Olympus EM-5 Mark III news and rumors

[whumber]

If you use AF-C, the only issue with the E-M5III is price, that same cost should get you a used E-M1.2 with very little trouble and isn't far off where an E-M1.2 is now

But it's definitely a no-brainer as an upgrade if you care about AF-C (and I should note, I do)

You're overpaying if you buy a used E-M1ii for $1200. The market price seems to be $800-950 from what I've seen.

 

[FrayAdjacent]

If you use AF-C, the only issue with the E-M5III is price, that same cost should get you a used E-M1.2 with very little trouble and isn't far off where an E-M1.2 is now

But it's definitely a no-brainer as an upgrade if you care about AF-C (and I should note, I do)

I also want the 120FPS in 1080p, which they haven't added to the EM-1 MkII. Seems it should be capable of it if the E-M5 MkIII is. If they added that function to the EM-1 MkII, then yeah, I'd be really tempted to just pick up one of those.

 

[whumber]

I also want the 120FPS in 1080p, which they haven't added to the EM-1 MkII. Seems it should be capable of it if the E-M5 MkIII is. If they added that function to the EM-1 MkII, then yeah, I'd be really tempted to just pick up one of those.

That would be great although I would really like to see them add C-AF to the 120fps mode, even if it only goes to the E-M1X.

 

[FrayAdjacent]

That would be great although I would really like to see them add C-AF to the 120fps mode, even if it only goes to the E-M1X.

THAT is something I could use. I am a bit more of a 'hybrid' shooter. The 1-2 switch on my EM-5 MkII switches from stills (usually in A mode) to video, and it's HELLA handy. I love the quality of the 1080p video out of the MkII, but the AF-C is just CRAP. Sometimes it works well, sometimes it just goes off into la-la land.

4k is very nice, and I'm not sure exactly how much I'll use it. 120FPS in 1080 is very nice, and I'd absolutely love having good AF-C in that framerate as well!

 

[betamax]

The target market will mostly be upgraders from an older body. I expect few E-M1.2 users to even look here.

there's a lot of us who gave up waiting for the E-M5.3 and jumped into the E-M1.2. I really prefer the ergonomics and versatility of the E-M5 line. But without something enticing to lure me back (tilt-screen or newer sensor or G9 type EVF), you're right, I probably won't spend more on m43 for now. However, i will need to control my GAS. If my E-M1.2 were to suffer an unfortunate accident though, I'd jump back.

 

[Saledolce]

there's a lot of us who gave up waiting for the E-M5.3 and jumped into the E-M1.2.

Very true. And now I have the large zooms, I'd have to buy the smaller body and then add the big grip.

 

[comment23]

there's a lot of us who gave up waiting for the E-M5.3 and jumped into the E-M1.2.

Very true. And now I have the large zooms, I'd have to buy the smaller body and then add the big grip.

Me too. I’m sure Olympus thanks us for our business though!

 

[Machi]

I will be, but how many will look at the price and buy elsewhere, especially if upgrading from a E-M10 of some variety with a kit lens or two. The same price as an E-M5III nets you a X-T30 with Fuji's outstanding 18-55 f2.8-4 or a 35/2 WR or the 15-45 and enough price difference to pay for most of a 50-230.

I think that only thing which Olympus lacks is good universal weathersealed zoom lens with reasonable cost.
12-40 is good but expensive and 12-50 is cheap but bad.
X-T30 isn't weathersealed which is enough for me to not consider it as upgrade from E-M10II.
Also I'm not great fan of in-camera RAW denoising which Fuji does.

 

[algold]

I think that only thing which Olympus lacks is good universal weathersealed zoom lens with reasonable cost.
12-40 is good but expensive and 12-50 is cheap but bad.
X-T30 isn't weathersealed which is enough for me to not consider it as upgrade from E-M10II.
Also I'm not great fan of in-camera RAW denoising which Fuji does.

14-150 II isn't bad at all and is reasonably priced. 12-200 is more expensive though than 12-40, but pana 12-60 is cheap enough.

 

[mawz]

I think that only thing which Olympus lacks is good universal weathersealed zoom lens with reasonable cost.
12-40 is good but expensive and 12-50 is cheap but bad.
X-T30 isn't weathersealed which is enough for me to not consider it as upgrade from E-M10II.
Also I'm not great fan of in-camera RAW denoising which Fuji does.

I agree that Oly needs a new weathersealed zoom in the mid-range. The 12-50 isn't actually bad, but it's definitely not performing commensurate to its cost.

But even more so, Oly needs to update the f1.8-2 primes for sealing. A sealed body does you no good if the best suited lenses aren't sealed (E-M5III + the f1.8's & 12/2) just like weather sealed lenses do you no good if the body isn't sealed (Fujinon's + X-T30)

If you think Olympus doesn't do any in-camera RAW denoising, be prepared to be disappointed. All systems do that now, it's been years since RAW files were actually RAW. The processor has a huge impact on the quality of the RAW files and it's definitely doing some denoising, regardless of which system you look at.

 

[Michael Meissner]

I think that only thing which Olympus lacks is good universal weathersealed zoom lens with reasonable cost.
12-40 is good but expensive and 12-50 is cheap but bad.
X-T30 isn't weathersealed which is enough for me to not consider it as upgrade from E-M10II.
Also I'm not great fan of in-camera RAW denoising which Fuji does.

Well the used price of the 12-40mm f/2.8 has come down somewhat over the years.

And there is the Panasonic 12-60mm f/4-5.6 lens that is a kit lens for Panasonic mid-range cameras like the G85/G95. It can often be found used fairly cheap.

And I've had good images from the 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 lens.

 

[FrayAdjacent]

I just got a laugh in the shower as I was thinking about the new camera... Lots in this discussion were asserting that the 5MkIII shouldn't and couldn't do anything better than the 1MkII, because that would have the midrange camera competing with the top-end camera.

Well, guess what? The 5MkIII is a direct competitor to the 1MkII!!

It's practically the same hardware in a smaller body, at a lower price. That's direct competition. I've seen a few here already saying that they'd choose the 5MkIII over the 1MkII because of price and size, and essentially have the same performance.

The only reasons I could see getting a 1MkII at this point are
- better ergonomics
- bigger battery, better battery life
- potentially saving money by buying a used body

So I got a bit of a chuckle out of it. The new midrange is a direct competitor to the top-end model.

I was hoping we'd get a new processor to make it even better, followed by Olympus announcing they are working on the 1MkIII that will have dual procs and much better performance.

 

[drd1135]

I just got a laugh in the shower as I was thinking about the new camera... Lots in this discussion were asserting that the 5MkIII shouldn't and couldn't do anything better than the 1MkII, because that would have the midrange camera competing with the top-end camera.

Well, guess what? The 5MkIII is a direct competitor to the 1MkII!!

It's practically the same hardware in a smaller body, at a lower price. That's direct competition. I've seen a few here already saying that they'd choose the 5MkIII over the 1MkII because of price and size, and essentially have the same performance.

The only reasons I could see getting a 1MkII at this point are
- better ergonomics
- bigger battery, better battery life
- potentially saving money by buying a used body

So I got a bit of a chuckle out of it. The new midrange is a direct competitor to the top-end model.

I was hoping we'd get a new processor to make it even better, followed by Olympus announcing they are working on the 1MkIII that will have dual procs and much better performance.

Agreed. If these models were released simultaneously, especially if they were different companies, they would be competitive models. One smaller and lighter, the other with better ergs for long lenses.
It's been awhile since any mu43 camera had anything wildingly new. OTOH, the FF bodies are really only in a MP war. The AF is competing, but it's hard to directly categorize AF the way you can just say "more MP". You have to rely on word of mouth or reviews. The thing they really need to get everyone's attention is a new sensor, BSI with all the trimmings, with a few more MP, maybe between 20 and 26. The new Sony 61 mp A7R makes 26 MP APS-C crops. This is might give a 20-24 mp mu43 crop. The problem is if you pixel peep the 61 mp image, you see a lot of noise. You can't beat this noise because most of it is "Light noise" and intrinsic to the nature of the light not the sensor. If you downsample to a smaller size, much of it goes away. However, this crop will be the mu43 image so that route isn't available. Mu43 would be better off (IMHO) sticking with 20 MP and concentrate on making it a global electronic shutter because the smaller faster sensor might let them have the edge for a while. I think Panasonic already had this realization.

 

[Lcrunyon]

I just got a laugh in the shower as I was thinking about the new camera... Lots in this discussion were asserting that the 5MkIII shouldn't and couldn't do anything better than the 1MkII, because that would have the midrange camera competing with the top-end camera.

Well, guess what? The 5MkIII is a direct competitor to the 1MkII!!

It's practically the same hardware in a smaller body, at a lower price. That's direct competition. I've seen a few here already saying that they'd choose the 5MkIII over the 1MkII because of price and size, and essentially have the same performance.

The only reasons I could see getting a 1MkII at this point are
- better ergonomics
- bigger battery, better battery life
- potentially saving money by buying a used body

So I got a bit of a chuckle out of it. The new midrange is a direct competitor to the top-end model.

I was hoping we'd get a new processor to make it even better, followed by Olympus announcing they are working on the 1MkIII that will have dual procs and much better performance.

Of course the E-M5 Mkiii and E-M1 Mkii would be so similar that there are reasons one might choose either camera. That was never even in question, and was implicit in the assertion that the E-M5 was always going to be a smaller E-M1. The point was Olympus had neither the technology nor the business willingness to make the E-M5 Mkiii surpass the E-M1 Mkii so much that it rendered it (and most likely the E-M1X as well) obsolete. And they didn’t. The only body that eventually may do that is the E-M1 Mkiii.

This is the last post I’m going to make on the subject. At this point, there isn't anything else constructive left to be said.

 

[FrayAdjacent]

Of course the E-M5 Mkiii and E-M1 Mkii would be so similar that there are reasons one might choose either camera. That was never even in question, and was implicit in the assertion that the E-M5 was always going to be a smaller E-M1. The point was Olympus had neither the technology nor the business willingness to make the E-M5 Mkiii surpass the E-M1 Mkii so much that it rendered it (and most likely the E-M1X as well) obsolete. And they didn’t. The only body that eventually may do that is the E-M1 Mkiii.

This is the last post I’m going to make on the subject. At this point, there isn't anything else constructive left to be said.

There may not be much more to say... but my observation is generally that, if say Olympus had a new processor, a TruePic IX, or a new sensor that would have made using it in the EM-5 MkIII technically superior to the E-M1 MkII, people were essentially asserting that Olympus shouldn't use it in that context, because the 5MkIII would compete with the top-end model.

I think that's a bit silly. The "top-end" model is 3 years old now. Maybe camera tech really isn't advancing very rapidly, and a 3 year old camera is still in every way, shape and form a 'current' model. I don't really think that's true, though.

So ideally, if Olympus actually did have a new processor or a new sensor that would make the 5MkIII superior, I assert they should have used it AND announced the EM-1 MkIII at the same time - have the latter with dual processors and thus superior performance.

Anyway, for me, the E-M5 MkIII is "enough" of an upgrade that I'll buy it. I was hoping for better, but was prepared to be underwhelmed, and I'm honestly kinda in the middle of those two states about it. I do get the impression, though, that I will love that camera as much as I love my 5MkII, and that it will work just fine for me, which is a positive thing.

 

[Aristophanes]

I just got a laugh in the shower as I was thinking about the new camera... Lots in this discussion were asserting that the 5MkIII shouldn't and couldn't do anything better than the 1MkII, because that would have the midrange camera competing with the top-end camera.

Well, guess what? The 5MkIII is a direct competitor to the 1MkII!!

It's practically the same hardware in a smaller body, at a lower price. That's direct competition. I've seen a few here already saying that they'd choose the 5MkIII over the 1MkII because of price and size, and essentially have the same performance.

The only reasons I could see getting a 1MkII at this point are
- better ergonomics
- bigger battery, better battery life
- potentially saving money by buying a used body

So I got a bit of a chuckle out of it. The new midrange is a direct competitor to the top-end model.

I was hoping we'd get a new processor to make it even better, followed by Olympus announcing they are working on the 1MkIII that will have dual procs and much better performance.

This speaks to the near desperate need for the EM1 series to source a sensor upgrade sooner rather than later. I suspect early in the New Year.

 

[FrayAdjacent]

This speaks to the near desperate need for the EM1 series to source a sensor upgrade sooner rather than later. I suspect early in the New Year.

While I wouldn't buy whatever the E-M1 MkIII becomes, I'd LOVE to see it with a badass new sensor and new processor(s) so that it kicks major ass in the field.

The only lamentation I'd have is that those things trickling down in to the E-M5 MkIV would make it so much superior to the MkIII version.

 

[Saledolce]

This speaks to the near desperate need for the EM1 series to source a sensor upgrade sooner rather than later. I suspect early in the New Year.

If Oly was in the position to have a new sensor (bsi?) I believe we would have seen it on em1x.

 

[saladin]

"independent" reviews such as TCSTV and dpreview are a bit "meh" on it, making the point that it's really nothing new, just a smaller Em1ii. Well, yes. That's exactly what it is. And was always likely to be.

 

[mawz]

I think that Oly likely was looking at a new processor and sensor for the E-M1X and E-M5III, but it simply wasn't ready.

I'm not expecting more than 20MP, because the 20MP sensor is still the highest pixel density sensor in common use today (the new Canon 32.5MP sensor is approximately the same pixel density). But copper wiring and BSI on the same basic pixel density would bring some real wins, especially if Oly balances the tradeoff between AF speed and noise performance a little better than Fuji did (Fuji put everything on AF with the 26MP sensor, which is why its noise performance isn't any better than the 24MP sensor in the previous gen bodies)

From what I've read, the current hardware that TruePic is built on is a developmental dead end. That means that Oly will need to port all their code to a new platform for TruePic IX, which explains why we didn't see it on the E-M5III (that's a very involved change).

The sensor is likely more a matter of money, they need to pay somebody to develop it and since Panasonic has gone in a different direction in terms of AF, there's much less of a shared investment than there was on the non-PDAF sensors