Did Olympus botch the roll-out of the E-M5 Mk III?

Centauri27

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
49
When I travel, I do not take my pro lenses. Too heavy and bulky, for this old man. For me, at my age and condition, travel requires a compromise to reduce weight and bulk.
My basic travel lenses are the Panasonic-Lumix 12-60 + Olympus 17/1.8, then optionally the Olympus 40-150R.
My last vacation, the Lumix 12-60 was on the camera 99+% of the time. The 17 and 40-150 were used less than a dozen times in total.
I must reluctantly agree with you. I wouldn't consider myself old, but I'm hardly a spring chicken either. On my last trip, I didn't bring any of my PRO lenses. I got good results with the 14-42 EZ, 14-150 Mk I, and 9-18. I also packed along my tiny Speedmaster 25mm f/0.95 and fisheye body cap lens. And I ended up using all lenses fairly equally!
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,202
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
That's why I like the "tax transparency" of listing the purchase price separately from the tax added. In the USA, when taxes go up we, the people, know it and we scream bloody murder! I think it serves to keep taxes a bit lower overall.
Hasn't worked in Calif.
When I was in High School, I thought 8% in NY was BAD.
Now in Calif we are over 9%, with 10+% around the corner.
Cracking 10% is going to be a political hurdle. But once cracked, it is going to keep going up. :(
The politicians keep finding reasons to want to raise the taxes, to fund the various projects they want.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,530
Location
France
I heard in one of the reviews, they mentioned that the E-M5 Mk III has a focus limiter.
It has the focus limiter, but it's not taken into account in the Fn1-2 lever function, which switches between 2 focus mode of your choice.
It's only: AF-mode (S-AF, C-AF, MF etc...), AF Target mode, and AF Target Point (menu B Fn lever function).
But not the Face priority or Focus Limiter setting.
(each of the 3 functions can be ticked or not, so what is really taken into account is up to you... so if they added 2 more functions, they could be unticked by people who doesn't want them to be remember the other settings).
 

ooheadsoo

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
597
Hasn't worked in Calif.
When I was in High School, I thought 8% in NY was BAD.
Now in Calif we are over 9%, with 10+% around the corner.
Cracking 10% is going to be a political hurdle. But once cracked, it is going to keep going up. :(
The politicians keep finding reasons to want to raise the taxes, to fund the various projects they want.
Here in LA, we've cracked 10% many times. I'd be surprised if the bay area didn't crack it already.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,530
Location
France
I thought you could reconfigure a button to turn "face recognition" off.
Maybe. I didn't find it yet, if it exists :)
Face recognition has been a love/hate thing for me. When it works, it is great. But in a party/group environment with a lot of people, it usually fails by grabbing faces that I do NOT want. Then I am back to single point AF, so that I can select where to focus. So, I rarely use it.
I kind of like the function, but sometimes it's really frustrating, so I'd like to have a quick way to put it on/off.
 

djtaylor7

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
757
Location
Nelson, NZ
Real Name
David

Centauri27

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
49
just received this promotional email, which may explain the reduction in price, simply so they can say "Every OM-D camera is in sale now"

http://view.email.olympusamerica.com/?qs=1e1151a010aaa3f687909da78bd6a0b48fcac295a8be71a85f82a299ba21e2e9ef692d1d7c33558bfe2147b42f4973e3dcd58eff846561b08d779edb913da040c7168a461ed1c06b26e7ac5a0e80fa47

Offer runs until midnight on the 11th, guess something is happening on the 12th.:biggrin:
Uh huh...Feb 12 is when we're supposed to hear about the E-M1 MkIII and the 12-45 PRO.

Now I wonder if they're going to discount the E-M1 Mk II further...I may well rue the day I oped for the E-M5 Mk III! 😄
 

ooheadsoo

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
597
See now, the e-m1.2, that's how you hold the line on value. I could never muster the scratch for it, but anyone who did must feel good that it's held its value so well for so long.
 

Centauri27

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
49
See now, the e-m1.2, that's how you hold the line on value. I could never muster the scratch for it, but anyone who did must feel good that it's held its value so well for so long.
The E-M1.2 has dropped to nearly half its original price after 3 years. I guess that's considered pretty good, but I don't have enough information to make a call either way. The fact that it's a pro level camera, and that there's no real replacement until now (with the impending E-M1.3) helped. And the only the other 'pro' camera from Olympus is the E-M1X, which is so expensive that it makes the E-M1.2 look absolutely affordable.
 

ooheadsoo

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
597
The E-M1.2 has dropped to nearly half its original price after 3 years. I guess that's considered pretty good, but I don't have enough information to make a call either way. The fact that it's a pro level camera, and that there's no real replacement until now (with the impending E-M1.3) helped. And the only the other 'pro' camera from Olympus is the E-M1X, which is so expensive that it makes the E-M1.2 look absolutely affordable.
Until now, olympus has held the line on the e-m1.2 at $1700. It's only dropped now because its direct replacement is imminent. Look at the G9 in comparison. True or not, agree or not, reviewers called this camera a direct competitor for the e-m1.2, yet I purchased one for 50% off msrp within 12 months of its release. In my estimate, the e-m1.2 has done relatively well in holding value.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
65
Serious question, can those of you that bought the em5iii tell me why exactly? You could have a second hand em1mkii for less. Is it the slightly smaller size?

anyway, for me I didn’t really get this camera. At the price point it doesn’t make sense.
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
385
Location
Austin, TX
Real Name
M@
Here in LA, we've cracked 10% many times. I'd be surprised if the bay area didn't crack it already.
With all the Californian transplants to Texas (and my area - Austin), I will not be surprised when the local sales tax (8.25%) goes up. Property taxes are sucking already and I loathe to say it, but California did that bit right - being taxed on what you bought your house for, not what it's worth today. That saves retirees from massive property taxes because the houses they've lived in for decades are worth several times what they were purchased for. Heck, my parents bought their house in South Austin in 1991 and paid just over $100k. It would sell for over $400k today.


As for why I bought the E-M5 MkIII, well, I had the MkII and the battery grip. I also had the 12-40, 14-42EZ and a couple of other old adapted manual lenses. I liked that with the 12-40 and the battery grip (or just the upper bit) the camera was very comfortable to use. If I wanted to, I could take the grip off and slap the 14-42 on and it becomes almost a pocket-sized camera. I would have stuck with the MkII if I only used it for stills. Since I use it for video as well, the capabilities of the MkIII appealed to me.

Combine the ability to be very small and compact with the video specs, and upgrading was a not-so-tough-to-swallow pill for me. I bought the grip for it as well. Shortly after purchase, I had to make a family trip out to Phoenix, so I bought a little compact camera padded case and was able to shove it in there with the 14-42 on it. I even had a gradual ND filter for it in there, too. With only the one battery, all I needed (and had with me anyway) was a micro USB cable to charge it. In April, I'll be going to London for 3 weeks. I'll be taking the camera, but in a larger backpack. The 12-40 will be on it the most, but I picked up a 17 f/1.8 for 'indoor' and low light use. I'll take the 14-42 along as well in case I want to "go compact".

My only misgiving about the differences between the 5MkIII and the 1MkII is probably only in battery life. I'm not a pro, so I can deal with that. I never needed more than 2 batteries in a day with the MkII, so the 3 that I have for the MkIII should suit me fine!
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,530
Location
France
Serious question, can those of you that bought the em5iii tell me why exactly? You could have a second hand em1mkii for less. Is it the slightly smaller size?
I choose m43 for the size, so from my point of view choosing the em5.3 over the em1.2 makes sense.
The em5.3 is already bigger than my em10 and it reaches my size limit for a camera body. Slightly bigger would be too much.
An em1.2 won't fit in my camera bags, so there's absoluty no hesitation.

On multiple occasions, I could have bought a brand new G9 for 900€ or less.
It was very tempting because it's a great body (I prefer the G9 to the E-M1.2), but it's too big. I wouldn't take it outside my home.

I'm ready to pay MORE for something smaller with roughly the same performance.
 

GBarrington

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Apr 4, 2014
Messages
683
Location
Springfield, Illinois
Serious question, can those of you that bought the em5iii tell me why exactly? You could have a second hand em1mkii for less. Is it the slightly smaller size?

anyway, for me I didn’t really get this camera. At the price point it doesn’t make sense.
I have been a reasonably happy E-M10 (both Mk1 and Mk2) user since it was first released. The new E-M5 allows me to get the Hybrid focusing, better IBIS, and the 20 mp sensor in a size a tiny bit closer to that of the "Ten". Though I do notice the difference in size, and weight. I'm pretty sure I'd find the E-M1 series unpleasant to hold and carry long term. For me, the tinier, the better.
 
Last edited:

JensM

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2016
Messages
750
Location
Oslo(ish), Norway
Real Name
As screename
On multiple occasions, I could have bought a brand new G9 for 900€ or less.
It was very tempting because it's a great body (I prefer the G9 to the E-M1.2), but it's too big. I wouldn't take it outside my home.
Thats what I thought initially as well, now I hardly use the (in comparison) small GX8. The G9 is an absolute wonder to work with and the only place it can be described as any sort of big, is in the M43 universe. :drinks:
 
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
65
I choose m43 for the size, so from my point of view choosing the em5.3 over the em1.2 makes sense.
The em5.3 is already bigger than my em10 and it reaches my size limit for a camera body. Slightly bigger would be too much.
An em1.2 won't fit in my camera bags, so there's absoluty no hesitation.

On multiple occasions, I could have bought a brand new G9 for 900€ or less.
It was very tempting because it's a great body (I prefer the G9 to the E-M1.2), but it's too big. I wouldn't take it outside my home.

I'm ready to pay MORE for something smaller with roughly the same performance.
Thats cool. Just curious. I went from a GX7 to the em1ii. I thought I’d still use the GX7 when I was out and about traveling light, but it’s barely seen the light of day since I got the Oly. For me, by the time I put a decent lens on the size difference is moot and I prefer the better handling of the slightly larger body.
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,202
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
Thats cool. Just curious. I went from a GX7 to the em1ii. I thought I’d still use the GX7 when I was out and about traveling light, but it’s barely seen the light of day since I got the Oly. For me, by the time I put a decent lens on the size difference is moot and I prefer the better handling of the slightly larger body.
If you want small, you need to match the body and lens.
When I use my EM10, I don't use my big pro lenses, I use the smaller Lumix 12-60, or the tiny 12-42EZ.
 
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
65
If you want small, you need to match the body and lens.
When I use my EM10, I don't use my big pro lenses, I use the smaller Lumix 12-60, or the tiny 12-42EZ.
I get that, but practically what are you doing that requires it to be that small, seriously I’m curious since I’m a minimalist? The 5mkiii with the 12-60 won’t fit in trouser pocket. I’ve put my em1.2 with any of the small 1.8 primes in a jacket pocket just fine. Around the wrist or neck, the 12-40f2.8 is fine and it’s hardly cumbersome with even the beefy 12-100f4.
 

Centauri27

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
49
Until now, olympus has held the line on the e-m1.2 at $1700. It's only dropped now because its direct replacement is imminent. Look at the G9 in comparison. True or not, agree or not, reviewers called this camera a direct competitor for the e-m1.2, yet I purchased one for 50% off msrp within 12 months of its release. In my estimate, the e-m1.2 has done relatively well in holding value.
Yes, I agree. The Panasonic G9 is considered a direct competitor to the E-M1.2. And in light of the Panasonic price drop, the Olympus has held its value well. I think all the higher end Olympuses hold up well, like the PEN-F (which is still quite rare to find used--and how I wish they would put out a Mk II of that!). I guess even the original E-M5, pushing 8 years old, are selling for about 1/3 their original price.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom