Can't wait for the E-3 fun to begin

I'm really excited about the next Olympus flagship body that's about to be released, and here's why:

-I'm really looking forward to a lot of folks being disappointed that it's not as good as the latest offerings from -insert manufacturer's name here-

-I'm anticipating all of the image comparison arguments that are won by changing the subject; i.e. dustbuster vs. megapixels; quality of lenses vs. 'full frame'; weather sealing vs. frames per second, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum....
-I know I'm gonna get a kick out of the 'price point' arguments.

-I'm especially going to enjoy all the trolls coming over from other forums to give us grief about how -insert manufacturers name here- creates a better camera, and that we are all suckers for buying into the (dead) Olympus system

Believe me, there's going to be a lot to amuse us. I wish I had links or quotes from the bone-heads that claimed just a few short years ago that the 4/3rds system was a dead end, or that there was no way that anyone could make a 4/3rds size sensor with more than 5 megapixels (apparently, the laws of physics dictated this to be so), or that no publisher would accept images from an Oly camera.
Hang on to your hats folks, this is gonna get good!

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/58453489@N00/

Here is Michael Reichmann (Luminous Landscape) with his obituary for the 4/3 system at the time of the E-1 release:

"We can now look at the flaw in the logic behind the 4/3 format. While larger chips (up to full-frame) are more expensive than ones of the 4/3 size today, this won't be the case for long. Increasing production volumes along with technological advances will bring the price of large chips downwards at a steady pace. Will smaller chips always be less expensive? Of course. But will the differential be enough to make the downside of using a smaller chip worthwhile for very long? I doubt it.

"So, we have someone that buys into the 4/3 format in late 2003 or early 2004. They also buy several lenses for this format. But what happens in 2005 and 2006, and onwards? We will undoubtedly have imaging chips ranging from a 1.5X factor to full frame 35mm that don't cost all that much more, and you can be certain that companies like Nikon and Canon will be making cameras that use them, and which can utilize the huge existing inventory of full-frame coverage lenses available.

"Anyone owning 4/3 format lenses then will have no escape. They will be limited to using cameras with a 2X magnification ratio because their lenses are unable to cover a larger image circle. If we assume that the price differential between small and medium sized imaging chips is going to decrease, then a 4/3 based camera will always suffer from smaller images or lower image quality by comparison, because while the number of pixels can be increased (this is accomplished by making the pixels themselves smaller), by making them smaller image quality is reduced. It's just physics. Anything that Kodak does to the 4/3 format chip can also be done to larger ones, so the differential will remain.

"It seems to me that history is about to repeat itself. Olympus was the champion of the failed but elegant little half-frame format of the 1960's, and now appears to be heading down the same path. A shame really, because the E-1 is a very fine camera in many ways, and deserves better than to be built around a format that, like half-frame, may turn out to be just a footnote in the history of photography."

smokeyjoe said:

Believe me, there's going to be a lot to amuse us. I wish I had links
or quotes from the bone-heads that claimed just a few short years ago
that the 4/3rds system was a dead end, or that there was no way that
anyone could make a 4/3rds size sensor with more than 5 megapixels
(apparently, the laws of physics dictated this to be so), or that no
publisher would accept images from an Oly camera.
Hang on to your hats folks, this is gonna get good!

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/58453489@N00/

Click to expand...

oh boy, I think I'm getting too old for this and may have to sit this round out.

Wake me up after PMA 2008

--
http://www.highsee3.smugmug.com

'A camera maker that simply copies others' idea has no right to call itself an original
maker in the first place.' -Mr. Maitani, creator of the OM photographic system.

John Cozijn said:

Here is Michael Reichmann (Luminous Landscape) with his obituary for
the 4/3 system at the time of the E-1 release:

Click to expand...

John Cozijn said:

"So, we have someone that buys into the 4/3 format in late 2003 or
early 2004. They also buy several lenses for this format. But what
happens in 2005 and 2006, and onwards?

Click to expand...

oh no, it's almost Q4 of 2007, we should all be dead by now :-(

John Cozijn said:

We will undoubtedly have
imaging chips ranging from a 1.5X factor to full frame 35mm that
don't cost all that much more, and you can be certain that companies
like Nikon and Canon will be making cameras that use them, and which
can utilize the huge existing inventory of full-frame coverage lenses
available.

Click to expand...

People have been waiting for FF Nikon since release of the D1. This poor bugga wanted a FF D1x back in 2001 http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=807069&q=nikon+ff&qf=m

6 years later, Nikon may just release that camera, for a cool $6000-$7000.

The 5D is still $2500 and only has 2mp more than a $600 Olympus.
--
http://www.highsee3.smugmug.com

'A camera maker that simply copies others' idea has no right to call itself an original
maker in the first place.' -Mr. Maitani, creator of the OM photographic system.

M. Reichmann et al. are first businessman then photo lovers. I don't "buy" all the stuff they highly recommend.

LOL. Great stuff - can't wait... nt

Hi There

It's begun already - Tim seems to be writing off the E3 after the 40D announcement, even though the Olympus specs are better in several areas.

We live in a strange world.

I wonder what the 'fatal flaw' will be this time:

1DsMK2 destroyed files
D200 impossible banding
D2x broken auto focus
1DMkIII broken auto focus
Leica M8 broken IR

there will be SOMETHING!

best wishes
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

--
--
mumbo jumbo

I just presented the quotation as an example of how even very experienced people can get things very wrong. In this case the key assumption was "the price differential between small and medium sized imaging chips is going to decrease", which of course is not true.

There are other factors as well. I suspect the E-1 bodies have held up rather better than the 10Ds (a consideration with the E-3, which I suspect will be beautifully engineered - but that is hard to measure).

John

John Cozijn said:

Here is Michael Reichmann (Luminous Landscape) with his obituary for
the 4/3 system at the time of the E-1 release:

Click to expand...

Well in Michaels defense, the arguments he put forward were valid and correct. The only thing he didn't particularly mention at the time was that while his viewpoint that whatever fourthirds can do to improve IQ, a larger sensor can do as well, its possible we'll get to a point where the increase in IQ doesn't matter to certain segments of the market.

And back then, he didn't have access to something like the 7-14 so he could see that the advantages of the telecentric design wasn't just marketing blurb.

he does say on his site that he's just commenting and its just his opinion. And I'm pretty sure he's published something a bit more recent that takes back some of his comments.

if he gets his hands on a new E-pro and say the 7-14, 12-60 and 35-100, I would not be surprised if he gives it a big thumbs up .... although he'll still say that his FF 1DSMKIII review sample will give better image quality ... and he'll be right! (with the right lenses....)

Remember. he's lovely and cuddly.

PS MR, I've just realised ... where's my new LL DVD ??? Grrr.. I'll have to chase that up ...

G.

HI John

John Cozijn said:

There are other factors as well. I suspect the E-1 bodies have held
up rather better than the 10Ds (a consideration with the E-3, which I
suspect will be beautifully engineered - but that is hard to measure).

Click to expand...

Perhaps it's a fundamental difference here - paying extra for 'longevity' in terms of build quality and engineering is always a bit of an intangible, and not very significant for a marketing department (where ticking boxes is what matters).

I hope that the E3 is built as well as the E1, but I'm not sure that it will have a great effect on it's sales . . . . on the other hand, the build quality of the E1 will have some effect on the E3 sales (I'll be buying one for that reason at least!). Presumably if the E3 is as well made as the E1, then that will have an effect on the sales of the E4.

As I say, deferred gratification isn't too much of a marketing ploy!

best wishes
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

--



http://catmangler.smugmug.com/

Jono Slack said:

Tim seems to be writing off the E3 after the 40D
announcement, even though the Olympus specs are better in several
areas.

Click to expand...

Perhaps I was not clear. I was questioning Olympus's ability to predict the competition. I was questioning the projections Oly made in the pdf, not the new E.

As far as I'm concerned, while we won't know for sure until its released, the new E looks very good.

smokeyjoe said:

I wish I had links
or quotes from the bone-heads that claimed just a few short years ago
that the 4/3rds system was a dead end, or that there was no way that
anyone could make a 4/3rds size sensor with more than 5 megapixels
(apparently, the laws of physics dictated this to be so), or that no
publisher would accept images from an Oly camera.
Hang on to your hats folks, this is gonna get good!

Click to expand...

Of course, on the other hand, it's equally amusing to remember the bone-heads who claimed, just a few short years ago, that plastic cameras are cr@p, image stabilization is unnecessary, etc, etc...

Olympus users are prone to the same idiocy as others in their statements about cameras and their use.

--
Brian

Some monochromes:
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/spiritmist/SundayBoating/index.htm
Some more monochromes:
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/spiritmist/BWWebPage/index.htm

'To quote out of context is the essence of the photographer's craft.' John Szarkowski, The Photographer's Eye

Jono Slack said:

Hi There
It's begun already - Tim seems to be writing off the E3 after the 40D
announcement, even though the Olympus specs are better in several
areas.

We live in a strange world.

I wonder what the 'fatal flaw' will be this time:

1DsMK2 destroyed files
D200 impossible banding
D2x broken auto focus
1DMkIII broken auto focus
Leica M8 broken IR

there will be SOMETHING!

Click to expand...

Maybe the new cameras won't take good pictures from underneath troll bridges. Nah, that's probably why Canon puts so much energy into low light behavior to satify some of their users

No Text

I agree with Reichmann! (not often that happens), he just got the timescale right.

Sorry to say that next few years is still here. Sure 4/3 is still around..but its not exactly blowing the barn doors off is it?

You see people getting excited about the new E cameras? nope..

I just see people with canon and nikons around there neck.

Sorry in 5 years time you will be cursing Olympus for locking you into a format that is too limited.

And the new E-3 just got slapped down with that nice 40D price..you can be sure Nikon and Sony will eat up the rest of the pie.

Leaving the scraps for Oly ;-)

Their market share is appaling..these new cams will just hammer it even more.

Not that I want that to happen, but its a shame to see a company take a route that is clearly limited over the long term.
--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)

Tim,

I am sure you are aware of the spider diagram ( on the leaked pdf file) comparing the E-P1 and 40D. In my book,Olympus done a pretty good job in it's assumption of 40D features.

While the feature set of both E-P1 and 40D are comparable down to the implementation of Oly style AF in live view mode, the 40D will never match the Oly's ergonomics and built quality.
Regards,
Alfred

certain things are just this way, and no matter what specs do brand x or brand y have their user will allways say that their brand is "tha" best .. as so for Olympus there willl allways buyers for oly products, and buyers who say my oly is "tha" best ... and we got to be real no matter the cammera u r using, but what the cammera user does, it's is point of view in the photo ...

cheers and long live oly

People don't buy four-thirds cameras because the sensors are cheaper. And many of us wouldn't dream of buying a heavy, bulky "full-frame" (sic) DSLR just because the prices came down.

I think the real threat to four-thirds DSLRs (and 1.5, 1.6, and "full-frame") DSLRS will come from the other direction, when smaller sensors become and electronic viewfinders become good enough to allow "EVIL" cameras that are as good as today's DSLRs but are no bigger than, say, a Panasonic superzoom.