(FT5) Price of the E-M1 and 12-40mm lens in YEN

Share

There are the prices in YEN of the new Olympus camera and lens (Source: Digicameinfo). I converted the price in Euro and Dollar but as usual keep in mind that the price will be different because of TAX and VAT reasons.

1) E-M1 body ¥ 145,000
Converted: 1100 Euro or $1500

2) E-M1 with 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 kit lens ¥ 175,000
Converted: 1330 Euro or $1800

3) E-M1 with 12-40mm f/2.8 kit lens ¥ 220,000
Converted: 1670 Euro or $2200

4) Power Battery Holder HLD-7, ¥20,000
Converted: 151 Euro or $200

5) PT-EP11 Waterproof housing, ¥100,000
Converted: 750 Euro or $1000

6) 12-40mm f/2.8 lens only, ¥90,000
Converted: 681 Euro or $900

The good news is that the 12-40mm f/2.8 lens is cheaper than the Panasonic 12-35mm X lens!

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

Share
  • babaar

    I don’t understand why someone would pay these kinds of prices for a sub-APS-C size sensor. The trend these days is moving to full frame, which provides a lot better image quality and can be fitted into a small body. Well, to each his own I guess.

    • OMG

    • Anonymous

      the trends this day is to go FF? maybe for a few keen enthusiast yes.
      well, FF lenses will always be huge, specially with the more demanding new sensors (look at the size of the new zeiss 55mm). I doubt many people will be enthusiastic about that.
      m43 offers a good compromise between quality and size. Actually, that’s how 24*36 became the format of choice over MF in the film era.
      That’s what is attractive, independently of price. you then have different model for different wallet/needs, with varying figure. As long as the quality is good enough, the rest is more important. we are there now.

      What is so hard to understand?

      • “Good enough” is a challenging concept to those who base their assessment of quality upon technical criteria rather than upon their experience / practical needs / art. Unfortunately, those vast, detailed transmitted-light displays and the web do not make it easier for technology aficionados. They are destined to break their backs and wallets while desperately trying to keep up with the rat race. It’s such a pity you can’t compare prints over the internet. Tragic, really.

        • Anonymous

          You always put it so elegantly, sneye. Always a pleasure reading a comment from you.

        • Anonymous

          well, trajic is may be a bit over the top 😉 it’s only cameras

          but yeah, this good enough depends on everyone, no official threshold here. I would however expect that potential customers, in their majority, already have a digital cam and therefore some experience of IQ. Coming from point and shoot, m43 will impress no matter what, and previous dslr owners may have realised it is not IQ that’s limiting them anymore

        • I went with Leica when I started in photography because then I’d know that, if anything was not right, it would be my fault. Once I saw that what I got out of an E-PM1 was not discernibly different, I made the switch. Accepting the “good enough” has been a very relaxing thing for me.

          Funny thing is, my first camera, an R3MOT, developed a very annoying but ignorable problem soon after I got it. So has the E-PM1. The R3 was still good enough, and so is the E-PM1.

          • In fact, actually, I’d say that the R3 and the E-PM1 have both been more than “good enough”. They both offer lots of things that fancier models don’t. Topic for another day, since I need to go to work. 🙂

      • Mike

        The trend is to have lighter equipment, buddy!! I totally agree with Anonymus!!

    • Flo

      @babaar
      You simply don’t understand the benefits of M43. It’s about being small while providing “good enough” IQ. It’s all a matter of compromises, you can’t have it all.
      Not everyone needs FF. I’d actually say that for 95% of shooting situations MFT is good enough. Mind you, I shoot with a D800 and I’ll be buying a E-M1 along the 12-40 f/2.8. Sensor tech has gone a very long way and the IQ one gets today from the latest crop of MFT sensors is better than anything else pro could have used 20 years ago!
      The point of MFT resides in its size and weight. Also, the 2x crop factor can be very useful. The Pana 100-300 gives you an 200-600 equiv. in a super small package. I own a Sigma 50-500 and believe me, 9 times out of 10 I take my Pana G3 + Pana 100-300 instead. Yes, the IQ is not as good, but it’s close enough to make the FF kit irrelevant.

      • Bm

        I find it funny that someone who owns a d800 and probably the latest and greatest 4/3 camera who plans on buying the em1 is preaching about “good enough” . call me crazy but that just doesn’t make sense.

    • jimbo

      Small body? No. There are some on here who are pretty good at photography, no matter the camera. Frankly speaking, a very good point and shoot like the rx100 is capable of giving you images that are often hard distinguish from DSLRs.

      • lorenzaccio

        True. OTOH, there are compromises you have to take into account. Good enough is not “best possible”. This implies that ppl are less prone to spend thousands of dollars for the product. Em1 looks great, but, as it happens recently, overpriced for what it offers.
        No wonder the new Olympus cams are NOT selling well…

        • Anonymous

          But ‘full frame’ isn’t the ‘best possible’ either (there are some medium and large format options that are technically better), and eh, what is the best possible anyway? That totally depends on what you need.

          The best camera is the one you have with you, not the one with the best specs.

          • “Best possible” doesn’t just depend on what you need, it also depends on what you can afford. If image quality were the only issue, we’d all be chasing medium format digital cameras costing $30,000 or $40,000. But short of selling off a few of my internal organs, that just won’t happen for me (or likely, anybody else in this discussion).

            So “what you need” will differ from person to person, as will “what you’re able / willing to pay.”

            Personally, all the “trend is toward X camera type” talk is nonsense to me. I take pictures for my own whims, buy camera(s) for my own needs — so why am I supposed to care what “all the cool kids” are allegedly doing?

            • Anonymous

              Totally agree SSP Eric, thanks for putting that in much better wording then I did.

          • People do forget that FF was, itself, a huge compromise; it was called “small format” back in the days. It was the smallest “good enough” format given the film technology of the time, but not too small for the precision engineering abilities of the lens manufacturers.

            If the sensor and lens technologies continue to improve, Pentax Q may some day be considered “full frame”. If the camera-phone trend continues, all the ILC lovers will be left trolling phone-camera rumor sites, saying what horrible compromises they are making.

            Meanwhile, I’ve still got my Century Graphic 6×9. Some real photography gets done when you have to lick and reload your film every 8 shots, if only because no cat will hold still long enough for you to adjust your Scheimpflug planes. 🙂

            • Sorry; didn’r mean to bash cat photos. Actually, I have a big cat envy.

            • Interesting points about sensor size.

              Some readers here might remember the 110 film craze of the early 80’s. Mostly, the tiny format produced lousy photos, IQ-wise hardly satisfactory even at 4x5in. (Except when Kodak spooled Kodachrome in 110, but that’s a whole different story.)

              Nobody mentions the fact that the 110 format was ~13x17mm. But, wait a second, that’s almost exactly the same size of our “modern” 4/3 sensor!

              In other words, FT and mFT are the current-day manifestations of a much-maligned “tiny” film format of the past. It’s hardly inconceivable what’s now regarded as a “tiny” format will become more than acceptable in the future.

              To be sure, technologies are moving targets, while endless debate over trivia is a constant.

              • Oilymouse

                Now that you mention it… It reminds me about APS-C film cartridges. That wasn’t such a hit either, but worthy of an honorable mention as the inspiration for more than a decade of DSLR products.

                But I guess you’re right: where film was the bottleneck before, we now see digital technology advancing rapidly, rendering all such comparisons nonsensical at best.

              • adaptor-or-die

                Your point is only that film stock has known size limitations, even that can be then debated with all the professional 16mm cine archives which also habitat a similar same footprint … I think everyone knows by now that digital sensors work better than film when it comes to miniaturisation. It didn’t happen overnight, but it happened.

                I’ve always laughed at the marketing of “APS” Digital. Let’s take one of the most unpopular film formats and make it our standard! Out of all of film’s vast history, they chose APS? (I guess somebody held the TM and was going to squeeze something out of that dead horse) At least FourThirds chose “half-frame”, which in Cinematic stock sense was considered “Full Frame”. Now none of this has anything to do with performance and capabilities, it’s simply a standard to weigh in on. Some people hang onto 35mm/135 film as a magic standard, that magic is based on film stock technology. That isn’t really relevant in this new age.

                Go Pro video and cellphones show a better solution than 110 and disc camera horrors. Mine is bigger and better, is a dated chant. A parallel. At the turn of the 20th Century. Every respectable man had a pocket watch. This hadn’t changed much since the 1600s when the pocket watch was first invented. In a only a matter of years, not decades or centuries; deemed originally a feminine concept, the wristwatch took over and replaced the pocket watch as the must need standard. Technology made the ability to create the same device smaller, and the advantage of that ability was realised, dated opinions changed and timepieces advanced, waterproofing, shock-proofing, auto-wind, increased accuracy. All the time in a smaller package.

                Maybe timepieces aren’t cameras, but the historical technological path could provide some clues.

            • Actually, I happily shoot with both my PEN E-PL5 and my Pentax Auto 110, depending on the subject.
              But what opened my eyes the biggest was using the Pentax lenses on the Olympus with an adapter. And because the frame/sensor sizes are the same, the lens focal lengths match. The only disappointment is that 18mm is the widest you can get.
              What it proved was that the film was the Achilles Heel of the format, not the lenses. I enlarged some up to A3+ for an exhibition and few believed that such quality came from a lens not much bigger than a thimble.
              Sometimes I look at Little Brother (the 110) and wish he were digital. I have promised him that if I win the lottery, I will make a New Brother, a digital Pentax Auto 110 that uses the old lenses – and a new wide angle.
              Oh, and the camera and lenses came in black. Except for the Safari model, which was brown and cream, but he only goes out on special occasions.
              I’ll stop now. Thank you for reading my dreams.

              • That is a beautiful promise. Thank you for sharing it!

          • Daav

            Correct. But lets clarify, medium and large format are not just technically better, for some things they can be creatively better as well. Medium format commonly have 40, 60 and 80 gb backs now. And have you ever seen the magic that can be accomplished with the swings, shifts and tilts of a large format camera with a good optic?

            The best camera though is always the one with you.

    • omolympus

      It’s not a football team, it’s not Roma v Lazio, etc
      Just cameras for taking phots.

      The micro stuff does allow for a smaller rig overall when you bang the lens on,
      but there is room for both – FF & MICRO ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. They each have their place, as do SLRs with optical VFs down to a P&S. And I will use both depending on the need

      It just seems human nature to have to pick a “team” – i use Canon, I use Nikon, I use Olympus…..just use the effing kit that suits the job and be happy. Peace.

    • Milt

      some people must crave/need the attention of being a troll. Personally, I look forward to a pocketable medium format, with small lenses to match. In the meantime, M4/3rds is fine with me.

  • safaridon

    In this picture the EM1 with 12-40/2.8 looks like a lot more attractive kit then previous views without irrespective of pricing. The slightly wider and longer range of the 2.8 lens should be an advantage. From this view the shape of the VF does look different from that of the EM5 as seems wider and extends back further???

    • Milt

      This photo doesn’t show the join between the grip and body that looked temporary or tacked on in the original photos.

  • Bru

    Personally i think em1 + 12-40mm should be priced at $1699. 1200 for the body and 900 for the lens. 200 off the bundle.

    • milkiwei

      $1200+$900-$200=$1699!

    • Bobafett

      ??
      Please explain your math.

      • bru

        ha! my mistake. should be 1899 though at 1699 it would definitely be a hot seller.

    • Sure

      There’s 3 kind of people:
      * Those who can do math
      * Those who can’t

      Eh no wait a minute…

      • Anonymous

        There are 10 types of people.
        Those that understand binary and those that don’t.

        • MJWC1

          There are two types of people – those who think the world can be divided into two types of people, and those who don’t 😉

  • Samuli

    Well, from my point of view APS-C has absolutely nothing to offer. It is just compromised FF with too much weight and tiny advantages.

    I have FF for work and m43 bodies for hobby. If I had to settle for only one system, I think I would chose m43. More so after bodies like GH3 and E-M1.

  • What is interesting in the 12-40 is that there is hope that Oly used *less* FW correction that Panny, and thus that the lens is intrinsically better, resolution wise.

    But this too must be checked. It will also be interesting to make a ‘Strange Comparison’ with the old 12-60. I expect a lot of bitching 🙂

    • Well I hope that silly “PRO” designation stands for something. I’m not going to buy this lens (I’m fine with my m4/3 primes and 4/3 zooms, thank you very much), but if I was I would be willing to pay an extra $50 for a copy without that obscenity.

      • Gabriel

        I think the PRO label is not enough visible, why they don’t make the letters in red blinking led 😉

  • Eric

    It’s about enjoying taking photos and something else at the same time, not just bringing heavy stuff sweating.

  • Turin

    Can someone remind me if there was an actual rumor about a 2.8 telephoto from oly, or am I’m confusing it with Sony or whishful thinking from people here? 12-40 looks like a nice lens, but it’s a completely new filter size, which is a bit vexing.

    • Daav

      There have been a couple of different rumors about F2.8 telephoto zooms from Oly. 40-150 and 40-200 are the two I am aware of. Panasonic has already announced and shown prototypes of an upcoming 150mm F2.8 as well as their 42.5mm F1.2. Just don’t have dates for them yet.

  • Pro with scene and art mode ?

    • McGyver

      Pro with AF mode?
      Pro with Photoshop?
      No wait… real men take pictures with a FF sensor, a magnifier, masking tape and a swiss army knife (or is it McGyver?)

    • Daav

      “:Pro with scene and art mode?”

      Why not? It is already there in the processing engine and does no harm. Because of shared components with other models they would most likely have to engineer it out at extra cost. When I shoot now days, I always shoot JPEG=RAW. I use the JPEG’s to remind me of what I saw and then post process from RAW for maximum quality. One of the nice things about Olympus is that if you specify JPEG+RAW with scene/art mode effects you can experiment in the field with ideas but it will also save an unadulterated RAW file as well. It’s actually an effective way to stimulate creativity and you still have that RAW file to work with. Saying “Pro with scene and art mode?” is like saying “Hot Rod with satellite radio”. It is okay to have both. The hot rod is not lessoned by having the satellite radio, nor is the pro camera lessoned by having some creative functions. In each case the extras are optional for use.

      Let’s face it, for those who have been long in photography, you could question the “Pro-ness” of autofocus, autoexposure, high speed drives, digital displays, CA correction, distortion correction, dynamic range enhancements, etc. But the reality is they are common parts of digital photography today. Useful tools when you want them but can be ignored if you don’t.

      A camera is not “less pro” because it has some extras.

      • Oilymouse

        > A camera is not “less pro” because it has some extras.

        Indeed. Moreover, I read and hear (and think myself) that shooting straight-up jpeg is something that more experienced photographers enjoy (and while you’re at it, you might as well use something like “dynamic B+W”). So, IMO every Olympus should have this.

        Here’s the kicker: while a FF body + 2.8 zoom lens is something most people (pros especially) rather leave at home during a weekend trip with the family, an E-M1 + 12-40 is easily brought along. Of course you’d want those scene + art modes then!

  • Tim

    Anybody spot the HDR button? That would be a nice addition.

    • Daav

      Yes the HDR button has been mentioned many times. It is also the drive settings and timer button. What we don’t know is if the camera does in-camera HDR or whether that is just to set bracketing and exposure options for post processing HDR. I personally don’t mind either way as long as I can save bracketed RAW files and do my HDR on the computer where I can have precise control. Many in camera HDR functions compile exposures in camera but then save only the compiled image, and not the individual files. I don’t like that. But I think it would be nice if the camera let me create a “reference” JPEG HDR but saved the individual files as RAW. Otherwise I’ll do it myself the old fashioned way.

      • stephen

        i wouldnt mind a single output file unless it was Raw. Then you could tweak the file in Post till the cows come home

        • stephen

          i mean i would want a single Raw

          • Daav

            I understood what you meant. 😉 The problems is that once you submit the different exposure files to in camera processing by combining images, it ceases to be a RAW because they have already been modified. But there is lots of software available for combining images on computer, where you can work from the original RAW images “until the cows come home”.

            • Anonymous

              That is just a little bit too simple. For example, many cameras can apply in-camera darkframe subtraction for long exposures to raws, and in fact, all raws are somewhat processed, or ‘cooked’ as its often called.

              Raw ain’t 🙂

  • rutrem

    well guys…the “pro” in front of cameras,lenses,brushes,software,shoes and condoms can be used when u use them for a payed jobs…even a point and shoot can be “pro” tool when you can sell the photos taken with it.

    • Daav

      The real “PRO” is behind the camera. However Olympus has used the “Pro” designation in the past and if they hold true to that post then it indicates an item that is designed to higher standards for durability and quality.

      • Oilymouse

        Kodak + Fuji: same thing exactly.

  • jimbo

    For $900, one would have to take a hard look at it. I primarily shoot with primes, but a zoom is a godsend when it comes to traveling with less fuss.

  • ol´55

    em-1- is this not an inferior camera to the em-5?
    but the price is almost the same? shoud it not be much cheaper? help me out …

    • lorenzaccio

      Nope, the “1” number means that it is a superior camera than the OMD.

      • OMega

        Interesting, seeing as the E-M1 is an OM-D.

      • hullyjr

        You mean like the E-1 is superior to the E-5? Or the E-P1 is superior to the E-P5? And if “1” is top what comes next, 0.5? The numbers & naming of cameras by Olympus is absymal and bears no resemble to logic or common sense. Canon and Nikon are not far behind.

  • Rumors have it:

    The 43 adapter will be available cheap for E-M1. I don’t know what that means, but I assume it means the Olympus MMF-3 (water-sealed 43 → MFT adapter, since that’s in the leaked video) will be available for $50 (total guess, but there’s no glass in the adapter, so why not).

    So, $1450 + 50 would be… $1500 for E-M1 ready for 43 glass.
    Optional battery expansion / portrait grip: $200.
    Total: $1500 / $1700 depending on battery / portraiture needs.

    (Total speculation based on rumors but consistent with rumors so far.)

    • Gak. Well the latest rumor does mentions $1500 body, and does not mention MMF-3 adapter. So maybe the starting point is $1500 for totals of $1550/1750, but I’m hoping the kits (at least the early ones) include an MMF-3 adapter, or at least a really cheap deal.

      • M

        Wait a half year or a year and there will probably a cheaper body for a proper use with 43 lenses 😉

      • Anonymous

        There’s no glass in an MMF-3 either, but Olympus still charge $160 for it!

        • MAFAv8r

          It is splash proof and well made, and can be bought for $90.

  • I have a theory. That those who purport that FF is ‘equivalently’ better than m4/3 must be encouraged to choose their format of choice and be it.

    But if they keep coming back here bitching it is a sure sign that they don’t have the money to fund their ambition, and therefore must be treated as beggars.

    Possibly they have only the money for a P&S or for a smart phone, that is why they are so ashamed that they stay anonymous. Therefore why even argue with these beggars whose investment are only virtual. Possibly they don’t even have money for college, being in the youngest bracket of American consumers.

    Only as them to clean the premises, after they have disgorged their bile 🙂

    • There is one thing I miss about FF (granted, I only did film):

      All the wonderful legacy wide-angle glasses.

      There is one thing I’m willing to concede to FF folks (but not to APS-C folks):

      High-ISO performance.

      I can’t say I’ll be in µ43 forever–since I’ve already betrayed one system, I could do it again–and I admit I’ve expressed some strongly-worded “disappointments” at sonyalpharumors from time to time–because I once really wanted to be able to love NEX–but all the bullying and baiting here is a bit too much sometimes.

      Perhaps if we felt a bit less insecure about ourselves, we wouldn’t be baited as much?

      • Yes that makes sense. However AF speed is of the essence. If did convince myself to buy a Sony FF mirrorless (or a Leica, if money was no object) I would just get a couple of lenses, like HCB.

        m4/3 lents you have everything else, with no loss of resolution, and top technology.

        So why get caught into binary thought?

        • Anonymous

          Still looking for a second hand 135 format alpha here so it can share the nice 24/2.8, 28/1.8 and 135 STF lenses I’m currently using on my Minolta AF film cameras.

          No, not going to ‘leave’ m4/3 over that, amazing as it may seem to some on this forum, not only is it possible to use cameras from more then one brand, its even possible to use more then one system!!

          🙂

        • Amalric’s bloated Ego

          You keep calling others beggars, but you yourself are poor by choice? With you, it always comes down to money. Mentioning yourself and HBC in one breath is offensive.

          • LOL! It seems to me that money is of the essence, for many, in photography.Therefore why hide it? Better show it! 🙂

            And since you find offensive my mentioning HCB, let me mention Man Ray’s delicious quip: “Dreams that money can buy”

            Isn’t it a perfect definition of Art? The problem, Sir, is that you miss the irony… 🙂

      • Macintosh Sauce

        I think some of the people here espousing 35mm FF have mastur”bated” a lot. LOL

      • adaptor-or-die

        @JShin even that has changed in the modern approach. Most wide landscapes and panoramas that you see now rely more on PostProduction and stitching, vs a lens that can grab everything in one frame. That doesn’t always work of course, but a small camera and tripod and some planning is a lot easier than large kit, especially if you want to subject and isolated mountain range somewhere …

    • MAFAv8r

      Or a link to your photography blog required before you can post 😉

  • Feeble wallet

    FF nex with d600 sensor , or even better one , with Olympus ibis is going to be really interesting , an interchangeable RX1 will be compact awesome, if the wallet is not to feeble

    • Anonymous

      Its too bad thats only really going to work well for wide angle lenses. Anything somewhat approaching ‘tele’ will either be large, optically heavily compromised or very expensive, and likely some combination of the 3.

      Oh wait, that requires Sony to release lenses to begin with.

      Really, they should work out the kinks of the rx1, provide it with a very good evf, and you have a killer street camera that can still be very compact. A full frame nex is interesting, but no direct competition to m4/3 for pretty much everything except when using it with wide-angle lenses.

      • Yes, that is why I mentioned that in case I went FF I would get only two lenses, probably a 17mm and a 30mm.

        RX1 has also a v. good teleconverter so you can double those focals when needed. OTH Street Shooting is about Content, so m4/3 is perfectly adequate for that.

  • Jankoff

    I was sure and I wrote many times that 12-60 would not be made. It either cannot be made – for physical reasons or, if it can be made at all, it would be the same weight and size as 12-60. Plus more expensive. Oly opted for a faster zoom, which is OK, but the versatility of 12-60 is something you cannot do without, once you have the experience with it.

    • You’re right, there’s no way Oly would have attempted a new 12-60mm.

      It’s pretty clear Oly wanted a lens to compete with the 12-35mm, so had to produce a constant f/2.8 zoom. Since a 12-60mm f/2.8 would be really huge and heavy, they had to restrict the zoom range to “only” 12-40mm. No doubt 12-40mm taxed the limits of lens engineering, but probably not coincidence that it was just enough to outclass the 12-35mm.

      While I never had the 12-60mm, I always enjoyed the 14-54mm I’d owned since 2004, and used on several cameras (E-1, E-3, Pens, EM-5). The disadvantage of the 12-60mm was the 1-stop loss from max aperture in mid-zoom range and beyond. The 14-54mm was more constant through most of its zoom range.

      But I’d agree it would be nice to have a “normal” zoom with a longer reach. Perhaps there’s a market for a higher aperture zoom covering 14-60mm or even 17-80mm. I’m not holding my breath waiting for it, but who knows, as mFT matures, such options might emerge.

  • rumi

    FF is better.. thats that. how m1 would compare with pentax k5II i wonder..

  • MarioZ

    Many APS and FF cameras are ugly and too heavy and you will have to carry a tripod where ever you go. My first and last DSLR was a D700 I used it a few times but after that I just lost interest, that thing felt like a heavy rock and now it is accumulating dust. I can understand the need for a professional to use the best camera out there, but for me photography is just a hobby and with less pain it will be a good hobby!

  • Timbo

    How long do you reckon this will take to ship realistically?
    Christmas? After that?
    I remember the GH2 took a little while to arrive.

    • Oly has usually delivered sooner than 3 months after product announcment. Though there have been exceptions, like months of unavailability of spare batteries for the EM-5. I’m sure others here will have additional examples.

      Seems like there was a rumor that the EM1 was going to show up in November some time, which sounds plausible. If it matters, that would be just in time for the holiday season…

  • I benefit from browsing your site. Many thanks!

    • Jono

      Benefit from knowledge or humor? 😉

  • Rob

    90k yen is OK for me for that lens. If it’s weatherproof and has decent image resolution with no major flaws that people report, then it’s definitely on my list.

    • Jono

      If Olympus calls a camera body or lens “Professional,” it is a given it will have weather-sealing and good-to-great robustness. Since Oly normally appears to use the lower camera lines to “beta test” upcoming pro bodies, glaring negative issues are normally a non-factor.

  • Those of us who spent their time with film. did it of course with FF 135mm. It is no wonder that we are so blase’ with FF.

    Despite what noobs believe, it doesn’t entail better per pixel resolution, quite the contrary. And for me having twice the DOF with 4/3 was extremely welcome.

    So as long as we get the same or better per pixel resolution, I don’t see the need of getting FF, as cheap as it may go.

  • Could we please have an automatic block filter on “APS” and “FF” comments on this forum please. It is extremely tedious and completely irrelevant for existing m43 users.

  • micmac

    Just joined the 4/3 ranks with an OMD power kit and 75-300. It’s a long time I had so much fun with a camera. However the price of the E-M1 better be around 1100.-€. Any higher price will lead to a Sigma SD1 disaster. I was heavily intending to invest in lenses and bodies of MFT after I sold my D800, but with the current “marketing evaluation” on prices I’m defietly holding off until I see some reason coming back to the Olympus marketing guys.
    Greetings from Germany
    micmac

    • Anonymous

      Your e-m5 is still a current camera, no need to upgrade to an e-m1 really unless it offers a specific feature that is really important to you. The E-M1 is not a direct replacement for the E-M5, and such a replacement isn’t due till spring next year at least.

  • micmac

    It’s not about replacing my gear. It’s about system reliability and reasonable company policy. I long doubted 4/3 to survive. Now they are at the dawn of getting fully accepted as a serious alternative to DSLRs. However you easily get equivalent gear of Nikon, Sony or Canon with better specs for sometimes less money. Imagine a E-M1 1500.-€ with 12-40 2,8 for 1000.-@ competing against D7100/Sigma 18-35 1,8 or Nikon D600 with Tamron 28-75 2,8!? I’m serious. The E-M1 doesn’t fit that bill. And it looks like Olympus tries to significantly push up the prices. That’s not going to help sales and popularity.
    micmac

    • Anonymous

      sigma 18-35 ONLY is over 800g!you fucking guys should consider the weight!

    • Oilymouse

      You have excellent taste. My next three buys:

      1) Sigma 18-35 as soon as I can pick it up;
      2) D600 as soon as the dust & debris have settled;
      3) E-M1 as soon as I can get my hands on it.

      Please note the E-M1 just may arrive sooner than the D600… 🙂

      After that, all done for the next 20 years!

    • Anonymous

      Hopefully the 12-40/2.8 will work quite well on the “venerable” EM-5. Would make a nice combo for a reasonable weigh/price ratio with low compromise on quality comparend to competition (if you don’t shoot flying birds playing soccer of course, as every FF fan here do, seems so 😉 ).

  • Selwyn

    I just don’t get it why do people argued about this M43 is not good enough compare APSC or FF or bad or just cannot compare, too expensive. If these people don’t like M43 just LEAVE this site, no one force you guys to read this site, post comments, or even force you to use M43, some people like some people don’t, some people like small size , some people like their big gun. some people think FF is unbeatable compare small tiny sensor M43. so what??? you dont like dont come don’t buy don’t give UN-experience comments (if you think shooting bricks and looking at 100% is experience? think again!!). at the end what really matters is the picture that SPEAK. i come form a canon 5D mk2 user with several L lens and after i switch to M43 completely, i don’t really missed my FF camera beside the Bokeh, so what? that is my opinion, my experience, something i HAVE TRY, i LIKE, and i do really enjoy even though it only using small tiny sensor that many people laugh at. SO WHAT??

    i just annoyed when people argued about sensor size, slr vs mirrorless, camera brand Can*n vs NIK*N, IOS vs android vs blackberry, Haizzzz

  • micmac

    Hired by marketing or just uneducated?

  • Brent Cov

    3) E-M1 with 12-40mm f/2.8 kit lens ¥ 220,000
    Converted: 1670 Euro or $2200 or £1423.51 @ 1.9.2013 prices
    is this correct???????????????????????????????????

  • I love the precious information and facts a person give your posts. We’ll search for your website and check out once more listed here on a regular basis. I am somewhat convinced We will be knowledgeable a lot of new stuff listed here! Good luck for one more!

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