Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
EM-1X - is this the Bee's Knees of ALL MFTs, or - did Olympus blow it?
Page <<first <prev 4 of 12 next> last>>
Feb 12, 2019 17:27:18   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
tdekany wrote:
Yes


Thanks, Tom ... late arrivals of those pics - dial-up and all that ... I see that, now ... thanks !!!

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 17:33:08   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
User ID wrote:
It's not their only model. And it's useful to have
a flagship model to "raise the bar," cuz whatever
proves successful is soon enuf fitted into smaller
models. You asked "should they have left things
alone ?" Well really, there's no "things" to leave
alone. Hardware seems like "things" but is really
a material expression of ideas. Ideas will always
just keep on keepin on !

Personally I think a huge small format body is a
rather weird idea. Not all users think about size
of format. Some think only of capabilities ... and
that is verrrrrry rational. I'm olde skoole. Can't
help but laff a bit when I see that huge body in
a lensless state with a tiny m4/3 sensor peeking
out at me. Little green postage stamp, in a hole
in a huge machine ... looks silly to me.

But OTOH I'm participating, to some degree, in
the thing I laff at. I've been doing it since back
in the film days. I always thought big 35mm SLR
bodies with their tiny film gates were freakishly
out of proportion. A Rollei or Blad was hardly any
bigger than a Nikon F but the roll fim format size
was considerably bigger.

And I'm still participating in what I laff at. I don't
have that giant Olympus m4/3, but it took me a
while to convince myself a Lumix G9 was not so
ludicrous. So I bought it and it's amazing. I just
ignore the body-size vs format-size craziness and
see it only for its astounding capabilities. I'm sure
that would also be true for whoever makes use of
the new giant Olympus as well. It's the size it is,
and it does what it does. And costs what it costs !
For certain users, that all makes sense. I know
that deal [at MY level] thru my G9. It's an m4/3
and it's as big as my FF Sonys ! But, in use, the
Sonys seem rather crude by comparison.

.
It's not their only model. And it's useful to have... (show quote)


Is it REALLY that big, USER ID? … So, you've held it, then … AND, used it, USER?

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 17:36:09   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
burkphoto wrote:
I don't think the EM-1X has anything to do with the future of Panasonic. (Maybe it does for Olympus, but I don't see much of a downside.) I also don't think Micro 4/3 is in trouble, just because full frame mirrorless is taking off.

The "killer apps" for Micro 4/3 are *total kit weight savings,* Panasonic's video, and lens selection and adaptability. With over 100 native lenses available from several excellent manufacturers, configuring a small, light, travel-worthy kit is easy. With many different manufacturers making various adapters and focal length reducers (AKA SpeedBoosters), hundreds more lenses can be adapted to Micro 4/3 bodies in a pinch.

All of the camera companies have gone through, or are going through, a period of "right sizing" in response to market shifts. We may see some mergers and acquisitions in the future, but I don't see anything truly disappearing. After all, the medium format digital market is tiny, but it is still there. And the film camera market is tiny, with few models available, but it's still around. Nikon still sells the F6...
I don't think the EM-1X has anything to do with th... (show quote)


Bill - which "mergers and acquisitions" are you anticipating?

Reply
 
 
Feb 12, 2019 17:42:33   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
wdross wrote:
tdekany is right. How do you think they test how good it is for sports? You have to put it in the hands of a true sports photographer and get their feedback. Then you use that feedback to finish your camera design. It requires a non-disclosure agreement, but the sports photographer gets to play with the latest "toy" before it is available to anyone else. I know I would sign such an agreement if approached by Olympus. Play with the new toys and not tell anyone - a really "hard" decision!
tdekany is right. How do you think they test how g... (show quote)


It's nice they give away 5 grand cameras to folks who really don't need them …

Now, if they'd only give one or two - in MY direction - I'd be HAPPY to try them out, for them!!!!

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 17:50:42   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
wdross wrote:

Since I don't shoot sport or very fast action that much, I will not be buying one anytime soon. Would I like to have one? Sure - for free! Not going to happen anytime soon.


You and I should sign up for those Freebies, WD … now, if we could ONLY figure out WHERE to sign !!!!

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 17:54:42   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
PierreD wrote:
From what I read (only reviews; I use Olympus MFT but can't afford the new camera), it's just the other way around, i.e., they improved more than they screwed up: Dual processor, better AF, the best image stabilization of ANY camera, and (for now limited but likely to improve when they release firmwares) object and face recognition AI. Thus Olympus, once again, demonstrates that it is among the top envelope-pushing and innovative companies in the business, which may in no small part be a main motivation for their producing this model.

Current users seem to be happy with it and are getting some great shots.

As to what this camera tells us about the future of MFT, and despite what some naysayers and other frizzy haired guys say, it's all hand-waiving and crystal ball reading, IMO, and only time will tell.
From what I read (only reviews; I use Olympus MFT ... (show quote)


Now, to which "frizzy-haired guys" are you referring, here, Pierre?

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 18:06:53   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
wdross wrote:
You are right. The EOS-1DX can only shoot 15fps with no Pro Capture and the E-M1X can shoot 18fps with shutter, fully tracking, and exposure, 60fps with the shutter locked up, and provide you with 30 frames before you pressed the shutter just in case you were a little slow on the trigger. Capturing the moment is what sports is all about. One has to pay $2500 more for less camera than the E-M1X?


WD … the Canon EOS 1Dx - THE PRO CAMERA - for Canon Users, is a hair short of six grand. From what I've read - the EM1x - will sell for around five grand. So, I'm not sure where you get this $2500 more biz. Perhaps, you were thinking of the D5 - THE PRO CAMERA - for Nikon Users. This sells for $6500. Right?

So, we're talking about a difference of a grand with the Canon, and a grand and a half - for the Nikon. And BOTH of THOSE will provide a FULL FRAME (24x36mm) image ... not a 110-film-sized image like the EM1x!

Reply
 
 
Feb 12, 2019 18:14:20   #
PierreD
 
That's the guy (supposedly a pro; don't remember the name) who, a few weeks back, posted a terribly negative online review of the EM-1X, all the while acknowledging (paraphrasing here) that he didn't have time to test it extensively, not telling us about conditions used to take/process pictures that he attached to his review, and not conveying the impression that he had a clear understanding of the difference between bokeh and depth of field. Plus a few other choosy moments...

It was a very biased and sorry piece of work. Many photographers, Olympus users and otherwise, reacted accordingly.

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 18:14:32   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
$2995 for the em1x Chris.

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 18:19:45   #
User ID
 
`

AntonioReyna wrote:
........
Go to any big event and pretty much all you
see are the big Canon white lenses, some
Nikons and a few Sonys.



Reply
Feb 12, 2019 18:20:10   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
tdekany wrote:
$2995 for the em1x Chris.


But, that's Body Only, Tom … by the time you put a choice lens on it, you're looking at five grand - EASY!!!

Anyway … it's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of my league!!!!!

Reply
 
 
Feb 12, 2019 18:24:18   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
PierreD wrote:
That's the guy (supposedly a pro; don't remember the name) who, a few weeks back, posted a terribly negative online review of the EM-1X, all the while acknowledging (paraphrasing here) that he didn't have time to test it extensively, not telling us about conditions used to take/process pictures that he attached to his review, and not conveying the impression that he had a clear understanding of the difference between bokeh and depth of field. Plus a few other choosy moments...

It was a very biased and sorry piece of work. Many photographers, Olympus users and otherwise, reacted accordingly.
That's the guy (supposedly a pro; don't remember t... (show quote)


Pierre - this post was meant to open up a discussion about this camera - no more!!!!

If folks wish to review it, or post specs on it, or go over its many features - that'd be fine.

Pics taken - by those involved in the discussion - would also be very welcome …

Nobody here is panning it … just wanted to see what others feel about it …

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 18:28:42   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
PierreD wrote:
That's the guy (supposedly a pro; don't remember the name) who, a few weeks back, posted a terribly negative online review of the EM-1X, all the while acknowledging (paraphrasing here) that he didn't have time to test it extensively, not telling us about conditions used to take/process pictures that he attached to his review, and not conveying the impression that he had a clear understanding of the difference between bokeh and depth of field. Plus a few other choosy moments...

It was a very biased and sorry piece of work. Many photographers, Olympus users and otherwise, reacted accordingly.
That's the guy (supposedly a pro; don't remember t... (show quote)


Oh, I see, Pierre - so this was your answer to my query about - which frizzy-haired guy? … gotya!!!

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 18:34:12   #
PierreD
 
Chris T wrote:
Oh, I see, Pierre - so this was your answer to my query about - which frizzy-haired guy? … gotya!!!


Yes, it was... I should have replied with your quote inserted. Sorry for this, I noticed my mistake after hitting the SEND button.

Reply
Feb 12, 2019 19:35:23   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
PierreD wrote:
Yes, it was... I should have replied with your quote inserted. Sorry for this, I noticed my mistake after hitting the SEND button.


Yes, you should've, Pierre … but, no biggy!!! … A careful re-read helped me to understand what it was …

These folks who post at these sites, w/o having the slightest idea what they're talking about - are for the birds, aren't they, Pierre? …

I confess - I am - sometimes - like - guilty - but, there are times when I just wish to delve further into something - w/o having to make my own deductions, based on numbers, alone. Just numbers, or just pics, don't always tell the whole story. This kind of posting gives the opportunity to hear different folks who've actually USED a camera or lens, out, in the field … and I find this kind of feedback - invaluable - don't you?

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 12 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.