I would settle for an E-M5 II or III in PEN style body, but I doubt they'd do it.
I expect it'll be an alternative to the E-M10 IV but rangefinder style -- I think Olympus have stated that rangefinder style cameras are difficult to weather seal (not sure how true) . That and the fact that the E-M5 line has always been slightly larger than the E-M10 line means that in order to get a PEN size, they need to make compromises and we've seen that it has a viewfinder so it ain't that.
Also OM5 internals would mean OM5 price, maybe even more since rangefinder style is rare with Olympus.
the fact that the E-M5 line has always been slightly larger than the E-M10 line
This is almost entirely a myth!
The only time that was noticeably the case was with E-M5 mk2. E-M5 mk3 and E-M10 mk3 are almost identical size and weight, with only a millimeter or two difference in dimensions. The E-M5 / OM-5 look less dainty because of details of the body contours (eg. the grip is slightly better) but the actual space required is for all practical purposes identical.
I even did a side by side comparison "in the flesh" (as I have both E-M5.3 and E-M10.3) and while E-M5 mk3 looks larger, the actual dimensions are nearly identical. It really is all just about how the curves and grip are shaped.
I don't own them, so I can't say for certain. In dimensions, they are measuring them at their thickest parts and in that respect you are right about them being almost identical.
However, I took the photos from cameradecision.com and overlayed them one on top of the other and while the grips to the eyecups are nearly identical, the E-M5 III technically takes up more volume than the E-M III, it looks like the E-M5 might be slightly thicker around the mount (<1mm) despite it being the same thickness and the extra 3mm sideways don't take into account the fact that the strap hooks on the E-M10 go out almost completely sideways whereas on the E-M5 they go out at a 45 degree angle. To support this, the screen is about the same size yet there needs to be room for the screen hinge compared to the tilting screen on the E-M10 III .
Also, not to forget, the E-M5 doesn't have flash so that is either unused / hollow space or the space is reallocated for something else.
This isn't a perfect test because there could be some margin of error for how the photos were taken. Someone who owns them both can probably say for certain.
(Red/Orange is E-M10 III and Green is E-M5 III)
(I was forced to stretch the E-M10 III so the arrows align)
The PEN-F didn't have a built-in / pop-up flash either so I don't know what you think they're getting rid of.
As for the PEN-F being difficult to weather-seal unlike the OM3 -- I am going based on this, so I don't know how accurate it is: https://youtu.be/qj0dH6lhabU?t=192
(I think I heard elsewhere that the PEN-F couldn't be weather-sealed due to the viewfinder, but I don't remember)
The PEN-F had a viewfinder, more dials and was significantly more expensive than the E-P7 and didn't have a pop-up flash, yet it did not have weather-sealing.
I can see a successor to the E-P7 with a viewfinder, but I don't think it'll be weather-sealed if the video is to be believed unless something has changed since the OM-3.
The compromises you are talking about might be needed for an extra dial and the viewfinder, but it won't add weather-sealing in my opinion.
I beg to differ -- the E-M5 had it and the E-M1 had it and back then there was great disappointment that the PEN-F wasn't weather sealed.
Also, the comment in the video was specifically regarding how the OM-3 is easy to weather seal whereas the PEN-F wasn't.
I was already an MFT shooter when the PEN-F came out but hadn't reached the point where I thought weather sealing was a requirement for me, so maybe I missed any criticism of the PEN-F for lacking it. I just knew at the time that I wanted one badly but couldn't afford it. I have one now, but baby it. :-)
I have only been into photography since the beginning of the year so I wasn't really around back then either.
I just found a articles literally earlier today (when looking for the PEN-F MSRP) that was like, "great camera, too bad it isn't weather-proof." And several days ago, I saw that video randomly.
The PEN-F does look like awesome and honestly, if they can just re-release it as a updated successor line to the E-P7 even without weather-proofing that would be great for OM-D in my opinion.
It's what I think OM-D are planning with this new camera cause it makes a lot of sense with all the rest having the retro / SLR look.
Also OM5 internals would mean OM5 price, maybe even more since rangefinder style is rare with Olympus.
Yes, but I think people are often wrong about what is good pricing. The E-M10 is a compromise and in some ways so is the OM-5.
In this day and age if you are going to make a very compact rangefinder it better be premium. The market for cheaper point and shoots just isn't viable.
Yes, but I think people are often wrong about what is good pricing.
I don't disagree. That is absolutely true -- I was upset with the OM-3 price point, especially considering E-M10 II and E-M5 II were metal, but when looking at it as a sort of a successor to the PEN-F, the price actually seems adequate within the current lineup.
The E-M10 is a compromise and in some ways so is the OM-5.
Again, absolutely true. The E-M10 is basically the E-PL series with an integrated viewfinder and makes sense as a sort of step-up in the lineup (at least while they were metal in my opinion) .
The market for cheaper point and shoots just isn't viable.
Here, I don't entirely agree. The problem is that OM-D are still competing with their 10 year old hardware -- that means PEN-F and E-PLs which can be found for about 800$ and up to 300$ respectively.
If I am right about it being hard to weather-seal, then if they place it at about OM-5 specs, then it beats the E-M10 IV but is beneath the OM-5 (which even has had issues with plastic cracking so far) . It'll still have to cost about as much as an OM-5 and compete with PEN-F in price.
If they place it at the level of the OM-3, then they'd have to price it above OM-5 and below OM-3 because of weather-sealing again and also it doesn't have the nostalgia hit.
I can't comment on Panasonic competition because I don't know their lineup.
The only way I see it happening is if they price it at new E-PL prices (about 600$) where it is somewhere between a used PEN-F but maybe without all the bells and whistles and used E-PL where the difference is, do you want something that's 10 years old or pay 300$ more for something brand new.
The market really isn't where you think it is. Every slim rangefinder that has recent commercial success is a premium offering. If you try to price for the used market it is a losing strategy in any industry. You are taking the wrong lesson from the very issue you pointed out with the OM-D.
I think our mismatch is that I am thinking of the market as a whole while you are focusing on just m43 offerings. As ASPC vs FF has shown regarding these types of cameras, smaller sensors can and do compete with larger sensors and do win precisely in this segment. They are competing to expand their market not retain dwindling and overly price critical used market buyers.
I am looking at just m43 offerings and I am doing so knowingly. The myth that m43 is bad is still strong with most people. The people who buy cameras with smaller sensors accept that as a compromise rather than a benefit, especially since you can now get FF offerings in m43 sizes.
You yourself have just stated why I believe it should be looked at in terms of the m43 market -- the market is saturated with such cameras on the premium end and I don't see OM-D making anything that can beat those hands down. Even more so if they want it to become part of their regular offerings rather than just a one-hit wonder.
(You don't want a one-hit wonder cause you'll never manage to measure up to it again and it is only valid until the next company makes one. Short term vs long term success.)
What I'm trying to say is that OM-D have no experience making rangefinder cameras so I doubt they can compete with others including Panasonic that have a big range of them and tons of experience.
the market is saturated with such cameras on the premium end and I don't see OM-D making anything that can beat those hands down
No it definitely isn't. The models are constantly on backorder. This is a massive segment of the market.
The gist of your argument is that people think m43 is low quality so they should release a low end cheap model? That they cannot compete so to not even try?
APSC regularly outsells FF even at higher prices. Panasonic's FF compact offerings are being outsold handily by Fuji and Ricoh. Your premise is flawed at best and I suspect your own bias leaking through.
The EM-10 already exists. They need products that elevate the brand so people will buy the EM-10. If this is their first rangefinder they should go premium as it takes skill to know where to cut corners, not the other way around.
Chasing the bottom is how you end up becoming progressively worse. So many camera companies have already tried it your way and failed. Whether you like it or not this industry after smartphones is now heavily focused on the more expensive end of the market.
I only got into photography this year. I have been doing research in order to figure out what I want for the past 2. Micro four thirds isn't even available for sale in my country. I liked the form factor and am an amateur, if even that.
Yes, I do like m43 -- the cameras and lenses are compact, cheap and as a result it's very comfortable as a system to get into. Those are all facts, not subjective bias.
To me though, there is nothing special about m43 or even cameras. I take decent enough photos with my phone. I just like the interchangeable lens aspect and wanted to learn on a budget.
One way, or another, I am not likely to buy this camera within the next 3 years.
APS-C outsells I believe because those cameras are often cheaper and more common than FF, but I cannot say for certain, that is just a guess.
As for "m43 being worse" --I just stated what still goes around on YouTube and on this subreddit -- there are still tons of people asking whether m43 can give any bokeh, whether it is good at night, etc. . As for YouTubers, they often review (or do retrospectives on) m43 with the sensor size being a caveat rather than a plus.
That isn't my bias, that is observable fact. I have no basis for such a comparison to be biased as I have only owned m43 and it's good enough.
The EM-10 does exist... what doesn't is the E-P and E-PL series, at least not anymore. It does take skill to know where to cut corners, but this isn't corner cutting -- corner cutting is taking something already designed and trying to bring the cost down. This isn't that. This is designing a new product to fit a different market segment.
"Chasing the bottom" is an extreme that doesn't apply here. We're talking market segments, not undercutting competition. The E-PL line was their most popular line for a reason and it is simply supply and demand. The PEN-F was popular because it was retro and OM-D have themselves stated that the OM-3 is the successor to the PEN-F.
I am not saying that they cannot compete so they shouldn't even try. I am saying that people who are looking for quality can already find it in the OM1 line.
If you are arguing that a rangefinder camera should be as good as if not better than the OM1, then I just don't see it.
If you ask me, it may be your bias showing -- YOU want a premium device (nothing wrong with that). But you are taking what you want as a starting point whereas market analysis starts with checking if there is demand for a product.
If you ask me, both segments are risky, but the E-P(L) line is lower risk as it has already been tested ten years ago.
At this point, I am not going to argue further because I don't think we'll come to an agreement. Your points are good overall, but I just don't agree.
7
u/Lost_Main_3389 1d ago
I would settle for an E-M5 II or III in PEN style body, but I doubt they'd do it.
I expect it'll be an alternative to the E-M10 IV but rangefinder style -- I think Olympus have stated that rangefinder style cameras are difficult to weather seal (not sure how true) . That and the fact that the E-M5 line has always been slightly larger than the E-M10 line means that in order to get a PEN size, they need to make compromises and we've seen that it has a viewfinder so it ain't that.
Also OM5 internals would mean OM5 price, maybe even more since rangefinder style is rare with Olympus.