OM-1

OM systems did absolutely shoot themselves in the foot by re-using old camera names that are still traded frequently in used spaces. This creates a lot of pointless confusion. Keep in mind that the OM-1, being a full-grip pro-body that appeals to more serious photographers who are expected to use he

I truly hope—pray, even—that OM System’s next release won’t just be another rehash like the OM-1 Mark II. That camera, while fine on paper, was essentially a software update sold at full price, and it left many of us deeply disillusioned. I’m starting to lose hope in the brand. I’ve been using the E

Image quality of all the OM constant F/4 lenses, including the 12-100, is good. I bought the 12-100 years ago, and it's one of most most used lenses outdoors. handles perfectly on "1" series bodies. Enough weight to tilt grip of the camera over to return the handshake. The best way to give that 40-1

I think there is a perception problem with m43 that is unfortunately fueled in part by the m43 maker marketing. I say this as a mft user for the past four years that is now looking for alternatives elsewhere. There are many reasons why users come to or look at m43. My reasons were size, affordabilit

Honestly, if you're getting into M43 for the weight, the OM-1 ii and 2.8 zooms is not a weight-saving plan. You'd be saving like 4 to 8 ounces total, compared to a FF mirrorless + f/4 zooms. Especially if your subjects are all low-light where you really want wider apertures and close subjects with n

I don’t think that’s likely. E-M1X was a bit of a bet that failed because non-M4/3 users had a hard time understanding why they would buy such a large camera if the sensor was still half the area of a full-frame body. Olympus did pack the extra space inside it with as many features as they could at

In light "bound" photography, where shutter speeds are required to freeze motion and ISO "gain" is required to expose, it doesn't matter if you're shooting with a large or small sensor, both sensors require the same physical size aperture to achieve a similar performance for a given FOV. Smaller sen

I would have gotten an OM-1 but I wanted to put more of my budget into glass, and for $400 the E-M1ii is still insanely capable. Bird detection would be nice but old school S/C-AF works good enough for me. Also I hate the new OM System branding. It just looks janky compared to the classic “OLYMPUS”.

Thanks for the quick and helpful response! Unfortanetely, the OM-1 and/or 300mm f4.0 pro are not very affordable to me. However, I have definitely been debating between the panasonic and olympus system and lenses, but ive found that the lenses both are said to have their respective benifits and down

I agree that the OM1 isn't all that far behind today, as its autofocus is relatively quite good. But it will become so if they don't try to keep up. Yes OM System offers a clear cost advantage over virtually all of its FF competition, especially when one factors in the cost of the lens; but that adv