Announcement: OLYMPUS OM-D E-M5 MARK III

On October 17.10.2019, 5, the OLYMPUS OM-D E-MXNUMX MARK III was officially introduced.

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

Key features include:

  1. Micro 4/3 Live MOS 20.4 megapixel matrix, creating images of the maximum size 5184 X 3888
  2. TruePic VIII Processor
  3. Built-in image stabilizer compensating for up to 5.5 steps
  4. ISO Range 200-25.600
  5. Mechanical shutter with shutter speed up to 1 / 8000 s. Electronic shutter with shutter speed up to 1 / 32.000 s.
  6. 121 cruciform phase focus point + 121 focus area by contrast
  7. Maximum burst speed with a mechanical shutter of 10 frames per second, buffer for 150 RAW shots
  8. Maximum shutter speed with electronic shutter 30 frames per second, 23 RAW image buffer
  9. 4K DCI video 4096 x 2160 24 fps 237 Mb / s or UHD 3840 x 2160 29.97 fps 102 Mb / s, built-in stereo microphone, external microphone jack, can record via HDMI 4: 2: 2
  10. One SDXC slot supporting UHS-II
  11. 3-inch swivel display
  12. EVI 2.360.000 points and 100% frame coverage, magnification 0.67X
  13. Wi-Fi, Bluetooth
  14. Weight: 414 grams (with card and battery)
  15. Protected enclosure
  16. The price is about $ 1200 per body

Appearance

All OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL Lenses for Micro 4/3

  1. 8mm 1: 1.8 FISHEYE PRO
  2. 9mm 1: 8 FISHEYE
  3. 12mm 1: 2 ED MSC
  4. 15mm 1: 8
  5. 17mm 1: 1.2 PRO
  6. 17mm 1: 1.8 MSC
  7. 17mm 1: 2.8
  8. 25mm 1: 1.2 PRO
  9. 25mm 1: 1.8 MSC
  10. 30mm 1: 3.5 ED MSC MACRO 1.25X
  11. 45mm 1: 1.2 PRO
  12. 45mm 1: 1.8 MSC
  13. 60mm 1: 2.8 ED MSC MACRO
  14. 75mm 1: 1.8 ED MSC
  15. 300mm 1: 4 IS PRO
  16. 7-14mm 1: 2.8 PRO
  17. 8-25mm 1: 4 PRO
  18. 9-18mm 1:4-5.6 ED
  19. 12-40mm 1: 2.8 PRO
  20. 12-45mm 1: 4 PRO
  21. 12-50mm 1: 3.5-6.3 EZ ED MSC MACRO
  22. 12-100mm 1: 4 IS PRO
  23. 12-200mm 1:3.5-6.3 ED MSC
  24. 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 ED
  25. 14-42mm 1: 3.5-5.6 L ED
  26. 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 MSC II
  27. 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 R MSC II
  28. 14-42mm 1: 3.5-5.6 EZ ED MSC
  29. 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 ED
  30. 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 ED MSC II
  31. 40-150mm 1: 2.8 PRO
  32. 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 ED MSC
  33. 40-150mm 1: 4-5.6 R ED MSC
  34. 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 ED MSC
  35. 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 ED MSC II
  36. 100-400mm 1:5-6.3 IS ED MSC
  37. 150-400mm 1: 4.5 TC 1.25X ED IS PRO

Decoding of the main markings of OLYMPUS lenses M.ZUIKO DIGITAL for Micro 4/3:

  • PRO - professional lens
  • SPLASH PROOF - a protected lens (so are marked, for example, all 'PRO'-lenses)
  • ED (Extra-low Dispersion) - low dispersion elements in the optical circuit
  • MSC (Movie & Still Compatible) - a special focusing system for comfortable video and photography
  • EZ (Electronic Zoom) - electronic zoom
  • IS (Image Stabilizer) - built-in image stabilizer
  • MACRO - macro lens
  • Fisheye - ultra wide angle fisheye lens
  • R (?) - lens with an updated design
  • II - second version of the lens
  • TC - built-in teleconverter
  • the lenses 9mm 1: 8 FISHEYE и 15mm 1: 8 (MF) do not have auto focus

All Olympus Micro 4/3 cameras

Olympus Pen EP Series:

Olympus OM-D EM Series:

Materials on the topic

  1. Full frame mirrorless systems... Discussion, choice, recommendations.
  2. Cropped mirrorless systems... Discussion, choice, recommendations.
  3. Cropped mirrorless systems that have stopped or are no longer developing
  4. Digital SLR systems that have stopped or are no longer developing
  5. JVI or EVI (an important article that answers the question 'DSLR or mirrorless')
  6. About mirrorless batteries
  7. Simple and clear medium format
  8. High-speed solutions from Chinese brands
  9. All fastest autofocus zoom lenses
  10. All fastest AF prime lenses
  11. Mirrored full frame on mirrorless medium format
  12. Autofocus Speed ​​Boosters
  13. One lens to rule the world
  14. The impact of smartphones on the photography market
  15. What's next (smartphone supremacy)?
  16. All announcements and novelties of lenses and cameras

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. For the selection of a variety of photographic equipment, I recommend E-Catalog, Socket и AliExpress.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval... Look for me on Youtube | Facebook | VK | Instagram | Twitter.

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 58, on the topic: Announcement: OLYMPUS OM-D E-M5 MARK III

  • Boris

    What, however, handsome! You will take such a device in your hand - and you will never want to part! To Olympus designers - my delighted applause! And the specs are impressive. And they make wonderful optics ... I never understood why amateurs so undeservedly do not notice this manufacturer.

    • Roman

      25 / 1.8 for 10K UAH ...

      • Borman

        There is Panasonic Н-H025 25mm f / 1.7 - 4500 UAH

  • Rudakov

    Notice both lovers and pros

    • Boris

      Nevertheless, according to my observations (and they are very long and numerous, and not only in my provincial town) 1 Olipus accounts for 300-350 Kenons and Nikons. I know one pro who took Olympus just in case, "for the pampering of his wife."

      • Ivan Shikhalev

        Just for the same money, Canon and Nikon offer a full frame.

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Sony can even have a full frame with a whale lens for the money. But the M5 Mark III has its own nice features that others do not have.

          • Ivan Shikhalev

            Features, including pleasant ones, are for everyone (well, from serious ones). I didn’t write about Sony, because above we talked about Nikon and Canon, and yes, and Sony has it. I, in general, about the fact that for an amateur, _ understandable_ characteristics and price are usually important. And the subject, like other expensive Olympuses, here is inferior in price, and inexpensive Olympuses are inferior1 in _explicit_ characteristics.

            As for the _not immediately clear_ characteristics, I like Oliki, I tried them ... But I chose Canon for myself, also because it is much easier for me to carry an extra kilogram on my shoulder than trying to hold the camera with three fingers. Ergonomics are taken by the arm.

            And then prevalence begins to work on prevalence.

          • Ivan Shikhalev

            By the way, for this money, you can take both Canon and Nikon FF with a whale. Here they have about parity with Sonya. Well, that's what I look at our prices.

        • Borman

          If my memory serves me right, then Nikon D600 at the start of sales was $ 2000., And D610 $ 1900. It is very convenient to compare ff, which is on sale 6-7years with a new double-crop.

          • Arkady Shapoval

            I didn’t write anything about the d600, but indicated only for Sony

            • Borman

              Arkady Sori), wrote to Ivan Shikhalev regarding:
              "Just for the same money, Canon and Nikon offer full frame."

          • Ivan Shikhalev

            So the question was not in comparison, but in why “1 Olipus accounts for 300-350 Kenonov and Nikonov”.

          • Dmitriy

            You can just take the D610, and not this soap dish from Olik

  • Artem

    1200 euros for a double crop, Olympus are you out of your mind? and what is new in the model besides the tsiferka?

    • WMatveev

      Add another Euro 300-400 - and you can take the full-frame mirror Pentax K-1 - the beast-camera, in terms of the totality of qualities. Where is the logic of marketers mikra?

      • koba

        The Pentax K-1 is a truly amazing camera - it costs $ 1100 in excellent condition, lenses are inexpensive, Canon 5Dm3 costs $ 1200.
        Further - for 400-500 dollars: Canon 5Dm2, Nikon D700, for 700-750 dollars - Canon 6D, Nikon D800, Nikon D3. Almost all normal crops are superior in image quality to cameras with a small matrix, but we will forget this, since you can work with Olympus and get excellent results, it also has a lot of advantages, but the price is aaaaa ... And the prices for pro lensesyyy weight and dimensions, all-weather and really good video quality, as well as stub. But hey, he takes the stated 6.5 stops with certain lenses, say a very good 12-100 / 4, but the latter costs about $ 1000! A friend of mine in China put together a system for Olympus, very good, and recently told me that he paid $ 7000 in total! 7000 for the quality of photos from a double crop! They also have extremely expensive accessories. The same Fujifilm for the same price will give it a big head start!

  • 1

    Pathos speech.
    Pro Series lenses, which are expensive, are not for fans at all. Why would a lover buy such lenses and their corresponding carcasses (I mean top ones)? Otherwise, I can’t imagine how 7000 evergreens can be precipitated on a micra. Mikra is so good (unlike cropped canons and other aunts of sleepyheads) that she has a ton of modern very good glasses, not only in the Pro (in the sense of a horse's price tag) segment. And assembling a very good amateur system on a mic is much cheaper than even actively dying mirror crop (here we must take into account the complete absence of good native crop lenses for the holidays and a lot of problems with autofocus on third-party lenses). And this is not to mention the difference in size and weight. Moreover, the quality of the photo for the most part depends on the photographer. The main thing is to understand what you are doing.
    Accessories (flashes in the first place) are dear ones. Although, again, how to look. Top vacation flashes with the same functionality as top-end panaoli flashes are more expensive and the weight and dimensions are again incomparable. It’s just that the mikra is not perceived by the majority as a serious tool, so it seems wrong to pay such money for outbreaks. But there are third-party manufacturers. For example, Godox (and not just him) makes excellent TTL flash for mikra with all the functions of native and even more. The benefit of the protocol is open.
    I don’t drown for mikra at all. I just want some kind of objectivity in my judgment. It is not necessary, as already mentioned, to compare the just announced product with the existing one on the market for 5-7 years at a price. Yes, now the claimed 1000 with a hook for the carcass of a new olik seems a little expensive (although by the totality of the characteristics, in general, there is none). However, you wait at least half a year and the price will reach a completely different level. Look at how much the previous nickel now costs (which itself has been on the market for 5 years) or even more so the first one (it is still found in stores).

    • 1

      This was a response to a Koba message, but apparently I clicked on the wrong link

    • WMatveev

      Size is a very controversial argument. Even in the last advertising photo from the review, you can see how difficult it is for a person with large hands to hold a miniature camera, how he has to grab a “crab” - an extremely inconvenient, sometimes even painful way!
      And my modest experience also testifies: how much easier and more convenient to hold the large body of a full-frame first foot, in comparison with the small and narrow cropped 350D!
      After a dime, I even wanted to try to shoot with any top-end “brick” like 1DmkII / III or D3s - solely because of the dimensions, which imply very good ergonomics (a battery grip for a dime is still a bit different). :)

    • Photographer

      Quote:
      "
      And to assemble a very good amateur system on a mic goes much cheaper than even on an actively dying mirror crop
      "

      One, a question for you.

      There is a task to collect a budget amateur system.
      Need a camera, moderately wide-angle staff (EFR ~ 35mm) + portrait (EFR ~ 85mm).
      Development and processing of photos Camera Raw / Photoshop respectively.

      No video needed.

      What will be the cost of new (not used) kits, for example, Canon crop and Olympus crop?

      • 1

        The question is too general. I would recommend first asking the price of something, for example, onlinetrade.ru, and then sorting out what are the strengths and weaknesses of a particular bundle that satisfies your budget.

        My personal opinion, if you choose from olikov against the canon's budget crop, then olik is unambiguous. Mirrorless crop-canon as a system is practically nonexistent. Most likely you will have to put the adapter on it for a full frame and use budget full-frame mirrored glasses. Is it necessary? I think no. And the mirror crop will soon die out as a class, with its irremovable sores, so I would not look at it at all, although if there is very little money, then yes, now you can quite solve your problem with the very initial mirror crop.

        If you take an olive, then I would take om-d em 10 II complete with a whale 14-42 (for an amateur landscape, and indeed a street on a covered diaphragm is quite suitable) + 45 / 1.8 for portraits. It will be around 50 sput. If the viewfinder is not needed, then you can further reduce the amount by taking Pen E PL 8 with a whale + 45 / 1.8.

        On the whole, by mirrorless crop against micra, I would look only towards Sony. It is also an open bayonet mount, therefore there are enough glasses for any tasks and wallets, and there are plenty to choose from for carcasses.

        • Artem

          the mirror has its advantages, which are not yet available. smaller shutter lag, especially noticeable in the series. more accurate af. battery, a bunch of cheap optics, a more comfortable grip.
          There are also less noticeable disadvantages of the UPC, they are equipped with excellent screens, you look at the photo, it looks great, you come home - you didn't get it. Exaggerating the need for a stub, but when it is there it is still better. but it will only help you with static.

          • 1

            1. The shutter lag has nothing to do with the principle of sighting and is a parameter of a specific product. It consists of the reaction of the software to the shutter button, preparatory actions and the reaction speed of the shutter electromechanics to the command to work. In the case of the UPC, there is no preparatory action, but the ZOC needs to be raised a mirror. So ceteris paribus ZK even in the red. You probably judge by some ancient UPC. Now even the simplest UPCs have no tangible lag. And all sorts of monsters like Olympus Om-d em1x or Sony A9! so generally machine guns.

            2. About AF already in my opinion everyone here wrote. It can not be more accurate on the ZK than on the BZK. The maximum it can work just as accurately as on the BZK, but as a rule with a specific instance of the lens and if the stars have successfully laid down. The only advantage in AF that remains with the ZK is speed and sensitivity, as The sensors are big. It will be difficult to improve these parameters with sensors on the matrix, but over the past couple of years, the phase focus in the BZK has made such a giant leap (remember again the Olympus units) in these parameters that it will soon be possible for DSLRs to have this advantage.

            3. I wrote about the battery. I agree. But here, too, everything is developing. The battery is certainly not very fast, but the gluttony of the element base is rapidly decreasing. In the subject, for example, there is a small battery from Pen, but its claimed number of shots remains as well as the second penny, despite the fact that there was a larger battery.

            4. I don’t agree about a bunch of cheap optics. For mikra and sony cheap and good modern optics is enough. And all, I emphasize, all third-party autofocus optics works without dancing with a tambourine. And on the micra even regularly through the carcass it is reflashed, if necessary. For a ZK, optics are cheap either by old native fifty kopecks (I don’t consider whale zooms here), the more carcasses become megapixel, the worse they show themselves, or third-party lenses with which are almost always a solid hemorrhoids due to closed bayonet specifications.

            5. About a more convenient grip, I’ll just say that it’s possible to make the camera more compact in the BZK and therefore there are suggestions like a subject, where the dimensions are at the forefront, and there is like Panasonic, which is no worse than large DSLRs in terms of grip convenience. This is a matter of philosophy rather. But a compact SLR is difficult to make. So no argument. Do not like the grip, buy a magnifier or choose a model where the grip suits. It’s good to choose from what already exists.

            6. About good screens in the BZK and that they interfere with this is some kind of stupidity. Any camera has a screen; this is not an attribute of the UPC. Getting into focus must be watched with a magnifying glass. And here it all depends on how this magnifier is implemented in a particular camera. Anything can happen. Plus it happens (this also applies to the ZK) that the cameras on their screen do not display the frame you shot, but a preview of the killed quality, then yes, you can make a mistake, but this is not the fault of the BZK, but of a specific manufacturer.

            7. Stub really helps in the video (which I personally do not do much, but I shot) and when using telephoto lenses. Already on EFR 85 (and even 60) it is very appropriate to have a stub when working indoors, when the shutter speed is difficult to squeeze in 1/30 (at such a shutter speed people shoot normally, a person usually does not move faster). It is better to have a stub than to bully for the sake of this ISO. And my portrait, for example, is generally 120 mm. Of course, if you shoot only wide landscapes, you do not need a stub. Moreover, you do not need autofocus either.

            • 1

              As for the first point, I’ll add that the UPC can still have one preparatory action, this is closing the shutter if there is no electronic front curtain. But this is still not slower than lifting the mirror.

              • Arkady Shapoval

                Everything is more complicated, there is also a reverse response of the diaphragm closing sensor to the desired value, with thick and long lenses there the lag is already substantial on the strongly covered diaphragms. But, of course, it is easily solved by preliminary sighting at the desired value.

              • 1

                The fact that the speed of the aperture in a particular lens affects the overall perception of the shutter lag is unconditional, but it does not have a direct connection with the type of camera. Therefore, I pointed out that you should not generalize your specific negative experience to all of the UPC.

              • Arkady Shapoval

                This is a good point. For example, I have a lot of negative experience with the UPC and ZK, but there are many positive ones. Finding a balance is not always easy.

              • 1

                By the way, a question for you, Arkady. Here is your last message and mine has no Reply link. Is it due to the fact that the maximum nesting of messages is achieved?

              • Arkady Shapoval

                Yes, a certain level of nesting of comments, so that they do not strongly shift the right to the desktop version of the site.

              • 1

                Thanks for the information, otherwise I already thought that something was bugging me.

      • Eugene

        And canon have crop lenses with ether 35? If only on eos m 22mm, but it is without a stub and there is no matrix stub. And if you still assemble the system on eos m, then the ether 85mm is only mirrored half-wires. To invest in the mirror if you live not in the capitals, then it’s still a pleasure - get all the charms of the adjustment by mail. And indeed, neither canon nor nikon particularly strained into the glass for the crop, hence the problem with decent widths on the crop.
        Well, to olik I can count approximately-
        Om-d em10m2 - 30000, mzuiko 17mmf1.8 - 35000 or sigma 19mmf2.8 ~ 10000, mzuiko 45mmf1.8 - 20000.

        • Photographer

          The announced Olympus kit is too expensive for me, unfortunately.

          • 1

            I tried to answer all morning, but the answers go nowhere. What I wrote roughly corresponds to Mikhail’s answer, only for a start I would take the indicated olive with a whale of 14-42. Where you need shirik this lens will fit perfectly. And given that it has almost no effect on the price, the amount from 45 / 1.8 will be about 50 ty

            • 1

              I apologize to Eugene’s answer.

        • Michael

          There is an EF-S 24 2.8

          • Eugene

            And what's the point ??? If there is 17-55 f2.8 native or analogues of sigma and tamron, and notice everything with a stub!

            • Michael

              Such that in the conditions of the problem there were two fixes

      • Michael

        If the year of the announcement is not important. There are options like 100D ~ 20k, EF-S 24 2.8 ~ 12k, 50 1.8 ~ 8k

        • Photographer

          Michael, thanks.

          Canon 100d is not available in ordinary stores. If I replace it with a Canon 4000d (similar in price), will AF capture the shooting with the described lenses?

          • 1

            Of course it will. Only here is how much it will get where it is necessary, with mirrors there is always a question

            • Photographer

              Thanks for answers. Question to all.
              There are no calibration options for the camera and lenses in my city. How real is the problem of systematic misses in AF, say, for an entry-level crop? For example: EF-S 24 2.8 STM, 50 1.8 STM and Canon 4000d. Could this problem be decisive when choosing in favor of the UPC system?

              • Michael

                The problem is real and it doesn’t matter if it’s the initial segment or pro. This is a general question for mirror systems. It all depends on the specific instance. Also for Boots there is a solution in the form of Magic Latern, in which there is a micro-adjustment of the lenses. I didn’t use it myself, I can’t tell in detail

              • Eugene

                I use ML on canon 60d, there is no lens adjustment, and ML is only for old cameras. The difference in focus between bzc and DSLRs is huge, and this is the decisive argument in the transition to bzk. Left the mirror only for frost.

              • 1

                The determining factor in which it is better to choose the UPC is the fact that in them all organs that need to analyze the image see the same thing - what the matrix sees. In the DSLR we have at least 3 different images. On the sensor, on the AF sensor and in the viewfinder. Hence the problems requiring adjustment. On DSLRs and autofocus, it can smear and you will not focus with your eye in general, especially through the viewfinder of the most budgetary cameras. It is shallow and dark there. It will seem to you that everything is in focus, but after shooting it may turn out that it is not. Therefore, for accurate focus on DSLRs, they are switched to LiveView mode, making it a healthy, braking (in the case of budget models) mirrorless camera without a viewfinder and with a bunch of unnecessary unnecessary mechanics inside. So draw your own conclusions, you have to go no.

              • 1

                Suddenly morning answers appeared. I don’t know what was the matter, but I apologize that they turned out 2

              • Michael

                To 1. Well, not everything is so bad, highly unbalanced specimens are not common and ZK has no direct tragedy. From the Internet by mail, of course, it is better not to order, there should be the possibility of a test. And fig viewfinders in low-cost OPCs also have a place to be.

              • 1

                Yes, I know. It’s just that if a person still doesn’t really understand the pitfalls, it’s better to report them.

                The UPC (especially budget ones), of course, also has its drawbacks (the battery is eating; the eye gets tired of the viewfinder (on modern models there is almost no this effect); if there are no phase sensors, autofocus is somewhat slower), but they are more likely to be “everyday” and affect more process than the end result. While it can happen with a DSLR (especially in Zamkadye) that you spoil all your nerves. Of course, if you use only the regular dark zoom, then moderate misses of focus can be leveled by a large depth of field, but this also needs to be understood how to use this effect correctly.

              • Eugene

                The fact of the matter is that you can touch only in Moscow. Even on an ordinary zoom with f2.8, it is not necessary to smear much, and the situation is quite normal when, for a wide angle, a backing is allowed, on a long front and in the middle of focal norms. And the mistakes seem not to be big, but the glow of the contours on the focused objects. Here, for example, I have a sigma 17-50 2.8, and it works, but there are no problems with the probes in the m6 and m50 stores. Yes, of course, you had to take canon, but it is practically no better, and almost 2 times more expensive. After adjustment, by the way, everything is OK (for some reason, the old sigma of the EX norms are adjusted, in contrast to the new art).
                In general, it is possible to normally shoot both ZK and BZK, only on the BZK I have many times fewer takes.

            • Dmitriy

              Depends on the hands

  • Pavel Gorbunov

    If it were full-frame (or at least with a normal crop of 1,5-1,6), it wouldn’t have a price!

    • 1

      And what will give you full-frame or normal-crop? With comparable resolution, quality of optics and hardware of the camera?
      In fact, only a theoretical possibility to raise the ISO a little more and have a slightly different depth of field at comparable angles of view. As for me, the first thing is a very specific thing. I'd rather do my best to create normal lighting than try to squeeze a masterpiece out of a deliberately underexposed frame. I understand that among the pros there are cases that there is no other way, but in amateur practice, you can always just forget about shooting, if a priori it is clear that to get at least an acceptable result, you will then need to spend a lot of effort at the computer. In addition, the margin for really working ISO within the iron of one generation even for a full frame, the area of ​​which is 4 times larger than a micra, does not amaze the imagination. What can we say about a half-crope. Well, the difference in depth of field is generally a purely artistic thing and its quantitative comparison is meaningless. In the right hands, micra will give a delicious result. In addition, there is a lot of very light glass on the mic for quite reasonable money, again thanks to physics.
      For all that, the weight and other things being equal will always be on the micra side. Yes, not everyone likes compactness, therefore, for all compact cameras (and not only in the system mics), grip magnifiers are produced. In addition, we do not hold the carcass with one hand when we work, of course, but with two (the left one under the lens, as a rule) and compactness does not affect the comfort of holding at all. For example, I was dealing with the first Olympus ten (the most compact camera with a viewfinder in the lineup) with the installed Panasonic zoom 12-60. No ergonomic retention issues. Another thing is that the hardware buttons are not enough on it, but this is the same amateur device, and the subject is already much more convenient in terms of control. I’m silent about the little ones.

      And a little more in response to Koba. About Fuji. Fuji with its one-and-a-half crop of a non-standard mosaic structure in which the pattern is larger than in the buyer, basically cannot give odds, because much more interpolation is used to obtain a picture from such a sensor. Therefore, for acceptable sharpness, the frame with the fuja needs to be sharpened harder. Sharp kills the meaning of photography. Of course, they also do not stand still and their modern cameras and processing algorithms give a good result in comparison with the horror that was the same 5 years ago, but understanding with the brain how much effort the camera spends to deal with the fundamental error inherent in it, I completely I don’t want to mess with her. In addition, I had some experience communicating with fuja cameras and from a purely everyday point of view, I can note two extremely important points for those who are trying to compare them with the same olikov. First, the fujas slow down. Yes, even the modern XT3, in terms of responsiveness to the actions of the operator, has not reached what was already in that first Olympus top ten and I will not even talk about its modern classmates from the world of mikra. It may seem that these micro-delays are nonsense, but in practical use it is extremely enraging. Secondly, fudge is a closed system, and given its not very large market share, third-party developers are not in a hurry to reverse engineer and rivet cheap glass / flashes / synchronizers on it. As a result, the system is essentially limited only to native glass and other accessories. Yes, XF glasses are excellent, no worse than the Olympus / Panasonic offer in the middle and upper segments for mikra, but they are expensive and there is no alternative to them.

  • 1

    The answer is for Photographer. It’s not possible to respond to a specific message, so here.

    The question is too general. I would recommend first asking the price of something, for example, onlinetrade.ru, and then sorting out what are the strengths and weaknesses of a particular bundle that satisfies your budget.

    My personal opinion, if you choose from olikov against the canon's budget crop, then olik is unambiguous. Mirrorless crop-canon as a system is practically nonexistent. Most likely you will have to put the adapter on it for a full frame and use budget full-frame mirrored glasses. Is it necessary? I think no. And the mirror crop will soon die out as a class, with its irremovable sores, so I would not look at it at all, although if there is very little money, then yes, now you can quite solve your problem with the very initial mirror crop.

    If you take an olive, then I would take om-d em 10 II complete with a whale 14-42 (for an amateur landscape, and indeed a street on a covered diaphragm is quite suitable) + 45 / 1.8 for portraits. It will be around 50 sput. If the viewfinder is not needed, then you can further reduce the amount by taking Pen E PL 8 with a whale + 45 / 1.8.

    On the whole, by mirrorless crop against micra, I would look only towards Sony. It is also an open bayonet mount, therefore there are enough glasses for any tasks and there are different levels of wallets and carcasses.

  • Photographer

    Quote from Arkady: "For example, I have a lot of negative experiences with the BZK and ZK, but there are also a lot of positive ones."

    This is a great topic for an article. You can consider in the context of choosing a budget system for domestic use (shooting in a typical apartment, portraits on the street, etc.).

  • Victor

    Stupid system, the road to nowhere.

    The optics are expensive, it will be even cheaper to assemble a system comparable in quality on the canyon (ff), while the olika will have top-end glasses (and there is nowhere to go further), and on the canyon - quite ordinary budget ones.

  • Iskander

    Lovers of such “brands” want to insert some stake from some wood into some hole. Everyone has forgotten, perhaps, what were Olympus, Kodak and other Fuji having fun in the late 90s and early 2000s?
    Film soap dishes with one button, free focus, plastic lens, but with a flash! Now I'm scanning this squalor from the films, and I'm just losing weight! How can Olympus and such shit be considered serious devices after this? The question is rhetorical ...

    • Roman

      This is something unhealthy. Be careful with your secret desires, and can attract for propaganda.

      Olympus has been making its CZK system 4/3 for 16 years and has its own customer. Whoever there was once engaged in is an argument so-so. Everyone once started. Kodak and Fuji made the film for everyone, Olympus was engaged in amateur cameras for a certain segment.

Add a comment

christening photographer price Photography for lovers

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2021

Russian-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2019/10/anons-olympus-om-de-m5-mark-iii/