Reading mode: Light Dark

Andy Westlake... superhero!

Go to last post
Louis_Dobson said:
35mmFF chip prices are falling ...
Click to expand...
The only evidence I have seen of significant price reductions for 35mm format sensors is through increasing sales volume allowing smaller markups, not substantially reduced unit costs. That can go only so far, with unit costs apparently staying well above those for APS-C and 4/3 sensors, probably by $1000 or more.

The 5D has achieved higher sensor sales volume through price cuts allowed by using a far cheaper, lower spec. body, and probably also through thin margins after initially poor sales force multiple price cuts.

The D3 has achieved higher sensor sales volume through Nikon having a single high end model serving many of the customers that Canon divides between the 1D and 1Ds, plus pent-up demand for Nikon 35mm DSLRs. Nikon will soon advance this advantage in sensor economies of scale by using the same sensor in two models, D700 and D3, and I Sony seems set to do likewise, selling its 24MP 35mm sensor in both its flagship and the Nikon D3x.

I doubt we will ever again an $8,000 35mm format DSLR, or a DSLR sensor used only in a single high-end model and thus selling at only about 2,000/mo, as Canon has done so far with its 1Ds sensors. Instead the market strategy of sharing a good sensor (or slight variants) between several models at different price/performance levels seems to be taking over. Giving us $2,500-3,000 35mm format DSLRs, but not $1500 ones!
 
Leaving room for an enterprising individual to perform a little light-hearted blackmail..... if not for said drunken rant.
Juergen Hahn said:
This plan would be particularly "secret" as you post it on a message
board before you implement it :-).
Click to expand...
--
D620L -> D540 -> C750UZ -> E-500 -> E-510 -> E-3
 
If I was carrying just the camera and lens, then the 25mm pancake would make a fair bit of difference. As I'm generally carrying 50-200 SWD, 50-500, 14-54, (sometimes) 30mm F1.4, and E-3 with grip I'd barely feel if one of the lenses was attached to a E-4X0.
--
D620L -> D540 -> C750UZ -> E-500 -> E-510 -> E-3
 
I never understood why 25mm either... mundane at best. In my old (and still on occassion) OM days, the 50mm 1.8 almost never came out of the bag. Now a 20mm pancake ED on the otherhand... or a 40/45mm 1.4 ED prime ... I'm all over it.
Louis_Dobson said:
Louis_Dobson wrote:
the 35 instead of the 25 (though I would, I hate the 50mm EFL
perspective), I'm just pointing out how little size and weight is
being saved for a whopping great drop in quality.

You forgot the back cap. With back cap and lens on the 25, the
difference between it and the 35 is tiny. I'm all for travelling
light, but that difference isn't worth having, in my opinion.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
Click to expand...
--

 
Louis_Dobson said:
The size and weight saving is minimal, the quality loss is serious.
Click to expand...
The only 25mm-ish lenses for Four Thirds are the D-Summilux and the Sigma 24/1.8. Compared to either of those and all available zooms except the 14-42mm kit (which is 1 1/3 stops slower at 25mm), I'd say that the size and weight savings is serious. If you consider the very low weight of an E-420, the proportional weight gain using one of those lenses compared to the pancake is great. Meanwhile, I'd say that the quality loss is modest. Moderate lateral CA and some non-complex barrel distortion are the flaws. The lens is sharp with good contrast, good flare resistance, and good bokeh characteristics. For situational photography (candid people photography, street photography, etc), the flaws are not very evident and the size/weight savings are. I've seen both barrel distortion and color fringing in my photos with this lens, but neither have troubled me even so far as wanting to correct them. It's not a great lens choice for architecture or landscape photography, which probably explains why you don't "get it."

Regards,
Amin
 
Would you consider doing a DSLR superzoom roundup?

Leica D Vario 14-150
Tamron 28-300 VC
Canon 28-300 IS
Nikon 18-200 VR
Sigma 18-200 OS
Tamron 18-250

etc

Lots of folks looking to move into the DSLR realm still hope for a one lens solution, and such a roundup would no doubt help some of those folks in choosing a system.

Agree with Brian that the lens reviews have been very good so far.

Regards,
Amin
 
Juergen Hahn said:
If your post is true (and for now I am just going to treat it as a
rumor),
Click to expand...
Which it is at the moment. I just have this feeling that even if it is ... its probably going to be true at some point in the future.
Juergen Hahn said:
then this would show that the posts that I am referring to
are wrong.
Click to expand...
I guess so. Although in fairness, a lot of the posts along these lines make out that its the smaller sensor in general that's 'doomed' (at least in terms of the higher end market).
Juergen Hahn said:
It would essentially mean that Nikon has given up on APS-C
as far as "professional" (whatever that means) cameras are concerned.
They would put in APS-C for the consumer level DSLRs and FF for the
professional DSLRs
Click to expand...
Yes, or dump APSc altogether for SLRs, but I suspect not, at least not for a fair bit longer. It would concern me though if its only a D40/50/60 type body (or even reduced even further as in the new Canon 1000D) that we would see.
Juergen Hahn said:
which also means that you would have to carry a
bunch of big heavy lenses around if you want them :-)
Click to expand...
Naa ... apart from extreme telephoto, you'd be hard pushed to give me a common focal length range that I don't have a lightweight FF option to stick in my bag if I wanted to, that would compromise me in IQ compared to a smaller sensor offering.

Although I agree that I could certainly make my bag VERY heavy as well if I wanted to (as would the E3 user wanting to compete in the ISO and subject isolation stakes).
Juergen Hahn said:
In short,
these types of systems ,i.e., APS-C, are no more (or no less) future
proof than others. Sure, they would still sell APS-C, but it would be
the red headed stepchild system for them that is "only" good enough
for the mass market. That was my point.
Click to expand...
I understand now. You might be right. I will now go out and mow the lawn and contemplate all things sensor related :-)
Juergen Hahn said:
P.S.: I do not agree with your statement that large sensors will
become very cheap. While they will become cheaper, this is not how
semiconductor manufacturing works. The yield does not scale linearly
with the size and therefore it will always be much more expensive to
produce larger sensors.
Click to expand...
With current and projected volume comes the desire and money to develop better machinery and production methods. Its not just a question of making more in the same way.
 
Go figure.
Louis_Dobson said:
Look at the 35mm f3.5 macro, that is a GOOD lens, and still tiny.
Click to expand...
YES. I fully agree. But let's face it, it's larger than the pancake, it's got a less advantageous focal length (to many people's minds) and it's slower. So with that in mind I don't AT ALL find it baffling that SOME folks would prefer the pancake and think it's the cat's meow for a jacket pocket cam on an E-4XX. I don't, but my point is I do understand why OTHERS might think so.
Louis_Dobson said:
However, pancakes seem to be in fashion thee days, and I'm delighted
to see Oly make money (hopefully they can spend it developing lenses
I actually want).
Click to expand...
Well, they're selling to blokes who frequent photo forums but I'm not at all sure how that translates to "real" people...but I agree that a profitable Olympus is a good thing.

Oly
 
Louis_Dobson said:
It is marginally faster than a cheap zoom. Great.
Click to expand...
It's faster than the ZD 14-54, 12-60 and Leica 14-50 and none of those are "cheap" zooms.

It's significantly faster than the cheap zooms.

Oly
 
Louis_Dobson said:
Being stuck walking around with a slowish, CA-producing 50mm
equivalent would be my idea of photographic Hell.
Click to expand...
Not the 50mm eq. part but the "slowish" comment. Louis, there are only a handful of lenses in the ENTIRE 4/3rds arsenal that are faster than f/2.8! All of the excellent mid-grade Zuikos, save the 50 macro, and half of the HIGH grade Zuikos are either f/2.8 or slower. Hell, I wish my MID-GRADE Zuikos were a constant f/2.8 much less this inexpensive little pancake!

So please, whatever you're smoking - STOP - because you need the fog to clear such that your comment accuracy factor creeps up a notch. I don't disagree with you re. the general desirability of primes but your continual harping over the speed of this lens is so off base it's BAFFLING.

Oly

--

 
Timskis6 said:
Based on the need to test lenses which people own and use, and which
are popular upgrades, the 50-200mm is a no-brainer test.
Click to expand...
True. I fell into the Dobsonian "say something provocative/over the top just to make an impression" method and I should be chastised as a result. ;-)

However, I'd say that the 18-180 falls into exactly this group so I do hope they test it.

Best,
Oly

--

 
Timskis6 said:
First of all you can't buy a D700. Second of all, the price of the
D3 and 24-70/2.8 is far greater than the price of the E-3 and 14-35/2.
Click to expand...
Oh details schmetails. ;-)

Not to mention the fact that if you're already invested in the Olympus system it's certainly nice to have a lens that's unparalleled in this focal length rather than dumping the whole system and having to gear up with all of the accoutrements that accompany an entire system. Again, details details...

Regards,
Oly

--

 
One thing I do wonder though - given that the 4/3rds mount is by design relatively large compared to the sensor, how does this effect using other mounts with it? For example, the average size of APS optimised lenses isn't very different from 4/3rds, even though the sensor is larger (albeit by a smaller margin than most people think). Does this mean 4/3rds can take full advanatage of APS lenses' resolution? And how does it effect corner to corner sharpness? (Judging from your comments on telecentricity, it may actually be improved!) Anyway, I think all of this would be very interesting and instructive to test.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top