Are you going OM-D?

Are you going OM-D?

  • O yeah, here's my pre-order confirmation!

    Votes: 36 10.4%

  • You bet! just have to de-GAS a few gears to fund it

    Votes: 23 6.7%

  • Positively, but only when it hits street price level

    Votes: 65 18.8%

  • I don't know, I like it, but won't my APS-C buddies shun me?

    Votes: 50 14.5%

  • Heck no! I won't be caught dead with a dinky m4/3rd camera

    Votes: 110 31.9%

  • OMD? Are they coming out with a new album?

    Votes: 61 17.7%
  • Total voters
    345
  • Poll closed .
You know what is weird? All of this negativity about a camera that, for the most part, most of us have not even held in our hands yet. Also, all of the usual digital bashing is thrown in for good measure.

A lot of you guys remind me when light meters went mainstream in 35mm film cameras. A lot of photographers pissed and moaned about the death of photography. Then, automatic exposure came about. Good grief, you would have thought the end of the world was right around the corner. Then, auto focus. Holy cow, we had become nothing more than robots, now.

I love the m4/3 system. It allowed me to ditch a bunch of clunky, heavy ass equipment and travel much, much lighter. Sure, it has it's limitations, but I soon learned to work around them. And for the kind of stuff I shoot, the system is ideal. And the best part? - The system keeps getting better and better. I now prefer an EVF over an optical finder any day, especially in low light. Plus, the lenses, especially the primes are top notch. The entire system is a bargain, money wise, as compared to others. It is not perfect, but nothing in this world is.

I look forward to checking out the new OM. Too bad I missed the rep at Arlington Camera. I might be able to catch him Thursday.
 
Rick Waldroup said:
You know what is weird? All of this negativity about a camera that, for the most part, most of us have not even held in our hands yet. Also, all of the usual digital bashing is thrown in for good measure.

A lot of you guys remind me when light meters went mainstream in 35mm film cameras. A lot of photographers pissed and moaned about the death of photography. Then, automatic exposure came about. Good grief, you would have thought the end of the world was right around the corner. Then, auto focus. Holy cow, we had become nothing more than robots, now.
Click to expand...

I saved this quote from somewhere, think it might actually have been posted on this forum some years back. From I think 1901, decrying the "new" photography. Not much has changed.

"The photographer, in the earlier days, at least, was a man who respected himself and his calling, the amateur was generally a man of some means, and this implies of education properly applied also. It is first the dry plate, then the great simplifying of the processes, the cheapening of the apparatus and finally the vast catastrophe of film that have popularised and wrecked photography, and by so doing have attracted to it hundreds and hunreds of men and youths whose sole mission appears to be to bring discredit on the ranks in which they have enrolled themselves. It is the "fatal facility" of modern photography that has cursed its parents by producing such offspring. A hundred times more difficult and its reputation would stand a thousand times higher. The snapshotting of women in bathing dress, of lovers, of the cat sitting on the top of the wall, or to go what we may call a step higher, the revolting "trick photograph", have contrived to bring the reputation of photography low down indeed.

Photographers, amateur and professional, who eleven months of out of the twelve are pillars of society, churchwardens who wear a black coat and take round the plate, fathers of families and all the rest of it, go on their holidays and forget themselves - some of them. So deeply has the hand-cameraist's want of respect for photography, this wicked poison, penetrated, that lantern slides have been made and exhibited at public meetings of subjects which cannot, in any sense of the word, bring credit to the craft. "Film is so cheap you know. Let us fire them off" they say. "Here's a fellow hugging his sweetheart, they don't see us. Lets take them and show it on the screen"
Click to expand...
 
Photography was ruined when Barnack made a handheld for that stupid miniature film. The APX referred to in my signature is 4x5, you sissies.
 
Rick Waldroup said:
You know what is weird? All of this negativity about a camera that, for the most part, most of us have not even held in our hands yet.
Click to expand...

I'm not negative about the camera, or the camera system. I just don't think it's for me. If it is for you, then great - go for it and fill your boots.

Rick Waldroup said:
I now prefer an EVF over an optical finder any day, especially in low light.
Click to expand...
Believe it or not, I actually envy you. I certainly believe you about your results in low light. I have no reason not to.

I also know, though, that no EVF I've ever seen is right for me. If it's good for you then, well, fine or even better. EVFs suit you, so go right ahead and use 'em. They don't suit me, yet and perhaps ever, so I won't. That's it, really.

...Mike
 
I supect that given time and natural progression EVF's will be so good we'll not be so obsessed with wanting optical finders on our cameras.
 
So who was doing this......

So who was doing this......

Who was handing out the wet blankets when this thread started. I think the owner of the forum should add a new rule.

Opinions posted can only stay on the board if substantiated or corroborated (not sure which is correct as have not seen enough CSI lately) by either actual ownership or 3 months physical use of the product being reamed..... err uh reviewed.

Been shooting Oly since 1972 and Oly digital since the E-300. Have owned about eight Oly DSLRs and one Pen.

Currently own and shoot, E-1 and E-400. The E-400 was the last Kodak sensor 10 Mp (Europe distro only), smallest DSLR globally at the time. Not much bigger than the Pen E-PL1 I have. So I have a small DSLR with great Color. But I'm on for this OM-4 style M4/3.

Am in a positions to make an informed selection. Not just whip crap on any camera I have not tried personally.
 
kuzano said:
Who was handing out the wet blankets when this thread started. I think the owner of the forum should add a new rule.

Opinions posted can only stay on the board if substantiated or corroborated (not sure which is correct as have not seen enough CSI lately) by either actual ownership or 3 months physical use of the product being reamed..... err uh reviewed.

Been shooting Oly since 1972 and Oly digital since the E-300. Have owned about eight Oly DSLRs and one Pen.

Currently own and shoot, E-1 and E-400. The E-400 was the last Kodak sensor 10 Mp (Europe distro only), smallest DSLR globally at the time. Not much bigger than the Pen E-PL1 I have. So I have a small DSLR with great Color. But I'm on for this OM-4 style M4/3.

Am in a positions to make an informed selection. Not just whip crap on any camera I have not tried personally.
Click to expand...

That's funny!
What amazes me is the number of people who claimed that they won't be caught dead with a 4/3rd camera.
For me, only Leica M8 falls into that category... hehehe...

Ah well, I'm sure that OM-D will have enough buyers and subsequently users who will keep Olympus going.
 
shadowfox said:
That's funny!
What amazes me is the number of people who claimed that they won't be caught dead with a 4/3rd camera.
For me, only Leica M8 falls into that category... hehehe...

Ah well, I'm sure that OM-D will have enough buyers and subsequently users who will keep Olympus going.
Click to expand...

I remember the day I sold every bit of my Nikon DSLR gear and invested in the 4/3 system. My friends thought I was crazy.

Then, when m4/3 was introduced, I dumped all of the 4/3 gear. I like smaller cameras and lenses. Reminds me of my rangefinder film cameras I owned years ago. I always used Nikon gear and large format systems for work and used rangefinder cameras for my personal stuff. This is what the m4/3 system reminds me of. It is not exactly the same but it is close. And the bottom line is that I am producing good stuff with these cameras and I like using them.

I called Arlington Camera yesterday and they said the Olympus rep is supposed to be in the store sometime Thursday morning. Because of my schedule I am not sure if I can make it but I certainly am going to try. It will be interesting to see the new camera up close.
 
Rick Waldroup said:
I remember the day I sold every bit of my Nikon DSLR gear and invested in the 4/3 system. My friends thought I was crazy.

Then, when m4/3 was introduced, I dumped all of the 4/3 gear. I like smaller cameras and lenses. Reminds me of my rangefinder film cameras I owned years ago. I always used Nikon gear and large format systems for work and used rangefinder cameras for my personal stuff. This is what the m4/3 system reminds me of. It is not exactly the same but it is close. And the bottom line is that I am producing good stuff with these cameras and I like using them.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Rick.
I have come to believe that good photographers have a high rate of good photos regardless what camera they choose nowadays, so choosing a system that works well with you, is an important decision.

The m4/3rd system will not be a success if Olympus didn't implement it in a body that people like to use. Those who can't get over the specs. miss the fact that they too may like using these cameras were they to give it a chance. All the non-camera-geek people who has a chance to hold my E-P2 say they like it, but most can't justify the price because they are just "casual photographers."

But I'm not one to point fingers, I say I don't like Canon cameras all the time except their classic rangefinder ones, but recently I picked up a black FTb and I must say, that is an excellent camera, precise, solid, and fun to use. :D
 
Whatever ISO (which I agree is a legitimate question,) it's fine for me. I'll just choose that ISO when I want something that looks like that. :)
 
This could be an attractive camera for the people who have to shoot some digital for work purposes but use film aswell.
 
mfunnell said:
I also know, though, that no EVF I've ever seen is right for me. If it's good for you then, well, fine or even better. EVFs suit you, so go right ahead and use 'em. They don't suit me, yet and perhaps ever, so I won't.
Click to expand...

That's mostly how I feel, too, having tried them.

Though I'm less pessimistic than you are about them ever getting to the point where I will find them acceptable. The last time I tried looking through a m4/3 EVF, I did so with two camera bodies representing the latest model and the model just discontinued. The one on the newer model was definitely better when it came to low-light performance, although it still lagged too much for my purposes. I don't find it far-fetched that one day (perhaps even now, I haven't looked through one in a while) EVF's will get there so far as my standards are concerned.

Personally, I'd love it if a decent (by my standards) EVF let me reduce the weight and bulk of the camera equipment I hike with. I'll definitely be trying out the m4/3 cameras at my local store once I again have the sort of income that enables me to purchase one.

It's just that any statement that an EVF must automatically be better than an optical one in low light simply because it happens to be brighter is pure techno-hype that ignores issues other than brightness, and I will take issue with it.
 
Tried a OM-D today, and my first impression is very positive. It looks beautiful, it is very compact, only slightly bigger than a E-P1, it's very snappy, stabilisation for video works very well, ergonomics are very good. Very impressed, might consider it instead of my GH2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom