Olympus OM enthusiasts' digital prayers have been answered ...

What makes this an "OM enthusiasts prayers answered" more so than any
previous E series SLR (other than the OM-D name)?
Does it have an OM lens mount as standard rather than 4/3? Or is it simply
just an E-series evolutionary move away from a reflex prism/mirror.

Trevor.

On 5/02/2012 5:54 PM, Trevor wrote:
What makes this an "OM enthusiasts prayers answered" more so than any
previous E series SLR (other than the OM-D name)?
Does it have an OM lens mount as standard rather than 4/3? Or is it simply
just an E-series evolutionary move away from a reflex prism/mirror.

Trevor.




Anyone with a 4/3 mount camera can buy a lens adaptor to put OM lenses
on it. Mine cost $20. A little roughly machined but accurate to focus.
Shots using my old E300 and a 600 mm manual focus lens looked so good
that at one time I thought this really was the "enthusiasts answer".
Then I found the (far to many) faults those Kodak sensors had and the

The only thing Olympus ever had going was exceptional lenses. Find a way
to use Olympus lenses on Canon or Fuji bodies and you'll have that
answer. Even the E5 promised much and delivered little.

Beautiful camera fantastic viewfinder and the rest? Well there's always
the OMD to look backwardly towards. Even Panasonic seem to be following
the "nearly" perfect route Olympus must have taught them.

On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 19:10:18 +0000, Bruce
wrote:

"Trevor" wrote:

What makes this an "OM enthusiasts prayers answered" more so than any
previous E series SLR (other than the OM-D name)?


The OM-D looks like an Olympus OM, just as the PEN E-P1, 2 and 3 look
like an Olympus Pen F or FT. Yes, it is all about appearances, and
about exploiting the enormous positive sentiment for the OM System.

I am very happy to be exploited and I think many OM enthusiasts will
too. I have no doubt that the OM-D E-M5 will sell very well indeed. I
expect I will buy one at some point, just not immediately.


Does it have an OM lens mount as standard rather than 4/3? Or is it simply
just an E-series evolutionary move away from a reflex prism/mirror.


It isn't an E Series body. It doesn't have an E mount. It is a Micro
Four Thirds body. Olympus will be making at least one more E Series
body, but this is not it.

To the sceptics I would ask, where was Olympus before the PEN E-P1 was
introduced? The answer is dead and buried. The E Series was not
selling and sales of compact P&S cameras had peaked.

Panasonic developed Micro Four Thirds without Olympus and went down
the route of making their first camera - the LUMIX G1- with the look
and feel of a modern SLR. Olympus drew on their history and made a
Micro Four Thirds camera that looked like a 1960s PEN.

Although the PEN was an SLR, it didn't look like one.

Surely that's wrong. The PEN was never an SLR?

It was an
inspired choice, though, as it helped Olympus gain a greater share of
the Japanese market than Panasonic. The OM-D will provide an even
greater boost to Olympus sales at a time when they really need it.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

"Eric Stevens" wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 19:10:18 +0000, Bruce
Panasonic developed Micro Four Thirds without Olympus and went down
the route of making their first camera - the LUMIX G1- with the look
and feel of a modern SLR. Olympus drew on their history and made a
Micro Four Thirds camera that looked like a 1960s PEN.

Although the PEN was an SLR, it didn't look like one.

Surely that's wrong. The PEN was never an SLR?

The 1960s PEN F and PEN FT certainly were.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympus_Pen_F

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 10:24:40 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
wrote:


"Eric Stevens" wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 19:10:18 +0000, Bruce
Panasonic developed Micro Four Thirds without Olympus and went down
the route of making their first camera - the LUMIX G1- with the look
and feel of a modern SLR. Olympus drew on their history and made a
Micro Four Thirds camera that looked like a 1960s PEN.

Although the PEN was an SLR, it didn't look like one.

Surely that's wrong. The PEN was never an SLR?

The 1960s PEN F and PEN FT certainly were.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympus_Pen_F

You can knock me down with a feather!

A friend of mine had an 'F' many years ago and I never knew it was a
reflex.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
What makes this an "OM enthusiasts prayers answered" more so than any
previous E series SLR (other than the OM-D name)?

The OM-D looks like an Olympus OM, just as the PEN E-P1, 2 and 3 look
like an Olympus Pen F or FT. Yes, it is all about appearances, and
about exploiting the enormous positive sentiment for the OM System.

I am very happy to be exploited and I think many OM enthusiasts will
too. I have no doubt that the OM-D E-M5 will sell very well indeed. I
expect I will buy one at some point, just not immediately.

As a long time OM enthusiast I can say it will take more than a retro look
for me to buy one. My Canon DSLR's take my OM lenses with adapters just the
same as the E-series or OM-D will.
Now if it had an OM mount with aperture automation, it might "answer some of
my prayers", but it doesn't.

Trevor.

snip

It isn't an E Series body. It doesn't have an E mount. It is a Micro
Four Thirds body. Olympus will be making at least one more E Series
body, but this is not it.

I own and E-620 and I'm still learning about Olympus products. What is
the E mount you referred to?


--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ---

Eric Stevens wrote:
Surely that's wrong. The PEN was never an SLR?

Hi,

There certainly was a PEN SLR, as I owned one. It was half frame camera.

Mort Linder

Trevor wrote:
wrote in message
...
What makes this an "OM enthusiasts prayers answered" more so than any
previous E series SLR (other than the OM-D name)?

The OM-D looks like an Olympus OM, just as the PEN E-P1, 2 and 3 look
like an Olympus Pen F or FT. Yes, it is all about appearances, and
about exploiting the enormous positive sentiment for the OM System.

I am very happy to be exploited and I think many OM enthusiasts will
too. I have no doubt that the OM-D E-M5 will sell very well indeed. I
expect I will buy one at some point, just not immediately.

As a long time OM enthusiast I can say it will take more than a retro look
for me to buy one. My Canon DSLR's take my OM lenses with adapters just the
same as the E-series or OM-D will.
Now if it had an OM mount with aperture automation, it might "answer some of
my prayers", but it doesn't.

Trevor.


Hi,

I still have about a dozen OM lenses for my two OM-4T bodies. It
certainly would be nice to have a new Olympus digital body with the OM
lens mount and auto diaphragm, and I would not mind manual focus. I
suppose that it is just daydreaming.

Mort Linder

On 06/02/2012 9:42 PM, Mort wrote:
Eric Stevens wrote:
Surely that's wrong. The PEN was never an SLR?

Hi,

There certainly was a PEN SLR, as I owned one. It was half frame camera.

Mort Linder

So larger format than mini 4/3


--
Mike