Mid-line camera prices creep towards the $2000 mark, middle classdispensed with, really

In article ,
RichA wrote:
They just announced the price of the new Olympus E-M1 revision. It's
$1999.00. The previous model was $1299.00. Prior to that, the most
expensive body was the E-M5 which was about $1000 at introduction.
That's only over a span of about 4 years. $2000 with a decent kit lens
is more or less what you'll pay now for a middle-road camera and kit
lens.

You are looking at their top-of-the-line m4/3 camera. Olympus offers
less expensive cameras that take the same lenses. The E-PL7 can be
had for $349 body-only.

--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |

In article ,
RichA wrote:
On Thursday, 3 November 2016 19:25:25 UTC-4, Paul Ciszek wrote:

You are looking at their top-of-the-line m4/3 camera. Olympus offers
less expensive cameras that take the same lenses. The E-PL7 can be
had for $349 body-only.

That's really a P&S, despite the sensor size. Add the #4 EVF (which
clips on) or the kit lens, and the price rises to over $600. Add both
to bring it more in-line with the E-M10II, and it costs over $900.00
which is more than the E-M10II.

The E-PL7 is an interchangable lens camera. It could be used with the
new micro four thirds 12-100mm zoom lens that is being discussed in
another thread.

--
Please reply to: | "Try to imagine a row of computers programmed by
pciszek at panix dot com | hippies."
Autoreply is disabled | --Ayn Rand, The Anti-Industrial Revolution

In article ,
RichA wrote:

On Monday, 7 November 2016 19:28:01 UTC-5, Paul Ciszek wrote:
In article ,
RichA wrote:
On Thursday, 3 November 2016 19:25:25 UTC-4, Paul Ciszek wrote:

You are looking at their top-of-the-line m4/3 camera. Olympus offers
less expensive cameras that take the same lenses. The E-PL7 can be
had for $349 body-only.

That's really a P&S, despite the sensor size. Add the #4 EVF (which
clips on) or the kit lens, and the price rises to over $600. Add both
to bring it more in-line with the E-M10II, and it costs over $900.00
which is more than the E-M10II.

The E-PL7 is an interchangable lens camera. It could be used with the
new micro four thirds 12-100mm zoom lens that is being discussed in
another thread.

Could be. But it wouldn't be very ergonically-acceptable, the lens is large
and heavy and the camera body is like that of a P&S. My point was that to
make it work like a comprehensive mirrorless (Sony 6000, Olympus E-M10II,
Fujis, etc) you need to spend a lot more than the initial cost.

I think that you are both right. The E-PL7 is a point 'n shoot, that's
what mFTs are all about. While dragging the consumer/prosumer into a
game of futile upgrading. I did try my 360mm Schneider on me EOS-M and
it did indeed look like a rear lenscap and though it did take pictures
the 1D2 was a way better choice for balance and ergonomics. Bigger is
better...

My unsolicited advice for those that want a compact ILC is to not use a
smaller sensor than halfframe (APS-C), mFT is really quarterframe with
all the drawbacks a small sensor have for serious photography. Note that
mFT cameras still is limited to 16MP and are noisy compared to their
contemporary APS-C comrades among the compact MILCs.

Whatever! There's surely lots of offers around under £500:

http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/cl/29/D...fProducts=60&a
ttr_59487512=59487532&attr_59487624=59487759%2C594 87762&loadGuide=1&sort=
3&viewType=standard

http://tinyurl.com/p8vuwl8
--
teleportation kills

In article ,
android wrote:

My unsolicited advice for those that want a compact ILC is to not use a
smaller sensor than halfframe (APS-C), mFT is really quarterframe with
all the drawbacks a small sensor have for serious photography. Note that
mFT cameras still is limited to 16MP and are noisy compared to their
contemporary APS-C comrades among the compact MILCs.

I can't speak to the last point, but the OM-D E-M1 mk II is a 20MP
mFT camera. I believe that Panasonic has something similar (if not
the same sensor).

--
Money is Speech
Corporations are People
Ignorance is Strength

In article , android
says...
Note that
mFT cameras still is limited to 16MP and are noisy compared to their
contemporary APS-C comrades among the compact MILCs.

There are 20MP models now and with the high res mode you get 50MP
(static scenes using a tripod).
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article ,
(Paul Ciszek) wrote:

In article ,
android wrote:

My unsolicited advice for those that want a compact ILC is to not use a
smaller sensor than halfframe (APS-C), mFT is really quarterframe with
all the drawbacks a small sensor have for serious photography. Note that
mFT cameras still is limited to 16MP and are noisy compared to their
contemporary APS-C comrades among the compact MILCs.

I can't speak to the last point, but the OM-D E-M1 mk II is a 20MP
mFT camera. I believe that Panasonic has something similar (if not
the same sensor).

Oki... I missed that. Not a big improvement IMO. The HR mode mentioned
by someone is a feature aimed mainly towards necrophiliacs , IMO. Things
move, even in landscapes...
--
teleportation kills

In article ,
(Paul Ciszek) wrote:

In article ,
android wrote:

My unsolicited advice for those that want a compact ILC is to not use a
smaller sensor than halfframe (APS-C), mFT is really quarterframe with
all the drawbacks a small sensor have for serious photography. Note that
mFT cameras still is limited to 16MP and are noisy compared to their
contemporary APS-C comrades among the compact MILCs.

I can't speak to the last point, but the OM-D E-M1 mk II is a 20MP
mFT camera. I believe that Panasonic has something similar (if not
the same sensor).

Oki... I missed that. Not a big improvement. The HR mode mentioned
by someone is a feature aimed mainly towards necrophiliacs , IMO. Things
move, even in landscapes...
--
teleportation kills