Both the Panasonic GH5 and Olympus E-M1 Mark II cameras priced around $2,000?

panasonic-lumix-gh5-camera
olympus-e-m1-mark-ii-camera
A reader sent me these links to online retailers that have already listed a price for the new Panasonic GH5 and Olympus E-M1 Mark II cameras - if those prices are correct/true, both cameras will be selling for around $2,000 (the previous GH4 is now $1,497.99, while the Olympus E-M1 is now $1,099):

panasonic-gh5-camera-price
olympus-e-m1-mark-ii-camera-price
The US pricing of the Panasonic GH5 and Olympus E-M1 Mark II cameras were not yet officially announced.

Via 42photoFotokonijnenberg

This entry was posted in Olympus, Panasonic and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Jarret O’Shea

    Man…I was considering picking one of these up, but not at that price. $2000 buys a D500! I think $1400-1500 is about the most I think would be reasonable for an M4/3 camera.

    • Hubertus Bigend

      But why should I want a D500? It’s a fine camera, would have been my dream camera two or three years ago. Two years ago I didn’t even want to give up the DSLR, which was an Olympus E-30 at the time. The E-M1 I, though, was the only upgrade path for me, as Olympus stopped making DSLRs and I wasn’t inclined to replace all my lenses. The thing is, now that I did make the step, I wouldn’t ever want to go back. Mirrorless has just too many advantages for me, and I couldn’t care less for the small differences there still may be in image quality between Four Thirds and APS-C.

      • Spy Black

        I shoot 1-inch, M4/3, APS-C, and FF. I wouldn’t say there’s “small differences there still may be in image quality between Four Thirds and APS-C”. At least, not with Nikon and Pentax cameras using Sony sensors and their custom processors (and probably now also Sony in their own cameras). However I have seen lesser differences between my GM5 and APS-C Canons.

        • Zos Xavius

          The Pentax cameras tend to punch well above their weight.

  • VanHoff

    LOL, for less than $2000 you can pick a vastly superior D500 right now.

    • You can get a full frame camera too, I hope those prices are not correct.

  • Azmodan

    Have to echo the sentiment, $2000US is lunacy, these will be a $3000 cameras in Australia, they are literally smoking crack. Oh well looks like no need to hold on the D500 purchase any longer, I can already get on for $2300AUD now and was just waiting to see how the MI II performed, but no thanks.

    • markz

      That would be pricing suicide at the more enthusiast end of the spectrum given this will come significantly over the price of entry level full frame DSLRs from Canon ($1800), Nikon ($1700) & Pentax ($2800) and Sony’s mirrorless A7II ($1930)

      Given the GH range is well regarded for pro/semi pro video work and has always been premium priced compared to the G and GX range it could pick up sales there but couldn’t imagine too many enthusiasts would splash out that sort of cash.

    • M. Sauvage

      I am sure Olympus will not make the same mistakes as they did with the E-3 and E-5 (1999$ USD). 1499-1599$ seems to be the ultimate limit for a mirrorless camera (not likely to surpass the D500 AF performances) that has a smaller sensor then the Fuji X-T2 (1699$)

      • I just received another confirmation from a good source that the new E-M1 will be priced at 2000 EUR in Europe, so a $2,000 US price is very likely. Not sure about the GH5.

        • Zos Xavius

          Good luck selling that

  • KT

    Even if the E-M1 Mark II sensor matched an APS-C, as they claim which I doubt, you are still better off with a D500. I hope this is just Brexit effect on European pricesp

    • Arnold

      18 fps in a camera no sane person would use for serious sports photograpyh anyway…. so what are the 18 fps worth?

      • Marco –

        On my nx1 I never used more than 8-10fps.

      • Osama Al Ali

        If I’m not mistaken, with AF locked at first exposure, it does 18fps. With continues AF and AE it only does 10FPS. That is pretty good, but many very cheap m43 cameras can do 10FPS these days. So even if it does 18FPS with continues AF, the price isn’t justified in my opinion.

      • Mike Gordon

        10fps with focus….

      • hje

        And Nikon 1 can take 20 fps with autofocus between each frame. And still no one seemed to have used it for professional sports photography.

    • Jeffry De Meyer

      Brexit did almost nothing the ECB printing money like there is no tomorrow for 2 years now has done more to send the euro down to almost usd parity.

      This is going to get worse before it gets better.

  • Arnold

    for that money i buy a real camera not a tiny sensor m43 stuff….

  • Eric Calabros

    The first serious effect of Sony monopoly in sensor manufacturing.

    • Chaitanya

      Sony still doesnt have monopoly, soon it might but not now. Their sensors are far better than competition and it’s fair that most camera makers want to use Sony sensors due to performance they offer.

      • Eric Calabros

        You must see the market share charts. Its almost terrifying.

  • SteveHood

    This site shows a price that is much less. We will soon find out which one is correct.

    https://www.42photo.com/Product/olympus-om-d-e-m1-mark-ii-mirrorless-micro-four-thirds-digital-camera-body-only-/119631

  • Alda Smite

    have 2000$ and want pro body in good system? – how about FullFrame – Canon 6D or Nikon D750? no? need something super fast, dual card slots, with 4K?… how about Nikon D500 or Fuji XT-2? or take your m43 (aka – bigger than phone sensor) and get used to calculate equivalence of focal lenght and aperture and better get Denoise too – because that iso “200” of m43 is as clean as teenage boys browsing history (after home alone session – before he deleted it)

  • Overman

    I hope they price it at $2000 so sales will be so low for a very long time. Then they’ll be force to drop the price.

  • markz

    yeh that price seems a lot more realistic given a $2000 USD price point would an increase of over 70% on the models they are replacing (OM-D E-M1 ~ $1100 USD and GH4 ~$1300USD)

  • M. Sauvage

    The E-M1 mark2 is basically a M43 version of the Nikon D500, same pixels count, same kind of high frame rates and fast action, so a price just a bit lower to aknowledge the sensor size difference seems fair. 1699$ would be fair.

  • Yoiks! I hope not – that would make the E-M1 II retail for around AUD$2500. Ain’t payin’ that.

  • Clubber Lang

    Yes, I think this is too expensive. But, for all of the people saying you can get a full frame or whatever for the price I have to mention. What is it that you are really gaining as an average photographer. I just got back from a trip where I saw loads of tourists getting off of cruise ships. They were all carrying around all this gear. Zoom lenses, backpacks etc. shooting in a manner that looked like they were shooting snapshots. Most didn’t appar to be framing a shot or paying attention to lighting etc. so I say who really cares in the end. I’m not sure at this point in camera history that a m4/3 camera is going to limit a good artist.

    • Clubber Lang

      And please note. I’m in no way saying I’m a great photographer.

  • ZMWT

    I think system cameras should be priced starting at $2000+. Why? To prolong the update cycle, so that purchased equipment keep its value longer, and users wait for rather substantial updates when they are really due, instead of constantly devaluing existing cameras for the sake of continuous minor improvements issued through pointless models. This production model is obsolete, only fills up digital junkyards.

    • TheTree

      Oly has a 3year product cycle for cameras above $1000. When the technology is good enough they can prolong it even more. But the time isnt there yet.

  • Pancanikonpus

    Now i learnt that pro system must sell for high price $2000 for m43 and apsc sensor. So what to call for those FF system that cheaper than this $2000, Pro2 system? Xpro2 system? Pro-of-Pro system? PurePro system? RealPro system? xPro system?

  • Jeff

    Get a A7II and done with it
    whatever they say, IQ can’t touch full frame
    micro four third is just that, a small sensor

    now it is heavy and expensive
    no reason to own at all

    • TheTree

      But you lose the compactness, responsiveness, ergonomics, snappy AF, longer battery life, a lot of clever features (focus bracketing. live bulb…) and the fact how well it is all put together.

  • nwcs

    I think there is a reality here that gear oriented people neglect: pricing of a camera is based upon the maker’s perceived value not the quality or price of the sensor. Over-emphasizing the sensor to the exclusion of the overall value proposition of a camera is being short sighted.

    • CHD

      The sensor is the single most expensive component of the camera, so of course people are going to say $2000 for a Micro 4/3 sensor is ridiculous. At the end of the day the camera can have all the features and speed in the world but at $2000 it is going to be compared to FF offerings.

      When micro 4/3 came out the argument was that it would be cheaper and smaller. The smaller part was realized but at $2k for a body it is totally overpriced for all but the diehard Olympus fans..

      • nwcs

        So what if it’s, theoretically, the single most expensive physical piece? What does that matter? What matters is the whole value proposition. What does the camera do? Pricing by components is ridiculous. Pricing is done by what the camera is capable of doing. Period. Who gives a frack what FF offers? This obsession over sensors is ridiculous. You see it all the time on these forums: people lusting over some cheap FF camera that has crap AF, crap abilities, no IBIS, etc. and lording it over a smaller sensor camera that has better AF, GPS, WiFi, IBIS, pixel shift, high FPS, etc.

        Who cares about what m43 started saying 6 years ago? How is that relevant to today?

        • CHD

          Pricing by components is ridiculous?? We’re not talking about the grip, or the shutter, or the buttons…we’re talking about the sensor.

          I guess it depends on what you want from a camera. It matters from the perspective that for $2k you can buy a camera with a lot better image quality then what a 4/3 sensor provides. If all you care about is size, AF speed and reach then ok maybe it makes sense to you but I would say it’s still overpriced.

          I like how the micro 4/3 guys like you always defending the tiny sensor and saying it ‘doesn’t matter’. It does matter…it will never be as good as bigger sensors. Period.

          • nwcs

            You know, most things are priced by value and not by component price. Open your eyes, you’ll be surprised. And it’s funny that you think I’m some m43 person. Even Peter would tell you I’ve only talked Nikon and Fuji. My post history proves that as well.

            Maybe this is a sign that it’s time to leave all these gear obsession sites. They seem to bring out people who brag about the details of esoterica

          • CHD

            Put it this way…at $2000 US Olympus won’t be selling a lot of these cameras. So you go ahead and define ‘value’ all you like…but Olympus is not Leica, they cannot overcharge based on name brand. The feature set of the camera does not (for most people) justify the cost of the camera. Your perceived value of the camera is out to lunch, and I suspect very few will sell at $2k before a significant price drop.

  • llocq

    If this turn out to be true, well rip micro 4/3

    • I am sure that the new Olympus camera will be priced at 1990 EUR in Europe.

      • TheTree

        Who will buy it for such price? Does it mean that the E-M5III will be $1500/€1500 when it come out? Holy sh*t. I believe when I see an official price announcement.

        • Maybe this is the new normal and we have to get used to it. In order to survive, camera manufacturers may start charging more.

      • llocq

        Sad news indeed then…

  • Andrea Corsini

    …if the price will be correct i think that someone in olympus is completely gone crazy…2000 € i hope it’s related to a kit, not a body only…if real ,they will lost a sector of market they conquered with lot of sweat…bah….

  • Camaman

    The real value of money has gone waaay down with all this wild printing from central banks to keep the stock market casino and other bubbles propped up…
    We the people are behind the value curve, stuck in 2008 pay grades and billable services, because none of it trickled down to the real sector like “they intended”…
    Olympus and others are charging us based on that info calculation. Its the real inflation rate…

  • Neopulse

    Makes me think that the next a7 III will cost $1999.

    • Yes, expect all prices to go up from now on.

      • Neopulse

        🙁

  • D800GuyIsBack

    Great for people already invested in the MFT system, but imo MFT’s value proposition to a new buyer is quite poor simply because of inferior sensor compared to APSC, FF, and now even MF camera systems…

  • Clubber Lang

    Actually, this is great news. If and when Nikon makes a larger sensor mirrorless that has all of the technology these cameras already have it will be $4500. Ha ha.

  • This price, at least for the GH5 will be due to excellent video performance (10-bit 4:2:2 in camera).

  • Back to top