Olympus launches the E-3 DSLR?

Remember the unnamed Olympus DSLR of with multiple monickers? We've seen it as the E-P1 and P-1, but now, after what seems like countless months brand-free glass-encased trade show appearances it looks like Olympus has officially titled launched it's E-1 DSLR successor, the E-3. We don't yet know much about it, but we understand it will have a live view LCD, work on the 3/4ths mount standard, and be available at least somewhere in November. (That in addition to the other stuff we heard, like it having a 10 megapixel sensor, 11 point autofocus, etc.) We'll update with information as it continues to trickle out.

[Thanks, Adam]

[Tibwolf @ Aug 28th 2007 6:44PM]

That lens may be tacky, but I want

[t-bone @ Aug 28th 2007 8:52PM]

I agree. It may not even be a very good one, either, seeing that have the casing is clear.

[Zoobiee @ Sep 5th 2007 2:45AM]

Actually it isn't tackiness. That photo's displaying the new SWD motors of the lens, exposing the internals to do so. The actual copy of the lens will be in black.

[Drew @ Aug 28th 2007 6:56PM]

The lens mount is "4/3rds", not "3/4ths".

[Chinthaka @ Aug 28th 2007 7:17PM]

B-O-R-I-N-G

Nikon D3 or D300 anybody?

lol yes i'm a fanboy

[humpty @ Aug 28th 2007 8:08PM]

Built-in flash = NOT professional

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Aug 29th 2007 12:00AM]

That's meaningless, the inclusion of a flash does not indicate anything; it has a hot shoe so you can use any flash you desire. I also find built in flashes to be convenient for those moments where you need a quick time sensitive shot, like those WTF moments. But I do understand the need to use a dedicated flash, there is no substitute for that.

[Ryan @ Aug 28th 2007 8:54PM]

Olympus continues to be the laughing stock of anyone who knows anything about DSLRs. Unless something vastly changes with this model their sales will continue to reflect their less than mediocre feature set and design. Even Kodak was smart enough to use Canon/Nikon mount as opposed to some proprietary mount with shit glass. APS sized sensors are bad enough, not alone miniaturized prisms and primary mirrors and glass, etc. I wont even go into ergonomics or lack there of. Olympus is losing their ass on market share. Enough said.

[tekdroid @ Aug 28th 2007 10:46PM]

1) every mount is proprietary
2) Olympus glass is not sh*t
3) Olympus market share is on the up since the intro of the 410 and 510 (both with brilliant features and performance for their respective price ranges, IMO)
4) Olympus kit lenses are among the better out there

Such Olympus hate for running third in market share in Japan. As if by that alone we should not even consider them. Sigh.

[Geir E @ Aug 29th 2007 8:09AM]

The 4/3rds format is shared with Panasonic and I doubt you can call some of their Leica lenses "crap".

Beside the medicore feature set is now copied by Canon 40d, 1d(s) mk3 and Nikon d3 and d300. (you know, live view).

Olympus is a great camera, limited by the size of the sensor ofcourse - but that also gives adventages in physical size.

And no, i dont own one myself.

[craig @ Aug 29th 2007 10:47AM]

None of them have copied the 4/3's poor sensor size though. 4/3 will always be inferior because of that.

[t-bone @ Aug 28th 2007 9:12PM]

Why is that?

[Tony @ Aug 28th 2007 9:16PM]

My first serious camera was a e-10 and I have to say it had the most amazing piece of glass on it. I now have canon L lens and to me they are weak compared to the glass that was on the e-10.

[t-bone @ Aug 28th 2007 9:44PM]

That was directed at humpty.

[humpty @ Aug 28th 2007 9:51PM]

Built in flash are weak, can't bounce, and useless in portrait orientation. Most pros use more powerful external flashes or other means like fast lenses or high iso. The only benefit may be to use it as a trigger for wireless setups.

It's also a liability since its a weak point on the body.. imagine you're in a war zone getting bashed around. The swivel LCD is even worst.. its a consumer feature.

[t-bone @ Aug 28th 2007 10:43PM]

@humpty: Wouldn't you rather by stuck with a donut than no spare at all? Everything you said is true but it is still possible to get outstanding results from a built-in flash.

[George @ Aug 29th 2007 1:02AM]

@humpty. Having a bad day, eh? Having the ability to trigger a wireless flash is kind-of a nice pro feature. If yo don't like it? Don't use it. As for the articulating LCD it's nice that you can flip it inside so it's not exposed all of the time. Nice huh. No need for an extra cover. BTW, Live View is now mainstream since C/N both have it. And what's the point of having Live View, if it doesn't enable you to shoot in challenging angles.

[humpty @ Aug 29th 2007 5:10AM]

The most important thing in a pro dSLR is durability of the body, it needs to take a bashing and keep on going. You cant have pieces of crap flipping out of the body.

Anyways, whatever suits you.

And there are other ways to trigger wireless flashes.

[Dan @ Aug 28th 2007 9:51PM]

Beep that stuff. The big question is: Is is full frame or just half frame - (requiring the half frame lenses)? No more half frame cameras for me, thanks. Anybody want to buy a newly reconditioned Nikon D70?

[Ryan @ Aug 28th 2007 11:46PM]

All makers are propriety that is true, but considering the wider availability and quality range available from Nikon and Canon for commercial use I just dont think there is any competition. I have never seen an olympus lens that can compete with a Canon L in either focus speed, sharpness, saturation or contrast. Understandably, the lenses are over twice the price and are aimed at a different market. But I dont see why any one would dump cash into an Olympus SLR when you can get a 40D or D300 with so much more available. When is Olympus going to pump up the auto focus points and speed and throw something in the ring to compete with the 5D or 1D Mark III or 1DS Mark III? They know their market I will give them that. Out of everyone I know in the wedding/events industry, I know 1 guy that shoots with an E1. I think if Olympus wants to compete they need to offer a more ergonomic design, more AF points, full frame, a better image processor, etc.

[Ryan @ Aug 28th 2007 11:46PM]

As far as kit lenses go... Olympus is definitely good quality for the price. I haven't ever owned a kit from any manufacture so I cant say much from first hand experience, but that seems to be the consensus.

[craig @ Aug 29th 2007 10:54AM]

Since you haven't owned any of these by your own admission, why do you spew such worthless commentary? Who gives a shit what fanboy consensus is? Canon L is only a legend in the minds of Canon owners. Every SLR line offers fine lenses, including Olympus.

[Seto @ Aug 29th 2007 12:50AM]

i thought the fourthirds standard is open so that the mounts can be freely used by companies that support the format, that's why Leica lenses can be used on the olympus dslr, no?

even though i am using a nikon D80 right now and couldn't be happier, i think this fourthirds system is quite promising. with so many new dslr just announced for this year i think there will be quite a battle out there.

[craig @ Aug 29th 2007 10:59AM]

It's too bad that no 4/3 system has ever matched the performance of Canon or Nikon offerings and never will. That's the price to be paid for standardizing on a sensor size smaller than what your competitors are capable of. If you don't need dynamic range/high ISO/high resolution then 4/3 could be OK for you.

Despite the claimed advantages of 4/3 as an open system, lens selection is more limited than either Nikon or Canon. In either a Canon or Nikon system, you have more choice in bodies than 4/3 plus you have multiple lens vendors and a vastly superior selection of lenses. I don't see what makes 4/3 so promising.

[craig @ Aug 29th 2007 10:51AM]

"I have never seen an olympus lens that can compete with a Canon L in either focus speed, sharpness, saturation or contrast."

And I'm sure you're using the Canon 85mm f/1.2L as the standard for focus speed. Frankly, a comment like that just shows what a bullshitting fanboy you are.

[Ryan @ Aug 29th 2007 1:38PM]

Actually I shoot with a 85mm F1.2L for studio and product shots, a 24-105 F4L IS for events/weddings, 100mm Macro, and a 70-200 F4L IS. I wont argue that the Leica lenses from Panasonic are excellent, or even the Zeiss glass from Sony, but neither are utilizizing the quality of glass when they use half-sized sensors, same applies to Olympus. In all practical, uses pro or consumer, I dont think the Olympus gear can keep, maybe its due to the lack of AF points or lack of light entering the prism due to the smaller format. Their target market is not creative professionals in my opinion. As previously mentioned, durability is a must. I have shot my fair share with Nikon and Canon and there are plenty of reasons they are number 1,2. I prefer Canon, but deffinetely not fanboy status, I owned Hasselblad before that, and Nikon before it.

[craig @ Aug 29th 2007 3:23PM]

Yes, of course, durability is a must for you. That's you failed to mention it when you said "I have never seen an olympus lens that can compete with a Canon L in either focus speed, sharpness, saturation or contrast." Now, explain again, how Olympus can't keep up with the world's slowest AF lens, the Canon 85 f/1.2L...

Of course, you've admitted "I haven't ever owned a kit from any manufacture so I cant say much from first hand experience, but that seems to be the consensus." Now you are apparently a pro. Sounds like BS to me.

Anyone who wants a real appraisal of the Olympus system can find them at photography sites. You can bet they'll be less biased and more fact-based than BS speculation Ryan has to offer.

[Ryan @ Aug 29th 2007 4:23PM]

Dude, I am just stating my opinion, not claiming its fact. After all, this is the "comments" section not the fact/spec sheet for any of the manufactures. I would also expect anyone who is seeking an "appraisal" on a camera to go and try them before dumping $1000+. My opinions stated above have been from other photographer's experiences and of my own in that every Olympus I have had my hands on in a shop (E-300, E-500, and E-1) have all been painfully lacking in AF system, durability, etc. In concerns to the 85mm lens in particular, I use the lens in studio where quality trumps speed. Hence the other lenses are used for more speed intesive situations. Pissing contests about brand is not going to give anyone a reflective opinion about a camera. Nothing more to add...

[rk-d @ Aug 31st 2007 10:18PM]

Interesting the bile directed towards Olympus SLRs from people I suspect have never used one. Coming from someone who switched from a d200 to a 510, I can assure you that the image quality is as good with possibly better low ISO performance and the included kit lens is, without question, superior to Nikon's offering.

[Simon Radburn @ Sep 1st 2007 1:37PM]

I own a Canon 10D which is highly regarded as a true DSLR classic this camera is considered to be the best bet if you buy a second hand DSLR and it is said that the sensor quality has not been matched by the 20, 0r 30D. Of course there is a 40D around the corner which could change that. Anyway I work for Jessops and was lucky enough when the company dealt with second hand to borrow an Olympus E1 and a 14-42 kit lens. I have to confess I prefer the E1 to my 10D. This doesin't mean I prefer the E-System though. I don't understand why people are so rigid with camera's what's wrong withy guilty pleasures. Again this brings me to the question why do people dis a system when they have little or no experience of that system. I do feel that full frame is looking to be the popular format for the future and it may be difficult for Olympus to keep up. I wonder if the rumors of a foveon style chip are a possible answer? And what's to say Olympus won't design a full frame model the E-system was the first system to benefit from digital based lenses and it was made from the ground up so it's not an impossibility but it would be very expensive. I am certainly no expert when it comes to sensor design or lenses but would I be right in saying that although a full frame camera uses non digital based lenses the light would travel through the lens similar to film and not hit the sensor directly? This makes me ask the question why has no one designed a lens specifically for full frame, or am I confused here?

[Jerry @ Sep 4th 2007 3:15PM]

This thread is HILARIOUS! Nobody wants to be told they bought the wrong system. I have been a Canon 35mm user for years, and now am an E-1, E-410 user. I think the engineering on the lenses is far improved over the 35mm lenses the Nican people are using and purple fringing is proof of this. But they are free to play in their playground and we Oly users play in ours.

It is pretty funny to watch my friend surf through endless menus on her D200 while I quickly twist a knob or press a button to achieve the same thing.

Conservatives resist change, that will not change. Oly is a radical departure that is future oriented and that required change in the optical engineering related to digital sensors.

I appreciate carrying a small package that is weather proof with really first class optics (read the reviews and see - they are pretty much all rated at the top of the heap). But if somebody gave me a Canon or a Nikon I'm sure I would make pictures just as bad as I do now with my Oly gear, thank you.

In the end it is not about the camera.

[TOSHI @ Sep 8th 2007 11:13AM]

I HAVE BEEN A DIE HARD NIKON USER FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS, I HAVE FORM THE ORIGIAL 1960 F TO F4,F5, FUJI SPRO'S.
OLYMPUS IS A 500 YEAR OLD MASTER OPTICS COMPANY. SCIENTIFIC & MEDICAL OPTICS FROM OLYMPUS PUTS THE FEAR OF GOD IN THE LIKES OF LEICA ZEISS NIKON & CANON.
NOT TO SAY THEY ARE NOT GOOD. BUT OLYMPUS HAVE THEIR ROOTS SO DEEP IN THE OPTICS INDUSTRY THAT NO OTHERES CAN MATCH. WATERFILLED LENSES FROM THE 16TH CENTURY FOR ASTRONOMY THAT OLYMPUS MADE WAS AT THE SAME TIME PERIOD WHEN EUROPEANS KILLED ANYONE WHO SAID WORLD WAS ROUND!!!
THE 4/3RD SYSTEM IS THE FUTURE (IN MY OPINION) I JUST PUT IN A $5800 WORTH OF E510 SYSTEM & WILL BUY THE UPCOMMING E1 WITHOUT EVEN SEEING ONE!!!

[Kevin @ Sep 22nd 2007 7:44PM]

Well, you Canon and Nikon fanboys can tote your heavy ass lenses around while I use the 4/3 lenses which are substantially lighter. Anyone ever use a 400mm L IS/USM lens? That sucker is heavy as hell. I'll stick with Olympus til the day I die. It's funny that people call Olympus sh*t even though other "higher end" companies are copying their innovations (SSWF: SuperSonicWaveFilter, and LiveView MOS's [in dSLR's]). Say what you will... the fact remains that Olympus is on the forefront for innovation and looking forward while other companies are trying to essentially get back to film (i.e. full frame... why? we have new technology that allows us to make things SMALLER) I guess it's the "Hummer" mentality though... hahahaha E-3 will kick ass and I will have a few bodies along with their new ZD ED lenses.

[joecapp @ Sep 27th 2007 2:19AM]

wow! crazy shit here.

I have an e-1 and an e-330 and when the new e-3 comes out, I will run out and get that too!

I am very happy with my oly