Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by liork

  1. 5 hours ago, DBounce said:

    It's not a E-M1 II with a grip. In terms of the body it is greatly updated. The weather-sealing is top notch. It no doubt is a much tougher camera. Granted, it shares much of its electronics with the E-M1 II, but the body is a huge upgrade. That said, you would have to be a bit insane to want to plop down $3000 for this camera. From all accounts this camera is robust, but it is outdated in many important ways. While the image stabilization is amazing, the warping effect that it sometimes produces will be the gremlin that ruins the important must get shot for you. 

    It's not hard to make the decision to pass on this one. I think this camera may be further proof that M43 is dying. They could have done something epic at this price point.... built in ND, Global shutter, Dual ISO, 120 fps 4k.... the body is certainly large enough; but all they did was to toughen the body and rehash some old tech. Pity. 

    No, its not a "much tougher" camera comared to the E M1 II. You could wash the E M1 II in tap water and have no problem, you can go into water falls taking pictures, I had no problem doing that. Working in minus 10 Celcius degrees? Done that, No problem.

    Olympus always gave us impressive weather proof bodies, so I don't see any real E M1 X advantage in this area.

  2. 10 minutes ago, frontfocus said:

    Now that the official specs are out, the camera looks really disappointing from a videostandpoint. No 4K 60p, low bitrates, only 8bit and so on...

    Personally I thought it would at least get G9 specs

    Agree, total fail.

  3. 2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

    I read articles/forums claiming they did, but I could not find any actual proof. I think if they did, that would make the rolling shutter even worse lol. I have no idea how they even accomplish rolling shutter that high (5div & eos r) with a 1:1 crop ?

    Yes, probably its a hardware limitation that cannot be fixed by firmware.

  4. 12 minutes ago, DBounce said:

    Not seeing a massive difference between UHD and FHD imo. Granted there is some,  and in some instances that may be important... but when filming people does it matter? I'm not so sure.

    I agree its does look quiet good, but maybe its relevant for a very specific case : shooting faces from real close distance. If its the only or mainly the thing you shoot, than its OK for you. I remember the first Sony A7S had a great FHD quality (sharpness and details), but on most cases, I see a clear difference compared to UHD (on a UHD screen of course). Surely it will gain you much wider angle on the EOS R which is a good thing.

  5. 9 hours ago, Mokara said:

    That is because most MILCs don't oversample enough or don't oversample at all, so some degradation happens.

    The NX1 did a pretty decent job at it though.

    Well, some MILC oversample from 6K and there is still degradation in EIS.

  6. 8 hours ago, Mokara said:

    As long as you have minimal rolling shutter and an oversampled sensor, using EIS should be superior to IBIS.

    Well, still waiting for the first Mirrorless camera to show it. Right now, all present models show sharpness decrease in EIS.

  • Create New...