Micro 4/3 rangefinder by olympus?

[monkeypainter]

I don't quite understand why some people here want to stick M lenses on it.

'cause this are the lenses I have.

 

[Ray Nalley]

At some point you gotta leave the M lenses behind. As must Leica.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

Older? Ten years older? Fifteen? Digital cameras have only been mainstream consumer goods that long. Do you think that this camera will still be around 50 years from now. If so, will it still work? Will anyone even remember it? I think not, it'll be in the landfill with all the rest of the detritus of the "digital" age.

Gary, as a friend of mine is fond of saying, "This ain't yesteryear and I'm not the Lone Ranger."

Get with the times my friend, or forever stay with your head in the sand. You like film. Good for you. So did I. Not anymore.

Embrace the new. It is here to stay. The day I quit learning as a photographer is the day I will stop being a photographer.

Now, I am only saying this in jest. 😀

I like where we headed in this medium. It really is a brave new world.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Crop factor of the new micro 4/3 camera?

Crop factor of the new micro 4/3 camera?

Thanks to Ondrej and others here who kindly responded to my question about this camera's crop factor with answers such as "a 20mm lens on will be 40mm on the 4/3 sensor".

However I'm not convinced yet. First the title "4/3" is only a ratio... not necessarily absolute numbers. Is there any evidence yet that this sensor is exactly the same absolute size as the sensors in other Oly 4/3 cameras?

Second, I get the impression that the lens mount on this prototype might be closer to the sensor than other 4/3 camera bodies. If that turns out to be the case, then the image circle of the lens gets smaller... approaching the size of the sensor and thus reducing the crop factor closer to 1.0.

The point I was trying to make in my first post (not very well I admit) is that it appears that there's potential for a camera here that has a crop factor approaching 1.0... at least until we see the actual specs, hopefully not too far off in the future. 🙂

 

[Spyderman]

Jamie: the mount plane to sensor plane distance is 20mm, which is half of what 4/3 has (40mm) and that's why it's called micro 4/3 (u4/3 for me). The sensor size is the same. Why don't you read the announcements about the u4/3 at dpreview.com ?

Oly and Panasonic strongly support this system, so I doubt they will ever increase the sensor size. They are trying to make 4/3 a system with wide compatibility, not a mix of cameras with various sensor sizes and lenses with various image circles... The u4/3 will be reverse-compatible with 4/3 via an adapter that will transfer all functions like AF, aperture. The other way it won't be possible because of the short distance from mount to focal plane.

BTW: the 4/3 doesn't mean anything (like 4/3 of an inch or something like that), it's simply a name and should be read as "4/3".

 

[Matthew Allen]

BTW: the 4/3 doesn't mean anything (like 4/3 of an inch or something like that), it's simply a name and should be read as "4/3".

Actually it does mean something - it refers to an archaic video camera tube standard with a 4/3" diameter. All the same, the modern digital camera standard should be written simply as 4/3 just as you say.

Matthew

 

[kshapero]

My setup of lenses would go normal on up!

 

[ElrodCod]

Gary, as a friend of mine is fond of saying, "This ain't yesteryear and I'm not the Lone Ranger."

Get with the times my friend, or forever stay with your head in the sand. You like film. Good for you. So did I. Not anymore.

Embrace the new. It is here to stay. The day I quit learning as a photographer is the day I will stop being a photographer.

Now, I am only saying this in jest. 😀

I like where we headed in this medium. It really is a brave new world.

I'm holding out for the Quantum cameras.😉

 

[Rick Waldroup]

I'm holding out for the Quantum cameras.😉

Now that is funny. 😀

You, of all people, Gary, should at least appreciate the crisp, clean design of the camera? Someone mentioned that is has a certain art deco look to it and I agree. 😎

I can't wait to see all of the specs on the camera.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Actually, "4/3" does mean something. Its the ratio of the length of the sensor to its width. Just like a 35mm film frame is "3/2"... the ratio of 36 to 24.

 

[ferider]

You are right, Jamie. Except 35mm format being sqrt(2)/1 (close to 3/2 but a bit off), like the European DIN formats 🙂

Cheers,

Roland.

 

[George S.]

RE: "Sticking Leica glass on it..."


While I recognize that a lot of Leica glass is the finest in the world, you also have to realize that Olympus is quite capable of also making lenses just about as good if not as good. If you haven't tried some of the older SLR Zuiko lenses you are really missing out on some special lenses.

One thought on the micro RF- the lens release button is definitely in the wrong location...

 

[BillBingham2]

Well.....Yes and No

Well.....Yes and No

I don't quite understand why some people here want to stick M lenses on it. I'm sure Olympus, Panasonic and maybe also Leica will produce some good glass designed specifically for this new standard, so the lenses will have better coating, autofocus, appropriate focal length... etc.

Just think about manual focussing it on the LCD 😱

YES: While I would prefer the Green Camera approach (putting a digital back on a Nikon S2/3/4, F/2/3 or say an M6, I would not be against getting new glass as long as it was as good as the stuff I have today. Lots of Zuiko glass was great but there is such a focus (pardon the pun) on zooms I'm not sure what would come out.

No: Do not get hung up on optical rangefinders, think digital. Lots of DLSRs have a little green light that lights up when it hits the right focus (when focusing manually), why not a DSLR? Put it on the top like the LEDs on the Bessa T so you can see them with your eye in the optical brightline finder and it would be great. Show it on the LCD for those times you shot that way and I think you would have a world class camera.

What about: Now if you have two rocker switches (like the single one on the back of the GR-D) to control aperture and shutter speed. How do you pronounce WINNER!!

B2 (;->

 

[sevres_babylone]

And here I thought it meant the age of the system's designer, or the address of Olympus.

I thought it was a tribute to the Patriots defense, and that's why (at least on the Panasonic version) it comes with video.🙂
Oh wait a second, they run the 3/4...

 

[wyk_penguin]

Great looking camera. It will be interesting to see what lens Olympus markets with this and what other lenses will be in the line-up. I am sure you will be able to mount some type of external viewfinder on the hot shoe. I could care less about using the monitor as my viewfinder.

The micro 4/3 system is going to be exciting for photographers.

It would be a good RF if only they put an RF on it.

 

[Trius]

It's just what the world needs....another throwaway digital camera.

How does that photo imply throwaway? Dude, you have issues! 😉

Oh, I see, because it's digital. Well here's the thing ... as much as I love film, digital cameras are here to stay, and until someone invents a digicam/DSLR that will operate forever, we're stuck with what can be/is produced. Given that the vast majority of people who are interested in buying a camera will buy digital, your/my preference for film doesn't mean squat.

There are times when I want the convenience of digital, but I am frustrated because:

1. B&W image quality sucks, IMO
2. Digicams & DSLRs are so damn button/menu crazy that the camera actually DISCONNECTS me from the act of making a photograph

So the idea is that I want a digital Olympus 35SP or OM -- simple, straightforward, analog controls, etc. If this camera gets close enough to that goal and I can put really good glass on it, then hey, that's a gain.

For the most part, gone are the days of high end gear that lasts forever. I am just now retiring audio components that I bought used in the mid-80s. They still work fine, but the living room system needs the functionality of a well-designed AV receiver.

Believe me, I believe in quality and long product life. But in the digital camera world, that's pretty rare, if it exists at all. So yeah, I'll keep shooting my Olympus film gear, but I ain't tilting at the windmill when they make progress on the digital front.

 

[ZeissFan]

This is a tiny body. I would worry that most M-mount lenses would end up being bigger and heavier than the body.

I think we should give up on the thought of using existing lenses with this camera.

PLUS, there's the 2x factor. I'd rather see what lenses Olympus develops.

 

[ZeissFan]

And to further add:

A Leica lens probably would be larger than the body. Imagine trying to manually focus a lens on a tiny LCD screen in the daylight. Meanwhile, you're trying to steady the body, because you're doing all of this at arm's length because there is no optical viewfinder.

Now, think of trying this with an LTM lens with an infinity lock. Plus, that 50mm Summitar is a 100mm lens, magnifying camera shake. Each tiny movement of your hand is magnified while you try to focus the lens.

On the wide side, your exotic 21mm lens becomes a rather pedestrian 42mm.

Sure you could do it, but in use it would be cumbersome.

This continues to be mentioned ("I want to use my Leica lenses with it."). While everyone can continue to dream, it's not an idea that would not be any fun to use.