Are the Marketing People at Olympus Totally Incompetent???

The discussion with Olympus, and their promise to look into the
matter to Brian Mosley and others, was about Manual Focus
Confirmation for other imaging situations than using current 4:3rd
mount lenses.

As I took some pains to explain, and Olympus seems to have
acknowledged, this is not just for legacy lenses, but also
photography through microscopes, endoscopes and other special imaging
devices (many of which could use the OM mount, btw.).

There are also the OM auto-bellows, the comprehensive series of OM
macrophoto "heads" and a few very high quality --and price--Olympus
superfast telephoto lenses like the 250 f2 (which Olympus still touts
as one of its optical triumphs) for all of which they seem to agree
their is no current equivalent or replacement. On top of that, there
are astronomical, birding and multi-use conventional and mirror
lenses. including Ol'ys own, for which this would be useful.

I do think that it is important to keep reminding Olympus of all of
these potential uses for which manual focus confirmation would be
useful.

BUT it is probably unwise and impolitic to link this with IS, which
would be of limited benefit for many of these applications, and, more
importantly, may open the whole can of worms that those much more
expert than I have mentioned.

After all, there's always the "Dandelion" ...but does it work???
Exactly. FC LED and beep is what should be number one, and very simple fix. There is no point to have IS if your image is OOF, so without focus, IS is nothing to have. Also, there are much more people who would benefit from FC LED / beep. Olympus, being a medical company should have realized that problem a long time ago. There are no cons in the FC LED solution, only pros. Making a firmware IS solution is just too complicated, an adapter is the only way to solve that professionally. That way, those who want, can get it. In a menu driven firmware solution it's never going to be real good and flexible, IMO just waste of effort.
--
http://www.olyflyer.blogspot.com/
 
You seemed to have missed my post (in reply to the OP) where all I did was mention the Pentax issues. I have never mentioned Oly legacy lenses. I can't help it if you cant follow a thread.

The post of mine is here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=25971376

Jeeze, your bad day must have translated into the inability to follow my response to the OP talking about Pentax. Never once (until your brash statements to me) did i mention Oly lenses. In fact...only the Pentax was mentioned in either of my threads.

--
Regards, Kevin
Member PPA, NAPP, WPPI
 
I have a number of Leica R lenses and they perform superbly on my Olympus bodies. But with the small viiewfinders of the E410, E510, E330 etc, it is not an easy thing the focus accurately, so you do get a lot of OOF shots, and that is frustrating.

Which is why I have the Panasonic L1 with focus confirmtion lamp. Works faultlessly. Or, try the E3 with its much bigger and brighter viewfinder, and high ISO. OK - would be nice to the IS with legacy lenses, but it hardly matters on the E3 as high ISO results are so good and useable. On the E3, accurate focussing is pretty easy.

--
Kind regards,
Rich Simpson
 
Dennis: Fair enough. I, too, cut my teeth on Pentax as a
photojournalist student some 30 years ago. I'm curious, though, why
did you give up on the Pentax K10D? I find it a great digital camera;
however, I wish my superb fully manual primes, both K and screwmount,
would meter at f stops other than wide open. My Pentax istD allows
for metering at all f-stops, and it supports TTL flashes, while my
K10D only supports P-TTL systems. Also, why Olympus over the K10D?
Curiosity here??? Don
Difficult for me to be brief, I feel I owe you an explanation, regarding my choices, because I do think highly of the Pentax 10D.

The 10D (w/kit lens and the 43mm f/1.9 Ltd) was a gift from my brother-in-law from Japan who visited us this summer along with his new E-510. He travels a lot for university research and had been through a series of Oly digicams (including 4040, 8080), bought the Pentax 10D, then bought the E510 for its relatively small size/weight. He did not know that I already had a Canon 20D system.

I was quite intrigued by the 10D, and used it heavily for several months. The kit lens was not so good, but on the other hand probably average for most anyone else’s kit lens. The 43mm was sweet, and the 10D is a very well-designed body, intuitive user interface, and some unique features. The in-body IS actually worked, too! However, as I stated before, by this time I did not have my really good legacy Takumar glass, other priorities, you know.

I had also been thinking about the small size/weight of my brother-in-law’s E510, and as I reviewed his photos and some I had taken with his E510, I was frankly amazed at the IQ of that little kit lens. I kept thinking how I would take that kit with me places when I would leave the Pentax or Canon at home. I did more research into the Oly system, and had decided that I had some choices to make: silly to have two different systems, good to have a backup body, so impressed by the Oly glass etc.

I jumped at the chance to try out the Oly E-510 for only $600 – what could I lose? Well, the rest is history, I made the jump.

As for the 10D vs Oly – the Oly system for my shooting style gives me the most bang for my dollar. I found the little Oly kit lens to be relatively superb. In my experience, I would rank the Pentax IS as a level below my Canon IS (but not all my lenses were IS!) so really the Pentax’s redeeming value was that any lens became IS on it, a tradeoff therefore. I would rank the Oly’s IS a level above my Canon IS lenses, really I was impressed (v1.2 firmware). I’m happy, and as I sell off my old stuff I’m replacing it with Oly, including an E3 w/12-60mm, and a 7-14mm. - and I still will have that tiny E510 kit to take anywhere.

Good luck with your decisions as well!

--
-Dennis W.
Austin, Texas

 
--No, Olympus is too busy making it possible to use (wirelessly) $250
P&S cameras with $500 flash units. In other words, they are catering
to whom, exactly?
You know .... I hadn't really thought about that, but your absolutely right. The E400 still doesn't have a mirror lockup feature in the firmware, yet now you can do wireless with a P&S camera. Interesting demonstration of where their priorities lie.
 
My logic is not flawed. Hardware is not firmware and people have been clamoring for a firmware update to enable IS, etc. on the basis that it would not cost them too much to do.

As for the free adapters, again there is no flaw. I never claimed they were available in Oz, I was merely showing that Oly has at least made some steps in the past toward accommodating owners of legacy glass, and in at least some cases even providing free hardware.
Oly already handed out their share of free hardware with the free OM
adapter to anyone who asked early on.
That "free" MF-1 adapter cost AUD$199 in Oz, and always has. Up until
last year Olympus Japan denied that it even existed in an email to me
...

Sorry, your point does not wash. Your logic is fatally flawed, which
is precisely why some of us are so angry about the way Olympus has
treated us, and continues to treat us, here in the Third World.

--
kindest regards, john from Australia.

http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/main.php
--



E-One/E-Three-Hundred/DZ Fourteen-Fifty-Four/DZ Fifty-Two-Hundred/FL-Fifty
E-Ten/C-Twenty-One-Hundred-UZ/E-One-Hundred-RS/D-Four-Hundred-Z
Oldma-cdon-aldh-adaf-arm-EI-EI-O
 
alignment can really work where you are layering stuff, unless you
get it pretty much perfect in the first place.
Stitching things perfectly is what panorama tools are about. You can try it, or you can write to Olympus about IS Mode 3.... ;)

Louis, I'm just letting you know about a method I and other photo friends have tried and found to work. You don't need to believe until you have seen it but if you are interested in handheld HDR pictures it is worth a try.

regards,

--
Jonas
 
I'm not just being awkward, but stitching really is technically different to layering...

I think I have to stick with the third option, which is using a $&$#ing tripod.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
 
I have some 20-year-old lenses for my OM-1. They aren't all in 100% perfect shape but they're worth holding onto, I think. So I just bought an adapter ring, screwed 'em into that, and started experimenting - manual, of course, but I don't mind learning a new trick or two. My camera is an E-510. I also have the two kit lenses and a 70-300 is on its way. So I don't feel especially limited; I figure that with three main lenses, I don't need a whole array of extras, but I can play with the older glass if I want to take the time.

I took the following indoors, with no flash, using a vintage Sigma 50 mm macro with the new camera. Focus is very soft, as is the lighting, but as a "first time" shot I felt it was somewhat OK. Someday I'll learn more and do better.



Brenda
 
I'm not just being awkward, but stitching really is technically
different to layering...

I think I have to stick with the third option, which is using a
$&$#ing tripod.
John... ?

But thinking about it, John Bean is one of several photographers having done this.

Maybe my explanation in my first post wasn't clear and good enough. And maybe there is something there giving you the idea I don't know the difference between stitching and layers (a verb and a substantive respectively, right?). Anyway, the choice is yours, the $&$#ing tripod or trying something else.

--
Jonas
 
Regardless of what the armchair firmware developers may think, a real firmware developer knows that this isn't simple, and could consume a lot of resources. The dandelion shows that one can rig up a solution that sort of works, but sort of works isn't good enough when you're a major manufacturer with a reputation for delivering on your promises. Olympus has been remarkable in it's consistent delivery. A dust buster that actually gets rid of dust. Kit lenses that aren't junk. AF that doesn't go south in hot or humid conditions. Glass in general that one doesn't have to send back two or three times to get a good copy. Apply that to a firmware change, and introduce the unknown of hundreds of legacy lenses from many companies, and the testing for such a change would be a nightmare. That's the difference between theorizing online, and actually implementing a firmware change with a corporate reputation to uphold. Olympus didn't get it's reputation for high quality and consistent delivery by accident.

I'd love comprehensive legacy film lens support, for the same reason you want it - low cost glass. What it would cost to buy my Nikkor 400 3.5 in 4/3 glass... I'd hate to think. But, I don't want to give up SWD lenses, faster AF, more effective IS, better sensor performance, and time to market to get it. We waited long enough for the E3 without this slowing up the works.

That's why I'd prefer that legacy support be provided by a 3rd party that doesn't have such rigorous standards for consistency to uphold. Those that wanted to use legacy lenses, and didn't mind fussing with an adapter that occasionally missed, would be happy. Those that didn't, wouldn't see future developments delayed.
 
Brian (which is probably whom you are thinking of) reckons that PhotoAcute can cope - and that of course does the whole shebang. I'll give it a go when I have more time. However, Photomatix aren't stupid, and they'll be using the same techniques as the other two, and it at least does not register accurately enough to cope with an HDR, where the changes in micro contrast stick out like a sore thumb...

I see many people using it WITHOUT a tripod, but I don't rate the results myself...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
 
I'd love comprehensive legacy film lens support, for the same reason
you want it - low cost glass. What it would cost to buy my Nikkor 400
3.5 in 4/3 glass... I'd hate to think. But, I don't want to give up
SWD lenses, faster AF, more effective IS, better sensor performance,
and time to market to get it. We waited long enough for the E3
without this slowing up the works.
There is absolutely no contradiction in FC LED & beep fixed in firmware and all the lenses and the E-3 development you are talking about. The FC LED is an afternoons work for a competent firmware programmer, plus a few days for test and documentation, topping not more than one man weeks work. Oly know that as well. FC LED and beep is best done in firmware. The beep sound is not supported in todays 4/3 lenses in manual focus mode, which of course should be fixed as well.

There is absolutely no sane explanation to why the FC LED is disabled for legacy lenses, just like no sane explanation to why the beep sound not working at all with any manual fucus lenses.

For the IS, I agree, it is too complicated in firmware and should be done with an adapter. 3rd party or Oly, it can never be 3rd party unless Oly publishes the lens communication protocol, which will be like never. So, until then, Oly should provide an adapter which, since you also say 'Oly quality is high' which I agree with, would be quite easy to sell for the cost it takes to make. It would definitely not steal efforts from other development, especially not from Oly, since they already have the machinery to make the adapter, the know-how on how to do it and they have the people to do it and to market it.
--
http://www.olyflyer.blogspot.com/
 
Dear Brenda
I have some 20-year-old lenses for my OM-1. They aren't all in 100%
perfect shape but they're worth holding onto, I think. So I just
bought an adapter ring, screwed 'em into that, and started
experimenting - manual, of course, but I don't mind learning a new
trick or two. My camera is an E-510. I also have the two kit lenses
and a 70-300 is on its way. So I don't feel especially limited; I
figure that with three main lenses, I don't need a whole array of
extras, but I can play with the older glass if I want to take the
time.

I took the following indoors, with no flash, using a vintage Sigma 50
mm macro with the new camera. Focus is very soft, as is the lighting,
but as a "first time" shot I felt it was somewhat OK. Someday I'll
learn more and do better.
Exactly my point. I have found that the lenses that I have used for 35+ years work beautifully (so far as I have had the time to play - sorry, "experiment & research"), BUT they behave completely differently from their behaviour on the OM-1 etc. This is to be expected, and I did - at least to some extent.

When I get it right, the results are pretty darn good. Here is a photo taken with my Olympus f1.4 50mm wide open. Anselm is a good 'sitter' as he is a life drawing artist (I should say "Master"), and can hold a 'natural' pose for minutes at a time as he also has much experience as a life drawing model. This image was taken shortly after I got the E-510. WB is not great (my fault). The image was auto-exposed by the E-510, spot metering. For all my comments about using this lens wide open and metering, it seems OK with SPOT. The image could probably do with a little +EV compensation, but I would not want to get a "perfect" exposure and WB at the expense of the ambience of the shot.

I think that this shot shows the great promise of this "old, antiquated, damaged, useless" lens for portrait work. I look forward to using it further.

The image has been cropped and sharpened, no other PP. It is also among the first I took with this lens. ISO 800, f1.4 1/25th second hand-held, no flash.



--
kindest regards, john from Australia.

http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/main.php
 
Dear Jan
I am tired of hearing this:

"Olympus alienated us OM users....."
"I will/could never buy/trust Olympus again"
...
But I never felt alienated or betrayed.

Sure, I wish I could put my 50:1.4 on, and use IS, too.
Sure, especially since there aren't exactly alot of primes offered to
substitute for them!

Hell, I have a E-1 with no ZD's -- only OMZ's.

So just be grateful they're still around. I know I am.

Jan
Sorry to take so long to get back.

I think your comments above shoot your first comment in the foot (machine-gun it?), don't you?

It NEVER hurts to consider your existing (loyal) user base. It is the first rule of business (CPA speaking, not photographer!).

Olympus forgot this, then remembered, then forgot, then remembered ...

At the moment, it is hard to say whether they are remembering or forgetting - or is that just me losing the plot???

I KNOW that most companies don't give a rat's behind about their customers. Some do. It would actually be nice if "our" company, Olympus, did. I have yet to see ANY evidence that they do.

Right down to the "we don't care that the flash shoe protector fell off your E-510 all by itself, with no encouragement by rough use; we cannot supply you with a replacement" response when this happened to a three week old camera (mine).

Parts like this should only be removable by consciously doing something (like removing a network cable connector). They should not just "fall off".

Did Olympus Australia care? No, they didn't.

--
kindest regards, john from Australia.

http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/main.php
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top