itai195 wrote:
I'm astounded that one can provoke ongoing discussion of a topic and then complain that discussion persists.
At any rate, there hasn't been much news, so I guess something has to fill the vacuum.
So a couple of years ago Olympus made a claim that this new camera is going to be a game changer. With everything that has been introduced since than, it would be a very tall order, we can all agree on. The only feature I was personally looking forward to was the hi res mode handheld. That is obviously not happening this time around. No big deal though. But look at what else is Olympus claiming now. That it is better than any DSLR. I'm not positive that their claim is going to hold once the public is able to test them, but look at all the improvements Olympus is making to the mark II. The best some of the members can come up with is complaining about the on/off switch? Maybe my issue is that I see the glass in life half full.
savingspaces wrote:
But look at what else is Olympus claiming now. That it is better than any DSLR. I'm not positive that their claim is going to hold once the public is able to test them, but look at all the improvements Olympus is making to the mark II.
What can we realistically expect from the Mark II, as compared to the Mark I? Personally, I expect clearly improved C-AF. With 121 AF points, all of them cross type, all of them working in contrast detect and phase detect mode, covering a large part of the viewfinder, powered by a new and extra quad core processor, I'm confident C-AF will work more reliably than it does on the Mark I.
Otherwise, I expect rather incremental progress. RAW image quality may be improved by 1/3 stop, or 1/2 stop at most, which I appreciate. Blue skies will look cleaner using ISO 64. Linear resolution is some 12% higher. The C1 to C3 settings are good, better than the mysets. The back AF button is placed a bit closer to the thumb, that's better. That prerelease capture feature could prove useful at times. I hope I don't need exposure delay any more to prevent shutter shock, but I'm not sure about that. I don't like the swiveling LCD (anybody shooting vertical video?), but I'm sure I'll get used to it.
That's about it for me. I will probably buy it just for the improved C-AF because that's really much appreciated for my PJ type of usage.
brunobarolo wrote:
What can we realistically expect from the Mark II, as compared to the Mark I? Personally, I expect clearly improved C-AF. With 121 AF points, all of them cross type, all of them working in contrast detect and phase detect mode, covering a large part of the viewfinder, powered by a new and extra quad core processor, I'm confident C-AF will work more reliably than it does on the Mark I.
Otherwise, I expect rather incremental progress. RAW image quality may be improved by 1/3 stop, or 1/2 stop at most, which I appreciate. Blue skies will look cleaner using ISO 64. Linear resolution is some 12% higher. The C1 to C3 settings are good, better than the mysets. The back AF button is placed a bit closer to the thumb, that's better. That prerelease capture feature could prove useful at times. I hope I don't need exposure delay any more to prevent shutter shock, but I'm not sure about that. I don't like the swiveling LCD (anybody shooting vertical video?), but I'm sure I'll get used to it.
That's about it for me. I will probably buy it just for the improved C-AF because that's really much appreciated for my PJ type of usage....Show more →
I agree, expecting this or any camera to reinvent the wheel is silly. At its core it'll follow the same principles of the predecessor. Technology seems to have reached a capacity for the time being until there's some breakthrough in technology. Everything will be incremental. The next a7rIII will see incremental improvements, the next D810 as well. The days of being truly floored with a new camera are probably gone.
For the specs that it provides, the E-M1 II appears to have given enough improvements to earn my dollars.
TMaG82 wrote:
I agree, expecting this or any camera to reinvent the wheel is silly.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. All I wrote is what Olympus claimed. The em1 II was supposed to be a game changer. This was from about 2 years ago. At photokina during the initial introduction Olympus made another claim. That it is a better camera than any DSLR - the video is on YouTube that anyone can watch any time.
Was anyone expecting a game changer? Or as you put it: that this camera is going to reinvent the wheel? I frequent several different forum related to m4/3 but haven't seen one member ever make such statement. Indeed it would be very silly.
savingspaces wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean by this. All I wrote is what Olympus claimed. The em1 II was supposed to be a game changer. This was from about 2 years ago. At photokina during the initial introduction Olympus made another claim. That it is a better camera than any DSLR - the video is on YouTube that anyone can watch any time.
Was anyone expecting a game changer? Or as you put it: that this camera is going to reinvent the wheel? I frequent several different forum related to m4/3 but haven't seen one member ever make such statement. Indeed it would be very silly. ...Show more →
As with the on/off switch, I think you're taking the comments too seriously. The whole industry seems to be one of careful iteration at best.
savingspaces wrote:
If you think he is complaining why isn't he welcomed by you? You didn't seem to mind the others complaining? At least be consistent please.
How about this for an idea. Instead of continuing this back and forth, let's just let it go and move on to a different topic since there is no point to continuing this?
Agreed? Or continue?
Iwas joeking wrote:
How about this for an idea. Instead of continuing this back and forth, let's just let it go and move on to a different topic since there is no point to continuing this?
Agreed? Or continue?
Ok, it's not important enough to continue arguing about. So, I have a question, Olympus has made some rather bold claims about the sensor improvements. Increasing megapixels makes it tougher to do, but my guess is that it will be a 1/2 to 2/3 stop better at most. With Sony 1" sensors hitting similar DR as the M1(12.6/12.7), do you think we'll see more than 13 stops at base ISO? If so, that would be pretty impressive. I think physics is against them attaining better than cropped DSLR s quality as they suggest though.
Iwas joeking wrote:
Ok, it's not important enough to continue arguing about. So, I have a question, Olympus has made some rather bold claims about the sensor improvements. Increasing megapixels makes it tougher to do, but my guess is that it will be a 1/2 to 2/3 stop better at most. With Sony 1" sensors hitting similar DR as the M1(12.6/12.7), do you think we'll see more than 13 stops at base ISO? If so, that would be pretty impressive. I think physics is against them attaining better than cropped DSLR s quality as they suggest though.
No one can answer that question until it is actually tested. Olympus was claiming 1 stop but didn't say RAW, so you are probably right.
It sounds good, I have to admit I'm really looking forward to this camera. I'm not expecting it to put my Canons in the closet, especially for fast moving subjects like birds in flight, but every step up is awesome.
Or you could call Olympus to find out. They should know. But maybe not.
Thanks. I didn't see it there. I noticed on the info sheet it didn't have info on raw file size so I guess if they haven't finalized that info then maybe it's to be determined still.
savingspaces wrote:
So a couple of years ago Olympus made a claim that this new camera is going to be a game changer. With everything that has been introduced since than, it would be a very tall order, we can all agree on. The only feature I was personally looking forward to was the hi res mode handheld. That is obviously not happening this time around. No big deal though. But look at what else is Olympus claiming now. That it is better than any DSLR. I'm not positive that their claim is going to hold once the public is able to test them, but look at all the improvements Olympus is making to the mark II. The best some of the members can come up with is complaining about the on/off switch? Maybe my issue is that I see the glass in life half full....Show more →
Fair enough. I won't put words in the mouths of others, but I am interested in the camera. At this point in the digital world, most cameras are pretty good and game changing cameras are going to be harder and harder to come by. If we hopped in a time machine and chatted with our 2006 selves, I suspect they'd be in awe of the cameras we have available to us in 2016.
The on/off switch in the grand scheme of things is a usability issue, not a deal breaker. Every camera has usability issues, some more serious than others. These days, with so many options, even minor flaws are magnified.
Or you could call Olympus to find out. They should know. But maybe not.
Also since all the camera manufacturers seem to be cross using technology, one could think that the new LSI technology found on the new a6500 could possibly be incorporated on the E-M1 II and the GH5.
It's an interesting report, and the images are certainly compelling, but I feel that the jury is still out on IQ improvements of the m2 over the M1 or the Pen-F.
I assume that all those photographers testing out the m11 are using jpegs as I don't think that RAW processors have been released for the m2, though I could be wrong . . . It's just that I remember reading that Olympus said that the improved IQ is due (at least in part) to the new truepic processor which might suggest that they are getting more sophisticated at processing noise at the software level rather than eliminating it at the hardware level. I personally don't care as less noise is less noise - and frankly I think that the noise performance of most modern sensors is really pretty good.
Before the Nikon D500 was released, there was a photo circulated of a tropical bird at some ridiculous ISO (32k? 64K?) that looked fabulously clean and detailed. People swooned as it looked better than a D5, and a lot better than my trusty D750. It was perfectly exposed and reduced in resolution and probably had some careful processing done. But it wasn't particularly representative of what the camera was capable of. If you look at raw files in the dpreview comparator, you'll see pretty much what you would expect as results from different sized processors - that is a 1" 20mpix has more noise than an M43 20mpix which has more noise than and APS-C 20mpix. Physics matters.
I have read any number of 'impressions' that the Pen-F offers improvement in color range or DR. Bench testing doesn't seem to bear that out, but that may be more an issue of what exactly is being tested on the bench as opposed to our more sophisticated visual impressions. . . . I'm just questioning what Rohnfelder means by his 'impression' of better IQ
Frankly, as I'm not a professional, but more of an enthusiastic hobbiest, a half stop better noise performance, or slight increase in DR, while welcome, is not going to make or break my decision. I want a solid reliable camera that ergonomically makes sense. In my book, the M1's IBIS has improved my photography more than almost anything else. If the M2 can improve upon that (and it sounds like it does) than I'm in.
glassartist wrote:
It's an interesting report, and the images are certainly compelling, but I feel that the jury is still out on IQ improvements of the m2 over the M1 or the Pen-F.
I assume that all those photographers testing out the m11 are using jpegs as I don't think that RAW processors have been released for the m2, though I could be wrong . . . It's just that I remember reading that Olympus said that the improved IQ is due (at least in part) to the new truepic processor which might suggest that they are getting more sophisticated at processing noise at the software level rather than eliminating it at the hardware level. I personally don't care as less noise is less noise - and frankly I think that the noise performance of most modern sensors is really pretty good.
Before the Nikon D500 was released, there was a photo circulated of a tropical bird at some ridiculous ISO (32k? 64K?) that looked fabulously clean and detailed. People swooned as it looked better than a D5, and a lot better than my trusty D750. It was perfectly exposed and reduced in resolution and probably had some careful processing done. But it wasn't particularly representative of what the camera was capable of. If you look at raw files in the dpreview comparator, you'll see pretty much what you would expect as results from different sized processors - that is a 1" 20mpix has more noise than an M43 20mpix which has more noise than and APS-C 20mpix. Physics matters.
I have read any number of 'impressions' that the Pen-F offers improvement in color range or DR. Bench testing doesn't seem to bear that out, but that may be more an issue of what exactly is being tested on the bench as opposed to our more sophisticated visual impressions. . . . I'm just questioning what Rohnfelder means by his 'impression' of better IQ
Frankly, as I'm not a professional, but more of an enthusiastic hobbiest, a half stop better noise performance, or slight increase in DR, while welcome, is not going to make or break my decision. I want a solid reliable camera that ergonomically makes sense. In my book, the M1's IBIS has improved my photography more than almost anything else. If the M2 can improve upon that (and it sounds like it does) than I'm in....Show more →
Agreed, I'm cautiously optimistic about the AF improvement. The true acid test of that for me will be flying birds. I tried them with the M1 on the pany 300mm zoom and it was hopeless for fast flyers. But even if it still lags in that department, if it can handle following a bird bouncing around in a tree that will be welcomed. The improved battery will be appreciated too. Hopefully it ships in November or early December in decent quantities.
The pro capture mode where it buffers and keeps the last 14 frames once the shutter is pressed, also works in the really fast electronic capture modes as well(up to 60fps). When I first read about that capture mode I thought it only took the sequence when the shutter was released, but it appears you can use it in several different shutter modes.
