Quote:
Originally Posted by shenstone
Quote:
Originally Posted by greyhound
On the subject of digital, my choice of system was Olympus 4/3rds so I invested in an E1 and over the years added various lenses and cameras. Then Olympus decided to ditch the system for Micro 4/3rds. I was so disgusted I decided not to go down that route.
|
I read your post with interest (Boots Beirette, Zenit EM/TTL Pentax film and then 4/3 Olympus. This point amongst it all resonated hard with me
As you can see from my signature I invested heavily in the 4/3 system and I felt quite the same. the day the E5 was launched and on the same day it was noted that there would be no more 4/3 cameras they lost my trust entirely (along with the 50% or more that my kit dropped in value the same day effectively locking me in)
I do want to upgrade as I would like to downsize my kit and also do video with the same kit rather than the separate kit I have to carry now, but I have twice now picked up the Em1.II and the lack of dedicated WB/ISO etc. buttons means I have to remember things I should not need to and I am still not sure that my trust has been gained back by Olympus which is why I am also heavily looking at the GH5 which I found much easier to use
Regards
Andy
Regards
Andy |
I understand why 4/3 users are upset about the demise of the system. However, it might have been worse as the Samsung NX story illustrates. The 4/3 system had lost in the battle of the DSLRs - Canon and Nikon (and even Sony/Minolta) had much more market share. The bodies were just as big as the market leaders, but the sensors were smaller and not competitive. Despite the superiority of the optics, as a system it was failing.
Adapting the format to the new niche of small mirrorless was a very sensible business decision and at least has given some life to 4/3 owners in being able to continue to use lenses, flashes etc. I think Olympus did try, to some degree, to cushion the blow when they launched the E-M1. It's not perfect, but as I said, it might have been worse.