agentlossing
Well-known
That's true. It could be seen as an attempt upon the Fuji X100's throne, though the image quality is never going to quite rival the full image area of an APS-C sensor. I'd absolutely love a fixed focal length version, though. If they turned the excellent 20mm f1.7 into a built-in lens with better internal motors, and kept the size the same or a bit smaller, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.
Archlich
Well-known
Been dreaming for a fixed focal length M43 camera for a decade. The LX100 was close but not quite there yet. Doubt we'd be seeing a III too.
JeffS7444
Well-known
My crystal ball is on the blink, but I think depending on the depth of Japan Industrial Partner's pockets, Olympus / Pen as a Japanese camera company may be around for awhile. Rather than any grand vision for a new Olympus, they seem to be figuring things out as they go. But their marketing people aren't wrong in reminding us that there are some advantages to the format when it comes to smaller, more hand-holdable optics.
emraphoto
Veteran
I used an LX100 for quite some time. If you want it as your daily, go everywhere camera I would caution against it. The dust problem, via the lens retracting and sucking everything in, became an issue with mine and two other folks I know who used them. Mine became so bad it was shelved within a year.
With that said, I am not particularly cautious with my gear
biomed
Veteran
I just read a release from Olympus (new Olympus) that u4/3 mount lenses (all brands) out sell lenses in other mounts in the domestic Japanese market. The market share for u4/3 mount lenses is slightly over 21%. Can't verify the truth of this, it may be a marketing ploy.
Mike
Mike
HHPhoto
Well-known
You are probably referring to this article:
https://petapixel.com/2021/01/29/mi...umber-one-market-share-among-all-lens-mounts/
The Japanese market is very different to the North American and European market.
Small(er) cameras are in general much more popular there, in Japan.
So the data is probably right.
Cheers, Jan
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I must be Japaneese then.
willie_901
Veteran
The still image market is challenging because of supply and demand imbalance. This is a disadvantage for niche products. As still-image market demand shrinks, the market share for niche products can become unsustainable. I am not optimistic M4/3 will survive. I am certain it will not thrive.
However, for many types of still photography the M 4/3 system is more than sufficient.
M 4/3 offers three advantages: small, lightweight equipment, a native 4:3 image format and a convenient means to achieve a wide depth of field.
The technical image quality (signal-to-noise ratio) is not necessarily limited by the sensor area as the light available to the sensor (the signal) depends on lens surface (aperture) and sensor surface areas.
A practical limitation to SNR is the size, weight and cost to manufacturer lenses with very large surface areas. Another SNR limitation is the reduction of active pixel area as sensor resolution increases.
The newest M 4/3 cameras offer 20 MP sensors, so resolution is sufficient. However increasing the pixel density of smaller surface-area sensors is limited by manfacturing processes that limit the active pixel area. Also, lens optical resolution has to match the sensor MTF50 which increases lens cost (and perhaps size and weight) as pixel density increases.
I gave the M 4/3 system a try in 2009. I did not find the 4:3 image format useful. Back then the sensor and AF technologies were significantly inferior to APS-C and 24 X 36 mm DSLRs. Also, I am not a videographer.
However, for many types of still photography the M 4/3 system is more than sufficient.
M 4/3 offers three advantages: small, lightweight equipment, a native 4:3 image format and a convenient means to achieve a wide depth of field.
The technical image quality (signal-to-noise ratio) is not necessarily limited by the sensor area as the light available to the sensor (the signal) depends on lens surface (aperture) and sensor surface areas.
A practical limitation to SNR is the size, weight and cost to manufacturer lenses with very large surface areas. Another SNR limitation is the reduction of active pixel area as sensor resolution increases.
The newest M 4/3 cameras offer 20 MP sensors, so resolution is sufficient. However increasing the pixel density of smaller surface-area sensors is limited by manfacturing processes that limit the active pixel area. Also, lens optical resolution has to match the sensor MTF50 which increases lens cost (and perhaps size and weight) as pixel density increases.
I gave the M 4/3 system a try in 2009. I did not find the 4:3 image format useful. Back then the sensor and AF technologies were significantly inferior to APS-C and 24 X 36 mm DSLRs. Also, I am not a videographer.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Panasonic is still having ball with M43 for video.
https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/slrs/panasonic_dcbgh1
https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/slrs/panasonic_dcbgh1
Tom Diaz
Well-known
I enjoyed looking at this one...
Same here. Lovely light, and you captured it.
Tom Diaz
Well-known
I will go back and read more of this long thread. I hope I am not repeating points made by others.
I have a full-frame Leica with a good assortment of lenses and also two Panasonic GX cameras, also with an assortment of (Panasonic) Leica lenses.
The Panasonic Leica lenses have been superb for me. That will keep me using the cameras (and maybe upgrading the GX bodies if needed) for a long time. I'm not a video person, but my daughter is, and her company has done good stuff with Panasonic machines.
So from my viewpoint as a serious still photographer, I still take my Leica body out with me if I know, somehow, that I'm out for serious stuff. However, I also try to take a camera with me at all times, everywhere, and that is always one of the Panasonics.
I don't give advice to Olympus, Panasonic, or anyone else as to whether they should stay in the still photography business. It is obviously not a good business, but that may depend mostly on whether you own some important niche. Leica owns the Sultan of Brunei niche; I notice that they already have sold out of the newly reimagined Noctilux f/1.2, at $17,000. I think Nikon and Canon will share most of the pro still photography business as long as they can, but one of them may get out, too, because I believe they are both looking at declining sales.
As a hedge against complete still photography business disaster, I still own a fully functional Leica CL. Film and chemicals will not disappear within my lifetime.
Tom
I have a full-frame Leica with a good assortment of lenses and also two Panasonic GX cameras, also with an assortment of (Panasonic) Leica lenses.
The Panasonic Leica lenses have been superb for me. That will keep me using the cameras (and maybe upgrading the GX bodies if needed) for a long time. I'm not a video person, but my daughter is, and her company has done good stuff with Panasonic machines.
So from my viewpoint as a serious still photographer, I still take my Leica body out with me if I know, somehow, that I'm out for serious stuff. However, I also try to take a camera with me at all times, everywhere, and that is always one of the Panasonics.
I don't give advice to Olympus, Panasonic, or anyone else as to whether they should stay in the still photography business. It is obviously not a good business, but that may depend mostly on whether you own some important niche. Leica owns the Sultan of Brunei niche; I notice that they already have sold out of the newly reimagined Noctilux f/1.2, at $17,000. I think Nikon and Canon will share most of the pro still photography business as long as they can, but one of them may get out, too, because I believe they are both looking at declining sales.
As a hedge against complete still photography business disaster, I still own a fully functional Leica CL. Film and chemicals will not disappear within my lifetime.
Tom
Tom Diaz
Well-known
Wow. Good for those guys, taking a big swing. I may do the Indiegogo thing, and it looks like a camera I might like, too.
This raises the other, interesting question: will other new companies get in the business? I would definitely consider buying a Voigtlander body for my M43 lenses, and I'm sure others who read this forum might do so.
Tom
Tom Diaz
Well-known
Agree with all!
Tom Diaz
Well-known
Well, I added back another copy of the Summilux-DG 25mm f/1.4 ASPH to my Micro-FourThirds kit. It was one of my most used lenses in the past, and it looks like it will be again.
As long as mFT can keep producing images as nicely as the GX9 and E-M1 do, I'll keep shooting with them ... alongside my other cameras, of course.
Panic Button - Santa Clara 2020
Panasonic GX9 + Summilux-DG 25mm f/1.4 ASPH
ISO 800 @ f/4 @ 1/30
Morning Espresso - Santa Clara 2020
Panasonic GX9 + Summilux-DG 25mm f/1.4 ASPH
ISO 800 @ f/1.4 @ 1/80
enjoy! G
"Equipment is transitory. Photographs endure."
Those are outstanding.
biomed
Veteran
agentlossing
Well-known
Earlier in this thread, I talked about the LX100ii and I was unconsciously hoping that it would be the solution for the M4/3 shooter who is dissatisfied with the Panasonic GX9.
Now, having used the LX100ii and judged the images for a while, I'll say the actual truth: the Panasonic GX9 - with a good, large-aperture lens - is the solution for the M4/3 shooter who is dissatisfied with the LX100ii.
The IQ at distance and in backgrounds from that LX100 lens, coupled with the possibility of dust or failure issues with the lens barrel and the slightly worse IQ and slower operation, for me highlight how darn good that GX9 was with a lens like the Sigma 30mm f1.4, or any of the other good M4/3 lenses. I ultimately wasn't quite happy with the GX9, but it's a really, really good camera that never got its due.
Now, having used the LX100ii and judged the images for a while, I'll say the actual truth: the Panasonic GX9 - with a good, large-aperture lens - is the solution for the M4/3 shooter who is dissatisfied with the LX100ii.
The IQ at distance and in backgrounds from that LX100 lens, coupled with the possibility of dust or failure issues with the lens barrel and the slightly worse IQ and slower operation, for me highlight how darn good that GX9 was with a lens like the Sigma 30mm f1.4, or any of the other good M4/3 lenses. I ultimately wasn't quite happy with the GX9, but it's a really, really good camera that never got its due.
Archiver
Veteran
I had no idea some needs to switch aspect ratio all the time.
First time reading about it. I like full sensor size. Not some crop from it.
But been not agree, because don't understand, I totally agree with
Cameras like the LX100, and the LX7 and LX6 before it, are special circumstances. They use an area of the sensor which allows for retaining focal length at the same megapixel count, instead of cropping. The LX100 at 4:3 ratio has the same mp count as at 16:9, which makes the image taller or wider, respectively.
I always loved the 16:9 aspect ratio on the LX7, as instead of 24mm focal length equivalent, it was more like 22 or even 21mm. I also often prefer 4:3 aspect ratio for portrait orientation images.
The Panasonic GH5S has a similar oversized sensor which gives the same megapixel count at different aspect ratios. No other manufacturer does this, which is a shame.
Archiver
Veteran
As of now, there have been no new m43 cameras announced, although there are rumours of a Panasonic GH6, and the possibility of the G9.
As I said before, the G9 will keep me going for a few more years to come, given that I shot with the GH4 for five years. With the addition of the GH5S, I'll be set for the next five or six years, maybe more. The stumbling block for editing footage from the newer cameras is my computer, which is next on the upgrade list.
But this doesn't really bode well for future m43 bodies if what is available now will suffice for the next five or six years. Unless there's a significant jump in dynamic range and tonal variation, I can't see myself buying a future m43 camera until then.
As I said before, the G9 will keep me going for a few more years to come, given that I shot with the GH4 for five years. With the addition of the GH5S, I'll be set for the next five or six years, maybe more. The stumbling block for editing footage from the newer cameras is my computer, which is next on the upgrade list.
But this doesn't really bode well for future m43 bodies if what is available now will suffice for the next five or six years. Unless there's a significant jump in dynamic range and tonal variation, I can't see myself buying a future m43 camera until then.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Panasonic made new M43 camera in late 2020.
https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/slrs/panasonic_dcbgh1
One more thing which fascinates me about E-PL1. Its sensor is totally dust free.
https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/slrs/panasonic_dcbgh1
One more thing which fascinates me about E-PL1. Its sensor is totally dust free.
emraphoto
Veteran
I don’t know nothing anything about the camera business. Zilch. Zero.
However I believe the folks at the company formerly known as Olympus have excellent platforms in existence already. Refining them and offering useable video features would not be prohibitive $ wise and more $ could be spent on marketing them
Add raw video out to a hard drive. This should become standard in coming models. I’ll take great raw 1080p over 5k any day of the week. Add this to the EM-1 and EM-5 line. You’ll sell bucketloads of E-M5 if you can keep it around $1000 and include zebras
The current lens line-up is outstanding. Seal up the primes and leave it alone
Build an exlr interface/pre-amp available for sale separately
Build an HDMI screen compatible with EM1/EM5
I saw it mentioned elsewhere and thought it was a brilliant idea. A 4/3 sensor XZ-3 with solid 4K video specs and audio in
The EM-1 should set the G9 as a benchmark for video performance. Add raw out, a pre-amp option and dummy battery to V plate support
The EM-10 should have audio in. Vloggers of the internet unite!
And that’s a damn good start without breaking the bank