skip to Main Content

(FT5) New images and sensor info. Announcement on 2am London time. Follow us live!


IMPORTANT: Olympus will announce the new E-M5 camera tonight at 2am London time (February 8). It will be 6pm in San Francisco (February 7), 9pm in New York (February 7), 3 in the morning in Berlin (February 8) and 11 in the morning in Tokyo (February 8). You can follow a live coverage on 43rumors. I will continually update you with precious info and links to reviews, videos, interesting news and preorder options. So be sure to be online at 43rumors by that hour!!!

LEAKS: There are again new leaks from Japan! On Flickr (Click here) you can find two REAL pictures of the E-M5 without the grip. UPDATE: Here on facebook is the silver version.
The Japanese store Biccamera already posted the pictures of the new E-M5 accessories:
eyecup EP-11
power battery holder HLD-6
MMF-3 adapter
New battery
Underwater housing (Flickr)
And there is one more size comparison made by our reader Paolo on Flickr (Click here).

NEW SENSOR INFO: The source “European Lady” (cool name!) sent me some interesting tidbits about the sensor:
1) The 16.1 Megapixel E-M5 sensor is 40% less noisy then the previous 12 megapixel sensor from the Olympus E-P3.
2) Thanks to the new powerful TruePic VI engine Olympus can use a very weak AA (anti-aliasing) filter. Only the FUji X PRO 1 and the just announced Nikon D800E  (Click here) don’t use any AA filter!


Again thanks to all sources and readers for sending me info and links to leaks! I should send a bottle of good Chianti to everyone :)

  • FiatoPichan

    Thanks for the info, admin. I want it badly. LoL!

    • Anonymous

      Me too !

    • MJr

      So does the first grip also take an extra battery ? From the new picture of that grip it actually looks like it has a secret compartment to store a extra SD card. :D

      • Darko

        I don’t think so, probably a compartment for battery door you must remove (like on E-620).

        • MJr

          So it does take a battery as well ?

  • Jesper

    40% less noisier, so a small improvement from the G3/GX1 sensor then. Hope the rest will be improved as well, such as DR.

    • admin


      • Steve

        Well, don’t get too exited – 40% isn’t even one stop and the rumour is that the new cam is 40% better than the E-P3, not the G3.

        • James

          Indeed. I am lusting after this camera but unless it can deliver something very special (past the styling) I just don’t see how it will justify being double the G3 price … at least not for my needs

          but it *is* pretty

          • Bob B.

            I agree. I think it is a very cool camera….and more is always good for MFT, but give me new tech (D800E)..not retro styling with old innards and a LOT of hype comparing the new offering to your old camera…not market standard. This is the mansion built on sand to me.

            • Digifan

              Euh, in what way is the D800E really new tech?
              It’s got a new sensor, but what else has changed SOO much?

              • Alexander

                D800 is state of the art- Olympus 5 years behind!

                • Charlie

                  D800E is an obvious COPY of the OM-D,

                  Stop it, Nikon!

                • Dana

                  Umm… No. Different tools for different jobs.

              • Bob B.

                um…new, improved sensor, (in the D800E)…which is waaaaay too much for this photographer (it is not a camera I need)….but it could be an inspiration for MFT in is sooooo what MFT needs, just a “meaningful” improvement in DR. (not “tweaks”).

                • Steve

                  Nobody really is clamoring for “meaningful improvement in DR”. This camera and m4/3 is what it is. There’s compromises with any system. If you need improvements in DR, the M9 is in stock right now.

                  • Bob B.

                    It doesn’t need to be to that extreme…look I love the system…I just do not want my highlights blowing out so easily. With this “system” being what it is
                    …so fantastic..don’t you want to see that, too?

                    • Not picking on you, Bob, just pointing out some info that people seem to be forgetting.

                      Metering, metering, metering. Olympus gives you all of the tools you need to get exposures that don’t have blown highlights: highlight spot, manual exposure, ESP. I sometimes wish for an OM-4-ish multi-spot meter, but it is what it is. The tools are there, you just have to use them correctly. And look at your RGB histogram, not luminance, and certainly not just chimping without a histogram.

                      Now, you’ll end up losing some deep shadow detail, which isn’t necessarily the end of the world; read the current discussion of DR on Thom Hogan’s google+ stream for some interesting thoughts, and real world examples.

                • Meaningful improvements? Sorry, but I fail to see any meaningful improvements in the D800 over the D700 aside from the new sensor…and for some users the new sensor may even be a downgrade depending on how it performs in low light. The one D700 shooter I know is less than thrilled at the prospect of 36mp files. He was hoping for the same sensor from the D4.

                  I don’t know what more you can ask out of Olympus on the OM-D as I dont see that its missing any meaningful feature i truly need. They are not a sensor maker, they can only use the best they have access to. Worst case scenario if it’s the same G3 sensor then that is fine by me. That’s all I need.

                  I don’t see myself upgrading the OM-D for years. Image quality isn’t a concern, nor are missing features. The only thing that might get me to upgrade in the next 3-4 years is if they add a much improved EVF in the next model.

                • Tweaks is for fast AF on MFT camera, but i hope also Olympus come by a camera out AA filter not only weak AA filter so in E-5.

          • @James
            Have you touched the G3? I thought the G3 looked like a great deal on paper also until I tested one out in person. After only 5 mins of using it I lost all interest. That is one of the cheapest feeling cameras this side of the original Canon Rebel. If you don’t mind cheap build quality then the G3 is a great camera, but if plasticy control dials do bother you then it isn’t even an option.

          • Tom

            Forgive my ignorance – what is the calculation to convert between % noise improvement and f-stops? What percentage improvement would one f-stop be?

        • Jesper

          Steve, that’s why I said a small improvement from the G3/GX1.

        • Vivek

          After all the BS with “new sensor”/”tweaked whatever”, now it is only 40% less noisier than the EP-3’s sensor?

          Hmm.. is that a tacit admission that the GH-2 still is on top?

          Anyway, the best damn news is that Cosina 17/0.95 lens! Way cool!!

        • Russ

          You need to double check your math.

    • Isn’t the G3/GX1 40% less noisy than the Panasonics with the old 12 MP sensor?

      • jim

        yes absolutly – G3 is 40% on an EPx… so what they are saying is they have just got to the level of the £400 G3… for £1200!

        But I do like the idea of 5 axis IBIS… all be it for a cost of £800!

      • Narretz

        Since the EM-5 has the same sensor, the numbers make sense.

    • Please correct me if I’m wrong…

      but isn’t DR strictly a function of the sensor. Post-processing can improve DR in JPEGs, but can not ‘make’ new information to improve the dynamic range in RAW.

      Read my lips: G3 sensor… for stats see DXO

  • C. Algor

    What does less noisier mean? Did you mean less noisy?

    • Steve

      No he means not as noisy as ;-)

      English is not his first language so don’t be a pedant. How’s your Swiss-German ? Gut ?

      • C. Algor

        I actually was not sure whether it was a mistake or some photographic jargon I could not understand, as I do not understand a lot of technicalities on this forum. English is not my first language either. I managed to learn four foreign languages and I know the difficulties one can have. My oral understanding of Swiss-German is nöd so schlächt but I would not pretend I know that language.

      • Bob B.

        I learned a new word this morning. pedant.

        • MJr

          Way not to be pedantic !

          • Bob B.

            I may run with it.

      • D3xmeister

        It is, but I espect the Oly to be better. Their 12mp implementation always was ahead Panasonic one in high ISO noise, so I expect the same. My guess is will have very clean ISO 1600 that you can use withput thinking, in AutoISO. and the 3200 will be the new 3200 in old sensor.

    • i think he meant “less nosy”

      • Serge



        • Bob B.

          and/or: nosey. ( think I was being pedantic).

      • Me

        Only because they cheated by using ISO values that were 2/3 EV lower than displayed… That’s why exposure time is always longer than on Panasonic cameras when using same ISO and aperture.

        • That’s not right. Look at the dpreview pages if you like. Or read the dxomark comments on their ISO measures carefully. Oly’s ISOs are *exactly* correct. Pana’s ISO’s used to be wrong by 1/3 stop (i.e. ISO200 are in fact ISO250, if I recall the dpreview numbers correctly). The fact that Oly underexposes the sensor by one stop has nothing whatever to do with cheating, but only with a better handling of highlights.

  • Alexander

    E-P3 with integreated VF & some better specs. In this case I would prefer an E-P4 (with integreated flash / optinal VF).
    Also an remote control.
    -> I want it all !!!
    Question: which camera has this all?…

  • Ton

    The hype is over, at least good news are still coming. Btw, is the clip on flash can be bounced? It looks to me that it can.

  • TheEye

    Hmm, less noisy at low ISO? At high ISO? In the shadows or middle tones?

    Not sure if this is the right place for an ad, but I’m selling one of my kidneys in used but good condition. Accepting $2,500 or best offer. ;-)

    • Bobafett

      18 more hours to go and you will know =)


    • I’d sell part of my liver, but I’m not sure how good shape its in ;-).

  • Samuel Sihombing

    I want it!

  • Bromo

    Very interesting admin. Keep up the good work :)

  • alflor1

    40% less noisy? How many stop is it?

    • One stop is 50%. Or is that two stops? Maybe it depends on how you define “noisy”?

      • Steve

        One stop is a factor of 2 – either half or double. So, 40 % is less than 1 stop. So much for 2 stops eh ?

        • JF

          I think that it is not so simple to convert noise to stops…it depends on the slope of SNR versus iso ? For G3 sensor, there is approximately -6 dB/stop, so yes 50% equal 1 stop…

          • reverse stream swimmer

            2/3 EV improved DR is a welcome, and is an observable improvement.

        • jim

          yeh can’t wait to see how crap ISO 25k looks!

  • Jason

    does the little flash that is included tilt?

  • alflor1

    Anyway, good news!^^

  • bru

    either the sensor looks tiny or the body looks huge in that picture.

  • Now I can’t wait to see real photos …. IQ almost as good as the Fuji…sounds to good to be true.. in a smaller body
    Hope the increased DR aswell.

  • Anonymous

    Want one !!!!!
    Im windering what kind of quality this camera has with 4/3 optics like my super glorious 12-60 SW ?

  • TheEye

    Eye (pun alert) notice that the little “eye” on the left side of the mount looks more like an AF assist LED than a WB sensor.

  • alflor1

    I like the look and am now looking forward to knowing its guts.

  • sound promising! tomorrow when i open this m43 web, if i not see this i come over to you :D lol…

    • admin

      Of course ;)

  • TheEye

    Sexy humped beast, you will be mine.

    • bli

      Somehow, that doesn’t sound good… :-)

  • Jason

    admin please tell us the little flash tilts….

    Fuji XPro1 is oversized and overpriced.

    • fuji theory is done iq in apsc > ff dslr when d800e is annouced

  • Geoff

    All these questions about the flash’s ability to bounce, bouncing a GN10 flash head, I hope your ceilings are pure white and low, the effect of trying to bounce a flash that small is much like using a point and shoot in a stadium, effect in non existant.

    • achiinto


    • Jason

      @Geoff- Glad you’re an expert… when shooting macros and close-ups of shiny things, it helps to not hit them directly with the flash. If using a flash close-up, I always bounce. So if I were to want to fire my remote flash using the built-in flash, I cannot, unless it too bounces. SUCKA

  • You can find other pictures in this flickr group as well

    Especially this one where you see that the e-m5 is nearly as big as the gh2… I wonder how much accurate this collage is though.

    • They should be fairly accurate if they are based on the mount’s dimensions. But is it really narrower than the E-P3? That’s not quite right, is it?

    • If the camera is GH2 sized that would be great. Not too big, not too small – you can easily carry it in your hand all day. I hope the ergonomics are better though, i don’t have large hands and i keep on hitting buttons unexpectedly on the damn thing.

    • safaridon

      The comparative sizes between the E-M5 and G3 are a bit off as the G3 is 0.3″ shorter and less height than the E-M5 if the leaked dimensions are correct?

      Thanks for providing this useful link to the photos.

  • peroni

    On a different topic, wasn’t Panasonic supposed to announce the new pro lenses today?

    • CDMc


  • I guess I’m just too dim to figure it out but…What are the two diff. grip/holders for?

    Do they BOTH house a battery? I understand the thicker one, looks like a little HLD-4, but what is that thin one that goes between the HLD-6 and the E-M5?

    • Balthier Bunansa

      thin one is just a grip ,no battery , for those who need larger thing to hold.
      other one is a grip for portrait orientation with batteries

  • Looking into the mount and comparing to my E-P1, there are extremely few and small differences. Certainly thete are no PDAF sensors according to that patent, which has been discussed many times here.

  • Note that the grip does not replace the battery. The body must have a special socket for it at the bottom. Great.
    Looking forward to tomorrow.

  • Joe
  • Camaman

    Sh.t I opened today hoping i0ll see the announcement!! I mixed it up with D800!
    Lool! :-P

  • Farrukh

    40% less noise?! Sigh I should have passed on the EP3 and waited for this instead :(

  • Shingo
    • Ahh.. there we have the different leatherette texture on the silver version for the first time. Beautiful!

      • The silver. Definitely.

        • combined with the 75mm 1.8

          • Drool about that lens. If its anywhere near the 45mm, then its a winner…

            Just hope it came in black :( Silver lenses call attention to themselves easier, look bigger and (at least the 45mm) do not age very gracefully.

      • ShatteredSky

        Yep, it is getting more and more difficult to decide. Silver with better texture, or black with the more industrial look. Silver may go better with both silver and black lenses. Hmmmm… Can’t wait to try out!


        • TheEye

          Make sure to wear matching knickers!

          • ShatteredSky

            I will try my best :-)

            • TheEye

              I’m currently looking for a snazzy hat that reflects the pyramidal hump.

  • Indicates sensor is a bit better than G3/GX1 – nice. Weak AA-filter – question is weaker than on Panasonic? Weak AA-filter increases sharpness but also the risk for moiré – how do Oly avoid that?
    New, positive info that raises new questions.
    The OM-D is 50g lighter than Fuji Pro – and a lens cheaper than Pro. Really lokks forward to compare IQ and usability from test and reviews!

    • Bromo

      They try to avoid it through the processing engine which is generally quite effective at least in the E5 (the OM-5 has a newer generation of processor so it should be even better). I have seen cases where it shows through but it can be removed in software. The OM-5 isnt the first Oly camera to have the light AA filter so they have some exposure to it :)

    • DR

      “Indicates sensor is a bit better than G3/GX1 – nice”

      Actually, indicates sensor is about equal. Better than previous generation OLYs, yes.

      Only 50g lighter than Fuji Pro? On that basis, I’d take the Pro with its better sensor.

      • I guess we’re comparing apples to oranges. The fuji pro (which I admittedly drool over) is going to be much slower, bigger, and the lenses lineup is in its infancy yet. As much as I like that proposition I wonder if it makes sense as of 2012 – maybe in a year or so, after fuji has dramatically improved af speed and such, and there are more lenses.

        Not to mention that lens size is way bigger.

        • Luckily for me, Fuji will have the lenses I happen to need by 2013. The Fuji lacks some features that the new Oly has. On the other hand the bigger bulk is used for ergonomy and a couple of buttons = less menudigging and toggle compared to OM-D. Lenses look fairily compact so far f.i. the macro.
          This will be a very interesting evaluation and a difficult choice.

          • I’m not sure the lenses are “faily compact”. In my world compact is the panny 20mm or 25mm. I don’t think we’ll see anything like that on the fuji.

            As for ergonomics, you have a point there.

            Totally agree, the choice will be difficult. And with so many exciting new offers every day (enter Canon in the mirrorless arena by the end of the year), its going to be even more difficult!!!

          • Digifan

            Ever used an Olympus? It seems to me you didn’t.
            The Super Control Panel (SCP), that Olympus has allready had with 43rds, is that good that one seldomly has to dive in to the menu.

  • HB

    There are (will be) 2 versions of NIKON D800. One with and one without AA-Filter. The one without is called D800E. So NIKON seems not to be too sure about how to deal with that issue :-)

    • Metthew

      They create two versions for supporting various market needs. For example, If you are serious about fashion or portrait, D800 is the proper choice. If you are landscape jounalist or others, go to D800E.

      • Hehe, Nikon can allow for no AA-filter, as most of their optics acts like one! ;)
        Thus teh 800E would be the best option of the two, I guess…

      • Hehe, Nikon can allow for no AA-filter, as most of their optics acts like one! ;)
        Thus the 800E would be the best option of the two, I guess…

        (sorry for the double post, it’s due to the heavy load and delay in here right now)

        • But at 36 MP resolution, this actually makes more sense than you probably think.
          If you have high enough resolution, the lens will always act as a low pass filter and no AA filter is needed.

  • bilgy_no1

    That link to the MMF-3 adapter photo puts an end to my hope for a PDAF solution for 4/3 lenses. Damnit!

    This is still a very nice camera, but Olympus are missing an opportunity if they do not provide a fast AF solution for the excellent (weather sealed) 4/3 lens line-up.

    • I may be too optimistic, but devising a mirrored adapter with a PDAF sensor, like Sony’s, would not require a new body. Now that m4/3 becomes weather sealed Olympus will have to respond to this bit of criticism sooner rather than later.

      • Boooo!

        The difference in flange distance is about 2 cm, and the adapter is tiny. Where and how would you put a mirror in the adapter, along with a mechanism to flip it and the AF sensor array? :)

        • The mirror doesn’t have to flip, you know, and the sensor could be small enough.

          • Boooo!

            If the mirror doesn’t flip, the light doesn’t reach the main sensor ;) And it can’t be semi-transparent, because the light loss would be too big for this sensor tech.

            If you have a 4/3 DSLR, have a look at how big the AF sensor area is. Things just won’t fit in a small adapter.

        • bilgy_no1

          “The difference in flange distance is about 2 cm, and the adapter is tiny. Where and how would you put a mirror in the adapter, along with a mechanism to flip it and the AF sensor array?”

          It would not necessarily need a fixed mirror that covers the entire light path. It would be possible to fix only small mirrors that correspond with the AF sensors. But I agree with you that the MMF-adapters are not very thick.

          • Nathan

            Would you really want to compose on an object you couldn’t see because an AF sensor mirror was lowered into your viewing path?

      • I think they have found a software prediction technique that can be just as effective as PDAF and much cheaper to produce.

        • That does not help most high grade 4/3 lenses, which are simply not suited to work with contrast detection. The only ones that should work seamlessly are the PanaLeica 25 D (not sealed) and the 14-54 II.

          • Esa Tuunanen

            Here’s official list of contrast AF compatible 4/3 lenses.

          • Not conventional contrast detection. But suppose they come up with a software algorithm that predicts the focus in a new way, that is more suitable to these lenses…

          • I think what @Agent00soul was trying to get out is that it may be possible to extract direction and distance from an image, and use that information in the same way that PDAF works. I’m pretty sure that won’t be quite as fast as PDAF, but it should be better than straight CDAF with 4/3’s lenses.

        • bilgy_no1

          That would be interesting. One small move of the lens allows for two measurements (beginning point and end point)to predict the point of sharpness by extrapolation. The lens then moves to that point and additional finetuning measurements can be taken as it moves. That requires a lot of processing power and speed, as well as high sensor read out frequency. It would eliminate the need for trial and error moves along the focal point.

          • dzv

            If the new IBIS technology is able to move the sensor on 5 different axis, the camera could be able to quickly use back-and-forth sensor shifting to determine focus direction, couldn’t it?

            • The Million Dollar question!-)

              First at this late stage in the game, I doubt Olympus is solving this problem. If they were, it would’ve been a great buzz builder, and there’s no such buzz (and it’s now officially Wednesday in Japan, so buzz building is over).

              Second, according to rumor, the new IBIS is 5-way. There are 6 independent dimensions of sensor movement. Guess which one is (rumored) left out? You got it: in/out — i.e., the very one you would use for focusing. Again, we seem SOL (out of luck).

              Third, it occurs to me that, depending on physical implementation of IBIS-5D, Oly could combo some motors to get in/out direction for PDAF support. However (as someone pointed out on a previous topic and thread), it’s not clear the IBIS motors have sufficient distance for PDAF support. (I do not know the factors.) So, seems like a long shot.

              Also, the IBIS-5D approach would require a fast sensor readout. It’s rumored the sensor has fast readout (e.g., for video), so perhaps that’s leveraged for PDAF support. But that’s a lot of ‘if’s.

              The new 43 adapter is simply weather-sealed. No solution there.

              For better or worse, we should find out with the official announcement in the next 14-15 hours.

      • bilgy_no1

        @ Sneye

        I agree, it would not be too difficult. But in the pictures of the MMF-3, there is simply no mirror at all. That’s why I think it is simply a weather proofed version of the MMF-1/2. Unfortunately…

    • OlyFan

      Patience my friend. If Oly found a solution for that problem, it would render 43 system useless. There would be no need to work on the new E7. Besides it would piss a lot of 43 system users. I think the long-term goal of Oly would be to integrate the 2 systems. I strongly feel the OM-D line of cameras is a step in this direction.

      • + 1

      • Andrew

        Why would it piss them off? To have the option to use their lenses on another system?

        I suppose you mean that if Olympus figured that out they’d drop 4/3 faster. Hard to say, but I don’t think that’ll factor too much into whether Olympus continues 4/3 or not.

        • achiinto

          I am a 43 user and if Olympus can drop the 43 body, I don’t really mind. I much prefer a good adapter to increase the flexibility of a system in m43.

        • OlyFan

          You are right. What I meant to say is that if Oly finds a solution for the AF problem with 43 Zuiko lenses, there would be no reason to continue 43 development. All the users with 43 equipment would be left stranded because there would be no more support. There are still many 43 users out there who prefer to continue using their DSLR equipment. Perhaps handling may be one of the main reasons.

          In the long run, Oly will be addressing all the concerns of 43 users trying to move over to m43. Looking at the grips, I think they may have just addressed the handling issue. Addressing the AF problem will be last on their agenda IMO, which is not going to be easy.

          • Digifan

            There is NO 43 developement anymore. They will only update sensor tech and maybe a few minor things not much to write home about and not really that much work for R&D.

      • Esa Tuunanen

        With 4/3 basically left to drift in the wind three years ago Canon, Nikon and Sony are already eating that lunch from Olympus.

        Olympus can’t afford two systems so best use of resources would be developing that hybrid AF solution ASAP and give proper high end mirrorless body to dam that leak of users.
        Remember that Sony is already aiming for EVF-based Alpha system and 4/3 has even harder time in making big optical viewfinder picture than others.
        So I don’t see really much anything for Olympus to loose by making E-30/E-5 replacements fully digital era design with m4/3 mount and use of 4/3 with simple adapter because they’ve already been bleeding users thanks to lack of upgrade options.
        Heck, if 4/3 lenses had been optically as underdesigned and mediocre as m4/3 lenses I don’t think there would be much anyone left in 4/3 boat by now.

        • Steve

          There already is no 4/3 development, hasn’t really been since the E-3.

      • bilgy_no1

        @ Digifan

        I think it pisses 4/3 users off that they are forced to upgrade to the E-5, even if they got into the system with an E-620 and perhaps the 14-54 and 50-200. I agree that the OM-D is a step towards integrating the system, especially with the accessory grips. But there needs to be some kind of solution to bridge the differences between CDAF bodies and PDAF lenses.

        A very easy solution would be to create an adapter like the Sony adapter.

    • “Agent00soul:
      But at 36 MP resolution, this actually makes more sense than you probably think. If you have high enough resolution, the lens will always act as a low pass filter and no AA filter is needed.”

      Exactly. That’s what I’m implying here as well.

      • 36MP at FX size is the same density as 9MP at 4/3’s. Nikon lenses aren’t THAT bad.

        • Maybe not, but still the Zuiko SHGs delivers approx. double the MTF resolution of the Nikkors. And most else, for that matter.

  • omg! whole world is shaking now! xpro1 then D800 just now, tomorrow EM5, soon NX20!

    • admin

      I guess the world will not “shake” for the NX20 :)

      • Bob B.


    • Is it just me or is that Nikon D800 one of the ugliest cameras ever produced?

      • @ Agent00soul
        …and boring

        “micro four thirds like a DSLR only bettr”

      • Ralentizeur

        no, it is just you

    • Vril_Ya

      This calls for IBIS :) .. one that works!

  • napalm

    regarding the sensor: I guess the best expectation will be that it will perform the same as the G3… maybe a bit better because of the weak AA filter… and with better jpeg output because of the TruPic engine.

    …and that is already good enough for me.

    • admin

      I just heard it has a very fast readout system. This will avoid bigger rolling shutter problems on video and EVF!!!

    • yes it makes you wonder why they did not eliminate the low pass filter altogether. There are enough examples ( sigma Dps , Leica M , Ricoh GXR module) to know that it provides MUCH BETTER results


      • The Sigma produces AWFUL moiré. Didn’t you see that parrot image that have been floating around the net?

  • I put together a collection of a ton of the collected photos of the E-M5:

  • Mikey

    The silver finish on the silver E-M5 looks quite cheap I think. It doesn’t have the beautiful luster of the E-P3. I think that’s going to be a disappointment.

    Olympus may have gone too retro on the finish. Hopefully the real camera looks better than the photoshoped version.

    • Balthier Bunansa

      then go for the black version

    • I’ll wait til I see it in person before making any judgements.

  • rrr_hhh

    These assertions are rather curious : weak AA filter plus higher pixel density mean more noise, not less. And remember that it was already said that the improvements were achieved in the jpegs, not in the raws and with respect to Olympus 12 meg sensor.

    So my take on this is that we will get a G3 sensor tweaked by Olympus know how for better jpegs. That will be a step forward with respect to the E-p3, but not a real difference with respect to the G3, especially if you shoot raw.

    • Boooo!

      Noise is a property of the sensor, not the filter. Meaning, you get the exact same amount of noise with a bare sensor as you do with a kilometer of beer bottle glass.

      • Well, the noise spectrum will be different if you low pass filter it. And if you remove some of the spectrum, the total energy will be less too.

        • Boooo!

          No, it won’t be. Noise is a *sensor* property.

          • You’re right. The sensor is after the filter, so the noise is produced after the filter.

    • AA filter does not affect sensor noise at all.

      • rrr_hhh

        I thought that weaker AA filter meant more details, but more noise at low ISO in the final picture ? and that this was the compromise you had to accept for getting more details ?

        • simon

          No, it means more details, but those details are likely to be false to some extent. Sometimes this is fine (e.g. foliage) and sometimes not (moire). I’m not sure it’s a great idea to go with a weak AA filter, but it seems people see it as a feature.

          The AA filter doesn’t directly affect the sensor noise. However, with a weak AA filter you need less sharpening to get the same (impression of) acuity, so the net result would be a decrease in noise.

          • Only one, Nikon come to day by D800 and also D800E by out AA filter.

          • If anything, S/N ratio should improve because there’s one less layer between the outside world and the sensor, which would mean more photons hit the wells of the sensor, am i right???

            • jim

              absolutly – nothing is 100% transparent!

              Although I should think the gain would be somthing like 0.0032% more light!

            • In a properly exposed photograph, the same number of photons hit the sensor regardless of the amount of glass.

        • If you sharp up a image in PS, will you also sharp up noise, but not by reduction of AA filter, you only litte more problem by alians and moarè.

          • rrr_hhh

            If the AA filter adds some blurr to get rid of moire and aliases doesn’t it at the same time blurr some of the details and some of the noise ?

            • No noise come from sensor, but you lose details by use of AA filter, so also maybe is look like noise.

            • The AA is an optical filter, not a software filter so it cannot affect the noise

    • OlyFan

      I think the sensor is still the same as GX1. Oly just tweaked it to get the fast AF. All the lesser noise tweaks, IMO, have been achieved in the new image processor(agressive noise reduction?). Unfortunately, this is not great news for RAW shooters.

      • I have to admit that I don’t know a lot about the technology.
        But if a JPEG engine – that is just an in-camera RAW converter – is able to produce pictures with less noise, shouldn’t this also apply to RAWs that are PPd afterwards?

        • all the ‘less noise’ they talk about on this camera is relative to the previous generation 12mp-sensor cameras like E-P3 etc, ie we expect JPEGs to have same noise levels as G3/GX1 (same basic sensor)

          if the JPEGs of the OM-D have less noise (than G3/GX1) then I think yes, this is just from the on-camera RAW convertor and you should be able to get the same results from shooting RAW on the Panny cameras and processing afterwards

          this is only bad news for RAW shooters in the sense that, particularly after earlier rumours, we were hoping for better sensor performance than G3/GX1 rather than basically the same

    • AA filter is only for to reduction of moarè optical, not noise.

    • acahaya

      The fact that all statements regarding IQ are related to the JPG IQ does NOT necessarily mean that there is no improvement in the RAW files. As long as no RAW converter is able to convert E-M5 ORFs it is simply not possible to make a statement regarding RAW IQ.

  • OlyFan

    Wow! Lets hope all of this is true! Until we see the results, these are subjective opinions.
    Here’s hoping the results bear all our expectations!

  • Jules

    I don´t get the shape! What´s in the huge pyramid underneath the hotshoe??? Thats not the EVF, is it?

    • BA Baracus

      It’s just to facilitate the accessory port …

    • TheEye

      The E-M5 is just happy to see you.

      • +1 :D

      • Not quite, it also holds the EVF optics and circuits. It’s not like an EVF contraption takes up no space at all, is it? Imagine the VF-2 put in there somewhere… Exactly – it resides within that hump!

  • pask74

    Any idea how this one will compete against GH2 for video ?

  • Pete

    I like to have this kamera with my 2,8/17 everyday in my pocket!
    (yes, I know, the lens is not good bla bla bla)

    • BLI

      It might not look good with that hump in your pocket.

  • marilyn

    i love it i want one admin you made my life more enjoyable… and to all the people who show us the pictures cant wait to burn my pocket…

  • oksamot

    one important question: will it have manual control for video?

  • nicwalmsley

    Still hoping you can detach the hump, for when you don’t need to use the hotshoe/accessory port.

    • tmrgrs

      +1 but I’m not banking on it. If it is true, it’s been a very carefully guarded secret. Any thoughts admin?

    • rrr_hhh

      With all the pictures we have seen by now among which none without the whole pyramid, I doubt that this is a possibility.

    • would be a nice idea, but prob makes the body much more expensive, considering all the effort needed to make the interconnect area weather sealed. (like the sliding connect style prism of the Nikon F5)

    • Charlie

      That would be the E-P4.

  • bert

    For me one of the best things is getting the choice to mount the grip with or without the additional battery. Handling will be much better for my bigger hands than with the GH2.

  • Pixnat

    If the source is correct, the E-M5 has a 16.1 Mpix sensor. The G3/GX1 sensor is 16.6 Mpix.

    E-M5 : 16.1 Mpix G3 : 16.6 Mpix

    Does it mean that it’s a different sensor?

    • I dont now the look in spec is E-M5 use 16.1mpx total 16.8mpx and G3/GX1 use only 15.8mpx, maybe the is a new sensor. GH2 use also 16.1 mpx in 4:3 aspect.

      • Olaf

        I think we will be surprised tomorrow with a new sensor from somewhere else than Panasonic!

        • Pixnat

          I HOPE you’re right :-)

          • rrr_hhh

            The difference between total number of pixels and effective pixels is due to IS. Although they were using the same sensor, Olympus 12meg cameras did also have a slightly larger number of effective pixels.

            It may be due to the fact that IBIS movements are more restricted than OIS movements, or to the fact that Panasonic is more conservative than Olympus with the effective number of pixels. I think that the fact that Panasonic will have the same sensor as the GX1/G3 was an FT5.

            • TheEye

              Please explain how IS affects the pixel count.

              • Olaf

                IS moves the sensor, so you need a few pixels on each side if you do not want the IS to crop your photos.

                • TheEye

                  The image circle is large enough so no cropping will occur. Please explain how the sensor moving a trivial amount will reduce the pixel count. The sensor gets exposed fully even when it moves to its limits.

                  There is a difference in size between JPG and RAW images. RAW images have a higher pixel count. JPG images are slightly cropped all around.

                  • rrr_hhh

                    The total image circle is one thing, the sharp image circle is another. Plus there is what is thrown out due to software correction.

              • IBIS works w/ sensor shift, that is the sensor is moving around to counteract camera shake. Hence the sensor needs to be slightly bigger than the picture rendered from the lens, simply to make sure the sensor can fully capture that rendition in any shifted position.

                With OIS the sensor need not move, so normally the effective pixel count will be higher on a static sensor than an IBIS-based one. So, provided the same sensor in a Panny and an Oly body, the Panny will have a slightly higher effective pixel count.

                And for the multi-ratio sensors, the effective pixel count pr. ratio/format will of course vary, and also be less pr. ratio than the maximum pixel count for the entire sensor area.

                • Pixnat

                  “So, provided the same sensor in a Panny and an Oly body, the Panny will have a slightly higher effective pixel count.”

                  Now, that’s intersting.
                  The GX1 sensor has 16.6 Mpix, with 16.0 effective Mpix

                  If the E-M5 had the same GX1 sensor, it should have less than 16.0 Mpix? Right? But it has 16.1 Mpix (surely effective Mpix). So slightly more effective pixels than the GX1, while it should have slightly less due to IS…

                  So, new sensor or not? :-)

                • Need only more room for sensor, so sensor can moving around.

                  Look on Olympus E-410 and E-510 and only E-510 had IBIS, but same sensor in both camera and have total 11.8mpx and use 10.1mpx or image on 3648 x 2735 anyway.

                  • @ Pixnat:
                    I guess this also depends on the actual sensor implementation from different camera makers, like the Bayer matrix details, the placement and type of sensor circuitry, the physical design of the sensor assembly, IBIS construction and efficiency and so forth… No fixed answer here I believe, as nothing will ever be completely comparable, even though the sensor DNA stems from the same pedigree.

            • If I am not mistaken only DIGITAL IS (aka fake IS) reduces the number of pixels as it crops the active area of the sensor and shifts said area to compensate for movement.

              Oly’s IBIS shifts the sensor physically, which does not have any impact on the pixelcount.

              Please correct me if I am mistaken!

              • Olaf

                When the IS moves the sensor it still reads the same area that the lens projects the image on. It do not recompose your picture…. :-)

                • Light circle on FT lens is ca 26-32mm on MFT ca 24-27mm, and by IBIS in camera is sensor so is movable, if IS is on.

        • Wouldn’t bet on the sensor being new. At all.

    • TheEye

      I suppose there are different ways to count. My E-620 has supposedly 12.3 MP. However, a RAW image is 4100×3084 pixels, which comes to 12.6 MP.

      • rrr_hhh

        I think that this is due to the fact that 1k is 1024, not 1000.

        • TheEye

          As I said, different ways of counting: 1k could be either 1,000 or 1,024 (There was a lawsuit over this issue).

          However, I’m simply saying that an OOC JPG from my E-620 has 4032×3024 pixels, while a RAW file has 4100×3084 pixels. The JPG is cropped. The pixel count of the RAW file is higher than that of the JPG.

          • jim

            There is pixels on the sensor that are not used for the final image! – so you can have a 12Mpix image form a 12.1Mpix sensor!

      • Digifan

        That is RAW developed with 3rd party software

        • TheEye

          Sure. I want all the pixels available. The JPG crops the image area slightly.

    • maybe those are bruto /netto values?

  • Anonymous

    Looks like the two grips will be sold as a bundle – the battery grip looks like it only attaches to other grip – the gold connectors are offset so you can’t just attach the battery grip directly to the camera.

    • TheEye

      Looks to me like you can use A by itself, but B requires also A.

    • A sensor’s effective area is less than the total, because along the edges of a sensor some of the RGGB sensels groups in the Bayer Matrix will be cut off by the physical sensor edge. An RGGB sensel group constitutes one effective pixel. To maximize color info at each pixel, Bayer demosaiching i used, combining different RGGB grouping in a 2×2 sensel pattern as explained here:

      But along the sensor’s edge, some of those 2×2 demosaicing groups will inevitably be cut off, and thus not counted as effective pixels either. Successively they will be excluded in the making of the picture as well. They will however be counted for in the total pixel count, but as explained not in the effective pixel count.

  • Ace

    The Ricoh M-mount module and leica M9 doesn’t have AA filter too. You might wanna edit your last line.

  • looks great, can’t wait. But what would a MMF3 do?

    • Nothing, except allowing you to mount 4/3 lenses.

    • TheEye

      At the very least the MMF3 will allow weather-resistant 4/3 lenses to be mounted on the weather-resistant E-M5. Hopefully the MMF3 will also allow speedier AF, although I suppose any potential AF trickery is done solely in the E-M5 body.

      • Darko

        Somebody explained before that only a few normal 4/3 lenses can use CDAF, not weather sealed PRO lenses

    • BLI

      Weather sealed attachment of 43 lenses (as opposed to micro 43 lenses, they need some more distance to the sensor).

    • alflor1

      I saw, but forget from where, on the web that it should be merely the mmf2 + weathersealing.

  • L

    It’ll be 1pm in Sydney time… Arr~~ Hard day to work tomorrow…

    • Ross

      Yeah, I know. Just as well I work for myself. ;) Anyhow, it’ll be lunch time. :D

  • Mumbly

    For me, this camera looks too much like a (D)SLR! It’s a shame that the manufacturers adopt such conservative camera designs. Thanks to the EVFs resp. the omition of a mirror, the eyepiece doesn’t have to be in the same axis as the lens path anymore – which opens whole new possibilities in terms of camera design. But camera makers seem to lack the will for innovation…

    • TheEye

      Where do you want the eyepiece? Are you left-eyed or right-eyed? How big is your nose? Just put the camera in your Louis Vuitton purse and be done with it.

      • BLI

        I think the main consern was that with electronic viewers, there is much more freedom to place the eyepiece. The hump could thus have been avoided (perhaps; Sony has managed it — it all depends on what Olympus has put into the hump + their ability to miniaturize). To insist on a hump for nostalgic reasons is akin to insisting on a CRT monitor — stupid, unless it serves a purpose.

        • But it does serve a purpose. The original OM series was an ergonomic triumph in its day. Given the choice, most people would prefer a centered viewfinder, I think. It helps steady the grip of the camera and lens. If you don’t believe me, try it yourself.

          • It does not.

            I have owned a OM-1 and own a Leica M now. The positioning of the finder on the top left corner on the Leica is a lot more ergonomic,
            not only because it keeps the camera clear of your nose.

            Really people with rangefinder Leicas have never complained about unsteady grip of their cameras in the last 50 years or so.

            • Well, I used to own an E-330 and still own an OM2sp (both un-stabilized). The difference is clear, but that’s subjective.

              • oluv

                i always use the viewfinder with my left eye, so for me an EVF on the left side doesn’t give any advantage over a centered one.

                • Charlie

                  HUMP is cosmetic. Silly.

            • TheEye

              Not everyone is right-eyed.

          • BLI

            Why do you assume that I have not tried a camera with a centered eyepiece? I have! (My first Cosina SLR, my second OM-2 slr, my Nikon DSLRs, my XZ-1 with VF-2, my E-P3 with VF-2)! To me, having the eyepiece in the lens axis is not a big deal (a number of mju’s, etc., etc. — yes, I know that they are lighter!). I accept that different users have different opinions on the hump. What I can’t understand is those who argue for a hump in nostalgic/sentimental terms. Don’t tell me that the entire hump is required by the eyepiece — there must be more than the optic connection to the eye (i.e. the eyepiece), e.g. electronics, etc. which just as well could have be put other places. Ok — maybe the centered hump is the easiest (laziest?) design?

            • TheEye

              Compare the hump to size of the VF-2.

          • Well. Personally I don’t like rangefinder style cameras with the VF on the left edge.
            Shooting landscape this may be fine, but I REALLY find it awkward to use in portrait orientation.

            YMMV, though.

        • Suppose Olympus have held user clinics and found out that most prospective customers actually prefer the classic SLR look with the viewfinder in the middle?

        • TheEye

          If you don’t want a hump you have to place the eyepiece either to the far left or far right of the (large) screen. Or you have to make the body a fair amount taller than the screen, which allows placing the eyepiece anywhere.

          I don’t consider the hump a faulty design, even if it does not contain a prism. It does house the VF components and it is an attachment point for the hot shoe and the accessory port.

        • Beautemps

          The EVF is CRT-Technology?? Damned good, consequent retro design. That would explain the hump. Any specs.? 60hz? Dotmask? :-)

          By the way: about 40% of menkind are left-oriented, -handed, -eyed. EVF on the left side means a big loose of market share.

          • BLI

            Have you seen it? Is it really a tiny CRT? :-)

          • Charlie

            That’s bullsh!t.

            40% are NOT left handed. :D

    • Vril_Ya

      @ Mumbly, if you find the design too conservative, there is the new Pentax K-01. :D

    • No one seems to have noticed the camera is asymmetric… so the viewfinder is slightly to the left, and not centered.

  • The new battery isn’t physically the same as the BLS-1 and not likely compatible, meaning you can’t use your existing BLS-1s in the E-M5. The new battery has five connections, whereas the old has just three. Too bad.

    • BLI

      It would be nice with a compatible battery, but that is the least of my worries about the E-M5.

      • Well, it means extra cost for a new spare battery.

        • Bobafett

          Let’s do a cost comparison:

          1 x E-M5 Body only = 1200$

          1 x 3rd party battery from e-bay = 20$

          If you gonna buy this cam the battery-costs are peanuts =)

          • I doubt third party batteries will be available at launch. And besides, many third party batteries have less capacity than stated or are of inferior quality, so why take chances?

            • T-L

              Maybe because you can buy 2 or more non-original batteries for price of one original?
              And some of them are as good as original. Hope the new low-capacity battery for E-M5 is priced better than BLM-1 :P
              And would be good to know, what kind of battery fits into the new grip.

            • Bobafett

              I agree that at launch there won’t be any 3rd party batteries available. But I’ve been using 2 third party batts from e-bay extensively (in different climates from 35°C to -12°C) for a year now. They’ve the same capacity as the oroginal and are still working. Maybe I’m just lucky.

    • simon

      If the battery is new and incompatible, I hope they at least used this opportunity to have the battery report detailed charge level information (percentage).

      • ShatteredSky

        Yes, this is another thing I’ve been waiting for.


  • Serge

    But where is my ‘special’ OM adapter


  • Nick

    What Oly and Panny dont seem to understand is that we DONT need megapixels, we need DR. Sony gets it. Fuji gets it. And even Canon gets it with their new 14mp.

    I would much more want a 12 mp that have DR that is “sony-good” than 16 mp with low DR.

    43 is beginning to be a marketing product, not a photographer product. Sorry to say.

    • You’re right, and both Panasonic and Olympus admitted it, but Olympus does not have many choices with sensors.

    • … well, it was Sony that took the pixel race to a new level.
      And the new Canon sensor only has half a stop more DR than the Pana G3 sensor (according to dxomark, which also says that half a stop is barely recogniszable).

      • Nick

        Sony manage to get MORE DR from smaller pixels (their 24mp vs 43s 12mp). Sonys 24mp is similar in pixelsize to M43s 16mp – and they manage to get much more DR.

        Why is that?

        In my dreamworld Sony would buy Oly, so Oly could get their sensortech. Pany and Olys sensors is their weakest point right now.

        When NEX is bringing smaller lenses, Pany and Oly must respond sensorwise. Otherwise they will fall.

        • GS1

          > Sony manage to get MORE DR from smaller pixels (their 24mp vs
          > 43s 12mp). Sonys 24mp is similar in pixelsize to M43s 16mp –
          > and they manage to get much more DR.
          > Why is that?

          read-out noise is near the same on current sony and panasonic sensors ( compared with pixel level), but sony managed to have a higher full well capacity ( => lower base ISO )

        • The Real Stig

          Real photographers use film. ;)

          • yes, and then preferably 8×10″ format

        • If Sony buys into Oly: Oly get sensor technology and Sony get small HQ lens technology :-)

    • BLI

      Does Sony get it? From what I have heard, their NEX-5N with 16Mpx has a better image quality than their top-of-line NEX-7 with 24Mpx.

      • GS1

        but only if you have the need to compare pixel-by-pixel ;)

      • i read the NEX-7 had lots of problems with M-mount wide angle lenses

    • The Real Stig


  • TheEye

    Let’s kill those remaining 9 hours or so until the great show and tell with a drinking game. Whenever someone posts “hump” we have a drink. (I just had one)

    • Cheers!
      At the current rate we won’t make it to the announcement. Far off.

      • TheEye

        I expect to find myself under the table within three hours.

        • Tomorrow you look the E-M5 like a big pink elephant, give you noise by all mpx. :-D

  • bidou

    “Only the FUji X PRO 1 and the just announced Nikon D800E (Click here) don’t use any AA filter!”

    And Leica M8, M9, ricoh GXR A12, and all medium format.

    • TheEye

      Speaking of the D800, it has an enormous hump. And that Fuji is a big hump. *burp*

      • achiinto

        The entire Fuji pro is a hump of itself.

    • rrr_hhh

      I can’t wait to hear all the grumpy people complaining about moiré over at DPreview !

      • Mr. Reeee

        I’ll take bitching about moiré over yet another round of “equivalence” oneupsmanship! ;-)

  • Geoff

    Interesting to note that it’s smaller than GH-2.

  • pingflood

    Not sure if it has been discussed already, but I read the new flash unit has LED lighting for video recording. Does anyone know if this can also be toggled as a modeling light when using it as a regular flash?

  • oluv

    i think i would have preferred it like this. it just looks out of proportion with this big EVF-hump:

    • I think it will look better in-the-metal. Look at front-on shots of DSLRs.

  • In comparison with an VF-2 the HUMP is not that bad….

    credits to ktf_design

    ….so with a bounce flash on the top~ some height as PEN+VF-2 !!

  • spong

    I’ve a question for those familiar with modern battery grips/holders (I am not): Is the large battery holder/grip that fits across the bottom of the camera designed to take AA batteries? I assume it is but for all I know it could be an Olympus lithium custom battery requiring charging from the mains. Personally, I would prefer AA batteries as can then take the camera hiking with a large pack of AAs and won’t have to worry about running out of power. Thanks for your help.

  • Berneck

    There are other things like speed and functionality that will matter to me more than just the sensor. I like the weather sealing, although they need more lenses for that to be useful. This 3D tracking sounds promising, it may just render all the focus problems a thing of the past! I like the programmable dials/buttons. I’m starting to believe this is the breakout camera we have been waiting for…..albeit a year or so late…..

    Everybody keeps screaming for improved low light and DR, but do they really “need” that, or are they fixated on something that doesn’t come into play all that often, IMHO. I feel like all people want to do is crank ISO up as high as possible, then worry about the other settings later. Shouldn’t we be doing the opposite, by starting with the lowest ISO possible and work from there?

    • bibi

      hey, say what you want but, i don’t want to hear about poor DR. high ISO can wait, but DR is something that you NEED, or will shoot in B&W.
      in my opinion they should maintain the 12mp sensor but with much more DR and improved ISO. Sony from almost same dimensions of the photodiods, gets more DR.

  • MGuarini

    I already know a guy that cancelled his preorder for a nex 7 and another for a Fuji X pro 1, both in favor of the E-M5.

  • MacGyver

    There is much talk of the hump, but I personally do not understand why, think more than performance, whether or not she has the pop-up flash not think it is important that the flash! EVF has! do we care that the hump? I like it!

  • Rchard

    When Oly introduced the E-300 there was a lot of moaning and whinig about that it hadn´t a hump!

    • BLI

      That is because it was perceived as unusual and ugly at the time. Now people perceives the Nikon V1 hump as ugly — it takes some time getting used to. Perhaps even the new Pentax will be loved :-).

  • On a totally different note. I am trying to decide on a normal-prime to get, especially for street photography and landscapes (70/30% split I’d say).

    20mm seems a bit wide to me. A 25mm would be much preferable. While I know about the speed differences etc. I’d like to have your opinion on the

    m43 25mm 1.4 Panasonic lens (525 €)… and the

    43 25mm 2.8 Zuiko Pancake lens (255 €).

    Price is kind of important for me, while the size is not. The Voigtländer m43 lens or the Panasonic 43 lens are both out of reach. Going for the 43 Zuiko lens would enable me to get a 45mm/1.8 at the same time.

    So… what is your personal (and subjective opinion) on that matter?

    • I had booth. The 25mm has better image quality, but you don’t see it in every picture. In the end I always left the 20mm at home, but that was more about the 25mm perspective that I liked better.
      20 mm is half price and almost as good. The 45mm is excellent for it’s price.

    • Vivek

      Still my preferred street lenses (25mm) are a Computar-TV 25/1.3 or a Fujinon-TV 25/1.4, both c-mount lenses. Small, compact and sharp. They can be found cheap if you look for them.

      I have the 20/1.7. Not buying the 25/1.4 PanaLeica, ever.

      • I just don’t like the 20mm FOV enough to make me buy that lens.

        I’ll have a look at your 2 recommendations, though.
        Thanks a lot for that.

    • Geoff

      Some interesting responses to this comment, while the lens is not the greatest of performers, for street photography it is a superb choice and that is the bog standard 17mm. It is small and quite indiscrete.

    • spong

      I’m a newby regarding micro 4/3 so please forgive my ignorance. I am interested in the e-M5 for video. Would the Panasonic 14-42mm X Zoom lens be compatible with the E-M5 without an adaptor? This Panny lens has its own stabilisation, so would this be redundant given the fact the E-M5 has IBIS? Or would it actually increase the stabilisation of the image over and above the e-M5’s own IBIS? Any advice appreciated as I would be looking for a wide angle with some zoom, bright as possible and good for video. I know there are some Olympus lens options too.

      • bibi

        no need an adaptor, and torn IS of the lens OFF. Oly is doing a very good job in IS area.

        • Mr. Reeee

          In-lens stabilization (OIS) is more effective than IBIS, mainly because t’is optimized for the specific lens. IBIS can be used with ANY lens.

          If you’re shooting video and the camera is on a tripod, turn off stabilization altogether.

      • BLI

        Theoretically speaking, there is no reason why the Panasonic OIS should be better than the IBIS.*

        Since Olympus seems to up the ante with the E-M5 and the 12-50 mm, I *do* expect very good video performance from the E-Mt.

        * Ok: if the lens is assumed perfectly stiff, there is no reason why IBIS should be inferior to OIS. I suspect that the previous problems with IBIS (or non-use of IBIS) is due to Olympus lack of experience with video systems. Hopefully, “IBIS5D” is superior to OIS. The only case in which OIS theoretically speaking might be better, is if the lens is “flexible” — in that case, the OIS might correct camera shake along the lens axis.

    • Mr. Reeee

      A 4/3 lens requires a $150 adaptor, so if you don’t mind the extra cost, size and weight, go 4/3. I’d buy the Leica 25mm f1.4.

      I rarely use my 20mm except for situations where I want AF or other people will use my camera and I switch to JPEG and iAuto.

      For streetshooting, I use a Voigtländer 25mm and adapted 35mm and 50mm. I prefer the extra reach (and added stealth) of longer lenses.

      • Thanks for the advice.

        Currently I also use an adapted 50mm 1.8 Zuiko OM lens to get a longer reach. I really like that lens a lot. Just the MF is really unpractical on my aging E-510, except for portraits and when tripod mounted. So I guess I’ll replace it with the 45mm 1.8.

        If MF works out well, I might dust off my 28mm 3.5 OM lens and give this one a shot.

        My thought about the regular 4/3 25mm Zuiko pancake was based on the rumor of a free 43 to m43 adapter for current 43 users. If it turns out to be true at least.
        If not… I might save up some money and get the Panaleica at the end of 2012. At least if I can justify the purchase after having used the kit lens extensively by that time.

      • “Mr. Reeee:
        In-lens stabilization (OIS) is more effective than IBIS…”

        Just for very long tele, where IBIS will not react sufficiently to minor camera shake, although such movements results in severe blur of the subject. Here OIS is slightly better, because it reacts sufficiently to the movement of the long lens barrel, instead of to the small(er) movements of the camera body itself.

        Apart from that, IBIS is generally better and more versatile, as no fragile and expensive OIS has to be incorporated into the lens design, and any mounted lens will be stabilized. Moreover, the Zuiko lenses do communicate their focal (FL) lengths to the IBIS, which then acts accordingly, in tune w/ the FL used.

  • spartacus

    What do you think: Will this 40% less noise make the picture quality better, equal or worse compared to the G3/GH2 in high ISO range? How will it be at low ISO?

    (AFAIK there is no big difference between G3 and GH2. So I think we don’t care about that!)

    • spong

      Just to add to my post above regarding the Panasonic X zoom, I have now read a review which stated that the lens stabilisation does not work at all on Olympus cameras, so that question is now answered for me.

      • Olaf

        Strange. Normally you can turn on the IBIS on the lens and keep the sensor IS of or vice versa. Just not both at once.

        • rrr_hhh

          There is no hardware switch anymore on the new Panasonic X lenses, nor on the 14-42mm kit zoom which replaced the 14-45mm.

          • Olaf (or Torstein?), there is no such thing as “IBIS on the lens”!
            IBIS = In Body Image Stabilizer
            In a lens it’s OIS = Optical Image Stabilizer

    • I think there is no way it could be worse than the GX1 if it has the same sensor. The question is if it will be noticably better or not.

  • E-400 User

    As an E-400 user, with the fl-36R, 9-18 and 2 kit lenses, this may be the camera I’ve been waiting for.

    Tomorrow and ongoing reviews/hands on will decide.

    I’ll be looking at the exposure bracketing and other features, as well as in-my-hand ergonomics.

    • You hope on Kodak sensor, in E-M5. ;-)

      • E-400 User

        Haha!:) I do like the Kodak sensor and seem to have been lucky as I didn’t know when I bought it – it felt good in the shop, took nice pictures and was in-budget.

        The new OMD-5 seems to have better bracketing. (I use HDR for increased dynamic range to good effect.) However, it seems very small and unless the grips are reasonably priced, and existing 4/3 users get an adapter, I’ll still wait.

  • I didn’t realize the battery grip also added that big hump on the side. Without the grip it actually looks way better. That battery grip really ruins it, but without it you can see the styling really does match the old film camera on which it was based. Not bad at all.

  • JaSon

    appearance wise the gh2 looks fat and nasty compare to the e-m5.. the e-m5 looks more fit and healthy.. i love it.. =p

    • MJr

      Indeed, and it actually looks like Photographic Equipment, rather than, well … a Panasonic !

      • Bob B.

        From the 70’s! LOL! (careful….you may poke yourself in the eye!) :-)

        • MJr

          Ah yes, a time where one could control a camera without asking software for permission, a time where buttons, dials and levers were directly connected to its function, a time where lenses were the main attraction and cameras did nothing more than spool the film and time the exposure. Oh what a time. Poke, poke !

          • Bob B.

            True..all true….but alas, the past! :-)

Back To Top

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,, 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:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

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.