Olympus E-5 Review out from dpreview.com - tsk tsk

[ricktas]

I guess FF is doomed now Pentax have the 645 for a similar price. It's science, pure and simple

It's not like you'd keep your uncompetitive FF cameras because the LENSES are faster or more useful. It's all about the sensor....

There are arguments for and against everything, including camera sensors. Ultimately 4/3rd will not be able to compete against APS-C, FF or MF. The low light issue of a smaller sensor with the same MP as a larger sensor will always exist and always leave Olympus behind the other market players in relation to ISO performance. No system is perfect.

[Ross the fiddler]

Olympus is not staying loyal to its users by remaining loyal to 4/3rds. It is dumping 4/3rds for m4/3rds which is a format I for one cannot abide. The micro 4/3rds bodies are totally out of balance with the amazing 12-60mm or 50-200mm Zuiko lenses. Having quite a bit invested in the lenses I will stick to the system rather han changing over. The investment in Canikon lenses of the quality of these costs more than a few stops is worth especially as I have had very little need for ISO speeds above 400.

Here is a translation of a quote from an interview in China at the P&E 2011 by the Chinese website Tech.sina interviewing the ex Olympus chief Mr. Watanabe

Editor: Are there any plan on new E system camera? In P&E 2011, what Olympus will focus on in the promotion?
WATANABE AKIRA: We are not ready to reveal the details of new products. We will definitely further develop the 1 and 2 digit E system series (e.g. E-5 and E-30) since there are some functionalities cannot be realized in PEN series. But concerning the 3 digit E system series, we are considering replacing it by the PEN series. We be continue to develop lenses for PEN series and at the same time we will continue to develop Four Third lenses. We think that PEN series lenses are still very limited so we might focus more on this in the near future.

It seems like there is still a future in Olympus DSLR's, including bringing out a replacement for the E30.

[Ross the fiddler]

[I have owned an Olympus film and digital SLR (both now sold). Olympus gear is solid and well made. I found the photos from my E-300 were great straight out of the camera and the Zuiko lenses are brilliant bits of kit. My issue is this pig-headed retention of the 4/3rd system. It will always be an issue for those that rely on it solely as the one and only sensor size.

If they make a sensor in 4/3rd's with say 16MP and good high ISO noise levels, then a full frame sensor at 16MP is always going to be better (as long as same tech level), as the bigger sensor means bigger pixel sites, and even better high ISO performance. This is just basic science! Same number of pixels over a larger area, bigger pixels, better light photo capture ability.

I am not going to dish out on the new camera, I am sure it does a super job, but Olympus are stifling their own users by this insistence on remaining 100% loyal to 4/3rds.

Their pig headedness is because they believe the 4/3's size for lenses & format is the perfect all round size. Please don't ask me to explain the technical reasons (you would need to look up dedicated Oly forums etc to get that answer).
The lenses are at an advantage over larger systems, but obviously get heavier with the larger aperture lenses. You try & buy equivalent quality for equivalent effective lens lengths & notice how much more affordable the Oly lenses are compared to Canon & Nikon.

[jim]

So there are advantages and disadvantages to the 4/3 format. With Nikon, Canon, Sony and Pentax concentrating on the larger sensors, Olympus has chosen to differentiate themselves by sticking with the smaller format. It might work for them?

Disclaimer: I have no experience of Olympus cameras since the XA, and no experience of 4/3 cameras at all. I ask only for information...

[peterb666]

Their pig headedness is because they believe the 4/3's size for lenses & format is the perfect all round size.

I wouldn't but the E-5 into that 'size' category.

I think it would be interesting to look at the relationship of sales between MFT and FT. I don't think FT has long left.

It would be good to see Olympus port some of their more unique lenses over to MFT like the f/2 zooms.

[Ross the fiddler]

I think we can discuss & argue either way till the cows come home & we need to concentrate on what we have a camera for, so, using the terriblly noisy & small sensor of my Oly E30, here is something from it I took recently.


You will need to scroll down if you're interested
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Cecile Brunner Rose after a shower of rain.
P4065935s.jpg

I don't think I'm going to give up on Oly yet & as I showed in the earlier post, Oly are going to continue with the Ex & Exx lines of DSLR's, which should mean we shall see a replacement for the the E30 sometime soon. The above photo was using the Sigma 150 Macro lens on the Oly E30, just think how much sharper it would have been (in the sharp areas) with the ZD 50 Macro lens on an E5 with it's great fine detail ability. See Robin Wong's blog of the E5 & ZD 50 macro lens to see just how great the fine detail really is. http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2010/1...ooting-at.html

Anyhow, havagoodwun & get out & get some great photos with the gear we have.

[Arg]

From what I am reading on the blogs, a very large and increasing proportion of serious photographers simply aren't bothering with printing any more. They store, catalogue, process, enjoy, and share their photos on screen. The advantage these people get from a larger than 4/3 sensor is miniscule. Especially if it involves selling off an Olympus system they own and enjoy.

[Kym]

@Arg - I'm finding the opposite, i.e. more printing being done and at larger sizes. I really don't do less than 8x12 anymore.

Sure there is a bigger (Flickr, Facebook, etc) online demand, but I'm also getting requests for 'can I get a big print of that to frame'.

Also: High ISO is very handy!

[JM Tran]

I agree with Kym, I barely hear my colleagues or friends talk about printing at the usual 6x4 or 8x10 or 8x12 inch anymore. I dont bother at those sizes.

big prints like 40x30 and 45x30 inch are the norm now, simply as prices are falling for massive enlargements like that, due to technology and competition etc.

Want to see some mid to high ISO prints at that size from a 4/3 sensor? I'd prefer not to!

[Arg]

Kym, JM, your comments don't contradict my point. A lot of photographers work on a 24, 27, 30-inch monitor, prepare images and slideshows for digital display and sharing, and simply don't make the printer a significant part of their hobby. Paper is just one medium for presenting photographs, it is the old medium, and it is not usually the old medium that is the growth medium percentage-wise.

Also, http://tinyurl.com/42qmb36. Maybe it's a case of try it first.

Remember, I agree completely that a big paper print of a high iso image on an E5 will be detectably less finely resolved than same print on a 7D (a similarly priced unit). But:

• it might be sharper in the corners! (heh heh).

• it might still be perfectly acceptable to look at from the proper viewing distance.

• a little post processing goes a long way.

• it's not a camera test; it's about getting a communicative image. A little noise doesn't kill that.

• camera bodies come and go, but lenses are forever.

• there's an obscure accessory available called a tripod that solves the issue for many subjects.

There's a lot more to choosing a camera than the sensor's ultimate performance boundary.

[Ross the fiddler]

Here is a bit more to consider when evaluating cameras & their users.

E-5 wins TIPA award--Best D-SLR Expert: Olympus E-5
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...8&changemode=1

[Ross the fiddler]

I wouldn't but the E-5 into that 'size' category.

I think it would be interesting to look at the relationship of sales between MFT and FT. I don't think FT has long left.

It would be good to see Olympus port some of their more unique lenses over to MFT like the f/2 zooms.

Watanabe's comments do indicate there will be more lenses for micro 4/3's & that will be where most of their concentration will be for a while, but he also concedes the DSLR is still needed by continuing the Ex & Exx lines because of the limitations of the Micro 4/3's. I would like to see more innovations in the sensor & unless they were to use one of the better APS-C sized sensors (in 4/3's size still), no other manufacturer will be supplying the 4/3's size except Panasonic & Olympus are therefore stuck with what they can get from them. At least the E5 has shown how much Olympus has been able to extract from the limits of that sensor.

The following is not directed at any one person.
How many of you have checked Robin Wong's macro samples in the link I put in earlier? http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2010/1...ooting-at.html

Are you not impressed with the results using the ZD50 Macro lens on the E5?

I don't believe photography is just about ISO & megapixels & I thought having forums are for support & learning & not for putting the smaller brands down but to help the users of any gear get the best out of it. Hearing the old constant cry of "mines bigger & better than yours & yours will never be better" does not encourage others that don't have "the biggest & the best". I like my gear & would still like to add a few more lenses, but that requires money, so in the mean time I'll just keep trying to get some good keepers (with gear that is never going to be as good as others ).

Cheers

[JM Tran]

Here is a bit more to consider when evaluating cameras & their users.

E-5 wins TIPA award--Best D-SLR Expert: Olympus E-5
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...8&changemode=1

and I'll let u point out the flaws of being awarded that title first, before I mention some things, which were raised by other posters in that thread too.

[olympuse620]

You guys are making it hard to justify spending $2k on the Zuiko 7-14mm lens, but then for what I want which is outdoor landscapes low light really does not matter. I also will admit I was more than happy carrying light gear to the summit of Cradle Mt and back.

[rocklogic]

I own an e-30, and I was really keen to jump the bullet and get the e-5; but I'm really still undecided.

I've got quite a fair bit of new glass invested in Oly - but just ... I'm disappointed in the low light capabilities of the e-30, and from what I've heard - the e-5 is not that much better as well.

Probably at this point in time I'll keep the e-30 for a bit more - but not sure to get the e-5 (or jump brands)...

[Tannin]

Olympus gear is solid and well made. ..... My issue is this pig-headed retention of the 4/3rd system. It will always be an issue for those that rely on it solely as the one and only sensor size...... bigger sensor means bigger pixel sites ... this is just basic science! Same number of pixels over a larger area, bigger pixels, better light photo capture ability ..... Olympus are stifling their own users by this insistence on remaining 100% loyal to 4/3rds.

Spot on!

I think they are between a rock and a hard place. If they stick to the 4/3rds (ridiculous name!) format, they die a slow, painful death because no matter how hard they work and how smart their engineers are, they will never be able to match Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, Sigma, or Samsung for image quality. Never.

But if they introduce a new, bigger format and put themselves on a level footing with Canikax, they are as good as admitting that 4/3rds can't match it with the big boys, and they risk seeing an exodus of users to other brands. Plus, they have to do a whole new range of lenses - that's massive expenditure right there - plus they have to think of a new way to be special and not just another brand ..... massive task. Just the same, I reckon an Olympus E-11 in full frame 35mm might just put a cat amongst a few pigeons in Canikax land.

[Arg]

The high-ISO noise level of the Oly sensor is due to its performance more than its size. If they took the Canon 18MP sensor and jammed it into an Oly body and cropped it to 13x17.3mm (4/3 format), they would get 12.3MP with exactly the same high-iso performance as the latest Canons (taking processing out of the equation as it is not sensor-specific). And superb lenses. And sharper edge and corner resolution.

That's a pretty good formula! I am not an Oly user but I admire their point of difference and I think they offer an image product that has pluses and minuses against APS-C, and should have genuine appeal to many. I think the message boards are far too negative about perceived on-paper issues that are given too much importance in purchasing decisions and don't significantly affect the image portfolio one ends up with.