E-M1 news: Robin Wong review part two. Picture of an exploded E-M1. Dpreview corrects AF statement.


Image courtesy: ePhotozine

This what you can expect to find inside your E-M1 if a truck rolls over your camera :) This picture belong to a set of exploded E-m1 images posted by ePhotozine (Click here). They also posted a panning video test on youtube and a 10fps sample. Edmond Terakopian shared some Image samples and Olympus press event pics at Castle Leslie on Flickr (Click here).

Robin Wong (Click here) posted the second part of his ongoing E-M1 review (Image Sharpness, Handling and Continuous Autofocus with Tracking). You can also download the full size test and image samples.

And our reader BLI (Thanks!) just noted an important change at Dpreview AF first impression article. Dpreview originally suggested that the AF of 43 lenses was *slower* on the E-M1 than on the E-5. It now seems like they have changed their opinion: they state that their first claim was based on “memory” of using E-5, not actual comparison. After reusing 43 lenses on the E-5, they tend to suggest equally fast AF for 43 lenses.

Preorder Links (updated with Amazon UK and ES):
Dedicated page at Amazon.
Olympus E-M1 body at Amazon, Adorama and BHphotoAmazon DE (via DL), Amazon UK (via DL), Amazon ES (via DL), WexUK, Topshot FI, CameraWorldUK.
Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO Lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, AmazonDE (viaDL), Amazon ES (via DL).
Olympus E-M1 with 12-40mm Lens kit at Amazon DE (via DL), WexUK and CameraWorldUK, Amazon UK (via DL), Amazon ES (via DL).
Olympus E-M1 with 12-50mm Lens kit at Amazon DE (via DL), WexUK, CameraWorldUK, Amazon UK (via DL), Amazon ES (via DL).
Olympus EP-13 Eyecup for E-M1 at Adorama and BHphoto.
Olympus HLD-7 Battery Grip for E-M1 at Amazon, Adorama and BHphoto.
Olympus LC-62D Metal Front Lens Cap for 12-40mm at Adorama and BHphoto.
Olympus LH-66 Lens Hood for 12-40mm at Adorama and BHphoto.

  • Seraph

    The AF on the E-M1 is more reliable than on the E-5 for the fourthirds lenses. The C-AF is definitely better for tracking on the E-M1 (tested with a few different lenses including the ZD300/2.8) and copes much better with objects coming toward you. Also, the AF is way more reliable in low light with lenses like the 14-35, 150/2. I had the opportunity to use the camera last week pre-launch for a few hours.

  • Ma Defaka

    How much pays Canon to Dpreviews for the stinky stuff they write? Based on memory? And we are supposed to take them seriously? Please…

    • Anonymous

      Well, there’s a race for “the first to publish the full review”. That’s how those sites earn money, and sometimes they rush out so fast that they do mistakes…
      It’s up to us to keep cool and wait a little bit till the hype is over and build an opinion ;)

    • jf

      I agree that dpreview AF review is very very light…

    • preview

      The article was marked as first impressions and dpreview in the comments field mentioned that they’ll go back and verify and update the article. what’s wrong with that?

      • stu5

        You simple don’t compare a camera on focusing speed from memory of the previous camera and not state it in the write up in the first place. It now brings into question all of DPRs reviews. How many more comparisons tests have been done from memory rather than having both cameras next to each other. I am not talking about just Olympus but all brands. It is lazy reviewing.

  • MarcoSartoriPhoto

    That’s why I stopped reading Dpreview. There’s no passion at all and as shown by admin (not the first time, not the last) they lack in precision too.
    I’m waiting for them to name OM-1 in one of their comparision :D

    I respect them for having corrected their statement, though.

    • Jón

      Dpreview has gone to the shits after Askey left. Now it’s just a tech news feed, and not even a good one.

    • Sören

      Well, there are user-reports supporting dpreviews previous claim (http://www.systemkamera-forum.de/micro-four-thirds-fourthirds-kamera-technik/48053-ein-paar-stunden-mit-der-e-m1.html). Sorry, it is in german, but what it says is that AF with FT lenses is almost on par with the E-5 in good light, but drops down quite strong in darker conditions. This difference is more pronounced in AF-C than AF-S.

      So, there are contradicting reports and we might just have to wait and try it ourselfs…

      • dingenus

        He did it without the final firmware as he write, “ich hatte wie üblich im Vorfeld der Neuankündigung die Möglichkeit, ein paar Stunden mit der E-M1 zu verbringen und sie im Rahmen ihrer Möglichkeiten, denn die finale Firmware war noch nicht verfügbar, zu testen.”

  • Djay

    I hope they can assemble it again.

  • Jankoff

    “After reusing 43 lenses on the E-5, they tend to suggest equally fast AF for 43 lenses.” GREAT NEWS!

    • Ma Defaka
      • Bob

        The correction if you read closely is that it does better AF then the E-5, they did add the comment about how poor the E-5 was compared to most other DLSRs. Unfortunately the whole AF section didn’t have much in the way of quantifiable numbers.

        The two areas of most interest to many of us are high ISO performance, which seems to be covered fairly well, and the AF speed which hasn’t been covered except as impressions so far. The impressions on AF speed seem to say better than E-M5 but still not DLSR speed. But nothing really to make a judgement against.

        • Jankoff

          Indeed! Focus is not like colour nuances, i.e., mainly subjective. Focus can be objectively measured, easily. Come on, isn’t there someone out there to do this for us, 43 glass users? We’ve been waiting for this for four years …

        • Surab

          But maybe Olympus is not capable of Canikon PDAF and that E-7 would have had the same performance? Then a E-M1 with m43 lenses support is better and it is the best Live View PDAF so far (on par with 70D).

          If it is on E-5 level, then the 43 users should be satisfied. If they needed or wanted more speed, they would already have travelled to Canikon/Pentax/Sony. If that is not the case, than they should stop complaining. Now they can pair the excellent with excellent m43 primes! :D

          • Jankoff

            What, on earth, is the reason why Oly should refuse to make a 43 body with the new sensor and stabilization? E-7 would be too expensive and not a commercial success, OK. But then they might make E-550 or E-650. Why didn’t they? E-550 or E-650 would be a commercial success. I have friends asking me what camera to buy. I try to convince them that Olympus PEN is good enough IQ-wise and has the advantage of the smaller size over Pentax-30. But when they take hold of a PEN and a Pentax-30, they choose the Pentax – for being “a more serious camera” and “easier to hold”. This happened several times. I don’t think it is accidental. Oly are making a mistake of not making E-550 or E-650. DSLR rules and will rule, I am sure. And m43 is for ladies not knowing what it’s all about – and wanting small :-).

            • Anonymous

              Your last sentence discredit all your comment.

              • Jankoff

                I myself discredited my comment? Why? I am not against m43. I have two Olympus m43 cameras (but three Olympus DSLRs). Ladies without technical knowledge must have their choice of having either small or big. Why only small? Why without an optical viewfinder? There is no reason for Olympus – or any other camera manufacturer for that matter – not to offer DSLRs, especially after having already made very good lenses. I myself want a DSLR of the (hypothetical) E-550 or E-650 (or perhaps E-50) class and price point and, if given the chance, would use a small PEN/OM-D as a second camera. In the situation as it is now, I would rather invest in a Pentax K-30. It’s not a decision yet, but might soon be.

            • Surab

              So why not an entry OM-D then with the new PDAF system which would satisfy your superficial friends. If they go for the design then they won’t be in the position to understand or make use of the larger sensors DOF, will they? I don’t want to offend them, but m43 is the same 43, but without the mirror and an EVF in place of the OVF.

              But actually, I am not sure whether you really read my comment. I was only talking about AF speed and that anyone who wanted more than E-5 has already gone and those should be satisfied with on par.

              • Jankoff

                I will explain my position. The defects/shortcomings of mirrorless, IMHO, are two: small size without a grip, lack of an optical viewfinder. Small size can be viewed as an advantage, of course – depending on people, needs, etc. Cameras can be made a little bigger with a good grip, that’s what Olympus have just done. OK, but then the first and greatest advantage of mirrorless is gone. And the lack of an optical viewfinder simply cannot be overcome. At least not in the forthcoming years, maybe never in the foreseeable future. So, why not have an Olympus DSLR then, especially a smaller one like E-620 but with a better grip? And I have already given other arguments (see above) in favour of DSLR.

                • Anonymous

                  You may find “big” m43 body if that’s what you’re looking for (GH3, EM1, etc…).
                  Now about the OVF/EVF debate…
                  * Why do every DSLR shooter rush to the LCD once the picture’s been shot “to check how it is”? Wouldn’t it be easier if they could “check how it’ll be” in real time?
                  * Did you realize that most video cameras only have an EVF? Why is it so?

                  So you may be used to OVF. You may think that it suits your needs. But maybe there’re good reasons why EVF is really a plus in many situations, and being too conservative isn’t necessarily the right way to go.

                  Maybe Olympus (or Panasonic) isn’t getting the right path, maybe they’re doing a bad move. Or not: EVF may be the future of digital photography, and they are just a step ahead.

            • Surab

              But actually my sister us the same: she always tells me to get a Nokin and then everything is fine and for other electronic Sony…. So your friends are not alone. ;)

  • jf

    Lol, the E-M1 is not in stock but already disassembled ! Was it really necessary ?

  • Camaman

    Now they change it but damage is done…
    People will talk about how it (E-M1’s AF ) is not up to par because that is wahat got stuck in THEIR memory.

    Thy planted a bug in everybodys mind.
    Nicely played…

    • Mattphoto

      Well, it got me back interested. I need a body for my beloved 12-60 :)

      • Anonymous

        As we say in my country “only fools dont change their minds”.
        Welcome back :)

        • mattphoto

          Sounds like a wonderful country.

      • Djay

        +1 and 50mm f/2 + 50-200mm

    • Really? Strange, I recognized from the way they wrote the first one that it was in imprecise assessment not based on direct comparison. While poorly stated, I knew we would have to wait until they had time to do more accurate comparisons. I wasn’t surprised at all and formed NO poor assumptions. If you can’t accept that people do make mistakes sometimes, that is your problem. They did the right thing by owning up to their mistake.

      Personally I would like them to slow down on some of the “expansions and improvements a little” and focus more on their core functionalities of testing.

      • Of course we understand “mistakes”, but cavalier attitude and sloppy work aren’t merely accidental. Fact is, DPR didn’t own up to their “error” until there many observations that DPR’s preview (re: FT AF) was inconsistent with nearly all other impressions of the camera’s performance. Makes us wonder if DPR would ever have admitted having done a poor job if not pointed out by a vociferous community.

        Ultimately it makes DPR’s trustworthiness questionable.

  • kavat

    “One camera to rules them all” EM-1, admin, 2013 lol

  • Ro

    Could it be the E-P5 is using the same sensor as E-M1? I noticed a much faster AF (at least three times faster) with 12-60 zuiko and MMF2 on the E-P5 than on the E-M5 (not from memory, both camera’s tested next to each other). Would be interesting to compare AF speed with 4/3 lenses between E-P5 and E-M1…

  • it was a sloppy way to describe the AF, but at least they corrected themselves.

  • MMF user

    Well well well, DP review recanted their objection. Well done for them to admit to their mistake. My 4/3 lenses eagerly await being autofocused again. While I really like the slow down and MF level of control, I do miss AF for moving subjects. Now for a hands on test :D

  • kavat

    About Robin wong review,
    it would be better to use a lens with shallow dof for really test the continuous af. Something like the 75 f1.8 @ 1.8. It’s much easier for a camera to tracks something with a wide angle and at a distance. The best test you can do is to just ask someone to run TOWARD you…
    The macro stills are really impressive. Great clarity.

    • Tobias Giesen

      Tracking with 75mm at F1.8 will be difficult. The DOF is too shallow.

      • Anonymous

        At distances where C-AF and tracking are most useful say 40+ feet the DOF of the 75mm is a minimum of 5 feet at 60 feet you are up to 10 feet hardly wafer thin.

  • Vlad

    So, who again was explaining how Robin was a paid shill and we can’t trust him, and DPreview are unbiased saints?

    • kavat


  • e-300

    DPR “Pre”-View is nothing scientific at all but has made a bold statement. True, it is incrementally -ve for Oly, but reality is fall of DPR credibility / neutrality. DPR will pay the price.

    • Anonymous

      Looking at the normal Amazon USA sales charts the E-M1 is a glitch caused by the lost boys from four thirds DSLR’s desperate for a way forward. The sales from mirror less are hugely dwarfed by DSLR sales so DPreview owners will not exactly be crying about it

      • Dave

        Go back under your bridge.

  • I find DPreview correction so lame!!! It do shows that they do not understand a s*it about Olympus: they not only just handled the camera for a short while – originally not having any interest or knowledge in it – but more importantly they know nothing about E-5, to which they compared E-M1! VEry deluding. I have been a pretty intensive user of E-5 also in low light and I can fairly say that with Super High Grade lenses it has a very fast focus. Nikon D3s with Nikon 24-70 or new Tamron 24-70 are barely (and I repeat.. barely) on the same league. E5 was far more responsive. Pretty much comparable to EM5, where the only time where you can really grasp a better speed is when you shoot from the LCD screen, pointing with your finger hwere you want the focus. Contrast detection autofocus gave some issues sometimes in low light, of course, but so it does on EM5.
    I repeat… DPReview is pretty lame!

    • Jankoff

      Totally agree – I am one of the “lost boys”. And I still wonder whether I should not join the Pentax party. With Pentax the major camera.

  • Jankoff

    These days I saw several reviews of the E-M1 on the Internet (YouTube, etc.). They showed 43 glass, said it focused. OK, but none of the reviewers cared to take a picture and say if the focus is fast or not. Strange. Maybe it’s a mixed affair. Maybe in need of clarification – could depend on the shooting situation, etc. Eager to see.

  • Overall i see a big improvement on E-M1 when i read crossed review from many website and blogers and i can say there are so many areas of improvement ; per pixel sharpness, color rendition, AF speed, C-AF, High ISO, Dynamic Range,.and not include E-M1 has better handling, better EVF,Screen,Build quality, better 5-AXIS IBIS is NOW AUTOMATICALLY,.no need to set how the IBIS will performed just like on E-M5 or E-P5

    • Surab

      I believe the E-P5 to have that auto-detection of the IBIS for paning as well.

  • Cupid Stunt

    Why are there no road shows or photographic exhibitions here in the US? Just about every other country has them. There is virtually no chance of handling any of the new gear (Olympus or otherwise) until it is sitting on the shelves at places like BestBuy/Calamet. I just want to fondle these models…

    • FredG

      I think that there are a number of factors that influence this.Probably the main one being the significantly smaller demand for mFT in the USA.In the first 6 months of this year 91% off interchangeable lens cameras shipped to the USA were DSLR. The other 9% consist of all mirrorless brands with Sony doing better than mFT the market share of mFT in America is sub 4%


      Just as when it comes to supplying the various markets it seems only wise to supply the markets with the highest demand and the best profit margins neither of which are America.

      • Cupid Stunt

        True, but you could argue that if they want to increase their market share in the US (a sizeable market) they need to promote their products on a more local level. I’m surprized Panasonic’s digital photography group actually sell anything in the US. They are notoriously bad for delivering items as promised and I’ve only ever seen one of their m43 models (in Target of all places) outside of places like B&H/Adorama. Nikon with their One system and Sony’s NEX are in many eletronic stores so why not Oly & Pana?

        Joe public doesn’t even know there are alternatives to the DSLRs and P&S.

  • Taran

    Robin Wong doesn’t review anything.

    A review implies criticism or the potential for criticism. Robin Wong is producing advertising for Olympus… an online brochure for the camera. It is informative, but when purchasing something, if something is entirely positive and the “reviewer” is paid by Olympus, how can anyone with a brain trust the assessment?

    Oh wait.

    • Vlad

      “A review implies criticism or the potential for criticism.”
      But it doesn’t require it. Also, anyone with a brain won’t base their purchase decisions on a blog post. These reviews are here to simply satisfy the general curiosity for a new item, but apparently some people are expecting a 300 pages detailed review for free.

      • Taran

        “But it doesn’t require it”.

        Look up the word review. It is required, in any standard dictionary, and implies criticism. Could you show me the definition of the word review as you use it?

        I speak English, and have a degree in English, so I’m “kinda” an expert when it comes to words.

        • Tarzan

          [Which university?] The potential for criticism does not imply the need to criticize something if nothing is wrong with the reviewed entity.

          • Taran

            “if nothing is wrong with the reviewed entity.”

            Thanks for making my point.

        • Vlad

          I don’t have a degree in English and I am not even a native English speaker.
          To review something means simply to evaluate or examine something, unless I am missing something. So, master of words, what happens if the reviewer doesn’t find any negative points for his type of usage?

          • Taran

            It means they live in a perfect world, and I envy them.

            • Vlad

              Maybe they do indeed. I think it is pretty clear what Robin is providing and he is perfectly honest about both his bias and his employment. From there, it is up to us to trust it or not. I think blogs like his are rather enjoyable and even if he was entirely independent and very critical, I still wouldn’t base any purchase decision on it.

              • Raist

                Now that he has come clean as an Olympus employee, I do not see a conflict of interest. The review has to be weighted accordingly though. I think it does present valuable information but you cannot pretend is going to have the same weight in terms of pros and cons of an entity who reviews it and is not an Olympus employee.

                This is pretty basic.

                • Taran

                  Again, you all use the word review like it means something it does not. I understand that the blog creator is not a native English speaker, I understand that Robin Wong may not be a native English speaker, and yes, of course, Vlad has admitted he is not a native English speaker.

                  That is all well and good. I was born in Hong Kong and my Chinese (madarin and cantonese) sucks. Hence, I don’t try and convince native speakers of that language what their words mean.

                  I am a native English speaker, and I also have a degree in the language. The word “review” is being used wrongly in this instance. Not a big deal, but if you want your words to have meaning, then look it up, otherwise, you are demonstrating that you have no understanding of the language at all, and you should just speak jibberish.

                • Vlad

                  But you agree that it has to be weighted by us, the readers, hence there is no reason to denigrate the guy?

                  • Raist

                    I agree it has to be weighted by us, but if he comes forward claiming objectivity and talk about doing a review, that’s on him- sorry. I will agree that I have been sometimes too harsh pointing this out (and apologized to him on that aspect recently) and that by coming clean as an Olympus employee (salesman pretty much) then it’s fine to make some of the things he posts.

                    But originally he didn’t see an issue with objectivity for example and receiving a free E-5- why would that be a conflict of interest? I am sorry but that one is pretty basic.

                    So anyhow, I think he did the best in disclosing his new relationship with Olympus and now that clears him of conflict unless he actively pursues to portray himself as objective when doing comparisons or competitors comments.

                    • JimD

                      “I agree it has to be weighted by us” Why? The fact Robin works for Olympus does not change the images he shows. It does not change him as a very good writer. We don’t even know what he does at Olympus. So why weighting? It does not change the colour, focus, sharpness or anything else. Also Robin can be negative over things he does not like as any other can. In fact, more so because of his style of presentation.
                      Robin is showing images from the camera. He is not showing “a day in the life of an Olympus employee in Malaysia”

                  • Taran

                    I am not denigrating the guy, I am merely demonstrating he doesn’t have a grasp of the English language. Review implies objectivity, where there is none. Some person online who wants to buy an E-M1 googles “E-M1 review”. Now he gets Robin Wong’s page and it is an advertisement. People who don’t know as much as you and I assume the review is objective. Lo and behold they get the E-M1 and it isn’t roses. Nothing like the Robin Wong review. Guess what, you have made a hater for life of the m43 system, and a bunch of people who expected to get a “review”, when all they got is a meta tagged advertisement by Olympus corporate, and a page view for Robin Wong who makes money off his blog.

                    This is very bad for the system, and will make more enemies of m43 than a person who really reviews the camera.

                    • JimD

                      Robins grasp, understanding and presentation of English is very good. In fact better than very good. He is able to convey what he wants very well and also say what is wrong without confrontation. Quite capable of imparting his thoughts to others via his written word.

                      As for English. The Queen reviews Her Fleet on occasion. She also reviews the troops more frequently (Yes, those guys in the funny furry hats at the Palace are Regular troops and do their turn in Afghanistan and wherever they are sent). By your context of the word she has to blow them up or let them blow up something other than simply sail or march by and comment how nice they look. It would appear that your English is not up to scratch!

                • True enough. How much weight we attribute to a potentially biased source depends on the degree of confirmation coming from others we’d consider less biased.

    • BdV

      Very often you can still get a lot of information from these rev… or just call it product demonstrations.

    • I agree, but then few reviews are as impartial as they should be. Some of the stuff is barely disguised advertising. At least Mr. Wong provides a clear disclaimer at the top of each essay so you know where you stand. If I were him I would refrain from the term ‘review’ though. ‘Experience’ or ‘opinion’ would describe what he writes more accurately. He is much too enthusiastic about the gear he uses and tends to use superlatives where understatement is more appropriate.

      • Raist

        Agreed for the most part.

        • It’s a bit sad that many people can’t tell an editorial, or that what may amount to a de facto advertorial, from a review.

          • JimD

            Your definition and difference is?

  • C. C.

    What dpreview did was shameful. They caused some real damage to the reputation of the E-M1. And they were WRONG. So they put an update inside the early review, but they did not post a retraction (or apology) right up front in the News section. Idiots.

    Disgusting. Too bad they can’t be sued or punished for libel.

    The other reviewers were spot on. The AF with the E-1 and 43 lenses is basically comparable to the E-5.

    How in the world can you make comments based on your hazy “memory” of the E-5? What a joke. That is no review.

    • Cupid Stunt

      I’m not trying to defend DPReview but nothing has really changed. The E-M1 has not significantly improved from the E3/5 when using 43 lenses. I find it hard to believe that is the equivalent to the live-view AF performance of Canon’s 70D. I bet the E7 would have offered better C-AF.

      • C. C.

        You totally miss the point. The E-M1 is basically comparable to the E-3 and E-5 in AF. That is great, great news – and for those of us with 43 lenses, this is what we have been waiting for. No one expects the E-M1 to be better than the E-5, just perform similar to it for the 43 lenses (and that is sufficient). That is all. But DPReview made it sound like it is not as good.

      • Surab

        Maybe. The E-M1 only lacks 2 things compared to an hypothetical E-7: only 43 mount, better PDAF performance and OVF. Nothing else.
        The first one means no support for those excellent and light weight m43 primes and the second one means garbage AF in video mode or LV. Lastly, 43 OVFs are pretty small and the EVFs like VF4 are not that far off anymore in terms of quality and usabilty and also have their own advantages, actually plenty of them (menu, more info, better level gauge, low light visibility, MF magnification, peaking, color preview, exposure preview and so on). With the quality of last generation EVFs it is becoming more and more subjective to want OVF.

        I think it is a wise choice to introduce a body which appeals to m43 and 43 at the same time. The 43 users can add lenses like the Oly 45mm, the Pana 25mm and ultra compact, yet decent Pana 14mm to their system.
        I mean Oly would have to put money into PDAF research which they could use for new lenses.

      • Ash

        Speaking out of your vast experience with the camera?

        What a stupid statement.

  • Anonymous

    @admin: any news on upcoming third party lenses, esp. zooms? The new PRO zoom from Olympus is a bit off budget, would be great to have something like the sigma 17-70/2.8-4 for m43…

  • Anonymous

    Dear ADMIN please remember your humble readership only want links to sites that affirms their wonderful judgement , no criticism no suggestion that mFT is not perfect.Preferentially from either Olympus employees or dedicated fanboys after all who else can you possibly trust

  • NikonShooter

    I can see its naughty bits…


  • mattphoto

    Sounds to me like DPreview originaly was thinking… the AF performance is very crappy, It’s going to disappoint people coming from the SLRs.
    And then they realized, oh the Oly SLRs have always had crappy autofocus, so i guess it’s on par.

    • It’s quite far from my experience. Some 4/3 lenses focus quite fast and accurately on my E-5, Even compared to focusing demons like the D700 and its refined glass. There is nothing slow about the 12-60 or the 50-200 SWD.

      I find DPReview’s comments rather confusing to be honest. Perhaps their evaluation stems from comparing 4/3 vs. m4/3 lenses on the E-M1.

    • ADK

      That’s exactly it. Clearly the AF performance was sluggish relative to the current standard. Whether this performance is equivalent to the E-5 or not seems pretty insignificant.

      “Great news, the AF is just as dissapointing as it used to be…!!”

    • Anonymous

      Can’t find the exact quote now (using smartphone) bit didn’t they say that mft lenses focused so fast that they found FT lenses focusing sluggish, even if on par with E5 (at least with good light).
      That said, olympus is aware of this fact, hence the new PRO m.zuiko lenses lineup: fast focusing and high quality.
      Remember that many E5 users on forums where only asking for “E5 perf with better sensor” so Olympus listened to them, sort of ;)

      • I recently was just for fun playing with my old E-1. It has its limits for sure . But the AF speed was not bad, even in moderately dim light. Besides, even the E-M5 is not *always* a stellar performer. Statements about AF performance really need to be more carefully specified.

  • Henrik

    Hey admin!

    Any news on the new high-end compact camera you wrote about in one of your posts not to long ago? Or is it just my memory that fails me?

  • Eddy Myerber

    Picture of an exploded E-M1…
    A opposed to the Micro four thirds system, which will soon implode
    and be gone forever…
    …to be replaced by the next gimmicky system:
    a Micro Squared system, from LG, LOL!

  • M

    the fulls size sample pics made with the 12-40 look nice (even if I sit in front of a not so good laptop monitor ;-) ) http://www.ephotozine.com/article/olympus-m-zuiko-12-40mm-f-2-8-pro-lens-preview-22865

  • OM-4ever

    DPReview knows what side the bread is buttered on and it has always been SLR fanboy HQ, this started with Phil and it hasn’t changed nearly enough. As far as the writers, they are quite unsophisticated and the writing in the AF section of their preview is an excellent example of clear bias. Again, this is not new, but many readers fail to pick it out, as this bias has already been internalized.

  • the bit that still hangs around is
    “Our experiences were fairly positive, but only when seen from a ‘DSLR trying to do live view’ perspective,”

    DPReview can amend it anyway they like, but from the video reviews around it seems to me the AF performance of this camera is pretty damn far from a ‘DSLR trying to do live view’, Olympus quite probably among the best in that regard anyway.

    Meanwhile the rather weird performance of 70D pretty much go a pass

    As much as five years ago this type of fly by the seat of the pants review style might have been ok, in 2013 its seen for what it is.

    • Cupid Stunt

      “Meanwhile the rather weird performance of 70D pretty much go a pass” Why weird? I assume you are refering to its live view AF performance? As of today it is best available on-sensor phase-contrast AF system and I am pretty sure we will see it on all of Canon’s mid- to low-end models. It offers credible live view and conventional DSLR C-AF performances in one camera. I was expecting (and still am) that the E-M1 with 43 lenses would be better than the 70D in this regard.

      • well you cupid stunt, maybe you should actually read the review and the pass it got for clearly soft OOF images even with conventional pdaf focussing. Does it seem like DPR are extending beyond their expertise?

        I think if review sites are going to engage in comment about AF they should do so on the basis of statistical data. then we can put the tree of AF performance together and actually know where a cameras performance is situated.

        The adhocracy of their performance in these two reviews ought to require some investigation to improve their position, rather than the usual blame the Olympus users for having pointed it out. But we will see I guess.

  • Camera for lossers

    • M

      lossers? Sorry, English is not my native language, and I can’t find this word in my dictionary… Could you please explain it?

    • Cyril

      “Lose yourself” good song for E-M1

  • Ed

    I don’t have any 43 lenses but my friend who does, was not impressed with the performance of his 43 lenses on the E-M5.

    If the E-M1 only matches the E-M5 AF performance for 43 lenses – I don’t see why people are happy about that.

    • The G

      It matches the E5, not the EM5.

  • Just fanboys will have a excuse to say is good product , just look at the 70d 7100 fuji ……. But Sony already kill the m43 cuz can ikon have to go out with something nd shure it will be better ……anyway olympus always behing them not evn talk of panasonic and their. Crappy products

    • Cupid Stunt

      Stop masterbating and try to use both hands when typing, you illiterate turd.

  • Robin did post some convincing tracking AF samples. It’s enough proof for me that it works, maybe not with same high keeper’s rate as D4 or 1DX or even Nikon 1 series, but still very impressive.

    • michael

      Actually, I find Robins examples for C-AF not very convincing.
      The girl/recycle-man series are a fair bit blurry up close. DL the full-size pics and you will see it, but i cant tell if its the long shutter speed or inaccurate AF.
      In the skater series, there is soo much DOF, that almost any camera would have managed C-AF on the subject. The only remarkable thing is, that the E-M1 did not jump to focus on the background (my Canon surely would have).

    • BLI

      Is Robin too positive? Does he lack a critical mind, as Taran suggests in a previous post? How can Robin be so positive about C-AF when Ming Thein finds: “I spent some time shooting traffic and found that the E-M1 would perform similar to or slightly better than the D200 generation of cameras in terms of tracking ability”? D200 — technology from 2005-2006 or so…

      Anyone who can read will find examples of critique in Robin’s review. And sometimes, it is necessary to read between lines to find indications of critique; Robin’s strong underlining of his lack of experience with C-AF is an example of such, and also suggests to anyone who can read that it is not straight forward to succeed with C-AF. But he also has had some success. Anyway, that is how I read him.

      Ming Thein’s critique is more obvious. But it is also not clear what lens MT used, and whether C-AF works better on m43 lenses. Hopefully, MT will touch on this in his review of the 12-40/2.8 tomorow Sept 13; Robin explicitly states that his success was achieved with the 12-40. Also Pekka P has avoided to make strong statements about C-AF.

      It is probably safe to guess that C-AF works better on E-M1 than on the E-M5. How good it is compared to e.g Nikons’ 1 series is very uncertain. The answer may depend on lens, technique, etc. Most likely it lags the “1” system, but it may still be ok — see e.g the bird shots on the mu-43 blog, taken with the mZ 75-300, which is not extremely fast.

  • Chris

    I’m still torn whether I should get a GX1 with kit lens or keep saving and get a em-1 no kit lens, I have a 25mm PL 1.4, 40-150mm R and 14-42mm II (could sell my EPM2 body only) I want the GX1 because its more compact and has a silent mode both are perfect for street shooting, which is what I mainly do.

  • Shenkie

    Boehoe somebody wrote something bad about our em1. Boehoe dp review hurts us fangirls boehoe. We fangirls are so pathetic boehoe.

  • Cyril

    DPReview is good for housewife ,nothing more.

  • Jankoff

    I have just been watching some pictures taken with my E-520 and 12-60 “in sunlight”. I have two E-520s and one E-600 and they will probably be functional for some years to come. I also have the first PEN and the E-PM2. I need something like the E-M1 for my 11-22 and 12-60 but ONLY for low-light conditions. Splashing out on a E-M1 solely for low light would be unreasonable. The E-PM2 with the carry-around PanaLeica 25mm/1.4 does low-light perfectly. Even 11-22 works satisfactorily well on the E-PM2, especially with touch-screen focusing and shooting. The E-PM2 costs 4 times less than the E-M1. If I get the E-M1 as a present (might happen), I will be sparing it for when the day is over, for dusk. Why, on earth, should I operate an expensive toy like this all day long? No, I won’t.

    • Anonymous

      You already seem to have an E-PM2 which is serving you quite fine, congrats.

      But why the $%&^#%^ should anyone care about whatever you want to carry all day?

  • Gear head

    Pretty lousy out of focus photos, too. And this is from camera reviewer? What do they know about photography?

  • “After reusing 43 lenses on the E-5, they tend to suggest equally fast AF for 43 lenses.”

    And far worse in moderate-to-good (or worse) light. You forgot to mention that part.

    • you could model this against Nikon 1, which uses a similar form of pdAF on sensor
      but without one vital improvement. The coverglass (an Olympus patent) is such that it should gain almost 1 e/v capability on Nikon 1 before it then (probably) goes to full cdAF as Mikon 1 does.

      Another thing that seems to have gone unmentioned is that this system ought be more accurate than preceding AF systems.

      Still the biggest issue for the moment is what is CAF like
      and in what circumstances

  • Rantanplan

    A bit off-topic, but interesting nonetheless. I wonder why the 43rumors article: “After the E-M1: Does Olympus have to go Full Frame?” isn’t online anymore?

    Some call from Olympus Marketing department?

    Don’t get me wrong, I really like the Olympus Pen’s and OM-D, etc., but I think for the future it could really become a problem (only) having the smallest sensor in the “professionals camp”.

    • 1. Olympus are not going to do that
      2. As it is the premium ground already occupied by C&N it would fail miserably anyway

      as sales seem to indicate
      their niche product will trade well and they can charge more for it
      logistics of having no lenses aside
      at $1500 they wouldn’t make any more money than with m43rds,
      and they wouldn’t sell more against established competition.

  • JimD

    I have said for years that DPreview is a waste of time for Olympus.
    Now we will have the E-M1 forever ‘slower than the E5’ come up for the next 100+ iterations of this camera.

  • Chris

    Dpreview is just a joke. Memory of E5…holly crap…can you actually remember?

  • Jeppis

    Nice to see whining fanboys here, again and again. :)

  • Seraph

    The AF performance is better than the E-5 for C-AF – I am confident of that. It is also better in low light with the f2 lenses. I actually tested the camera last week. The big benefit in C-AF is the camera doesn’t jump off focus lock like the E-5. It is also way better when the subject is coming towards you – the tracking obviously works well. What I was impressed with, in low light, is the greater accuracy and lack of hunting for PITA lenses like the 14-35f2, which had previously been very hit and miss on the E-5. Looking at the various ‘reviews’ out there, it doesn’t look like they were able to test with many lenses. I was very happy with the 300/2.8+EC-14 combo. I will be buying the E-M1, no question. The grip size increase makes it work well with the 300 and 90-250 on a gimbal arm and the 50-200 + combo is also comfortable. Despite my fears about the heavy FT glass chewing through the batteries, I wasn’t aware of drastically worse battery life than with the 75-300.

  • John Z

    Is there anyone care about the Model name of CMOS on EM1 like me?

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.