On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 12:53:58 +1000, Chloe wrote:
: On 5/02/2012 5:49 AM, Bruce wrote:
: wrote:
: I suppose using that methodology, Stuffing an OM looking body full of
: all those Pro parts that never sold makes perfectly good sense.
: Imitating the old half frame pen worked (almost) why not falling back of
: their old flagship?
:
:
: There is a strong positive sentiment towards the OM System, even more
: than there was towards the PEN. It makes sense to offer people
: cameras that they want to buy, for whatever reason. The similarity of
: the OM-D/EM-5's appearance to the very popular OM will encourage a lot
: of people to buy it.
:
: I use a Panasonic G3. It has the same sensor and EVF as the Olympus
: OM-D/E-M5. It is a very good camera and I am very pleased with it,
: but if I was buying now, I would choose the OM-D/E-M5. Why? Because
: I used the OM system for nine years in the 70s and early 80s and
: really enjoyed using it.
:
: So the OM-D/E-M5 is a Panasonic G3 in disguise? I don't care. It is
: a very convincing disguise. ;-)
:
:
:
: I guess I should preface this with "without prejudice" but photography
: is not the only area where people are happy to live in the past. For Me,
: I'd rather buy tomorrow's technology and participate in the way imagery
: is changing. There is only one Olympic lens I should never have sold but
: I gladly parted with with all my Olympus bodies.
:
: I believe the immediate future lies in Fujifilm's newest XPro 1 camera.
: will become the initiator of how professional cameras with small sensors
: will evolve. Filling antique looking, plastic bodies with rebadged
: electronics is just wacky engineers playing in their sandpit.

"Professional cameras with small sensors" sounds like an oxymoron to me. Maybe
you're right, but I'm not yet ready to believe it until I see it.

Bob