>>3855278The Pen-F creative dial (pretending to look like a shutter speed dial) honestly sucks, I'm sorry to say.
I shoot in raw anyway, and I get much more flexibility out of software like Luminar 4.
I'd only use the dial if I was deliberately taking images to export to my phone, and having a SOOC jpg is necessary for that.
Pretending to look like grainy ass film is barely enticing.
I'd rather shell out for DxO Photolab and their film emulation database to at least get emulations of not just Fuji, but also Kodak and Ilford. Of course... shooting in raw wouldn't make a difference.
>>3855284Olympus used to not style its camera in a retro way. Look at their 2000s bridge cameras, their Four Thirds DSLRs and even the Tough.
The angular looking pseudo-pentaprism on the OM-D cameras certainly do give them a retro look, but... The E-M1 (outside of the silver Mk I) looks more modern and the Pen-E cameras feel more like the EOS M or Nikon 1 stuff.
>>3855330>>3855334I see you everywhere, so I have an idea of the stuff you do.
But yeah... film is in a strange place right now, but if rumours are consistent that Fuji and Ilford are going to make more consumer grade film, then I suppose both companies could be looking to sell more to people do have been buying resusable plastic lensed, fixed focus cameras... but hey, if Leica's new film M camera does well... we could see much more of a shift away from professional film and to consumer film.
>>3855518Z-Axis IBIS only makes sense to me for handheld macro photography when the DoF is so thin that leaning slightly can get you missed focus.
Of course... Z-Axis would probably be totally useless for general photography, where DoF is plentiful, that is... unless you're using some impossible one of a kind f/0.5 lens with razor thin DoF... Plus MFT's inherent quality of giving deeper DoF than APS or 35mm is certainly not going to be a factor that's gonna need Z-Axis.
