What are the big three doing?

shame none of big tree probably arent very keen to create/follow a common standard, we will have proprietary lens mounts from each one of them, for the new camera systems.
 
What share of the digital camera market to the "big 3" have?

75%? I don't know the actual number.

I suspect the number is so significant though that their opinion is that they are doing things right and the rest of the pack is desperately reaching for ideas to make a difference.
 
My guess is that they're waiting for the market to grow sufficiently large for them to warrant spending the money on developing new lenses for the 4/3 system. P&S are stilling selling like hotcakes (for the moment) so why fix what's not broken?

Having said that, I would love for them enter the 4/3 market.
 
jarski said:
shame none of big tree probably arent very keen to create/follow a common standard, we will have proprietary lens mounts from each one of them, for the new camera systems.
Click to expand...
Well, historically that's something that hasn't been done much prior to the 4/3 and m4/3 systems. I suppose these companies see it in their interest to lock their customers into buying the products that they are selling. I think the big three will all come out with EVIL systems that feature adapters for their SLR lenses, hoping to lure their existing slr customers to migrate to their EVIL products with the ability to use existing lenses, albeit by giving up many of the benefits of EVIL systems.

Personally I'd much prefer to invest in an aps-c or dx EVIL system than m4/3. I like selective/narrow depth of field and the kinds of renderings it make possible, and that's comparably lacking on m4/3. Dream scenario would be an evil system based on a full frame sensor, but that's not likely, is it?
 
bmasonoh said:
Having said that, I would love for them enter the 4/3 market.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, except on µ4/3. The chip size for this concept is so small that serious photography with subject isolation via limited DOF is no longer possible. If any one of the big manufacturers wants to create a new camera market that offers better IQ than today's P&S cameras, it will at least have to have an APS-C sized image sensor.

Please give us a µAPS-C system ...
 
alien8 said:
Dream scenario would be an evil system based on a full frame sensor, but that's not likely, is it?
Click to expand...

bigger the sensor, bigger lenses, especially zooms. so this contradicts the idea of downsizing the new non-reflex system. but, one can always hope :p
 
jarski said:
bigger the sensor, bigger lenses, especially zooms. so this contradicts the idea of downsizing the new non-reflex system. but, one can always hope :p
Click to expand...
It's the flange distance and mirror box design that largely contributes to the larger size of slr lenses. An EVIL 35mm system could have lenses roughly comparable in size to a 35mm rangefinder. Those lenses are certainly much smaller than equivalent focal length lenses of slr systems. The only reason the lenses would have to be significantly larger than say M or G lenses is if the manufacturers decide to make mostly zoom lenses. But even the zooms would of course be smaller than those of an slr.
 
alien8 said:
The only reason the lenses would have to be significantly larger than say M or G lenses is if the manufacturers decide to make mostly zoom lenses.
Click to expand...
Don't forget that a new EVIL camera system will likely include lenses that feature focus and aperture control, and deliver status data electronically to the rest of the camera. That means supplementary electronics and two actuators, all of which will occupy additional space. Such lenses will definitely be larger than your normal M bayonet type optics.
 
Last edited:
Sure, they would be somewhat larger than M lenses for the reasons you point out, probably mostly in their width dimension, but probably not too much larger than G lenses of the same focal length. Certainly they could be far more compact than slr lenses, which would be attractive for many.
 
Three? They are only two!

Three? They are only two!

2009 has been a tough year for the camera industry. After digital cameras were introduced Canon has been the big winner in both turnover and profit when comparing the industry's camera business only. Most likely, in the years from 2004 up to 2008 Canon's profit on making digital cameras were more than the total profit of the whole industry combined. No.2 is Nikon who have been struggling, - but are now catching up. All the others, from Olymus to Pentax produces such tiny profits through the good years that it could well be that they will disappear or decide not to make cameras. The same with Sony.

Still, the most dramatic in 2009 is that Nikon now is back to an equal possition together with Canon. - AS late as 2007, Nikon's camera business was half the size of that of Canon's camera business. This is due to that Nikon is back in the pro DSLR market with a FF sensor, which is what the pro's want. It is here, pro Full Frame Digital Cameras with lenses and flashes, the profit is. So, if you buy a FF-DSLR camera from either Nikon or Canon you are in the middle of the focus point of the management of the two most important camera producers in the World: Canon and Nikon.

I would not bet much on the Four Thirds system....
 
I, on the other hand, would, and am about to list my full frame A850 for sale, after having it for about a month. Each to their own.
 
bmasonoh said:
My guess is that they're waiting for the market to grow sufficiently large for them to warrant spending the money on developing new lenses for the 4/3 system. P&S are stilling selling like hotcakes (for the moment) so why fix what's not broken?
Click to expand...

Not so - according to this article sales are down

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...camera-makers-install-the-unique-1907563.html

"A decline in sales of compact digital cameras has triggered a scramble among manufacturers in Japan to equip them with a range of new functions.

Sales were down five percent in 2009 in comparison with two years earlier, with the primary reason being that most Japanese households already own a compact digital camera. Overseas sales are following a similar path, while total sales have been hurt by intensified competition among camera makers.

The way to perk sales up again, manufacturers believe, is to convince consumers to replace their old models."
 
alien8 said:
It's the flange distance and mirror box design that largely contributes to the larger size of slr lenses. An EVIL 35mm system could have lenses roughly comparable in size to a 35mm rangefinder. Those lenses are certainly much smaller than equivalent focal length lenses of slr systems. The only reason the lenses would have to be significantly larger than say M or G lenses is if the manufacturers decide to make mostly zoom lenses. But even the zooms would of course be smaller than those of an slr.
Click to expand...
Having owned both the new 35 1.8 and 5 1.4G Nikon primes, I would have to say that Nikon has long forgotten how to make good, small, quality optics and favors big bulbous P.O.S. . They can't even come up with an F 4.0 zoom that is smaller than their 2.8 version. Seems like all the great Japanese lens makers have died off and all that is left is a bunch of punk kids with marketing degrees, and Napoleon complexes, or Penis envy and think everything needs to be huge.:bang:
 
jsrockit said:
They don't have to go u 4/3, but they do need to start making compacts with bigger sensors to sell inbetween their P&S and DSLRs... it doesn't make sense not to.
Click to expand...

Samsung NX10 (you knew I was gonna bring it up...) Full-sized APS-C CMOS sensor, build-in EVF, no mirror. Compact body - smaller than DSLRs, larger than 4/3rds cameras. Might be something you want to consider. They are launching with a 30mm f2 pancake lens (46mm equiv in 35mm):
Hands on preview:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/SamsungNX10/

Image samples:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1001/10010403samsungnx10gallery.asp

Same sensor as Pentax K-7.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom