This is OM System’s latest camera, the OM-3. It’s a USD$2,000 body only digital camera that, in spite of its features, is too expensive for me to purchase. It’s too expensive in terms of just the cost, and too expensive in photo taking capability.

Personal History

I started using Four Thirds cameras in 2006 with the purchase of the Olympus E-300 kit system (which included a Zuiko 14-45mm kit zoom and Zuiko 40-150mm kit zoom). It was half-price at NewEgg, of all places. I purchased the E-300 because the body had a range finder form factor, a lot like the Pen F I would eventually purchase. Over the years I purchased and used the E-1 (used), E-3, E-P2, original E-M5, OM-D E-M1.2, Pen F, and Panasonic’s G9 and G9.2. Every camera save the E-P2 was purchased at a discount, at times a considerable discount. Because these purchases stretched out over a near-20-year time span during which I was employed, I could justify all those purchases. I bought them, learned how to effectively use them, enjoyed using them, and enjoyed the photographs they produced. If there were any limitations it was due to my limited skills and experience, not the hardware.

I’ve kept up with what has been happening to Olympus over the decades, going back to their OM film days. My father started using Olympus with the OM-1, while I would get into the Olympus film system with the OM-4. For a time I got away from Olympus, having purchased a Nikon N90 for my family, especially as my girls were growing up. When I crossed over to digital photography in 2006 I chose Olympus, and except for a single Sony N5 I picked up for a song, I’ve owned and used Olympus pretty much ever since.

Why did I stick with Olympus? Because of the Zuiko glass. Zuiko lenses are some of the best, if not the best, lenses in the world. For example, here’s one photo I took with my now-gone E-3 and the Zuiko 50-200mm Four Thirds zoom lens.
I used to commute from my home to where I worked, a trip which took me past an executive air port in downtown Orlando. In 2010, when this photo was taken, all the major businesses would pay blimps to come to Orlando and fly overhead, advertising an event or a place to the public below. When they blimps weren’t flying they were parked at that airport, and I would stop by on my way home and take photos of them. This photo was taken with the “ancient” E-3, with its 10MP sensor; by 2010 Olympus had released the E-P2 (which I’d also purchased) with its 12MP sensor and advanced processing engine compared to the E-3. And yet, I continued to use the E-3 because of the selection of zooms I’d purchased to use with the E-3, specifically the 12-60mm and 50-200mm. When I go back and re-visit those old photos, I’m still appreciative of the high quality I could achieve with that combination, most of the time without even trying it seemed.

I lost those jewels when when my car was broken into and they were stolen, in my drive way of all places…

Current Status

I continue to use my Olympus equipment. I tend to gravitate towards using the Pen F with a few different lenses, such as the 17mm f/1.8, the 45mm f/1.8, and the 12-40mm f/2 PRO. However, my last purchased camera wasn’t from Olympus, it was from Panasonic, the Lumix G9.2. B&H Photo and Video had a deal with Panasonic to knock $500 off the regular MSRP, and they would also take another camera in as tradein on top of the sale price. I thus traded in my Panasonic GH4 which had been sitting in a bag for a while, a camera that had seen its MSRP price cut by 2/3rds when the GH5 was introduced and they wanted to clear out all GH4 inventory. The trade-in value of the GH4 didn’t make up for the low price I paid, but it was still fair enough for a camera that wasn’t being used.

When I think about why I purchased the Panasonic Lumix G9.2, two important features stand out: the 24MP resolution of the sensor combined with on-sensor PDAF (phase detect auto focus), instead of CDAF (contrast detect auto focus). The only Olympus camera with PDAF were the E-M1 series. There’s quite a few more important features in the body I like and use, but I’m not going to do a point-by-point comparison; that particular horse has been truly beaten. Suffice to say that the G9.2 can hold its own. The G9.2 is meant to be a direct competitor to the OM Systems OM-1.2, from which the OM-3 supposedly derives its internal electronics, as well as the sensor. Which leads me to my final point.

At the time of this post you can purchase the OM Systems OM-1.2, a true flagship pro camera, for the same price as the OM-3. If I were in the market, I would purchase the OM-1.2 over the OM-3 in a cold New Your minute. And if the OM-1.2 weren’t available, I’d seriously consider the extremely capable Panasonic Lumix G9.2 which B&H is currently selling for USD $1,500, or go all out and get the equally capable Panasonic Lumix GH7 video and stills body, which is USD $2,000, again from B&H. Even the older Panasonic GH5.2 is a ‘mere’ USD $1,200, from which the original G9 was derived.

But as I said at the top, it’s way outside my budget these days.

Here’s one last thought to consider. Keep in mind that OM Systems is Olympus’ camera division spun out as a separate company. A lot of folks want the “new” OM Systems to succeed. I don’t know if OM Systems will succeed or not, but I’m not betting on its long term success in the marketplace, especially by spending my money on any of its products. If you’re invested in Four Thirds like I am and just like the overall system, then consider buying Panasonic. Or, if you’re looking to move on to a larger sensor system, consider Panasonic’s S5.2 and S5.2 X full-frame cameras, which are USD $1,500 and $1,800 body only, respectively. Add a Panasonic Lumix 20-60mm zoom as the “kit” lens to the S5.2, and for the same price you’d pay for the OM-3 body only, you can have an extremely capable Panasonic hybrid system with a far stronger future than OM Systems. Again, however, all prices well outside my budget.

Links

OM System OM-3 — My First Impressions — https://robinwong.blogspot.com/2025/02/om-system-om-3-my-first-impressions.html