New EM1X Photos

[super_claret]

Just seen this over on 43 rumours...

https://www.43rumors.com/ft4-are-the...the-new-e-m1x/

What do you think?

[Jax]

Originally Posted by super_claret

Just seen this over on 43 rumours...

https://www.43rumors.com/ft4-are-the...the-new-e-m1x/

What do you think?

2 thoughts: Firstly, it's posted in a board intended for E-Group announcements. Secondly it's already posted further down in "Camera Conference"

Jax

[super_claret]

Sorry but I can't seem to find the thread, can you link please.

[super_claret]

Found it!!

[090657]

Too big. One reason I switched to Olympus was to downsize- this just looks too bulky to me.

[Ricoh]

It looks a monster of a camera, doesn't make sense at all. And it's supposed to be uFT, presumably!

[shenstone]

Yes bulky, but I hope it does well for the rest of the range to continue to be supported. I think it's aimed at a specific use and if we can get more pro's using the system it can only help us all.

TBH I hope they drag out the new lens launches a bit - which it's nice to have a load of new lenses, it's been good to see Olympus at the top of 4/3 rumours for days at a time recently and they can keep it like that by having new things to talk about all the time

Regards
Andy

[Ricoh]

I can't imagine professional users choosing a bloated camera such as this with a sensor only one quarter the area of a full frame (FF). It doesn't make sense at all. uFT is chosen by the serious amateur no longer wishing to lug massive cameras such as the Canon and Nikon FF.

The added benefit of the small sensor is reduced mass (lower inertia) and responsiveness for stabilisation purposes. But the benifit is somewhat negated by the housing resembling a misshaped brick.

[Darkroom]

http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=49080

Darkroom

[Ross the fiddler]

Originally Posted by Ricoh

I can't imagine professional users choosing a bloated camera such as this with a sensor only one quarter the area of a full frame (FF). It doesn't make sense at all. uFT is chosen by the serious amateur no longer wishing to lug massive cameras such as the Canon and Nikon FF.

The added benefit of the small sensor is reduced mass (lower inertia) and responsiveness for stabilisation purposes. But the benifit is somewhat negated by the housing resembling a misshaped brick.

You need to stop talking to that Tony No(hope).

[Bearair]

I have been away from Olympus and the forum for a long time, the reason? Unfortunately I found Olympus MFT bodies to small for my hands and the focusing not good compared to the Sony A68 that I bought to replace my E-30. At the time I was shooting a lot of surfing shots and fast moving model gliders. I have just bought an E-M1 with grip and it has reminded me how much I love Olympus Cameras. The introduction of an even larger body with the emphasis on sports and wildlife suits me personally. MFT offers other advantages to me other than just size and weight.

I find the aspect ratio is better in portrait for computer screens, which if I am honest is where I view most of my pictures.
I actually find the increased DOF an advantage in the majority of the photo's that I take, not everybody wants wafer thin DOF.
The extra reach given by MFT is very useful to the photography I do.
On the E-M1 the control system is excellent and fast, I am bonding with the camera already after a very few days.
Some of the features that Olympus employ are great for creative photography which I hope to "get into". Already I have tried Live Composite and can see many possibility's as an example.
So I am saving for the new Olympus as I think it will be a great camera for my needs, I realise it will not suit everyone but there are already great cameras in the Olympus line up for those people who prefer a smaller body, let those of us who have "gurt big hands and struggle with smaller bodies have some fun with Olympus to!

[TimP]

Originally Posted by Ricoh

I can't imagine professional users choosing a bloated camera such as this with a sensor only one quarter the area of a full frame (FF). It doesn't make sense at all. uFT is chosen by the serious amateur no longer wishing to lug massive cameras such as the Canon and Nikon FF.

The added benefit of the small sensor is reduced mass (lower inertia) and responsiveness for stabilisation purposes. But the benifit is somewhat negated by the housing resembling a misshaped brick.

Totally agree, I’ve got a grip for my EM-5 mk2 (camera rarely used I have to say) and while it gives an excellent finger grip for the right hand the added bulk is ridiculous, plus there’s all that unscrewing faff to change or charge batteries - obviously not going to affect the X model though.
I’m sure it works well for some people but it goes against why I went m43 in the first place.

[Dave in Wales]

How long before we start calling it the E-MIX ?

[Ricoh]

Or breeze block?!

[Jim Ford]

Originally Posted by Bearair

Unfortunately I found Olympus MFT bodies to small for my hands

Strange! I'm 6ft 4ins with hands in proportion ('lavatory pan lids' ) and I don't have problems handling my E-P5!

Jim