Was Olympus E-M1X A Mistake?

Olympus OM-D E-M1X was released in 2019, it became the first camera to break away from the Micro Four Thirds principles of making small, portable cameras yet delivering high performance. In fact, the E-M1X was larger and heavier than most cameras, whether DSLR or mirrorless. It was a daring attempt by Olympus to target a separate user group altogether, and it could have worked with the intended vision of what E-M1X was designed for, but somehow it fell short. Consequently, the E-M1X was the beginning of a series of mistakes that led Olympus to their downfall. I want to take a closer look at the E-M1X and share my thoughts on why this was a mistake that could have been avoided. 

On paper, E-M1X seems promising - a powerhouse camera that can match the likes of flagship level Canon or Nikon offerings (1DX II, D5). It has powerful processor, fast burst rate, great weather-sealing, robust construction for ease of mind in wide operability applications, and long shutter life. In reality, the E-M1X was not well received by the general crowd. 

The non Micro Four Thirds users did not see the attraction at all - while the camera was huge, the image sensor was still much smaller than full frame offerings, and worse, it was using the exact same, recycled image sensor from the E-M1 Mark II released 3 years before E-M1X. The Autofocus performance especially when it comes to C-AF and tracking capabilities fell behind by a wide margin, in comparison to what the Nikon D5 or Canon 1DX II can do. There was nothing much that the E-M1X can offer that cannot be matched by competition, and the temptation of smaller lenses was not enough to outweigh the vast difference in terms of image sensor and autofocus performance. 

Olympus was hoping that their leading innovation in computational photography can add some unique edge to the E-M1X. The hand-held high res shot, creating composite 50MP images from the 20MP image sensor, the effective 5-Axis image stabilization, which I must admit was quite impressive, the live composite mode, the pre-burst (Pro Capture mode), the 60fps blazing fast sequential shooting speed, and live ND filter, which can be useful in some situations. With the exception of the powerful image stabilization, the other "computational features" simply did not make much of a difference to sway anyone else to pick up the E-M1X, they were convenient to have, but not game changing. 

The Micro Four Thirds crowd themselves were not giving the E-M1X a warm welcome. Why did we choose Micro Four Thirds? They originally believe in making truly small, portable cameras and lenses, yet delivering high performance. We don't need the performance to match or surpass full frame DSLR or mirrorless, there is a point of sufficiency that the Micro Four Thirds system hits and is good enough for a majority of photographers both working professionals and enthusiasts. The key selling point was "small & lightweight" system, which seemed to be lost in the design of E-M1X. The first time I picked up the E-M1X, I was together with dozens of Olympus Visionaries on the trip to South Africa, and I have to say I was astonished by the unexpectedly large size and heavy weight of the camera, not in a good way. I was not alone in this assessment. 

If I want a big and heavy camera, why bother choosing Micro Four Thirds?

The E-M1X was also the start of Olympus diving into the wildlife photography genre. It was when they decided to go all in targeting outdoor, nature photography. They were working closely with wildlife and bird photographers from all over the world. If they can manage to keep the size of the camera down, and the lenses as well, this could have been a fantastic vision. The issue was - the E-M1X was huge, and the long lenses for Micro Four Thirds were not exactly that compact either. 

The wildlife-bird-outdoor-nature narrow target continued on well beyond the time of Olympus' shutting down imaging business in 2020 and was carried over to OM Digital Solutions. They continued on this direction while ignoring almost every other possible market out there - vlogging, which was on the rise, street photography, look at what Fuji and Ricoh are doing, lifestyle, travel, people, documentary photography? I'd think journalists would love to work with smaller and lighter setup that are capable, they don't need the best or the most advanced gear, they just need something portable that works good enough! Why abandoned all these sizable markets? This wildlife strategy started from E-M1X, and it did not work back then (if it did Olympus would not have shut down) and it won't work now or anywhere in the future.

It was a dangerous bet to take on the big boys, as wildlife photography was already dominated by Canon, Nikon and Sony. While I was working for Olympus, they constantly emphasized that we were not competing the big players head on, we won't win because Olympus had limited budget and resources, we had to play smart. Instead of going into specifications war, Olympus focused on alternative products that can appear equally as attractive, they may not surpass competition in any way, but they can be a good solution to have - that was what Micro Four Thirds was all about. They stand out, because being so small and so light, people found joy using Olympus and Panasonic cameras day in and out. I just cannot believe all that were thrown out of the window when E-M1X came, and all they wanted to focus on was taking a swing at the big boys in their wildlife territory. 

It proved to be a mistake. I don't think they see it, and I don't think they will ever learn. 

God I hope OM Digital Solutions won't come up with an OM1X or something to succeed the E-M1X. Honestly, I don't think it was a bad camera, I think it was created with good intentions, but it was also a confusing product and did nothing to push Micro Four Thirds forward in the market. This time, I hope they really listen and do not repeat the same mistake twice. 

Please support me & keep this site going:

BUY ME COFFEE

PAYPAL

B&H AFFILIATE