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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 31, 2013, 10:45 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,533
Default

Ok.. now this is going to surprise everyone as it did me.. .. E520 added to the mix.




And the E520 vs EM1 - their the same size and thats shocked me quiet a bit and Id say the EM1's grip is going to be more comfortable. Its still not tall enough if its the same height as the OMDE

HarjTT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 10:51 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

looks like its going to be close enough to be close enough doesnt it
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 11:37 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

I used the rear LCD to scale these together
theyre aligned at the l/h edge

the M5 in its specs is 122mm
which makes M1 132mm, actually calculates to 132.5 near as I can make out

Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 11:40 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,533
Default

You know that grip looks very much like the E1's and even the back of the cam where it tapers off is very similar. Now if the cam was taller I'd say its going to be fairly comfortable to hold. It does look pig ugly though
HarjTT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 11:47 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HarjTT View Post
You know that grip looks very much like the E1's and even the back of the cam where it tapers off is very similar. Now if the cam was taller I'd say its going to be fairly comfortable to hold. It does look pig ugly though
yes that canted shutter release button is very E1

the texture of the material on the outside is the same as E5
I think it would be less useful to us without the grip on it, as you say about the height.
But even a cheap dumb plastic block would suffice in giving the body the depth in needs.

Another thing, looking at the top deck of M5 you can see it has a similar shape to its left side.
Now take that idea to M1, and you can see a residual impression of the right side of the top deck edge of M5.
If that is the case, and it is in direct alignment with M5, its 130mm wide exactly.

I dont think its a pretty camera in any sense, but quite frankly I think most camera designs have lost their beauty since they all went digital.
There are bits of some I like, but pretty much every prism hump around is ugly.

Last edited by Rriley; Aug 31, 2013 at 11:50 AM.
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 3:35 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,533
Default

Last bit of photosphoping .. I included the E3/E5 into the mix...

Now looking at the cam's from the top the E3/5 doesnt look that big at all, and still looks way more comfortable to hold and with the better grip.
Attached Images
  
HarjTT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 3:40 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

this thread has been useful
I suspect we are among few people on the internet who actually know how big this camera is.
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 4:18 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,533
Default

Mate, what it made me really realise is that Oly was already there with the small size with the E620 and so did they really need to go m43 ? When i look at the 35mm F3.5 and the 50mm f2, those two primes are small and I doubt any of the current m43 glass is better. So what if Oly had gone and made a number of fast prime F1.4 -F2 lenses instead to go with an E6XX replacement with the new sensor ? They would have had to put in the sized E30 OVF at least but that would be it.

Last edited by HarjTT; Aug 31, 2013 at 4:20 PM.
HarjTT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2013, 9:14 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

Not really Harg. The E-M1 is the biggest micro four-thirds camera. E-M5 and Pen units are smaller to much smaller and without the success of those, the E-M1 never would have seen the light of day. Had the DSLR's been selling in numbers to make the system relevant to more people and profitable enough for Olympus, they would still be making them. I would imagine there will be more micro system-only users buying the E-M1 than users of four-thirds glass.

Last edited by Greg Chappell; Sep 1, 2013 at 7:04 PM.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2013, 8:55 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,533
Default

Hi Guys

Looks as if my comparison with the E520 was slightly off, as the official size of the EM1 seems to out in the open and the cam is essentially E620 size. Not that the 520 is much bigger.

EM1:
Dimensions: 130.4 x 93.5 x 63.1mm
Weight (inc batt): 497g

E520:
Dimensions: 136 x 92 x 68 mm
Weight inc batt: 552 g

E620:
Dimensions:130 x 94 x 60 mm
Weight inc batt:500 g

I think its going to be interesting to see how well the Em1 + FT lenses handle and whether it has enough battery powerwithout the BG. How comfortable is it going to be to hold with the bigger glass .. the enhanced grip s going to help but its still a small camera.

HArj
HarjTT is online now   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 9:49 AM.