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

Centauri27

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
49
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 was in the same shoes: I compared and thought long and hard between the E-M1.2 vs E-M5.3. At the original price, the E-M5 was not a very good deal IMHO, whereas the E-M1 discounted price was extremely tempting. Add to that, if I added the grip to the E-M5, it would end up costing more than the E-M1!

But I was leaning toward the E-M5 for these less-than-obvious reasons:
  • longer EVF eye relief (I wear glasses and using the EVF was always annoying)
  • OLED EVF (the LCD versions, like on the E-M1, did not work with polarized sunglasses--another major annoyance)
Those reasons plus the smaller size and the drop-dead gorgeous design of the E-M5! And consider this: the E-M5.3 is brand new and will be supported with firmware releases for while (until the Mk IV comes out). The E-M1.2 is over 3 years old and its Mk III replacement is coming out imminently. No guarantee how much longer you'll get updates. When the E-M5.2 came out, my original E-M5 was pretty well abandoned for firmware updates.

Final clincher: Olympus just put the E-M5.3 on sale for $200 off, so that made it a no-brainer purchase. Now to wait for the ECG-5 grip to go on sale...
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,531
Location
France
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:
Yes, it is. It feels nice in my hands, as I have big (thin) hands.
It feels *a lot* better better nicer than the E-M1.2 (I'd perfer then E-M1 mk I to the mk II based on pure handling comfort)

The G9 would be perfect to be used at home, but it would stay at home...
I want to be able to take my camera in small bags, and to be able to walk with the camera hanging from my shoulder strap all day long without noticing.

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.
As said before, on a decision made only on "handling" I'd choose the G9 over the E-M1.2, without any hesitation.
And I don't like at all big lenses, for me micro 4/3 is mostly about using the small f/1.7 1.8 primes.
Even when I use the Panasonic 45-150, I enjoy it less (but it's still very small for what it offers).

What killed the E-M1.2 for me is when I tried it and I discovered than none of my camera bags were big enough for it.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,531
Location
France
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.
Funny. I never managed to but my GM5 + 17 f/1.8 in a jacket pocket, so I don't imagine a E-M1.2 even without any lens would fit. But I guess I don't like jackets with big pockets :)
 
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
65
Yes, it is. It feels nice in my hands, as I have big (thin) hands.
It feels *a lot* better better nicer than the E-M1.2 (I'd perfer then E-M1 mk I to the mk II based on pure handling comfort)

The G9 would be perfect to be used at home, but it would stay at home...
I want to be able to take my camera in small bags, and to be able to walk with the camera hanging from my shoulder strap all day long without noticing.


As said before, on a decision made only on "handling" I'd choose the G9 over the E-M1.2, without any hesitation.
And I don't like at all big lenses, for me micro 4/3 is mostly about using the small f/1.7 1.8 primes.
Even when I use the Panasonic 45-150, I enjoy it less (but it's still very small for what it offers).

What killed the E-M1.2 for me is when I tried it and I discovered than none of my camera bags were big enough for it.
Everyone has their own reasons, I wasn't trying to convince you of anything just curious because my own experience is quite different. Depending on what kind of traveling I'm doing, I don't think the slightly smaller em5 would make much difference. Even if I was carrying primes only which I sometimes do (17 or 25 and 45), it would take just about the same space in my messenger bag. Also, a second battery would probably be necessary for me with the em5 so there would go some of the weight savings.
 
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
65
Funny. I never managed to but my GM5 + 17 f/1.8 in a jacket pocket, so I don't imagine a E-M1.2 even without any lens would fit. But I guess I don't like jackets with big pockets :)
I've easily put the 12-40 2.8 or 75 1.8 in a sport jacket pocket. Camera in hand with wrist strap with the other lens is not a bad combo when doing street or traveling. Typically a small messenger bag is with me while traveling...no need for a purpose built camera bag with MFT gear IMO. I just have a padded liner to hold the camera with lens and 2-4 other lenses. I can move the liner into whatever bag I'm traveling with or pop it in a messenger bag. I typically have the 7-14 2.8, the 75-300 (if expecting wildlife), and either the 12-40, 12-100 or a couple of primes.

My old setup was the GX7, the Pana 14-140, sigma 60mm 2.8 and the 20mm 1.7. It was a very minimal kit and got lots of nice images/video from it, but for a little more size/weight I get much better performance/image quality.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,531
Location
France
Everyone has their own reasons, I wasn't trying to convince you of anything just curious because my own experience is quite different.
No worries :)
I sometimes regret not having bought the G9 at 800 or 900€... it's an awesome camera for the price.

Depending on what kind of traveling I'm doing, I don't think the slightly smaller em5 would make much difference. Even if I was carrying primes only which I sometimes do (17 or 25 and 45), it would take just about the same space in my messenger bag. Also, a second battery would probably be necessary for me with the em5 so there would go some of the weight savings.
I didn't try the E-M5.3 on long days yet, but my E-M10 was nearly OK for full days (approx. 600 photos by battery).
I really depends on which messenger bags you are using. I like thin messenger bags :)
I tried with my Tenba DNA-8 and I didn't manage to fit either the E-M1.2 or the G9 in it.
Same with my Lowepro Hatchback. Even my E-M5.3 is not so easy to fit.

I typically have the 7-14 2.8, the 75-300 (if expecting wildlife), and either the 12-40, 12-100 or a couple of primes.
For lenses, that's not really the space they take in my bag (it counts but not so much... I take a lot of lenses with me so it takes space anyway).
But I find that having the camera with a big lens (12-40 or 12-100) mounted is not comfortable.
It's also a question of balance when taking pictures. I like the weight to be in the camera and not in the lens (it's probably different with the G9).
I tried many things... that what works for me, in pure terms of shooting pleasure.

That took some time for me to figure out this. A few years ago, I wanted the E-M1.2 and the Panny 8-18.
I went to the Paris photo show, all the gear was on display (m43 and others). I didn't like the E-M1.2. I didn't like the Panny 8-18.
I loved the E-M5.2 and the Loawa 7.5. And the Oly 17 f/1.8. (I also loved the G9 but definitely too big).
It's not decisions made on image quality... just taking the gear in my hands and observing what works for me.
 
Joined
Aug 8, 2017
Messages
65
No worries :)
I sometimes regret not having bought the G9 at 800 or 900€... it's an awesome camera for the price.


I didn't try the E-M5.3 on long days yet, but my E-M10 was nearly OK for full days (approx. 600 photos by battery).
I really depends on which messenger bags you are using. I like thin messenger bags :)
I tried with my Tenba DNA-8 and I didn't manage to fit either the E-M1.2 or the G9 in it.
Same with my Lowepro Hatchback. Even my E-M5.3 is not so easy to fit.


For lenses, that's not really the space they take in my bag (it counts but not so much... I take a lot of lenses with me so it takes space anyway).
But I find that having the camera with a big lens (12-40 or 12-100) mounted is not comfortable.
It's also a question of balance when taking pictures. I like the weight to be in the camera and not in the lens (it's probably different with the G9).
I tried many things... that what works for me, in pure terms of shooting pleasure.

That took some time for me to figure out this. A few years ago, I wanted the E-M1.2 and the Panny 8-18.
I went to the Paris photo show, all the gear was on display (m43 and others). I didn't like the E-M1.2. I didn't like the Panny 8-18.
I loved the E-M5.2 and the Loawa 7.5. And the Oly 17 f/1.8. (I also loved the G9 but definitely too big).
It's not decisions made on image quality... just taking the gear in my hands and observing what works for me.
Cool glad you figured what works for you, but the DNA-8 is designed to fit an A7 iirc and isn't the hatchback like 16L or something? I have an insert that is pretty much the same as the DNA-8 and the em1.2 fits fine with e 7-14 2.8 on it. Plenty of room for all teh 1.8 primes as well.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,531
Location
France
I tried it with the real camera and the real bag (with some lenses in it). It doesn't work for me. It deforms the shape of the bag and makes it bulky. I didn't like it at all.
I already find that my E-M5.3 is taking too much place. It slightly deforms my hatchback and make it a little less comfortable.
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
385
Location
Austin, TX
Real Name
M@
Well, now that the E-M1 MkIII is out (or at least revealed)... I think the 5MkIII falls back to "somewhat disappointing". Barely 3 months later, the 1mkIII has a new processor and a USB C port. IMHO, those should have been in the 5MkIII - it would give it an edge over competition in its price range AND give it some longevity, even if some features were 'nerfed' or removed so as not to functionally directly rival the 1MkIII. Heck, they could have even underclocked the processor a bit or something like that.

Now the E-M5 line likely won't get that processor until it's 3 years old, and will likely be flagging behind the competition by then. Right now, it doesn't stand out that much compared to its similarly priced competition. It's "enough" for me that I didn't want to jump to another platform, but barely.

OR Olympus updates the E-M5 sooner and leaves us MkIII owners feeling the shaft.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,531
Location
France
Yes it would have been better with an USB-C port. It's hard to know why it didn't get one.
However considering I'll probably almost never use it... I won't consider that this is a real problem...

I would prefer no USB port at all, and a plug for the remote correctly positionned... (it's blocking the LCD movement)
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
385
Location
Austin, TX
Real Name
M@
Yes it would have been better with an USB-C port. It's hard to know why it didn't get one.
However considering I'll probably almost never use it... I won't consider that this is a real problem...

I would prefer no USB port at all, and a plug for the remote correctly positionned... (it's blocking the LCD movement)
I'd use the hell out of a USB C port. Faster data transmission alleviating the need to have a separate piece of hardware (SD card reader), and with USB C PD faster charging and the ability to power off of an external battery bank...

I have the extended grip on the 5MkIII and will likely have it on most of the time. Being able to charge the battery without having to disassemble the camera would be advantageous.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
1,531
Location
France
I'm just jealous of the "Live ND" function which should probably have been included in the E-M5.3.
And the joystick and the 4 Custom modes of course.
However the E-M1.3 is very close to the E-M1.2, so I'm not sure anybody who prefered the E-M5.3 over the E-M1.2 will change his mind with the E-M1.3.
 
Last edited:

Centauri27

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Messages
49
Well, now that the E-M1 MkIII is out (or at least revealed)... I think the 5MkIII falls back to "somewhat disappointing". Barely 3 months later, the 1mkIII has a new processor and a USB C port. IMHO, those should have been in the 5MkIII - it would give it an edge over competition in its price range AND give it some longevity, even if some features were 'nerfed' or removed so as not to functionally directly rival the 1MkIII. Heck, they could have even underclocked the processor a bit or something like that.

Now the E-M5 line likely won't get that processor until it's 3 years old, and will likely be flagging behind the competition by then. Right now, it doesn't stand out that much compared to its similarly priced competition. It's "enough" for me that I didn't want to jump to another platform, but barely.

OR Olympus updates the E-M5 sooner and leaves us MkIII owners feeling the shaft.
It's obvious that Olympus wants to clearly differentiate between a "prosumer" camera like the E-M5 Mk III and a "pro" camera like the E-M1 Mk III. They might have liked (or are now worried about) the E-M5 Mk III being billed as a "mini E-M1". I don't think they could have scaled back existing features like under-clocking the CPU, because then that would mess with the AF system, etc.

People keeping moaning about the lack of USB-C, but to me, aside from my notebook computer, I have nothing else that uses USB-C.

As for the new processor, it's obvious they're making the new E-M1 more "E-M1X like", and that they're not going to let the E-M5 series steal the thunder.

As always, it's easy to moan about the features that are missing, but we should appreciate the features that are already there, and how well they all work together.
 

AmritR

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Jun 18, 2017
Messages
21
Location
Alkmaar
I own the EM5 MIII for about three weeks now. Because of very poor weather it saw little usage.

I’m very happy with this cam. I am surprised though it doesnt have USB-C. I knew that in advance, certainly no dealbreaker. But anno 2020 still messing with outdated usb connectors is unfortunate.

regarding Olympus part in this; It would have been very kind and polite off Olympus if usb-c had been included. Just as if someone would keep open the door for you. ‘Thanks!’ If you understand what I mean.

regarding old usb conncetors in general, and the usb-standard organisation, I’d rather quote Douglas Adams:
“You barbarians!' he yelled. 'I'll sue the council for every penny it's got! I'll have you hung, drawn and quartered! And whipped! And boiled...until...until...until...until you've had enough.'
———-
'And then I will do it again!' yelled Arthur, 'And when I've finished I will take all the little bits, and I will jump on them!”
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
385
Location
Austin, TX
Real Name
M@
Eh, I just think that if Olympus had a new processor and the ability to use a USB C port, which is the way mobile devices are going, it would have just made sense to use them.. or at least would have made more sense to use them. Shit, USB C ports can be wired up to limit to USB 2.1 spec, but still charge and such. That would at least make it usable with more modern cables.

For example, I'm taking a trip in April. I'd love it if I didn't have to have 3 different types of cables (and I'm already thankful Olympus didn't stick with the oddball proprietary USB connection they had on the 5MkII) with me. My laptop uses USB C to charge. My wireless headphones do as well. The portable battery pack I'll be carrying does. My phone does. Hell, the only things I'll have with me that use anything else will be my iPad mini and my camera and maybe the little QI charging pad for my phone, although that bit is not a necessity.

I guess it's 'future preparing' (similar to future-proofing I guess). It's the standard port these days, why not use it?

Overall, I AM really happy with my 5mkIII, but it's still a bit disappointing to know that it could have likely easily been considerably better in a couple areas that matter to me. And because of those things I now know I have to keep an obsolete type of cable around or carry one with me instead of using a single cable for multiple devices, and that as the camera ages it's less and less competitive with other 'prosumer' models. Hell, it started out somewhat less competitive, IMHO.
 

saladin

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
1,814
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
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