I’ve had a couple of people ask me this morning for my opinions regarding the brand new Olympus—sorry, I mean OM System as they are now called—OM-3 camera, which was announced today. I don’t have a lot of strong thoughts about it, and I’ve never handled the camera nor seen it in person, so these opinions should be taken with a large grain of salt.
Micro-Four-Thirds (M43) sales have been on the decline for years. It’s a shrinking market and has been for awhile, but it’s not dead (yet, anyway). Olympus—err, OM System—has surprisingly strong sales in Japan, but not worldwide, where it’s largely a minor (and almost forgotten) footnote in today’s digital camera market. The OM-3 will surely help to bring more international attention to the brand and the format.
I don’t have any major issues with the camera itself. I think M43 hit a ceiling several years back, and there’s not a lot of room for growth. You see that in this camera, as it’s not especially innovative compared to their releases going back to 2019. This is not a suggestion that the camera isn’t good, only that the system needs some major technological innovation in order to break the ceiling it is currently pinned against. Right now, they seem to be leaning into AI for that, but I’m not sure if that’s going to do it.
The OM-3 is a bit large and expensive for what it is. This is a Fujifilm-centric blog, so I will make some quick apples-to-oranges comparisons to X-series models. It’s similarly sized to the Fujifilm X-T50, and just a smidge heavier—I think that’s the Fujifilm model the OM-3 is most similar to, although they are divergent enough not to directly compare. The OM-3 is better-looking, but (unfortunately, IMHO) with a dial format more similar to the X-S20, plus a swivel screen. The OM-3 is weather-sealed, and in that sense it could be compared to the X-T5. The stacked sensor will draw some comparisons to the X-H2s, while the price is the same as the X-H2. I think if OM System had been able to price it three or four hundred dollars less, it would be a bit more compelling. Perhaps the camera that the OM-3 will get compared to the most is not a Fujifilm model, but the Nikon Zf. It’s possible that Olympus views this more as a competitor to that camera, and less to any specific Fujifilm model.
For those with M43 cameras, the OM-3 must be a sight for sore eyes. Between both OM System and Panasonic, M43 has averaged only two camera releases per year for several years now, so new bodies are few-and-far between. The OM-3 is the best-looking M43 camera released in awhile. It’s basically a flagship model, so it has a lot of solid features. For those on the outside—who aren’t already in the M43 system—I’m not sure this camera is enough to draw you in, especially when there are options with larger sensors, more resolution, higher dynamic range, better high-ISO, smaller depth-of-field, etc., for the same or less money, and not much larger, if larger at all.
The advantages that M43 has over other sensor formats are size, weight, and price. The OM-3 doesn’t leverage any of those advantages, but if Olympus were to make a new PEN-F, that very well could be a big success because it would play to the advantages of the system. If I were them, I would do that before 2025 is over. I would also return to the Olympus brand name, as OM System just doesn’t have as good of a ring to it, nor does it hold any nostalgia (plus, I keep accidentally typing Olympus instead of OM System…), but I highly doubt that will happen.
Let me wrap this up. I wish OM System much success. I have nothing against them or the OM-3. I’m sure it is an excellent camera, and that those who buy it will be quite happy with their purchase. I don’t have any interest in the OM-3 personally because I love my Fujifilm cameras, and there’s nothing profound enough with this model to convince me to invest into a new system, especially one that is barely holding on. I think this camera will appeal the most to those who already own some M43 lenses.
I was like Fujirumours very exited and anticipating the coming of this OM-3.
Very good looking retro body.
Coming after the bankruptcy, etc.
But on reviewing the specs, its size, the lack of real speed dial (instead still the PSAM one) and more its price (OMG) well like Fujirumours on announcement day, well my interest faded more exploded like a balloon in mid flight.
Still remain though the Nikon Zf and Zfc against the Fuji retro-style.
And for 400-500$ more than the OM-3 you get with the Zf a more than very solid FF retro-style camera. I failed to understand the ‘premium’ price tag of the OM-3. Way too high.
So I even cannot advise this OM-3 for a newcommer.
And last going full IA for next releases so to go around the technical issues of they have with 4/3 is a real turnaround for me.
Hence sadly I concur with your article Ritchie. I’m happy though for Olympus owners to have this new release. Long deserved for staying into the system and furthermore with good looking camera for a change.
And I’m waiting indeed like you for a new Pen camera.
For those in the M43 system, this is a heck-of-a-camera to be announced. For those not in the system, I think it’s more: “Yeah, that’s cool, now moving on….” I just don’t see it attracting large numbers to M43. I do believe it will be a hot seller in Japan.
Ditto. I so loved the Olympus OM-1 when it came out: a jewel of a camera that was so diminutive that even my small hands had to get delicate to work it. It was so much prettier than the nasty Nikons, and tiny and light compared to my beloved but huge Canon FTBn. Alas, like Pentax, they never built a professional system, so when I went pro I had to choose Nikon or Canon.
My Nikons are now just the Zf, the Df, the D500 and the Zfc. My Canons, all 35mm film cameras, are long since gone, even the lovely F1nAE, although I do miss the FTBn that a friend borrowed and drove his Jeep over. (Just about the only way to break that camera!)
The upcoming Fujifilm GFX100RF should give the Leica Q series a run, for those who prefer a fixed lens over interchangeable. I have owned several Fujifilm X100 since before they had letters after the X100, including the X100vi, and it’s a pretty good little camera, but not really so special that I would like a full-frame or “medium-format” version for more weight and dollars. (And if you can squeeze IBIS into that tiny body, how can you NOT put it in a 33×44 sensor camera? Duh.)
Don’t get me wrong, I love Fujifilm GFX so much I have two 50R bodies and one GFX lens. Now that this fixed lens version is approaching, I despair of ever getting a REAL GFX 100R, rangefinder style with IBIS and manual dials. Or an Olympus Pen, or an actually-retro (not just style-wise) OM-4.
My opinion is that a future GFX100R hinges on the success of the GFX100RF. If the 100RF has strong sales, Fujifilm will likely begin to develop a successor to the 50R, but if it struggles to sell, the 100R is toast.
I hope you are right, that a GFX 100R might be developed if GFX 100RF sales are good, but I fear not. The success of the Leica Q series has not led to a full-frame successor to the T/TL/CL series, or even to a modest continuation of the APS-C series but to its complete abandonment. The full-frame SL continues on, of course, with the Q as its very successful little fixed-lens brother, as the GFX-S series will, with the GFX-RF as its little fixed-lens bro. And the GFX R line will be dropped as the Leica CL was, just another well-appreciated camera with too few customers to fit the corporate sales strategy. But if the GFX 100RF fails, then I am absolutely sure you are right, and no real GFX 100R will ever be developed. For companies as small as Fujifilm and Leica, there may not be enough yen/euros to pursue all good product lines. So I am afraid that either way, photographers hoping for new products in the GFX-R line will lose. I hope I am wrong.
When Fujifilm launched GFX, I think they believed it would attract a lot of X-series users; however, it really didn’t. Not to the extent that they thought it would. Mostly it was non-Fujifilm photographers who were attracted to the line. Because of this, the GFX50R was a sales flop (it took a lot of steep discounts and a lot of time to clear the inventory), so that’s why a successor has not come. But… as time has gone on, I believe that not only have more X-series photographers added GFX to their lineup, but the 50R has a strong cult following now. So I see the environment has changed, and there is a good possibility that the 100RF will be a great success, and Fujifilm will in turn see the possibility of a successful 100R.
Is this just a matter of over-pricing? I have a Leica D-lux 7, which has an M43 size sensor (21mp), even though it is not an interchangeable lens M43 camera. And my Fujifilm X100vi has an APS-C size sensor (40mp), even though it is also a fixed lens camera. I would defend either of these cameras as excellent, in fact fabulous cameras, but definitely over-priced. So. maybe we are just complaining about MSRP’s that seem out of line with some pretty good or even way better values on not brand new models?
It could be. Ultimately, what is the “right” price is what someone is willing to pay for it. If not very many are willing to pay for something, that could be an indication of overpricing; however, for those who did buy, they might not of thought of it as overpriced.
Interesting article. The OM-3 will drop in price just like every other new camera body released by Fuji, Nikon, Canon and it will make much more sense then. The X100vi is not exactly cheap to be honest. The OM-3 is a beautiful camera packed with features that will appeal to buyers. FF only appeals to those who feel they need it. I do not. MFT is a brilliant system and even the older models shine, achieving fantastic results. There is a camera for everyone and hopefully the Pen F successor will follow. BTW I am a Fuji shooter as well as MFT.
Price drops of cameras are typically a supply-and-demand response. If demand is less than the number of units manufactured, the price will drop to move the product. That’s how Fujifilm, Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc., do it. If you see a steep discount given, it’s because sales are sluggish for that model.
I learned yesterday reading PetaPixel that Olympus does not necessarily operate that way. They apparently overprice their gear at launch to take advantage of their loyal customers, then drop the price to what it was intended to be originally. Here’s the article:
https://petapixel.com/2025/02/06/om-system-must-be-careful-not-to-become-ubisoft/
PetaPixel’s prediction is that the OM-3 will drop in price to about $1,600 within months (presumably by summer). This is the “real” MSRP. At that cost, it is more compelling.
Unless one just needs the speed, interestingly, the Fujifilm X-T1 will have similar IQ, and those can be picked up on eBay for under $500. Personally, that would be my recommendation. I think (outside of speed and price) those two cameras are surprisingly comparable.
What if one wants to do handheld long exposures for landscapes without lugging a tripod around, or is partial to a lens like the Lumix 20mm f1.7 pancake that doesn’t have an equivalent on Fuji?
The only 2 camera systems I can ever consider using are Sony A7xx with 40mm f2.5, or a M43 camera with 20mm f1.7.
Get whatever camera and lens makes you happy.
As far as which Fujifilm camera-lens combo I would point you towards as the most “similar”, it would be the X-T50 with the 27mm f/2.8 lens. Great combination, in my opinion.
Odd camera. I feel like the price is not inappropriate for the specs. The OM-1 is a beast of a camera, rugged and fast, basically the OM-D flagship and an excellent wildlife and adventure camera. I think that’s a $2000 camera. Very high performance for the price, due to the cost savings of a small sensor.
So the OM-3 has near OM-1 specs (that is, near-flagship specs) and near-flagship prices. But because it’s marketed as “retro body with creative jpeg controls”, people are looking at the OM-3, comparing it to far-from-flagship Nikon Zf, Zfc, and Fuji X-T50/X-M5, rather than high-end speedy cameras like a Fuji X-H2S or Nikon Z8. The Zf/Zfc are great examples–they’re fun cameras based on mid-level and entry level camera architectures like the Z6 and Z50, and priced accordingly.
So the price seems outrageous, because the camera looks like it should be a fun entry level camera even though it’s got specs far above OM-D’s entry level cameras like OM-10 and OM-5. Maybe there’s a market for a near-flagship, high-end retro body. But it seems like for most folks looking for retro-body cameras, the OM-3 seems like overkill specs (50 or 120 FPS stills with the electronic shutter is more than most folks need!) with commensurate price.
I feel like it has a bit of an identity crisis. Since so few models are released in the M43 space nowadays, perhaps combining multiple concepts into one body is the best approach. This camera has to serve two niches because they’re just not going to release two separate bodies for those groups. I’m just speculating.
From a still-photography retro-camera perspective, the OM-3 is surprisingly comparable to the X-T1, and maybe the X-T10 to a degree. From a flagship speedy camera perspective, the X-H2s is the one that it will get compared to… the OM-3 beats it on AF and stills FPS, but the X-H2s beats it on video capabilities, high-ISO, dynamic range, resolution, etc., etc..
I think those in the M43 space are going to go nuts for this camera, as they should. It’s probably the most interesting M43 camera released in many years, maybe close to a decade. Those outside of M43 might take a closer look at it than previous releases in that format, but I don’t think it’s going to convince all that many to convert to M43. At least not at $2,000.
You mentioned in passing the possibility of JPEG options for the possible X-Pro5. Considering that original JPEG is basically obsolete, the best options would be JPEG-XL and JPEG 2000 both with adjustable compression including lossless compression. The option of DNG file format would also be nice.
I doubt Fujifilm will add support for either JPEG-XL or JPEG 2000. But they certainly could, who knows? The future X-Pro5 will likely support HEIF, as they are currently supporting that on newer models. I disagree with the statement that the JPEG is “basically obsolete”, I think that is being excessively harsh and not supported by reality. Could a better format emerge and be universally embraced? Sure. But it’s unlikely to be either JPEG-XL or JPEG 2000, and the JPEG format will most likely outlast both by a significant stretch. I just don’t see much of a future for either JPEG-XL or JPEG 2000. But I’m not a fortuneteller, and cannot predict the future, so anything could happen—I don’t know anymore than the next person.
I don’t think that DNG will be used, either, because of X-Trans, which requires much different processing than Bayer, and I believe DNG is meant for the Bayer array specifically. I could be wrong about this, but I think it is true, had a conversation once with someone who knows more about it than I who suggested that this is the case.
But, the lenses are way cheaper. At least the very nice mainstream build ones. Not the cheap chinese ones.
Depends on zooms vs primes, mostly. (and Zuiko vs Panasonic)
The 25/1.8 and 17/1.8 just got updates for better body build quality and WR, and they’re $100 more expensive each than the Fujichron 35/2 and 23/2 which are also quite small.
The Olympus f/1.2 Pro lenses–17, 25, 45– are all $1200-1400, while the 23/1.4, 33/1.4, and 56/1.2 (newer WR versions of the 23 and 56) are $800-1000. There’s a $600 gap on the nicest fast 50, and a $500 gap on the portrait lens.
For zooms, I think there’s a lot of great OM-D/Olympus lenses at strong prices. But looking at fairly normal Zuiko primes, I think Fuji’s prime offerings are typically about the same, and sometimes significantly cheaper.
Yeah I agree, you have a fair point. But also as an old term mft user with several lumix cameras and lenses, cheaper lenses in lumix range was unexpectedly good too. Especially the 42.5 f1.7 was a gem. It was producing way much better outputs than expected according to its price. Somehow I couldn’t get the same feeling with the 35mm f2.0 from Fuji. However, it is also so much related with the sensor size. Smaller sensor means smaller lenses. In terms of WR and robustness, you’re absolutely right on that too. Lenses with WR on lumix and olympus/om-system range is also not super cheap.
In terms of 3rd party alternatives, i can say that MFT and X mount are head to head.
But, there is one lens which nothing can beat imho, Mitakon speedmaster 25mm f0.95 for MFT. I couldn’t find anything similar in that small size with that incredible sharp and nice contrasty output even at f0.95 in X mount range.
I guess only thing I desperately miss from my MFT era is that lens.
The Fujinon 33mm f/1.4 would be equivalent to a MFT 25mm f/0.95 as far as full-frame focal-length and depth-of-field. I can’t speak on sharpness regarding the MFT lens, but the Fujinon is super sharp. Obviously the Mitakon is both smaller and cheaper, but it also lacks AF and weather-sealing. As far as IQ, put those two head-to-head, and I bet the Fujinon wins hands-down, at least wide-open. It’s an apple-to-oranges comparison (first-party AF APS-C vs third-party manual MFT), but if you are looking for something fairly similar in the X-series line, the 33mm f/1.4 would be my suggestion.
For a more apples-to-apples comparison, the TTArtisan 35mm f/0.95 might be it. Similar size and weight, similar focal-length, same aperture, both manual and non-weather-sealed. I bet the image quality is fairly similar between the two; however, one is likely better than the other (at least a little), and I would think it is the Mitakon. The TTArtisan is half the price. Interestingly, Mitakon has a 35mm f/0.95 for X-mount, but it is notably larger and heavier.
Excellent! I have the 33 1.4 already, and basically my go to lens and which is almost sticked to my xt5. However for my xt50, i’m looking for a more pocketable lens. Didnt know that tt artisan have a manual 0.95 33 too. Will check it definitely. And mitakon’s 35 0.95 x mount clone is brightinstar 35mm 0.95. They are identical, except the coating and 1/3 of the price😅 but that is too heavy and big to put into pocket.
i’m now having the tt artisan 27mm 2.8 autofocus one, and i can put the xt50 to my jacket pocket with it. But the image quality is meeeeh. Not sure if fuji 27mm 2.8 can deliver more than that too. Will check the tt artisan 35 0.95 Thanks a lot!
I would not judge the Fujinon 27mm f/2.8 based on the TTArtisan version. There’s a pretty significant IQ difference between the two.
A few words here –
– They can’t use Olympus name because of licensing/agreements/trademark issues. So that’s out of the table- only Olympus the remaining company could grant that and look like they aren’t.
– The OM-3 has some interesting features, but for the target market once has to ask if it really needed a stacked sensor, particularly when the OM-5/EM5.3 sensor already has a faster readout than the Fuji 26MP (and def. the 40MP) sensors. It would have easily knocked out some chunk of that price
– I agree that a PenF sized camera (or EM5.2 size and body) would imho seen great success. It would leverage small, and a small modern compact m43rds camera is sorely missing. The OM-3 is smaller than the OM-1 but it’s not exactly compact.
Dpreview seems to suggest the OM-3 has better AF than the X-T5. I am going to try one for a spin on that, it’s possible. If it had a better price, I think that alone could make it competitive to Fuji at least in some markets.
As far as the name, anything is negotiable, and it was a mistake not to get the name in whatever agreement they made. Perhaps it was cheaper to not get the Olympus name, but, from a marketing perspective, I think that was a mistake. They should renegotiate to get the name, in my humble opinion.
The camera has some interesting features, no doubt, but a bit of an identity crisis. Those on the outside (not in the M43 world) aren’t going to buy it as a flagship because it doesn’t have a grip (isn’t ergonomic) or the IQ expected from a flagship (dynamic range, high-ISO, etc.); those wanting a vintage camera don’t need 120fps RAW or desire non-tactile shutter/aperture/ISO controls. So it sits in an odd spot. For those on the inside (in the M43 space), this camera is amazing, because it checks most of the boxes for two niches and is the coolest M43 camera in a long time.
I have no idea if the OM-3 has “better” AF than the X-T5, but it would make sense if it does since Olympus has been making AF since the 1980’s. They also collaborated with Panasonic (using Panasonic’s deep pockets) to develop/improve the M43 AF. So it would not surprise me if it were a little better than Fujifilm’s AF, since they have been doing it for longer and on a larger budget. With that said, we’re also talking about diminishing returns. Fujifilm’s AF is significantly better than any AF from 15 years ago, yet today’s photos are no more impressive than they were then. So, to me, saying that one company has better AF is like saying a sensor has two more megapixels than another, or maybe 10mp more. That might be nice to have, and someone might convince themselves that they “need” it, but the reality is that it isn’t all that important, and any AF deficiencies can easily be overcome with good techniques and a little practice.
In my opinion, for the OM-3 to be considered competitive to the X-T5, it has to be cheaper than the X-T5. Nobody is going to pay more money for a M43 camera (with half the resolution, lower dynamic range, worse high-ISO, less shallow-depth-of-field capability, only one card slot), but they might pay less money as a justification to the disadvantages. So if they drop the price by $400, it might at that point be seen as a competitor, but even $400 might not be enough.
My prediction is that the OM-3 will be a sales success for Olympus, especially in Japan, but it won’t bring in all that many people from other systems, it will mostly be purchased by those who already own an M43 camera.
The five custom settings slots look useful. The four slots on my X-S20 aren’t enough for me. However, the price of OM-3 is a deal-breaker. The X-S20 was a lot for me, and I bought it on a sale.
I think the seven custom slots that many Fujifilm cameras have are not enough. I would like to see 10 or more in the future.