xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Heck, I am still waiting for the digital full frame Nikon SP 🙂
I sense that many people have just moved on being excited about this camera. It has been a year since the promise of the Olympus, and people have already discussed, bought and sold the Panasonic G1 (which is similar in concept).
Stop the ads and just produce a camera already.
Majid - In a post a few weeks ago you seemed quite upbeat about the Oly (pasted below). Wondering why you see things different now?
I just think the Pen43 will eventually be an evolutionary dead-end. Its small sensor ultimately cannot compete with larger sensor cameras (that are not available yet). If they limit it to 6MP, it will work better.
The G1 does poorly at ISO 1600 where all the entry-level APS DSLRs from other manufacturers are perfectly acceptable (let alone a D700 or 5DmkII). The people who seem to think a G1 is competitive with full-frame cameras are simply in denial.
What we are lacking is high-quality pocketable cameras equivalent to a Contax T3, Nikon 35Ti or Leitz CL.
I haven't seen too many entry level APS sensor DSLRs perform well at 1600. Nor have I seen anyone who thinks a $500 G1 is competitive with a full frame camera. How could it possibly be?
Who cares? 4/3rds can hold its own with full sized 35mm sensors, let alone APS-c sensors from Canon and Nikon and Pentax which are only a tiny % bigger than it. Refer to the picture I posted on the last page - ISO 1250 pushed to 2000 and it's clean and sharp. The "small sensor" comments are vague and generally made by people without any experience in the system.
Those are entirely different cameras, two fixed lens and one interchangeable...
arguably there are several high-quality digital pocket cams with fixed lenses...
There are two major advantages of in-lens stabilization over in-camera stabilization. Both Nikon and Canon know this.
Firstly, in-lens stabilization gives you an approximately two stop advantage over in-camera stabilization.
Secondly, you can confirm the effect of the stabilization control through the optical finder.
The G1 does poorly at ISO 1600 where all the entry-level APS DSLRs from other manufacturers are perfectly acceptable (let alone a D700 or 5DmkII). The people who seem to think a G1 is competitive with full-frame cameras are simply in denial.
I sense that many people have just moved on being excited about this camera. It has been a year since the promise of the Olympus, and people have already discussed, bought and sold the Panasonic G1 (which is similar in concept).
Stop the ads and just produce a camera already.
They've taken too long and now it's not worth bothering about.
+1
I agree that olympus should simply produce the camera and stop playing with our minds.
The negativity towards oly's m43 is not strange in any way -it is simply based on the poor DR and focusing of previous oly cameras and the horrid barrel distortion of their first pancake lens.
I am waiting for Samsung's offering to come later this year. It will have a much larger sensor.
Hm, I like in lens stabilisation with an optical viewfinder. IMHO framing is not easy with a 300/2.8 when the viewfinder is bouncing all around, even on a monopod which is very useful with such a heavy lens, IS or not.
For short lenses, say up to 85 or 135mm, I never felt the need for stabilisation.
+1
I agree that olympus should simply produce the camera and stop playing with our minds.