(I posted the indirect link because that is where I saw reference to the review)
--
One amusing negative is that the G3 seems to have higher resolution. Not sure if this is due to anti alias filter or if oly is playing some sort of trick to improve dr at the expense of resolution.
I handled one of these the other day. Looked like a nice little camera, but it's not for me. It seemed like it was straining too hard to look like an SLR, and I'm not sure what the point of that is. The outer body dimensions are similar to the NEX-7, but it feels much more cramped, since the controls are clustered closer to the center of the body. I hadn't thought about this before I handled the OM-D, but part of what makes the NEX-7 handle so nicely is that the viewfinder and control dials are as far apart on the body as possible, which really helps the ergonomics.
I'm sure it will be a great camera, though, and a nice upgrade for MFT users.
Smiert Spionam wrote:
I handled one of these the other day. Looked like a nice little camera, but it's not for me. It seemed like it was straining too hard to look like an SLR, and I'm not sure what the point of that is. The outer body dimensions are similar to the NEX-7, but it feels much more cramped, since the controls are clustered closer to the center of the body. I hadn't thought about this before I handled the OM-D, but part of what makes the NEX-7 handle so nicely is that the viewfinder and control dials are as far apart on the body as possible, which really helps the ergonomics.
I'm sure it will be a great camera, though, and a nice upgrade for MFT users....Show more →
Seems the market research must show that consumers want SLR/rangefinder/retro styling on their cameras
Their really is no reason a mirrorless camera needs to look like a SLR, any more so does it have to look like a rangefinder, nor is there any practical reason why it should have the so called "retro" styling to make it look like its out of the 60's/70's, but it certainly seems to help sell cameras
Take the Fuji X100 for example, it would still be the same functional camera with great IQ if it was a black rectangle with sharp edges and a laser etched grip, and could really have better control with things like a IR remote port, but instead its got retro styling with faux leather wrap, thread shutter button etc.
Why ?
Because people (most people) at least see it and have an emotional response to its design. Either nostaglia, or perhaps a feeling of being unique (for those who weren't born when all cameras looked like that)
Its as much fashion and style as anything.
Nothing wrong with Panasonic's generic black plastic stuck in the 1990's Japanese style. They work great after all, BUT, no one looked at a G series body and ooohh'd and ahhhh'd over it.
No one ever called a GH2 "sexy"
No one ever wanted a designed retro strap to wear a GH2 around their neck proudly, as much for the looks and attention it drew as its performance.
Very reason someone may want the EM-5 is the same reason someone else might refuse to buy that Pentax Tonka Truck looking camera
That's it for me too! The emotional response thing I mean. I suppose if my first 135 cameras were shaped like coffee cups then today I would be preferring digital cameras that looked like coffee cups. The same is true with sports cars, musical instruments, clothing, and even items where function is it's only purpose. Like the traditional mouse-trap still outsells better and newer designs simply for the associations (or emotional response if you like) we have with that form - shape.
BTW, all you have to do is go to another site to see the GH2 being called "sexy". Of course I think they're retards but you certainly can't say: "No one ever called a GH2 "sexy"".
The EM5 is growing on me. Bif, I am in the same boat: I think I am going to wait for another 6 months for the price drop when EM6 come out. But silver or black!!!
A warning flag for the Techradar results seem to be in place. OTOH there are some positive user reports around showing good dynamic range. As a guy waiting for the E-M5 I'm a bit concerned about the relatively low resolution numbers reported by some early reviewers. Time will tell.
Jonas B wrote:
A warning flag for the Techradar results seem to be in place. OTOH there are some positive user reports around showing good dynamic range. As a guy waiting for the E-M5 I'm a bit concerned about the relatively low resolution numbers reported by some early reviewers. Time will tell.
That was puzzling. If I remember correctly long time ago some Olympus model have reduced performance at a certain shutter speed when IS is turned on. I wonder with the new IS and the sensor is always floating when turned on, is there some frequency/shutter speed that would reduce the resolution Hope this is not the case.
aleksanderpolo wrote:
That was puzzling (...) some frequency/shutter speed that would reduce the resolution Hope this is not the case.
I have no source as my "knowledge" mainly is gathered from different opinion-driven forums and little known "reviewers". For now I think people are speculating in the AA filter causing the resolution effectively on par with what we already have seen from the earlier micro 4/3 models. Maybe it was the test from the Lenstip polish site... moment... yes, they have something on that: http://www.optyczne.pl/178.4-Test_aparatu-Olympus_OM-D_E-M5_Rozdzielczo%C5%9B%C4%87.html
!!!
