chris00nj
Young Luddite
OMD looks pretty cool. They did what Pentax should have done.
Oh My Goodness (digital OM)
- Thread starter gavinlg
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 430
- Views 54K
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
How DARE you put down Zuikos! 😱
And for those who really don't/won't like the OM-D from Olympus, you could always just go with this to make use of OM System glass ... and don't forget the SCSI interface to your G3 Mac ...
(Warning: May not be suitable for "street".)
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I was kinda just nudging you a little. The new 12 and 45 Zuikos are supposed to be excellent, but when you buy your OMD opt for the Panasonic lenses for the other focal lengths and zooms.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Does anyone here have the Panaleica 25/1.4? I am drooling at the prospect of this paired with the OM-D...
swoop
Well-known
Is this thing 4/3rds or MICRO 4/3rds?
I remember Olympus sayimg they weren't going to abandon 4/3rds. And this looks like it fits the line.
I remember Olympus sayimg they weren't going to abandon 4/3rds. And this looks like it fits the line.
gavinlg
Veteran
It's the real camera for sure, some people are just confused...
It's m4/3. 4/3 is all but abandoned.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I know you were. 😀
IF (and that's a big if ... depends on price, any sales of old gear I make and, most importantly, SWMBO!) I were to get an OM-D, I would start off with my legacy OM glass plus one m4/3 prime, likely something in the 28mm equivalent range.
For OM Zuikos I have 21/2, 28/2.8, 35/28, 50/1.4 (x2), 50/1.8 (x3 I think), 100/2.8 (x2) and 300/4.5 needing CLA. Yeah, I know legacy glass and MF is not optimal, but with the DOF of the 21 and 28, I can use hyperfocal for snapshot mode, and with the anticipated quality EFV of the OM-D, I suspect manual focus won't be a huge deal. Chromatic aberration? I'm shooting b&w! Colour is for wimps. 😛
thinkfloyd
Flippy Nose
I am not greatly tied to Pentax, but still will not easily want to sell my FA Limited Primes. I am all but decided to do so though to make a change.
There is a part of me that says I want a FF DSLR and the new Nikon or Canon is what I should get. Then there is a real smarter part of me that says no matter how good they may be, I am not a pro, and don't need nor want to lug around a huge FF DSLR. That part says the OMD is a good choice. I had an E-P1, loved the images it produced, didn't like the camera or better said, the user interface of the camera. With better AF, increased dynamic range, cleaner high ISO output the OMD m4/3 camera should be all I need.
I think my Pentax experience will be part of my film photography hobby.
wblynch
Well-known
Tens of millions of them were sold around the world. Hardly a failure.
celluloidprop
Well-known
Man, I wish I could sell myself on m4/3 - I think the aspect ratio and lenses suit me as well as anything on the market, but I still spend half my time shooting at 1600+. My X100 doesn't capture as much detail at 1600 as my old D700, I doubt the OM-D (GX1/GH2/etc.) sensor will either...
Paul T.
Veteran
I'm glad for Olympus - the EP range has proven the sensor-size-fetishists here wrong, by redefining the market. If the focusing on this is far superior to the XPro, maybe a good number of people will go for practicality over sensor size once more.
Good luck to them, it all expands our choice.
Good luck to them, it all expands our choice.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Actually both Olympus and Panasonic disappoint me in one regard.
None of them produce a good, fast 35mm (equivalent) prime.
(and before y'all respond, no, 40mm is *not* 35mm, and 1:2.8 is not what I'd call 'fast')
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
So keep your D700 for half the time you're shooting, and get the OM-D for the rest 🙂
igi
Well-known
Your prayer seems to have been answered by Voigtlander... on the other thread, there's a strong rumor that they're going to release a 17.5mm F0.95 (albeit its very likely MF only).
[edit]
Oh, just announced!
http://www.43rumors.com/hot-voigtlander-announces-the-new-amazing-17-5mm-f0-95-lens/
nighstar
eternal beginner
...i like your reasoning. i too would really like to have a FF digital camera and like you i am not a pro. however, as much as i really want the E-M5 i think i will be going with a 5D Mark II instead (for now)..... is it bulkier and heavier? yeah. but so is my Hasselblad and it is still a joy to use. being an amateur, is it way more of a camera than i probably need? yeah. but i see a 5D Mark II as being a big investment. while it may be more than i need now, i hope to grow as a photographer so that it becomes exactly what i need even if not now but in the future. 🙂
will i still get an OM-D? hell yeah! but later. i'll keep my E-P2 and continue drooling over the E-M5 for now.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Which is why Olympus shut down the OM system. I see. :bang:
[edit]
And not to extend an argument/thread hijack, but it would be interesting to see official sales numbers of those models. Tens of millions?
willie_901
Veteran
Appreciating the advantages of increased sensor area is not necessarily a fetish. The physics of Bayer imaging dictates larger sensor areas collect more information (all other factors being equal). I prefer to record more information. Others will decide different factors are more important to them. I would not say they have a small sensor fetish.
Archiver
Veteran
I can't think of anyone, Mitch Alland notwithstanding*, who says that they prefer the look of a small sensor after having experience with large sensor cameras.
I would love it if the OM-D matched the dynamic range of today's aps-c sensors. That would be a real coup and something of an incentive for me to invest. I've stayed out of m43 for years because I haven't seen what I like in the image quality as yet.
I do like how the OM-D is being positioned as a higher end 'professional' system. There are some super lenses coming out and the addition of 1080p h.264 video is attractive to me.
Having experience with small, aps-c and full frame sensors, I have to say that I prefer the image quality I get from my full frame cameras overall. Bigger sensor = better image quality from what I can see. I don't know how much of this is a factor of intangibles like depth of field, and how much is from greater dynamic range, lower noise, higher resolution and suchlike. As far as the OM-D goes, I like its looks and form factor. I like what I read of the specs. Performance is yet to be seen.
*Mitch often says that small sensors should be regarded as another format, much like aps or 110 film in the old days, with their own characteristics which are not necessarily 'worse', but just 'different'. I agree that small sensors have come a long way, and can yield very high quality images for most applications, but I also prefer the look that I get from large sensor cameras.
I would love it if the OM-D matched the dynamic range of today's aps-c sensors. That would be a real coup and something of an incentive for me to invest. I've stayed out of m43 for years because I haven't seen what I like in the image quality as yet.
I do like how the OM-D is being positioned as a higher end 'professional' system. There are some super lenses coming out and the addition of 1080p h.264 video is attractive to me.
Having experience with small, aps-c and full frame sensors, I have to say that I prefer the image quality I get from my full frame cameras overall. Bigger sensor = better image quality from what I can see. I don't know how much of this is a factor of intangibles like depth of field, and how much is from greater dynamic range, lower noise, higher resolution and suchlike. As far as the OM-D goes, I like its looks and form factor. I like what I read of the specs. Performance is yet to be seen.
*Mitch often says that small sensors should be regarded as another format, much like aps or 110 film in the old days, with their own characteristics which are not necessarily 'worse', but just 'different'. I agree that small sensors have come a long way, and can yield very high quality images for most applications, but I also prefer the look that I get from large sensor cameras.