New Olympus E-M5 news roundup…(new E-M5 accessories and info abotu Four Thirds lens support)

Share


Olympus E-M5 focus speed test.

There was an ongoing Olympus press meetings in Amsterdam and Yokohama and plenty of websites are now publishing new previews and videos. Here is a short roundup of the latest news:

Pen And Tell german report (Click here)
Interview at Akihabara (Click here).
New E-M5 accessories at Olympus Global (Click here and scroll down to see them).
Very basic ISO comparison at Zol (Click here).
E-M5 image samples on Flickr (Click here).

Biofos (Click here) has some news from Olympus UK about the Four Thirds lens support: “No AF improvement on 4/3 lenses I am afraid“. But Olympus made it also clear that they are working on that issue. Their goal is to make Four Thirds lenses fully operable on m43 cameras.

Focus Numerique now removed the ability to download the E-M5 RAW files. Our reader Olaf sent us this: “here is a raw-conversion from me aimed at maximum detail and less texture-smoothing than the internal jpegs, i think it really shows the potential of the E-M5, taken with a 300€ lens at f/1.8!
http://datenkeule.de/dl.php?file=file1329348705olympus-om-d-e-m5-preserie-exemple9.jpg
it is not easy to get the same sharpness olympus is doing with their jpegs while at the same time reducing noise and preserving texture-details.
now here the same file upscaled to 48mp (8000×6000) with a crop of here left eye (eat this nikon D800) ;-)
http://datenkeule.de/dl.php?file=file132934883148mp.jpg
here some crops to compare the potential of texture-preservation compared to the internal jpegs. 2 100% crops with jpeg to the left and the raw conversion to the right:
http://datenkeule.de/dl.php?file=file1329342465jpeg-raw.jpg
http://datenkeule.de/dl.php?file=file1329343823jpeg-raw2.jpg
unfortunately i wasn’t able to save all raws, i only managed to save 4 or 5 of them. maybe i can post some other conversions later, like the one from the bike and the other shot of the woman.

P.S: If you love analyzing RAW files than check Fujirumors (Click here). They just posted the first X PRO 1 raw files!

Full Preorder list:
1) Black E-M5 body at
Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here), Warehouse UK (Click here), Redcoon Germany (Click here) and Amazon Japan (Click here).
2) Silver E-M5 body at
Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here), Warehouse UK (Click here), Redcoon Germany (Click here), and Amazon Japan (Click here).
3) Black E-M5 body with 14-42mm lens at
Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here) and Amazon Japan (Click here).
4) Black E-M5 body with 12-50mm lens at
Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here), Jessops (Click here), Redcoon Deutschland (Click here), Amazon Deutschland (Click here) and Amazon Japan (Click here).
5) Silver E-M5 body with 12-50mm lens at
Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here), Jessops (Click here), Amazon Deutschland (Click here) and Amazon Japan (Click here).
6) FL-600R wireless flash at
Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
7) MMF-3 Four Thirds adapter at
Amazon (Click here) and Adorama (Click here).
8.) HLD-6 power battery holder at
Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here) and Amazon Japan (Click here).

Share
  • Leave a reply

    Wow, 100% crops from raw conversion are really impressive!

  • L.S

    Not only it took Olympus a week to come out admitting there is no support for 4/3 lenses , they dare not specify when exactely will they have it.
    YES Olympus owes me that much !!! I f I as many others bought with my hard earned money 4/3 lenses for 2,000 USD I expect not to be deserted because of Olympus’s sudden whim to change formats.
    WTF !!! this is as close as it gets to deceiving , well when think about it again that what Olympus directors have been busy with in the last few years.
    Anyone interested in 12-60 SWD and 50-200 SWD + E520 in excellent condition ?

    • LOL…. E-M5 maybe like fast focus so E-520 by this two lens, but you can go for a old E-3 or a new E-5. ;-)

    • Duarte Bruno

      @L.S.
      I don’t understand, did those lenses stopped working in your E-3/5 in any way?

      • MJr

        Remind yourself of where we are, what we do here, and then think about that question.

      • PS

        Bruno
        On the contrary he didnt use the lenses, thats why they are in excellent condition?

    • Stu5

      If they knew when it would be they would have held the camera back until that date. They simple don’t know as they are still working on it. When they make the breakthrough they will launch it on a camera. I have been a 43 user since the E1. You need to just be patient, wait for the E7 which is being developed or change systems. They are not deceiving you at all regarding this. A photographer who has used the camera with an old 14-54mm MK1 said she found it to be slightly faster focusing than the E1 and very accurate.

      • L.S

        Dear Duarte and Stu5 , as many 4/3 customers I bought into the system because of it’s small size hence that’s why I own the E520
        E3 ,E5, E7 are too big too bulky and too profeesional to my taste.
        E5 and such can not be an argument for keeping 4/3 lenses.
        My main point is that I dont need to be patient , if the technological breakthrough of “one beautiful system ” hasn’t been made yet than , I expect Olympus to keep coming out with 4/3 cameras such as E530 or at least E40.
        With all do respect even if I ignore the E5 size it’s so old by now that it’s technologicaly backwards compared to most of Olympus M4/3 not even mentioning Nikon Canon and Sony.

        • Steve

          So why did you buy 4/3 lenses if you don’t like the 4/3 cameras???? Doesn’t make much sense.

          And I very respectfully disagree about the old technology in the E-5. I still take very, very lovely pictures with my E-3. Just because it is not the latest and greatest doesn’t mean you can’t take compelling pictures!

          • MJr

            What are you trying to prove Steve. Obviously it sucks when a system you’ve invested in stops getting updated, whether you need a new one or not. What are you trying to prove him wrong for? My gramophones play music fine as well, probably till the end of my time. Nowhere did he say not to like 4/3. Where did you even get that? It really isn’t that difficult to put yourself in his perspective, and i don’t even like 4/3.

            • Steve

              What do you mean, what am I trying to prove? Of course I would like to see more 4/3 support. But I don’t think Olympus has willfully abandoned it’s user base, I think it’s user base fled to greener pastures and further development just isn’t economically feasible. Believe me, when the support for 4/3 lenses is there for m4/3 I will be a very, very happy man. But until then I will continue to take pictures with my E-3 (which I use only for certain cases) and my E-P3 (the rest of the time).

              I find the argument that “E-3/5 are old so they are crap” to be completely invalid. Those took great pictures when they came out and they continue to take great pictures. A camera doesn’t turn crappy because a better one comes out, does it?

              • MJr

                I’m not arguing that, and L.S isn’t either i believe.

                If you read “that it’s technologicaly backwards compared to most of Olympus M4/3 not even mentioning Nikon Canon and Sony.” and then quote that as “are old so they are crap”, then you’re obviously reading into things that aren’t there, for your convenience of proving a (irrelevant) point.

                • Steve

                  Considering I wasn’t arguing with you in the first place I am not so sure what you are on about.

                  Unless your 4/3 camera is actually broken, the system still works fine. That’s my point. It’s a bonus to be able to use the lenses on a newer camera but it doesn’t make the camera system you already own irrelevant.

                  • MJr

                    And nobody said otherwise.

          • L.S

            Did you read what I wrote ?
            Did I say I dont like 4/3 cameras ???????
            I said I dont like E5 OR E3 and probably E7 .
            Again I have E520 there is quite a difference between E520 and E5.

            • Steve

              L.S, I honestly did miss the part where you said you were an E520 owner. My apologies. I had read your post as wanting to use 4/3 glass on m4/3 and you didn’t have or want an E-series camera.

          • James70094

            It does make sense. He liked the E-520 for it’s smaller size, just I liked the E-300 and E-510 for their size. The E-x are just too big for what we want. Olympus was making the smaller DSLRs and then stopped to switch customers over to the pen series. That’s when they should have made sure the lenses worked as well on those bodies. When I bought my lenses, Olympus had not publically hinted at abandoning the cameras I was buying and using. Fortunately for me, I do mostly landscape and architectural. So fast autofocus is not an issue.

        • xmort

          How exactly is E5, (or E30 and E620 for that matter) technologically backwards compared to most Olympus M4/3 cameras? All these cameras share pretty much the same 12Mb sensor, most of the new technological development olympus made in the last 2 or 3 years happened in improving the focus speed and overall usability of PENs so they can catch up with their dSLR line. The image quality remained the same. Since they had to prioritize their limited research effort, it didn’t made much sense to release E50 or E530 with the same old sensor. I think that is about to change now since they have finally updated their sensor and came up with new IS system.

      • Esa Tuunanen

        > If they knew when it would be they would have held the camera back until that date.
        If company knows they have something better coming you can bet your head that they won’t declare coming of that new feature when releasing already designed camera because that could lower sales lot.

      • Shanti

        I was told that on FB when I asked about 4/3 lens..so my 14-54 will work at least as good as on my E1..its such a great lens

    • What’s wrong with the E-5 exactly?

      • L.S

        SIZE , SIZE , SIZE .
        NO VIDEO !!!
        POOR REAR LCD SCREEN.
        WEIGHT
        E5 can take beautiful pictures and same goes for my E520, if you are the kind’a guy that buy a new product only after the first one literally dies , than good for I am all envy . I would like on the other hand to refresh my photography tools let’s say every … 3-4 years, I think it’s a reasonable amount of time that won’t categorize me as a gearhead

        • Robbie

          It’s kinda funny because E-5 is in every way much better than the E-520. At least Olympus admits that they are working on PDAF for m43, and as a long time Olympus owner(which I suppose you are), I don’t really mind longer waits. If you hate it, probably you’d have changed system already.

          • Yes absolute :-D

          • L.S

            I haven’t changed still own my E520 and 12-60 and 50-200 SWD.
            Am I happy waiting for 4 years for a camera to replace the E520 …. NO!
            There is longer wait and there is longer wait.

          • James70094

            It’s better in every way, except size. I have an E-510 and E-30. I prefer my E-510 for the size.

        • MP

          The E-5 is same size as Canon 7d.
          It does have video although not as good as 7d.
          It has a 920k dot Swivel LCD.
          It weighs almost same as Canon 7d.
          And you say it also takes beautiful pictures.
          So whats the problem?

          Anyways my point is, when it comes to size and weight no other company or system is currently giving you a 100% Perfect solution with full backwards compatibility. Sony has a good sensor but no lenses and the A- mount lenses to NEX body size ratio is even bigger than 43- M43. Same with Nikon. Even Sony and Nikon mirrorless don’t provide complete backwards compatibility. Fuji is doing something really new and its expensive. With Pentax you don’t really have the size advantage although they have backwards compatibility and the idea of K-01 kind of sucks. M43 is the by far the best bet.

          The problem is that the industry is going through a technology changeover and this thing is going to happen. Its the same like when Canon moved from FD to EF or the change from film to Digital. Although it is not fair, you just have to accept it.

          • L.S

            What has 7d got to do with what I said.
            7d is one of the biggest cameras ( non professional ) around it’s a good thing you didn’t compare it to mid format.
            My HG lenses goes extremely well on my E520 but its been time ( long time ago ) for an update.
            An E530 same as one of the newer Rebels with the HG lenses is what should have been by now , until they work out the PDAF issue.
            Am I suppose to wait 2 more years or 5 more years for a solution ?
            Do you find it reasonable that 4/3 owners will still use E520 or even E620 when Sony will have the Alpha A59 generation 4 ? or maybe Nikon will have the D5900 ?

            • Stu5

              They have said quite clearly several times that anyone who has a E-xxx should look at m43 as they are not bringing a replacement out. That was said months ago. So you are waiting for a camera that is never going to happen.

            • MP

              I said Canon 7d because it is the best comparison for Olympus E-5. Both Semi-Pro models. Both Weather sealed.

              Well in the case that you are waiting for Olympus E-530 you should really give awy your hope and sell your lenses. Because Olympus publically announced quite a while ago that they won’t be making any E-xxx cameras anymore. They might make E-x and perhaps E-xx.

              About your last question. Ultimately all the manufacturers are going to make this kind of changeover. Olympus and Panasonic have recognised this and have been quite progressive in making this change. A year or two down the line you would find users from all systems complaining about the same problem. Sony itself announced they were not sure whether the translucent mirrored SLT was the future or not.

              • Esa Tuunanen

                > A year or two down the line you would find users from all systems complaining about the same problem.
                And that’s why Canon and Nikon won’t be putting their customers to similar waiting game.
                After getting customer hooked with their brand name that diverse and wide internally compatible system is what has enabled them to keep those customers and that’s something they surely don’t want to endanger if they have any sense.

                And Sony’s problem is that they can’t let go off Alpha mount without loosing optics. Now that semitransparent mirror allows live view and features of fully digital camera they can keep that existing optics and core customers happy. If anything I’ll see Sony working for integrating PDAF into sensor for decreasing complexity of body.

                • Olympus hooked so few users on 4/3’s that they simply couldn’t afford to keep going. They probably sold more µ4/3’s cameras last year then 4/3’s cameras in the entire active life of the system. All the complaining and kvetching (love that word) in the world won’t change that.

                  As to why Olympus doesn’t yet have PDAF integrated into µ4/3’s (or at least a reasonable substitute), I’m sure that they have their reasons. They’ve always marched to a different djembe, so who knows what’s going on?

                • MP

                  @ Esa Tuunanen

                  Ofcourse thats why Nikon is giving such stepmother treatment to the mirrorless ‘1’ system. So that they can continue selling the SLRs.

                  But do you really thing 5 or may be even 10 years down the line Canon and Nikon will keep manufaturing SLRs? They have to change some time. And when they change, they will ofcourse have to create an entirely new system.

                  Change is unavoidable. And the companies which don’t change, perish. See what happened to Kodak, what almost happened to Leica, or for that matter to Olympus when they didn’t make the changeover from manual focus OM to Autofocus. I think they learned the lesson.

            • slomo

              >Am I suppose to wait 2 more years or 5 more years for a solution ?
              >Do you find it reasonable that 4/3 owners will still use E520 or even E620 when Sony will have the Alpha A59 generation 4 ? or maybe Nikon will have the D5900 ?

              L.S.,
              You would be waiting for Godot (who will never come) if you are waiting for an E-xxx in the DSLR form, because Olympus has stated that it will only have Pro level body for E-System (Four Thirds) in the future.

              The only hope of possible salvation of using your 12-60 and 50-200 with the same performance would be if:

              1. Olympus were to develop a translucent mirror FT to mFT adapter similar to what Sony has for Sony Nex system to Alpha mount lens (LA-EA2). I am not talking about Sony SLT body here, the LA-EA2 is for Nex systems. Alpha mount lens is just as fast focusing in Nex body as in its native Alpha body with this adapter. If Oly opts to build something similar, then the closest solution you can have is a Panasonic GHx or Gx style body with that fast adapter to use the 50-200 SWD and 12-60 with. You will have an SLR styled body but lose IBIS. At this time, GH2 is king of the hill of video, so if video priority is high, you may want to get it if it is still king of the hill when the time comes.

              2. Oly built sensor based PDAF ala Nikon System 1 for FT. This could only happen on a future Oly camera. It will more likely that you have IBIS, but no one knows what the form factor of the body will be.

              So, your only option is to wait and wait still, which is actually good, because the longer you can wait, the better and more option you can have. And the path you take may not necessarily be holding on to the 12-60 and 50-200, it may even take you to systems other than m43. After all, you know that Sony and Nikon has a better track record of supporting those having their older lenses.

        • The Real Stig

          There have been quite clear statements from Olympus executives that they are still committed to the E system. So the EM-5 does not mean the end.

          It has been said the E glass will focus on the EM-5 – and slightly faster than the E-1, so you don’t lose anything do you?

          As for investing and felling owed – oh you poor baby. I have a bunch of OM glass including a 180mm f2 worth more than all your stuff put together many times over considering the original retail price (AU$18,000) – Olympus has abandoned me too – boo hoo.

          How dare Olympus release a new camera that wont autofocus my OM lenses. Of course I could just put them on an EM-5 and manually focus them, just as I have been doing for the past couple decades. Now there’s a thought.

          • L.S

            I don’t even know how to answer your comment ?
            “boo hoo” , “poor baby” REALLY ????
            I still have my OMPC dated back to 1988-9 with at least 2 OM lenses , the thing is that OM lenses were considerably different than 4/3 lenses due to the digital revolution .
            Where is the revolution between 4/3 and M4/3 ? what is the justification of cancelling 4/3 format after few years unlike the OM lenses which exsisted for decades ????

            • Yep. Really.

              Business is business. It gets done, and doesn’t give a fig about your feelings. Get over it. Go out and take great photos with the equipment you have.

          • Geoff

            OK Stig,how do you expect to Autofocus a manual lens, perhaps create a cage that fits around the lens body with a worm drive to twist the focus collar. I wonder if ther’d be a market for such a tool, you could have multiple cages for different size lennses which the worm drive could be attached to.

            • The Real Stig

              I don’t. That was sarcasm, hence the following sentence where I suggested that perhaps I could manual focus them.

            • I am not reading all the bla bla, but from first comment I understand you are selling your stuff? Ok, how much for the 12-60mm?

        • To be honest, if you’re using 43 lenses, size and weight should be a lower priority on your list, in my humble opinion. The progress of technology is inevitable unfortunately. I personally don’t see a lot of sense in keeping heavy, large glass designed for phase-detect DSLR cameras in order to use it on contrast-detect micro cameras. So, as others have pointed out, waiting for the E6/7 is probably your best bet.

          I appreciate it must suck to have good glass that cannot be used at regular AF speeds on newer cameras though. I imagine people who had amassed lots of high quality manual focus glass felt the same way when AF was first introduced.

          • Jot_eS

            If weight is to be a “lower priority” than what about the price? The last and only new 4/3 camera is E-5. It’s $1600. OM-D is to be $1K. Kind of a difference, isn’t it? I, just as L.S., would preffer a replacement to e-520 (e-30 actually in my case), but in absence of one why not use OM-D instead? I don’t really care whether is phase detection or contrast as long as the autofocus is fast and acurate. I didn’t buy my E-30 because I like phase detection system. Now, after 3 years I would like to take pictures with high ISO just as my friends with Canon/Nikon/Pentax do. I can’t because the sensor is old. I have 5 lenses. If I chose Canon 4 years ago I would probably sell lenses with a discount much less than I’ll be forced to just to switch to m4/3. I wonder, if they at some point they decide to go back to phase detection and abandon m4/3 in favour of 4/3 – will you also think that it is normal and be not angry at them? …And say, well I know what I bought: the contrast detection – no wonder that I can’t use it with the new 4/3 machines…

          • JimD

            Michael, where do you get such strange ideas.
            I have 43 cameras and lenses, I (as are others here) am interested in a lighter smaller camera. That is, as I get older, becoming a higher priority. I also have a considerable amount of money tied up in 43 glass. The body is supposed to be the expendable part and the lens the “system”. This has now changed and a “system” becomes a use now until the next “system” comes out. I seem to be one of many here, who do not want an E7 with bulk and size, but I do want to be able to use the thousands of dollars worth of lenses I already have for an Olympus “system”.
            When AF arrived it was an advance of the system for most users not a new system.

            • I don’t think my ideas that that strange really. I tried the 12-60 lens on my E-P3 and it was horribly unbalanced. Even the 50 f/2 is chunky. If mixing different technologies were that easy, Olympus would have found a solution already. That they have yet to provide excellent AF speeds with old lenses on newer cameras is testament to the difficulty involved, or at the very least a lack of available resources devoted to solving the problem.

              That said, Olympus have provided adapters which give adequate autofocus, so your lenses aren’t useless at all. If fast AF is necessary, the E-620 is still a very good camera. It doesn’t stop being useable just because new technology is developed.

              As was pointed out earlier, Olympus have been clear that the technology to make smaller and lighter cameras exists in the move away from SLR technology. As a company who are still making a loss on their cameras, I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect Olympus to provide solutions across the board, especially when the 43 system was comparatively weak compared to the competition. Resources devoted to the development of a new, small DSLR body for your needs would be precious resources taken away from development in the fast-growing and competitive mirrorless sector, adding greater risk of failure for Olympus.

              Personally I think it’s a wise decision for Olympus to focus their efforts, even if that means some users do not get the exact camera body they want.

        • OlyPan

          Do u really own an E5??? It has video. It does 720p. If size matters to you then move on. Obviously you’re too impatient. Did ur E5 or if u did have this camera stopped working? or your just trolling. Go to Nikon, Canon, Pentax. Just move on. We’re fine without u. Damn troll.

        • Michael Meissner

          Umm, L.S, no video? Are you sure you are not thinking of the E-3 perhaps? Last weekend I shot several hours of video with my E-5 and 50mm lens.

          In terms of weight, it depends on what you are used to. I hate the battery grip on the E-3 and E-5 (though I have it for a special application), but I find the E-5 (no HLD-4), 14-54mm and Metz 48 flash fit nice in my hand. Even with the 50-200mm, the camera is well balanced (unlike say my E-P2 with the 50-200mm). Perhaps the E-1 was just a tad better in my hand than the E-3/E-5, but not by much, and the E-1 had its faults as well (I tended to knock the S-AF/C-AF/M-AF button by accident).

          I find the E-P2 a little on the small side for shooting through out the day with the camera in my hand, but it is great for when I want a camera in a jacket pocket to take out for a single snapshot. The E-M5 looks like it fixes some of my issues with the E-P2 (viewfinder that will work with external flash, moving the control wheel away from the arrow pad, weather sealing).

          In 2011, I shot about 65% with the DSLRs, and 25% with the E-P2, and the remainder with other cameras.

      • MJr

        What the fuk’s with these stupid comebacks. If nothing is wrong with the E-5 then what’s everyone even doing here. Goddamn geniuses.

        • achiinto2

          Mainly is the size and weight. I am considering selling my E3 to go m43. But I still wish there is a good solution to support my SWD lens. Selling them away as well is just too wasteful and m43 still does not have anything comparable to the SWD.

          • Mar

            Size and weight are a problem for E-X?

            Don’t think so because it’s a great match for HG and SHG lenses. Small body with large lenses makes no sense.
            100-200 grams you’d save on a smaller body would cost you worse ergonomics and smaller viewfinder.

            • MP

              +1

            • Vlad

              The E-5 is 900 grams. That is full frame territory. I don’t see a K-5 having worse ergonomics or viewfinder. Not to mention it is cheaper.

              • Mar

                It’s closer to 800grams.

                Unlike cameras such as 5D2, it’s got much better construction and thicker shell, swivel LCD, IBIS and 100% viewfinder plus on-board flash.

                Why do you think a full frame camera needs to be big? Have you seen OM series? They’re smaller than any modern SLR except maybe E-4XX series while having better viewfinder than any modern FF camera.

                Due to smaller 43rds format, E-3/5 needs large glass prism to get good viewfinder size and that’s why it’s bigger than some think it should be.

                Again, don’t see the point in small camera if you’re going to mount large lenses.

                Pentax is different, they only build small primes mostly so K-5 fits nicely in that scheme.

                • Mr. Reeee

                  How can you compare 35mm film bodies to FF digital bodies? Yeah, I have an FM2 and Spotmatic IIs and they sure are small compared to a D700/D800, but about the same size as my GH2. So, what’s the point?

                  The E-5 (892g) is roughly the same size and weight as a D700 (1095g) or D800 (1000g) and much bigger than a D7000 (780g), so why on earth would I buy into that given the difference in sensor size (FF or APS-C) and the huge array of Nikon lenses available? Pretty JPEGs, IBIS, weatherproofing and few lenses (regardless of quality) that can really only be used on small number of cameras?

                  http://camerasize.com/compare/#202,181
                  http://camerasize.com/compare/#202,291
                  http://camerasize.com/compare/#202,7

                  It’s a bummer than 4/3 never really took off. But that’s the unfortunate reality of consumer culture. Some products fly, some die. Some just fade away…

                  • Well said.

                  • Mar

                    Reee, you forgot better lenses.. that “small” differentiator between Olympus and others.

                    First of all, APS-C is a shit system, lenses are absolute crap because manufacturers want you to go for FF and spend more $$$$.

                    Second, most lenses (like 90% lenses sub 100mm) are pretty bad on FF if you look outside of center, distortion and vignetting or CA.

                    Especially zooms.

                    Sensor size doesn’t matter at all if lenses are shit (and they are). Wow, it will only matter at marginal conditions and in poor light where old 43rds sensors will have bit shittier quality compared to just shitty quality from APS and FF.

                    Maybe you don’t care about lenses and only portability, so that’s the reason you chose m43…. I don’t know.

                    For me lenses are by far the most important as all modern digital cameras have more than good enough sensors if you know how to take photos and know how to use the light.

                • +1000

            • achiinto2

              I had this thinking not because I mft nor the OMD. But I have started shooting OM with film recently and fell in love with that size and ergonomic. Ever since OM, I stopped shooting digital. And my SWD and E3 have been seating dust on shelf. Luckily they are dust proof.

              I figure that the OMD grip can give me the ergonomic for SWD lens.

            • achiinto3

              I had this thinking not because I mft nor the OMD. But I have started shooting OM with film recently and fell in love with that size and ergonomic. Ever since OM, I stopped shooting digital. And my SWD and E3 have been seating dust on shelf. Luckily they are dust proof.

              I figure that the OMD grip can give me the ergonomic for SWD lens.

          • MGuarini

            I have an E5 with 7-14, 14-35 and 35-100, I also have an E-P3 with 12 f2 and 45 f1.8. The 12 is noticeably better than the 7-14 at 12. The 45 is as good or better than the 35-100 at 45. I just ordered the Panasonic 25 f1.4, and when the E-M5 come, and then the 60 macro and the 75 f1.8, that will be it for my 4/3 system. This morning I walked around 12 Km. of trails here on the Chilean Andes and was so happy to left my heavy 4/3 equipment at the lodge. The E-P3 With the 12 and the 45 were so sweet. I just need a couple more high quality primes.

      • bilgy_no1

        @Michael (and OLYMPUS!!!)

        Buying the E-5 is not a serious solution for someone who bought into the system with an E-520 or E-620 and added some HG lenses (say, 14-54 and 50-200). Those lenses deserve to be used on an updated body, but that should not result in having to go for a (much) higher level body.

    • bilgy_no1

      Olympus rep said: ‘We’re not there yet’. Biofos takes that as ‘there is no improvement’.

      The German link in the post (Pen and Tell) actually reports a notable improvement in AF speed with the 35-100 and 50-200 (old version).

      Let me just say, I want to get some real life confirmation of what the deal is… Also, if Olympus says they’re working on it without revealing how, I might just hold off buying the E-M5. What if they come up with on-sensor PDAF and I need to buy a new body. If it’s going to be an adapter like Sony, I have no problem waiting a little longer.

      • Ru Elpser

        pen and tell is a bad fanboy site, anything there is always improved, and leaps and bounds better then the previous model, real world shows almost no improvement for the last 4 years

    • Ralentizer

      I sold all 4/3 stuff 6 months ago, it was almost impossible to sell even back then.. only to lowballers, for lowballer prices. i’m glad it’s gone finally, oly was not interested in esystem sind 2006, when the original 5D overleaped any competition around back at the time

      • Tom B

        I’m one of those lowballers, happily using some great OMZ glass that I got (relatively) cheap on my E620. :) I’ll definitely buy the EM5 with a nice prime and then we’ll see what happens. Can always trade later….

  • First time I’m for real impressed with the images coming from E-M5! Those RAW-conversions from Olaf are in totally different league from rather crappy JPEGs we’ve seen so far – suberp details and really nice tonality all&all. Phew, looking good after all! ;)

    ps, any similar high-ISO RAW-conversions online anywhere?

    • Stu5

      Raw Photo Processor is free and will open the Raw files up from the camera.

      • Yes, but I’m lazy and don’t have the RAW-files available… ;)

        • The Real Stig

          I downloaded one of the RAWs taken at iso 5000. Want me to put it somewhere for you to download and play with?

    • BLI

      Yes, the picture looks good! No moire-pattern to see, and lots of details in the textile texture. The colors seem to me somewhat bleak, though, but it might be my cheap monitor…

    • 43shot

      I’m a bit tired of all the focus on 43 lenses particularly from reviewers that write about a camera and have never held it. It’s a M43 camera not a 43 camera.

      • BLI

        Well, I can certainly feel sympathy with people who have invested heavily in 43 lenses of top quality. At the same time, a commercial actor like Olympus need to earn money. Personally, I have invested in a few FX lenses for Nikon D300. If I choose to upgrade to e.g D700, these lenses are rather useless — I need to shoot in low resolution with them. This situation is simiar to the 43 case, but not identical — there may be a D400 upgrade.

        Anyway, I don’t understand *why* the 43 lenses don’t focus rapidly on e.g the E-M5 and other m43 cameras. It is *clearly* not the focus measurement, because that is fast on the E-M5. The limitation must thus be in the way 43 lenses *treats* these measurements.

        • The problem is in the motors that drive the lenses. 43 lenses motors are optimized for PDAF, m43 lenses motors are optimized for CDAF.

          • DonTom

            @BLI You make a great point about Olympus being a commercial actor. How many 43 bodies are they going to sell if they bring a new one out? Who on earth will buy a new 43 lens knowing that the system is at the end of its life?
            Sure, I feel for those holding HG 43 glass, but the writing has been on the wall since the first m43 body. I feel that Olly needs to stop wasting money developing stopgap options, and just get on with the new system. They did well to carry on and bring out the E5, and that was the right move, as it supports the most expensive lenses properly.
            Still, this is a good place to have a whinge!

        • Esa Tuunanen

          > It is *clearly* not the focus measurement.
          Problem is in different focus measurement.
          When you half press shutter CDAF body doesn’t even know which way focus should be moved to get correct focus.
          When you half press shutter PDAF body sees instantly to which direction and how much focus should be moved.

          So where CDAF body needs first to do small focus change just to find out correct direction PDAF body just tells lens where to move focus (and fast SWD lens like 12-60mm goes there very fast) and after that re-checks focus if it needs adjustment.

          In simplified sense it’s like if you had to move something in coordinate grid to other place in it:
          PDAF body tells target coordinates directly while CDAF body starts calling orders “one position downward… sorry, take that back and start moving upwards one position at time etc…”

          So shouldn’t be that hard to understand why CDAF is hard for lenses if whole focus system (both mechanics and motor’s control electronics) isn’t designed to do these small iterative moves.

          • BLI

            Ok. So you guys say that CDAF requires the lens motors to make *high frequency* movements back and forth, and in doing so (based on some contrast measure) the CDAF decides in which direction the motors should go “on the average”. While PDAF can assess the direction in which to go *without* making this rapid “experimental” movement. Is this it?

            Next, the 43 lenses are not prepared for these rapid movements (“perturbations”): they both have limitations in how fast they can move, and they might not take the ‘wear and tear”? While on the other hand, the *m43* lenses have very rapid servomotors (much faster than what is needed for the “slow” focusing; sufficiently fast for high frequency movements to “perturb” the contrast and build up the direction in which to go??

            • Agent00soul

              As far as I can see from a sectioned lens, the MSC lenses have voice coil actuators instead of conventional motors for the focusing. So there is no gearing to wear out. That’s also how they can be silent. It’s mostly the gears that produce noise.

            • Esa Tuunanen

              Here’s simple explanation of basic principle of every PDAF system:
              http://graphics.stanford.edu/courses/cs178/applets/applets.html#autofocus
              Instead of separate sensor (which was necessary with film cameras) it can be also intergrated into sensor which is what Fuji has been and Nikon 1 does.
              http://www.dpreview.com/news/2010/8/5/fujifilmpd

              SWD/USM (what ever maker calls it) focus system doesn’t have any gearing or even anything which looks like motor.
              http://www.photoscene.com/sw/tour/inside.htm
              That’s how it’s so much quieter than old fashioned micromotor based system and smaller number of moving parts also makes it easier for it to operate faster.

    • Reto

      +1 I agree, those RAW conversions look awesome. And I believe this sensor needs very good glass to really shine, such as the 45mm. Most pictures taken with the 12-50mm might be good enough for some but might do the sensor no justice.

      Now let’s just hope this beauty doesn’t blow highlights as badly as my otherwise very nice GH1.

  • @ admin
    Olympus hinted that they might introduce a none weatherproof O-MD in the future http://youtu.be/UODschk35vQ

  • L

    http://www.olympus.co.jp/jp/support/cs/dslr/fw/index.html

    Say, just saw that there is a firmware update for ZUIKO 70-300mm F4.0-5.6
    It said it improved the handling while mf….

  • Good work Olaf! The post processed RAW looks great. Notice the improved color fidelity compared to the flattering jpg. The EM5 is a really good camera maybe worth an upgrade from my G3.

  • > But Olympus made it also clear that they are working on that issue. Their goal is to make Four Thirds lenses fully operable on m43 cameras.

    Really glad to hear that.

    Unless of course it is some case of misunderstood marketing speak.

    But even then, I’m still glad to hear it.

    P.S. There is always of course another feasible and technically simpler solution: take the E-510, plug into it the sensor and the LCD from the E-M5, add the swivel from the E-620 and sell it.

    • achiinto2

      I am glad to see this too. At least they too think that the MMF adapters are still not enough. Anyhow, I don’t want to buy another camera specific for my 43 lens.

    • JimD

      If you want that compatibility very quickly, I can make it happen. I will buy an E-M5, that will ensure that 2 days after it is delivered Olympus will announce a new version the E-M5+ that has full 43 glass compatibility.

  • Duarte Bruno

    @OLAF: What RAW converter have you used to generate these JPEGs?
    You did a pretty good job of outdoing the camera’s JPEG engine! :)

    • oluv

      @Bruno: raw therapee with some further adjustments in photoshop.
      raw therapee did only the basic conversion, sharpening etc was all done in photoshop.

      • achiinto2

        You probably used D800 to convert it. :D

      • Alex

        What settings/effects/filters did you use in photoshop..how did you smooth the noise? I can’t recreate what you did in lightroom 3 or 4 beta..no smoothing tool that Im aware of.

  • Boooo!

    From the other big thread:

    I have no idea how to use RawTherapee properly, but that said…

    I opened the dark window shot taken at ISO 640. Then I pushed it by 6 (six) stops in RT. Used highlight recovery, slider to 100.

    Saved as TIFF, opened in Lightroom v3. Very quick corrections made there:

    * blacks +20
    * NR luminance +50
    * NR color +33
    * magenta saturation -50

    Resized to 800×600: http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/3982/olympusomdem5preserieex.jpg

    Considering this is kind of like ISO 40960, I’m impressed, to say the least.

    • Duarte Bruno

      It’s not the same thing as ISO40960 because you have an ISO640 capture to boot. Once it’s loaded in the RAW converter engine (which might be 16 or 32 bit) the amount of correction and counter correction it can handle is very different.

      The only valid way to compare would be to push an ISO640 capture that was initially underexposed by 6 EV in camera.

      • Andy Taylor

        I’m not sure that I understand how that is any more valid than the method he used – the original RAW shot *was* significantly underexposed in the shadows, with overexposure in the highlights. Surely boosting the exposure by that number of steps is equivalent to getting a boosted “fake” ISO result from inside the camera (bearing in mind that the highest genuine ISO is probably 3200)?

      • Boooo!

        It wasn’t underexposed by 6 stops, more like about 4.5, but I pushed it even further.

        Here’s a JPEG from the original: http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/3982/olympusomdem5preserieex.jpg

        • Duarte Bruno

          Ok, I didn’t remember what the original looked like.
          Now I’m impressed!!!

    • Andy Taylor

      Excellent work! I’d consider that just about usable for emergencies, which is a lot more than I would have expected from such an extreme methodology.

      I am becoming more and more impressed by the capability of the sensor on this camera.

  • anony

    that eye are cutted

  • RickeyG

    We need Iso comparison shots of solid colour to compare. Iso shots of grains of bread tell me very little due to textures. Solid Dark colours please…….

    • Andy Taylor

      Those sorts of shots tell you nothing about detail retention, though. Tit for tat.

  • fh

    Hi admin, just reminding you again that the E-M5 + 14-42 lens kit will not be released in Japan. The options in Japan are for the E-M5 + 12-50, and E-M5 body-only, each in black or silver. The Amazon Japan pre-order link under “3) Black E-M5 body with 14-42mm lens” just points to the 12-50 lens kit.

  • Bernd

    Filming without tripod or rig is problematic, but the German video shot – and in the meantime removed – by “Pen and Tell” shows much more ugly rolling shutter effects (wobbly buildings) than I expected to see. Let’s hope Olympus will be able to fix it before delivering the E-M5 to paying customers! Otherwise there’s at least no real need to upgrade the firmware to 50i/25p/50p standard, because videographers won’t buy a lot of E-M5s anyway. Didn’t someone say a few weeks ago that the video quality of the E-M5 will surpass the Panasonic GH2? Oh boy, presumably he never filmed with one at all.

    • tware

      I’ve read, and commented, a desire for this camera to be at least on par with the hacked GH2. If this camera had come out of the gate with full featured HD I think videographers would have showed an interest. The recent Oly announcment about future emphasis on quality primes gives me hope for expanded video capabilities. I’m just hoping they do it in firmware and don’t make us wait for the next latest and greatest OM-D whatever they come out with.

  • JJ

    “*The color of the lens is black with both the Silver and Black camera models.”

    Why do they show off that great looking silver 12-50 if it won’t be available? And why no 14-42 silver kit?

    • Fan

      You can buy it separately.

  • Salty

    I’d certainly be excited by a non-weathersealed version.

    If I get my gear wet I expect it to stop working. Anything that doesn’t is against god and against nature.

    • Esa Tuunanen

      > I’d certainly be excited by a non-weathersealed version.
      Shouldn’t be that much cheaper unless they also change frame material to plastic.

  • st3v4nt

    Wish the affirmation of Olympus still working on way to make 4/3 lens AF as fast in m4/3 not coming from Oly UK Marketing Manager but from Oly Chief Designer or at least Oly Global Marketing Manager…because if I could recall from the previous interview Oly is already said that they given up try converting 4/3 to m4/3, and believe that the future of AF is with CDAF not PDAF. It’s kind of mixed signal now…I prefer Oly keep two system alive or just kill the 4/3 and release the equivalent lens in m4/3. Also I don’t believe it takes so many iteration till they could make 4/3 AF as fast in m4/3, probably they just don’t want use the available technology or system that other maker already have to avoid paying the patent.

  • Scott

    I shoot with the e-5 for many reasons but when I was deciding between it and Canon I didnt compare it to the 7d I was comparing it to a used 1dm111. The image quality is about the same and the price of the e-5 was about the same but I get a new camera with weather sealing and the color is better. You dont always have to compare a camera to its current competetion. 7d is a toy to the e-5. Yes its video is better and yes it shoots faster but it isnt a pro body like the e-5

    • Have you actually used a 7d in the field??? I have one, i’ve been under heavy rains with it, and it performed flawlessly. The ergonomics and responsiveness are top notch. The files it produces are waaaay more malleable than what you get in the m43 camp. Its definitely not a “toy”.

      • Scott

        We actually have 2 of them in our studio. We use it for a video camera at the moment because the e-5 images look so much better. Quality is about the same but the e-5 images are a bit sharper and the color is much better. We use the 35-100 2.0 so in low light you cant beat the e-5 compared to the 7d. Yes the 7d looks a little bit better at higher iso but using a 35-100 2.0 @ 2.0 at iso 800 compared to 70-200 at 4.0 at iso 3200 you cant beat the e-5 images. Plus I dont like backing up so much because of the crop sensor.

        • I guess if you are comparing an E-5 with 2.0 zoom lenses, you should compare it to a 7d with 2.8 zoom lenses – in terms of price, size, dof, that makes more sense. Try shooting an E-5 1 stop overexposed, and try to recover highlights like you would on a 7d file. Or try shooting an E-5 at iso 6400. Not sure to understand the “backing up” thing.

          I’m not saying the e-5 is not a good camera. It probably is (it should, given its price tag). What I don’t see is how any of what you’ve said turns a 7d into a “toy”.

          • Scott

            I was comparing the 35-100 to the 70-200 2.8 but you have to compare dof too. the 70-200 2.8 is not sharp at 2.8 so you have to stop down to 4.0 but the 35-100 is super sharp at 2.0.
            You have to back up because of the 1.6x crop factor.

            I said its a toy because of the way it feels and the sound of the shutter. It is no where near the quality of the e-5 or 1d series

  • Bob B.

    hmmmm….the images Olaf sent regarding the OM are impressive…

    • MJr

      The first thing i did with the RAWs was turn off the default sharpening, let alone increasing it. Personally i don’t see the appeal of such an overload of sharpness at 100%. What is the point. You guys call it detail, but detail is there without sharpening, and viewing the image as a whole looks much more natural to me without these eye stinging ‘enhancements’. Tho sure that is mostly just a matter of taste. I like a softer more film-like texture.

      http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii301/moviemonster6/olympus-om-d-e-m5-preserie-exemple9.jpg
      (never mind the colors/contrast, i haven’t touched that)

      • Ru Elpser

        +1 all i see are oversharpened processed files, no doubt, an e pl1 could deliver the same quality

        • NPrincen

          You’ve totally smeared away the texture detail in the fabric of the coat. That is real detail that exists in the RAW file and it is now gone. How is this improving things?

          • ulli

            don,t exaggerate, maybe some details can disappear when reducing the size, especially when resizing an unsharped original

          • MJr

            Didn’t improve anything. The trick is not to ruin it.

            On my screen there is plenty texture. But tell me how extremely detailed (and disturbing) texture is going to help bring out the subject ?

            (It’s downsized a bit by photobucket.)

  • tmrgrs

    I wish that Oly would introduce a PDAF adapter just so that the complaining would end. Have any of you 43 lens owners ever thought about selling? I had a car that wouldn’t run properly without 100 octane leaded gasoline back in early 70’s and guess what? I ditched it as soon as I could find a dummy that was willing to buy it!

    • Shanti

      well if m4/3 can make a fast lens like the 50-200 2.8 or 12-60 then it can be interesting..

    • I use both systems and I must say 4/3 lenses are much better in general. Especially HG zooms. Still waiting for m4/3 to support them properly. I am patient.

    • Esa Tuunanen

      > I wish that Oly would introduce a PDAF adapter
      And just how would they do it?
      With flapping mirror blocking live view during focusing or with semitransparent mirror wasting 2/3 of stop of light?
      Both bad ideas.

  • I have ordered the new camera. After being in this industry for over 55 years I wish that camera companies would not give a notice about new products so far ahead of actual delivery.

  • Camaman

    Maybe Olympus will issue a firmware that will tell the motors inside 43 lenses to behave differently when connected on m43 body?
    :-)

    • NPrincen

      This may not be possible as it could wear out the motors. CDAF needs much faster reacting motors (higher torque) that start and stop much more often. Imagine that all of this extra starting and stopping wears out the motor maybe four times faster. Would you be happy if your precious 4/3 lens autofocus motor wore out four times faster on a micro 4/3 body? Imagine the complaining on the forums if Olympus did this and the motors started failing.

      Only way to really solve this problem is to have a PDAF adapter or incorporate PDAF into the camera body. Getting a PDAF optimized lens to work quickly under CDAF does not seem like something that is technically feasible. That may be why nobody (Olympus or Panasonic) has been able to make this work well.

  • Art Filters === Filtered Art.

  • JimD

    Admin, I can’t believe you put up those bloody rolls again.

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