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 .
bwcolor said:
Funny how this thread has devolved into trivialities.

Be careful not to confuse a label with the real thing.

I suggest that how you label a camera is far less important than the ultimate image. I label myself smart, but that doesn't make me so. You label me to be an idiot and that may not be descriptive. To argue if a camera is professional, a compact camera, a rangefinder camera.. all of these arguments are a waste of time. Buy what gets the job done.

Perhaps, application of Advaita to photography might be of some use.
Click to expand...

You are right. I am arguing something that doesn't matter. And this all started with me just saying I voted no because I have no use for this camera - which I labeled an amateur one.
 
Mike Ip said:
You forget the m43 is a 2x crop FOV vs a full frame 35 mm. So really the 12/2 (24 mm fov) and the 20/1.7 (40 mm) aren't as great as first impressions might suggest.
Click to expand...

No , are we not still classifying wide as 24mm ... 35mm in 135 terms and beyond that super-wide.

Anyway the addition of 8/3.5 (rectilinear), 17/1.8 and 25/1.8 weather sealed primes would be nice 🙂
 
FrozenInTime said:
No , are we not still classifying wide as 24mm ... 35mm in 135 terms and beyond that super-wide.

Anyway the addition of 8/3.5 (rectilinear), 17/1.8 and 25/1.8 weather sealed primes would be nice 🙂
Click to expand...

24 mm is still very wide. But other than that there are no real fast wide angle primes. What might seem to be wide, is no more normal-ish

17/1.8 would be nice.
 
Overall, the market for smaller sensor cameras prefers zooms and telephoto lenses, with wider than 35mm equivalent being a pretty small market. So it's not surprising that the choices for truly wide primes is limited.
 
There is no such thing as an amateur camera. There is such a thing as an amateur photographer. It means 'not getting paid for your work'.

I have always been, and will always be, an amateur photographer. Still, my images have been used for countless publications, artwork like posters and CD-covers, websites and magazines. Up to and including national newspapers with a circulation in the hundreds of thousands.

The funny thing is, that absolutely no-one has ever said: 'Oh, are your pictures made with an amateur camera? Then we cannot publish them!'.

But then again, as an amateur photographer, what can I possibly know about it?
 
Ronald_H said:
There is no such thing as an amateur camera. There is such a thing as an amateur photographer. It means 'not getting paid for your work'.

I have always been, and will always be, an amateur photographer. Still, my images have been used for countless publications, artwork like posters and CD-covers, websites and magazines. Up to and including national newspapers with a circulation in the hundreds of thousands.

The funny thing is, that absolutely no-one has ever said: 'Oh, are your pictures made with an amateur camera? Then we cannot publish them!'.

But then again, as an amateur photographer, what can I possibly know about it?
Click to expand...

My take on it is that a professional is one who doesn't worry about whether their equipment is "pro" or not. How many pros do you see sitting around reading spec sheets and comparing DXO scores?
 
Mike Ip said:
Well for what it's worth I'm really using "amateur" and "consumer" interchangeably.
Click to expand...

Perhaps this is what's causing all the bickering. The terms generally applied to gear levels seem to be "consumer", "pro-sumer", and "professional".

OTOH, "amateur" vs "professional" is a whole different distinction as people are pointing out and getting worked up about.

I fall into the camp of "no such thing as an amateur camera". To me they're all just cameras.

Well, except my Fuji cameras that all seem to have "professional" emblazoned on the body... so they *must* be ;-)

j
 
Ronald_H said:
There is no such thing as an amateur camera. There is such a thing as an amateur photographer. It means 'not getting paid for your work'.

I have always been, and will always be, an amateur photographer. Still, my images have been used for countless publications, artwork like posters and CD-covers, websites and magazines. Up to and including national newspapers with a circulation in the hundreds of thousands.

The funny thing is, that absolutely no-one has ever said: 'Oh, are your pictures made with an amateur camera? Then we cannot publish them!'.

But then again, as an amateur photographer, what can I possibly know about it?
Click to expand...

Professional cameras are made to take the strain of daily constant use. As an amateur, you don't need that. Some of us do. By the way, if your work REALLY has been used so extensively, why do you call yourself an amateur? Please tell me you were smart enough to get paid for these uses. If you did, and your work has been used 'countless times', then you're a professional.
 
JonasYip said:
Perhaps this is what's causing all the bickering. The terms generally applied to gear levels seem to be "consumer", "pro-sumer", and "professional".

OTOH, "amateur" vs "professional" is a whole different distinction as people are pointing out and getting worked up about.

I fall into the camp of "no such thing as an amateur camera". To me they're all just cameras.

Well, except my Fuji cameras that all seem to have "professional" emblazoned on the body... so they *must* be ;-)

j
Click to expand...

Mamiya made several cameras with Professional or Pro written on the body (and in the model's name). C330 Professional, RZ67 Pro, 645 Pro, RB-67 Pro-S, etc.

Nikon Marketed the F-series 35mm cameras as professional models because they were built to take heavy use. Same with the digital D1, D2, D3 series, and Canon's EOS1 series film and digital bodies.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Mamiya made several cameras with Professional or Pro written on the body (and in the model's name). C330 Professional, RZ67 Pro, 645 Pro, RB-67 Pro-S, etc.

Nikon Marketed the F-series 35mm cameras as professional models because they were built to take heavy use. Same with the digital D1, D2, D3 series, and Canon's EOS1 series film and digital bodies.
Click to expand...

Dude i was kidding... that's a winky/smiley thing at the end of the sentence. I actually agree at the Professional end of the camera label (and have the RZ and the Nikons myself) . I was pointing out that the disagreement seems to be on the labeling of the other end... that is "amateur" vs "consumer".
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Professional cameras are made to take the strain of daily constant use. As an amateur, you don't need that. Some of us do. By the way, if your work REALLY has been used so extensively, why do you call yourself an amateur? Please tell me you were smart enough to get paid for these uses. If you did, and your work has been used 'countless times', then you're a professional.
Click to expand...

No. As I clearly stated I was never paid and will never be paid. You can call that naive or even stupid (as in 'not smart'), but photography is my hobby. I do it because it is fun. Being under any sort of obligation while doing it isn't. That is why I call myself an amateur. I don't want to carry any responsibility, and I gladly (or should I say gleefully?) accept working for free in return.

The reason that I was published 'countless times' (which just means 'more times than I care to remember') is that when I started doing concert photography as a volunteer, I got regular requests from bands, venues and magazines to use my pictures. Would that be because my pictures could be had for free OR because the were actually any good? I'll leave that to the judges.

In any case, dismissing the OM-D as an 'amateur camera' doesn't sit well with me. Sure, if you REALLY need Canon or Nikon support, photography probably feeds your family and good luck to you. However, I have seen too many people with the best possible gear who were really quite clueless what they were doing. Call me cynical, but the man is more important than the machine. And the OM-D is in all probability a wonderful machine too.
 
OK, so I voted no. The OM-D looks like a really interesting camera. If I didn't already have a digicam, I might be more interested. But I've already got an Oly E-PL1 which I like for its small size and excellent jpegs. It pretty much satisfies my digital camera needs. I do like the m4/3 format, btw, and am glad to see Olympus continuing to bring new m4/3d offerings to market. Still, I'm more interested at present in concentrating on b&w film photography and developing a "look" I like in that medium. YMMV.

OK, chaps, carry on...
 
I'm not sure there's any rational reason to get all worked up over this - especially since the Panasonic G3 is easily available and much cheaper with the same "engine" er, sensor... Yeah, the Oly OOC jpegs are very nice, but I'll always be a raw shooter anyways. The weather sealing doesn't count until there are some (more?) weather sealed lenses to go with it. Gosh darn menus and easily displaced controls drove me nuts on the E-PL2. And before I buy a load of marketing BS about the "world's fastest AF" I'll want to see the professional sports and bird-in-flight shots that are the real test af an AF system, thank you very much.

I voted for a new album from OMD - that would be cool.
 
Mike Ip said:
Also pouring a bottle of water over the camera is not the same as shooting in misty or constant rain for hours. Very different. This camera might have some weather seals, but what are their tolerances?
Click to expand...

Umm.. you obviously don't have much experience with the famous olympus weather sealed DSLRs. They're sealed at a much higher level than even the canon 1 series and nikon Dx series.

15 hours in snow & rain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A15MgHHS_M8&feature=related

There's many more examples of this sort of testing on youtube. Some people have even completely submerged their E-series cameras with no problems. The e-m5 is supposed to be the same level of weather sealing as the E-1/3/5.
 
gavinlg said:
Umm.. you obviously don't have much experience with the famous olympus weather sealed DSLRs. They're sealed at a much higher level than even the canon 1 series and nikon Dx series.

15 hours in snow & rain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A15MgHHS_M8&feature=related

There's many more examples of this sort of testing on youtube. Some people have even completely submerged their E-series cameras with no problems. The e-m5 is supposed to be the same level of weather sealing as the E-1/3/5.
Click to expand...

As a matter of fact I have no experience with Olympus DSLRs. I know their film cameras were spectacular, but I've never used one of their digitals.
 
Although I like the feature set better, I find this new Olympus to be uglier than the new Pentax mirror-less camera. I think this OM-D looks like a patchwork of parts. IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom