honestly this camera is a bit of a sore spot for me. it was my first introduction to the online photography community and the elitism that seemed to surround it at the time (no idea if things have changed, I left and never looked back). from what I saw it got lots of hate because it was a mirrorless camera (with an aps-c sensor at that) and that samsung was an appliance and phone brand not a "real" camera brand, so "best to not waste your time with it as they'll never succeed." basically a self fulfilling prophecy.
I started with the OMD-1 years ago. I liked the lightweight and size vs the DSLR of the day I still am not sold on OM systems as a company. The OM-1 ll was not much of an upgrade. From my existing OM-1. I suspect at some point I will switch to Sony and probably pick up a Panasonic body for m 4/3 as I am getting into video more and more and have a nice collection of lenses.
This is a really good review and well made video. I expect you feel like the view count vs effort level didnt pay off here, but you didnt do anyting wrong, I think you just got swamped by all the big channel releasing their reviews. I would maybe make a video doing something different from everyone else about it and focus on one aspect then lead them to this video from that one. Like a video that stands out among the reviews because you are doing just one area in depth maybe.
I think it's an excellent convenience, but far from being a feature that would lead me to buy a new camera. The same can probably be said for many of the most recent enhancements, but it is all dependent on the type of photography one does and where one is looking to take it. A secondary consideration for me regarding a choice between this and a piece of glass is how much faster / more responsive it would allow me to be - assuming the filter holder is attached, i'm guessing that dropping in a piece of glass and physically rotating would be quicker than setting-up and messing around via the screen. Good to see Oly (OM) continuing to look to find innovative solutions - it's what has kept the system alive thus far. Cheers - well done vid. Lkd&Subd - from a cabin in a swamp in a rainforest in New Zealand.
I have three NX1 bodies and two NX500s, with almost all the original Samsung lenses and two copies of the 16-50 f/2-2.8. Plus numerous adapters to be able to use the lenses with all possible mounts. Of all the cameras of almost all the brands that I still have and that I have never resold, except the awful, indecent Kodak SLR/n, year 2004, these Samsung are still my favorites both for the quality of the picts [I don't shoot videos], and for the comfort and speed of operation that makes me feel at ease, menu structure and excellent ergonomics for the NX1. As soon as I used the first NX1, I immediately preferred it to the three Sony A7S, A7, A7R. I take panoramic pictures around and above mountains, to do Gigapixel images, stitching many many AEB shots. The only problem I noticed for the NX1, but not for the NX500, is the tendency to produce blurred shots because of the camera shake with shutter speeds between ~ 1/100-1/60 and 1s with the camera mounted vertically on a three-axis panoramic head on a good tripod, even with medium focal lengths, not only telephoto that amplify the blur. But this also happens/happened with the Sony A7R due to the movement and the micro shock created by the shutter curtains. Unfortunately they does not have a purely electronic shutter.
I remember when this camera was launched. I watched every video review. It was my dream to get one and I was heart broken when Samsung quietly closed their camera branch.
I still have the mirrorless Samsung NX-11 that I bought around 2013 and I love it. It does have 2 small issues with a malfunctioning self-timer and a missing ISO100 option that could potentially have been repaired by firmware if Samsung's camera division hadn't folded.
Great review! I'm struggling between the OM 1 mk1 and Lumix GH9 mkii. The Oly is down to HK$900 and the Lumix is HSK1200. I can't decide if I need the extra resolution of the Lumix or the better build quality of the OM
I'd like to get this lens. I don't mind that it is a rebranded Sigma but I do mind that it's, effectively, a rebranded Sigma with a $1000 OM System adapter. Did it really cost that much extra to modify the lens to fit the OM cameras?
I still have my NX1. The video quality is ridiculously good. Still holds up in 2024 and will last for another few years for sure. I mostly use it as B or C camera for weddings shoot. Indeed the camera was way ahead of its time!
Not sure if this is legit but I have previously read that the external recording was 4k 422 10Bit. If so it would be great. If you have one maybe you can test it.
I think if they had made a full frame camera to compete with the Sony A7 they would still be making cameras today. The apsc pro camera market is small, smaller than that of the full frame one, it is likely samsung expected to sell as many units as a full frame camera, not an apsc one. With how good the NX1 was a full frame samsung would have likley been even better and could, with the right marketing, have been a true competitor to the Sony A7 line
OM should do a 200-500mm and try to cut down the weight,. I agree that if you are a serious birds photographer then this focus length is definitely a plus, weight is acceptable for this purpose, 100-400 may be a bit short,
Its not worth the upgrade cost from the OM1.1 given the advancements in processing software or by using HDR1 on the OM1. Lastly its the sky you want to effect and not the subject these days the only filter that is required is a polarizing. Id skip this camera and wait a couple of years for the next with more realistic cost benefits. (I have an OM1.1, EM1MKIII and EM10MKIII WITH A BAG FULL OF LENSES)
Lovely photos. I'm thinking about an OM-5 so I'm looking at a lot of examples and reviews, so this has been helpful. I like a little more contrast in my photos, but I guess that's just down to how we choose to process them. Thank you!
Thanks for the comment. I found the OM-5 to be a very cool camera for a trip away. It does have drawbacks as mentioned, but on the whole I see its potential
The reason I moved from full frame to M43 is so that I didn't have to lug my Sigma 150-600 around. So I sold it and got an OM-1 and the Panasonic Leica 100-400 (faster and lighter than the OM Systems equivalent). I'm not going to start carrying that weight again.
I've just sold my Olympus 100-400 to get this lens. Been using it for slightly more than a month. Its sharp, the AF is fast, and the extra zoom range is very noticeable. The only problem is the extra 1kg is also noticeable. Will need some time to get used to this new weight, but I do find that its quite balance. Also, I found that switching from a neck strap to a sling strap helps a lot to avoid neck aches.
I have been using m4/3 system for about 6 months now and so love the smaller size. But at the end of the day full frame still wins out in overal image quality. Not slickly due to the bigger sensor but more the bigger pixels. I wish the manufacturers would stop the silly megapixel race. It’s ridiculous at this point. I use the lumix G9II and with 25mp on a sensor that is literally 4x smaller than a full frame system. The images are not at the same level of my Sonys or nikons with the same 24mp on full frame. Size of those pixels makes a bigger difference than the number of them. I wish I could get a 12mp m4/3 sensor with more dynamic range. But I know that will never happen due to the marketing hype of having to keep up with the jones when it comes to megapixels. But for what I use my m4/3 system for most video it is good enough for now. Plus the G9II has features that only the flagship 6k Nikons and Sonys are just barely getting around to putting on them. Pre burst shooting is a game changer for shooting birds and other fast moving skittish creatures. Shots I would miss due to not having the reaction time required is a thing of the past with pre burst
Thanks for making that review. I have been looking at getting a good used kit for wildlife photography. I’ve been all over the map for months in terms of sensor size and brand. However, when I look at the FF lens size and weight compared to your MFT system I’m back thinking about a lumix G9 or an Oly mod em1 mii. Do you feel like you’re missing out on anything with your MFT system? Thank you!
I really don't understand why Olympus/OM System seem to attract so much negativity with everything they do, and yet they have always innovated and set standards that other camera makers copy but rarely equal. When Leitz first introduced their 35mm cameras and then the Japanese companies adopted the format too, 35mm was ridiculed as being too small for real photographers, and yet Leica are now considered the most prestigious and desirable cameras, a 35mm became the standard for film, which was then emulated in digital. When Maitani introduced the Olymps Pen half frame camera it was ridiculed by "serious" photographers but sold well. When he made the iconic OM-1 SLR it too was ridiculed as being a toy and too small to be a real professional system, and yet it had a much larger viewfinder than any other camera, and many other features and lenses that made it unique. It wasn't long before Pentax, Canon and Nikon were all producing much smaller SLRs. When digital came along, Olympus stuck to its philosophy of making smaller, innovative cameras firstly with the Four Thirds DSLRs, then with Micro Four Thirds mirrorless system that was years ahead of what other manufacturers were making, and their IBIS is still market leading. Olympus understood that digital sensors worked differently to film so didn't need to match the frame size of film. Yes, low light performance was not as good, but it wasn't great on larger sensors either in those early days. And how many photographers today have actually tried pushing ISO 200 film to 1600 or 3200? The results, especially with colour, aren't what you would call great. When Olympus got caught in a financial scandal it sold off its loss-making camera and audio division to JIP. Everyone started shouting about the end of the system and MFT. Then the new OM-1 came out, and they couldn't make them fast enough. However this was a camera that was already in development at Olympus. There was a new company formed (OMDS) with the existing R&D team, but new management who had to not only make sure they kept the business and manufacturing going, but also do it without the financial backing of Olympus's hugely successful and profitable medical division. OMDS also had to start rebranding their cameras and lenses because they could no longer use the Olympus brand after the initial release of the OM-1. However, they could use OM System, which was always part of the branding of the Olympus SLRs (OM being Olympus Maitani). So, although OMDS is a relatively new company, which has managed to take the failing imaging division into profit, it is still attracting masses of negativity, particularly from RU-vid "experts". Developing new cameras and lenses takes time and money. OMDS has managed to stay in business and become profitable, but they also needed to keep releasing new products so that they didn't get accused of doing nothing. They also needed to rebrand all their gear to OM System, because they were no longer part of Olympus Corporation. That meant releasing minor upgrades to existing cameras, and lenses that were already in development, all with the new branding. Collaborating with Sigma on the 150-600mm was a smart business decision. OMDS has committed their marketing and branding towards nature and wildlife and releasing a super telephoto made good sense, but why reinvent the wheel? Their M4/3 partner Panasonic has had a longtime partnership with Leica for lens design, and both have partnered with Sigma in the L-Mount Alliance for "full frame" lenses. Tamron has been making new Nikkor branded lenses for Nikon, a company that has always been renowned for its glass. Sony, another electronics company like Panasonic, partnered with Zeiss for lenses from the outset, as well as opening their mounts to all third-party lens makers, which is a major contributor to Sony's success in digital cameras. So why shouldn't OMDS get Sigma to customise one of their existing design to meet their requirements and specifications, and make a far better lens that perfectly suits the OM digital cameras? This leaves the OMDS R&D department free to work on other new designs. When it comes to the 150-600, it fits perfectly between the 100-400mm and the white 150-400 pro beast, in terms of price, weight and features. As far as I can gather from people who actually need and use such a lens, it delivers the goods, and the size and price aren't really an issue. And let's face it, there's no shame or anything wrong with using a tripod or monopod if it helps. Back in the late '70s/early '80s I was using an 800mm f/8 lens on my OM-1 body, and there was no way I was going to try handholding that bazooka. If you don't want to buy or use the lens, then don't, but please stop all the bloody whinging in the comments. It doesn't help anyone and makes you look like a bit of dick. Nice balanced review though. And apologies for the length of the comment, all the negative comments were pissing me off.
OM System has very good colors rendering. But with your post processing its looks like old fashion color grading which is doesn't show all beauty of that sensor...
I bought the NX1 on its launch and was so dissappointed when it was discontinued. I even contacted Samsung to express my concern that they were making a big mistake. Over the past four years I invested in Sony gear but now on retirement I have returned to my first love, the NX1 and buying everything back via ebay. It is still as good as I remember. No regrets and I particularly do not miss Sony's menu system.
Awesome camera. I use mine as well as the NX11 regularly. Fantastic video especially the Full HD 120 fps. I wish they had continued making cameras, would have given much competition for the other large brands..
I think you are spot on. Is it for everyone? Nope. Is is large? Depends on your perspective. If you are a street photographer with an M5 and regularly use the compact and amazing f4 pro lenses then this isn't for you. And that's okay. Don't buy it. However, for a 1200mm reach in a super zoom, it is compact & reasonably priced. Which coincidentally does maintain a main attraction of the mft format. I can't afford the otherworldly big white 150-400 but this unique lens is possible and exciting for me. I am glad we have another choice added to the wide range of mft lenses.
I use om, but I would not buy this Sigma. How does it change wildlife photography? It has been available from sigma in other mounts for ages AND it is cheaper!!
