8 ms·

Photography is one of those areas where devices don't go obsolete very quickly. With a good lens from 50 years ago I can still take an excellent photo on a digi

Photography is one of those areas where devices don't go obsolete very quickly. With a good lens from 50 years ago I can still take an excellent photo on a digital camera from 15 years ago. Sure you won't have all the bells and whistles of the latest cameras and you'll sacrifice a few stops of dynamic range but for the average hobby photographer that doesn't really matter. The only customers who will upgrade every few years are professionals and Olympus hasn't had a huge offering for professionals. The micro four thirds standard is a great compromise between size and picture quality but it isn't what most professionals are looking for. They can use a phone for most of the things that an Olympus camera is good for and everyone these days already has a phone on them. One market that hasn't been explored by camera manufacturers is software upgrades. I would pay a fair bit of money to get some of the latest computational photography features on my 5 year old camera.

sumoboy 6y ago
Sony appears more like Apple supporting older bodies with firmware updates which is unfortunate for Canon and Nikon owners. The Canon R / RP are pretty much dead products after one year due to lack of upgrades, but pretty much the same attitude holds true for even there pro 1D bodies. I think few factor this in before buying since just don't know.
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  Yes, the older A7s getting eye autofocus and advanced PDAF for adapted lenses being trickled out was pretty cool.
taborj 6y ago
Yep. I throw 30-40 year old lenses on my 10 year old E-PL1 and go out and just have fun with photography. I never worry about taking it out on the beach, or on a boat, or any other place that cameras die. If it dies...I just pick up another one cheaply and continue having fun, and because I'm not as concerned about it, I take it places and get shots that others don't. It's like having a beat up old 4x4 pickup. It gets the job done, and if you bang it up a bit in the process...oh well.
pedrovhb 6y ago
> Photography is one of those areas where devices don't go obsolete very quickly. True, and kudos to the photography industry for that. My fully mechanical, analog, 1992 Zenit camera has the same hot shoe flash system and tripod mount as current cameras coming out. With a cheap simple adapter I can also use its original lens on any digital camera. The Canon EF mount was introduced in 1987 and new cameras are only now ditching it for a new standard to take advantage of new technology, and not for the sake of breaking backwards compatibility and forcing customers to buy the latest and greatest.
- ISL 6y ago
  Moreover, EF is still supported through an R adaptor. They're completely backward compatible.
eropple 6y ago
Panasonic pushed a ton of features to the G9 (my current top-end camera) that make it very competitive with the GH5 for video, so they seem to have gotten some religion on that front. Five year old cameras are likely past the cliff of "too slow "for a lot of feature improvement, though. I have a GH3, a G7, and a GH4, and they all have the same sensor but even the UI on the GH3 runs slower and chunkier. Trying to wedge more stuff into it seems like a bad time.
pkulak 6y ago
Man, I hate this phone analogy. Every shot I take with M43 looks nothing like anything taken with a phone. I just took these shots a couple days ago, for an example. There's no way you get anything close to this with a phone. https://photos.app.goo.gl/TSFhhA5igk1iEfRbA https://photos.app.goo.gl/TSFhhA5igk1iEfRbA
- barbegal 6y ago
  Which is true, but very few professionals would use a Micro four-thirds camera to take these type of photo over a DSLR.
- holografix 6y ago
  No offence but I’m guessing you haven’t taken many photos with an iPhone 11 Pro.
  - pkulak 6y ago
    Even 50mm isn't close enough for me. And fake bokeh looks terrible even when it works. Absolutely amazing for what it is, but it's not replacing my camera.
- onion2k 6y ago
  Every shot I take with M43 looks nothing like anything taken with a phone. How much of that is an actual difference in the camera tech and how much of it is subjective perception? I suspect for things like the two photos you linked to, even the best professional photographers would struggle to tell the type of camera was used to take them. By the time they've gone through a few apps and services and they're being viewed in Google Photos they could have come from a phone, or an M43 camera, or even a high-end medium format dSLR. I do wildlife photography when I'm not building web stuff (https://www.instagram.com/onion4k/ https://www.instagram.com/onion4k/) - that's pretty much impossible with a phone camera simply because you need to a really long focal length for any animals that won't come close to you, but I still see people out in the countryside giving it a try. I often wonder if they're happy with the pictures they take. I suspect they are. For most people photography is about recording the moment more than producing a print quality picture.
cialowicz 6y ago
I'd argue that cameras don't really ever go obsolete, given the artistic nature of photography (as long as you can get the image out of the camera and onto a medium). Any great photo that you've ever admired was take on either previous or current generation gear.
- Polylactic_acid 6y ago
  In my eyes a camera is obsolete as soon as the average phone can take a photo as good. My parents got a $300 sony camera recently but other than zoom, I just can't see why you would carry it around when your phone takes the same photo.
  - fomine3 6y ago
    I assume some $300 range cameras has sensor that same (or less) size to $600 smartphones.
    - Polylactic_acid 6y ago
      They are almost entirely pointless in my opinion I'm not sure why they even sell low end cameras anymore. The only potential benefit I see is the software allows a lot more manual control but it also doesn't have as good automatic improvements that phone software has.
      - fomine3 6y ago
        Even though a sensor is poor, it has better form factor, better zoom, and it's dedicated device.
      - Jaxan 6y ago
        The battery typically lasts for weeks. This is something we cannot say at all for phones...
        Polylactic_acid 6y ago

sumoboy 6y ago

Sony appears more like Apple supporting older bodies with firmware updates which is unfortunate for Canon and Nikon owners. The Canon R / RP are pretty much dead products after one year due to lack of upgrades, but pretty much the same attitude holds true for even there pro 1D bodies. I think few factor this in before buying since just don't know.

sudosysgen 6y ago
Yes, the older A7s getting eye autofocus and advanced PDAF for adapted lenses being trickled out was pretty cool.

taborj 6y ago

Yep. I throw 30-40 year old lenses on my 10 year old E-PL1 and go out and just have fun with photography. I never worry about taking it out on the beach, or on a boat, or any other place that cameras die. If it dies...I just pick up another one cheaply and continue having fun, and because I'm not as concerned about it, I take it places and get shots that others don't. It's like having a beat up old 4x4 pickup. It gets the job done, and if you bang it up a bit in the process...oh well.

pedrovhb 6y ago

> Photography is one of those areas where devices don't go obsolete very quickly. True, and kudos to the photography industry for that. My fully mechanical, analog, 1992 Zenit camera has the same hot shoe flash system and tripod mount as current cameras coming out. With a cheap simple adapter I can also use its original lens on any digital camera. The Canon EF mount was introduced in 1987 and new cameras are only now ditching it for a new standard to take advantage of new technology, and not for the sake of breaking backwards compatibility and forcing customers to buy the latest and greatest.

ISL 6y ago
Moreover, EF is still supported through an R adaptor. They're completely backward compatible.

eropple 6y ago

Panasonic pushed a ton of features to the G9 (my current top-end camera) that make it very competitive with the GH5 for video, so they seem to have gotten some religion on that front. Five year old cameras are likely past the cliff of "too slow "for a lot of feature improvement, though. I have a GH3, a G7, and a GH4, and they all have the same sensor but even the UI on the GH3 runs slower and chunkier. Trying to wedge more stuff into it seems like a bad time.

pkulak 6y ago

Man, I hate this phone analogy. Every shot I take with M43 looks nothing like anything taken with a phone. I just took these shots a couple days ago, for an example. There's no way you get anything close to this with a phone. https://photos.app.goo.gl/TSFhhA5igk1iEfRbA https://photos.app.goo.gl/TSFhhA5igk1iEfRbA

barbegal 6y ago
Which is true, but very few professionals would use a Micro four-thirds camera to take these type of photo over a DSLR.
holografix 6y ago
No offence but I’m guessing you haven’t taken many photos with an iPhone 11 Pro.
- pkulak 6y ago
  Even 50mm isn't close enough for me. And fake bokeh looks terrible even when it works. Absolutely amazing for what it is, but it's not replacing my camera.
onion2k 6y ago
Every shot I take with M43 looks nothing like anything taken with a phone. How much of that is an actual difference in the camera tech and how much of it is subjective perception? I suspect for things like the two photos you linked to, even the best professional photographers would struggle to tell the type of camera was used to take them. By the time they've gone through a few apps and services and they're being viewed in Google Photos they could have come from a phone, or an M43 camera, or even a high-end medium format dSLR. I do wildlife photography when I'm not building web stuff (https://www.instagram.com/onion4k/ https://www.instagram.com/onion4k/) - that's pretty much impossible with a phone camera simply because you need to a really long focal length for any animals that won't come close to you, but I still see people out in the countryside giving it a try. I often wonder if they're happy with the pictures they take. I suspect they are. For most people photography is about recording the moment more than producing a print quality picture.

cialowicz 6y ago

I'd argue that cameras don't really ever go obsolete, given the artistic nature of photography (as long as you can get the image out of the camera and onto a medium). Any great photo that you've ever admired was take on either previous or current generation gear.

Polylactic_acid 6y ago
In my eyes a camera is obsolete as soon as the average phone can take a photo as good. My parents got a $300 sony camera recently but other than zoom, I just can't see why you would carry it around when your phone takes the same photo.
- fomine3 6y ago
  I assume some $300 range cameras has sensor that same (or less) size to $600 smartphones.
  - Polylactic_acid 6y ago
    They are almost entirely pointless in my opinion I'm not sure why they even sell low end cameras anymore. The only potential benefit I see is the software allows a lot more manual control but it also doesn't have as good automatic improvements that phone software has.
    - fomine3 6y ago
      Even though a sensor is poor, it has better form factor, better zoom, and it's dedicated device.
    - Jaxan 6y ago
      The battery typically lasts for weeks. This is something we cannot say at all for phones...
      - Polylactic_acid 6y ago