Micro 4/3 - storm in a teacup ?

[Trius]

I only see a smaller form factor system like m4/3 getting better and more full-featured. The question is whether Olympus & Panasonic have enough of a lead to stay ahead of C-N long enough to establish their market share. This may be something like Sony losing with Beta, but winning with BluRay, eg Pen/half frame lost in film, but may win for compact digi. All Olympus needs is an E-P2 with viewfinder and one or two fast wide primes.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Most of my recent photos have been with the G1 and kit lens and I am anxiously awaiting that 20/1.7 prime. The image quality out of the G1 is almost on par with my old Nikon D300 and frankly I now prefer the G1 viewfinder and LCD to the APS SLR-sized viewfinders. It is great to be able to use the LCD with my recent nearsightedness too.

It would be sweet if Panasonic made a G1 with a larger form factor for bigger hands, it is just a little on the small side. Toss in some more metal and weather-sealing, a higer res LCD, and double battery compartments... and sell it for twice as much and it would still have a market.

I've loved my Nikons but Panasonic got so many things right with the G1 and the compact LX series that they've won a lot of brand loyalty from me -- I think they actually talk to photographers, like the designers of the Ricoh GR series (and the designers of the Sigma DP didn't!)

Over on the GetDPi forum it looks like a lot of early adopters are unloading their EP-1s -- but you don't see many used G1s.

 

[ruben]

With the likes of the new Canon and Ricoh announcements, I wonder if we really are on the cusp of a revolution towards the micro 4/3 standard?

There seems to be little interest from Canon in adopting it, and a somewhat mixed opinion on the merits of the EP-1 in consumer hands (ie, is the EP-1 really a market killer - enough to spur investment into new models from other manufacturers?).

It will certainly be an interesting next 12 months - but I wonder if micro 4/3 will eventually dominate or remain an expensive niche market for those with legacy glass? If the latter, then I fear we will not have as much to choose from as we think we might.

I disagree with all the assumptions here.

What Canon may like to adopt or not, has nothing to do with the fact that at the hands of Panasonic and Olympus superb mini dslrs, which will continue to challenge any dslr camera on the field of size and weight. Dslrs will shrink with time, no doubt, but at the same time micro 4/3 will be improving too. The mirror-less dslr is a full revolution in camera design.

But the o.p. has went very wrong in my opingion by comparing single lens cameras with exchanging lens cameras - even before we start to talk about sensor size.

The Panasonic Gi is a cornerstone for a new breed of cameras. Panasonic may like or be able to further develope it, and if not the G1 will remain a cult camera for years to come. Certainly there are things to improve within the G1 - yet all of them on the reach of hand, more or less. The most important of all concerning the manipulation of RAW images. Then this mirror-less camera must be absolutely silent, and, of course, a wider line of primes is to be hoped for.

On the other hand the Olympus old Pen myth and new fancy version in nothing but an excuse to gain time in order to make a final decision to end the 4/3 system, with which they are too involved unlike Panasonic, and concentrate on the Micro 4/3 - or loose both markets to Panasonic.

However, the GRD III and the S90 ? a tea cup.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[250swb]

I look at photos of what professional photographers were holding in their hands back in the seventies and eighties, and compare that with what pros are lugging around today. It strikes me as odd that in this age of miniaturisation, the SLR form factor has grown in size. Compare something like the Canon A1 with the Canon 5D with comparable FD versus EF glass.

I wonder if we're witnessing the very beginnings of a new shift in thinking and a return to simpler times.

I would hope so.

But the modern DSLR has attracted a different sort of character to the amateur market. They are the ones with a photo backpack, two DLSR's around their neck with different zoom lenses, a pouch for a filter system, a monopod, and a photo vest, and a far away look with the sun catching the underside of their chin, all to photograph a canal boat on a club day out. They also have the ability to pixel peep when back at base,.. but lets not look at the photo.

I'm not saying it didn't happen with film, but display amongst photographers is a key area that Canon in particular have worked on with digital. They are not alone in an age where things can be made smaller, consider the size of Rolex watches from the 1930s to today. So if Canon can bring themselves to make cameras smaller, perhaps photographers will need something new to show how serious they are, maybe gaudy feathers, because tribal display is what its all about.

Steve

 

[Pherdinand]

that's exactly the discussion i had 15 mins ago with a colleague of mine. He's an enthousiast nikon dslr user and we were wondering why on earth the "pro" dslr bodies are so freaking large. We even googled it but no answer to be found in that digital pollution called "internet camera forums"
I came up with the idea, maybe they are made larger than they should be to distinguish the "pro" from the "amateur".

 

[ruben]

.............

Over on the GetDPi forum it looks like a lot of early adopters are unloading their EP-1s -- but you don't see many used G1s.

At this very moment I went there for a g1 body, and of course I saw none. But the Micro 4/3 subforum at the moment I was there had the most active members there, 24.

Prices of the G1 went higher during the last weeks by 30%.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[Sonnar2]

I see no future in DSLRs except professional applications.
Four Thirds is sufficient for most photographers, and Micro 4/3 is the most intelligent approach.
In the next couple of years they will outlast prosumer DSLRs in function, size and weight.
If Canon jumps onto the train, this likely will happen soon.
If a No.1 in the market is't clever in leaving the sinking ship (DSLRs for mass market) and investing in new fields it will lose its leading position or be kicked out. This is what history teaches. For Nikon it's even more important, because Nikon is the next to lose autonomy if they don't increase clever acting in the market.
Personally, I NEVER liked DSLRs, and will never like it. I have about 50 film SLRs but never had a DSLR and will never buy. I see no sense and no future in this concept.
Micro 4/3 is the more intelligent concept. Closer to RF too.

 

[Wiyum]

Tempest in a teacup.

I always heard it as Tempest in a Teapot. But that's neither here nor there.

Fascinating discussion thus far. For my pie-in-the-sky input...

I'm interested in Micro 4/3 for two reasons: miniaturization and innovation. The miniaturization is in some ways essential, and the reason the whole thing has life. While cameras now are smaller than ever, most of them also aren't very good, especially for the sophisticated user. One of the primary reasons the Leica M has endured is because many people don't like big cameras. So this format steals what allows that to be the case: mirrorless design. This step "backward" allows for cameras to be extremely small without sacrificing image quality, and live view allows framing (whether via LCD or EVF) to be just as precise as a DSLR. On those grounds alone, these mirrorless formats stand to inherit much of the rangefinder faithful (those drawn primarily by the small size of the gear).

The innovation, though, is where the excitement is. Look, for example, at the GH1 and rumored GF1. Here you have two cameras with ostensibly the same specs, same sensor, etc. On one hand you have SLR ergonomics, on the other you have rangefinder-y ergonomics. Same set of lenses for both. One could easily own both and grab the right tool for the job as needed (I think some of you already do this with the G1 and E-P1). Imagine a Panasonic prosumer camcorder, with camcorder ergonomics, sharing the same set of lenses. Now let your mind run wild, imagining other camera bodies... I'm partial to imagining a Hasselblad 500C/M-type affair with a small cube-shaped body and a high-res waistlevel LCD viewfinder. But more than any of these, I want to see the camera that looks and feels like no camera ever has, made possible only with this new format. In a world where image quality is plateauing and many people now have (or soon will have) a camera that meets all of their needs in terms of quality, how do you continue to sell bodies? One way, useful for photo enthusiasts, is to offer a different shooting experience with each one. That way, users collect a system of lenses and bodies, all interchangable with one another, each purchase adding something for the user but also increasing their investment in the system. Makes good business sense.

And of course the "out-of-the-box" thinking has already borne fruit for users, as the GH1 (and the GF1, if rumors can be trusted) has its multi-aspect sensor, allowing users to shoot in full-resolution in 3 different aspect ratios. That's impossible with a mirrored camera, and calls to mind the X-Pan. I can't wait to see more of that.

As for Canon and Nikon, my hopes for them are entirely unreasonable, but they are as follows: Use either the Canon 7 or Nikon S heritage like Olympus did with the Pen, devise a mirrorless APS format, and do something really unexpected that the competition can't match. I think either could get alot of play by limiting their focal lengths and including a zooming optical viewfinder, something along the lines of a digital Contax G series. Include an LCD for more extreme lengths or so users can choose their method of composition, and launch with a zoom and three primes that directly correspond to classic focal lengths: A 16mm, 24mm, and 33mm for Nikon DX, for example. I don't think it'll happen, and I don't necessarily think it would make good business sense. But I do think Canon and Nikon need to get into this market, and that if they don't do something big, unpredictable, and outside of what the specs for Micro 4/3 allows, they'll always play second fiddle to Panasonic or Olympus (both of which, by the way, cannot dominate this market; my money's on Panasonic).

That or they should get to market by Photokina with something very much like the E-P1, but with an EVF and multiple primes available on day one. I suppose that would do it too.