Re: Olympus E-5 professional DSLR announced and previewed

I'm really disapointed as a E-3 owner no high ISO no super dynamic range announcement Can we have a RAW taken at 6400 ISO to see noise ? Can we have quickly a DR mesure ?

Fred13 wrote: I'm really disapointed as a E-3 owner no high ISO no super dynamic range announcement Can we have a RAW taken at 6400 ISO to see noise ? Can we have quickly a DR mesure ?
We asked about DR - it's not improved over the latest generation (Pen etc) - though these are better than the E-3 and other earlier cams. High ISO is also going to be very similar to the PEN cameras - it's the same sensor and the big changes in the E-5 concern sharpness and resolution. The higher ISO option is a reflection of improved processing (i.e. don't expect miracles with ISO 6400 raw). We'll post output as soon as we have a reviewable sample. Simon -- Simon Joinson, Editor dpzen.com

could you also test if the zoom on image when viewing it it on the full image or on a thumbnail ? and if 14x is really 1:1 ? On e-3 it is on a thumbnail so it is ipossible to really check the focus ...
Simon Joinson wrote:
Fred13 wrote: I'm really disapointed as a E-3 owner no high ISO no super dynamic range announcement Can we have a RAW taken at 6400 ISO to see noise ? Can we have quickly a DR mesure ?
We asked about DR - it's not improved over the latest generation (Pen etc) - though these are better than the E-3 and other earlier cams. High ISO is also going to be very similar to the PEN cameras - it's the same sensor and the big changes in the E-5 concern sharpness and resolution. The higher ISO option is a reflection of improved processing (i.e. don't expect miracles with ISO 6400 raw). We'll post output as soon as we have a reviewable sample. Simon -- Simon Joinson, Editor dpzen.com

I think, once the price descends to reasonable, this cam will be a success with owners of Olympus lenses : simply the low AA filter, perhaps a smidgen weaker than even the weak e-pL1 AA filter, has a massive effect on picture detail provided the lens is up to the resolution. Best current Olympus sensor/processor (e-pL1) in the best body (e-3) with the best AF innards/performance (e-30) : all the little improvements mount up to something good : IF it all works right and IF the price is slashed pronto.

Simon Joinson wrote: We asked about DR - it's not improved over the latest generation (Pen etc) - though these are better than the E-3 and other earlier cams.
Ouch. Improved sensor dynamic range (in raw) was the major feature I was hoping for, and that shouldn't have been too hard given the DR performance of the Pen models. Panasonic can clearly do better (GH1), so either Olympus doesn't think people care or they couldn't buy the proper sensors from Panasonic. Either way, a very uncompelling buy, and I'll stick to my E-1 for a while. I really wonder how many they expect to sell at that price. Cheers, Simon

It'll be interesting to see how they implemented the tone curve. So far the 620 seems to have the heaviest DR stretching of the 12mp sensors at iso 200, and the EPL1 seems to have the least (though it's definitely still there).

I'd say they are very similar in terms of DR trickery with the E-PL1 having a little less DR at ISO 200 but also more pleasing straight OOC. Where they seem to be radically better than the previous generation (the 510 in my case) is in the mailability of the files (both raw and JPEG). I've never messed about with the E-3's files but I'm guessing the E-5 is not an insignificant upgrade.

What do you mean by this, as I have an E620 and my wife an EPL-1. Do you think that therefore the DR is improved on the E620?

Not DR as measured on the sensor by Dxo, but DR as measured by DPR, yes (they both look at jpegs and process raws to measure possible "output" DR). See here: http://www.dpzen.com/reviews/olympuse620/page16.asp

Is that the video mode is not 24p with manual control. Otherwise, I think it looks to be an amazing camera if the image quality is as good as they say it is. Things I love are the high rez. LCD, dual card slots (SD finally!), Conservative 12mp with light AA filter, new high capacity battery, viewfinder level, and same great viewfinder in very rugged body. It's a camera I would buy as an early adopter if I had the money saved up. Not a compelling change, just solid upgrades all around. Cheers, Seth -- What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?

It doesnt sound they are developing any more Exx or Exxx series; theyre trying to move that market to mFT. Which makes sense in a lot of ways. Which leaves the Ex series to carry on FT, but, for how long? I suspect E5 will be the last FT body... they need it until they develop the pro series mFT bodies.
Fred13 wrote: I'm really disapointed as a E-3 owner no high ISO no super dynamic range announcement Can we have a RAW taken at 6400 ISO to see noise ? Can we have quickly a DR mesure ?

mFt is not the synonym for mirrorless. mFt has a different flange distance and shares only the sensor, antidust and processing with FT. Oly will develop a mirrorless FT in the future, it is already hinted in the dpzen preview. So what will happen is that we will se a mirrorless FT probody in the not so distant future. But FT will continue alongside mFT.

mcvh wrote: mFt is not the synonym for mirrorless. mFt has a different flange distance and shares only the sensor, antidust and processing with FT. Oly will develop a mirrorless FT in the future, it is already hinted in the dpzen preview. So what will happen is that we will se a mirrorless FT probody in the not so distant future. But FT will continue alongside mFT.
The camera they should have created is the Sony a33/55 (incidentally, they had a great thing going with the E10/20). A CDAF only FT body doesnt make much sense; you cant use mFT lenses and you lose PDAF... the majority of FT lenses arent designed for CDAF. Anyways, the writing is on the wall. A warmed over E3 posing the E5, no new lenses, no new accessories, and no more development of Exx/Exxx series.

Jogger wrote:
mcvh wrote: mFt is not the synonym for mirrorless. mFt has a different flange distance and shares only the sensor, antidust and processing with FT. Oly will develop a mirrorless FT in the future, it is already hinted in the dpzen preview. So what will happen is that we will se a mirrorless FT probody in the not so distant future. But FT will continue alongside mFT.
The camera they should have created is the Sony a33/55 (incidentally, they had a great thing going with the E10/20). A CDAF only FT body doesnt make much sense; you cant use mFT lenses and you lose PDAF... the majority of FT lenses arent designed for CDAF. Anyways, the writing is on the wall. A warmed over E3 posing the E5, no new lenses, no new accessories, and no more development of Exx/Exxx series.
I don´t want to use the mFT lenses And how come you are so sure that we can´t use CDAF with the FT lenses? Oly seems to be working on this. And I believe that there will be updates to the lenses so they can be used in the future. Oly always said that they intend mFT for the masses and FT for the more ambitous photographer.

mcvh wrote: Oly always said that they intend mFT for the masses and FT for the more ambitous photographer.
So, there is going to be less and less ambitious photographer using Oly.

This could very well be -- Come to where the pictures are http://www.von-hacht.com/ or directly to my galleries at http://www.von-hacht.com/galleries/media

mcvh wrote:
Jogger wrote:
mcvh wrote: mFt is not the synonym for mirrorless. mFt has a different flange distance and shares only the sensor, antidust and processing with FT. Oly will develop a mirrorless FT in the future, it is already hinted in the dpzen preview. So what will happen is that we will se a mirrorless FT probody in the not so distant future. But FT will continue alongside mFT.
The camera they should have created is the Sony a33/55 (incidentally, they had a great thing going with the E10/20). A CDAF only FT body doesnt make much sense; you cant use mFT lenses and you lose PDAF... the majority of FT lenses arent designed for CDAF. Anyways, the writing is on the wall. A warmed over E3 posing the E5, no new lenses, no new accessories, and no more development of Exx/Exxx series.
I don´t want to use the mFT lenses
I dont blame you They're inferior and more expensive to boot!
And how come you are so sure that we can´t use CDAF with the FT lenses? Oly seems to be working on this. And I believe that there will be updates to the lenses so they can be used in the future.
There a lot written up on this. They AF, but, not in the same way as with PDAF.
Oly always said that they intend mFT for the masses and FT for the more ambitous photographer.
Oly says a lot of stuff. In practical terms, do they intend to only have an E5? What about lens development and sales?

mcvh wrote: I don´t want to use the mFT lenses And how come you are so sure that we can´t use CDAF with the FT lenses? Oly seems to be working on this. And I believe that there will be updates to the lenses so they can be used in the future. Oly always said that they intend mFT for the masses and FT for the more ambitous photographer.
What point is there in making FT cameras with nothing but air where the mirror should be--you could just as well be making a mFT camera with a -> FT adapter glued on. Sacrifices flexibility for no gain whatsoever. "we've had strong hints that a common live view only FT / MFT platform lies ahead" means that future cameras will be compatible with both FT and mFT. Guess what? mFT cameras are all FT compatible. This is marketing speak for "Four Thirds will only be supported as legacy lenses on mFT cameras."

I do it all the time. Even the versions that have been updated for cdaf like the 14-54 mk II - I use the MkI just fine with my e-p1. The cdaf updates or compatibility just mean they work better. They all work right now. This forum is weird. My old E30 outperforms my Canon 5dmkii for most shooting situations. The E5 will increase that lead. Go figure. -- John Mason - Lafayette, IN http://www.fototime.com/inv/407B931C53A9D9D

Jogger wrote:
mcvh wrote: mFt is not the synonym for mirrorless. mFt has a different flange distance and shares only the sensor, antidust and processing with FT. Oly will develop a mirrorless FT in the future, it is already hinted in the dpzen preview. So what will happen is that we will se a mirrorless FT probody in the not so distant future. But FT will continue alongside mFT.
The camera they should have created is the Sony a33/55 (incidentally, they had a great thing going with the E10/20). A CDAF only FT body doesnt make much sense; you cant use mFT lenses and you lose PDAF... the majority of FT lenses arent designed for CDAF.
thats a whacked out idea for a start that Sony is a stop gap measure until Sony get their own version of phased CDAF sensors up and running, then Sony will cancel its ticket and you wont hear any more about it
Anyways, the writing is on the wall. A warmed over E3 posing the E5, no new lenses, no new accessories, and no more development of Exx/Exxx series.
heh' you have no idea whats going on out there

but where is olympus innovation ? Please Olympus, show me i'm wrong thinking 4/3 is over and no R&D is done on it .... (or send me an E-5 in exchange of my E-3, i'll cover the shipping charges ;-))

Hi, Olympus innovation ? Olympus is a company that oscillates back and forth between very innovative and very evolutive to consolidate and further refine what they innovated before. Look at the OM-3/4 and OM-3T/4T: the latter were just like the former but in a better body and with some small tweaks to the circuitry. The result ? A great idea in an even better execution. That's what the E-5 is: a typical Olympus update of a great idea into an even better execution. Peter.

PeterLeyssens wrote: Hi, Olympus innovation ? Olympus is a company that oscillates back and forth between very innovative and very evolutive to consolidate and further refine what they innovated before. Look at the OM-3/4 and OM-3T/4T: the latter were just like the former but in a better body and with some small tweaks to the circuitry. The result ? A great idea in an even better execution. That's what the E-5 is: a typical Olympus update of a great idea into an even better execution. Peter.
It may be slightly better performing, but execution is also about timing! In that perspective, releasing a camera with soon two years old technolgy, Olympus is performing pretty bad!

Hi Torstein,
TorsteinH wrote:
That's what the E-5 is: a typical Olympus update of a great idea into an even better execution.
It may be slightly better performing, but execution is also about timing! In that perspective, releasing a camera with soon two years old technolgy, Olympus is performing pretty bad!
Exactly, and that's what I'm referring to. Compare: Olympus OM-4Ti: introduced in 1986. A simple camera, while Minolta launched its first autofocus camera with in-body motor one year earlier. Olympus OM-3Ti: introduced in 1995. A full manual SLR, while Minolta launched a DSLR the same year. Canon launched IS that year. Same principle: sometimes innovative, then slow evolution. Peter.

PeterLeyssens wrote: Olympus OM-3Ti: introduced in 1995. A full manual SLR, while Minolta launched a DSLR the same year.
No they [Minolta] didn't.

Rikke Rask wrote:
PeterLeyssens wrote: Olympus OM-3Ti: introduced in 1995. A full manual SLR, while Minolta launched a DSLR the same year.
No they [Minolta] didn't.
http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Minolta_RD-175

I think this is the same type of camera that almost everyone agrees that the E2 SHOULD have been had it ever appeared. That is, a reasonably competent placeholder that keeps the Oly flagship camera current while development continues on the "Next Big Thing". This camera isn't designed to attract new users, it is designed to keep current users from looking elsewhere because the current specs aren't current enough. I suspect the mythical E2 would have gotten the same comments had it appeared as the E5 is getting now. I can't help but wonder if Olympus is shedding its technogeeky innocence and starting to learn from its marketing mistakes. (Hint Oly, don't repeat that awful cow's butt advertisement!) -- I'm Thinking of changing my name to Manheim Pike because it sounds more 'Artsy'. What do you think? Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . . http://glenbarrington.smugmug.com/ http://www.jpgmag.com/people/glenbarrington/photos

This doesn't mean though they can do this sort of thing again. It might work this time, but if they decide to continue the DSLR line, the E6 has to be a pretty significant upgrade. -- I'm Thinking of changing my name to Manheim Pike because it sounds more 'Artsy'. What do you think? Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . . http://glenbarrington.smugmug.com/ http://www.jpgmag.com/people/glenbarrington/photos

Perhaps this is up to where Olympus has intended to go with a classical (D)SLR approach. So they did't bother wasting their time too much doing something they're not interested to pursue in the long run, and where, frankly, no one can win against 500 pound gorillas. It's a race to the bottom. To continue, you must innovate, think differently and exit the game to enter a new one. There was a strong rumour many months back that Olympus was working on a totally different camera concept, that will integrate best of m4/3 as well, but steer clear from the classical (D)SLR approach. I personally don't see them to be so crazy to spend 3 years doing -- as some posters said -- just minor improvements. They must have known people will react to this with a slap in the face, but perhaps they were ready for it because that's the last 'slap' we're gonna hear from or about Oly's cameras. I presume that time has been spent on something better. I don't have a proof of course, but all this doesn't strike me as a 'company gone mad'. It's very unusual, thus I don't condemn them. This is becoming very interesting, indeed.

I agree with your analysis. Something completely new must be lurking on the horizon. Still, the E-5 looks like the capable camera the Zuiko lenses have been waiting for. Judging from the E-PL1 output all the E-3 issues have been addressed, including DR, banding, soft RAW files and to some extent noisy high ISO. As to the future, it is quite clear that a mirrorless camera can soon use 4/3 lenses seamlessly. The two limiting technologies are EVF quailty and phase difference AF on the main sensor. Both these areas saw important advances over the past year, so such a camera will inevitably appear during 2011. I hope Olympus will be among the first to introduce one. -- Gallery: http://weatherloony.fruitsens.com/snphoto.html

The E5 highly suggests that something else is in the works. Maybe that something else is taking a touch longer than anticipated, so they went for the E5 for now, but it seems pretty clear that they don't want high end 4/3 to die just yet for a reason.

jkrumm wrote: The E5 highly suggests that something else is in the works. Maybe that something else is taking a touch longer than anticipated, so they went for the E5 for now, but it seems pretty clear that they don't want high end 4/3 to die just yet for a reason.
Uh oh... the beginning of a new cycle of (false?) hope that some miracle product is coming?

jkrumm wrote: The E5 highly suggests that something else is in the works. Maybe that something else is taking a touch longer than anticipated, so they went for the E5 for now, but it seems pretty clear that they don't want high end 4/3 to die just yet for a reason.
I'll guess the opposite. that they had minor tweaks rolled into the 'code base' and hardware base as a backup. they also were (probably) developing some 'killer stuff' but it was not ready and they felt the warmed over e3+ would be a good business decision. I'm not sure I agree, though. now they have to support this already out of date (by a year at least) model for the next 3 yrs. what a waste! wonder what the real model was supposed to be? the e5 aint it, though. it seems like a backup plan and one that should not have been launched out of internal alpha-test.

Rumored at 1200.00. Should be announced very soon.

bummer - time to sell Oly glass

what 'cha got? -- Don't feel too vindicated if I happen to agree with you today. Chances are we will disagree tomorrow. . . Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . . http://glenbarrington.smugmug.com/ http://www.jpgmag.com/people/glenbarrington/photos

Are they serious with that price? Really? For a FT body? hahahaha! -- Rick Halle wrote: " Keep in mind that tall buildings sway back and forth so they require faster shutter speeds."

It doesn't matter if they are serious about the price or not. Assuming that this camera is an incremental improvement over the E3 and not some stealth super camera, that price is not sustainable in the current market. The price will drop quickly, don't be in a hurry to buy this one.

Motion of consciousness at speeds faster than the speed of existence creates a phenomena of ontological dilation where the relevance of subjects, objects, observations and reflections cease before their arising. It becomes a fundament for Newton's laws of motion inside a contracting universe.
Fred13 wrote: I'm really disapointed as a E-3 owner

How can they label it "Professional"? Based on specs comparison the declared "midrange" Nikon D7000 equals or outperforms E-5 in almost everything. Olympus price is PRO level, though. (43% higher). -- Rapick Jalbum supporter http://www.pbase.com/rapick http://rapick.jalbum.net/

Well, being professional is not about features I would say. It's about dependability and how long it takes you after the shot to have something you can sell. The E-1 and the E-3 were bodys you could take for a job without worrying whether it will break or fail otherwise...or whether it won't deliver what it is supposed to - that's professional enough for many professionals I think.

chris_tr wrote: Well, being professional is not about features I would say. It's about dependability and how long it takes you after the shot to have something you can sell. The E-1 and the E-3 were bodys you could take for a job without worrying whether it will break or fail otherwise...or whether it won't deliver what it is supposed to - that's professional enough for many professionals I think.
... that most photographer recognize to the Olympus E-x series, but more dependable than let's say Nikon Dxxx? It looks like a subjective feeling... And many professionals would expect that their professional tool will outperform an entry-level camera, I suppose. -- Rapick Jalbum supporter http://www.pbase.com/rapick http://rapick.jalbum.net/

Add new comment

Attachment
More information
  • Files must be less than 2 MB.
  • Allowed file types: txt.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.