On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 8/14/2013 7:27 AM, Donald wrote:
> > As we say here, with irony, 'haud me back'...
> >
> > Not for me. Sure it will be for some folks. When I'm ready, all the
> > FourThirds stuff will go.
>
> "This camera will replace the Olympus E-5 Four Thirds camera and will be
> the first MFT camera having 100% support of FT
> lenses."
>
> Obviously, I don't know if this is true. If it is, then it means this
> camera answers at least four of the major issues
> raised by 4/3 people here about the E-M5.
>
I really don't have a lot of money tied up in FT glass, but I like what I
have and don't want to start over, so -- yes, this is quite good news. I
had thought about getting an E-5, but it is bracing now to have a real,
significant update. However, I suspect it is a mismatch to the old lenses
as size goes. I already find the older, bigger DZs a bit of a mismatch to
a body the size of the E-400. The E-620 marries up well, so long as I am
using it with the battery grip.
1. They have changed the sensor or otherwise managed to add phase detect
> AF. I believe that is the only way to fully
> support all the older 4/3 lenses. If they have come up with another, cool
> magic! The otherwise confusing new name, E-M1,
> could then make sense, as a combination of "E" and "M", a camera that is
> both 4/3 and µ4/3 - "1" because it is the first
> to combine formats.
>
> 2. Will they ever update the 4/3 camera line? is the plaintive cry heard
> here, less often recently, perhaps, but still
> echoing on the list like the pliant of the ghost of format past. The
> answer, to my surprise, appears to be yes, in an
> unexpected way.
>
Thanks for that fruitful analysis. I hadn't really processed more than
that it comes with a free adapter. But I have no experience with the
shortcomings of using FT lenses on the current crop of mFT bodies with
adapters, so I don't really know what has been lacking.
>
> 3. A higher resolution EVF. I am perfectly happy with the EVF in the E-M5,
> and can happily MF with it. But I am
> notorious for being able to be happy with pretty much any old VF. For all
> those ready to jump on a Fuji for the EVF ...
>
I too am not a VF connoisseur.
>
> 4. WiFi. It remains to be seen how complete and useful the implementation
> is. It will certainly do the stuff AG likes,
> perhaps even the stuff the GX-7 does. The way Oly and Panny are trading
> tech bits, it might be the Panny one.
>
Not a selling point to me.
I wonder how much better I would find this camera than an E-5 (or even my
E-620 or E-400), The E-620 is not clean at 3200, but it cleans up good.
I've just recently brought home some shots with the DZ 50-200 handheld at
1/15 sec. I felt the shots would be beyond hope, but they were
surprisingly sharp with the E-620's amazing IS. If I needed to shoot jpg
only, I might be less satisfied with what I've got, I suppose.
Thanks for 1 and 2 above.
>
> Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|