Olympus UK E-System User Group

Olympus UK E-System User Group (http://e-group.uk.net/forum/index.php)
-   General photography discussion (http://e-group.uk.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=75)
-   -   Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3 (http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=48290)

Ian 13th July 2018 03:46 PM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Being controversial is so-called click-bait, but it's a short-lived effect if the articles you are lured to don't cut it.

Ian

Olybirder 13th July 2018 03:57 PM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian (Post 450977)
Nobody pays $2000 for an E-M1 Mark II; $1600 or less is the market rate.

Ian

The Panasonic G9 is 1199 at WEX at the moment so wouldn't be surprised if the E-M1 II drops in price to match it before long.

Ron

drmarkf 13th July 2018 08:52 PM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian (Post 450977)
Nobody pays $2000 for an E-M1 Mark II; $1600 or less is the market rate.

Ian

I can’t speak authoritatively for the US prices, Ian, but to be fair to old Hogey the M1ii was around 1850 on the street in the U.K. from mid-2017 until the beginning of 2018. That must equate to around $2000 and, allowing for his usual gentle twisting of the truth to suit his argument, it’s price probably matched the introductory price of the new Aiii over that period.

Zuiko 14th July 2018 08:30 AM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Olybirder (Post 450980)
The Panasonic G9 is 1199 at WEX at the moment so wouldn't be surprised if the E-M1 II drops in price to match it before long.

Ron

Just wait 5 years and you'll get it for less than 300 pre-owned. :)

Otto 14th July 2018 08:52 AM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
That's the essential difference between digital and film. What you save on film you lose on depreciation!

Ricoh 14th July 2018 09:03 AM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto (Post 451012)
That's the essential difference between digital and film. What you save on film you lose on depreciation!

Or, what you lose on film (ie the cost) you gain by not suffering depreciation. In fact if you purchase the 'right' camera it will increase in value (as I have happily found out myself).

drmarkf 14th July 2018 07:10 PM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto (Post 451012)
That's the essential difference between digital and film. What you save on film you lose on depreciation!

Between DSLR and mirrorless, really. Pro level DSLRs hold their value much better than mirrorless cameras these days, and it's just a reflection of whichever market happens to be undergoing the fastest rate of development.

TimP 14th July 2018 07:34 PM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Tell that to my original Canon EOS5 which is worth approx 9d

drmarkf 14th July 2018 09:38 PM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TimP (Post 451048)
Tell that to my original Canon EOS5 which is worth approx 9d

Yeah, well, that is a relic.

More recently, just as a single example the 5D mk3 dates back to 2012, which is the same year as the original E-M5:

Canon DSLR 2999 - 1100 (36.7%)
Olympus CSC 999 - 210 (21.0%)

The s/h prices are approximate means of recent completed eBay UK listings.

Try making the same comparison for the 2013 introduced Oly E-M1 and Nikon D610.

Ricoh 14th July 2018 11:53 PM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by drmarkf (Post 451052)
Yeah, well, that is a relic.

More recently, just as a single example the 5D mk3 dates back to 2012, which is the same year as the original E-M5:

Canon DSLR 2999 - 1100 (36.7%)
Olympus CSC 999 - 210 (21.0%)

The s/h prices are approximate means of recent completed eBay UK listings.

Try making the same comparison for the 2013 introduced Oly E-M1 and Nikon D610.

Taking it a stage further:

Hubble Space Telescope ~ $1.5 billion - now on eBay for $2.99, but buyer has to collect! [Fake News]

Electronics - I spent my entire working life in electronics, mainly in design. The problem for the consumer is Moore's law, and it's not going to end soon.

Mechanical Cameras have their problems too - they need servicing every 10 years on average. Lubricants tend to separate into their constituent parts with the more volatile components evaporating, the remaining 'sludge' becomes viscous and less effective, resulting in metal to metal contact and eventually wear.

Gate Keeper 15th July 2018 06:26 AM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pdk42 (Post 450828)
There are a number of alarming Sony stories. The one about their cameras being "weather resistant" when actually they leak water like the Titanic is about the worst.

You are correct. In addition to your comment, a review of Sony mirrorless mentions it as being one of 10 faults Sony needs to address https://www.google.com/amp/s/photogr...s-problems/amp

A good friend is CEO for Sony (Europe) and when I told him I was thinking of buying a mirrorless camera, he said the most important thing to consider is the sensor. Very kindly he accessed a staff only site to get me one of their cameras at discount. But the cheapest came in at 960, reconditioned :mad:
I had to decline as my budget was half that for a body. I bartered, but he could not budge.

I did my research and even though my EM1 is 16MP? I took a shine to it.
Paul, you have more experience than I do in mirrorless cameras.
What does Olympus have to do to raise the bar to a minimum of 24MP, is it about money or what is it?

pdk42 15th July 2018 08:21 AM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gate Keeper (Post 451064)
You are correct. In addition to your comment, a review of Sony mirrorless mentions it as being one of 10 faults Sony needs to address https://www.google.com/amp/s/photogr...s-problems/amp

A good friend is CEO for Sony (Europe) and when I told him I was thinking of buying a mirrorless camera, he said the most important thing to consider is the sensor. Very kindly he accessed a staff only site to get me one of their cameras at discount. But the cheapest came in at 960, reconditioned :mad:
I had to decline as my budget was half that for a body. I bartered, but he could not budge.

I did my research and even though my EM1 is 16MP? I took a shine to it.
Paul, you have more experience than I do in mirrorless cameras.
What does Olympus have to do to raise the bar to a minimum of 24MP, is it about money or what is it?

I think the problem Phil is simply volume. The imaging (camera) divisions of both Olympus and Panasonic are small compared to their parent companies and neither do the design nor manufacture of their own sensors. That job is subcontracted to a very small number of companies that dominate the market - Sony Semiconductor Solutions and TowerJazz (part Panasonic owned) being the main two. Those companies offer sensors to anyone who can afford to pay the R&D and production costs.

The larger the volume the more these costs can be amortised and so the more affordable the cameras become. The problem for u43 is simply volume. Compared to FF, APSC, 1" and smartphone formats, u43 is low volume. So, we tend to lag other formats in the very latest tech because the costs of using it are too high. Having said that, I'm surprised that BSI hasn't made it to u43 yet. I suspect that's because the camera designers have been asking the sensor makers for other features (fast readout, 4k video, on-chip phase detect). BSI seems to add about 1EV to sensor sensitivity so maybe they don't think it's worth it (but I do!).

Actually, I think the lack of BSI is a big clue to where we are with u43. The camera designers have indeed focused their efforts on gee-whizz features rather than the ultimate in image quality possible. So, the E-M1ii introduced faster readout (4k video, ProCapture, 60fps burst), better AF and improved IBIS over its predecessor but only marginal IQ improvements. I assume that the designers thought those seeking the best in IQ would be buying FF (or bigger) so they spend the R&D cash on other things. I can see the logic in this, but there will come a point where it'll lose users (or fail to attract new ones).

Ricoh 15th July 2018 11:09 AM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
The M43 was driven by commercial decisions based on the cost of FF sensor manufacture (due to fabrication errors and wastage, the cost probably goes up by x^2, at least). Process technology has improved but Olympus and Panasonic are somewhat locked into the small sensor due to the valid reasons made historically.

Olympus will have to go bigger at some stage, or they will decline.

Gate Keeper 16th July 2018 07:31 AM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pdk42 (Post 451080)
I think the problem Phil is simply volume. The imaging (camera) divisions of both Olympus and Panasonic are small compared to their parent companies and neither do the design nor manufacture of their own sensors. That job is subcontracted to a very small number of companies that dominate the market - Sony Semiconductor Solutions and TowerJazz (part Panasonic owned) being the main two. Those companies offer sensors to anyone who can afford to pay the R&D and production costs.

The larger the volume the more these costs can be amortised and so the more affordable the cameras become. The problem for u43 is simply volume. Compared to FF, APSC, 1" and smartphone formats, u43 is low volume. So, we tend to lag other formats in the very latest tech because the costs of using it are too high. Having said that, I'm surprised that BSI hasn't made it to u43 yet. I suspect that's because the camera designers have been asking the sensor makers for other features (fast readout, 4k video, on-chip phase detect). BSI seems to add about 1EV to sensor sensitivity so maybe they don't think it's worth it (but I do!).

Actually, I think the lack of BSI is a big clue to where we are with u43. The camera designers have indeed focused their efforts on gee-whizz features rather than the ultimate in image quality possible. So, the E-M1ii introduced faster readout (4k video, ProCapture, 60fps burst), better AF and improved IBIS over its predecessor but only marginal IQ improvements. I assume that the designers thought those seeking the best in IQ would be buying FF (or bigger) so they spend the R&D cash on other things. I can see the logic in this, but there will come a point where it'll lose users (or fail to attract new ones).

Thank you very much Paul for those valuable insights. Most of us here I suspect do not like Thom Hogan running down our products. I wonder if Olympus visits this forum and if they do, I would like them to take on board your observations and bring out a new generation of a better camera to compete with the big names. Olympus, Id like a minimum of 24MP. Oly can you please keep up with the competition ;)

AMc 16th July 2018 08:47 AM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian (Post 450977)
Nobody pays $2000 for an E-M1 Mark II; $1600 or less is the market rate.

Ian

My point remains $2000 or 1600 is not the "consumer entry point" for cameras.

My first serious digital camera was a 300 DSLR + kit lens (bought used for 150).
Second was an E-PL5 with 2 kit lenses for 600.
Third was an E-M10 Mki - 330.
My most recent E-M10 Mkii was 275 body only.
I can't see myself every paying that kind of money for a body though I have no issue that others will.



1600 for a body then 500 more for a 12-40 F2.8 lens is not a "consumer entry point".

Zuiko 16th July 2018 08:52 AM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
I'm afraid our Olympus cameras have always played catch up with regard to sensors and always will do. You can bet that the moment we achieve 24mp the competition will normalize 30mp, that's just the way it is. We don't buy Olympus for ultimate IQ, we buy it for other features and innovations whilst still achieving pretty decent picture quality.

Ricoh 16th July 2018 12:51 PM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuiko (Post 451184)
I'm afraid our Olympus cameras have always played catch up with regard to sensors and always will do. You can bet that the moment we achieve 24mp the competition will normalize 30mp, that's just the way it is. We don't buy Olympus for ultimate IQ, we buy it for other features and innovations whilst still achieving pretty decent picture quality.

Spot on.
And for me I think the image quality of u4/3 - even the EM5 mk1 - is beyond what I wish for. Perhaps older glass would correct the situation. I want to see a certain character, not technical perfection.

Photography is a continuing journey of exploration. If only I had known five years ago what I know today. I certainly would not have purchased my M240, for sure. It's too good, too clinical.

Ian 16th July 2018 01:06 PM

Re: Thom Hogan slams Olympus M 4/3
 
I don't worry about sensor quality too much from almost any of the new cameras now; even some compacts and bridge types.

I have been using a Huawei P20 Pro smartphone, which uses three cameras (40MP, 20MP and 8MP) and AI to optimise image quality and it can achieve IQ under certain conditions that early Four Thirds cameras would really struggle to achieve.

The E-M1 Mark II matches the sensor performance of APS-C and some full frame models from Canon and Nikon from a few years ago.

The thing I like about Micro Four Thirds is that both Olympus and Panasonic are innovating faster (because they have to) than the others, the cameras AND the lenses are smaller and lighter and many of the lenses deliver outstanding quality.

The kinds of things we were complaining about concerning Oly kit a few years ago are getting addressed.

Don't get me wrong; I could just as happily use any rival camera - and I frequently get this chance thanks to my job - but I'm very happy with my Olympus and Panasonic gear.

Ian


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:11 PM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2018, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger