(FT5) New E-P5 coming soon and definitely has no viewfinder. Price close to $1,000.

Share

After yesterdays post I got feedback from more sources including some trusted sources. The new E-P5 definitely has NO(!) electronic viewfinder. Price of the camera with kit lens should be close to $1,000.  It will also be announced “soon” (how soon I don’t know) and probably be in Stock by June/July. A source also confirmed that major high end Olympus cameras are coming the second half of the year.

I ask the sources if they may can give me some more hint about the upcoming new lenses and the exact release date. Thanks!

Rumors classification explained (FT= FourThirds):
FT1=1-20% chance the rumor is correct
FT2=21-40% chance the rumor is correct
FT3=41-60% chance the rumor is correct
FT4=61-80% chance the rumor is correct
FT5=81-99% chance the rumor is correct

Share
  • dunsun

    Well I am too very disappointed.Iam expecting it will have very sexy vintage design. That’s what we pay for. Thank you Iam not interested.I do not know why but with every new oly product I fill they weight design too heigh.

    • jpig

      I know I’m in a minority here, but I’m not concerned by the lack of an integrated EVF. I already have a VF-2 so as long as that still works on the E-P5, I’m satisfied. What would turn me off of the E-P5 is if it accepts only the rumored new detachable EVF and is incompatible with the VF-2. I also prefer that the E-P5 NOT have a tilting or articulated LCD. I have no need for such a feature, which is prone to damage and makes the body more bulky. Basically, all I’m looking for is an E-P3 with the improved OMD sensor. I can even live without the 5 axis IBIS.

      $1000 is more than I’m willing to pay for an E-P5, but I’m happy to wait for the price to drop. If the majority of the comments here are any indication, maybe sales won’t be great and Olympus will end up discounting it heavily as happened with the E-P3. If so, my oddball preferences could turn out to be an advantage. At least I hope so.

      • AMVR

        Sounds like you want an E-PM2.

        – You don’t want tilt lcd, so no PL5, check
        – You want OMD sensor, check
        – you don’t want 5 axis IBIS, check
        – You need compatibility with VF-2, check
        – you want it cheap, check

        Why come here and make noise against an EVF E-P5 when all you want is an PMP2 ? is the E-P3 THAT important for you ? are you willing to waste $4-500+ for an otherwise 99% similar camera that fulfills pretty much the same functions. At least with an EVF the E-P5 would distinguish itself, your reasoning makes no sense.

        • J Shin

          E-P’s have more dials and buttons than E-PL’s, and E-PL’s have more dials and buttons than E-PM’s. E-P’s are also larger; European men seem to have trouble holding on to the E-PM’s…

          If the E-P5 with kit lens is $900, that’s $300 more than the E-PL5 with kit lens. Maybe it’s worth the extra dials and buttons and better EVF and better grip? And maybe more “scenes” and maybe better JPEG and maybe better IBIS? It’s still cheaper than the E-M5.

          Not to me, but I can see it mattering to some. I’ll wait for the E-M5 or the E-PL5 to be discontinued, and pick them up from the bargain bin. Actually, I’ll probably wait for their _successors_ to come and go before I consider another body. I love my E-PM1! 🙂

        • jpig

          Nope, I don’t want an E-PM2. I don’t like the lack of physical controls and I really dislike the 16:9 aspect ratio of the LCD. I agree that $1000 is too much for an E-P5 w/o EVF, but time will take care of that, and I don’t mind waiting a year or more for the price to drop. But only if the E-P5 turns out to be the camera I want. At the moment, it’s only a rumor.

  • Matthias

    Who says that these rumors are true? To talk about rumors is only a waste of time 😉

    • J Shin

      Noooooooo!!! It can’t be!

    • alexander

      dream on…

    • mooboy

      You’re talking about rumours…

  • mring1

    I’m actually more interested in what Oly defines as a “kit lens” for this camera. I suppose they could just throw on the tried-and-tested 14-42. Makes sense, I suppose, and cheaper for sure. But if you recall, the 12-50 was announced in advance of the E-M5, and this might be an interesting way to get the new lens out there. It would give Oly insight into the interest in this lens prior to the new bodies – whatever they are -that are supposed to be announced later this year.

  • Nonsense! I’ve been hanging on to my E-P3 waiting for the replacement with viewfinder integrated, interest level just dropped to 0%

    • Neonart

      Mitch, I had an EP3 and loved it, but the Em5 did it for me. I know the form is different, but it’s just fantastic. Same size as EP3, way better sensor, better IS, better dials, weather resistant, EVF, it goes on and on.

      I too prefer the look of the pens, but if Oly doesn’t put and EVF in one, the OM-D is just too good to overlook.

      • Ulli

        @Neonart, your adaptive attitude feels like a fresh wind between all the stubborn who cant accept anything else then an rf shaped evf camera.

    • The E-P3 replacement with a viewfinder is called Fuji X-E1. ;))

  • When it is released it will have.
    5 way ibis
    Worlds best EVF.
    CDAF and PDAF all at world best speed and accuracy.
    A tilt screen (16.9).
    All GH3 movie modes.
    rangefinder style.
    HDR in camera.
    Tripod mount under sensor.
    WiFi everything. with computer/Mobile operation and use.
    GPS.
    And use the HLD6 (with a little plastic $200 add on).

    Then WE HAVE A PROBLEM. What will we have to complain about? Oh I know, its to small for PDAF lenses.

    BUT! We will be so relieved we will all rush out and buy one.

    • mafia assistant.

      No PDAF lenses at givaway prices?

    • I truly hope so!

  • ph

    This olympus decision seems plain stupid and will probably be a commercial disaster.

    • ph

      There is a change of succes if the suggested price includes the new VF-5.

  • adaptor-or-die

    An OVF instead of EVF is a grasping dream I suspect? It doesn’t make sense, it would be a mixed OEVF if anything and that is really dreaming at this point.

    I suspect we are entering the fallout of the scandal and money woes. Sony has pumped money into Olympus, only in self-interest. Do they want to see mFT variant NEX-competition models? No. Money is far different than sharing technology, it’s just them grabbing more market profits, not some Renaissance of mirrorless tech design.

    Originally, Olympus was exploring EPSONs flat film designs for their EVFs. Is that in Sony’s sharholders best interest? I doubt it. Would it be to the point that something is scrapped for sake of replacing those parts in the future with Sony EVF tech?

    While that may penalise the customer base and offer something not as good, and delayed in delivery date, it sounds like real world business practice.

  • cosinaphile

    idiots a vf in the corner position is the way to go so of course they are clueless

    my em5 has nose prints on the lcd …..idiots

    the x100 the xe1 the nex 6 nex 7 all wildly popular ,,,,,idiots

    • The Other Chris

      As a left eye-dominant photographer, corner VFs have my nose pressed against the LCD as well. Idiot.

      • In that case what you want is a real pen-f. Being a portrait mode camera it can be turned 90 degrees left or right to landscape mode. Thus to avoid a right hand nose, a left hand nose, and suit a right handed person, a left handed person, a right eyed person or a left eyed person.
        Very flexible has superb lenses and is simplicity to use.

  • remoh

    1000 bucks is too much for a pen. and no evf? not interested!

  • jeroen

    how excruciatingly frustrating to be waiting for the e-p5, knowing it’s likely to disappoint like the e-p3 did.

    my current G3 takes fine pictures but it’s nothing special in the looks and feel department so I’m really missing my e-p2. If the p3 didn’t absolutely suck at ISO 1600 I might consider it as a backup.

  • Dante

    Why do we need this E-P5? Does it have any feature that is unavailable or significantly better/different from existing Olympus cameras?

  • ISO 1638400

    Typical reasons and responses given by the hidden agenda anti-MFT_RF_I-EVF_TLC brigade to deny the majority of m4/3 users an RF styled camera body with integrated viewfinder in the top left corner:

    Anti-I-EVF_TLC brigade: “There is no space for an integrated EVF”
    Counter: http://camerasize.com/compact/#155,183,375,da,b

    Anti-I-EVF_TLC brigade: “It would make the camera too heavy and bulky”
    Counter: http://camerasize.com/compact/#155,183,375,da,b

    Anti-I-EVF_TLC brigade: “I prefer removable EVF to keep the camera light and less bulky”
    Counter: Why buy an external EVF, if you are seldom going to use it? When you do use it, the camera will be taller, bulkier and uglier than the integrated version.

    Anti-I-EVF_TLC brigade: “It would make the camera too expensive”
    Counter: http://www.adorama.com/ISONEX6LBB.html

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0096W1OKS/ref=dp_olp_new/175-7326188-3908246?ie=UTF8&condition=new

    http://www.camerapro.com.au/fujifilm-x-e1-silver-body-only-australian-stock.html

    http://www.camerapro.com.au/fujifilm-x-e1-black-w-xf-lens-35mm-f1-4-53mm-equiv.html

    http://www.discountcameras.com.au/discountcameras/view_product/47331

    Anti-I-EVF_TLC brigade: “It would cannibalise sales of OM-D, G and GH”
    Counter: Cannibalise your own products with your own products, rather than somebody else cannibalising them with their products. Profits go back to the company and its employees, regardless of which products made them. Sales are being lost every day by upgraders holding-off from purchasing. Users and therefore future profits will be lost to other camera systems because of refusal to provide the products users require.

    Anti-I-EVF_TLC brigade: “I don’t want to pay extra for EVF”
    Counter: You don’t want to pay for an integrated EVF but pay for an external one instead, that you “leave behind when you don’t need it”. They got your money anyway, and by “leaving it behind”, you paid for thin air. Great economics. Another thing, with m4/3 you pay extra even without an I-EVF!

    Anti-I-EVF_TLC brigade: “Get the OM-D or G5/GH3 then!”
    Counter: This is a desperate, low-life comment from those who hide in dark corners, with a sharpened knife to attack those who would oppose them, full of hatred and vitriol towards those who would choose a different product to them. Their agenda is assimilation. You must be like one of them. They must rule and your must become their subjects.

    Every single one of the anti-MFT_RF_I-EVF_TLC brigade’s arguments is easily defeated. They are the straw men of straw men of straw men. All users who want an m4/3 RF styled body with integrated EVF in the top left corner must at every opportunity counter and defeat this arrogant and ignorant hidden agenda brigade who foist their camera preferences on others while denying us of so simple and timeless a camera design as the rangefinder style with integrated viewfinder in the top left corner. This is a battle that we will win. One way or another. We will win.

    E-P3: Height 69.1mm Weight 369g (no I-EVF)
    GX1: Height 67.8mm Weight 318g (no I-EVF)
    NEX-6: Height 66.9mm Weight 345g (with I-EVF)

    Excuses, excuses, excuses.

    http://camerasize.com/compact/#155,183,375,da,b

    • Jekyll&Hyde

      You are right but these are no arguments for the PEN brigades. PEN is a Productline without EVF. The E-P5 is for existing Customers and new point and shoot customers like women. If you have a PEN xy with VF2, you probably want an new model without i-EVF.

      There is a smal market for Rangefinder-Style beside the SLR-Style of OMD and G, GH Lines.

      • ISO 1638400

        J&H, thanks for reading and replying. But I have to counter your statements as well. All in good manner, of course.

        “PEN is a Productline without EVF”
        This sounds very conclusive. Set in stone. A proclamation even. “This is what we’ve decided the product is and will be and we’re not going to deviate from that”. To not even consider a design modification in spite of strong user feedback and sentiment shows arrogance and ignorance on the part of the company (and those who justify their decisions), especially from one in deep financial troubles.

        “The E-P5 is for existing Customers…”
        Who are these existing Customers? People who bought an E-P1/2/3 only? Because it’s these users, especially from the first generation E-P1/2 who have waited for the i-EVF model for years. Maybe existing customers want something more than a warm over of a warm over of a warm over. Perhaps I speak for others here as well, but it’s nice to have a freshly prepared meal for a change on new tableware and cutlery.

        “…and new point and shoot customers like women.”
        Are these the type of users that would pay $1000 for a mirrorless ILC with kit-lens? Would not the PEN Mini and PEN Lite with their less complicated feature sets and lower prices suit these users better? Conversely, if a certain subsection of P&S upgraders bought into the top model PEN to get more involved in the image taking process and the enthusiast feature set and high asking price is not a barrier, would not an integrated EVF be a welcome, even necessary feature, if even for the sake of matching what the competition is able to do at the same price point?

        “If you have a PEN xy with VF2, you probably want an new model without i-EVF”
        This is a strange statement. The reasoning behind it seems more on the emotional side than it is on the practical. Why would someone not want something that can be offered for little or no extra cost (I and others have proven this with several irrefutable examples from both Fuji and Sony already (also add Nikon 1 V into that distinguished group of RF styled mirrorless ILCs with an I-EVF)) just because they own an accessory that fulfilled that task years ago but now can be fulfilled integrated in the camera and can be justified both technically and economically. Does it make one feel remorseful, full of rage and angst over their $200–250 “investment” in an accessory EVF, if it was to be made mostly redundant because of an integrated solution? If so, then I fear for such people in such a challenging and troubled world, who cannot take such a small and insignificant cost in the greater scheme of things as an equally small and insignificant loss.

        “There is a small [sic] market for Rangefinder-Style besides [sic] the SLR-Style of OMD and G, GH Lines.”
        A market being small does not and should not necessarily negate the validity of a product being developed, manufactured and marketed to the right people. You make a product that enthusiasts want and will buy and they bring in other users with them. Enthusiasts act as “free” marketing for manufacturers when they can recommend their friends, family and colleagues what cameras to buy based on real user experience. If you don’t develop and make products that enthusiasts want and will buy, you lose them as customers to your competitors, as well as the potential many other users they might have brought in with them.

        Also, I challenge the notion that the RF design style is now relegated to niche status in today’s digital market. There was a time when the RF style was the norm, rather than the exception; and with the slowly increasing adoption and popularity of mirrorless ILCs and the use of small prime lenses, it makes a lot of sense in both practical and aesthetic terms.

        A key point I want to make in this whole drama of an integrated EVF versus an accessory EVF and whether they should or whether they shouldn’t is this:
        If the EVF is integrated, it is always available whether you use it all the time, sometimes or very seldom. There is not a worry as it is with an accessory EVF that you left it at home or in the car, or that you might have dropped and lost it somewhere, or that it might become dislodged. Also, one can still make use of their accessory EVF as long as the camera’s accessory port and hotshoe continues to supports it.

        And again, I have proven conclusively that an integrated solution does not make the camera any more expensive than what Olympus and Panasonic already dare to charge for their i-EVFless cameras over the years. And it does not necessarily make the camera any more or significantly larger to have an integrated solution. It may necessitate a redesign and relocation of the top plate components like the pop-up flash and hotshoe, but it is certainly achievable if the motivation is there to do so.

        You will often see those from the anti-MFT_RF_I-EVF_TLC brigade throw in the red herring of the Fuji X-E1 to falsely represent the implication of resultant camera size if a m4/3 RF style camera integrates an EVF. The X-E1, while not being a large camera, was not designed to be a small camera either. Controls and dials are larger and buttons are more spaced apart on the back panel. The camera that should be compared to a m4/3 solution is the Sony NEX-6, as the feature sets and target audiences share more similarities.

        I await the eventual E-P5 specifications with interest. But without an i-EVF, I will not be considering it for my next upgrade.

    • ISO, I thought the majority of writers wanted an EVF . Most of the complaints were that Oly seems to think that holding a camera out in front of oneself while squinting to see an image on a screen in daylight and looking like a dork is completely normal and expected.
      After all is not the 5 way stabiliser to prevent camera dip when pressing a shutter at full arms length?

      Good comment though.

      • ISO 1638400

        JimD, see my post above in reply to J&H for more of my thoughts on the EVF issue.

        I think composing by way of a tilting/articulating display is okay, providing that the ability to compose with an integrated viewfinder is also there. Having one should not rule out the other, especially in enthusiast level cameras around $1000.

        I’m often in harsh sunlight conditions and to rely soley on the back display is not practical. There is also a principle at stake here. Why should m4/3 users who choose an RF style camera do without an integrated EVF, when competitors have no trouble integrating one in their cameras at a similar price point?

        It’s akin to considering two brands of car in the same price range. One car has airconditioning, cruise control, Bluetooth etc. plus all the safety features as standard, while the other car provides some of those features only as options at extra costs. Your preference is to stay with the brand you currently drive and are used to driving. However, they are stuck in the past and force you to pay extra for features that are now considered standard. It’s only when they lose the enthusiasm of the motoring press and the confidence of the buying public, and a significant number of sales are lost do they come back to the table and start to make up for the errors of their greedy, incompetent ways.

        • A tilt screen is almost a requirement nowadays. I would not buy a camera without one.
          A Viewfinder, OVF or EVF is not ‘almost’ a requirement it is a fundamental. After purchasing an EP2 (with the EVF) I will never buy a camera without a built in viewfinder. Sunny Sydney and no viewfinder do not mix. Having said that the EP2 viewfinder does have the ability to lift up which I find very useful. While I am happy with the EM5, I would like an RF style body.
          So my order is for a tilt screen and built in EVF which is also tiltable and in RF style. Until that happens I am unlikely to be giving Oly any money for a body.

  • If I needed one I’d have already bought the EPL5 which looks like a wonderful little machine until one needs EVF.

  • LRH

    What Olympus needs is a model with the E-PL2 or E-P3 form factor–a REAL 3″ LCD, IBIS that works, built-in-flash–updated to the newer 16mp sensor, and priced at about $500.

    Until last week, for the past year I shot with the E-PL1 and E-PM1, eyeing upgrading to a new PEN with the newer 16mp sensor. E-PM2–nope, the LCD is still small and it’s stuck at $500, not budging. Is the IBIS any better than on the E-PM1, which was flaky as heck? E-PL5–nope, same small LCD and it’s $600. The E-M5 is everything I want, but it’s $1000.

    I gave up and got a Sony NEX-C3 for $330 WITH 18-55mm LENS that addresses much of that. It has a 16mp sensor that’s probably even a tad better than the E-M5 one, image stabilization works far more reliably than the E-PM1 IBIS (on the lenses that have it), and its LCD, while it still deals with 16:9 aspect ratio mismatches LCD vs image, doesn’t have it anywhere near as badly. Also, I don’t have to upgrade Lightroom 3.5 to LR4 to process the RAW files, further stretching the price gulf between the $500 E-PM2 (now $600 by the time you include software) and the $330 NEX-C3. Too bad, I like the Olympus feature-set, ergonomics, and especially its JPEG processing, and lens selection.

    A big part of the problem is that Olympus stuck with the old 12mp sensor for so long, so now you have to pay top dollar for better image quality if you want to stay in their camp, while you can get it on the cheap with Sony models that are a generation or two old but still way ahead of the 12mp Olympus models.

    A $1000 E-P5 doesn’t help, either.

  • cprevost

    If they simply shifted the viewfinder from center to left side and somehow shaved down the hump there isn’t much to differentiate it from the OMD. If it’s a left shifted viewfinder OMD then why bother? It will have no viewfinder but will have some other compelling replacement. Built in flash and something else I imagine that would both make it a compelling buy and an upgrade. Oly will need to get some OMD owners to jump ship. I’m afraid the same camera with a different viewfinder orientation won’t do. Plus, if they keep the built in flash there won’t be room for a viewfinder without making the camera bigger.

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.

Close