[Brightcolours]

Yeah, before the D3 Nikon (Nikon's return to 135 format) was big in pro sports and nature photography. Oh, wait.
And Nikon did not gain marketshare back when they returned to 135 format. Oh, wait.

[JJ_SO]

I hate lens equivalence posts in general but here it's most applicable!.......the camera is best described as high spec flagship sports action M3/4rds MLC.....not pro sports!
   
 IMHO Olympus lost it's reason d'être which was all about the diminutive form factor!

How often - if at all, did you use µ 4/3 ? Did you ever try to shoot sports, or where's your verdict coming from? There are more than one perspectives to look at this machine:

1. it's the same price as a D850, it appears - but a D850 doesn't shoot 18 fps with AF and 60 without. Not to mention the AF-point coverage...
   
2. add a grip and a D5 battery to a D850, and it's a grand more. Plus more than a pound added weight.
   
3. There's a lot of tech inside the camera, which is not available from other manufacturers: focus shift, sensor shift, ND effect handheld, 7.5 stops VR, a tilt swivel display, oh, and a AF good for trains, planes, motorsport 
   

I still think, it might be an interesting device for people deep in the µ 4/3 cosmos. And if you need to compare it, dos o to a D5, which is more costly and I doubt you can pour water on it the way Chris did in DPReview's video. "It's a camera for people who hate tripods". Why not?

[toni-a]

Olympus used to claim 6f stops was stabilisation limit because of Earth rotation.... Now they have 7 f-stops

[davidmanze]

I hate lens equivalence posts in general but here it's most applicable!.......the camera is best described as high spec flagship sports action M3/4rds MLC.....not pro sports!
   
 IMHO Olympus lost it's reason d'être which was all about the diminutive form factor!

How often - if at all, did you use µ 4/3 ? Did you ever try to shoot sports, or where's your verdict coming from? There are more than one perspectives to look at this machine:

1. it's the same price as a D850, it appears - but a D850 doesn't shoot 18 fps with AF and 60 without. Not to mention the AF-point coverage...
   
2. add a grip and a D5 battery to a D850, and it's a grand more. Plus more than a pound added weight.
   
3. There's a lot of tech inside the camera, which is not available from other manufacturers: focus shift, sensor shift, ND effect hand-held, 7.5 stops VR, a tilt swivel display, oh, and a AF good for trains, planes, motor-sport 
   

I still think, it might be an interesting device for people deep in the µ 4/3 cosmos. And if you need to compare it, do so to a D5, which is more costly and I doubt you can pour water on it the way Chris did in DPReview's video. "It's a camera for people who hate tripods". Why not?
_____________
   No, I've never shot a M4/3rds camera. Where's my thinking coming from?
  
  My verdict comes from shooting FF and APS-c! ....especially the D500....the experiences come from struggling to get low noise images...the noise limitations of the APSc sensor are apparent in comparison to the FF sensor....if I struggle sometimes with APSc, it will  be only worse with M4/3rds!.......not to mention lenses and DOF.

   Outside of sports/nature things change considerably, with Olympus's range of large aperture glass the light gathering issues mainly go away.

   So my point is, it may be a pro spec camera with "unlimited bells and whistles"......but how many sports/ nature pro-togs are going to risk their lively-hoods backing the M4/3rds sensor and with what lenses?
  
1. I would run the comparison with the D850 as they are at a similar price point, the extra size/weight/cost of the D5 manifests itself in the fact that it is the best pro FF body out there........surely we are not doubting the WR on the D5 are we?

2. Maybe the Olympus should have had a removable grip, it would have made the camera smaller and lighter reducing many of the criticisms seen here.

3. Yep, tech ago go!  

 
 4. Yes it's raison d'être is for existing M4/3rds users.........


   However I want to ask the question of .....
     
"What the hells in the camera that makes it so huge and heavy?" , when the A9 does more very much better?
   
 It's not the sensor or IBIS (given Sony's have IBIS) no mirror box..........looking at Chris Nichol's review, much seems to be the two batteries in the vertical grip.

Here's DPreviews take on it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AffPoX5VZ7E


  .......this camera leaves me scratching my head!

        

[Rover]

One of the Olympus-shooting pros I mentioned earlier now says he's taking the E-M1X for a spin. He likes it.

[JJ_SO]

   "What the hells in the camera that makes it so huge and heavy?" , when the A9 does more very much better?
   
 It's not the sensor or IBIS (given Sony's have IBIS) no mirror box..........looking at Chris Nichol's review, much seems to be the two batteries in the vertical grip.



            .......this camera leaves me scratching my head!

        

Hold the Sony under a water tap and open it wide (the tap...), then you' ll see rather quickly what's Oly's big plus!

I don't care much about both cameras and have better reasons to scratch my head.  but for Olympus owners with a lot of Pro lenses... I understand why they are happy about it.

[davidmanze]

Jarred Polin Froknows photo get's it right with his sports shooting review....his at the match tests:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-I4ygKnpVQ

Poor EVF,lack of DOF and lots of image noise.......

[JJ_SO]

Jarred Polin Froknows photo get's it right with his sports shooting review....his at the match tests:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-I4ygKnpVQ

   Poor EVF and lots of image noise.......

Dave, why are you complaining about a camera you will never ever buy? It's like I constantly would complain about Canon...

Jared Polin:

1. he admits it's the first µ 4/3 he's shooting with
   
2. he says right in the beginning it's a pre-production firmware
   
3. no idea, what was going on in the rest of the video - I also will not buy into µ 4/3, so why wasting time to complain about obvious shortcomings of a small sensor and instead look at the other real interesting features ?
   
4. I don't know if it was Jared or another reviewer who said since the camera has a rather good and snappy AF, he has more time to check for composition rather than for AF points.
   
5. When did you shoot with any EVF?
   

You say for yourself you're fighting against noise with an APS-C sensor, which is targeted at shooting with high ISO - so, even your machine struggles - all will have limits, µ 4/3 slightly earlier. Where's the news in that?

I don't think Olympus tries to pull FF shooters on their side, most of their customers already abandoned the FF boat at times when DSLRs were modern. But I do think Olympus wants to offer their customers a high end camera. And by high-end I mean within the bounds of µ 4/3, not for other systems. It DOES have some very advanced tech in it and it also does have very solid sealing which I consider as "weatherproof" = more than just some rubber gaskets. It does have a fully articulated LCD - which other high-end camera offers that?

What I find interesting: most posters in this thread have no idea about µ 4/3, me included. And the only one - Klaus - qualifies the body as "mad form factor". If that's so, then what is a D4, D5? What's the mad part in a body made for European grown-up adult hands instead of the hands of kids or Japanese? A weight (and price and size) comparison can be made with other high-end pro bodies with integrated vertical grip and huge battery - everything else is just stupid.

A agree on the noisy pictures - but if one wants to travel with not much luggage and gear, the Olympus soon gets rather interesting if big prints are not in your commission list. I don't need plane, trains or motorcycle/-car AF recognition, but for those who do, it's the only camera offering it.

What I like of this approach is, Olympus dared to come with new ideas (and shitty LCD/EVF, alright), set some ridiculously high standards in electronic shutter and maxed fps. I think it's hard to navigate to all this features, I also think one needs to study the manual for extended time. I think, I'll get the same resolution quality with some Sigma lenses or the 50/1.8 S - but I also think, a tripod would be necessary to get close to it. The Olympus doesn't need tripods that much. Again something for travelling light. Imagine if you could take shots with ¼ second, handheld...

[toni-a]

From a commercial point of view, obviously this camera won't sell a lot, and won't make much money to Olympus, however every company must have a flagship high end model for their brand image.
Panasonic who already have their full frame offering won't be making such a camera, they don't need it. Olympus without such an offering would look like the weaker side, they had to do something about it, and they did.
It's a marketing thing, having a high end models is a positive thing for the sales of all your models, just like making a high performance formula one or rally car will boost the sales of all that brand cars

[wim]

Agree with jj_so mostly.

I own an E-M1 II, and it is a great camera, with a battery I can shoot 2000 images with easily on a single charge. I would never get a battery grip, however, so the E-M1 X is not for me either, basically because it gets too large for my preferences as well. In addition, the battery drains only ever so slowly when not in use, unlike many other cameras I have used.

Essentially, the M1-X is a sports pro / wildlife pro camera, with its 2 UHS-II card support, and two batteries making it last easily as long as any other sports camera while out shooting. Whether that is mu4/3 vs APS-C or FF, who cares. Those who will use it successfully don't. Back in the days of Oly 4/3, there were quite a few Nat Geo photogs who used the 4/3 format, loging it for the small size and way lighter lenses for the same reach, so there is reason to expect that at least some pro photogs will use it.

With regard to the EVF: at 2.4 Mpix it is more than usable. Yes, a 4 Mpix version would have been nice, but it would have been bigger as well, making the camera bigger too, especially as the optical part of the EVF would have to be redesigned as well.

As to the remarks about 6 stops of IBIS vs 7.5 now: there is an interview on Imaging Resource (https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2019/01/24/olympus-e-m1x-closer-look-amazing-tech-underlying-new-OM-D-series-flagship) which explains this in more detail. Obviously the earth rotation thingy was pure marketing drivel, as being on earth you would not notice, unless the rotation is wobbly rather than constant. Thjere is a limit currently as to what can be done, because doing this without a gimbal gets rather tricky, if you'd aks me. And as ever, how usable IBIS and/or VR is, does depend on the individual user. Some manage more, some manage less. Considering you need to take equivalency into account with shutter speeds as well, meaning you need 1/200s where you could use 1/100s with FF, I reckon 6 stops for the E1 II is very reasonable (I mange about 8 stops routinely), so 7.5 stops for the latest edition sounds reasonable too.

Anyway, HTH, kind regards, Wim