EM5 get neglected by Olympus

[HNM43]

With release of the Pen 5 and the EM1, I feel that the EM5 is getting neglected.

I got the EM5 while my wife got the Fuji XE1, and I got to say I am quite jealous of the support from Fuji to their cameras. They seem to listen to the feedback and update firmware base on the users, even with the numerous of camera that they have release.

While look at Olympus, we haven't had any real update on the EM5 firmware. Dispite of the new cameras, I still love the EM5, there are only 3 things I would like Olympus to add, which should all be do able with firmware.

1) Smaller focus point - The EM5 focus points can some time be too big, and would focus on the background instead.

2) Focus Peek - I have done the setting to give me fake Focus Peek, but it would be much better to have the official function, especially since 3 other Olympus cameras already have it.

3) Lower ISO - I don't know if this possible, but it would be nice if possible.

I feel that a lot of users would like those functions mentioned above, and I wouldn't imagine it that hard to implement since it is already other camera (apart from the ISO).

For me this is like customer service, if you feel the company care about their customers you stay loyal, and right now I feel that Fuji is better than Olympus on this. I really like the look of the 12-40 and the EM1, but if the support isn't good from Olympus, then I may consider moving over to Fuji. With the improved focus speed and good quality lenses, don't think it will be a hard change over.

I was wondering if there is anyway we can create a petition for some of these functions, and see how Olympus wull response.

 

[Joe Billingham]

I suspect the E-M1 is the replacement for the E-M5 and the E-M5 will be fade into the mists during in 2014. It's rare for companies to issue major feature upgrades via FW, especially late in the product cycle, albeit Canon did it earlier this year for the EOS 7D.

 

[HNM43]

This is why I have been so impress with Fuji, add focus point button function and focus peek on the the XE1.

As for the EM1, there are many function that I like about it, including the Phase focus.

However, unlike other (everyone is different), I like the EM5 option of the grip, it give the option of having a small camera (with a pancake lense), or with the grip and pro zoom lense and you a very capable camera.

By add the grip to the EM1 this option is lose, for better economic (which in my case the EM5 economic is just fine).

Based on what Olympus and rumor is that the EM1 is not the replace for the EM5, and that Olympus will release the upgrade of the EM5.

My disappointment with Olympus is that lack on support to add simple functions. Good customer service is a key to retain loyal users.

The Panasonic 12-32mm will need an firmware update on the EM5, we will have to see if they bother. If not then maybe it is time for me to move on.

 

[phl0wtography]

I am very disappointed in Olympus too, albeit being a long time user, starting with OM-1.
I don't quite get why so many companies don't get how to earn the trust of their customers. it's definitely not by shackling them with minor upgrades in new bodies that could easily be implemented via firmware updates. I doubt a firmware update for the E-M5 would eat into 1's sales. The upgrades many bought a E-M1 for are hardware related anyway. There was a bit on TOP in relation to Adobe's CC that covered the same topic on how shackling customers with somehow mandatory updates - while earning short term profit - will result in decreasing customers.
It's time for a E-M5n (OM users will be familiar with the concept ;-) ) via software update(s).

 

[pdk42]

3) Lower ISO - I don't know if this possible, but it would be nice if possible.

You can do a DIY version of this by exposing to the right and pulling back in post processing. I usually set my E-M5 to over expose by 0.5 stop and then use the "blinkies" (showing under and over exposed areas with flashing blue and orange colours) to allow a slight amount of orange showing. I've found that you can pull highlight detail back from areas that show as slightly overexposed.

I saw a test done by an early owner of E-P5 and he found that over-exposing ISO 200 by 1 stop and pulling back in post processing was virtually identical to using the ISO 100 setting.

 

[OldRadioGuy]

I doubt a firmware update for the E-M5 would eat into 1's sales. The upgrades many bought a E-M1 for are hardware related anyway.

I understand the frustration here, but marketing strategy of big corporations doesn't seem to depend much on customers hanging on to old models. It's all about attracting buyers for new products.

Bob

 

[slappy]

Apple for instance upgrades it's iOS for the iPhone for past and present models. Ok you can get a new handset which is faster and a better screen. But the software updates are there for all.

But olympus seems to think that just two firmware updates to fix bugs are all that's needed.

I paid full price for my EM5 last December and it's annoying to see the price it's selling for now, and that enhancements on the EP5 and EM1 aren't given to us too.


Sent from my iPhone using Mu-43 mobile app

 

[yakky]

Apple for instance upgrades it's iOS for the iPhone for past and present models. Ok you can get a new handset which is faster and a better screen. But the software updates are there for all.

I'm not sure apple is a good example. Can an iPhone 3 run iOS 7? Even on a 4s that can install it, it makes it drag. They also have a vested interest in giving security updates. Hacked iPhones don't make for good PR.

 

[verbatimium]

If the EM5 got the three things via firmware that you mentioned in the OP (small focus points/focus peak/lower ISO) plus 1/8000 shutter speed (not sure if this can be done via firmware), than I would go out and buy one today. I use many manual focus lenses so the EM5 not having focus peak is a big turn off for me. The P5 is nice but it is too expensive for not having an built in EVF. The EM1 is too big and is just not for me.

Other than that, I will wait for the EM5 successor which will most likely have all those benefits, and have the upgraded EVF.

 

[Linh]

I suspect the E-M1 is the replacement for the E-M5 and the E-M5 will be fade into the mists during in 2014. It's rare for companies to issue major feature upgrades via FW, especially late in the product cycle, albeit Canon did it earlier this year for the EOS 7D.

Olympus has been quite clear the E-M1 is not an E-M5 replacement. It's an E-5 replacement. The price tag also slots it a step above the E-M5's introduction price. We'll see a real E-M5 replacement soon enough. I'm glad they are taking their time because yearly replacements is kind of ridiculous.

On the firmware side, I'm with everyone. The focus point being the most frustrating thing since it's already there, just in a different mode. With that said, how many companies can we say added features with firmware updates in the camera world? Fuji I think is the first, Canon has just started doing stuff with their C100 and 5D3. More often than not it's to fix issues (though, I guess you can argue some of the fuji updates were to fix the poor speed, heh)

 

[usayit]

Firmware vs Software development => cost is different.

Commodity hardware => There isn't much difference in architecture between the various iphone iterations. Development on IOS is easily applied across many iterations of iphone... much like O/S updates of Windows and Mac OSx. Most of the cost is actually in the QA phase of the development cycle to confirm that enhancements to the code base doesn't break on legacy hardware. If Apple is smart (which they are), they will probably have a dedicated QA/Dev group that doesn't do anything but maintain a framework and suite of tests that run continuously as code is checked in. The investment was made long ago and is fine as long as no major architectural changes were made (which would more than likely break legacy hardware).

R&D and timing. => Apple has much more resources. Product management is continuously reminding my team of the importance of time-to-market. Smaller companies with finite resources, have to make a decision on whether enhancing older products or getting new products out the door will sustain cash flow (or eventually go out of business). I surmise Olympus is pretty small comparatively and Apple is the exception. How many firmware or hardware updates do you get with a appliances, consumer electronics, vehicles... very few. (Wouldn't it be cool if auto manufacturers updated drivetrain and features on older cars every year?.... I'd have a free visual GPS system in mine)

Just my guess from starting a career in hardware/firmware but very quickly moving into software. Of course this is just a guess but what-if discussions around technology by the general public generally overlooks a lot of "hidden" or "unseen" costs in time, R&D, and business operations.

I once asked a friend at another company the question that goes along the lines of "Why don't they package this item for sale separately?". He reminded me that something that seems so simple as packaging also cost time and money.... package design, new part numbers, updating shipping channels/processes, updating sales listings/catalogs etc..




When I buy anything.... I expect them to fix bugs and various maintenance items for the so-called life span of a product. I expect them to stand by their product/service. What I never expect is a continuous investment into said product to deliver enhancements. An agreement was made towards a product in its current scope of features... not future enhancements.

BUT when I do see a company that stretches out to provide enhancements that I did not expect, I am very grateful and will usually send them an email to show my appreciation (I know how the engineers often feel unappreciative). The most recent example was Google and their acquisition of Nik Software. Free update to the entire line of Nik Software components to current license owners AND access to their new Analog Efex Pro package that wasn't even in existence when I purchased my license. Again.... the exception not the norm.

 

[Sela69]

I was wondering if there is anyway we can create a petition for some of these functions, and see how Olympus wull response.

I agree with you. There's no overlapping between E-M1 and E-M5, the product has been repositioned due to new selling price, and improving the product adding features via firmware update can raise the profits for Olympus. Seems to me a stupid strategy to neglect E-M5.

 

[faberryman]

Unless you are planning to release the E-M5 successor in January/February.

 

[Sela69]

Unless you are planning to release the E-M5 successor in January/February.

Whats more compared to E-P5/EM-5 but less than E-M1 ?

 

[ThomD]

I have never understood consumers who think that a company must continue to improve a product that is released (and in this case old.). Bug fixes are one thing, but expecting additional features is naive. Why on earth would a company add features to a year old product and risk eating the sales of the next generation? If uou think that this would have a significant impact on customer loyalty, I think you are out of touch with consumer electronics today. Only a tiny slice of customers even know what firmware is. A fraction of that slice would notice if new firmware came out. That tiny fraction of a slice are the ones I think most likely to jump ship to a new brand in the next upgrade cycle if there is a perceived advantage. Can you image anyone saying, "Here we are in 2015. The new brand x is killing it in the reviews. It is amazing. I'd buy one, but brand y has a second rate camera that I'm going to buy because they added focus peaking to a camera I used to own."?

If you want new features, expect to pay for them.

I see this phenomenon rabidly among some users of Android phones. Somebody buys a phone in June 2012, and complains about no upgrades when a new version of Android comes out in June of 2013. There just is no incentive in the consumer market for companies to engage in this practice for most devices.

Even if a company were inclined to do something like "add focus peaking", it simply may not be possible. We know so little about the inner workings of these computers with lenses that we have no idea if there are architectural issues, RAM issues. CPU issues, etc.

Firmware design is far more complex and expensive than many consumers seem to think.

 

[Sela69]

I have never understood consumers who think that a company must continue to improve a product that is released (and in this case old.).

The E-M5 is not retired. is still available.

For example, Canon 7D announced on September 2009.

The in August 2012 firmware Update .

On 6 August 2012, new firmware v2.0 was released[6] with the following enhancements:[7]
Improved maximum burst for RAW images (up to 25)
In-camera RAW image editing
In-camera Image Rating
In-camera JPEG resizing
Maximum Auto ISO setting (ISO 400-6400)
Manual audio level adjustment in movie recording
Support for the Canon GP-E2 GPS unit
File name customisation
Time zone settings
Faster scrolling of magnified images
Quick control screen during playback


So it's only a matter of choices. With "not so many" improvement you can reposition EM-5 as entry level m4/3 , the product is quite new, you have also the E-P5 and better to save money to spend more in R&D to develop next generation of top level m4/3 ...

 

[HNM43]

It seem like there are number of users and potential user of the EM5 feeling the same. The EM5 is a wondering camera, I'm sure many people would agree. I also love the Olympus 75mm 1.8 and also very interest in the 12-40.

The EM5 was my first mirrorless camera, and it has many great/excellence qualities/functions that I and many other want in a camera (with an exception of the functions mentioned and Phase Focus). But Olympus is not the only manufacturer, the market is very competitive, with Sony, Panasonic and Fuji, all are able to offer some to compete with Olympus. What they can offer maintain and increase their customers base with relative minimum effort is good customer service/support. With these functions already available in other model, it would not take much to add to the EM5.

I think we all understand that nowadays everything is becoming a "fast consumer" product, but I would hate to imagine I have to buy a brand new camera every year, just because the company have add one or 2 new functions, when it could be so easy to add/fix some on the functions with firmware.

I am looking to contact Olympus with these feedback, was wondering if anybody have any experience with communication with Olympus and with what result. I know I can call or send email to the customer service, but was wondering if anyone know a more specific place to send customer feedback.

 

[ThomD]

I"m not saying it never happens, but the 7D upgrade was a significant exception to common practices.

 

[Sela69]

I"m not saying it never happens, but the 7D upgrade was a significant exception to common practices.

We spoke also about Fuij for a similar approach on X-E1 (http://www.fujirumors.com/its-again-kaizen-x-a1-x-m1-firmware-x-pro1-x-e1-x-e2-x100s-coming-soon-new-lens-firmware-lmo-and-pdaf-support/).

Olympus is not so rich, i really don't understand why they are throwing away a product after less then 2 years, while company with better revenues are able to sell their similar products for more than 4 years with little improvements via firmware updates.

 

[EarthQuake]

To be perfectly honest with the Fuji system, yes they have released some nice firmware upgrades, that's clear to see. What isn't so clear to see is that their cameras on release were very, very immature and clunky products. I owned an EX1 briefly and the OMD outclasses it on a functional level in virtually every way, even with the firmware upgrades. While I would love to see a firmware fix for the large AF box issue (my biggest annoyance with my EM5), I think if you look at the situation realistically, Fuji is simply playing catch up more than anything.

Its great to see a company like Fuji buck the trend and release firmware updates for old models, but really, the grass is not greener on the other side. Fuji's cameras desperately needed those firmware updates for basic functionality. It will be interesting to see in the next few years as Fuji release more mature and functional cameras, if they keep up the habit of frequent firmware updates offering new features.