squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
The website 4/3rd Rumors is reporting a really interesting, and highly appealing rumor about Olympus's plans for its next "pro" camera body. Here's the post. Basically, they're saying that they are working on a design inspired by an unrealized Maitani idea for a modular camera system that will use BOTH MICRO FOUR THIRDS AND FOUR THIRDS LENSES, via interchangeable mounts.
Boldface added by me!
Boldface added by me!
shyoon
Well-known
Interesting, but I can't see the appeal of interchangeable 4/3 and M4/3 sensors. The whole appeal of the M4/3 system are the small lenses and small cameras, which would be negated by the inevitable large form factor of a modular DSLR. Add in the option of a full-frame sensor with an OM mount and now you're talking! One can dream I suppose...
By the way, that Maitani modular system looks absolutely stunning. Just imagine the possibilities if it had gone to market! As if we didn't need reminding of what a great talent we have lost.
By the way, that Maitani modular system looks absolutely stunning. Just imagine the possibilities if it had gone to market! As if we didn't need reminding of what a great talent we have lost.
stompyq
Well-known
Yawn..... Get a bigger sensor in their olympus
PCB_RF
Established
Hmm, does sound interesting.
Shyoon, it doesn't look like the sensor would be interchangeable, the lensmount would. You'd be able to use both 4/3 and m4/3 lenses on the same body, with the same sensor. Now you can use 4/3 on m4/3 with an adapter, but you can't use m4/3 on 4/3. Hopefully this would work without sacrificing af performance, ie 4/3 lenses as fast as on a 4/3 body, m4/3 lenses as fast as on an m4/3 body.
stompyg, the 4/3-size sensor is precisely what makes all the 4/3 size and performance advantages possible. Increase the sensor size and you're having to make bigger lenses, and butting heads with Canikon. I don't see any need to make the sensor bigger (except for the minor increase like in the GH1 to allow uncropped 16:9 format), but they should always do whatever possible to maximize image quality from the 4/3 sensor.
Note I'm not saying there are no advantages to a larger sensor, I'm saying going to a significantly larger sensor does away with all the 4/3 advantages.
Shyoon, it doesn't look like the sensor would be interchangeable, the lensmount would. You'd be able to use both 4/3 and m4/3 lenses on the same body, with the same sensor. Now you can use 4/3 on m4/3 with an adapter, but you can't use m4/3 on 4/3. Hopefully this would work without sacrificing af performance, ie 4/3 lenses as fast as on a 4/3 body, m4/3 lenses as fast as on an m4/3 body.
stompyg, the 4/3-size sensor is precisely what makes all the 4/3 size and performance advantages possible. Increase the sensor size and you're having to make bigger lenses, and butting heads with Canikon. I don't see any need to make the sensor bigger (except for the minor increase like in the GH1 to allow uncropped 16:9 format), but they should always do whatever possible to maximize image quality from the 4/3 sensor.
Note I'm not saying there are no advantages to a larger sensor, I'm saying going to a significantly larger sensor does away with all the 4/3 advantages.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Right, the sensor stays the same size. presumably this camera would be slightly larger than present m4/3 size, but still very small--like the OM4. There would be an m4/3 unit that could add a pentaprism-style EVF and m4/3 lens mount, and a larger 4/3 unit that would add the 4/3 mount and a mirror box.
"4) completely new design (based on the Olympus OM4ti)"
Now, THAT is interesting...
Now, THAT is interesting...
PCB_RF
Established
mabelsound, I don't know why you'd need a mirror box for the 4/3 lenses, all you'd need is the right nodal>sensor distance. The body could be entirely mirrorless, just like the m4/3 bodies. The m4/3 module would position the lens closer to the sensor than the 4/3 module.
I suppose you could have a mirrored OVF module, maybe with faster burst rates, better for sports/action, and mirrorless EVF modules for full-time live view and compactness. Visoflex meets the digital age?
I'd be happy with a modular solution that would maintain compact body size but let a 4/3 9-18 zoom or 50/2.0 macro focus as fast on the mirrorless body as it does on a mirrored 4/3 body.
I suppose we'll either find out when the announce it, or not find out if the rumor's not true...
I suppose you could have a mirrored OVF module, maybe with faster burst rates, better for sports/action, and mirrorless EVF modules for full-time live view and compactness. Visoflex meets the digital age?
I'd be happy with a modular solution that would maintain compact body size but let a 4/3 9-18 zoom or 50/2.0 macro focus as fast on the mirrorless body as it does on a mirrored 4/3 body.
I suppose we'll either find out when the announce it, or not find out if the rumor's not true...
ZeissFan
Veteran
How can a design be "completely new" if it's based on a previous camera?
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
You're right, of course...and I'm just speculating. I figured DSLR shooters might prefer to stick with an optical viewfinder. Perhaps both mirror-box and non-mirror-box options would be available.
stompyq
Well-known
My point was oly should try to improve the ergnomics of the m4/3 cameras and not try to put in a slightly bigger sensor. Wheres the small size advantage in m4/3 then? might as well go the whole hog then and go FF.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I have also said that whoever can give us a Nikon FM2/OM4Ti digital would have a real winner. But then I was pushing Beta back when VHS won out, so consider the source....
Completely new design and not based on their previous DSLR.
ampguy
Veteran
An OMx derivative would have an obtrusive hump where the prism is, and there are already those 4/3's with built in quasi-Vf's for those who can tolerate them, so why, assuming someone loads up on the "modules" would it be any smaller than what is already here, or a small DSLR kit?
The NEX 10 and beyond are interesting, in that new lenses like a 20/2 are already coming out. The diffraction inherent in 4/3 lenses with legacy aperture ranges limits them to the p&s arena.
I've not yet seen a 4/3 photo that couldn't have looked better taken with my FujiF70EXR in Velvia film mode, or my old Fuji F30 at ISO 1600 or 3200 in b/w mode.
The NEX 10 and beyond are interesting, in that new lenses like a 20/2 are already coming out. The diffraction inherent in 4/3 lenses with legacy aperture ranges limits them to the p&s arena.
I've not yet seen a 4/3 photo that couldn't have looked better taken with my FujiF70EXR in Velvia film mode, or my old Fuji F30 at ISO 1600 or 3200 in b/w mode.
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
I second that.
After decades of iteration, the mechanical FM, most notably the FM3A has fully evolved. [The FM3A is my do-everything travel camera, despite I own 4 F2s]. The only F/F2 handling features not found on them are:
- No mirror lock-up...I suspect more to do with no AI lenses that requires mirror up; and
- No ratcheted film-advance stroke...probably because the wind-angle is now small enough.
The built-in meter should not care what is behind the shutter curtain. I would gladly accept manual-wind or using the MD-11 motor drive.
I have the same thoughts about Leica-Ms...but always stomped on by the authorities.
igi
Well-known
So all these mean that I have to start saving again knowing Oly and their prices whenever they introduce new products
I think making the camera smaller is not Olympus' priority with this one, rather it's the modularity of the system.
I think making the camera smaller is not Olympus' priority with this one, rather it's the modularity of the system.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
I have*.
*Why yes, I do actually own and (still) use both an F30 and an Olympus E-620. You're wrong, and not a little wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
amateriat
We're all light!
Other than the glacial speed of its data buffer when shooting RAW, I think the last Really Good Olympus camera was the C-8080, which is my only "serious" digital camera. Typical Olympus think-outside-the-box design cues coupled with a killer lens, a damned good sensor, excellent construction and fairly compact dimensions. As digital cameras go, I love the thing. But the E-1 was merely "okay", while the E-3 was simply aping the designs of brands C and N, IMO. Not a bad camera, mind you, just unexceptional, from a company generally known for not releasing unexceptional cameras, particularly at the high end.
I truly hope the rumors aren't merely the product of someone's substance-fueled blue-sky postulating. (BTW, that Maitani prototype was SO out-of-the-box for '69...makes you wonder exactly where Rollei got the idea for their 2000F, eh?)
- Barrett
I truly hope the rumors aren't merely the product of someone's substance-fueled blue-sky postulating. (BTW, that Maitani prototype was SO out-of-the-box for '69...makes you wonder exactly where Rollei got the idea for their 2000F, eh?)
- Barrett
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Maitani was a genius, to be sure...
As for the Fuji F30, I'm with semilog. The 4/3 - m4/3 sensor isn't brilliant, but it's quite good. My m4/3 photos look much better than my F30 photos ever did. even though the F30 is a very fine compact.
As for the Fuji F30, I'm with semilog. The 4/3 - m4/3 sensor isn't brilliant, but it's quite good. My m4/3 photos look much better than my F30 photos ever did. even though the F30 is a very fine compact.
ZeissFan
Veteran
Quote:
4) completely new design (based on the Olympus OM4ti)
Again, it's not completely new if it's based on a previous model. Sort of like a car maker saying, "It's a completely new design based on the Chevette."
bluey
Its all about the image..
Olympus always used to do compact SLRs better than anyone. With the E-series DSLRs, they grew just as large as everyone else's. Fundamentally, mechanics and optics are relatively stable but electronics changes a lot with time. Clearly the Pens with EVF become just as large as an OM body but with ugly lump. Shrinking digital SLRs back to OM size and being able to upgrade the electronic components (viewfinder and sensor) sounds a great idea to me - and why not be able to use OM Lenses - they're still small in comparison to the competition.