Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 25, 2013, 3:46 PM   #31
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,380
Default

Well I guess I'll never own this unless I win the lottery. I just like the way the E3 feels in my hand, was not comfortable with the PL2, too small for my mits.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2013, 3:58 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

all you have to do is wait James
within a year there will be sub $1,000 cameras with identical technology
thats inevitable
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2013, 4:06 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,380
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rriley View Post
all you have to do is wait James
within a year there will be sub $1,000 cameras with identical technology
thats inevitable
I just like the larger body of the E3. I sold all my M43 gear so I am not about to get into it again.......unless I win the lottery.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2013, 7:15 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,535
Default

Ok.. now we see that the price of the new lens is going to be approx 900USD which if true is a little bit surprising as I was thinking Oly would be aiming for a wee bit more than that. Although my next question is does that price include the lens hood or will they charge extra for it ?

I'm interested in how that new lens compares to the 14-54Mk1/MK2 or the 12-60 esp in terms of IQ. How much of the size reduction is down to in cam software correction or is the lens very well corrected like the FT glass?

So as a new kit - the EM1 + 12-40 F2.8 + BG = approx 2400 USD.

and for anyone wanting to use FT lenses, where looking at EM1 + BG = 1650

Is the new adapter confirmed to be free with the EM1 ?

Last edited by HarjTT; Aug 25, 2013 at 7:17 PM.
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2013, 7:51 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,380
Default

The only Oly lenses that I'm aware of that come with a hood are the 14-54 and the 70-300. Of course I don't know about the new lens.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2013, 8:58 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,522
Default

Every four-thirds lens I ever bought (lots of them) came with the hood. Even when I bought the two kit lens E510. Hoods for both the 14-42 and 40-150 were included in the package.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2013, 10:35 PM   #37
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Chappell View Post
Every four-thirds lens I ever bought (lots of them) came with the hood. Even when I bought the two kit lens E510. Hoods for both the 14-42 and 40-150 were included in the package.
Yes, same here. All my lens including my 50-200 came with lens hoods.


Quote:
Originally Posted by James Emory View Post
Well I guess I'll never own this unless I win the lottery. I just like the way the E3 feels in my hand, was not comfortable with the PL2, too small for my mits.
I'm the same way, James. It's always fun to look and talk about new models, but I love the way the E-3 feels in my hands, and I like the way it handles. In fact, if the time ever comes when I have to replace it, my first choice would be to pick up a used E-5, as the body shape is identical to the E-3.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2013, 11:22 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkurkowski View Post
Thanks for your thoughtful answer. Do I understand correctly that you're thinking the new cam will be good at 3200? If so, with a 2.4 lens that's not much of a gain over the E5 and an f/2 lens at 1250. Although the new rig would be substantially lighter I dunno if the likely price is worth that.

Of course this is all speculation until we see the camera.
Easily ISO 3200, and more than just high ISO, you can raise shadows just crazy amounts with E-M5 raw files with virtually no noise penalty. Today, I expose for highlights, let the shadows fall where they fall and get them the way I want them in Photoshop where I'll often raise both the blacks and shadows sliders as high as 65-75, which is just crazy amounts and would produce stupid levels of noise in prior Pens and Olympus DSLR's I used before.

Here's a grab shot I took of Katherine some time ago in her dungeon of a living room with the E-M5 and 14-150mm f4-5.6 M. Zuiko at ISO 4000. I did all sharpening and limited noise reduction using the sliders in ACR. The sensors in the newest Micro Four-Thirds cameras are as good as Olympus users have ever had it. I've never worked with raw files as malleable as the ones from the E-M5 and I can't believe the E-M1 won't be an improvement.


Last edited by Greg Chappell; Aug 25, 2013 at 11:46 PM.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2013, 11:57 PM   #39
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

Gregs example is actually much better than mine of course

ultimately the beauty of the EM5 sensor is it seems to block out noise in shadow very well, as good or better than anything else.
At the same time the remaining noise is of the type easily dealt with and rarely objectionable.
By parity it gains a stop on D800 making it a stop under by the dreaded equivalence.
yet its resolution isnt that much under D800 either despite the size differences
something in the order of 2600 vs 3200,
but does stretch beyond nyquist with an amount of false detail making it seem even better to the order of 3000

tis such a pity the last SLR didnt have this sensor
as it so greatly hurts available choices for those who prefer that classic format

Last edited by Rriley; Aug 26, 2013 at 12:04 AM.
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2013, 11:05 AM   #40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,522
Default

I see "the rumors" site now says..

I also got a feedback from one of my sources. He confirmed that focus with FT lenses is as fast as with “native” MFT lenses.

If true, the MSC-driven Micro Zuikos (which is all of them today) are as fast or faster focusing than SWD Zuikos on an E5, so AF isn't going to be an issue and may actually be an improvement since AF is calculated off the sensor vs. the way it has to be done in a DSLR.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:17 PM.