The Olympus E-P5 Looks... Very Good?

Color me surprised and pissed off at the same time. Every time I feel like I'm getting the verve necessary to remove myself from the Micro 4/3 system, Olympus does something to keep me in it. The 12mm, the exemplary 75mm, the E-M5, and now the E-P5.

I mentioned in an earlier article about the Panasonic GH3 that I feel that Micro 4/3 is dying. They have priced their products at a premium that their brands cannot afford. Essentially, they've written checks that their asses can't cash. I still think that this is true. Olympus' camera division is dying, and all of Panasonic is dying.

I have often lamented the arrogance evinced by this behavior. Recent events like the introduction of the Metabones Speed Booster have only exacerbated my frustration with their persistence in selling their products at a high premium, while at the same time not even offering their best products in some bizarre and misguided attempt at protecting their extant markets. News flash to Oly and Panny, Canon and Nikon can pull that shit because they're huge. You are not huge. You cannot pull that shit, nor should you want to. Canon and Nikon deserve to be hated for it. Don't be something worthy of hate, for the love of Pete.

That said, Olympus' recent slate of products also evinces something else that I love and appreciate: a sense of detail. By that I mean that Olympus, more so than seemingly every other company out there, understands the way that details, in large numbers, are what makes a product work. Yes, sure, grand architectural directions are thrilling — just look at Fuji's new cameras — but without good attention to the way the details all gel together, the products fail — just look at Fuji's new cameras.

We can see this detail just holding an Olympus camera. The E-M5 feels so much better and special than an NEX-7. Likewise, the buttons, the menus, the way the accessories connect: they are all loaded with details that make the experience smooth. It's as though Olympus is looking straight at us, the knowledgeable enthusiasts, and saying "we understand."

That's all well and good, you may be saying, but what about the E-P5? The E-P5, you see, has a feature that no other camera on the market this side of a leaf shutter has: a flash sync over 1/250th of a second. This may seem like no big deal. It is, though. It shows that Olympus is interested in giving to the small segment of the market that knows how important that number is.

For those who are wondering what the hell I'm talking about, the flash sync essentially tells you how quickly the shutter can move over the sensor. If the flash sync is very high, then the shutter moves quickly, allowing the entire sensor to be exposed when the flash goes off, thus evenly exposing the sensor. If the shutter is slow-moving and the user selects a shutter speed that is beyond the capabilities of the shutter (for example, 1/1000th on a sensor with a flash sync of 1/160th) the sensor gets exposed for the set 1/1000th by having a slit move over the sensor. The entire sensor is never exposed at once. If you then tried to use a flash on these photos, you would see a band of bright, exposed image, and the rest of the image would be dark and underexposed.

Most mirrorless cameras... actually, all mirrorless cameras save for the Oly E-M5 and the crappy Nikon V1/2, have used the 1/160th flash sync time. This indicates that they almost universally believe their cameras to be for the uninitiated who won't care about the spec. Even Fuji's high-priced X Pro 1 was guilty of this. Most pro cameras have a flash sync of  1/250th. Oly's E-M5 also had a 1/250th flash sync. For me, that spoke volumes about how Olympus saw that camera.

But Oly didn't just match its old design, oh no! They made a camera with an amazing flash sync of 1/320th! That is a rare number indeed. For many reasons that I don't want to discuss right now, this number is very important. For the purposes of this article, all that is important to recognize is that Oly has stepped up to the plate. The E-P5 is meant for us.

Likewise, Oly has given us an absolute first for the mirrorless market: a max shutter speed of 1/8000th of a second. This is yet another pro feature implemented in a pocket-sized camera. Yes, I know that the Nikon V1/2 had a shutter speed of 1/16,000th, but that was an electronic shutter and that doesn't count. This 1/8000th is a real, mechanical shutter. For those who have been using the pro-thusiast SLR cameras from Nikon and Canon for years, this number should seem familiar, because it is. I have it on my eight-year-old EOS 20D. It's actually rather ridiculous that this is a first since the smaller sensor of 4/3 should make high flash syncs and shutter speeds easier.

But that's not important right now. Oly has delivered.

Perhaps these tools would have been more impressive if Sony hadn't already blown the world away with the RX1, but even in the shadow of that colossus, the E-P5 is impressive to me. I wish that Oly would get the fuck out of its own way and release good lenses for good prices instead of utter garbage like the 12-50mm. It's obvious that they are thinking about the very demographic that wants these lenses, so why only give us half of the equation? Give us the whole enchilada. Give us the lenses.

Sony Admits the A99 Isn't Selling

Sony has already launched the first "sale" for the A99, effectively admitting that, just as most industry observers thought, it isn't selling.

Sony of course is trying to save face and they aren't calling this a "sale." They're calling it a "bundle," where you get the camera, the verticle grip, and a flash for just the price of the camera. If you were planning on buying these things anyway, it drops the price of the camera down to around $2,000, which is precisely where it should have been from the get-go. Of course they shouldn't be fucking around and should instead simply drop the price of the camera to $1,999, but this is Sony, so they won't do that.

When is Sony going to realize that they don't have any brand value left? Why do they persist in trying to trade on the Sony name? They need to compete on price unless they have a truly unique product like the RX1 or RX100.

Regardless, this is actually a pretty good deal. If you're in Sony's system and don't have these accessories already, I'd make the jump. I still don't like the EVF for a flagship camera, but other than that, the A99 is a very solid camera.

The New Sigma f/1.8 Zoom Is The First Lens of The Post-Speed Booster Era

I said that the world had changed after Metabones announced their Speed Booster image-reducing lens adapter. To recap, what the Speed Booster does is take all of the light gathered by a full-frame lens and squeeze it down into an image circle that just fits an APS-C sensor. This does two things, first it eliminates the need for crop factor. Since the APS-C sensor is no longer taking only a small, center crop of the FF lens' image, it's no longer acting like a zoom. A 50mm full-frame lens no longer equals a 75mm APS-C lens. The final image is the same.

Second, it makes the image brighter. An f/2.8 full-frame lens increases in brightness to f/1.8 when all of that light is focused on the smaller APS-C sensor. It's wonderful.

There was nothing stopping lens companies from doing this. Canon, Nikon, et al., they could have made their FF lenses brighter on APS-C cameras with relatively small alterations to their FF lens optics. They did not do this because of greed.

Canon, Nikon, Sony: all of the camera companies make more money by restricting freedom. If they give you flexibility in how you manage your hardware, they limit their ability to squeeze money from your pockets. As such, it has taken them this long to simply take larger, FF lenses and squeeze them onto the APS-C sensor.

Indeed, even companies that exist solely as a discount alternative to system lenses, such as Sigma, display this greed.

Sigma is the first to respond, though. They have released an f/1.8 constant aperture zoom lens for APS-C sensors. It has an 18-35mm range, which equate to 27-52.5mm on full-frame, give or take a milimeter.

Usually, designing a lens and bringing it to market can take a long time — one to two years. I don't think that was the case with this lens. I suspect that they basically took an extant optical design and simply installed a Speedbooster-like optical element at the back of the lens.

Sigma does not have a FF lens with those specs, but they do have a discontinued lens that is 28-70mm f/2.8. That lens would equal around an 18-44mm f/1.8 on the Speed  Booster.

Moreover, if we analyze the measurements of the lens, we find similarly corroborating evidence. The 28-70mm Sigma lens weighs 18oz. The new 18-35mm lens weighs 28.6 oz. (If nothing else, the sheer weight and size of the lens confirms FF optics)

The Metabones Speed Booster with AF support weighs 7oz, giving the 28-70mm a weight of 25oz. Not exact, but close.

Similarly, the 28-70mm is 2.91" in diameter. Very close to the 18-35mm's 3.1". The length of the 28-70mm with the Metabones adapter attached is 4.43". Decently close to the 4.8" of the new 18-35mm, but not definitive.

All things considered, I think that this lens was a relatively quick rejiggering of an optical design they already had. When Sigma says that the design was difficult, I think they are lying. They are lying because they want to justify the very high price they are undoubtedly going to ask for it. Remember, this is the same company that tried to sell the SD-1 for $10,000.

Blackmagic Blows Away Everyone Else... AGAIN

I haven't had much time to write recently, but this could not be passed up.

About a year ago, Blackmagic announced the Cinema Camera. It offered unparalleled technology for one-fifth what other companies were charging. It was a game-changing camera and even now, Blackmagic corp. is unable to meet demand for its wonder-product.

Well, right after Panasonic decided to charge far more than it should have for the GH3; right after Canon released even more wildly overpriced crap; right after Nikon released a camera with awful video yet again; right after all of that, Blackmagic has done it again. Twice.

Blackmagic is releasing the not-unexpected 4K camera. What was a surprise was the time -- less than a year after the first camera -- and the global shutter. A 4K, global shutter, for $3999. Holy. Fucking. Shit. Canon can take its hyper-expensive C-Series of cameras and shove them were the sun don't shine.

The camera does lose a stop of dynamic range in the switch to the new shutter, but I remember reading that global shutter designs had a number of significant considerations that negatively affected other elements of the sensor, most notably in noise. I'm assuming that this is the reason for the loss. Frankly, it doesn't matter. One could purchase both cameras for less than the cost of a RED or Arri camera.

Perhaps the more exciting revelation is Blackmagic's compact, 1080p video camera undoubtedly aimed at competing with the Panasonic GH3. It has an active Micro 4/3 mount, does ProRes, and uses the same sensor as the original BMCC but employs a crop.

I say that this is the more exciting announcement because it appeals to a far larger demographic and is, I think, the more disruptive piece of technology. Currently, all camera companies are desperate to keep anything high-end away from their more entry-level pieces of technology, no matter how easy it would be to implement. They're doing this to service what's know as artificial segmentation.

There are many aspects to this process, but the end result as far as the consumer is concerned is that companies do not make the best product they can make. They make a product that fits into their catalog of products and thus forces customers to spend more than they should for certain features.

Blackmagic has come out of nowhere and completely schooled the entire industry in less than a year. This is what happens when an industry ossifies and becomes conservative and greedy. When true innovation comes along, it is such a stunning breath of fresh air that it creates an instant star. And that's what we have here -- a star. Blackmagic is going to be one of the industry's biggest players in the next five years. I guarantee it.

Fuji X100S Still Has A Quirk

More photos from the upcoming Fuji X100S are leaking out. The lens appears to definitely be the same as the X100, which is good I guess. It was a decent lens. The few people who have handled the camera also confirm that the autofocus is indeed much better (thank god). What has stood out, for me at least, is that the newest version of the X Trans sensor is retaining, infuriatingly, the same rendering quirks as the X Pro and X-E1.

Notably is the "painting" look that caused landscape photographers reject Fuji's baby in droves. The rendering can be seen most strongly in some field photos taken by Steve Huff, here. I'm not going to steal his images, because he deserves your clicks. Scroll down to the photos of the hanging shoes and look at the bokeh behind the brown boot. It looks awful on the Fuji. This problem was first found in the X Pro 1 and likely has to do with whatever wizardry is taking place to translate the X Trans sensor into an actual picture.

As I said, this is upsetting. Not terribly so, mind you, but upsetting. Fuji is pushing harder than any other company. Every camera generation is a significant upgrade from the previous generation, proving that Fuji understands that in the world of solid-state designs, "good enough" doesn't stay good enough for long.

So while I think it unfortunate that this particular problem has persisted in three generations of the camera, I maintain confidence that Fuji will get it worked out sooner rather than later. Granted, it's one of the reasons why Fuji has yet to receive any of my money... which is actually a pretty massive problem for Fuji now that I think about it... but Fuji remains on my radar in a way that no other company does.

Welcome to the Modern Era, Leica!

Analyses of Leica's new M camera have been posted across the various sites and, well, they look good. As always with Leica, though, the results are odd, verging on bad.

Looking at these results from Focus Numerique, we see a massive and material shift in image quality in the jump from ISO3200 to ISO6400. We saw a similar effect on the Leica Monochrom. Detail retention is good, but the amount of luminance noise is huge. Next to the Sony RX1, there is no competition. The RX1 is superior in every way.

DxOMark shows similar results. Wildly better than the old M, but still not up to the level of other cameras in its segment. And while the old M was unique on the market, the new M faces off against the RX1 and Fuji X Pro 1, making it a tough sell for anyone but the Leica faithful.

Still, the Leica sensor is competitive. That is much more than could be said of the old M, which produced inferior images to every other full-frame camera on the market.

WTF Consumer Reports?

I'm a fan of consumer reports. I buy their magazine. I subscribe to their website. Indeed, I read almost everything they produce.

That said, what the hell is up with their ratings of digital cameras? In the category of "SLR-like" cameras, in which goes all mirrorless models, the Panasonic GH3 tops the list. Alright. They specifically mention that GH3's exemplary video quality as a determining factor in putting it at the top. I can't much argue with that.

But the G5 comes in second? And the GH2 third? Both above the Olympus E-M5? Wha?

But wait! It gets weirder!

Just below the E-M5 is the Nikon J1! Seriously. A camera that has failed in the market and isn't taken seriously by any pros or enthusiasts as in their top ten.

All of these cameras are far above the likes of the Sony NEX-7, A77, and NEX-6.

It gets super-strange near the bottom of the list, where we find the awful Pentax Q cameras in similar standing as the Fuji X-E1, and the X Pro 1 is in last place. Last place?! The X Pro 1 had a lot of problems, some of which significant, but in no fucking universe is it in last place!

The SLR category isn't any less strange. The Canon 60D is in first place, followed by... the Olympus E-5. I have a hard time forming coherent sentences to describe my reaction to this.

The advanced point-&-shoot category has its fair share of bizarreness. Considering that the Panasonic FZ200 is the top camera, you would assume that this category only includes cameras with small sensors. You would be wrong! Drop down the list and you will find both the Sony RX100 and the Fuji X100. Two seminal cameras... squarely in the middle of the pack.

This absolutely does not affect my views of their other reviews. There are few magazines whose viewpoints I so rarely take with a grain of salt. This camera comparison, though, is so out in left field as to defy analysis or description.

Ignore it.