"Olympus E system mirrorless in two years. Probably."

[ginsbu]

Just saw this:

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/olympus_e_system_mirrorless_in_two_years_probably_news_295133.html?aff=rss

Sorry if someone has posted it here already.

 

[kwa_photo]

Considering the source of the article and the person they interviewed (with photo), I am inclined to believe it. What we are seeing in the EVF of the EP-2 is still a generation 1 product too! That is amazing. I'd say he is probably right, that in 2 years it will be amazing!

I've been on the fence about wanting to upgrade my E-3 (also have an E-1) and a Canon G11 (also a G9) to an EP series and/or the E-x replacement. After reading this, especially about the increased focus speed for the m4/3 line, I think I'll hang on to what I have for now and wait it out a little longer.

There's nothing wrong with an E-3 (14-54 + 50-200, both Mark I) and the Canon G11 is outstanding up to ISO 400 and very good to 800. Albeit, not as good as the EP series.
--
-Ken
'Don't feed the trolls!'
http://kwaphoto.wordpress.com

 

[Rriley]

i dunno

24 months to get the EVF lag and clarity to speed
and bring CDAF competitive with PDAF,

therefore suitable for 20fps (I like that) he comments on seems optimistic, indeed a very big ask...

caveat: i should stress, ive never peered into an Oly EVF

PS: does this mean Trine is out there somewhere

--
ʎǝlıɹ

plɹoʍ ǝɥʇ ɟo doʇ uo ǝɹɐ ǝʍ 'ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ uı

 

[jkrumm]

I wouldn't be surprised to see a mid-level or entry level evf mirrorless 4/3 camera first, as they work on performance issues. I'd consider it, if it were decently quick to focus, perhaps not as fast as my 620 outside but reliable in lower light. It'll be interesting.

--
John Krumm
Juneau, AK

 

[illy]

as someone who shoots things that travel very quickly i don't see this as good news, I'm not making any real judgements until this is more than marketing claptrap and something actually exists, but my initial reaction is not a positive.
--
http://illy.smugmug.com

 

[travelfotografer]

and bring CDAF competitive with PDAF,

Regular 4/3rd lenses still require the flange distance to the sensor. Remove the mirror but the distance must still be there. I suspect other interesting things can make use of the space in the mirror box. Mirrorless E-System might still be PDAF.

--
Leon . http://picasaweb.google.com/travelfotografer



E3.420.330.1 918.1260.1450rit.25lux.25.50.50200SWD EC14.20 EX25 FL50R B+W FEISOL LEXAR

 

[Gregm61]

as someone who shoots things that travel very quickly i don't see this as good news, I'm not making any real judgements until this is more than marketing claptrap and something actually exists, but my initial reaction is not a positive.

Me either. Basically would make this system no better than the micro four-thirds system to shoot action, which really isn't any better than a digicam to shoot anything that moves, so we wind up with a less versatile system than today, incapable of certain types of photography where it currently works....makes a lot of sense, huh? And what about separate flash units and their built-in AF assist lights that are so nice to have that do not currently work on EVF-fitted cameras?

A lot of retrograde moves for the sake of an inferior viewing system.

 

[Winder]

The GH1 is already there. More cameras will come as technology improves. I would not be surprised if the next E-6xx uses an EVF.

But at the speed Olympus develops 4/3 product it might be more than 2 years.

 

[Brent Gair]

Of course, this is the Oly forum so I realize that people will do everything possible to read this is as bad news and they will express there trepidation and disappointment.

I'm excited. Olympus is still looking at ways to innovate. I see the possibility of increased frame rates (not that big a deal for me anyway). And the death of the conventional mechanical shutter...while scary for old timers...offers up the possible advantages of lighter weight and increased reliability.

Also, the elimination of those things specific to a conventional DSLR body (mirrors, prisms,) make it more efficient for Olympus to share technology between 4/3s and m4/3s. Essentially, it makes the conventional 4/3 E system less financially burdensome.

I see the prospect of lighter, more reliable cameras with faster frame rates and more efficient video.

Yes, I know Oly users aren't supposed to be optimistic so I apologize.

 

[amalric]

and bring CDAF competitive with PDAF,

Regular 4/3rd lenses still require the flange distance to the sensor. Remove the mirror but the distance must still be there. I suspect other interesting things can make use of the space in the mirror box. Mirrorless E-System might still be PDAF.

I am not sure. They might instead make a µ4/3 flagship with adapter, if the main goal is to go smaller and lighter. The big lenses go against this tide.

The other policy line seems to be: go with HD video all the way, to the point that photography might become an option in what will be entry level, consumer oriented cameras.

I don't know how authoritative is a US DSLR product manager, but the explanation of Oly's mysterious ways seems plausible. Not glad or sad, but a mix of both.

As always, they could have told us before. Mr. Watanabe didn't say anything of the kind only 6 months ago.

Am.

--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

 

[Franka T.L.]

its not about the image quality. the DSLR ( OVF ) and the EVIL is basically 2 distinct different animal. And what's the point of the 4/3 going mirrorless if maintaining the same 4/3 mount architecture. And as anything goes, any DSLR today can easily be a mirrorless body simply by the control to Mirror Lockup ( and of course the appropriate exposure control then )

The 4/3 and M4/3 IMHO is to be seen as a single synergy of 2 system that can be used together ( to best employ ). What Oly really need to do is to made all those 4/3 lens updated to support CDAF.

And I must say the guys comment about 14MP enough for consumer made a satire to the whole thing. I recall back when they launch the E410/E510, they were all out saying its more than enough with 10MP, and now its 14, and in between they were the same saying 12MP ( guess where they put a 12MP sensor ) is good ... Yawn ...

--

• Franka -

 

[Gregm61]

Of course, this is the Oly forum so I realize that people will do everything possible to read this is as bad news and they will express there trepidation and disappointment.

Based on the technology as it exists today and the incremental increase in performance that might or might not be seen over the next 1-2 years, disappointment is in order.

I'm excited. Olympus is still looking at ways to innovate. I see the possibility of increased frame rates (not that big a deal for me anyway). And the death of the conventional mechanical shutter...while scary for old timers...offers up the possible advantages of lighter weight and increased reliability.

Also, the elimination of those things specific to a conventional DSLR body (mirrors, prisms,) make it more efficient for Olympus to share technology between 4/3s and m4/3s. Essentially, it makes the conventional 4/3 E system less financially burdensome.

Not to mention both less versatile and viable for many. What it does is it makes models like the Canon 7D better and better looking as Olympus leaves everyone in the dark and speculating like this.

There are reasons why I choose to use a DSLR vs. a camera like the Panasonic G1, and turning the Olynpus E system into something like the Panasonic G1 is not why I own this system. It converts the E system into something that does not work for me or anyone else looking to take pictures of anything moving faster than a slow walk.

I see the prospect of lighter, more reliable cameras with faster frame rates and more efficient video.

What good are faster framing rates if you cannot continue following the subject in the finder during a burst for still shooting? Ever tried it with an electronic finder? It doesn't work. And it still won't work 1-2 years down the road. Certainly not at the rate Olympus does things.

Yes, I know Oly users aren't supposed to be optimistic so I apologize.

It's not so much optimistic as it is unrealistic.

 

[steve16823]

My prediction is that we will shortly see some semi-official statement from Olympus that backpedals on everything the Olympus America product manager was shooting his mouth off about.

Not that I doubt the future of cameras may be without mirrors, but I doubt the 2 year timeline seriously.

 

[ginsbu]

My prediction is that we will shortly see some semi-official statement from Olympus that backpedals on everything the Olympus America product manager was shooting his mouth off about.

I had similar thoughts. Even if what he said is true, it seems like the wrong way to make such an announcement.

On the substance, I'm not much concerned about the move to mirrorless bodies, particularly if there's a decent period of transition. But I am concerned about what this would mean for lens releases and the soundness of additional investment in standard 4/3 lenses.

 

[buddika]

illy wrote:

as someone who shoots things that travel very quickly i don't see this as good > news, I'm not making any real judgements until this is more than marketing claptrap > and something actually exists, but my initial reaction is not a positive.

Me either. Basically would make this system no better than the micro four-thirds > system to shoot action, which really isn't any better than a digicam to shoot > anything that moves, so we wind up with a less versatile system than today, > incapable of certain types of photography where it currently works....makes a lot of > sense, huh? And what about separate flash units and their built-in AF assist lights > that are so nice to have that do not currently work on EVF-fitted cameras?
A lot of retrograde moves for the sake of an inferior viewing system.

What if they develop EVF with fast enough refresh rate. An EVF dont have to beat the refresh rate of an OVF, which is practically infinite. An EVF only has to beat the speed of response of human visual system. That they may do in few years.

 

[buddika]

no text

 

[Harold66]

as someone who shoots things that travel very quickly i don't see this as good news, I'm not making any real judgements until this is more than marketing claptrap and something actually exists, but my initial reaction is not a positive.

Me either. Basically would make this system no better than the micro four-thirds system to shoot action, which really isn't any better than a digicam to shoot anything that moves, so we wind up with a less versatile system than today, incapable of certain types of photography where it currently works...

Me neither. If this is true , this is a step backwards
No matter what some people wants to make believe, there are many instances where
an EVF just does not cut it

Olympus has already both options. I failed to see how limiting the choice could be seen as a progress
such a stupid thing to say also to make the pro Oly users start to worry now
Harold

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

 

[Raist3d]

as I mentioned as a strong possibility but I am not sure I would agree that the EVF of an EP-2 is still a match for an optical view finder.. but I can see with another degree of improvement it could be "good enough."

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

 

[dab1]

ginsbu wrote:
thanks for the link, he may have been quoted out of context, but:

Richard S. Pelkowski explained that the electronic technology in the company's Micro Four Thirds Pen cameras has already surpassed the viewing methods of traditional DSLR models

No, I have tried the EVF on a G1 and a Pen - its ok, but nowhere near as clear, or useable as the E-3s for serious work, professional work.

Pelkowski moved to reassure AP readers that the full Four Thirds system would continue to exist. 'We have a great range of lenses for the Four Thirds system, and they're not going anywhere, but they will be used on smaller and lighter more modern bodies.' /

Well that's great, Mr Pelkowski, unless you've invested thousands in the SHG lenses and need the balance of a larger body and a high quality OVF.

Sorry, but overall, for me this speel reads that we are going to move completely to EVFs and Micro 4/3s. And think they can abate the annoyance of existing 4/3 customers by offering either smaller 4/3 mount cameras with EVF, or Micro 4/3 with an adapter. Lets just find reverse gear to consumer land, another OM. Have I got ebay bookmarked.

 

[Cynops]

I guess that FF Nikon system has never been so close...

Marc
--
http://mdezemery.zenfolio.com/