[surfar]

No leaked specs yet but the word is something incredible,surpassing the Fuji XT-3 in both stills and video.

This should be intere$ting!

[jimr-pdx]

They must have hired a new engineer, video has not been Oly's strength up to now.
Rugged, IS inside, weak video.. hmmm why does that ring a bell? I think they are dooomed too..

[D1N0]

A m43 sensor is never going to be better than aps-c in iq

[Fcsnt54]

A m43 sensor is never going to be better than aps-c in iq

It depends are we talking about low light?

[mee]

It depends are we talking about low light?

There's no replacement for displacement.

[Rondec]

It depends are we talking about low light?

I think the point is how much you can push an image regardless of the light. Assuming similar generation of sensor, APS-C should have better dynamic range and less noise at similar isos compared to micro four thirds. That said, four thirds is probably good enough for most folks out there.

[Fcsnt54]

There's no replacement for displacement.

There is... Just need to tweak some things, and charge it up

[ChristianRock]

For lower ISOs, M4/3 surpasses APS/C cameras from only a few years ago, especially after the 20MP sensor came out. It's a great sensor but still can't touch the sensor on an A6500 or Pentax KP, for eample. Or the Fuji XT-2 - let alone the XT-3. For high ISOs, it's clearly better than APS-C cameras such as the K20D or K7, but still getting to the level of cameras such as the K-x from 2009. They might surpass that with the latest release but probably can't touch the K-5 (2010). So as far as high ISO performance or even stills I really doubt it can touch the X-T3, because as it has been said, there's no replacement for displacement. The APS-C sensor is 64.4% larger than the M4/3 sensor in terms of area coverage.

[wibbly]

so what if you don't need high iso?


the omd em1 has an insane feature pack (not too unlike pentax, pixel shift, ibis, interval composite, auto bracketing etc), and a very small package. they also have fast focusing, large aperture, super small, weather sealed primes. something that pentax has long forgotten about.

if the da limiteds were weather sealed and dc motor focusing there would be far less argument for some of the other systems.


the fuji system also features very small, reasonably fast, reasonably priced, fast focusing primes.

[mecrox]

The rumoured model number - E-M1X - makes it sound like an E-M1 Mark II with a turbo fitted. If so, deffo not for everyone. Most folks would likely prefer a solid midrange generalist camera with a modern 20-24 mpx sensor without an eye-watering price tag and fancy features they’ll never use. We’ll see if that turns up while the E-M1X acts as the halo/attractor unit. The rest - X-T3 vanquisher, etc - is just YouTube-style hype.

“Compact but powerful and full featured” has been the basic Olympus offer for many years now. One can argue about the exact nature of that as time and tech change but at least it’s always been clear. It’s not for everyone or for every situation by any means but if those criteria meet someone’s requirements, Oly (and Panasonic) offer a very good system imho. The accent is on system, a full and capable one by now given the range of bodies, lenses and accessories on M43.

[mee]

There is... Just need to tweak some things, and charge it up

Can do the same to the bigger 'motor' and get superior performance over anything smaller and 'tweaked.'

[wibbly]

Can do the same to the bigger 'motor' and get superior performance over anything smaller and 'tweaked.'

sure. if size is irrelevant. but sadly it usually isn't.

[Winder]

There's no replacement for displacement.

I think the point is how much you can push an image regardless of the light. Assuming similar generation of sensor, APS-C should have better dynamic range and less noise at similar isos compared to micro four thirds. That said, four thirds is probably good enough for most folks out there.

A m43 sensor is never going to be better than aps-c in iq

There are a lot of photographers who work in a studio where they can control the light. At base ISO with controlled lighting M4/3 and APS-C are more than adequate for professional work. Smaller sensors don't become a problem unless you are pushing high ISO.

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

The problem is that you really don't save any money with M4/3 and in some cases its more expensive. With M4/3 you need really good glass to match the quality of FF. I use a FF Sony and I have a friend with an Olympus OMD-EM1-II and the results I get with a $600 85mm F/1.8 Sony lens match the results he gets with his 45mm F/1.2 Zuiko PRO lens, but that lens is a $1,200 lens. At 6400 his m4/3 doesn't hold up, even at 3200 its not a match for my A9, but at base ISO or even up to 400 ISO I would say that there is really no difference in image quality. Now I could go to the 85mm F/1.4 and he just can't match that look because there is no glass for the system that can match it and if there was it would cost as much as a Leica lens, but the reality is with the right glass both M4/3 and APS-C can match the look of a FF camera. You just have to buy really high quality glass which is expensive. I'm a fan of the Olympus PRO glass. Its really, really good glass. The same can be said for Fuji. My Sony 85mm F/1.8 lens give almost identical images to the Fuji 56mm F/1.2 but at half the price. So at the end of the day its actually slightly cheaper to buy a Sony A7III and the Sony 85mm F/1.8 than it is to buy a Fuji XT-3 and the 56mm F/1.2 or the Olympus OMD-EM1-II with the 45mm F/1.2 PRO lens. All 3 systems are going to give you near identical results in a studio or if you always bring strobes to your outdoor shoots.

[Rondec]

so what if you don't need high iso?


the omd em1 has an insane feature pack (not too unlike pentax, pixel shift, ibis, interval composite, auto bracketing etc), and a very small package. they also have fast focusing, large aperture, super small, weather sealed primes. something that pentax has long forgotten about.

if the da limiteds were weather sealed and dc motor focusing there would be far less argument for some of the other systems.


the fuji system also features very small, reasonably fast, reasonably priced, fast focusing primes.

My point was not to disparage the micro four thirds system. It is good enough for many people and it is relatively small in size. It is just a fact that bigger sensors have better dynamic range and lower noise at a given iso. All sensors have come a long way and micro four thirds is more than adequate for many situations.

As Winder mentions, it isn't necessarily cheap though, when you consider the cost of top end bodies and quality lenses.

[ChristianRock]

so what if you don't need high iso?

I don't think that's what we'red discussing... but this from the OP:

No leaked specs yet but the word is something incredible,surpassing the Fuji XT-3 in both stills and video.

Even at base ISO, I can't see the smaller format accomplishing that, or even surpassing the stills from the XT-2...

I quite like the images I see from the newer M43 cameras, I'm sure it's enough to satisfy most people's needs... even if it doesn't "surpass" the current APS-C offerings.

New cameras now are kind of like having a supercharged V12 engined car for our daily commutes. They all pretty much do more than we need...