Why did Olympus call the new pro flagship E-M1x ?

The new pro flagship for the Olympus Micro Four Thirds line has just been launched. Youtubers, bloggers are having their initial impressions published.

After running through a few of these, the question that I came up with is, why did Olympus call the camera the X ? What's your guess?

• It's X for Xtra Large?
• It's X for eXperimantal test rig to develop all the new tech without size or energy constraints and let that trickle down later to the other cameras in the line?
• It's X for eXtended OMD-EM1?
• It's to balance with eXtra long lenses? 

Here are the initial impressions / videos so far.  Come to MeWe and join in the community for friendly chats on Olympus gear https://mewe.com/join/olympusfriendsaustralia

From Robin Wong 

https://robinwong.blogspot.com/2019/01/olympus-om-d-e-m1x.html

From DP Review

From Peter Forsgard

From Tony Northrup

From Joe Edelman

From Creative Island Photography
https://www.creativeislandphoto.com/blog/olympus-e-m1x?fbclid=IwAR1K-IXx5GlCuslNiuj3fbZsdQnz8-VBOEtZo12mGb_RTsn5ocraKrYJOT8


From Mirrorless Lessons
https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/olympus-vs-olympus/omd-em1x-vs-em1-ii/

From Young-Sun Teh

Relative Size is a Priority of Choice

Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Sigma 50-500mm Four Thirds lens next to the Sony A7 with 35mm f/2.8 Samyang pancake lens

People who have not gravitated to the Micro Four Thirds or Mirrorless ecosystems often take the example of a large MFT body and large MFT lens to demonstrate that the smaller sensor of the MFT system is pointless when the large MFT combo can be / is larger than a smaller-by-design full frame system. I realised that indeed, I do have the requisite gear to demonstrate this aberration and made this photo, impromptu.

The trouble with big trouble with waving big hands and making statements that seem obvious like that is, the truth is often other than obvious.

This specific Micro Four Thirds gear

The E-M1 and Bigma combo looks monstrous. It is. And not the most comfortable or effective for Birds In Flight - in fact it's far from optimum in most use cases. The E-M1 is not the smallest MFT body - it's made weather resistant, tougher, with a big hand grip to offer ergonomic comfort when mounted with larger MFT Pro Level Zooms. It and subsequent flagship Pro Level Bodies is packed with mechanical and electronic features - fast frame rates, sophisticated autofocus systems, the most effective in-body stabilisation and so on. So, it is not a good demonstration of a small light body for travel and street photography.

The Sigma 50-500 zoom is a huge zoom from the era of Four Thirds E-System DSLRs when the E-3 body was not particularly small and lenses for it were not well optimised for super small size. Lenses in those days were not much smaller than the competing APS-C or Full Frame DSLR lenses. In fact, it is likely that this Bigma is not specifically designed for a Four Thirds sensor and could be an APS-C (or full frame) model grafted onto a Four Thirds lens mount.

I bought the Bigma for old times sake - to play with a now discounted lens that I had heard so much about from the old days.

This specific full frame example

On the other hand, the Sony A7 (original version) was specifically made as small as possible for a full frame model. Sony chose lens mount called the E-Mount, originally first shown on the Sony NEX APS-C models. New competitors in the full frame mirrorless market are pointing out in a mischievous manner that their lens mounts, designed fresh, come with larger orifices to potentially enable f/0.65 lenses.

In this initial A7 model, Sony could not figure out how to include in-body image stabilisation into the system nor silence the strident sound and of the full frame shutter.  In this and in subsequent models, the hand grip is particularly truncated in contrast to the Nikon or Canon DSLR grips. There is no AF joystick, the buttons are not backlit for night work like the DSLRs.

The Samyang 35mm lens is particularly compact. It is only f/2.8, the autofocus is slightly noisy and the bokeh is not the smoothest.  I chose to buy it because I wanted something small, light and less expensive.

"Real serious" lenses that full frame owners (for example, those owners of the Nikon D850 and Canon 1D / 5D) prefer are typically 1.4 (at least), have a substantial number of glass elements to correct for all sorts of aberrations, ensure smooth bokeh, ensure 48 megapixel resolution and sharpness. Such no limits lenses are in no way small, light or inexpensive.

Meaning

Although the MFT sensor is a smaller cropped sensor, you don't have to design or choose gear that is small. Conversely, although the full frame sensor is larger and gear tends to be larger, you can opt to sacrifice design targets to make specific gear smaller.

Food for thought

Where goeth Micro Four Thirds?

The Question

With the spate launch announcements of full frame (often abbreviated as FF) interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras (colloquially called “Mirrorless”) following the awakening of the two giants, Nikon and Canon, the time comes again for some crystal ball gazing of the two champions of the Micro Four Thirds  (MFT) Standard, Olympus and Panasonic.

As usual, there is a throng of owners and non owners who have the “chicken little” syndrome – the sky will fall down and all that precious gear will be valueless, without prospect of new products. And then there are the denialists who will stand, shoulder to shoulder and chant “full frame mirrorless is another market, MFT will continue unabated”

My Answer

Olympus and Panasonic, separately and independently, will have to choose a path forward that is aware, with staff leaders who are brave in making decisions and resolute. But they have always been resolute and brave, otherwise they would not have weathered the transition from the loss making prior Four Thirds system to Mirrorless MFT.

Without a doubt, the purchase dollars equation will be affected by more competitors in the Mirrorless market. That is no different from the current situation where Nikon and Canon have had DSLRs (non Mirrorless) and do their outmost to deprecate the Mirrorless market. The only twist, and it is a major twist, is that Olympus could wait for DSLR transition-ers (usually enthusiasts, some professionals) to quietly add MFT to their collection of gear or move completely. It is not to say that once Nikon and Canon have viable FF Mirrorless that that rebel recruits who abandon the Dark Side and come to MFT will completely stop. Full Frame still remains Full Frame, the sizeable telephoto lenses will continue to be sizeable, less 20mm of flange distance. And you don’t have to lock into the high priced, big and heavy pro level MFT body to do street photography – the petite bodies like the Olympus OM-D E-M10 series or the Panasonic G-85 series are more than capable of tasks like that and more.

The Bottom Line is that the design leaders and marketers of Olympus and Panasonic need to fully understand what they have in their range (already MFT is in its fifth or sixth generation of refinement in contrast to even Sony, much less Nikon and Canon) and to excel at the virtues, deprecate the disadvantages.

Using a full frame lens on a cropped sensor body

A Quick FAQ for one of the most sensitive and hottest topics in forums. It stirs controversy not only because people don't fully understand, it causes anguish because people end up supplying answers to different questions.

Q1. Do I dial in a different ISO/shutter speed / f/no with the same lens on bodies with different sized sensors?
Ans: No, You use the same parameters

Q2. Do I get a different image "quality" if I use the same lens on different sensors?
Ans:

• It varies depending on some factors but overall, yes, the final image when enlarged from the sensor size to the final size of screen or print will show that the full frame image with less image noise, all things being equal. 
• It may not be exactly proportional to the sensor size ratios because all things are not always equal. 
• The increase in noise is due to the fact that the smaller sensor only sees a small part of the full frame image and you have to magnify the image more to fit the final size screen or print. 
• Some people want to explain it a different way and say that the smaller sensor has "lost" light - in one way, it has, because the smaller sensor cannot see part of the image. In another way, it has not - whatever light that does fall onto the sensor, is the same brightness per area.
• Also an issue is that people often want X megapixels (let us say 20 Mp) whether they use a cropped sensor camera or a full frame camera. That means that cropped sensor makers have to fit a higher pixel density (more pixels per area) onto a smaller sensor. This makes the pixel smaller on a cropped sensor camera. These are all theoretical design issues. At the end of the day, people compare real, practical cameras with real sensors - due to different technological edge, the superiority may not be proportional as prescribed by theory.

Q3. Will the amount of blur background be different when you use the same lens on different sized sensors for the same subject size in the frame.
Ans.

• Yes, there will be different background blur, all things being equal. This is where the notorious phrase - "f/2 on a MFT sensor is equivalent to f/... on a full frame sensor"
• A simplified visual simulator that you can interact with on the web is here:
  https://dofsimulator.net/en/
• An Android App that allows you to understand subject dimensions in the parameters of depth of field is the DOF and Hyperfocal Calculator by Cunning Dog.

Q4: If you fit a 50mm full frame lens on a cropped sensor body, what happens to the f/no?

Ans:

• The f/no stays the same - it is a property of the lens, not the camera body.

Q5: Isn't background blur the same as depth of field?

Ans: No, they are not the same. 

• Depth of field depends on camera to subject distance
• Background blur depends on camera to background distance

Q6. Will the inherent creaminess of a bokeh ball in the centre of the frame be different between the two bodies?
Ans. Likely the bokeh ball will be the same character of wiryness, onion skin, or bokeh ball shape.

Q7: Isn't bokeh the same as background blur?
Ans: Not, they are not the same. The original definition for bokeh is about the creaminess of the blur for the same amount of blur, not how blurred the background is.

Q8. Will the whole frame blur and bokeh effect be different between the two bodies with different sensor size with the same lens?
Ans. Yes, the full frame style of picture will be different because the smaller sensor does not show you the blurry bits and vignetting of the lens that is around the edge of the frame

Q9: If you fit a 50mm full frame lens onto say an MFT sensor body, will it become 100mm?
Ans: No.

• 50mm focal length is a property of the lens. 
• When you fit this lens on a cropped sensor body (whether it be MFT or APS-C), part of the image will not be seen by the sensor because the sensor is smaller (hence the name Cropped) than the Circle of Coverage of the full frame lens. 
• To ensure that you see the full height of the subject using a cropped sensor body, you will have to walk backwards - i.e. increase your camera to subject distance.
• People will then say that if you stand at the same spot but do not move back, you are using the equivalent of a 100mm lens on a full frame body, when you use a 50mm lens on a MFT body.

Having said all the above, let's look at an entertaining and illustrative video that combines some of these points together and..... potentially (if you didn't read above) fills your head with conflicting information (unless you sit down and calmly deconstruct the impact James is saying point by point)

Oh, Ok, so it wasn't that quick. Did you learn something?

For ease of access, here is a DOF calculator by PhotoPills

The Mirrorless Camera

dpreview is shutting down their user articles section. This is something I wrote September 29, 2011

The Name

It's a new camera type. We could and have called this class of camera the Interchangeable Lens Camera - Mirrorless (ILC-M) and we could call the other well known type of camera DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex). Whatever we call these things, the names come from common useage, from popular perceptions. There is no science to these names, there's no right or wrong to these names, they evolve and happen.

The Preamble

Prior to these ILC-M, the commonly and popularly known type was and is the DSLR. During the days of film, there was the SLR and when digital came about, these became known as the DSLR. A story for another day.

For a long time (well the phrase is relative), people asked why there was still a mirror (the R means Reflex Mirror) inside the camera. Why not dispense with it and simply keep the idea of a camera where you could take the lens off the body and replace it with another lens. It was a matter of time before one of the companies jumped into this and made one that worked.

What motivated the design of this type of camera? Why didn't Canon and Nikon, the two largest companies in terms of market share, make this type of camera first? My answer is that they have the "don't rock the boat" attitude - they have healthy lines of DSLR, good income, good sales, why rock the boat?

So it was left to the companies that weren't making headway in DSLR sales. Companies like Olympus, Sony, Samsung, Ricoh, Pentax. They had a chance of making a product that would have less competition, that would not be dominated by the big market share of Canon and Nikon. So they did.

What are the current design aims?

Most of the companies making these cameras would aim for the following in the ILC-M they make

1. A quick return of investment to prove that the product can viably sustain itself against the traditional types of camera - the DSLR, the Bridge/Ultrazoom and the Compact.
2. Don't go overboard in R&D Costs otherwise the product would not be able to pay for itself.
3. An interest to make the camera small. If the camera were big, as big as a DSLR, then the DSLR would be more attractive as a purchase.
4. Take care not to rob sales from their existing Ultrazoom on one end and their DSLRs on the other end. This varies depending on the brand - Olympus and Panasonic did not have much to lose, Nikon would.
5. Take advantage of more electronics and less of mechanical - optical assembly. In modern manufacturing, electronics is easy to improve, mechanicals are always expensive to assemble.
6. Make the camera better for HDTV - DSLRs are clumsy in the mechanism for movie shooting, a camera that does not have a flipping mirror (moving parts) is easier and cheaper to make for movie shooting. And in this world, there is not clear demarcation between shooting stills and shooting movies in the minds of the man-in-the-street. Their iPhone does both.
7. It would be hard to convince the pros who use DSLRs to switch to another class of camera, one that is still a ways to go in performance improvements. So firstly, aim at the easier customers - those who are growing up from their camera phone, from their Compacts.

So, what do you get on the market?

1. A camera that has an lens that you can take off and swap.
2. A camera that is smaller than a DSLR but bigger than a Compact.
3. A camera that has a bigger sensor than a Compact or an Ultrazoom - this gives benefits in better high ISO performance, potentially shallower Depth of Field visuals than the Compact or Ultrazoom.
4. A camera that is not conservative because it is a new type of camera, and the class is quickly evolving in technology. This means a classic DSLR from Canon or Nikon would conservatively retain more value in the lenses you purchase.
5. To keep the camera small, the camera may have no in built viewfinder or in-built external hotshoe. If both are present then body gains weight and bulk.
6. Because some of these cameras don't have a built-in viewfinder or even have no way of attaching an external one, holding the camera up to the eye and bracing the lens with your arms against your body is not possible. This affects the successful use of long telephoto lenses.
7. Because the whole package is designed to be small, you may not find a bright, big, fast focussing tele lens for this type of camera.
8. A camera that has smaller batteries and relies a lot on the LCD panel on the back and/or the Electronic Viewfinder  - this means you should always have more than one battery for a day's shooting.

As you can guess, if you are very conservative, this is not the camera for you. If on the other hand, you are the type to Seize The Day, this is as good as any camera to enjoy for the moment.

"Is there only one Mirrorless? Can I fit a lens from this brand to the other?"

There are several different brands of ILC-M. They are not interchangeable.

1. The Micro Four Thirds is a closed standard agreed upon by Panasonic and Olympus.
2. The Sony NEX (E-Mount) series of bodies.
3. There are the Samsung models
4. There is the Nikon 1 series
5. There is the Ricoh model.

• Several third party lens companies make manual focus lenses with custom mounts to fit some of these cameras. 
• Several companies sells low cost, manual mechanical adapters that will take an old legacy manual everything lens or a modern manual everything lens and fit them onto some of these cameras.

"Will Mirrorless take over from DSLRs?"

Who knows? If anyone knew, especially the camera companies, they would bet the whole house on them.

"Should I buy a Mirrorless or DSLR, I know they are different but...."

Yes, that question gets asked often. Here are my perspectives:

1. You CAN'T have BOTH your cake and eat it. You can't have conservatism in holding price value and combine that with a higher risk / faster depreciating model like an ILC-M
2. Cameras are about compromises. A compromise means you can't have everything in the one camera.
3. Buy a smaller ILC-M if you like a handier less conspicuous cam for general carrying around everywhere or nearly everywhere. Buy a DSLR if you want the works - a camera that can fit long lens and that you can hold with less handshake, that you can use for sports with reliably flast Auto Focus. Buy both if you can scrounge enough money or permission from your spouse.

And no, we can't make up your mind for you. And no, we can't magically take away the agony of decision and take bits from each camera type, combine them into one with all the plus features and none of the negatives.

Further Links

Navigate to:

Mirrorless in Forum Discussions

The Issue of Equivalence

The Preamble

Long ago, the size of the film was large. So large that you did not need an enlarger - you just placed the negative film in contact with paper (hence the process called Contact Printing) and you produced a paper positive that was ready for display. Later on, Oscar Barnack invented the 35mm film - a dimension of 24mm x 36mm and it became the most commonly used and known film size by the general public.

When digital was born, the manufacture of sensors was difficult and expensive, so the common digital cameras for consumer used sensors smaller than this 35mm film (now given the name "Full Frame" - even though there are now digital sensors with sizes larger than this 24 x 36mm).  Any digital sensor size that is smaller than this Full Frame is called a Crop Sensor.

Usually, the minimum diameter / size of a lens is related to the Coverage Circle that the lens throws onto the sensor. That being the case, comparing two sensors, the bigger sensor requires a bigger lens diameter.

To bring some real cases into this discussion go look at a 70-200mm f/2.8 Canon L lens and a Full Frame Canon 5D DSLR body. And then go look at at 35-100mm f/2.8 Panasonic X lens and a Panasonic GH-3 MIrrorless body. There is quite a difference in size and weight isn't there? And if you chose carefully, there might be a big price difference in favour of the smaller camera as well.

Now, let's look at points and questions that plague the enthusiast community - whether they be serious nerds or casual shooters.

The Q & A

Q: Is the Canon 70-200mm lens the same as the Panasonic 35-100 lens?
A: No, of course not. They are not the same, one is so much larger and heavier.

Q: Is the Canon 70-200mm lens equivalent to the Panasonic 35-100 lens?

A: Yes and No. Used with their respective camera bodies, they cover the same angle of view. That is, you can stand at the same distance to your subject and get the same framing of your scene. They are also both f/2.8 lenses if you used an external light meter, setting the same f/no and the same ISO, you would get the same image brightness.  In other aspects, they are completely different. 

1. They don't have the same background blur. They don't have the same Depth of Field.
2. They don't deliver the same amount of light to the sensors. (Think of different size buckets collecting rain)
3. They don't cover the same sensor dimensions in their Circle of Coverage. 
4. Depending on the specific autofocus mechanisms in the lenses and the bodies, they don't focus the same way or with the same speed or track moving objects the same.

So, if these two lenses are not 100% the same, why would retailers market them as equivalent? 

Focal Length Equivalence

To give the consumer a reference point, a "handle" to understand the distance where they stand and how bright a lens was in regard setting f/no and shooting in dim light, manufacturers relied on focal length equivalence and f/no equivalence. It's a classic and traditional reference point when switching between different film size cameras.  In fact, the 2x Crop Factor yields understandable focal lengths - like 12mm (equivalent to 24mm). When we discuss the phone camera or the little pocketable digital cameras, the lenses are down to 3mm or 6mm - it just boggles the mind. So manufacturers refrain from even mentioning the real optical focal lengths.

One proposal is that instead of using focal length as a reference point (because it doesn't embody what some people want to infer), that manufacturers use the Angle of View. That's might seem to be worthwhile. But we have two handicaps with that idea:

1. Do you know the Angle of View of a Full Frame 50mm lens on a Full Frame Body? Some do, most people don't have a clue.
2. What happens when you take a Full Frame 50mm lens and fit it on a Crop Sensor camera like an APS-C body or a Micro Four Thirds body? The Angle of View changes

For these reasons, the manufacturers decline to use Angle of View. So they keep using the Equivalent Focal Length.

f/no Equivalence

The smaller lens, the 35-100mm Panasonic lens,  is f/2.8 - that's the correct, physical optical ratio. The 70-200mm Canon lens, is f/2.8 - that's the correct, physical optical ratio. 

The whole aim of designing both lenses as  f/2.8 is to create an image of the same tone on their relevant bodies, 

But the two lenses produce different visual images at f/2.8. Yes they do. But those are implications that we weave - the background blur amount, the impact on image noise and so on. We don't even have to think that hard to baffle brains. One lens is huge and heavy. The other is not. They can't be the same. But isn't that the reason why people want a smaller camera and body? And others want a bigger lens and body?

Understanding basic electronic flash modes on Micro Four Thirds cameras and TTL Flashes

Purpose

A good friend asked for a work-together on figuring out his Olympus XZ-1 (pdf) and Nissin Di 466 TTL flash (pdf). It was confusing the heck out of him and after some early surprises, I was wondering about how it was supposed to work as well. So, this is for the beginner. If you are not a beginner, pass on this and visit Joe McNally, David Hobby, Mark Wallace to name a few gurus.

Approach: Auto Flash

Exposure Modes on the camera body

Typically there are following exposure modes – iAuto, Program Mode, Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority and Manual Exposure. Remember that without the flash, the camera in iAuto, P A or S mode will measure the scene light and adjust the f/no, shutter speed and ISO (if that is Auto ISO) for a standard exposure. With the flash fitted and both flash and camera switched on, even the M mode with Auto TTL flash will use calculations by the camera.

Flash menu icons on the camera body

Look for the Lightning Bolt (text describes this as Fill-In) – there is an implication to the description. It means

• the flash will explicitly fire
• the natural light of the scene will be measured with the camera’s chosen shutter speed, f/no and ISO settings.
• will fire to top up the light..

Settings on the flash itself

Set the flash to Auto-TTL mode - on the Nissin Di-466 this means the Mode LED is unlit

What to set

To reiterate – put the camera on iAuto, P A S or M and the flash on Auto TTL. The camera will automatically calculate how much flash light to use to top up the available light.

• This will be satisfactory if you are happy enough with the resulting exposure and don’t want to calculate or test anything.
• If you find the resulting exposure is a little darker than you prefer (for example a person’s skin tone appears too dark), either
• use the camera’s menu for flash +/- compensation to adjust brightness

• use the +/- buttons on the flash body to adjust brightness

Reasons not to use Approach: Auto Flash

• Even using the +/- compensation, the camera controlled flash is not outputting the full power of the flash. Remember, the camera first calculates the scene and then the human intervention is applied as an adjustment of the calculation.

Approach: Manual Flash

• Set the camera body to M for Manual Exposure Mode.
• Choose some starter settings for the camera body. For example, f/4, 1/100th sec shutter speed, ISO 200.
• Set the flash to non TTL - full manual mode. On the Nissin Di466, that means the Mode LED should be showing a red colour.
• Set the flash to medium power say 1/4 power. On the Nissin Di466 that means press the +/- buttons to light up half the power status LEDs.
• Aim and shoot. Chimp, decide whether you want darker or lighter and adjust the
• flash power
• ISO
• flash distance to subject
• bounce or direct with diffuser
• Rinse and repeat (no, not literally)

Reasons not to use Approach: Manual Flash

• You can't afford the time and effort to chimp and adjust until satisfactory
• Approach: Flash Auto is working fine.

The background behind the Olympus Micro Four Thirds cameras

Preamble

When you are more used to other brands (read Nikon or Canon) and decide to pick a camera from Olympus it can be initially confusing as to what model does what. It gets worse if you look at the older models (which are still on sale but production has ceased). Here're my insights.

Before the Beginning

Before the beginning of the Micro Four Thirds Standard, there was the Four Thirds Standard for DSLRs. Although this was grandly called a Standard, only a few brands sat at the Committee table. Olympus was the lead, Panasonic, co-leader. Sigma promised third party lenses, Kodak made a sensor or two (the E-1, E-500 had a Kodak CCD sensor), Panasonic made NMOS sensors and in collaboration with Leica, made some Lumix/Leica (affectionately called Panaleica). I think Samyang made manual focus lenses as well.

Olympus was keen on embracing Live View and competent Auto Focus in Live View. For that, they innovated the E-330 that offered two Auto Focus mechanisms - Live View A and Live View B.

The whole idea of Four Thirds with that infamously small sensor was that the lenses could be designed smaller, the body could be smaller and the sensor technology would advance to the stage that the difference between APS-C size vs Four Thirds size would not be significant to cause pain to the camera owner. The lens mount was brand new, all the lenses would be focus-by-wire instead of clunky mechanical coupling (since Olympus did not have a legacy of autofocus lenses) and this would offer brand differentiation and advantages over the other brands - at that time, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Minolta.

Sadly, the idea was ahead of its time.  Financial year after financial year, there were losses - it's hard to take on the near duopoly of the big two. Although Olympus made a 3 tier model structure - Pro level, Enthusiast level and Entry level, all three levels failed to make inroads in the market. Technical handicaps were immature sensor technology, zoom lenses that refused to shrink and were not able to compete on price because of lower volume sales, bodies that lacked the AF finesse of the competition.

So the Micro Four Thirds Standard was born

Olympus finally decided to give up the Four Thirds DSLR line (including lenses) and embarked on niche market, knowing that it would eventually grow. This is Micro Four Thirds. It does not have a mirror box and the body shrinks considerably.

When they built and sold the Four Thirds DSLR lenses, they could not foresee the motor and mechanical performance needed to work fast with the Micro Four Thirds adoption of Contrast Detect Auto Focus (DSLRs use Phase Detect Auto Focus). For that reason, they had to build and sell all new lenses again. And amateur home movies had not become popular - newbies want movies that are Auto Focus, Auto Exposure, no sounds from lens motors during zoom and focus, no jumping of the image during zooming in the movie.

Note that with an electronically coupled Olympus or Panasonic lens adapter, Four Thirds DSLR lenses will drive and shoot on Micro Four Thirds bodies, but AF will be slow. And with the plethora of third party adapters, legacy manual everything film lenses can be fit onto Olympus cameras - exposure control can be set to Manual with metering or Aperture Priority.

Olympus decided not to tackle the Pro segment of the market because that is a high cost, low volume market requiring high performance, bright, fast AF lenses and high performance, robust, fast AF bodies. They knew their first Micro Four Thirds models would not have fast enough AF and they still produced the E-5, their last Four Thirds DSLR which was the best Pro level body they could make.

Panasonic decided that they would build all three tiers - Entry level, Enthusiast level and Professional level Micro Four Thirds bodies. Panasonic did not have a Pro level DSLR to keep alive nor did they have a sizeable DSLR owner base.

The Olympus model tiering

There have been several generations of Olympus Micro Four Thirds cameras. Olympus uses the phrase Olympus PEN to invoke nostalgia driven sentiment (they produced a legendary innovative half frame film camera called the Olympus PEN F) and styling clues.

There are three levels of PEN. The three levels are differentiated thus:

1. The top PEN - the E-P model. This has enough buttons and dials, should exude some luxury feel in the hand and be the most styled cosmetically. It is not aimed at the Pro level of photographers.
2. The middle PEN - the E-PL model. This body does not have the strong style emphasis. The body does not have to be especially thin. There will be less dials or buttons to distinguish it from the E-P model.
3. The entry level PEN - the E-PM model. This body has markedly fewer buttons and dials - in fact, just one dial. It is assumed that price would be the major imperative with this model and owners would not normally be that keen to change camera settings between shots.

In the OM-D. Olympus decided that the technology had matured enough to aim for Enthusiast / Pro level market. This series has these features that the PEN range are not designed to have:

1. Built in eye level Electronic Viewfinder
2. Optional battery grips to allow longer sessions without needing to swap batteries, better ergonomics with larger lenses,  sometimes incorporating second shutter release button for portrait orientation shooting

Launch Dates and Reviews

Generation 1	E-620 DSLR March 2009	E-P1 June 2009 DPR	E-PL1 Feb 2010 DPR
Generation 2	E-5 DSLR Sept 2010	E-P2 Nov 2010 DPR  CL	E-PL2 Jan 2011 DPR   CL IR
Generation 3		E-P3 July 2011 DPR   CL  IR	E-PL3 July 2011 DPR  IR	E-PM1 July 2011 DPR   CL  IR
Generation 5		E-P5 May 2013 DPR  IR	E-PL5 Sept 2012 DPR  CL  IR	E-PM2 Sept 2012 DPR   IR
Current PEN			E-PL7 Sept 2014
Current OM-D		EM-1 Oct 2013 DPR  CL IR	E-M5 Feb 2012 DPR  CL  IR	E-M10 March 2014 DPR CL IR

Note: Dates generally from DP Review

Generation 1 - had sloooow AF. The sensor is a Panasonic sourced sensor.

Generation 2 - Quite improved AF. Accessory Port introduced.

Generation 3 - Very fast AF. Touch Screen for AF and control.

Current Generation PEN and E-M5 - First generation with Sony sourced sensor.  Very fast AF. Considerably better dynamic range, low noise high ISO performance. Fast stills frame rate.

New  Generation EM-1 - Phase Detect Elements on Image Sensor - Dual Fast AF system. AF that can handle legacy Four Thirds DSLR lenses comfortably.

Navigate to my Index of Articles on Olympus cameras

Life with a prime

I didn’t use a prime (fixed focal length) lens until early year, as my general, everyday use lens. Digital saw me with a 3x zoom on the Nikon 775 compact cam and then a 10x zoom on the Olympus C-750uz ultra zoom, then the 5x zoom on the Kodak P880. When I went digital, I had the two kit lenses on my E-510 and the story continued.

This year, David Williams introduced me to the 20mm f/1.7 Lumix pancake (40mm in old coin, film parlance) and 45mm f/1.8 Zuiko Digital (90mm in old coin). And I fell for these lenses. I wanted a shallower depth of field like in the film days plus more chance to take shots in dimmer light levels.

I fit the 20mm a lot – it allows closer camera distance, in fact, it forces a closer camera distance. And I switch over to the 45mm when I want some distance from the subject, when I have the space to back away or when I want to frame a tighter portrait.

Beginners to photography often gasp and say “What can I do without a zoom? I can’t live without one. Walking backward and forward isn’t an option I want to take or I have”. To that, I have to reply – what is impossible or immutable is only a state of mind, not an actuality of circumstances.

The honest gaze of sincere friend Kuan – we’ve known each other since University and now we’re apart except for the annual visit but we still find lots in common

The cup of Malaysian coffee is very important – after all, it’s a coffee shop. I didn’t develop a taste of habit for any kind of coffee. We used to have those old carved wood stools and marble seats, it’s been plastic chairs and melamine tables for a long while now. You’ve got to give the coffee a good stir of course, with the overflow dripping down the sides of the cup, otherwise it’s not authentic. The mouth expression in anticipation of before the event or savouring the taste afterwards.

The mahjong boys are back in town. Mahjong can be a gambling addiction and also a generational family and community pastime. Players and onlookers gaze in concentration and exclamations of animation abound when some event happens. Notice the half tiled wall (to save costs) and the unburied wire running (used to be stapled onto bulky wood runners, the modernisation brought PVC conduits. But then again, you could just run it along the wall.

The stand fan provides a breeze and if you are attired in a singlet, well that’s tropicalised wear for you.

Life goes way too fast in the concrete city staffed by Twenty-Somethings. It’s all hustle and bustle and winning the rat race except there are huge number of rats in the race.

When you’ve had your day in the sun, what you yearn for a nice tasty bowl of Yong Tau Foo. The slower you stir, the slower time passes, or so it seems. You can almost see some glimpses of past splendour and activity in the ripples and the reflections.

We close with a note to people who make such food happen. The lady below is peeling mengkuang otherwise known as Yam Bean. It’s good eaten raw, crunchy like an apple except that it is a root, not a fruit. It’s also the sweet taste in poh piah and joo hoo char

And, at the end of the day, we need money to survive. To keep the fridge stocked and running.

In the photos above, we’re not talking about action shots, urgent 5 frame per second shooting. These subjects are evocative, story telling. Yes, some of these shots are indeed cropped and a zoom might avoid that. But a zoom would, for the same price be darker, bigger, more clumsy – with these primes, you can make like you’re fiddling with your camera instead of framing up a shot.

Olympus gets it right

After a long journey to reach this milestone, Olympus has got it right. Firstly the really competent OM-D / EM-5 that is attracting attention from hardened Canon / Nikon DSLR owners (and this before any advertising commenced). And the Olympus Australia gang has upped their visual impact like, awesomely striking

I encounter people discussing whether the Micro Four Thirds this or that could compete with a Canon DSLR or lens and what is the shock, horror, equivalence of f/1.8 from Micro Four Thirds in Full Frame terms.

What is the equivalence of this?

Is it this?

Are you serious? There is no equivalence.
Just rock back. Take off the “mine is bigger than yours attitude”. Enjoy. Seize The Day!

Olympus Zuiko 75mm f/1.8 on E-PL1
- YouTube

Is 5 the answer?

There’s the perennial question about Photography that floats around – “Why are you interested in Photography” or more relevantly “Why did you take that shot?”

This one? Maybe it’s some Jungian urge to fondle the EM-5.

OMG, the OM-D/EM-5 is out

It's no secret that the OM-D / EM-5 has finally been released.

And there are those to praise it, those who knock it, those who lust over it and those who ask why. This is for those who ask why.

Reasons why the OM-D / EM-5 exists
(In no particular order)

1. Olympus needed to move on past the financial debacle.
2. The Micro Four Thirds catalogue needed a higher end camera model.
3. OM film SLR owners needed something new to hold on to.
4. PEN lovers needed something a model when asking/asked - "where's the EVF?"
5. The Micro Four Thirds catalogue needed a body to fit the FL-600 flash onto.
6. Micro Four Thirds fans wanted a body with two adjustment dials
7. Olympus needed a body to stick the 12-50mm kit lens to.
8. The Micro Four Thirds catalogue needed a body that would allow lens designers to design bigger, brighter, tele lenses (which would dwarf PEN like bodies).
9. Micro Four Thirds fans needed a weatherproof body.
10. Micro Four Thirds fans wanted a magnesium body.
11. Olympus needed to sell a new battery.
12. Olympus needed a body to stick the battery grip and the landscape grip to.
13. Olympus needed a body to fit the 5 axis IBIS mechanism to.
14. You needed to plead with your spouse to feed your Gear Acquisition Syndrome.
15. Four Thirds DSLR owners needed a reason to yearn for an E-5 / E-30 / E-620 replacement and another reason to ask "but will my Four Thirds lenses autofocus fast on this body?"
16. Hump lovers just needed another body to love / vice versa for Hump Haters.

Any more?

An Awakening of the Senses, A Quickening of the Pulse

You know when you have a camera that you will bond with when you hold it in your hands, switch it on, point it around, have a feel of the sounds it makes, the menus and displays, the feel not just of the weight but of the skin texture and so on.

That’s why we often ask “what camera shall I buy” newbies to go to a shop and actually hold the cameras that are on their shortlist. Sometimes they reach an epiphany, sometimes, they come back with a shrug of their shoulders and say  “feels a much of a muchness to me”. That’s just sad, actually not being able to realise that moment.

It gets better when you actually have your first real outing with the camera (aside from pointing it at the ceiling lights in a darkened room and making vroom, vroom sounds (or whatever sounds photogs make).

And in your first outing, you feel at one with the camera, you see, you point, you shoot, you chimp and it feels good. Then there is that bated breath moment when you actually see the images on the screen (or print if you are so inclined) and YESSSSSS, it is as you envisaged at the time you clicked the shutter release).

For some cameras that I have owned, it doesn’t feel like this. Ever.

For the newly discounted (for Mother’s Day 2011 in the US), PEN E-PL1, I get it. The attractiveness of the LCD. The often deprecated buttons that get me to the menus. The sound of the shutter. Oooh. I’ve had several cameras with focal plane shutters. There are only two that I have owned where the sound of the shutter turns me on – the Minolta X-700 (film SLR) and the E-PL1. For some reason, it puts a spring to my step during Shutter Therapy.

And, of course, the results.