answers: 53

  1. R'RёS,R ° F "RёR№
    07.02.2014

    Interesting camera.

    Reply

  2. landco
    07.02.2014

    Photo from the very Olympus, which explains everything http://cs322319.vk.me/v322319422/5b23/kQwwXJPW0gA.jpg

    Reply

  3. Andrei
    07.02.2014

    Thanks for the review! Finally, they waited until the official representatives found a worthy marketing platform in your resource (I hope Arkady is not free for you), for which there is a special thanks to them, if only the others would catch up.

    At the expense of the camera and the system as a whole, it is perhaps somewhat conservative:
    1) very high cost
    2) a matrix with crop factor 2, which is fraught with noise at a relatively low iso
    3) the micro 4/3 system itself
    4) a small park of lenses

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      07.02.2014

      The camera was provided to me for review for free, and the creation of a review is not paid in any way, so I can safely write what is in reality. I constantly refuse "paid" reviews, because they require "sugary text" for their products.

      Reply

      • Andrei
        07.02.2014

        I meant that you can produce a good product and not be afraid to give it for reviews, while supporting the author financially, but not limiting the “censorship”.
        Thank you Arkady for the honorable reviews)

        Reply

      • Vasilii
        07.02.2014

        "Small park of lenses"
        (C)

        Yes, you, my friend, a joker: for this camera, as well as for any other mirrorless park, the lens is the whole ibei. The mirrorless did not have human focus, and to call the whale from this review a lens simply does not turn its tongue.

        Reply

      • Andrei
        08.02.2014

        Do you offer to buy such an expensive camera and shoot with manual glasses? Any cheapest SLR or mirrorless can handle this.
        I meant system lenses.

        Reply

      • Vampire
        08.02.2014

        Is that a little lenses for mikru? Olympus and Panasonic, Sigma. And high-aperture zooms and cheap staffs, as well as all 4/3 lenses through an adapter while maintaining a fairly nimble phase autofocus ...

        Reply

    • anonym
      03.03.2014
  4. Jury
    07.02.2014

    That's right, nefig feed the bourgeoisie!

    Reply

  5. Vasilii
    07.02.2014

    Arkady, a few months ago Sony A7, the so-called mirrorless killer, went on sale. In light of this fact, Olympus, Panas and Fujik came to an end. Therefore, it does not matter at all whether the camera with a crop factor of 2 is good or bad, because there is a real opportunity to pay 300 tanks instead of this Olympus with a matrix from a soap dish to take a7 with a ff matrix. It's like instead of nikon d600, say “consider me a communist” and buy nikon d300s. The train left.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      07.02.2014

      To be honest, I am surprised by the forcing of the topic of the “killer” of mirrorless cameras :), but nevertheless this is a real reason for these manufacturers to bring their products to mind and lower the price.

      Reply

      • Zmitser
        11.02.2014

        Review A7 Sony, Arkady, I would like to see from you)

        Reply

  6. Lex
    07.02.2014

    crop 2 for 75000r yes you went crazy, you can buy a full-frame canon 5d mark 2 with minimal mileage and a lens is 24-105

    Reply

    • Vadim
      14.02.2014

      And you can not carry around 1.5 kg with your neck and get great shots: http://flic.kr/p/jkjsf4.

      Reply

      • Peter
        12.05.2014

        Vadim, why on the neck?
        There are excellent offloads for the 1st or 2nd FF cameras.
        I've personally been using it for almost a year now - no neck problems, despite the fact that my Canon 5D Mark III usually has a Canon 70-200 / 2.8L IS II and Spedlite 600-RT strapped on and I can work a full shift with it.

        I totally agree with Lex)

        Reply

  7. Hleb
    07.02.2014

    As for me, a great mirrorless.
    Arkady, I would very much like to see a review of the Lumix GH4, it really hasn’t come on sale yet), but as soon as I hope you’ll cram it)
    and tell us)

    Reply

  8. Vladimir
    07.02.2014

    Arkady, a small clarification, phase sensors work only with lenses of the 4/3 system. I myself am the owner of OM-D E-M5 and I can say that already on this model of the camera, autofocus is very fast, it was not difficult to remove the horse rushing at you at a gallop in poor lighting, while the second person had a camera with fast phase sensors autofocus has encountered great difficulties.
    Thanks for the review! All good shots.

    Reply

  9. Oleg
    08.02.2014

    “Personally, I shot with a Nikon SB-900 at 1/400 s.” Is this a hint of high-speed sync?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      08.02.2014

      No, this is just an undocumented feature of the instance from the review.

      Reply

    • Alex
      09.04.2020

      But how did you synchronize them?

      Reply

  10. Sergei
    08.02.2014

    Thanks Arkady for the review! And regarding the camera, although I have never been a user of mirrorless cameras, who knows maybe everything is ahead, I am surprised by the powerful functionality of the device and the frankly weak matrix and lens (autofocus) - again, in my personal opinion, this is the basis in the camera, again I understand what is on this type of technique can be made masterpieces and there are customers and perhaps there is even a demand, but the price ... And here's an interesting moment earlier in the time of DSLRs and soap dishes, the price of DSLRs was high, the manufacturers argued that the production is difficult and high-tech in the manufacture of matrices, etc. ... As time passed, they removed the mirror, removed the large size of the matrix, it seemed that it was nirvana and a bright photographic future, and the price is still high, but there is one plus the market has expanded and you can choose not only a DSLR and a soap dish as before, I don’t speak for the film, I think this area is for mega pros and aesthetic photographers ...

    Reply

  11. Dmitriy
    08.02.2014

    Hopefully other offices. dealerships will take an example and will provide the technician for reviews ... thanks for the review)))

    Reply

  12. Maksim
    09.02.2014

    Tse, if I don’t have mercy, it’s better to know the technology of. representative, let's say "the first pishov". I wanted a rule, not a vignation. On the apparatus: marveling at the photo - honored. Ale tsіna, a lover of his own advancement is guilty of being able to finish his job, with a price close to 20 thousand hryvnyas. there will be a number of buyers who will be finished.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      09.02.2014

      No, earlier other manufacturers also provided, but very few.

      Reply

  13. anonym
    10.02.2014

    For me, this is a very interesting product, if you believe the price tag of 400 ye with a lens, and the lens is of quite decent quality, even more than that. And what can you buy for the money? An old used SLR, without a lens, and here you can get a ready-made kit, with good autofocus and killer speed

    Reply

    • Maksim
      10.02.2014

      Yakikh 400 dolarіv? 20 yew hryvnia per kit !!!

      Reply

  14. Sandy
    10.02.2014

    400 cu this is only the cost of the lens, IMHO canon and Nikon whales have a better picture.

    Reply

  15. Oleg
    24.03.2014

    Thanks for the review!

    What surprises me is that Olympus - a well-known company with more than half a century of tradition and technology - scored on the quality of the optics for its so diligently promoted system (4/3, micro 4/3). After all, it is not difficult for her to release a high-quality lens with a constant aperture ratio of 2,8 or at least 4. After all, they have these technologies, but the issue of reducing the cost of production (not the price tag) is in the first place.

    Although, probably, the buyer for whom this system is produced may well be satisfied with the range of optics for it.

    Although Carl Zeiss Touit lenses are also available for the same Sony NEX

    Reply

    • Alexey
      30.03.2014
      • Oleg
        03.04.2014

        Dude Alexey, look in which cave you are sitting, a lens that covers an area of ​​the frame equal to 1 / 3.84 of the area of ​​the full matrix 24,0 x 36,0 / 17,3 x 13,0, with a luminosity of only 2,8, it costs as much as a lens with similar characteristics on a full 24,0 x 36,0 matrix. Given that the flange of 4: 3 = 38,67, versus 44,0 for Canon or 46,5 for Nikon. Also, in prices, it concerns more or less whale lenses of Olympus 4: 3. This is despite the fact that the cost of processing optical glass grows exponentially as the diameter of this glass increases. So dude, if this link had a lens with at least 2,0 aperture at the same price, it would be possible to talk about something.

        Reply

      • ALEX SHI
        19.03.2023

        For crop (x2-x1.5), 2.0-2.8 lenses are like on FF 4.0.

        Reply

  16. Andrey Turtsevich
    17.04.2014

    Who cares, I made a video review of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 with examples of shooting - http://youtu.be/kxJj3YgmXs0

    Reply

    • ALEX SHI
      19.03.2023

      Well done

      Reply

  17. Sergey from Moscow
    05.05.2014

    Has anyone tested with Soviet lenses? Very interested in the details. Does metering work? How does the diaphragm behave?

    Reply

  18. Peter
    12.05.2014

    What I'm actually doing in this discussion is what:
    http://500px.com/photo/69913055
    I saw an unfamiliar camera model, I decided to read what it is.
    But here, apparently, it’s just a case when the photographer outweighs the shortcomings of the camera.

    Reply

    • Peter
      12.05.2014

      And he used this lens:
      panagor pmc auto macro 90mm f2.8
      http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/data/88/large/IMGQ2104.jpg

      Reply

    • Sergey from Moscow
      14.05.2014

      With good hands, you can squeeze the maximum out on very budget devices. The disadvantages in the case of the E-M1 begin to rush only when shooting smart people after sunset, and even then they can be covered with high-aperture glasses like the Föhtlander.

      Reply

  19. Evgeny Belyaev
    09.06.2014

    for a SLR camera (lumix r2 or this OM-D) the dimensions of the lens are tolerable. but if you have a lumix gf 2, then 83 mm in length is not comme il faut. electric filling, of course, requires space, but let's be realistic.
    electric zoom - cool. but why? IMHO, with mechanics the rammer would be smaller.

    Reply

    • Ruslan
      23.07.2015

      Have you tried to shoot video with electronic zoom when zooming is soft and smooth?

      Reply

  20. Denis
    26.11.2014

    The camera is good, but the problem is the price. The price is not at all the same level as the picture.

    Reply

  21. Skai
    22.11.2016

    Hmm, KMK most commentators are against the micro - they did not shoot in full frame, and high-aperture optics.
    Yes, the price tag bites - but those who need compactness, speed and reliability - in any case, they will crawl to a smaller sensor size, and all 35mm fans - you will get one fig in a medium format :-)
    I myself switched from D610 to this baby, and I am not overjoyed. A camera with 12-40 2,8 fits in the pocket of a winter jacket.
    PS: The quality of the images was not affected, the lower dd makes itself felt, the frames with high iso when converted to typhoid from the native converter drive through noise reduction (maybe I did not turn off the checkmark somewhere in the software, I haven’t figured out yet).

    Reply

    • Sergei
      23.01.2018

      A soap box fits in your jeans pocket. To each his own

      Reply

  22. anonym
    22.01.2019

    Then, let's stop at the pictures from mobile phones - many of them are already very good!))

    Reply

  23. Alexander
    19.08.2019

    I just don’t understand why everyone immediately begins to compare mikra with ff and prove that it is worse. Clear business that is not better. But at the same time, it also allows you to take good pictures. Why can’t you pay attention to the advantages of the camera and system? If a person likes to shoot on ff, shoot on health, why go to such reviews and shout that ff is better, and the micra is miserable?

    Reply

    • Ivan
      06.09.2019

      For two reasons, fools, money. There are more fools, of course.

      Reply

  24. Koba
    26.09.2019

    why some people are against mikra is not clear. yes, the prices for them are greatly inflated due to their small size and dimensions, but cameras and lenses from Olympus or Panasonic are very good, some are even excellent. I personally own Nikon D3s, but I am considering taking a second (and even a third) small camera for such cases where Nikon is simply impossible to direct at people. up to ISO1600 and even more so up to ISO800 micra gives completely satisfactory results, and more is not necessary. By the way, who has this or other Olympus cameras, I would like to ask - is it possible to display the electronic distance scale during manual focusing in order to know for sure, for example, that the camera is focused at 2 or 3 meters? Maybe I'm asking a stupid question, since I never used them (except for a short-term use of the Panasonic GX1, which is an excellent camera and gave me excellent results, but I forgot to check the presence of an electronic distance scale), but I hope knowledgeable people will not scold me for this ...

    Reply

    • Michael
      26.09.2019

      Because everyone has different tasks, and some of them do not understand that you can shoot something else else. As a street camera, compact crop is very convenient and popular.

      Reply

      • Koba
        26.09.2019

        of course. It is also surprising that people are happy with mobile cameras with microscopic matrices, well, the largest is 1 / 1.7 on 1000 dollar mobile phones from Huawei, but cameras with 4/3 matrices, which are just giants compared to phones, turn out to be bad ... Freaks ...

        Reply

      • Pokemon
        26.09.2019

        It is one thing to pull the phone out of a jacket or pants pocket, another thing is Fujik 100series or mikru with a good lens.
        The reaction of the people to Fujik 100 series is positive (the dude takes off his father’s Zenith) and the people “don’t see” him at all. Everyone is used to phones and this is a convenience. It became very important to the people which camera is in the phone

        Reply

      • Koba
        26.09.2019

        I would like to ask the owners of mirrorless cameras once again - do they have an electronic distance scale, that is, if I want to set the lens exactly at a certain distance, let's say 2 places, is it possible to do this through visual control, otherwise most lenses for these systems there is no distance scale. Only the rather expensive Olympus 12/2 has it ...

        Reply

      • twm
        20.05.2021

        @Koba
        Belated response.
        The other day I was holding Oly 12-40 2.8 in my hands: the distance scale is marked on the lens body. Moreover, the AF / MF mode switching ring (mechanical - the rim around the lens body) hides this very scale: when AF is selected, it hides, when you switch to MF - voila, the marks are visible. An unusual and savvy solution.

        Reply

      • Maria
        11.10.2020

        correctly noticed

        Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer