wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

You trouted the "14fps" of the EOS-1DX as performance better than the E-M1mrII and E-M1X (EOS-1DX is actually 15fps, not 14). It is not as good as 18fps. And that is the EOS-1DX's 15fps AF/AE to the E-M1mrII and the E-M1X's 18fps AF/AE. Neither is EOS-1DX as good as the 60fps of 20mp RAW + JPEG. The EOS-1DX cannot capture 30 frames before you trigger the shutter. The shutter lag for all is 0.05 seconds. Although the number of focal points and exposure points is smaller than the EOS-1DX, I have very few problems with focus with my E-M1mrII even with sports. And the new E-M1X is even better. It has AI. It detects the subject and changes size and shape of coverage. It actually goes beyond just tracking movement. The EOS-1DX cannot do that. My E-M1mrII has 5.5 or 6.5 stops (with IS lens) of stability. And the E-M1X will have 6.5 or 7.5 stops (with IS lens) of stability. The EOS-1DX can only manage 5 stops with a lens that is 4 times the cost, 2 times the weight, and 50% more in size. ISO is now supposed to be good all the way to 6400 and neutral density filters built in. How many more performance levels do we need to go to show that the $5600 EOS-1DX was the camera that Olympus wanted the $3000 E-M1X to beat? And it is still 0.5" to 0.8" smaller per dimension than the EOS-1DX. And lighter too. And if you would like to see it in action, go to the Adorama Learnlng Center. And if one looks at it from a pixel count, once one crops to most of the standard print sizes, more pixels have usually been cropped away from the EOS-1DX than from either the E-M1mrII or E-M1X. I really wonder what you are looking at to determine superior performance.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Where do you get "5 grand"? The EOS-1DX is $5600, not the E-M1X. The E-M1X is only $3000 (still a steep price but a far cry from $5600). Don't you try to read what the specs are for cameras before you try and talk about them? All the information is extremely obtainable.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

The body only cost for the EOS-1DX is $5600. The body only cost for the E-M1X is $3000 for all intent and purposes. With a 12-40 f2.8 lens (24-80 in 35mm angle of view) the cost is $3600, still $2000 less than the EOS-1DX body only. You really need to check your "facts".

Besperus Loc: Oregon

The battery “bank” opens. Batteries can be removed and replaced in short order
locked up water proof, or nearly so...sure it isn’t a battery “clip” like reloading a firearm but easy enough to manipulate.

Besperus Loc: Oregon

People complain about 4/3’s format. Devised by Kodak at the beginning of the digital age, putting them out of business!
A lot of the professional video systems use the same format. One company has teased overtone with an 8k sensor of the same size.
Another thing it bugs me that a lot of folks believe a camera must be designed to shoot stills with the abilities of a view camera and video to broadcast the latest sitcom.
The same thing bugged me back in the film days. “Shooters” used 35mm shooting hundreds of images to get twenty or thirty good photos to fill a wedding album. I shot three rolls of 120
6x7 and used 99 percent of what I shot.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

I think you misunderstood my generalizing about performance, WD. There's many ways to measure performance. What one can achieve in hands-on use with a camera big enough to be able to control - vs. one that's smaller, and uses a sensor which is one quarter the size - are two very real different types of performance. I wasn't dealing with numbers. I was generalizing about speed which comes about in adept handling. It should be noted - I have no direct experience with either one. I'm just guessing at what elements contribute to a higher performance camera. Now, get off your high horse, and step back, WD.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Well, the EM1x hasn't technically been released yet, and so a) the specs are not very easily attainable … and b) not sure what good that'd do, as specs don't always cut it, for me, anyway. FPS is one thing, but all the other stuff … not sure I'd really understand it all, anyway. The EOS 1Dx II lists at $5995 - all I know.

Since the EM1x isn't officially released, yet … the price you don't really know, till it gets out on the street!

Besperus Loc: Oregon

I’d buy one. I don’t shoot sports most of the time. But limiting my imagination has not been my priority either. I’ve used Canons and Mamiya and Hasselblsd all for different reasons (needs). This Olympus won’t do it all but it is s tool that comes close. If I want to shoot video I’ll get a video camera capable of performing the task. If I want fine detail for a special shot I’ll rent a Fuji or Hasselblad with appropriate lens.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

I apologize if I sounded testy. The price has actually been released by Olympus. And the price is as previously stated just a nats ass below $3000. The AI is what I find most interesting. Teaching a camera to recognize objects is advanced.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

The price IS $2995. You can pre order one at that price.

(Download)


(Download)

tdekany Loc: Oregon

This is Olympus’ 100th year anniversary and they made it very clear that this camera is not an EM1 mark3. Other cameras are going to be released later on.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Not trying to stir the pot, but every one of the comments I have read from regular m4/3 users, who had attended one of those in store intro nights say the same thing. It isn’t heavy and barely larger than an EM1 mark2 with a grip. With that said, I am also not interested in the EM1X at this time.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

It's a fantastic camera, kudos to Olympus! They had a little info leaking about this camera about a year ago and even then I thought, this might be some real nice thing they are working on, but now that's it's out, I think it's even better They surely delivered a camera that can play with the big boys, it has been a while since Olympus did anything like that. It's "kinda" comparable to the time when Pentax came out with the LX (still to this day one of the best cameras ever build). I for one like seeing Olympus stepping up and I'm eager to see what's next!

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Chris, is the Pentax camera you are talking about picking up in another thread for $800? Is that really $800 or is it $2800? Since $800 is body only.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

WD - it's okay. I enjoy sparring with you. But, it should be noted - even though this topic title - as do most of mine - has a provocative title - all I really know about the EM1x is based on three different reviews I've read - none of which have made me want to plonk down UP TO FIVE GRAND - for the body with lens. Yes, it has some significant advances over the EM1 II - but, it seems there are some significant flaws, too. I did not set out to compare it to the 1Dx II, or the D5, or the a99 II, or the K-1 II. I just wanted to throw the idea out there, and see what cropped up …. Bee's Knees of the MFTs - don't you think it has a nice ring to it????

But others here - seemed to want to compare it to those other FF Top-o'-the Heap DSLRs … the only problem is … it's NOT FF, first of all … and secondly - it's not even a DSLR!!! … It's a MILC! … so, if one should want to compare it to something else out there - ideally - it should be compared - first of all - to the EM1 II … then to whatever Panasonic MFT with which it has the closest alignment. AND then - if you STILL insist on a comparison to an APS-C camera - the first ones one should look at are the Fuji line. But, I don't think it's a fair comparison to make - with ANY Full Fame DSLR - perhaps a FF MILC, whaddyathink