[boren]

[quote name='Martin R.' timestamp='1284497655' post='2763']

I doubt that you would put a A33 or some compact cameras with 14MP and 20fps mode above a Nikon D3 just because of some numbers with little to no practical relevance?[/quote]



You're missing the point. The fact is that Sony could squeeze those features in a $650 body, and Olympus didn't bother to do it in a pro body, even when they knew it's going seriously let down most of their user base and will result in a lot of lost sales. It's almost as if they want this camera to fail, just to be able get an excuse to ditch FourThirds as a non-lucrative platform.

It's not so helpful on the E-1.

I never used the E-1, but I find a very similar red-pattern AF assist lamp to be helpful on my flash units and some older film SLR's which had it built in. I guess it's a matter of implementation. My 1990 Minolta 8000i could focus on a blank white wall in almost any lighting condition thanks to using its powerful red-pattern AF assist lamp as a last resort before hunting. It worked so well, the camera almost always managed to lock on difficult subjects, as long as they were within the range of the lamp. But hey, it doesn't need to be that advanced (wink), I'd settle on an implementation that makes good use of this lamp when the light is dim.

The Nikon D70 had a green light which is annoying.

It's still a lot less annoying than the strobing the built-in flash.

I doubt that the GH1 sensor is significantly better than the PEN Sensor. I think this is mainly some forum hype.

It is 2/3 to a whole stop better in DR and noise, and very competitive with the best APS-C sensors. Check out the various reviews, and specifically dxomark.com measurements.

Yes, that's also my opinion, but the sensor size has very little impact on camera size if you want to keep the viewfinder as large as the competition. The shorter flange back distance would allow for a thinner camera, but the swivel display will add those extra mm again.

Fair enough, but I believe a merge of the E-30 overall size and articulated screen with the K-7 seals would result in a significantly smaller body than what we have we the E-3/E-5.

Also see comment above, Olympus reused an old camera shell to save r&d costs.

That's probably the main reason in the case of the E-5.

I had hoped for the option to use an optional EVF like on the newer PENs. Also didn't happen.

A DSLR with support for an external EVF? Now that would have been innovative and relatively easy to develop.

There is little innovation in all new DSLRs these days.

Maybe because there is little room for innovations.

It's mostly a numbers game. 2fps more, 3MP more, a few AF points and so on.

Come on, when was the last time a top-of-the-line camera was released with zero innovation? I can't think of one such example.

Maybe Olympus will sell 10.000 or 20.000 E-5 cameras. You can't finance much development & innovation with those sale numbers.

That's the catch. You can't sell more units without offering a tempting product, and you can't develop a tempting product without getting the funds from selling more units.

A contender for comparing data sheet numbers or as a tool to make photographs?

A contender for being a product that actually sells.



BTW, if I had to choose one DSLR+lens combo without thinking about budget or future gear purchases, I would have gone for the E-5 and 12-60 over any other combination. Everything else is either too heavy and/or lacking the features I want (in-body IS, articulated screen, multiple cross-type AF points, AF micro-adjust, dual dials, serious build quality etc). The superb 12-60 would have been the clincher. But life is more complicated than that of course <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />