09-14-2010, 06:35 PM
Let me have the honor to start...
The camera seems like a well rounded package, but there are several key points where it fails to be competitive:
- 11 AF points, 5 fps, 12MP and 720P are all sub-par compared to similarly-priced Canon 7D launched last year - 19 points, 8 fps, 18MP and 1080P. The Nikon D300s is also ahead with 51 points and 7 fps (same resolution as the Oly though)
- These specs are also way below some entry level cameras (e.g. Sony A55 has 16MP and 10 fps and costs less than half, their A33 with 14MP and 7 fps costs even less)
- No AF assist lamp. They had one in the E-1, why resort to the annoying built-in flash? Even some entry level cameras have this useful feature nowadays.
- Doesn't use the excellent GH1 sensor. Did Panasonic refuse to provide it? If not, then I really can't understand why Olympus chose the mediocre PEN sensor.
- Same heavily criticized ergonomics of the E-3. They had a good thing going with the E-30, why not continue from there?
- Large and heavy compared to what one would expect from a camera with a relatively small-sensor designed for outdoors use (think the old E-1 and Pentax K-7 for more sensible designs).
- No obvious firmware-only improvements (such as allowing the WB sensor to be used as an external color-meter for manual color temperature readings; multi-exposure HDR mode)
- Almost no innovation
- No ambition.
- No real commitment to FourThirds.
With 7 fps, 14-16MP sensor and 1080P movie mode the E-5 could have been a contender, but the way it is the only thing that could save it is a huge price cut (or a 12-60 lens free with every purchase of a body <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />)
PS.
Klaus will need to eat some crow for claiming Olympus would never release an upgrade to the E-3. I must admit I was a bit surprised myself though.
The camera seems like a well rounded package, but there are several key points where it fails to be competitive:
- 11 AF points, 5 fps, 12MP and 720P are all sub-par compared to similarly-priced Canon 7D launched last year - 19 points, 8 fps, 18MP and 1080P. The Nikon D300s is also ahead with 51 points and 7 fps (same resolution as the Oly though)
- These specs are also way below some entry level cameras (e.g. Sony A55 has 16MP and 10 fps and costs less than half, their A33 with 14MP and 7 fps costs even less)
- No AF assist lamp. They had one in the E-1, why resort to the annoying built-in flash? Even some entry level cameras have this useful feature nowadays.
- Doesn't use the excellent GH1 sensor. Did Panasonic refuse to provide it? If not, then I really can't understand why Olympus chose the mediocre PEN sensor.
- Same heavily criticized ergonomics of the E-3. They had a good thing going with the E-30, why not continue from there?
- Large and heavy compared to what one would expect from a camera with a relatively small-sensor designed for outdoors use (think the old E-1 and Pentax K-7 for more sensible designs).
- No obvious firmware-only improvements (such as allowing the WB sensor to be used as an external color-meter for manual color temperature readings; multi-exposure HDR mode)
- Almost no innovation
- No ambition.
- No real commitment to FourThirds.
With 7 fps, 14-16MP sensor and 1080P movie mode the E-5 could have been a contender, but the way it is the only thing that could save it is a huge price cut (or a 12-60 lens free with every purchase of a body <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />)PS.
Klaus will need to eat some crow for claiming Olympus would never release an upgrade to the E-3. I must admit I was a bit surprised myself though.