M10 Mark III review

[rockelye]

Originally Posted by KeithL

The 64,000$ question is, will it? Very expensive as a first step away from a smartphone.

It’s still cheaper than an iPhone X...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RobEW]

Originally Posted by rockelye

It’s still cheaper than an iPhone X...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But it only does one thing (photography) so you still need a phone.

- - -

Interesting discussion on Mark III. Sadly people usually do buy based on rather superficial marketing material and perhaps reviews which are also based on limited experience of a product. It's difficult when making a buying decision to access the experience of long term use - especially of a product is so new that no-one has used it for long.

When I was making a decision to try and get back into "proper" photography just over a year ago, I had absolutely no idea how complex the Oly's menu system would prove. Once I'd decided on mirrorless (rather than bridge camera - RX10 III was enticing but costly) I guess the factors which drove me to Oly included reputation - especially for lenses, maybe a bit of sentimental loyalty (I'd used an OM2n years ago), traditional appearance, and of course some reviews and personal advice. But crucially I was tempted by E-M10 II, and the only thing which persuaded me to get E-M5 II instead was weatherproofing. (And I later upgraded to used E-M1 due when I realised better compatibility with FT glass).

That was a long winded way of supporting the suggestion that Oly may be irked that the E-M10 II was too good.

[AMc]

I've just upgraded from an E-M10 to an E-M10 Mkii. If the Mkiii had anything significant in it's favour I could have spent the extra cash but there was really nothing there I wanted

[Ross the fiddler]

Originally Posted by AMc

I've just upgraded from an E-M10 to an E-M10 Mkii. If the Mkiii had anything significant in it's favour I could have spent the extra cash but there was really nothing there I wanted

I don't consider going to a later model of the same level an upgrade & am not surprised you're disappointed. If you wanted to 'upgrade' then going to the E-M5 Mk II would have been an upgrade.

[AMc]

Originally Posted by Ross the fiddler

I don't consider going to a later model of the same level an upgrade & am not surprised you're disappointed. If you wanted to 'upgrade' then going to the E-M5 Mk II would have been an upgrade.

I didn't want a bigger body - the silent shutter, higher resolution EVF and extra stabilisation more than made sense to go from Mki to Mkii.
4K video on Mkiii wasn't even a consideration.

[Ross the fiddler]

Originally Posted by AMc

I didn't want a bigger body - the silent shutter, higher resolution EVF and extra stabilisation more than made sense to go from Mki to Mkii.
4K video on Mkiii wasn't even a consideration.

Then you just wanted to update to a later model then. The Mk III is really a model for entry level users as it has been redesigned to cater more for them than experienced users getting a cheaper body with advanced features to compliment their more expensive model. I believe Olympus wanted to achieve two things with that model, have a User Interface that is easier for entry level users & taking out some advanced features & settings & in doing so hoping that second body users would buy a higher (more expensive) model instead of the cheapest of the range.