Glance at the potential for a system merge

Started May 17, 2012 | Discussions
odl
odl
Senior MemberPosts: 1,684
Like?
Glance at the potential for a system merge
May 17, 2012

Thanks to the lens simulator we can have a quick look at the potential for a merged system. While many on this forum will attack the SHG lenses for their size, they are simply comparable to the same lenses on other formats.

But, look at this, these are the SHG lenses on the OMD. Imagine if the OMD grip was larger, held 3 batteries (plus one in the body) what you can see already is the SHG lenses are certainly not monstrosities, even on this small body:

But here is why many professionals will buy in, because when you need them, those lenses are there, when you dont you have this:

A system that can expand to meet the needs of all but the most demanding forum warrior (read profesional) while being scalable, portable etc. To me, the SHG lenses are what professionals are used to carrying, but this system means if they want to pare back, they can, with no function change, no IQ change, not Image processing change etc.

From tiny to huge. It all pivots around their solution to PDAF, and I will say it again, as we havent seen it yet, despite the readily available solutions, they must have something else in mind. Such as a PDAF overhaul and a streamlined solution.

Ab

-- hide signature --

alatchinphotography.com

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For
knowledge is limited to all we now know and
understand, while imagination embraces the entire
world, and all there ever will be to know and
understand.” - Albert Einstein

agogo
Regular MemberPosts: 366Gear list
Like?
Hehe. OMG
In reply to odl, May 17, 2012

That 35-100 looks the same scale as my 300/2.8 on my E3!

Still, with the grips, it still looks manageable with the bigger lenses. Guess you won't be able to tell until you handle the whole lot by yourself to see.

Interesting to see how big the E7 will be if it's mirrorless.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
odl
odl
Senior MemberPosts: 1,684
Like?
Re: Hehe. OMG
In reply to agogo, May 17, 2012

agogo wrote:

That 35-100 looks the same scale as my 300/2.8 on my E3!

it is all relative, I was thinking of throwing in some other body lens combos but it was too much work.

Still, with the grips, it still looks manageable with the bigger lenses. Guess you won't be able to tell until you handle the whole lot by yourself to see.

Interesting to see how big the E7 will be if it's mirrorless.

I would be very excited if the rumors started to suggest it is the merge camera. I tracked birds with the EM5 and the 40-150 (m43rds) and managed to catch them in flight, I was even impressed at how against messy backgrounds it still caught the bird:

There is so much potential.

-- hide signature --

alatchinphotography.com

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For
knowledge is limited to all we now know and
understand, while imagination embraces the entire
world, and all there ever will be to know and
understand.” - Albert Einstein

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrapperJohn
Forum ProPosts: 10,041Gear list
Like?
No reason it can't happen
In reply to odl, May 17, 2012

The EM5 seems to be finding its way into the hands of quite a few advanced amateurs and even pros lately, not as a replacement but as a second, small solution.

So the bait has been taken, now reel them in. If the beautiful ZD zooms would also AF well on this small system, it adds a number of situations to the times when the small solution is preferable to the large one. In fact, such a combination would address all but the ultra shallow DOF situations.

There are some interesting primes, but the serious photogs don't always have time or opportunity to crop with their feet, which is why fast zooms are so popular with them. And we're sitting on a stack of some of the sharpest and vice free fast zooms ever made.

I've been using my old 50-200 on the EM5 a lot. My older 14-54 doesn't improve enough on the 12-50 (a lightning quick focuser) to make it worth the trouble, and the 45 1.8 replaces the 50M nicely for everything but close macro.

But there is no M43 equivalent for the 50-200. Frankly, most of the M43 zooms suck. The 9-18 is about like the ZD 9-18, the 12-50 is actually decent, would probably be sharper long if that macro feature wasn't there, but otherwise, the M43 zooms are too slow. They're soft wide open, and especially with the tele zooms, you're squeezed between a slow maximum aperture and diffraction limitation, you have maybe one stop to play with. Maybe. Not like the 50-200: sharp wide open, and several stops to work with before DL sets in.

It is ironic that we're finally seeing the original 4/3 vision come to life: making precision glass for a smaller sensor is easier than for a larger sensor - Olympus said this when the E1 came out. It just took ten years for sensor technology to mitigate the other advantages of the larger sensor.

 TrapperJohn's gear list:TrapperJohn's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Marty4650
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,151Gear list
Like?
I just don't see the point
In reply to odl, May 17, 2012

Of course you can get any lens to work with any camera provided they have the same lens mount or you have the right adapter.

I cannot imagine a worse kludge than taking a 15 ounce OM-D... adding a grip and battery pack.... adding a 4/3 to M4/3 adapter.... and then attaching an almost four pound beast of a 35-100mm SHG lens to it!

Sure, it can be done. But why do it?
Unless your primary goal is "to prove it can be done?"

Do professional photographers really want to work like this?

(This is a sincere question. I am not a professional photographer and I don't know if they enjoy combining four or five pieces of gear so they can get the best available optic that will almost autofocus well at a somewhat acceptable speed.)

I'm just guessing here, but I think an E-5 (or better yet, an E-7 if we ever see one) would be a much better tool for using these exceptionally good but large heavy lenses.

Olympus is still trying to define their mission.

4/3 was launched with the notion that it would offer some appeal to high end users. The very first camera (the E1) and the very first lens (the 14-54mm) were magnificently built and weather sealed. They created some really wonderful lenses that were held back by the smaller sensor. And eventually they ended up grinding out consumer grade DSLRs in two lens kits for $500, and still couldn't sell them.

So next they discontinued the entire line (save the top model, since they still needed a way to sell their existing SHG lenses) and moved on to M4/3.

M4/3 is a well designed system that is getting some traction, and perhaps it can eventually become a professional photographer's first choice. There are exactly six 4/3 lenses that are "CDAF compliant." All the others will work on a M4/3 camera, but will be too large, too heavy, or too slow to autofocus.

It is really best to use M4/3 lenses on M4/3 cameras, and to use 4/3 lenses on 4/3 cameras. I say this being a user of both systems, because there really is no "one beautiful system." That was all marketing hype or wishful thinking.

M4/3 currently has several nice lenses, with several more coming. Hopefully, some will be weather sealed. And when this happens it just might be the first choice option for pros for certain applications. But I really doubt many people who don't own SHG lenses will rush out to buy them so they can use them with their OM-Ds.

 Marty4650's gear list:Marty4650's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
odl
odl
Senior MemberPosts: 1,684
Like?
Re: I just don't see the point
In reply to Marty4650, May 17, 2012

Marty4650 wrote:

I cannot imagine a worse kludge than taking a 15 ounce OM-D... adding a grip and battery pack.... adding a 4/3 to M4/3 adapter.... and then attaching an almost four pound beast of a 35-100mm SHG lens to it!

My point wasnt the OMD, but a sized up OMD. A larger battery pack would give that size.

Sure, it can be done. But why do it?
Unless your primary goal is "to prove it can be done?"

So that all lenses work on at least 1 body with no drawbacks.

Do professional photographers really want to work like this?

Flexibility is very important.

(This is a sincere question. I am not a professional photographer and I don't know if they enjoy combining four or five pieces of gear so they can get the best available optic that will almost autofocus well at a somewhat acceptable speed.)

Again it is very important to have a flexible system. Many users already combine a body and vertical grip with a lens. Adding an adapter is hardly overkill, especially as one only removes it at certain points.

I'm just guessing here, but I think an E-5 (or better yet, an E-7 if we ever see one) would be a much better tool for using these exceptionally good but large heavy lenses.

Are you saying it would be better because of the weight? As I mentioned in my original post, one would have to bulk up the body (even if it was with a vertical grip) to be better balanced.

Olympus is still trying to define their mission.

I dont know about that.

4/3 was launched with the notion that it would offer some appeal to high end users. The very first camera (the E1) and the very first lens (the 14-54mm) were magnificently built and weather sealed. They created some really wonderful lenses that were held back by the smaller sensor. And eventually they ended up grinding out consumer grade DSLRs in two lens kits for $500, and still couldn't sell them.

That had little to do with the cameras and a lot to do with the established players.

So next they discontinued the entire line (save the top model, since they still needed a way to sell their existing SHG lenses) and moved on to M4/3.

As far as I know the E-620, E-30 and E-5 are still current on olympus US site. Now whether or not they are current or competitive is another matter.

M4/3 is a well designed system that is getting some traction, and perhaps it can eventually become a professional photographer's first choice. There are exactly six 4/3 lenses that are "CDAF compliant." All the others will work on a M4/3 camera, but will be too large, too heavy, or too slow to autofocus.

Too large: easily fized with a larger vertical grip.
Too heavy: no more or less heavy then when mounted on any other camera.
Too slow AF: being worked on.

It is really best to use M4/3 lenses on M4/3 cameras, and to use 4/3 lenses on 4/3 cameras. I say this being a user of both systems, because there really is no "one beautiful system." That was all marketing hype or wishful thinking.

It isnt wishful thinking at all, and I dont disagree that a OVF in at least one body would be a good idea. But one beautiful system is a real possibility, not marketing hype or wishful thinking as you suggest.

M4/3 currently has several nice lenses, with several more coming. Hopefully, some will be weather sealed. And when this happens it just might be the first choice option for pros for certain applications. But I really doubt many people who don't own SHG lenses will rush out to buy them so they can use them with their OM-Ds.

Every time i see someone write something like your last line I can see incredible short sightedness in their thinking (meant nicely). Why would anyone "rush out" and buy SHG lenses for this body? They wouldnt today. But what about in a year, if a pro m43rds body with a slightly larger build and bigger battery grip to scale the cameras size, weight and number of shots is released? What then? When someone who owns a pen (or omd) this year decides they want to take it further, they want a birding lens and have a look around, including at the 50-200, or the 300mm f2.8... They get to keep their existing lenses and use them...

The camera world is a relatively slow moving one when it comes to lenses. The SHG lenses exist, they are "paid for", so are the HG lenses. Getting them to work on a m43rds body is only a bonus for Olympus, it is a win win, there is no lose.

Ab

-- hide signature --

alatchinphotography.com

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For
knowledge is limited to all we now know and
understand, while imagination embraces the entire
world, and all there ever will be to know and
understand.” - Albert Einstein

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
amalric
Forum ProPosts: 10,399
Like?
Re: I just don't see the point ...+1
In reply to Marty4650, May 17, 2012

Marty4650 wrote:

It is really best to use M4/3 lenses on M4/3 cameras, and to use 4/3 lenses on 4/3 cameras. I say this being a user of both systems, because there really is no "one beautiful system." That was all marketing hype or wishful thinking.

M4/3 currently has several nice lenses, with several more coming. Hopefully, some will be weather sealed. And when this happens it just might be the first choice option for pros for certain applications. But I really doubt many people who don't own SHG lenses will rush out to buy them so they can use them with their OM-Ds.

It's nice to see someone coming to his senses. There is no market in m4/3 for SHG 4/3 lenses at 1041. But in no other site either. The only ones asking for experiences are previous 4/3 users. But even they are scarce.

The only alternative to the present state of things is the so called 'Modular camera', presumably a dual standard AF camera. However an Olympus rep warned, some time ago, that it was too expensive, and therefore mothballed.

Therefore it's not a matter of technology, it's a matter of money and missing market.

For Oly it's much easier to go on with an E-x indefinitely, and if they have now some money to invest, with an E-xx.

Personally the only lens I might want to buy at some point is the 14-54 mk2, but possibly only because it's cheaper than the coming 12-35 Panny.

Its weight and size are really the limit for m4/3, considering the added adapter.

The old 9-18 and 40-150 I keep, but only because I already have them, they are light and CDAF. However, such is the growing number of native lenses for m4/3 that there will never be any market for 4/3 lenses. Besides the new format, with its short distance to flange and EVF is ideally suited for Leica-like lenses - so again very high quality glass.

It's not nice to be a party pooper, but there must be a limit to credulity.
Buy two separate cameras and be done with it.

Am.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Rriley
Forum ProPosts: 21,843Gear list
Like?
Re: I just don't see the point
In reply to Marty4650, May 17, 2012

Marty4650 wrote:

Of course you can get any lens to work with any camera provided they have the same lens mount or you have the right adapter.

I cannot imagine a worse kludge than taking a 15 ounce OM-D... adding a grip and battery pack.... adding a 4/3 to M4/3 adapter.... and then attaching an almost four pound beast of a 35-100mm SHG lens to it!

been to the Nex forum lately

Sure, it can be done. But why do it?

easily a problem to do with lens choices, just where is the sealed 35-100/2 for mFT.

Unless your primary goal is "to prove it can be done?"

Do professional photographers really want to work like this?

if I started over, I would choose a system based on available lenses, then crosshatch bodies as options. As it stands Im happy with the optics I have for what I do, and I fit tasks with the bodies I have, although I find GH2 a bit fiddly.

(This is a sincere question. I am not a professional photographer and I don't know if they enjoy combining four or five pieces of gear so they can get the best available optic that will almost autofocus well at a somewhat acceptable speed.)

certainly AF is a part of the equation, but it isnt a difficult issue for what I do. For others it will be a lot harder, micro surely needs pdAF.

I'm just guessing here, but I think an E-5 (or better yet, an E-7 if we ever see one) would be a much better tool for using these exceptionally good but large heavy lenses.

sure, but then its all about system options and different people see this from within their own sphere. I find the idea of bulking up a body with a grip a very good idea as it provides more purposeful adaptability that quite frankly I dont see anywhere else

Olympus is still trying to define their mission.

thats a fair point, at least if one thought in terms of maximizing the potentials which is a discussion we could have on any system.

4/3 was launched with the notion that it would offer some appeal to high end users. The very first camera (the E1) and the very first lens (the 14-54mm) were magnificently built and weather sealed. They created some really wonderful lenses that were held back by the smaller sensor. And eventually they ended up grinding out consumer grade DSLRs in two lens kits for $500, and still couldn't sell them.

they didnt do as badly as all that in the heyday of E4xx and E5xx, but these bodies had some crippling problems like small OVF etc. Reviewing the SLR options of the day would prove that they could have been better, more competitive.

So next they discontinued the entire line (save the top model, since they still needed a way to sell their existing SHG lenses) and moved on to M4/3.

mmmmm.. maybe

M4/3 is a well designed system that is getting some traction, and perhaps it can eventually become a professional photographer's first choice. There are exactly six 4/3 lenses that are "CDAF compliant." All the others will work on a M4/3 camera, but will be too large, too heavy, or too slow to autofocus.

For AF in particular, thats more of an mFT issue than it is a lens issue, excepting that you wont be finding SHG grade lenses on mFT native mounts anytime soon.

It is really best to use M4/3 lenses on M4/3 cameras, and to use 4/3 lenses on 4/3 cameras. I say this being a user of both systems, because there really is no "one beautiful system." That was all marketing hype or wishful thinking.

this is another story too, my question to Olympus would be, if we went about this process thoughtfully, would it look the same. For there are things that I see that could have been very different from the get-go and would be making a difference right now.

M4/3 currently has several nice lenses, with several more coming. Hopefully, some will be weather sealed. And when this happens it just might be the first choice option for pros for certain applications. But I really doubt many people who don't own SHG lenses will rush out to buy them so they can use them with their OM-Ds.

i think the professional options in lenses native to mFT make it quite limiting and I dont see it as a pro standalone in any sense.

-- hide signature --

Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'

 Rriley's gear list:Rriley's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Olympus E-3 Olympus E-5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus E-M1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrapperJohn
Forum ProPosts: 10,041Gear list
Like?
That's easy
In reply to Marty4650, May 17, 2012

Looking beyond absolute shallow DOF, which is the main advantage of a FF sensor with today's sensors, those huge lenses are still very small compared to their FF counterparts. Five or six years ago, one could argue that FF's two stop advantage and greater PP headroom allowed for smaller, slower glass to be the same as fast zooms on 4/3. Today, that has been pushed by sensor technology away from practical use and into the theoretical. Both FF and 4/3 sensor got a lot better.

ISO has caught up for most practical uses. DR is up to very good levels. The EM5 sensor removes the roadblock from HG and SHG showing what they can really do. But, does that mean that large lens on tiny body is useful?

Markets are quite often created by stumbling into them almost by accident. In this case, it would be the pro who bought an EM5 because it's small and capable, and then finds it can take the place of the big rig more and more with the fast ZD zooms. An EM5 with a 35-100 is still a lot smaller than than a 70-200 F2 zoom on a FF body, and has the option of becoming even smaller - the 45 1.8 fits easily in a shirt pocket.

Arguably, the pro would be better off with an E7 and SHG, but they won't buy an E7 because it's not small . It has to be in their hands in order for them to use it.

Much as Apple didn't set out to own online music sales and portable players when they developed the first iTunes to organize music on a Mac, Olympus didn't set out to make major inroads into the high end amateur and pro market with the EM5. But, the opportunity is there, if, like Apple, they move quickly and execute flawlessly.

 TrapperJohn's gear list:TrapperJohn's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CollBaxter
Forum ProPosts: 12,409Gear list
Like?
Re: I just don't see the point
In reply to Marty4650, May 17, 2012

Marty4650 wrote:

Of course you can get any lens to work with any camera provided they have the same lens mount or you have the right adapter.

I cannot imagine a worse kludge than taking a 15 ounce OM-D... adding a grip and battery pack.... adding a 4/3 to M4/3 adapter.... and then attaching an almost four pound beast of a 35-100mm SHG lens to it!

I Have to agree. The balance would be all wrong and make it difficult to use. One forget the cost by the time you have bought all the bit and bobs Grip/Battery/adapter you would be looking at E-5 or E-7 prices.

Sure, it can be done. But why do it?
Unless your primary goal is "to prove it can be done?"

For a lot of us here its called continuity of a brand or segment.

Do professional photographers really want to work like this?

I would know I am not a Pro but a pro would use specific tools for specific jobs I should imagine in most cases its the lenses that change on the body and not the body on the lenses.

(This is a sincere question. I am not a professional photographer and I don't know if they enjoy combining four or five pieces of gear so they can get the best available optic that will almost auto focus well at a somewhat acceptable speed.)

Unlikely but at the moment I think almost auto focus well at a somewhat acceptable speed also applies to native m4/3 lenses in m4/3.

I'm just guessing here, but I think an E-5 (or better yet, an E-7 if we ever see one) would be a much better tool for using these exceptionally good but large heavy lenses.

Yep The extra volume gives better control and and damping for stability. With a big heavy camera and lens you only have to worry about gravity ( Up or Down). If the 5 Axis IBIS is added to a E-5 body it would be interesting to see if it pulls a Extra 2 stops over the E-M5.

Olympus is still trying to define their mission.

Whenever where they not

4/3 was launched with the notion that it would offer some appeal to high end users. The very first camera (the E1) and the very first lens (the 14-54mm) were magnificently built and weather sealed. They created some really wonderful lenses that were held back by the smaller sensor. And eventually they ended up grinding out consumer grade DSLRs in two lens kits for $500, and still couldn't sell them.

As to the Lenses the SG grade lenses I believe are equal to some systems HG lenses . They had to be to compensate for the poorer sensor. The E-500 was a huge success and so I believe was the E-510 as I see a lot of people hung on to them. The rest after that where well just reiterations. ( I have them all) Olympus where very late in bringing out a mid range E-30.

So next they discontinued the entire line (save the top model, since they still needed a way to sell their existing SHG lenses) and moved on to M4/3.

Discontinued ?

M4/3 is a well designed system that is getting some traction, and perhaps it can eventually become a professional photographer's first choice. There are exactly six 4/3 lenses that are "CDAF compliant." All the others will work on a M4/3 camera, but will be too large, too heavy, or too slow to auto focus.

I think Auto focus is a general m4/3 problem . Until it can CAF properly it will not be a serious contender.
Sony's Intro for the A37

‘Sony Introduces Speedy α37 Camera with Full-time Continuous AF Powered by Translucent Mirror Technology’

It is really best to use M4/3 lenses on M4/3 cameras, and to use 4/3 lenses on 4/3 cameras. I say this being a user of both systems, because there really is no "one beautiful system." That was all marketing hype or wishful thinking.

One bigger body with PDAF support would do it. ( I don't how how they will do it)

M4/3 currently has several nice lenses, with several more coming. Hopefully, some will be weather sealed. And when this happens it just might be the first choice option for pros for certain applications. But I really doubt many people who don't own SHG lenses will rush out to buy them so they can use them with their OM-Ds.

This is where a lot of us 4/3 users get cold feet as to a change to a system this words like Hopefully , will be , could be and should. 4/3 is not perfect but we know what we have got.

Actually reverse physiology says that if Olympus brought out a E-7/50 I might even buy a E-M5 sometime to use my smaller lenses on.

-- hide signature --

Collin

(Aficionado Olympus DSLR )

http://collinbaxter.zenfolio.com/
http://www.pbase.com/collinbaxter

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. (George Carlin)

New Seventh Wonder of the World.

 CollBaxter's gear list:CollBaxter's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX230 HS Olympus E-500 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-620 Olympus E-5 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
goblin
Senior MemberPosts: 2,507Gear list
Like?
Re: Glance at the potential for a system merge
In reply to odl, May 17, 2012

odl wrote:

...what you can see already is the SHG lenses are certainly not monstrosities, even on this small body

Monstrosities ?!? Did anyone ever dare saying that ?!? Send them in !!!

PS Now stop it guys. The size of the cameras has never been an issue for the merging. If anything, Olympus can go in the direction of comfortable gun grips like it was the case with the extensions for the E-10/20. We all know what the problem currently is. AF speed with legacy lenses, that is.

 goblin's gear list:goblin's gear list
Ricoh GXR P10 28-300mm F3.5-5.6 VC Olympus E-1 Olympus E-3 Olympus E-330 Olympus E-400 +31 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
muddyfunster
Regular MemberPosts: 447
Like?
Re: Glance at the potential for a system merge
In reply to goblin, May 17, 2012

goblin wrote:

odl wrote:

...what you can see already is the SHG lenses are certainly not monstrosities, even on this small body

Monstrosities ?!? Did anyone ever dare saying that ?!? Send them in !!!

PS Now stop it guys. The size of the cameras has never been an issue for the merging. If anything, Olympus can go in the direction of comfortable gun grips like it was the case with the extensions for the E-10/20. We all know what the problem currently is. AF speed with legacy lenses, that is.

made me giggle
--
the night is dark.....and full of terriers

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CollBaxter
Forum ProPosts: 12,409Gear list
Like?
LOL !!! (n/t)
In reply to goblin, May 17, 2012
-- hide signature --

Collin

(Aficionado Olympus DSLR )

http://collinbaxter.zenfolio.com/
http://www.pbase.com/collinbaxter

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. (George Carlin)

New Seventh Wonder of the World.

 CollBaxter's gear list:CollBaxter's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX230 HS Olympus E-500 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-620 Olympus E-5 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
odl
odl
Senior MemberPosts: 1,684
Like?
That is brilliant
In reply to goblin, May 17, 2012

Did you make that just for the reply to this post
--
alatchinphotography.com

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For
knowledge is limited to all we now know and
understand, while imagination embraces the entire
world, and all there ever will be to know and
understand.” - Albert Einstein

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
odl
odl
Senior MemberPosts: 1,684
Like?
Re: I just don't see the point ...+1
In reply to amalric, May 17, 2012

amalric wrote:

Marty4650 wrote:

It is really best to use M4/3 lenses on M4/3 cameras, and to use 4/3 lenses on 4/3 cameras. I say this being a user of both systems, because there really is no "one beautiful system." That was all marketing hype or wishful thinking.

M4/3 currently has several nice lenses, with several more coming. Hopefully, some will be weather sealed. And when this happens it just might be the first choice option for pros for certain applications. But I really doubt many people who don't own SHG lenses will rush out to buy them so they can use them with their OM-Ds.

It's nice to see someone coming to his senses. There is no market in m4/3 for SHG 4/3 lenses at 1041. But in no other site either. The only ones asking for experiences are previous 4/3 users. But even they are scarce.

How do you know this, you base your entire viewpoint on your own beliefs and assumptions. The fact the 43rds lenses exist means there is potential for a merge. PDAF would only help the m43rds focusing for CAF and would also open up the 43rds lenses to THOSE THAT WANT THEM. How many times have you read "fast zooms" on the m43rds forums? Tonnes of times. Panasonic will release thier f2.8 zooms and olympus will have their F2 zooms, not unlike the 2.8 and f4 lenses on other systems wouldnt you say?

The only alternative to the present state of things is the so called 'Modular camera', presumably a dual standard AF camera. However an Olympus rep warned, some time ago, that it was too expensive, and therefore mothballed.

A rep warned? I read they were struggling to pull it together, but that is why I imagine it would happen at the "pro" end of the spectrum as the HG and SHG lenses are for people who are getting a bit more serious.

Therefore it's not a matter of technology, it's a matter of money and missing market.

What market are they missing? It is about attacking your competitors markets while expanding your own. If you dont get that it is fine, doesnt make it less true.

For Oly it's much easier to go on with an E-x indefinitely, and if they have now some money to invest, with an E-xx.

I wouldnt mind that, however I am sure many 43rds users would love to use the m43rds primes in the future. I am also wary of the idea that m43rds users would have no compatibility with their lenses if they choose to move up. There is no incentive to stay within the (m)43rds camp. With on sensor PDAF (and nikon has done it at an $800 price point) it opens up the HG zooms to the m43rds people, and allows a more vertical integration between the systems.

Personally the only lens I might want to buy at some point is the 14-54 mk2, but possibly only because it's cheaper than the coming 12-35 Panny.

Its weight and size are really the limit for m4/3, considering the added adapter.

The weight and size are the limit for the current crop of bodies (but not the OMD with grip, which i feel would work fine even with the 50-200).

The old 9-18 and 40-150 I keep, but only because I already have them, they are light and CDAF. However, such is the growing number of native lenses for m4/3 that there will never be any market for 4/3 lenses. Besides the new format, with its short distance to flange and EVF is ideally suited for Leica-like lenses - so again very high quality glass.

I dont disagree Al, but look at it like this, it is win win. Get PDAF on higher end m43rds bodies and open up a whole slew of 43rds lenses. Get a bridge body in 43rds and open up a slew of primes. Olympus will eventually update all their lenses, as manufacturers do, but it wont be any time soon unless they start selling them.

It's not nice to be a party pooper, but there must be a limit to credulity.
Buy two separate cameras and be done with it.

I find it interesting that while Nikon has asolution at $800 and SOny has a solution for around $300 (guess) you feel it would be beyond belief that Olympus could pull it together. Sounds like you have some blinkers on there.

Ab

Am.

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

alatchinphotography.com

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For
knowledge is limited to all we now know and
understand, while imagination embraces the entire
world, and all there ever will be to know and
understand.” - Albert Einstein

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jkrumm
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,950
Like?
A little different for me
In reply to odl, May 17, 2012

If they come out with a decently large (perhaps E30 sized) m43 body designed to accommodate the large 4/3 lenses, with fast pdaf focusing, large capacity batteries, and nicely spaced buttons (and plenty of them) then you will have a "merged" system. Might look a little funny putting the 45 1.8 on such a camera, but I'd welcome the ability to do so.

-- hide signature --

John Krumm
Juneau, AK

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CollBaxter
Forum ProPosts: 12,409Gear list
Like?
+1 (n/t)
In reply to jkrumm, May 17, 2012
-- hide signature --

Collin

(Aficionado Olympus DSLR )

http://collinbaxter.zenfolio.com/
http://www.pbase.com/collinbaxter

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. (George Carlin)

New Seventh Wonder of the World.

 CollBaxter's gear list:CollBaxter's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX230 HS Olympus E-500 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-620 Olympus E-5 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
odl
odl
Senior MemberPosts: 1,684
Like?
Re: A little different for me
In reply to jkrumm, May 17, 2012

That would work too. My only point was that none of the lenses are wildly out there on a bigger body, either bigger with a battery grip, or just bigger like an E-50.

Ab
--
alatchinphotography.com

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For
knowledge is limited to all we now know and
understand, while imagination embraces the entire
world, and all there ever will be to know and
understand.” - Albert Einstein

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Rriley
Forum ProPosts: 21,843Gear list
Like?
Re: A little different for me
In reply to jkrumm, May 17, 2012

jkrumm wrote:

If they come out with a decently large (perhaps E30 sized) m43 body designed to accommodate the large 4/3 lenses, with fast pdaf focusing, large capacity batteries, and nicely spaced buttons (and plenty of them) then you will have a "merged" system. Might look a little funny putting the 45 1.8 on such a camera, but I'd welcome the ability to do so.

I think the best that could be hoped for in size is just about the size of M5, possibly a fraction larger, perhaps oriented some other way like a left position EVF. The modularity assists somewhat in handling, but there might be a way to go to get ergonomics which seem to trail a little behind what can be done on larger bodies.

utilising both lens sets would give the best of both worlds of course, and fill out the lens system options that 4/3rds never developed.

-- hide signature --

Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'

 Rriley's gear list:Rriley's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Olympus E-3 Olympus E-5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus E-M1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
goblin
Senior MemberPosts: 2,507Gear list
Like?
Re: That is brilliant
In reply to odl, May 17, 2012

odl wrote:

Did you make that just for the reply to this post
--

Nope, did that last month after watching the thing for hours and wondering why I like the way it looks so much. And then it hit me.

 goblin's gear list:goblin's gear list
Ricoh GXR P10 28-300mm F3.5-5.6 VC Olympus E-1 Olympus E-3 Olympus E-330 Olympus E-400 +31 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads