OM System just announced their new camera and a raft of new lens versions. The new camera is an exciting addition to their stable and will be aimed at a completely different type of photographer. Street and urban wildlife photographers and photographic artists, check out the OM-3.
I'll start by saying this is not a technical review; I will write one of those later when it is released. This is about the experience of using a new and unique camera.
The Lead up to the OM-3
There’s no denying that the two versions of the OM-1 cameras are aimed mostly at wildlife and landscapes. Consequently, there has been a huge migration from other systems to that camera because of its innovative computational photography features that leave other brands always playing catch-up. To name a few, there are Live Composite, Live Time, Live ND, and Live ND Grad. It has high-resolution shooting up to 80 megapixels. Those work alongside the recent massive leap forward with subject detection for birds, animals, people, and vehicles, including its Starry Sky autofocus, plus its incredible in-body and synchronized image stabilization. That’s not forgetting the unique sensor cleaning that leaves the sensor dust-free.
Furthermore, its stacked sensor, high-powered processor, and fast buffer give fast recording speeds, and shutter speeds of up to 1/32,000 second are possible. It also delivers up to 120 RAW frames per second. I should also mention the camera and lens size and weight advantage, as well as the shallower depth of field at any given subject distance, focal length, and aperture setting compared to other cameras. Oh yes, it’s IP53 weather-sealed, meaning when shooting in a heavy rainstorm, I am never concerned about water ingress.
On the other hand, the pocketable OM-5 carries most of those features and has been widely adopted by lifestyle photographers and adventurers. It’s smaller, lighter, and thus more portable. It’s adopted by photographers who want better quality images of family and friends, bloggers and vloggers, people looking for mushrooms in the forest, and those who hike up mountains, paddle canoes on rivers, and head out to sea. Now, a new camera is set to fit between these two models: we welcome the OM-3.
Now, a new camera is set to fit between these two models: we welcome the OM-3.
What Is the OM-3?
Aimed at a different market but versatile enough to cross over into other fields, the OM-3 oozes style and packs an arsenal of features almost the same as the OM-1. However, it has the added appeal of advanced color control that will attract artists. Street photographers and urban wildlife photographers will also be drawn to the camera. It’s a camera aimed at creativity and allows photographers to develop their styles inside the camera. Thus, it can negate the need for time-consuming post-processing.
The original designer of the half-frame Olympus PEN and PEN-F, the compact XA, and the OM range of 35mm SLR film cameras, the late Yoshihisa Maitani, realized that the size and weight of SLRs were a barrier to photographers. Subsequently, OM Digital Solutions is following the Olympus legacy and producing highly innovative, smaller cameras.
The OM-3 looks and feels like one of Maitani’s Olympus SLRs. Following the same ideals as its predecessors, it is smaller and lighter than its competitors. It is reminiscent of old Olympus film SLRs combined with the much-loved and reimagined Olympus PEN-F released in 2016.
When I picked it up, I was instantly transported back in time. Its look and feel are similar to my Olympus OM SLRs that I cut my serious photography teeth on nearly 50 years ago. In fact, sitting it side by side with my vintage Olympus OM-2, it has virtually the same dimensions, although it weighs considerably less.
It’s a thing of beauty, which isn’t something many modern cameras can claim.
With recent technological improvements, the historical noise issues with the Micro Four Thirds sensors are a thing of the past. Furthermore, the ever-increasing aging global population wants cameras that are easier to carry. There’s also the desire of a growing number of younger photographers not to carry hulking lumps of ugly plastic with them, despite them still wanting to capture photos beyond what is possible with a phone.
The Camera's Design and Build
This is a beautiful camera. Although a few photographers called for a new rangefinder-style camera like the PEN-F, market research clearly showed greater demand for one that looks like an SLR. Why else would they choose this design? I prefer the pentaprism-type body as it gives more room for additional controls.
Despite its retro styling, the OM-3 inherited most of the performance features from its big brother, the OM-1. It’s smaller than the OM-1 but slightly bigger than the OM-5. The retro look of this camera is boosted by its all-metal body and the silver and black casing, reminiscent of older SLR cameras. (There isn’t an entirely black version.) Despite its all-metal body, it weighs less than 500 g. All the switches and dials on the camera have a firm, solid feel to them.
On the front is a creativity dial, much like the one on the digital version of the PEN-F. Instead of delving deep into the menus, the front body dial switches between different creative color types. That is something that sets the camera apart from the OM-1. There are four color and four black-and-white profile options. Each is adjustable and can be saved in the camera as a preset. Consequently, hundreds of variations are possible, so photographers can create a look that suits their photographic style. Moreover, those looks can be saved and transferred to other cameras.
Immediately below are two default black-and-white presets before adjustment. The following illustrative images are unedited JPEGs from the camera demonstrating a tiny selection of the different looks achievable.
Like film SLR cameras, there’s no bulging grip at the front. However, the right-hand side (looking from the back) is longer, making it easy to grip, especially with the camera's rear thumb support.
It has front and rear exposure adjustment dials (called command dials by some manufacturers). For me, having two dials is essential for photography. Then, on top of the body are the mode dial, the hot shoe, the shutter release button, and other functional dials and buttons, plenty of which are customizable.
The rear sports a fully articulated Live View screen, along with more control buttons.
The camera has the same stacked sensor as the OM-1, which gives first-class image quality and shooting speeds. It also has 6.5 stops of image stabilization, plus an extra stop with Sync IS if the lens supports it.
Pleasingly, it takes the same high-capacity battery as the two OM-1 models and also supports in-body charging through its USB-C port.
Finding My Way Around the Camera
As a long-time user of Olympus and OM System cameras, the OM-3 felt familiar. The camera has inherited the improved menu structure from the OM-1, so setting it up was a doddle. The menu is sensibly organized and easy to navigate.
The model I received on loan to test came with the 12-45mm f/4 PRO lens. The camera was well-balanced with that lens and my 40-150mm f/4 PRO. I did try it with my physically wider and more highly featured 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO, and that was okay too, but aesthetically, the f/4 lenses were better and slightly better balanced.
Various buttons around the camera are programmable. I changed the function button from [+/-] to ISO, as exposure compensation is fully accessible through the dials anyway. The mode dial has a generous five custom settings—one more than the OM-1.
The front-of-body creative dial is what makes this camera stand apart from the other OM models, and indeed, any other camera. I won’t go into the full details of setting it up, but it gives a creative versatility beyond anything else I have come across. Combining the various color and tone settings gives an enormous range of creative effects that can be adopted as a personal style.
Although it has no specifically named film emulations, creating film looks is easy. Whether it’s a faded Polaroid or a grainy, high-contrast black-and-white, you can make adjustments to match them.
Ergonomics of the OM-3
When I attended a presentation about this camera, the representative from OMDS said that at first, they were unsure about the camera's shape and especially the lack of a forward grip. However, that fear was soon dispelled, and I agree. The elongated shutter button side of the camera is easy to grip, especially with the thumb rest at the rear of the body.
A problem I have with many other makes and models is due to my big hands and long fingers. I find that the side-mounted strap lug on the right-hand side can sit uncomfortably against my hand. Without a strap fitted, the D-ring was uncomfortable as it pressed against the base of my middle finger. However, fitting a strap negated that problem. Furthermore, my wife, with her small hands, didn’t experience that issue.
The controls are easy to reach and operate.
Like most cameras, it is designed for right-eyed people. However, testing it against my left eye, I found I had more peripheral vision with my right eye than with many cameras.
The supplied strap is a bit disappointing. Early adopters of the camera might get the excellent OM System leather strap included in the deal, but that may depend on your location.
In use, the camera was a joy. It had the best mechanical shutter sound of any camera I’ve used, with a deeper note than the OM-1. The viewfinder was bright and clear, and the controls were easy to reach. Shooting with it was fun.
All the switches and dials on the camera have a firm, solid feel to them.
It's for Video Too
At the time of writing, I hadn't tested the video, but the OM-3 comes with a host of advanced video capabilities that I will go into more in the technical review.
What I Liked and What Could Be Improved Next Time
What I Liked
- Versatile
- Solid all-metal body
- Great picture quality
- Inherited the wide array of unique features of the other cameras from the OM System stable
- It looks great
- Advanced video functionality
- Fun to use
What Could Be Improved Next Time?
- I would change the size and position of the strap anchor point, which doesn’t sit comfortably in my hand—although only when a strap is not attached. I would prefer a front- or top-mounted eye or, better still, an indented bar. (One of the reasons I like the OM-1 is that its anchor point is better placed than most cameras on the market.)
- The strap supplied with the camera could be of much better quality. However, most camera straps can be improved upon by aftermarket models.
- Although I could suggest a second memory card slot and a joystick, anyone needing those is more likely to buy one of the OM-1 models.
In Conclusion
A lot of new releases are underwhelming. We’ve reached a point where all cameras are good enough for what we want to do. I can understand some professionals wanting tiny incremental changes. But wedding, sports, and product photographers were taking great shots ten years ago with cameras that are now several generations away from where we are now. Therefore, it makes sense for this company to diversify with a great-looking camera, targeting its strengths to a new audience.
Walking around town to take test shots was a challenge because six people in an hour came to ask what the camera was. I had the brand name and model taped over—I had signed an NDA before borrowing it—and I quickly hid it under my coat as soon as people approached me. It really does look great, attracting interest from ordinary people and photographers alike. The last time I had that much interest in a camera was when I owned an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II.
I truly believe that photographic artists should be inspired by their equipment. I appreciate that is not a universally held belief, and if you disagree, that’s fine. However, if you are convinced that artists should surround themselves with inspiring things, then the OM-3 is a camera that will inspire.
I had a lot of fun shooting with this and playing with different creative looks within the camera settings. The stacked sensor provided excellent dynamic range and fast shutter speeds, just like the OM-1, and all the special features mentioned above were easily accessible.
This is a camera aimed at enthusiasts more than professionals. I conclude that because there’s no joystick and only one memory card slot. Yes, this camera performs in the same exceptional way as the OM-1, but as a professional photographer, I would choose the OM-1 to shoot a wedding because of the dual card slots. Similarly, although it has bird identification autofocus, I would be unlikely to attach my 150-400mm f/4.5 lens and head out to photograph puffins. It’s a camera capable of doing that, but the OM-1 Mark II's size and design are better suited. I might take it up a mountain or pack it in a canoe—it’s small and light enough—but if I were buying a camera specifically for those, I would be more inclined to get an OM-5 or even an OM System Tough because of their even smaller sizes.
However, if I were looking for a camera to use mainly for photographing the local streets, visiting festivals, creating a gallery of artistic photos, regularly meeting with other camera enthusiasts for photo walks, doing home portraits, or illustrating a book—all things I do on top of my work—this would be the camera I would choose. I would also pack it in my bike panniers when I head off on my early morning ride or take it on a walk along the beach or through a forest. Furthermore, my son is a concept artist, and this would be the perfect camera for taking photos for inspiration or photo-bashing.
It's a fun and easy camera to use, the results are great, and it has a beautiful design. There's not much more I could ask for.
Nice looking camera. It’ll be interesting to read the reviews once they start rolling in.
you just read one
Hi Ivor, it's a nice looking camera (though nothing beats the Hasselblad X2D in my opinion) and I always admire the build quality of OM and Olympus gear.
One thing baffled me, your line "as well as the shallower depth of field at any given subject distance, focal length, and aperture setting compared to other cameras" You are always stating that the larger dof of m43 compared to 35mm sensors (I know you don't like the term full frame) is one of the big plusses, and now suddenly m43 has shallower dof.
I'm also not convinced that a "creative dial" on a camera makes you more creative, on my camera there are picture styles, easily accessible by the Q menu, the are customizable , you can download them from the web and transfer between cameras , and I never use them. When I take an image I already have in my head how I want it to look before I even process the RAW file.
I agree that having two control/command dials is a must, since shooting with the R series I'm glad to have three, shutter speed, aperture and ISO.
The next time I visit a camera store, I will surely give the camera a look and feel.
I always counter the misinformation by the full-frame police who say their cameras have a shallower depth of field. They don't. Let's say you put the same focal length lens (e.g. 50mm) on a (full frame) 35mm camera such as a Sony A7 IV, and on a (full frame) Micro Four Thirds camera, (OM-1) and set them both to f/1.8, and focussed 2 meters away. The Sony would have a depth of field of 0.17 meters, on the OM-1 it would be 0.08 meters.
The truth is there are two sides to every story. If I put a 25mm lens on the OM-1, which would give a similar (not identical) field of view to Sony's 50mm lens, the depth of field would be 0.34 metres, still quite shallow but deeper than the Sony
With every advantage there comes a disadvantage. Those differences will suit some photographs and not others. But, it's so ingrained in the common psyche the great lie that MFT has less depth of field that I like redressing that.
The creative dial was hugely popular with the PEN-F users and it opens up an enormous range of adjustments not available in most cameras through the quick menus.
Thanks for the comment.
Here's the full frame police, and it did it's research:
compared the Canon EOS R to the OM systems EM-1 mk2
with a 50 mm lens at 1.8 fitted to both at 2 meters subject distance the OM has a depth of filed of 0.08 m and the EOS R 0.17m but......to get the same framing the OM uses will have to shoot at 4 meters giving him a dof of 0.33m. If the OM user fits a 25mm 1.8 to his camera to get the same framing at 2 meters his dof will be 0.33. So to get the same results in framing and composition a camera with a 35mm sensored camera has shallower depth of field than a m43 camera.
And that can be a useful thing or a downside, depends on what you are doing, portraits , macro's or landscapes. But don't start bending physics to make your camera look better.
So a MFT camera has deeper depth of field than 35mm full frame cameras, not what you stated in the article."as well as the shallower depth of field at any given subject distance, focal length, and aperture setting compared to other cameras"
Nice article Ivor. I have an OM-1 for my travels and I swap 2 zoom lenses back and forth on it. I was keen to see the pice of the OM-3 as it looks very nice. Just a little out of my budget for now though sadly.
I've been using it a lot since writing this and I'll be sad to send it back. I wouldn't swap it for my OM-1 Mark II, mainly because of the single memory card slot, and I think for traveling I would probably choose the smaller OM-5, which I think is a cracking little camera.
As is his wont, Ivor does not always stick to the actual real-world facts, preferring his own; he says, “Consequently, there has been a huge migration from other systems to the OM camera brand because of its innovative computational photography features that leave other brands always playing catch-up.” In reality, according to the most recent data, that can be fact-checked, most analysts predict that OM System's market share in 2025 will likely remain minimal, with little to no significant growth, potentially even seeing a further decline due to a lack of major new product releases and ongoing competition from other camera brands; some sources even suggest they might lose further market share, potentially dropping to around 3% of the mirrorless camera market. That right, OM’s current market share is around 4%. That’s the reality of the current situation that the OM lineup finds itself in, and not the dubious picture painted by the alternative facts that Ivor is promoting. Let it be clear: Ivor is, for all intents and purposes, a mouthpiece for OM systems, according to his own website; therefore, care has to be taken when reading his very one-sided OM-tinted articles that have a tendency to be thin on actual facts.
Now, I’m not saying this new camera or the current OM lineup are not good at what they do. I have many friends who use them and are very happy with their choice. I have nothing against any brand or axe to grind other than preferring sticking to the facts. While I use Sony cameras, currently the A7R5, I’m not blind enough or delusional enough to think they are the best brand out there. I just happened to find they suit my needs, though I’m sure a similar Nikon or Canon product would do just as well. I chose Sony a number of years ago as they were first to come up with a mirrorless camera that was a step up from my 5Dmk2. What I am saying is don’t be taken in by the spin Ivor puts on the capabilities of this particular brand and some of the claims he makes.
While this camera may well appeal to those who are shy of post-processing, which is totally understandable as editing does involve a pretty steep learning curve and can be very time-consuming. For those who just want to take photographs and simplify the workflow, this camera with its 'creative dial' may well be a good option. However, let's not fool ourselves or readers into thinking that photographic creativity can be had by the turn of a camera knob. This idea of real creativity built into any camera is more Ivor OM spin. Creativity firmly rests with the photographer.
The camera world is full of photographers who make claims that whatever they use is the best...because they use it. For new users, I would be careful in being taken in by any such claims. We are all individuals with individual needs and wants. In choosing a camera, be clear of what your individual needs are and then find a camera that meets those individual needs. Always seek impartial advice and steer clear of those who promote one system over another. They all have their strengths and weaknesses.
Saying one particular camera looks beautiful as Ivor claimed a number of times I find strange as most mirrorless cameras all look pretty much the same using a standard form factor, the differences being dials and knobs are shuffled around. Saying one particular camera looks beautiful is once more stretching things just a bit. This particular camera even looks similar to my old OM1 film camera I had in the 1980s, which you could say is a credit to the designers staying with that retro look.
Just to be clear, I’m not saying you should avoid OM system cameras, far from it as they have their place, what I’m saying is be clear about what your individual needs are when choosing a camera as it’s an expensive business where making the wrong choice can be costly.
Did you not read at the beginning of the article Ivor's clear statement: "I'll start by saying this is not a technical review". So Ivor is an enthusiastic OM user and fan. So what? On the other hand you seem to be obsessed with the fact that Ivor likes OM cameras and expresses positive opinions about them. Unfortunately, you contributed nothing useful to the discussion of the camera itself.
so what youre saying is , if someone says "this is not a technical review", it allows them to say whatever they want, even if not true?
That's an absurd interpretation.
So what did you mean then? In your response, you clearly used that statement to justify the rest of your comment implying that Ivors inaccurate statements can be attributed to that. your dismissal of my interpretation as 'absurd' doesn’t address the core concern i raised. the issue isn’t whether the article was labeled a technical review—it’s about the responsibility of any reviewer, technical or otherwise, to present information accurately and avoid misleading readers. disclaimers like 'this is not a technical review' should not serve as a free pass to make unchecked claims or subjective statements masquerading as fact. enthusiasm for a brand is fine, but when that enthusiasm crosses into potentially spreading misinformation, it warrants scrutiny. my point is that a review—technical or personal—should maintain a baseline of honesty and clarity, especially when influencing consumer decisions. dismissing my argument without engaging with its substance doesn’t strengthen your position; it simply avoids accountability for the standards to which reviews should be held.
Have a lovely day :)
I'm pretty sure, Eric, that most people with at least a first grade education would compare reviews from different sources before deciding on camera to purchase, but thanks for the advice anyway.
EWric always writes bad comments on Ivors articles. He has a big chip on his shoulder. Probably has small self esteem or something. 4% of a 9.7 billion dollar is about $3.9 million, I could be happy with that business size. and they develop new camera, a good sign.
To begin with, focusing solely on crappy picture style modes that folks with actual post processing knowledge largely ignore understates the enormous number of people who use camerqs witth virtually no post processing skills. Being able to flip easily through those modes without have to figure out the manual which they also dont do is more significant element than youve misrepresented. But you know that actually. You just chose not to state it....accurately.
And you also chose to ignore the direct access to computational modes that other systems dont have. And that are tremedously useful if not game changing. In camera ND and graduated ND filters are amazing. In camera live composite...also amazing. In camera fous stacking...amazing. pro capture....yeah...amazing.
In a great looking retro package.
The marketbis going to flip toward small camera systems and post processing algorithms. Large sensor systems are a dead letter....they just dont know it. The only unknown is whether OM Systems will stay afloat long enough, or will larger camera companies eventually consume them with there own small format systems which will inevitably arise.
It certainly looks like a gorgeous camera design the only thing I don't like is this trend for so many custom modes on the mode dial. FIVE custom modes? How are you suppossed to remember what mode was for what? The same with programable buttons, I would much rather have dedicated buttons which are labled for a specific purpose. Overall though, a fantastic camera.
Love the Custom Modes and use them all the time (the more genres/situations you shoot in the easier it becomes to easily switch from one to the other - far easier than trying to do it from within the menu), just rotate a dial and make any further adjustment deemed necessary quickly with the front / back dials. The more you use them the easier they are to remember.
We've long ago moved away from having buttons fixed for one purpose and almost everything on OM cameras is now programmable to our individual ways of shooting. Love that too.
Thanks for the comments, Keith and Kevin. I don't have a problem remembering the custom modes; I use a simple memory system that's easy to learn. I know photographers who write or print a label with the custom modes and stick it behind the Live View Screen. I agree with Keith that the customizable buttons are a boon. I reprogram some of mine. For example, on my OM-1s, the +/- button (for me) is redundant because of the two command dials, so that switches High Res shooting on and off while the video record button is for HDR. In video mode, the shutter button starts the video. I guess it's what you get used to.
Thanks for commenting.
In the micro 4/3 nerds video, it looks like you can name your custom modes.
You are absolutely right! I just checked the camera and it does allow them to be named. Thanks for spotting that.
Welcomed news from OM Systems, but the wrong camera. Always glad to see new offerings from a camera company, but as a former Olympus user until a few years ago, I kind of get the feeling that what camera buyers out there were hungry for was a new and improved version of the Olympus PEN-F, and not just a retro version that from what I'm seeing, introduces nothing new to the photographic consumer out there. Of course it looks very nice, and the specs seem to match what's out there already in the market. Style? Nice, but nowhere near the glitz of the PEN-F design, which would have appealed more perhaps to the legions of influencers and style conscious consumers out there. And of course, more pro specs do matter for some, but at this price range, perhaps there are other options out there worth considering. OM Systems really could use a WOW to appeal to those smartphone users out there so they can take the mirrorless plunge, and it seems to me that this was not it. So who is this camera for at this somewhat elevated price range in 2025? It kind of begs the question.
The people on the OM forums I inhabit LOVE this camera and it is undoubtedly the right camera at the right time to cash in not only on current OM users wanting a retro look but with features that come close to the OM1 (v2) but also for affluent yuppies (YT, IG etc.) who want an ILC camera with this type of image and functionality (and this camera is packed with functionality and features).
This is going to be a massive win for OMDS.
Hi Eric, I imagine OM System did the market research. Developing a new camera costs a seven-figure sum, so they won't have approached it without knowing the market. It may be the wrong camera for you, but the reception it gets suggests its very popular with a lot of others.
Thanks for the comments both.
Speaking about, I believe, the OM-1: "It has high-resolution shooting up to 80 megapixels." What I found is that the sensor is 20MP, so obviously the 80MP image is a result of some type of internal computational photography. Pixel shifting, apparently, whatever that means.
How well does it work? Would the quality of prints at 40" x 60" be comparable to a medium format Fuji camera? Being in the business of making large prints, that would be one of the first things I'd test on the camera. I've had an eye on the Fuji cameras but they're out of my price range at the moment.
“How well does it work? Would the quality of prints at 40" x 60" be comparable to a medium format Fuji camera?”
I have found it to work very well. As for the quality of prints -- that depends. If you laid both prints side by side and were pixel peeping with a loupe, then yes, you would see a difference. Hanging on a wall and viewing it from 6 or 8 feet away? Probably not so much.
I would argue that this is especially true if the camera was on a tripod and you minimally cropped the image.
While not related to IQ one should also consider the weight and volume of the system. My current MFT system -- body and three lenses (focal range from 14-300mm) weighs 1.2 kg and takes up 1.2 liters of pack space. Building an equivalent system with a Fujifilm medium format would weigh 4.25 kg and take 4.6 liters of pack space. A lighter weight and lesser volume system allows me to go deeper, longer and higher into the back country.
Nowadays we don't have to only rely on the sensor's MPs to print large. Software today is superb and I recently participated in an exhibition in Shanghai where I increased by x2 the M43 images for print (up to 120cms x 90cms) using upscaling software.
The prints were gorgeous and detailed. Could you see the difference between the upscaled versions and those taken with a larger sensor camera (I also had images from my Sony A7r5 in the exhibition)? Not for the customers that's for sure.
as long as the subject is still, it works amazingly well. I was out in the forest and there was a beautiful land scape. And I used it, it can really get you some high resolution. Great for landscapes, photographing art. you can use it on portraiture as long as the person holds their pose. it only takes a second or so to capture the 8 shots, the faster the iso and the more light there is the quicker it captures it. I usually turn up the iso, because it combines them and generally gets rid of a lot of noise in the combined image.
Great looking camera. I have an OM-1 and OM-1 mk ii. Enjoy both but see this as a great travel camera.
Yes. I think so too. Street photographers are going to love it as well. The more I use it, the less I look forward to returning it.
I love a retro looking camera, but I feel like the retro style hype train from a few years ago has smashed into a barrier called “no one has any money.”
Fair comment, lots of people are tightening their belts. But I hear there are plenty of people ordering it.
Unfortunately the money argument is true for all types of cameras nowadays.
The OM-3 looks like an interesting addition to the lineup, bringing a fusion of classic Olympus styling and modern creative control. The design, lightweight build, and in-camera creative options could make it particularly appealing for street photographers and photographic artists who want to craft their vision without spending hours in post.
That said, do you have concerns about the long-term viability of OM System?
After Olympus sold its imaging division to Japan Industrial Partners (JIP) in 2020, the transition to OM Digital Solutions brought both hope and uncertainty. JIP specializes in corporate carve-outs and struggling businesses, and historical data on Japanese mergers and acquisitions (M&A) raises red flags. About 25% of such deals result in write-offs and 10% lead to outright withdrawals. With that track record, I can’t help but wonder what the future holds for OM System. I hope they continue to innovate and support their users, but the long-term sustainability of the brand remains a question mark.
Paul Tocatlian
Kisau Photography
www.kisau.com
The same concerns were swirling around Nikon. Would it survive 2023? Might as well consult the tea leaves for what's gonna happen next.
I don't have any concerns at all. The company is back making a healthy profit and is seeing a large increase in people using the system, either switching to it or using it in addition to an existing system. I run a lot of photography courses and years ago it was rare for me to teach Olympus owners, now they are a regular feature. With the aging population, smaller and lighter camera/lens combinations appeal to many older photographers. I am also seeing a lot of younger photographers using the cameras too, because they don't want to be lugging big, ugly lumps of plastic around. I remember a video by a well-known photography commentator from 2018 saying Micro Four Thirds is dead. He got that wrong!
I've used Olympus cameras (now OM System) through from film OM1 1970's, OM4Ti 1980's all through to the present day for the same reasons, they are innovative, great glass, robust and most of all they are small and light. In the digital age I've never had anybody complain about the quality of my images from my Olympus/OM gear or not been able to get around perceived DOF issues so I concur with Ivor on this. It looks a great camera and I certainly will be buying one to replace my PEN F which was stolen recently along with my OM1 and OM4Ti, and in fact all my camera gear, luckily insured to the hilt!
Some camera's just feel right and become part of you and are greater than their constituent parts, hand, heart and mind. I've been lucky to have had two cameras like that, the OM4Ti and the Pen F and I have a feeling that the OM 3 will be another one.
Will it replace my OM1 mk2, no, for the reasons that Ivor outlines.
...and yes I too believe anyone that can be inspired by their equipment!
Thank you, Paul. The OM film cameras were great, weren't they? I had an OM-2n in the 1980s and have an OM-2 Spot Program, plus a couple of OM-10s now. I like that the heritage of those cameras continues in the styling of this camera.
This is it, the camera I've been waiting for!
I'm really digging the Pen-F: people always ask me to take their photos when they see it. That creative dial is awesome—I can switch between color and B&W without looking away.
But the autofocus misses a lot, the battery life sucks, and weather sealing would be great.
The OM-3 fixes all that in a sweet package.
Am I the only one who thinks that this camera is ugly?
Probably not, but you’re the only one stating it.
I've seen uglier cameras from Sony, Canon and Fujifilm.
I'm selling all my digital camera equipment - I'm bored with photography, there's too many photographs in the world these days. You can't avoid it.
Drawing and painting gives more satisfaction. :)
I can get that you’re bored with photography and prefer painting and drawing. But too many photographers , how does that influence your own joy in photography?