burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Perhaps, but sales numbers don’t impress me. Features that meet my needs do. There’s nothing wrong with dSLRs, it’s just that they don’t do what I need. Lumix gear does.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

People who love their DSLRs are picking up the remaining DSLRs since none are being made anymore. Not really a surprise. They will be able to buy a mirrorless anytime.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

My first toe-dip into M4/3 was a Panasonic G85. It was such a fun camera to shoot. I liked it so much I got a G9 for wildlife. There was so much I liked about that camera including a few features similar to Olympus. They have a “Pre” mode similar to Pro Capture, though not as flexible, and in camera Focus Stacking, but you can only get an 18mp JPEG and I think it also did an 80mp hi res shot and it did great video. Ultimately as much as I liked that camera it just fell short in focus speed for wildlife. I made the switch to the Olympus E-M1X and I was thrilled. Much better AF, it was the first camera with bird tracking, and when it comes to processing their “computational photography” features put them in another league. Focus Stacking is also just JPEG but the full 20mp and it’s more flexible and can be set to use from 3-15 frames, although it only works with certain lenses, (it looks like all the Pro lenses, both macros and the 100-400, also with both teleconverters). Since I shoot raw I’m more likely to use focus bracketing and stack in PS. You can choose 3-9999 frames and of course you can then choose how many of those frames you use in the stack. Pro Capture is a game changer for wildlife. I upgraded to the OM-1 and besides AF that’s faster and more accurate and a faster frame rate the sensor is easily better in low light by at least 2 stops. Besides all the other features I haven’t mentioned two favorites, Live ND, which has been increased from 5 stops to 6, and Live Composite, both of which I’m planning using tomorrow night when I head into DC for a night shoot with friends.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Yes, and if you read the article the big driver for that is availability. Because of supply chain issues most of the new, cutting-edge mirrorless cameras are in short supply while DSLR’s haven’t been as affected. They can’t sell what they don’t have.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I did read the article.
Duh.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

There are a couple good special interest groups on FB that I belong to ... " Olympus OMD and education group " , " Olympus OMD landscapes " , and " Olympus passion ". Between these 3 you can get good technical information as well as looking at captures by folks who can fully utilize the features of these cameras... Give it a shot; a whole lot more entertaining than the general news feed on FB.

kenArchi Loc: Seal Beach, CA

Thank you MrBob

Peteso Loc: Blacks Hills

One excellent resource is Scott Davenport’s book on ON1. The most recent edition has an index, but if you get the PDF version, you can do word searches to find what you’re looking for.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Olympus cameras are nice... especially their newest OM-1, which has substantial improvement in the autofocus system compared to all previous models. It is much better for active shooting, such as sports and wildlife.

Olympus are all mirrorless and they use a small "micro four/thirds" or M4/3 sensor. This doubles the effective focal length of the lenses used upon them. For example, a 100-400mm on the OM-1 will "act like a 200-800mm" would on full frame, if such a lens existed. This isn't so great for wide angle lenses... to be truly wide on an M4/3 camera, focal lengths have to be very short. There is a pretty good selection of Oly lenses, plus many Panasonic lenses can be used because they share the same mount and sensor format (Panasonic also has full frame cameras in a different mount, though).

The new OM-1 is rather expensive at $2200, body only ($2800 with 12-40mm f/2.8 lens). But if you are going to be shooting active subjects it's your best bet among the Oly cameras.

Now the bad part, just about every one of those "gee whiz" features you ask about can be done with just about any recent mirrorless camera... though it may be necessary (and better) to do it in post-processing rather than in the camera. You can save your originals and redo post-processing if something goes wrong... you can't do that when you apply a lot of those special techniques in camera. If the in-camera process fails to produce what you want, you will probably need to start over from scratch.

Frankly, Sony and Canon are currently at the forefront of mirrorless cameras. Nikon isn't very far behind. Then comes Fuji. Then Panasonic and Oly. Then a couple dozen more!

They all make good cameras. But, no, not all mirrorless have in-body IS (IBIS). Among the Sony crop sensor cameras, only their top of the line a6600 has it (currently out of stock everywhere). One of the two new Canon APS-C models have it (the R7). Neither of the Nikon APS-C Z-series cameras have it. Both Canon and Nikon have a lot of IS lenses, though (Sony has some too). I'm not sure about Fuji and Panasonic, or the other Oly models for that matter.

Just a quick overview of your options and some of the pluses and minuses (I'm assuming crop sensor... either M4/3 or APS-C):

Sony has been seriously committed to making mirrorless the longest, has a well developed system with a lot of choices (both full frame and APS-C format, both bigger than M4/3 format). They also have a lot of 3rd party lens support. Sony's "single digit" cameras are full frame (A7, A9, etc) while their A6000-series cameras are APS-C. BTW, that APS-C sensor is larger than the Oly's M4/3, but not as large as full frame. The same 100-400mm lens on one of these APS-C cameras will "act like a 150-600mm" would on full frame. For a long time Sony has had a very advanced autofocus systems in their mirrorless cameras. They also have a lot of third party support for their systems. Sigma, Tokina, Tamron and others make a lot of lenses for them. One of the biggest criticisms of Sony has been about their menu system, that it was difficult to navigate. They've been working on improving this in recent models.

Canon has been making mirrorless for just as long as Sony, but they've had two different system (that are incompatible with each other, BTW). They were slow developing the first "M-series" system and the emphasis was on being really compact and rather basic... sort of like "point n shoot" cameras with a few interchangeable lenses. They only ever developed 8 "EF-M" lenses for those cameras. (At one time they had 80 or 90 for their DSLRs.)

Several years ago Canon launched a whole new "R-series" mirrorless camera system, which they're taking much more seriously. The first cameras were pretty good, but not great. Their "RF" lenses, on the other hand, have been quite innovative and interesting. At this point they have about half as many lenses as Sony, but Canon has most needs covered and some of the lenses they offer is unique. Those are still in development. More recently Canon has introduced three new cameras (R6, R5 and R3) that are exceptionally good with very advanced autofocus that rivals Sony's very best.

Until last week all Canon cameras were full frame. However, they've just announced two fairly affordable APS-C format cameras in this system, as well as a couple "basic" lenses especially for them. What's most interesting about the $1500 R7 and $1000 R10 is that they appear to have almost the same AF system as the $6000 pro R3 they introduced last year. It really is quite amazing to watch the AF system at work (search for the early reviews on YouTube, some of those show exactly what you'll see in the viewfinder.) Canon's ergonomics and menus have long gotten high praise from users.

Fujifilm also makes some excellent mirrorless cameras and lenses. All of theirs are APS-C format (well, actually they do have a much larger medium format mirrorless system). I don't presume to know a lot about it, but Fuji has a lot of fans. I used Fuji cameras and lenses back in the days of film, but haven't used their digital systems. I get the impression their AF system is good, but not quite up to what Sony, the latest Canon and possibly the Oly OM-1 offer.

I already mentioned Panasonic, who share the M4/3 sensor and mount with Oly. Their real forte seems to be video. They get a lot of praise for that. Of course they are also capable of taking still photos. Again, it's a system I'm not terribly familiar with, so will leave it to other people to give more info or answer any questions about what is available.

Nikon also has introduced a number of mirrorless cameras in the last few years. They actually had a very compact mirrorless system for a short time a number of years ago, but didn't sell a lot and discontinued it (the "Nikon 1" system was unique, using smaller sensor than anyone else to be ultra-compact... even smaller than M4/3). Today their Z-series cameras and Z-mount lenses are a whole new system that's getting a lot of praise. It includes both full frame and APS-C, just like Sony and and now Canon. The Nikon Z50 and retro-styled Zfc are their APS-C models and both are quite affordable. Nikon has developed lenses for their Z-mount in numbers similar to what Canon has done... But Nikon's system has only recently seen more powerful telephotos and ultrawide lenses added. For the first couple years they simply didn't have the breadth of choices that Canon did. However, they do have two crop-specific lenses that complement each other nicely (something like a 16-50mm and a 50-250mm). Canon has only just introduced a couple (18-45mm and 18-150mm... but they already had fairly affordable 16mm, 100-400mm, 600mm, 800mm and more).

Depending upon what you want to shoot, any of these systems might serve you very well. I suggest you try to check them out in person, in a store, if at all possible. You may find one camera or system just seems a better "fit" than the others.

Don't get too hung up on the camera and it's "gee whiz" features. A lot of the time those are less useful than you might think. Lens and accessory selection and quality can be more important than the camera they're used upon. You also want to be comfortable that the system you choose will be around for the long haul... that you can add to it in the future or get repairs made if needed or upgrade within it in the future (it is expensive to have to change systems).

Canon is the world's largest seller of digital cameras (and has been for about 20 years). They're market share is upwards of 40%, which is more than the next four manufacturers combined. Sony is second now with around 25%, and in some regions is the leading seller of full frame mirrorless cameras. Nikon is third largest with about 20%. Fuji and Panasonic are tied for fourth place, each with around 5% each. I don't know how the others break down, but the remaining 5 or 6% is divided up among Oly, Pentax/Ricoh, Leica, Hasselblad, Sigma, and many more.

Olympus' camera division was sold at the beginning of last year. The new owner is Japanese Industrial Partners (JIP) who are operating the company under a new name "OM Digital Solutions" (the Olympus name remains with the previous company, which continues to make other products). The interesting and very capable new OM-1 is the first camera the new owners have introduced. Some say that may be the last camera to actually carry the "Olympus" badge, but it is encouraging to see the thought and effort that went into developing such a nice camera.

Overall, the camera market has changed a lot in recent years. The peak of digital camera sales was sometime around 2008, if memory serves. Since then it has been steadily dropping. Today global sales of cameras is only about 10% of what it was 14 or 15 years ago. The reason for this is camera phones. They've gotten better and are today's "point n shoot" cameras. People simply don't buy a separate camera for occasional snapshots. They just their phone. The digital point n shoot camera market, in particular, has virtually disappeared. The good news is that more advanced P&S and interchangeable lens cameras that photo enthusiasts prefer are still widely available and are better than ever.

I hope this gives you somewhat of an overview of what's out there, along with a bit of the good and bad of the different options. Have fun shopping!

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

I’m trying to figure out how I’d do Live Composite, Live ND and Star Focus in post. I suppose if you took enough images you could approximate Live Composite but it would take a lot of images and not be perfect. Pro Capture is another. How do I do that in post?

John Matthews Loc: Wasilla, Alaska

Not really sure what you mean by “do star focus and pro capture “in post”. Star focus allows the camera to achieve rapid focus on a star w/o the photographer having to manually try and focus the lens’s on the star. When the Pro capture feature is activated the camera starts taking photos that are held in a “temporary” memory when the shutter button is held halfway down. When the shutter button is activated all the way the camera will write the last 18 photos (mark 2 camera, more in later models) in the “soft” memory to the card and continue writing photos to the card until the shutter button is released.

Hip Coyote

Great summary!

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

I was responding to Amfoto’s assertion that you could do Olympus’s computational photography in post. I didn’t say you could do it I was questioning how.

rsworden

On Facebook, I like https://www.facebook.com/groups/OMD.education/

Olympus & OM System Education Group

HallwoedHill Loc: Chattanooga,TN

I had a Nikon system for years and years. In 2017 I switched to Olympus. Here is the bottom line:

If you print no larger than around 20 x 14 or so, and you do not crop excessively, the Olympus system is wonderful. Over those parameters many of the criticisms of noise , sensor size etc. start to become valid. And be aware that to fully use ALL the functions of the camera there is a steep learning curve. I am more than satisfied with Olympus. The bonus is the Pro lens are as good as it gets.