Discussion in 'Olympus Chat' started by Old git, Feb 5, 2012.
If it is... it looks awful.
Plus this post is probably in the wrong room!
I'll move it to the Olympus room... That body still looks like something out of the Lada factory though
I have severe doubts about the sensor size but the styling looks OK from the front ... it would be better without the "motor drive" ... maybe it's just me but I do prefer the old fashioned angular look to the modern trend to have camera bodies look like refugees from the Fisher Price catalogue.
eye of the beholder?
Still a tiny bit better than that awful new Pentax, though!
Hmm, I quite like both. That must say something about me...
PS my favourite dogs are French Bulldogs and my favourite car the original Fiat Multipla.
Multipla in Catania by Curt and Kristin, on Flickr
Spot a pattern?
No beauty but I wouldn't go that far.
Yeah, you've got absolutely no taste.
Well I wouldn't go as far as to say 'absolutely no' - I am partial to a Rolleiflex...
Nah! Could be worse.
A lot worse.
(Do we need a Speculation Room?)
Think we (!) [???] have to accept that the new Pentax is aimed at the 'yoof' ...
... whereas the new OM-D - if such - appears (externals-wise) to be aimed at the old geezers, perhaps to help them over the shock of an EVF?
I assume the 'motor-drive' is merely a battery pack. The body depth even without the B/p seems rather deep. Perhaps it is a 'filled' base to make the camera seem substantial and to give it balance?
I am puzzled why a 'Panasonic' lens is on the camera ... ... or are there yet more new lenses on the way from Olympus?
I have been expecting that camera makers will diversify and niche manufacture/market but haven't expected quite so much from so many so soon. I will be interested to get my hands on this - if this is 'it' - but would still like a Pen EP1 style camera with an opti-zoom finder.
And the award for understatement of the year goes to...
Thought I would add this image to the thread
Very different design ethic compared to the early '70's. Now I really know why Nikon are called 'conservative' ...
Very different cameras too.
The new lenses are interesting - but I think it may be a problem to have a lack of continuity of styling - the OM Zuikos obviously belonged to a "family" but this collection looks like a mixture of several different brands.
I assume so too. The "motor drive" really unbalanced the old OM cameras so I hope it can be got rid of!
As for the body depth ... I found the thickness of the OM SLRs and cameras with a similar design ethic from Pentax etc - largely governed by the diameter of the 35mm film cassette - worked well in the hand, and I really don't like the great thick hand grip moulded on to current designs. Anyhoo, even without the mirror box, there still needs to be clearance between the back of the lens and the focal plane, the more there is the easier it is to achieve tha telecentricity that the sensor depends on for performance. Many compact cameras seem to be designed for five year old's fingers and there are signs that the CSC market is going that way. A body which can be comfortably used by people with adult sized hands can't be a Bad Thing, can it?
Separate names with a comma.