(FT5) New High End OMD is also the E-5 successor (hybrid MFT and FT mount).

FacebookShare

It’s almost a year now that we speculate about a new Olympus hybrid mount camera. And finally I got multiple feedbacks from sources saying that indeed Olympus will launch a High End OMD camera in September that will have 100% full support for both MFT and FT lenses. And surprise, the High End OMD also replaces the current Olympus E-5 FT camera! The High End OMD is placed a step above the current Olympus E-M5. The High End OMD doesn’t replace the E-m5 and the E-m5 will get replaced in 2014.

So what about the mount? I am still not 100% sure on this but it seems that the new High End OMD has some sort of hybrid MFT and FT mount. How this should work I don’t know yet. Hope more sources can read this post and answer that question soon. Thanks!

For sources: Sources can send me anonymous info at 43rumors@gmail.com (create a fake gmail account) or via contact form you see on the right sidebar. Thanks!
For readers: Don’t miss any news. Join our group on facebook and follow our tweets.

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

 

FacebookShare
  • Anonymous

    I think this is great news, I’m holding off on switching to a full frame system until a mirrorless one takes off like m43 did (my bet is on Sony). At that point I’ll prob keep both assuming the ff larger sensor will have larger bodies so the m43 kit would be for mobility and slim down lenses. Having the option to use FT lenses would be awesome because it will satisfy my wants for a faster zoom even if the whole setup is a bit larger. This would fill a gap at least for me. If it does video well would be the ultimate since ibis is wasted on the omd’s codec and if that happens my desired kit in the near future (waiting on specials or when successors are announced) would be a gx7 and e7. I’m looking forward to how well this is implemented. F2 zooms would be so nice =) (and expensive + large). I’m finding myself getting irritated constantly switching primes and not having the right one on for certain moments. F2.8 is just not enough indoors in low light with kids b/c I need headroom for shutter speed and I want to minimize flash.

    • Because you have no art with flash, which is sad. Learn light placement and modifiers and a new world will open to you.

      • Ross

        Bouncing flash off ceilings etc for indoors is very effective & I started doing that with ASA(ISO)100 to ASA400 film in my Pentax SF7 film camera with dedicated TTL flash (with swivel head). I continue to do that (& did with E520 & E30) but the higher ISO E-M5 (& PENs) spoils us more allowing more use without flash.

      • Anonymous

        I don’t like the look of bounced flash .. Even pro wedding photos with flash just doesn’t look natural to me I for some reason prefer a grainy but focused shot with natural light. Not to mention shooting kids setting up flash or waiting for it to charge makes me miss shots.

        I use flash to shoot macros or formal shots .. pita with kids running around. Even in post I try to make it look like it wasn’t shot with flash. Not really sad just preference.

      • gerry-g

        Simply bouncing a flash often works but often fails to do a good job as well. can you get the right distances to get a decent light angle? If not, the light will be too much from the top. Maybe one can use a flash with dual tubes, one bounce and one straight on. If the ceiling is off white, the color balance goes away. There are a pile of tricks, even as far as a upwards rear firing flash bouncing off of a bracket mounted reflector if some shape. It’s rare that a single flash can replace good natural light or a couple diffused remote TTL controlled units. Too bad they need an assistant(s) ;-) But they are common at weddings, an assistant with a hand held boom flash with a moderately soft and broad reflector.

  • Do

    Couldn’t it have one inner m43 mount ring and around that an outer pop-up 43 mount ring? Ok, probably not pop-up like a flash but but moved. forward and backward like a lens-element?

  • Any revanchist thoughts of 4/3 over FF or even m4/3 are sadly misplaced. And yet you’ll see exactly that at the 1022 forum at DPReview.

    Those people live in a separate spacetime.They are not even considering that the room for real cameras (vs. smart phones) has sadly shrunk by almost 50%.

    So we are really sweeping the ‘remains of the day’. I appreciate the gentlemanly gesture of Olympus, but the future is completely elsewhere, Asia will decide on the future of Photography, although I am v. happy to have been invited by the City of Boston group at flickr to show my work.

    Let’s discuss more photography and less gear.

    • Anonymous

      I’d rather use non-plasticky, fast, sharp, weather-resistant lenses. FT is a world a hater like you does not amd will never know.

    • Togger

      Not talking about gear should start with you. And lose that stinking ego, I bet you’re work isn’t much cop.
      Post a link to some if I’m wrong.

      • Hugo Gold

        why did they not simply use the E5 body and take the OMD processor and update the processor and ready?
        for me oly is over. I switch to nikon

  • Wow. More than a year ago, I was predicting Oly would announce such a “hybrid” OMD in September 2013, and amazingly, it appeats that turned out to be right. (Check the archives of this forum and DPR.)

    Specifically, my primary prediction was on-sensor PDAF for FT lens AF, and the FT “hybrid” achieved by using a suitable adapter for the older lenses. (It may already exist: quite possibly the current FT to mFT adapter would work.)

    Note that effective OS-PDAF would also enormously benefit AF performance of current mFT lenses, and especially improve CAF. So bodies no bigger than we now have can be significantly enhanced, even if FT lens compatability were not a consideration.

    But for many of us, FT lens functionality is highly desirable. I still own, and use, my original 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 acqured with the E-1 nearly 10 years ago. Sharp, fast, near-macro focus (and it came with the hood!), not too large, what more could I ask for?

    Well, except AF is slow as a slug. If the new OMD solves that problem, and otherwise retains/improves the EM-5’s beneficial features (moderate size, weight, weather-resistance, etc), it will be a slam-dunk winner.

  • Matthias

    The good news is two fold:
    1.) we can keep the ‘old’ 43 lenses
    2.) it should be a good combination of the features from the e-5 (multiple functional buttons) with the features of the e-m5 (better sensor better ISO quality)
    I hope for the next sensor generation, wifi, maybe even GPS and a grip you get on the e-m5 only with the battery grip.

    Last not least the 12/60 m43 lens woul make an ideal kit.
    Press my thumbs
    Btw: I’ll go for the new camera !!

  • Anonymous

    It’s probably no coincidence that Olympus does this now, when Sony is about to go mirrorless with the entire A-mount line-up. Obviously, Sony have developed an on-sensor PDAF solution that actually works really well. This allows them to get rid of the SLT mirror, and it allows Olympus to fully support 4/3 lenses on a mirrorless camera. Olympus gets sensors with PDAF from Sony, while Sony gets 5-axis IBIS and help with lens design from Olympus.

    • Yes, however no matter what Sony (and Oly) does it will sell much fewer cameras, if you believe Kirk Tuck:

      http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.it/2013/08/has-bubble-burst-is-that-why-camera.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheVisualScienceLab+(The+Visual+Science+Lab)

      Sales of cameras are down 43% in the US, so it’s really the time to find all the synergies companies can. Who knows what the much fewer users left might buy? To me m4/3 is more than enough. But will other people decide that their (considerable) money is better spent on FF?

      What do you use your camera for? That for me is the dividing line. I.e. for Street Shooting m4/3 is much better than FF – 4/3 instead was always absurd.

      • Kirk Tuck’s theory of the drop in camera sales: “[2012] was the time frame when I started hearing from my non-professional friends (but very competent photographers) about their hobby ennui.”

        That may be, but I think it is more because digital camera performance has reached a plateau where any further improvement in sensor quality and optical quality will be incremental. Fewer of us have the motivation to buy new stuff. Camera sales had been driven by the desire to purchase the next best thing, and now, increasingly, only people who really need them are buying them. You can see this more and more in the comments here, too: more people are declaring that they are going to wait or hold off or something.

        • Oh, wait… he makes this very point later on in the article. Darn my impatience! :-)

          • Yeah, the bottom line is that digital cameras have become a “mature” field. So, there’s less and less reason for consumers to upgrade to this year’s model every year (same thing as happened to PCs, and now tablets, and soon smartphones).

            Still, film camera manufacturers managed to stay in business back in the late 1980’s / early 1990’s. The surviving digital camera companies will just have to settle back into the less heady approach they took during the previous “plateau.”

      • gerry-g

        . Yes, however no matter what Sony (and Oly) does it will sell much fewer cameras, if you believe Kirk Tuck:

        The same is true for all camera brands. Most cameras (including video) are being replaced by cell phones or other “appliances” that do other things than shoot photos/videos.

      • gerry-g

        >To me m4/3 is more than enough. But will other people decide that their (considerable) money is better spent on FF?

        Sensor technology has advanced so much (and even superior ones are getting readied for 2014 that about the only advantage of FF will be for those that need a very shallow DOF. For that, why not bring back the E-500’s focus bracketing feture and add “de-focus stacking”?

    • Not a bad trade-off at all. Achieving effective OS-PDAF has obviously been elusive, and if Sony has got a good solution, it’s really worth something. Oly’s IBIS*5 has considerable value, along with Oly’s established skill as lens-maker.

      Of course, nothing stands still, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Oly still has a trick or two to spring on us. Not hard to imagine the new OMD will sport “6-axis IBIS”, or detachable, wireless LCD monitor or who knows what.

      Getting the other guy’s current technology in exchange for one’s prior generation stuff is definitely a clever move.

      • Vitruvius

        @ jrapdx – “detachable wireless LCD monitor” – Sony is already making a “lens camera” that you attach to your smart phone to control it.

        • Yeah, I saw something about that–seemed kind of funny at the time.

          But what I was thinking was just the opposite. Imagine if it was possible to move the LCD monitor off the back of the camera and view what the camera “sees” at a distance. Very handy in macro, certain studio scenarios.

          Suppose it would need some way to adjust the camera, trigger shutter, etc. Could be “on-screen” controls (touch sensitive), well that’s not an entirely new idea.

          Just make sure not to lose it somewhere. Replacements would cost a fortune…

  • Market Analyst

    Wildlife photographers are idiots.

    • Anonymous

      Market Analysts are baffoons. :-)

  • Republic

    So long as the ISO is amazing LOW LIGHT….Oh Please dear God Olympus make it comparable to at least the Canon Mark III….oh and Dynamic Range improvement would be cool too ;)

    • Ross

      My guess is it will be something similar in performance to that of the E-P5 (but with other pro features).

      • JimD

        It could be far better than the EP5. Remember the difference between the early pens and the E5 the same sensor but the E5 was vastly superior in picture quality, even getting best DSLR from a German Photography web site.

        • Ross

          We can hope! ;)

    • Anonymous

      yeah, since photography ist in the mantime predominantly a nigh hobby, like star watching and so on, an amazing, 35-mm-like llow noise hi iso is absolutely essential ;)

  • Vitruvius

    Obviously it will be a larger and better OM-D with something like the Sony LA-EA2 smart mirror adapter. Essentially a new E-5 in tow parts. But it is still limited by the 4/3 sensor size otherwise all their lenses wouldn’t work.

  • really looking forward to seeing how they do this with (one?) mount!
    expect it to be between GH3/E5 size

    or, wouldn’t it be amazing if it was like that rumor of old, the blad box with a back and lens mount. Heck, they could even make mounts in Nikon F, OM, Pentax … that would get a lot of attention from people with some class old glass?

    but back on planet earth, make the 43 lenses seem attractive all of a sudden and might go some ways to explain Oly’s complete absence in the f/2.8 zooms!!!

    wonder if Panasonic will also make a 43/m43 body

    • Ross

      “and might go some ways to explain Oly’s complete absence in the f/2.8 zooms!!!”

      There may well be a lot of truth in that.

      • Oilymouse

        Agreed. I always figured that Oly saw no point in recreating the 12-60, 14-54 and 50-200 zooms, let alone the more expensive ones.

        You can’t make them much smaller for m43 without sacrificing IQ. Then these newly developed lenses would just compete on price, but Olympus would loose its image as being able to make some the finest lenses.

  • Joe Schmoe

    Thank God you know everything and can set everyone upon the path of righteousness!
    What we would all do without your bottomless pit of wisdom?

  • kirk

    Don’t believe Kirk Tuck, believe the organization, CIPA, which keeps track of (the now declining) camera sales. The numbers are widely available. Reading real source material is fun.

  • DaMacGuy

    Seems to me that the simplest way to accommodate a 4/3rd lens on an MFT mount is just to provide something like the MMF-3 adaptor with the camera. And, engineer it if necessary, to stay mounted on the body while you change FT lenses and support all the functions of the lens and camera. Actually, if they engineered it like a Metabones adaptor, even better. Then, when you want to use MFT lenses, you just take the adaptor off.

    KISS. That would be the Occam’s Razor way to do it.

  • I am not at all surprised if the US numbers worsen in 2013. There are material but psychological aspects in camera saturation. Kirk and Thom are very perceptive.

    As said this camera comes too late, at least for 4/3 owners. Many sold their stuff and jumped ship. Again what will you use it for? Birding? And invest thousands in it?

    Thankfully GAS is not really my motivation. But it happened for me with film, and I stopped for almost ten years. The emulation factor is real, but now all cameras are good. The last 10% perhaps is different, but then?

    Don’t forget that O&P should sell 2 million cameras to make a profit and they sell only one. So its a paradox that at the moment the best models appear the m4/3 crowd is demotivated, at least in the US.

    But camera collection is only superficially like luxury item collection, it has a social communication role, and that is covered by smart phones. It has an Art role, and that perhaps might be covered by better cameras. But even an older camera will do most of the time. So the activity and the buying diverge.

    The enthusiast crowd here is not very significant or representative of the wider world, and of what the Japanese banks might decide about O&P camera business. I really hope that light will come from the East, and not from Samsung :)

    • As mentioned above, some of us held on to FT gear, and actually some of it is still potentially useful. My 14-54mm is a great lens, and I do use it with the EM-5. Save for the slug-slow AF, it performs well.

      That’s why the “Pro” OMD will have appeal, if it lives up to expectations. That is, I expect the new OMD will have OS-PDAF, not only good for old FT lenses but also helpful to current mFT AF and CAF performance.

      While camera sales tank on account of phone-cameras, the issue isn’t technological competition, rather it’s “image overload”, that is, when imaging is completely ordinary and routine, it isn’t valued. Then the distinction between truly excellent photography and badly made snapshots becomes fuzzy. For many, perhaps the majority, having a “real” camera vs. “phone-camera device” is irrelevant.

      Perhaps that’s what the “psychological” element refers to. In any case, I’d agree that for the foreseeable future, equipment like the upcoming OMD is going to appeal to a smaller segment of the population than anyone had anticipated.

      • Yes, this was the neat analysis by Kirk Tuck. There is image overload, bad money chasing away the good one. But there is also gear overload, not having better cameras to aspire to.

        Now the OM-D pro could belong to the latter, or it couldn’t. I am in the same situation of Nsowon: a couple of 4/3 lenses, and I am certainly not going to unload 1700 $ to please them :)

        I also believe that the great success of m4/3 is due to the ‘always with you camera’. So the GX7 fits perfectly, the Pro doesn’t.

        Do I care about having access to technically excellent lenses? My answer depends on my photography. Do they help it? They won’t. I don’t shoot birds or lions from my car window. Moreover I find this style of photography, a’ la NatGeo, extremely boring. Technical excellence doesn’t change it one bit.

        I am an urban animal first, and I am interested in people first, architecture and psychogeography following. m4/3 is perfect for that, 4/3 isn’t. Neither do I need a 50-200 to fast focus a pet or a brat :)

        So although there will be a degree of reverse compatibility between systems, the people behind them might not have many values in common. The Cardinal Sin Oly made in the past was to try to compete with C & N in their own terms. It entirely wrecked it. So I won’t bear any revanchism.

        m4/3 was a radical departure from it. If it is yet important to unseat C&N dominant position, Sony might best succeed with a small mirrorless FF – Oly is already contributing to it.

        As for interesting photography I am pretty sure that m4/3 is still where it is at: so the GX7 is both more accessible and useful. Probably the cheaper OM-D will be an interesting camera too, but they have nothing to do with the once proud remnants of the defeated 4/3 army. :)

        • Oilymouse

          Worldwide DSLR sales (bigger bodies) are more healthy than mirrorless in all respects. It would be silly for Olympus to make just teeny bodies; they should take APS-C head on. They already made two wonderful small bodies, the E-M5 and the E-P5. Good enough for some pros, let alone amateurs, for years to come.

          You seem to be unaware Olympus has been making bigger (OM, E-x) and smaller (Pen, 35, XA) cameras for over five decades, being a very respectable competitor since the 70ies. It’s in their blood; they compete according to their own vision, like Pentax, Fuji and so on.

          And here you are apparently resenting they keep it up because of some personal reasons… Should we conclude that with you as a CEO Oly would have made an E-P5 with EVF to compete with the GX-7 and call it a day? Pretty poor entrepreneurship.

          • No such ambitions I am only a very modest photog, with a following which is probably many times over yours :)

            The very existence of m4/3 proves what a monumental error was 4/3. The superiority airs of 4/3 henchmen thus doesn’t impress.

            I heard that in the old Oly Board there were nostalgics of dSLR. They probably kept alive the old flame until they were kicked out.

            So now we have an expensive lifebuoy for those veterans that killed a century old camera company.

            A gesture, until further notice, that can only be likened to old officers and gentlemen making hara kiri, for their oldest, blabbering customers, that don’t have the stamina or resources to jump ship to a different dSLR system.

            I wipe a tear or two. How noble! :)

            PS will they get blind by using their first EVF?

            • Anonymous

              your personal vendetta against the FT-user must drive you mad

            • Oilymouse

              I have no followers. History lesson just for you: CCD-heating makes live view hard to implement. Hence the digital reflex cameras of the 2000s. Everybody was in on it.

              However, it’s clear you’re just trying to have fun. Now, it would have been great for you if the new Oly camera had no support for F/T lenses, even denying usage of the existing adapters.

              Sadly, it does support these fine lenses. Therefore I conclude many (me included) are having a lot more fun than you, because you really hoped for something else, didn’t you? Hahaha. Say hello to your followers for me. Ciao! :-)

  • mring1

    The combination of the new Pany RF-styled camera and an Olympus replacement of the E-5 (if true) is excellent news. Full disclosure: I’m not buying either one, but the combination of Pens, OMD, Pany and 4/3-m4/3s hybrid will create an outstanding range of options. Camera makers are going to need all the help they can get, because the market is shrinking. Virtually every camera under about $400, except for the very specialized ones like the Tough series, will disappear…a victim of the smart phone.

    It’s still going to be dog-eat-dog, or Canikon trying to eat everyone else, but there really isn’t a better option. I think the Oly/Sony and Pany/Fuji alliances bode well for anyone who’s interested in m4/3s.

    Now…if Oly would just release those HG-equivalent m4/3s zooms, that (for me) would be marvelous. The 12-35 is a very good lens, but too short for me. I think we’ll see that Oly lens, especially if they release that hybrid.

  • Nsowon

    I sold my E-400 and bought an OM-D because there was no entry-level replacement for the E-400. I only had the 14-42, 40-150 and 9-18mm, as well as an FL-36. I had no premium glass, and waited on the 100-300 and any primes because I was uncertain about the system.

    So, the change to m.4/3 was relatively painless and I stuck with Oly as the kit I got had a free adapter for the lenses I had. I am now fully m.4/3 with the 12-50mm, Panny 14mm f2.5, 45mm f1.8, Oly 40-150mm and the 75-300mm and an E-PL5 backup walk-around body; the exception being the 9-18mm, which has the adapter permanently on it.

    I bought my E-400 as it was the world’s smallest DSLR at the time, and the OM-D (I love a viewfinder) ticked all the boxes. I am not a pro-level buyer or user. I have no premium lenses.

    How is this relevant? There are many who bought 4/3 cameras and extremely wonderful and expensive glass and it was and is the glass that they care about; as any serious photographer has done for years. Oly knows this, and they know that these people are loyal customers. Given their financial troubles and funding restraints, I’m sure they are happy to at last be offering a better body solution to these high-value enthusiasts. That they have done so will, undoubtedly, keep these enthusiasts happy with the brand and perhaps loyal to whatever future models Oly produce. If they have stock or are still making the lenses for 4/3, then the value of those will retain also.

    Those 4/3 Oly owners are, generally, also very capable photographers judging by the photos I see on the sites I register with. They continue using their “old tech” cameras to produce wonderful pictures.

  • Nu

    Hopefully this will be the camera I am waiting for. As much as I like the M4/3 size advantage it’s weak point is in long fast telephoto lenses for wildlife. The 4/3 lenses already exist for this. If not then my next camera will be a Nikon 7100. Seems they have taken notice of M4/3 and now have an in camera crop factor that’s the equivalent of 4/3 format to gain some magnification and processing speed.

  • JimD

    So we have the “not interested in a hybrid camera” brigade now.
    It might be worth remembering that the pen cameras had the same sensor as the E5 at one time. The better quality electronics and more memory and higher specs (inc lenses) enabled the E5 to deliver images way beyond the capability of the pens.
    It is highly likely that this new hybrid will be of a similar quality step above the current cameras.
    I think the E-M5 is actually handicapped by a lack of processing power and memory. With more of both it would improve quite a bit. But that
    s the EM5 theis new one it would seem has a new PDAF enabled sensor.
    Making a dual mount is quite simple. visualise the MMF2 with a 4/3 lens mount on one side and a m43 lens mount on the other. have a band around the mount that acts as the camera registration distance using a wide throat on the camera. Now have a collar that goes over the adapter and clips it to the camera. Contacts for control made through the TOP of the adapter and wired to the lens contacts at the bottom. Signal reversal in electronics or by keeping separate contact paths. Using small contacts at the top opens up a lot of ground for third party lens control and even larger sensors.

    But there will be no focus peaking. You just cannot have it all.

    • JimD

      Should read
      ” But that is the EM5 this new one it would seem has a new PDAF enabled sensor.”
      Admin! I need “edit” back.

      • Ross

        So do we all! ;D

      • OS-PDAF and PDAF on sensor is not an good choice if we look on IQ, and PDAF on sensor need we also an new sensor to.
        But the i think Olympus do, is to use an 6-axis IS in this Hybrid camera so will by CDAF but to move sensor out/in so the not only give AF for FT lens but also to all MF lens to, all manuale lens so is dedicate for M43 to FT and also old OM lens too.

        • JimD

          Yes. but that means the body must be deep enough to take the 4/3 lenses. An adapter will mean the body can be smaller than 4/3 but the same or bigger than m43

          • Oilymouse

            In theory, only the mount part needs to be retractable for m43 lenses. The rest of the body doesn’t have to so big, because no mirror box is needed. In practice, we’ll have to see…

            • JimD

              The 4/3 lens still requires the same distance from mount to sensor even if there is no mirror hence the 4/3 adapter must stick out or the m43 adapter must be recessed. If the sensor moves then the body depth must be what the E series DSLRs were. But sensor moving would be double engineering as the mounts are physically different sizes and alastic metal is a bit of a problem.

              • If you look on E-10 and E-20, and look the mirror box on this, will you see the not is an normal mirror box, but an prism, so give an short optic fochus plan but not an short distance, so the i think is for M43 use Olympus an prism mirror box and on FT an normal mirror box.

                • it is possible to do this, but it does cost 1/2 stop of light (minimum)
                  really its an avoidance of using an EVF, but solves nothing for AF,
                  which on E10-20 was still cdAF

    • Yes, we should be interested in the “hybrid” camera whether or not owning FT lenses.

      The reason is simple. The concensus seems to be the new OMD will have on-sensor PDAF which will accommodate FT focusing, a very good thing indeed. However, OS-PDAF should also boost AF and CAF performance of mFT lenses considerably, a benefit to nearly all users.

      I’d guess more likely than not the new OMD will directly accept only mFT lenses. Mounting FT lenses probably will require an adapter, possibly the current FT to mFT model would work. In any case, sounds like we’ll find out in a month or so…

  • Republic

    C’mon Admin….give us some specs!!!!! :D

  • Chris

    I cant wait lol~~~~

  • AW

    Well, this is very disappointing news for me today. As a Canon crop user who has been planning for some time to change to m43, I was waiting daily for news of the new improved OMD EM5. But I don’t want a premium body priced anywhere near the estimated prices floating around here for this hybrid 4/3 & m4/3 camera. I would simply like an OMD with the improvements of the EP5 put into it. Now the rumour is maybe not until February?

    It looks like if I switch I will have to choose between the OMD, EP5 with VF4, and the GX7. I can’t abide not having a viewfinder, so it’s only one of those 3. I really want the 5 axis IBIS, and particularly the video IBIS, so that rules out the GX7. I really want focus peaking for my manual lenses, so that rules out the OMD. I’m left with the EP5, which has a questionable grip and looks ugly with the VF4 attached, but feature and controls-wise has almost everything I want except weather sealing. But who wants a camera that looks ugly? An OMD with all the new features and control layout of the EP5 would have been perfect for me.

    The plan doesn’t sound quite as satisfying. More thinking to do.

    • Maybe it was wrong thinking in the 1st place for a professional grade body coming with an attractive price. If you could rethink about your requirements for the new body? Personally, I think the accuracy for focus peaking is overrated and is only really usefull for videography and as an alternative for zone focus style photographers. Shooting wide open, you get better results with focusing in magnified mode.

      • AW

        I’m yet to hear what makes OMD Pro a professional grade body other than the rumour that it can take 4/3 lenses, plus has a maybe pdaf capable sensor. I wouldn’t call those 2 features alone pro grade, or worth many hundreds of extra dollars. Certainly not in manufacturing costs, anyway. OMD EM5 already has many strong features, and could use a logical refresh with the improved features of the EP5, plus better control buttons etc like the EP5. I was ready for that, and was not expecting anything more ‘professional’ than that.

        I’ve used magnifying mode before and find it fiddly. Why do you think focus peaking will not be easy to use wide open? The lines should be clear enough still I think? There may not be as many of them but still possible to see. But I haven’t tested it on the EP5 so can’t be sure. I’ve seen some review videos though, but don’t know if they were wide open.

        • What makes a pro body?
          Reliability: water-proof metal body and durability of mechanical components (e.g. shutter)
          Service: worldwide pro service with exchange bodies and lenses and fast turnaround.
          Apart from that it will have the best the manufacturer can offer currently in tried and tested components but the first two are more important than the specs

        • There are no confirmed details about the OMD Pro yet, but concluding from the rumoured prices it should at least match the build of the GH3, though I expect it will be the same level as the older E-1/3/5 models in durability, and the shutter should last for at least 150k-200k actuations. The previously mentioned Olympus bodies are well known for the sturdy and proven sealings(though the lcd swivel constructions were sometimes prone to dew/moisture penetrating in some way.The resistance against moisture is better then any other topmodel of any brand. I just based my opinion with peaking based on my use with the Ricoh GRX plus M-mount module with my Nokton 50mm f/1.1
          I am a wide open shooter, its part of my style. So I was very curious about the peaking modes: standard, which hightlights the max contrasts edges in an image, and mode2, which turned the preview in embossed style, very usefull in bright light using the lcs screen. The problem is, that at extreme wide apertures, the peaking seems to think it nails focus even when you still turn your focus ring a bit forth and back. But while doing this in normal magnified mode, you see immediately this slightly turn of the focus ring affects the the point of perfect focus. The fiddly experience is correct, but you should try it in combination with the stabilized EVF mode. I have the OMD, and its much easier now to focus in magnify mode because you EVF will not give that shacky image of a super magnified detail, but it will give a steady view when you press the shutter button halfway. Even with the Helios 85mm its easy to nail focus wide open.

          • AW

            Thanks for this useful info. Much nicer to read some informative stuff like that on here instead of people abusing each other. It’s my first time posting on here, by the way, although I’ve been following the site for some time. I also expect to shoot wide open on m43 much of the time. I like subject isolation, which is my biggest concern with moving to m43.

            Olympus has of course the right to make any body they want. The one rumoured today is just not the one that I want. But everyone wants something different. I think Olympus needs to be very careful though to avoid going too far over $1000 – it moves it out of enthusiast $$ range and too close to very nice FF camera prices. Anyway, the problem for me is choosing which of those 3 cameras I mentioned above is worth switching to, knowing that none of them will feel just ‘right’. But they might have to do until the OMD replacement is available mid next year.

          • AW

            Thanks for this useful info. Much nicer to read some informative stuff like that on here instead of people abusing each other. It’s my first time posting on here, by the way, although I’ve been following the site for some time. I also expect to shoot wide open on m43 much of the time. I like subject isolation, which is my biggest concern with moving to m43.

            Olympus has of course the right to make any body they want. The one rumoured today is just not the one that I want. But everyone wants something different. I think Olympus needs to be very careful though to avoid going too far over $1000 – it moves it out of enthusiast $$ range and too close to very nice FF camera prices. Anyway, the problem for me is choosing which of those 3 cameras I mentioned above is worth switching to, knowing that none of them will feel just ‘right’. But they might have to do until the OMD replacement is available mid next year.

          • AW

            Just saw your flickr site. Nice, & good to see some great shallow DOF and bokeh coming out of m43. I’m sure it’s not as easy as with larger sensors, but subject isolation is still very possible. Were those B/W photos taken with the EM5 straight from the camera or post-processed? I am trying to get a feel for what style of jpg Olympus produces, both in colour rendition and B/W. Not happy with the B/W out of my Canon, it doesn’t produce such punchy deep blacks.

      • AW

        First time poster here, by the way, but have been following the site for a while.

  • One way to see how Pro it is, is the number of shutter actuations.

    At Oly top of the line is typically 150,000.

    E-M5 is 100,000

    http://forum.fourthirdsphoto.com/discussion/70508-e-m5-shutter-life-100-000-a.html

    • thanks for this, I always wondered about the shutterlife, I assume they got it from official source?

      • If you look closely the source is in Kanji (?) so one assumes that it is straight from the horse’s mouth :)

    • Enzojz

      It’s not only shutter life, also a pro should have dual or tri processor!

  • isawitandhandledit

    i saw it it and handled it, its too awesome to describe!! thats the only thing that i can say for now. This was my reaction to the pre prod model when i tested it, “Oh My God!! I want this now!””

  • Michael White

    Damn, I’ll put my OM-D on eBay before this new baby hits the market. Prices of the old OM-D will go down, fast.

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