I'm out. At $2k something had to give and I've decided to add an a99ii and a few lenses to go with it. If it had been $15-1600 I'd stuck with the OMD-M1ii but had to draw a line somewhere. Besides price the lack of any real sports/wildlife reviews/images yet doesn't bode well either.
Looks like my trusty GX8 will continue on as the daily carry.
skamaraju wrote:
With so many landscape shots available from Iceland team, and nothing to prove its AF-C prowness till now, I seriously doubt Olympus's AF-C tracking claims. If they were trying to prove that EM1.2 is all weather camera by sending team to iceland, I feel it did not serve any purpose as we already know that prior model is equally good in that aspect. If only they had given camera to some sports or wildlife shooters and proved their claims, it would have worked out very well.
There were reports that they had planned a few action oriented events but it was canceled due to weather. If it was me I would just out the least fat and fastest reviewer of the bunch and asked him to back and forth a few times, lol.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
I'm out. At $2k something had to give and I've decided to add an a99ii and a few lenses to go with it. If it had been $15-1600 I'd stuck with the OMD-M1ii but had to draw a line somewhere. Besides price the lack of any real sports/wildlife reviews/images yet doesn't bode well either.
Looks like my trusty GX8 will continue on as the daily carry.
Disappointing to hear your out MM, but certainly not surprising factoring in the price and the fact that you're waiting for the a99ii. Then again if you cancel your 2 M5's, it'll equal 1 E-M1 II,
TMaG82 wrote:
Disappointing to hear your out MM, but certainly not surprising factoring in the price and the fact that you're waiting for the a99ii. Then again if you cancel your 2 M5's, it'll equal 1 E-M1 II,
I'm still in for the M5's, they're paid for but Poof might cancel hers and put the monies toward the M1ii....she's torn because she cut her teeth on an M2 and has an emotional attachment to that series.
I probably should say I'm out until the price drops
MedicineMan404 wrote:
I'm out. At $2k something had to give and I've decided to add an a99ii and a few lenses to go with it. If it had been $15-1600 I'd stuck with the OMD-M1ii but had to draw a line somewhere. Besides price the lack of any real sports/wildlife reviews/images yet doesn't bode well either.
Looks like my trusty GX8 will continue on as the daily carry.
I suspect that we're a couple of generations before we'll see top tier autofocus in mirrorless. OTOH, the Nikon 1 top bodies were supposed to have excellent follow focus, so who knows?
Either way, I've ordered the mark2 and my dealer said I should be in the first shipment(how they know that I don't know), so I will post my impressions once I get it. I'm not expecting 1Dx or even 7Dm2 performance but as long as it's head and tails above the mark 1, I think I'll be happy with it.
Iwas joeking wrote:
I suspect that we're a couple of generations before we'll see top tier autofocus in mirrorless. OTOH, the Nikon 1 top bodies were supposed to have excellent follow focus, so who knows?
Either way, I've ordered the mark2 and my dealer said I should be in the first shipment(how they know that I don't know), so I will post my impressions once I get it. I'm not expecting 1Dx or even 7Dm2 performance but as long as it's head and tails above the mark 1, I think I'll be happy with it.
Same. If I can get a 70% hit rate in C-AF, it'll be an improvement over what the E-M1 was doing. I ordered from B&H and they're listing 12/2 ship date, Amazon is listing 12/8. Olympus direct will probably be the first to ship.
It seems like those that are upset fall into one of the follow camps.
1. Those who were expecting it to be $1,599 or $1,699 and had a genuine interest in upgrading but are not turned off.
2. Those who are saying that for $1,999 it should track better than the D5, have better DR than the a7rII, and have better the noise performance of the a7s. We all knew what we were getting. Slight image quality improvements if that, but improvements in everything else (AF, ergonomics, dual card, video, IBIS, etc).
3. Those who are trolls and would never buy the system but have to resort to saying 'OMGWT.. $2,000 for a puny sensor? I could never buy that, my (insert camera here) shoots ISO 25,600 clean and gives me a 99.9% hit rate. Why can't m4/3 make a 24-1000 f/1.8 lens?
IMO, the reason for the great interest in this camera is mainly because many are hoping and/or believing that it will be the first mirrorless camera that will have decent AF in AI Servo mode. That is the main reason why many DSLR sports & wildlife shooters that want lighter gear have not moved to mirrorless. Not even Canon has been able to produce one so far.
It is a similar scenario as the success Sigma and Tamron have had with their 150-600 zooms, and Nikon with their 200-500. To get to a 500mm lens with Canon meant a heavy lens at eight to nine thousand dollars.
The orders for the new Oly just confirm that there are many willing to spend $2,000 on a 4/3 mirrorless camera that will do what they hope it will do.
Iwas joeking wrote:
Whether it's awesome or not, it's still a lot of cash.
Compared to what? I can buy a used 1DX for $3,000 or a new 1DX2 for $6,000. Sure, they are better cameras, but I don't want one. Besides size and weight, there are a number of features I see that are better with the Oly.
If the Oly has the AF performance that I want, I would have no problem paying $2500 for one.
Imagemaster wrote:
Compared to what? I can buy a used 1DX for $3,000 or a new 1DX2 for $6,000. Sure, they are better cameras, but I don't want one. Besides size and weight, there are a number of features I see that are better with the Oly.
If the Oly has the AF performance that I want, I would have no problem paying $2500 for one.
Not compared to anything. I'm just saying it's a lot of money. As a general rule, the higher the price, the lower the sales numbers.
Imagemaster wrote:
Compared to what? I can buy a used 1DX for $3,000 or a new 1DX2 for $6,000. Sure, they are better cameras, but I don't want one. Besides size and weight, there are a number of features I see that are better with the Oly.
If the Oly has the AF performance that I want, I would have no problem paying $2500 for one.
Well, for $250.- the Olympus HLD-9 Power Battery Grip for E-M1 Mark II Camera will get you halfway to $2500.- from $2000.
That's certainly true for me. I'll try this, but doubt it will be able to replace my Canon setup. Even if CAF is good, low light will not be and often I can't even use my 7D II because of its low light performance. At a lower price, I would have replaced both my E-M1s. Now, I replace one and wait with the other one. After all, the Olympus system is a great one and for me currently the only one that I enjoy using and where I think future developments will make it perfect for (almost) anything. DSLRs won't survive forever, I don't enjoy Sony, Fuji is too large for what it offers.
Imagemaster wrote:
IMO, the reason for the great interest in this camera is mainly because many are hoping and/or believing that it will be the first mirrorless camera that will have decent AF in AI Servo mode. That is the main reason why many DSLR sports & wildlife shooters that want lighter gear have not moved to mirrorless. Not even Canon has been able to produce one so far.
It is a similar scenario as the success Sigma and Tamron have had with their 150-600 zooms, and Nikon with their 200-500. To get to a 500mm lens with Canon meant a heavy lens at eight to nine thousand dollars.
The orders for the new Oly just confirm that there are many willing to spend $2,000 on a 4/3 mirrorless camera that will do what they hope it will do. ...Show more →
TMaG82 wrote:
Same. If I can get a 70% hit rate in C-AF, it'll be an improvement over what the E-M1 was doing. I ordered from B&H and they're listing 12/2 ship date, Amazon is listing 12/8. Olympus direct will probably be the first to ship.
It seems like those that are upset fall into one of the follow camps.
1. Those who were expecting it to be $1,599 or $1,699 and had a genuine interest in upgrading but are not turned off.
2. Those who are saying that for $1,999 it should track better than the D5, have better DR than the a7rII, and have better the noise performance of the a7s. We all knew what we were getting. Slight image quality improvements if that, but improvements in everything else (AF, ergonomics, dual card, video, IBIS, etc).
3. Those who are trolls and would never buy the system but have to resort to saying 'OMGWT.. $2,000 for a puny sensor? I could never buy that, my (insert camera here) shoots ISO 25,600 clean and gives me a 99.9% hit rate. Why can't m4/3 make a 24-1000 f/1.8 lens?
I guess I'm in the first camp. I do see what this camera offers over an X-T2 or A6500, and hence why it has a premium price. But it's a little more premium than I'd expected.
I belong to the first camp too and have pre-ordered the camera. But the forthcoming reviews on the C-AF/tracking performance had better be good or I will cancel my order.
itai195 wrote:
I guess I'm in the first camp. I do see what this camera offers over an X-T2 or A6500, and hence why it has a premium price. But it's a little more premium than I'd expected.
bobbytan wrote:
I belong to the first camp too and have pre-ordered the camera. But the forthcoming reviews on the C-AF/tracking performance had better be good or I will cancel my order.
That's pretty telling because I know of your deep investment already in the glass bobby. Starting from scratch again I'm waiting to see more reviews on the 12-100 before I decide on the 12-100 or the 12-40/40-150 combo. Either way I'll be getting the 25 1.2 so the slower f/4 on the 12-100 doesn't bother me. Just trying to see if I could live with 'just' the f/4 and the loss of reach from the 100 to 150 range.
