again in the undoubtedly vain hope that somebody at OM will hear my plea, but what would really excite me would be a digital version of the old Olympus 35SP, same form factor, same rangefinder focusing of a fixed lens (do it with EVF gizmos stolen from Fuji if you must, though optical would be my preference), full frame would be ideal.

I realize it won't happen, so I put the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 on my Pen -F and pretend.
 
Except for how nicely the first two in the series managed to balance size and weight with metal builds.
As much as I liked the fel and handling of the E-M5.2 the series went from 400g to 496g, the mk3 brought that back down to 414g.
Yes, that's true. I think it must be all the features they are packing into current cameras that makes it difficult to make them metal and still keep the weight down around 400g. For example, the E-M10.2 has a metal body but later ones don't (as far as I know). Actually, with the E-M10 series,this seems even stranger, since they removed a lot of features with the E-M10.3. Hard to figure. Maybe it's the video that is adding extra weight and requiring lighter casings?
The E-M10.2 was actually the anomaly; it was too advanced, too complicated for it's target. Sure many of us loved it, but how many of us (that take the time and effort to debate the point) are really the target for an entry level camera? I actually find the simplification of many of the advanced features of my E-M1.2 or Pen F to be more enjoyable on my simplified E-P7.
 
This is quite possibly heresy but new hardware announcements ceased to excite me a long time ago. I find the learning curve for new cameras, even iterations of the same model, is so steep that I really can't be bothered to even look at let alone consider the next 'big thing'. I have an E-M5.3, a nice selection of lenses and no needs whatsoever. In truth, I'm still finding things that the camera can do. With this kit, LR/PS and the latest DxO I can do pretty everything I want.
 
This is quite possibly heresy but new hardware announcements ceased to excite me a long time ago. I find the learning curve for new cameras, even iterations of the same model, is so steep that I really can't be bothered to even look at let alone consider the next 'big thing'. I have an E-M5.3, a nice selection of lenses and no needs whatsoever. In truth, I'm still finding things that the camera can do. With this kit, LR/PS and the latest DxO I can do pretty everything I want.
It’s attitudes like this which will kill the photo industry. Wake up, consumer! Fulfill your economic destiny as the font of the money stream which powers the millstones of progress! 🤑


I have an E-M5.3 too (two, in fact, so my alt/backup is the same as my primary) and aside from qualms about the mechanical integrity of the baseplate/tripod mount, I also am mostly satisfied. And I probably only use 20% of the capabilities of the device.
 
I'll say again in the undoubtedly vain hope that somebody at OM will hear my plea, but what would really excite me would be a digital version of the old Olympus 35SP, same form factor, same rangefinder focusing of a fixed lens (do it with EVF gizmos stolen from Fuji if you must, though optical would be my preference), full frame would be ideal.

I realize it won't happen, so I put the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 on my Pen -F and pretend.
I do the same :)
 
I eventually got into mFTs after 9 years as a FTs user in 2016. A mate who works for Olympus Oz told me about an E-M1 MkI + 12-50 macro kit (demo, but only the body had been out of the factory wrapping) with an extra OEM battery and 3 year warranty for just over half price. The other side of Melbourne, of course ...

Used my FTs 14-54 MkII + MMF-3 as my standard lens for nearly 3 years. Then the magnificent E-M1 MkII and 12-100 were released. I bought both on release, with a reasonably decent price on the 'kit'.

I've always lusted after one of the tiny Pen Mini bodies, and got a mint condition one for practically nothing (AUD$ 125) with two extra batteries about a year ago. Brilliant little camera with the 14-42 EZ and JJC auto-opening lens cap, 360 gms all up.

I still have all my OM and Four Thirds Olympus gear.

So my kit is now complete for many years. However, I will probably buy the 8-25, just to help OMDS along :) :rofl: .

My current in-use family, each with their default standard lens:

IMG_20210306_155523.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


So the 12-50, which I didn't really even want, is now my standard lens on my E-M1 MkI! It is a lot better lens than the reviews would have us believe, as is the 14-42 EZ.
 
What would wow me is focus focus focus focus.... Did I mention focus? Sony and Canon level CAF with tracking that actually works. With animal eye af. Not that it's such a hurdle to overcome, but wow they actually fixed tracking after all these years.

I would always welcome more pixels and dynamic range.

Faster readout sensor to minimize or eliminate any panning jello effects.

I'm sure some other computation wizardry would be a good thing

Another wow feature would be firmware to make the EM1iii focus better... Not holding my breath
 
On the EM1X / EM1 / EM5, you can set the lever around the AEL/AFL button to function as on/off switch. If I ever get around to buying one of these, it'll be as a bag camera, not hanging around my neck, so having the switch accessible to the hand pulling the camera out of the bag would be important to me. Happy that Olympus recognized that.
 
Why does Olympus persist in putting the power switch over on the left shoulder? It makes one-handed shooting a really PITA.

There's a long tradition of Olympus OM cameras having an on/off switch on the upper left of the top plate, starting with the original OM-1 right through to the OM-4. For me getting it out from under my right thumb is a great idea and I love the on/off switch on the Pen-F. Personally if I'm shooting one handed I want the camera to stay on, so I'm largely indifferent to where the on/off switch is as long as I don't keep turning the camera on and off by mistake. I do, though, have a slight preference for where Olympus puts it. But I cut my photographic teeth with the original OM film cameras, the OM-1, 2 , and 4, of which I still own a 1 and 4. Different strokes for different folks.
 
On the EM1X / EM1 / EM5, you can set the lever around the AEL/AFL button to function as on/off switch. If I ever get around to buying one of these, it'll be as a bag camera, not hanging around my neck, so having the switch accessible to the hand pulling the camera out of the bag would be important to me. Happy that Olympus recognized that.
How did I never figure this out!? Could be a life changer.

- K
 
Back
Top