Are you going OM-D?

[shadowfox]

There is a lot of things to like with the new OM-D.

Is it good enough for you?
Is it enough to sway you from your previous bias towards the smaller sensor? (smaller, not tiny)
Is it just another pretty body without substance?
Is it the answer to your dream?

Vote and chime up.

[Austerby]

No.
No.
Not sure it's that pretty
No

Next!

[shadowfox]

Originally Posted by Austerby

No.
No.
Not sure it's that pretty
No

Next!

Don't forget to vote

[f6andBthere]

Very tempted! This is a much prettier camera than the X100 or X-Pro IMO (won't even mention that damned Pentax) and although it doesn't have the attraction of the Fuji's optical finder it has something else that sets it aside from the bunch ... style I think they call it.

If the image quality is up there I couldn't care less about the sensor size provided the lenses are matched to the sensor's output.

[Mike Ip]

I voted no. I have no need for an amateur camera.

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Originally Posted by Mike Ip

I voted no. I have no need for an amateur camera.

Same here. More overpriced small sensor amateur crap. Olympus OM gear (the real OM gear, the kind that used OM lenses) was my intro to serious photography when I was 11 years old. When they dropped the OM-4T instead of moving the system forward in the 1990s, they lost me as a customer. I still shoot my old gear, but when I went digital, I went to Nikon and later to Canon. Not looking back.

[f6andBthere]

Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto

Same here. More overpriced small sensor amateur crap. Olympus OM gear (the real OM gear, the kind that used OM lenses) was my intro to serious photography when I was 11 years old. When they dropped the OM-4T instead of moving the system forward in the 1990s, they lost me as a customer. I still shoot my old gear, but when I went digital, I went to Nikon and later to Canon. Not looking back.

What is your problem that you feel the need to put down whatever doesn't personally interest you?

The amateurs out there are what keeps photography alive and keeps the companies that actually make the pro gear in business ... get of your friggin' high horse!

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Originally Posted by f6andBthere

What is your problem that you feel the need to put down whatever doesn't personally interest you?

The amateurs out there are what keeps photography alive and keeps the companies that actually make the pro gear in business ... get of your friggin' high horse!

I only said it because I knew it would make you stamp your feet and cry.

[Dante_Stella]

If Maitani of Arc
Had a heart
Would he put it
In a box?

[f6andBthere]

Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto

I only said it because I knew it would make you stamp your feet and cry.

I just don't get why cameras have to be separated into professional or amateur in their intention in your world Chris.

I shoot professionally with a full frame digital but couldn't really care less what the credentials of any other camera I care to pick up may be if it gets the job done on a professional or strictly casual/recreational level.

[Pablito]

Originally Posted by Mike Ip

I voted no. I have no need for an amateur camera.

It's not the camera that makes the amateur.

My pal at Magnum uses the 4/3rds Olympus stuff. I guess he is an amateur.

[emraphoto]

Originally Posted by Pablito

It's not the camera that makes the amateur.

My pal at Magnum uses the 4/3rds Olympus stuff. I guess he is an amateur.

don't go ruining the myths. it took a lot of internet forum time to build them

[Mike Ip]

Originally Posted by Pablito

It's not the camera that makes the amateur.

My pal at Magnum uses the 4/3rds Olympus stuff. I guess he is an amateur.

You're right, it's not the camera that makes someone pro or amateur. An amateur with a D3s is no more an amateur than an amateur with a point and shoot.

That being said, your pal at Magnum might be a professional, but he's still using an amateur camera. It's not insulting, it's just the truth. It is you calling him an amateur (in jest) not me. I never called anyone an amateur, just a camera.

I don't understand why people get so defensive about a camera.

I own a holga - that's a hipster camera, but I'm not a hipster.
I own a couple small sensor cameras - they're all amateur cameras, but I'm not an amateur.

Do comments like that really offend?

[shadowfox]

Originally Posted by Mike Ip

I voted no. I have no need for an amateur camera.

When you say amateur camera, do you mean:

A camera that is good enough for amateurs but not for professionals

or

A camera that cannot be used to make a picture that meet commercial standards such as:

• AF not fast enough for fast-action sports
• Not reliable
• Cannot withstand even light rain
• The pictures don't have enough resolution for 300 lpi/dpi prints
• The color balance is so bad it can't be reliably split into CMYK for offset printing for magazines/posters/etc.)
• Not enough lens selection
• Existing lens selection is so bad
• No image stabilization for low light / caving expedition

Just want to clarify.

[Mike Ip]

Originally Posted by shadowfox

When you say amateur camera, do you mean:

A camera that is good enough for amateurs but not for professionals

or

A camera that cannot be used to make a picture that meet commercial standards such as:

• AF not fast enough for fast-action sports
• Not reliable
• Cannot withstand even light rain
• The pictures don't have enough resolution for 300 lpi/dpi prints
• The color balance is so bad it can't be reliably split into CMYK for offset printing for magazines/posters/etc.)
• Not enough lens selection
• Existing lens selection is so bad
• No image stabilization for low light / caving expedition

Just want to clarify.

I'm certain this camera has the ability to produce great images in the right hands and with the right post processing. However, I consider this an amateur camera (and these are solely my opinions), because:
- the build does not seem rugged. My leicas and canon 1 series take an intense beating and come out fine. I highly doubt this camera can take the same abuse
- I shoot my cameras in rain and snow all the time without issue. Can this one?
- Lens selection - I *need* fast primes, just because of the way I shoot and the lighting situations I shoot in. While the m43 does offer some fast primes, they just don't seem to have great fast wide primes or fast super teles (400 2.8 etc).
- and another big point is the level of support. Whenever I'm shooting a big event - be it the NCAA tournament or a big awards show, etc. Canon and Nikon have people to offer support if I need it. I have never seen Olympus, Pentax, Fuji at these events. So if my camera were to die, I'm SOL. Where as Canon and Nikon would have loaner gear right there. Likewise, when my gear needs servicing or fixing, I can send it into Canon CPS and have a guaranteed turnaround time or they will give me loaner equipment. Will Olympus do that?

Really I can go on and on why these m43 cameras are amateur, but I think I've made my point.

[Pablito]

Originally Posted by Mike Ip

Really I can go on and on ....why these m43 cameras are amateur...

I've never seen an amateur camera, but I've seen plenty of good cameras in the hands of amateurs!

(Is a Hoga an amateur camera?)

[Mike Ip]

Originally Posted by Pablito

I've never seen an amateur camera, but I've seen plenty of good cameras in the hands of amateurs!

(Is a Hoga an amateur camera?)

Well for what it's worth I'm really using "amateur" and "consumer" interchangeably.

A holga is a plasticky toy camera. I dunno if you can really define it as amateur or consumer. It's sort of in it's own class (with Dianas, sprocket rockets, etc).

[FrozenInTime]

Originally Posted by Mike Ip

- Lens selection - I *need* fast primes...While the m43 does offer some fast primes, they just don't seem to have great fast wide primes or fast super teles (400 2.8 etc).
- and another big point is the level of support. ...So if my camera were to die, I'm SOL. ...
Really I can go on and on why these m43 cameras are amateur, but I think I've made my point.

I agree it's certainly an amateur's camera - look what happened when they tried to target the E-1 into the professional market : despite great fast lenses, it was outclassed by the Canons and Nikons. The 4/3 system really lacked a wide prime - that why I abandoned the E-3.

The µ43 system seems to have learn some lessons - the 12/2 , 20/1.7 , 25/1.4, 45/1.8 seems like a good set of fast wide/normal primes to me.
There's nothing at the longend yet to satisfy sports or birders yet.
Because of the E-1 pro experience, I don't think they will go into the 150/2, 35-100/2 or 300/2.8 territory again. Perhaps instead a 200/4 ?

As for backup, at $1K and 425g each, just get 3 bodies.

I think it will be a great lightweight 2nd camera for someone toting a M9 kit - occasionally something to shoot video or use single handed with AF is really useful.

[Mike Ip]

Originally Posted by FrozenInTime

The µ43 system seems to have learn some lessons - the 12/2 , 20/1.7 , 25/1.4, 45/1.8 seems like a good set of fast wide/normal primes to me.
There's nothing at the longend yet to satisfy sports or birders yet.
Because of the E-1 pro experience, I don't think they will go into the 150/2, 35-100/2 or 300/2.8 territory again. Perhaps instead a 200/4 ?

You forget the m43 is a 2x crop FOV vs a full frame 35 mm. So really the 12/2 (24 mm fov) and the 20/1.7 (40 mm) aren't as great as first impressions might suggest. Likewise, your depth of field on these lens will also be far deeper than their 35 mm counterparts.

I think the thing is though, is to accept this system for what it is and not expect it to be a 35 mm system.

[Trius]

Originally Posted by FrozenInTime

I agree it's certainly an amateur's camera

Unless some professional uses it to make photos that make him money.

A "professional camera" is a camera that a professional uses. Period.

[plummerl]

Originally Posted by Mike Ip

I'm certain this camera has the ability to produce great images in the right hands and with the right post processing. However, I consider this an amateur camera (and these are solely my opinions), because:
- the build does not seem rugged. My leicas and canon 1 series take an intense beating and come out fine. I highly doubt this camera can take the same abuse
- I shoot my cameras in rain and snow all the time without issue. Can this one?
- Lens selection - I *need* fast primes, just because of the way I shoot and the lighting situations I shoot in. While the m43 does offer some fast primes, they just don't seem to have great fast wide primes or fast super teles (400 2.8 etc).
- and another big point is the level of support. Whenever I'm shooting a big event - be it the NCAA tournament or a big awards show, etc. Canon and Nikon have people to offer support if I need it. I have never seen Olympus, Pentax, Fuji at these events. So if my camera were to die, I'm SOL. Where as Canon and Nikon would have loaner gear right there. Likewise, when my gear needs servicing or fixing, I can send it into Canon CPS and have a guaranteed turnaround time or they will give me loaner equipment. Will Olympus do that?

Really I can go on and on why these m43 cameras are amateur, but I think I've made my point.

Not rugged? Underneath, the body is a magnesium alloy. As announced in a Q&A on Thursday, the shutter is rated at 100K.
Rain and snow? Watch someone pouring water over the camera while taking shots: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhO9YDI8cHk.
During the Q&A, Olympus stated that they are evaluating putting the E-M5 into their Pro Service program.

[Mike Ip]

Originally Posted by plummerl

Not rugged? Underneath, the body is a magnesium alloy. As announced in a Q&A on Thursday, the shutter is rated at 100K.
Rain and snow? Watch someone pouring water over the camera while taking shots: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhO9YDI8cHk.
During the Q&A, Olympus stated that they are evaluating putting the E-M5 into their Pro Service program.

Also no prism? I'd be curious to see how fast and accurate their contrast detection autofocus is.

Also pouring a bottle of water over the camera is not the same as shooting in misty or constant rain for hours. Very different. This camera might have some weather seals, but what are their tolerances?

And once again, I refer back to my statement about Canon and Nikon pro-services. They have people on call at every big event. Where is Olympus at these events?

[rover]

Maybe, don't know.

[Richard G]

Pretty? It's ugly. The prism housing, for the prism it doesn't have, looks bigger than my film OMs. I'll be sticking with Fuji.

[Joe AC]

Originally Posted by Richard G

Pretty? It's ugly. The prism housing, for the prism it doesn't have, looks bigger than my film OMs. I'll be sticking with Fuji.

+1 couldn't agree with you more.

Joe