Reading mode: Light Dark

OK. So what happens to the lenses?

Go to last post
43photo said:
I think the demand for SHg 4/3 glass will rise when people can use them without Af compromise on an m4/3 (pro) body.
Click to expand...
Possibly, but I would say 'if they can be used without AF compromise' and not 'when' and would also say that it depends upon the time frame that such a body would be released in.

Otherwise, I think they will probably have a similar demand that a lot of old lenses have for m43.

--
Stu
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stujoe/
Eee Six Two Zero

.
 
papillon_65 said:
all the drivel being written about 4/3's lens being worthless in a few years time then please pass on your 7-14mm, 14-35mm and 35-100mm lenses. I'm particularly interested in these, and as they will be worthless soon, it'll save you a trip down the tip. I'll even pay for the postage and packing, I can't say fairer than that.
Click to expand...
It will be only in a few years (not now), so hold on to that thought. You might even get a break.

--
- sergey
 
DonParrot said:
..

This is so ridiculous. The PENs are selling like hot cake - as far as I know clearly better than the Panas - and are indeed the best selling system in Oly's history as camera maker - and you want to tell us they will go bust.
Click to expand...
Sounds like Oly kit lenses - demand and for decent price,

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=37631472

Unless by "decent" it is meant like "thank you, but I do not want it".

EDIT: Sorry, I meant to reply this to Bob.

--
- sergey
 
Time for everyone to take a rest from this and get out and use those lenses. Only so much can be said on the basis of reliable information -- and even fear. When the finger pointing starts its over. Kaput.

--
Take photos not pixel counts....
 
Hopadop said:
bobn2 said:
I'm not so sure. I just went on Ebay, there are a lot of brand new E-P1's with 14-42 for £235-250 the kit. That's not a price you see, even for an old model, unless there is significant stock to be cleared.
Click to expand...
Hopadop said:
Bob
Click to expand...
Not quite. Assuming they're the same ones I've been looking at the e-p1s are refurbs.
Click to expand...
Maybe, compare the price with other similar 'refurbs'. Why are there so many 'refurbs' in any case? Refurb tends to be synonymous with overstocks, unless a camera has a really bat reliability record and there are a lot of returns.
Hopadop said:
It still seems a good price. I'm hoping the seller gets a load of e-p2s to shift.
Click to expand...
Only if a lot of those come back faulty or end up overstocked.
--
Bob
 
I like the idea of on-sensor PDAF, as it eliminates focus inaccuracy vs. having two independent optical paths. It's the same deal with CDAF--it's simply more accurate, and works in dimmer conditions, to be focusing on the sensor rather than having an image going through a neutral density filter down a separate path to a separate PDAF sensor.

But alas, I don't think anyone's answered this question about the Fuji PDAF system: wouldn't it be terrible to have dead PDAF pixels on the sensor, getting mapped out? Granted it's about a 1 in (how ever many pixels the camera has) chance that that happens to be the pixel that dies. But then, it could be more likely that the PDAF pixel dies because it's a more complex pixel. It could increase overall costs simply because of the added quality control required to get a sensor with all of the PDAF pixels fully functioning, and then that says nothing to pixels that need to be mapped out later. Who knows how the PDAF-on-sensor would translate to the higher costs of a larger sensor.

I'm not too worried about the future of 4/3 lenses for my own part as my photography doesn't demand fast AF, but I do hope either Olympus or Panasonic comes up with a m4/3 solution to make 4/3 lenses more usable on m4/3 cameras, whether that's a mirror-based pellicle PDAF system in an adapter or whether it's just improving the CDAF engine with PDAF lenses.

The basic difference in focusing speed is that with PDAF, the distance needed to move the lens can be calculated ahead of time, but with current CDAF technology, it needs to make lots of separate calculations. Both of these techniques can be very fast, but they necessitate different motor designs that aren't mutually fully compatible. If they can make the calculation fast enough while the lens is moving, or if they can somehow figure out a way, knowing the parameters of the lens (FL/aperture/focus distance), to calculate how far the lens needs to move based on the amount/rate of change of blur, then either could be a great solution. But I'm not a computer engineer, so I couldn't tell you if either of these are actually possible.
--
http://www.photoklarno.com
 
bobn2 said:
Hopadop said:
bobn2 said:
I'm not so sure. I just went on Ebay, there are a lot of brand new E-P1's with 14-42 for £235-250 the kit. That's not a price you see, even for an old model, unless there is significant stock to be cleared.
Click to expand...
bobn2 said:
Bob
Click to expand...
Not quite. Assuming they're the same ones I've been looking at the e-p1s are refurbs.
Click to expand...
Maybe, compare the price with other similar 'refurbs'. Why are there so many 'refurbs' in any case? Refurb tends to be synonymous with overstocks, unless a camera has a really bat reliability record and there are a lot of returns.
bobn2 said:
It still seems a good price. I'm hoping the seller gets a load of e-p2s to shift.
Click to expand...
Only if a lot of those come back faulty or end up overstocked.
--
Bob
Click to expand...
I count 20 for sale in various packages. I wouldn't consider that a lot without the context of a lot of additional information, and certainly not evidence of either overstocking or reliability issues.

They're clearly sold as refurbished and, given the fact they're a lot cheaper than anyone else in the UK, I'm inclined to believe that's what they are.
 
mcabato said:
nobody does know anything concrete, except the r&d head of oly in japan.

what i believe is:
  • oly is working on a system providing phase detection AF for mirrorless cams, so that fast af with FT-zuikos is given
  • whether or until when they will succeed is like throwing a coin
  • there is a reason that oly filed a patent one year ago for a converter for increasing the image circle of FT lenses
  • i am not hoping that contrast detect af will ever work for FT-zuikos, since it is not only a matter of processor speed&power, but also of motordrive capabilities of the zuikos.
  • oly is trying to make presently money with their pens before the big dslr-producers come to the market and therefor oly is not concentrating on anything else now.
  • 90% of the camera-buyers shoot jpg ooc and for them it is not an issue whether on cam ahs a new or old sensor. the only thing the look at is, wheter "megapixel numbers are high enough or that the colours are oly-like".
  • in some years i will swith to the speedy oly e-8 with or without mirror using my present zuikos.
  • in 50 years the some canon-guys will still fancy as wheather they will ever be able to watch oly going bancrupt - they like dreams dreams and still fancy about old canons.
  • i am not sure whether in 10 years i still will like to carry bulky dslr-lenses with me, if there are good and light alternative solutions with sufficient quality.
  • i am not sure, whether in 100 years i will watch photographers from heaven or from hell.
  • future is bright.
regds gusti
Click to expand...
I wasn't suggesting it was in the air. I'm sure it's something that Olympus will never do, but it is technically feasible, and would solve the question of how to stop those lovely Zuikos going to waste if the E-5 really is the swansong for FT. I was wondering whether anyone would want it, I guess the answer is 'no', from the lack of interest.
--
Bob
 
don't focus on the Panny m4/3 cameras with the adapter at all.

They Do focus on the OLY m4/3 although very slow and certainly not optimized.

I could be wrong though.

Regards, Bernard
 
Klarno said:
I like the idea of on-sensor PDAF, as it eliminates focus inaccuracy vs. having two independent optical paths. It's the same deal with CDAF--it's simply more accurate, and works in dimmer conditions, to be focusing on the sensor rather than having an image going through a neutral density filter down a separate path to a separate PDAF sensor.
Click to expand...
Exactly
Klarno said:
But alas, I don't think anyone's answered this question about the Fuji PDAF system: wouldn't it be terrible to have dead PDAF pixels on the sensor, getting mapped out? Granted it's about a 1 in (how ever many pixels the camera has) chance that that happens to be the pixel that dies. But then, it could be more likely that the PDAF pixel dies because it's a more complex pixel. It could increase overall costs simply because of the added quality control required to get a sensor with all of the PDAF pixels fully functioning, and then that says nothing to pixels that need to be mapped out later. Who knows how the PDAF-on-sensor would translate to the higher costs of a larger sensor.
Click to expand...
I mentioned the pixel mapping as a way to "hide" dedicated AF sensors in the chip. I am not sure that the fuji blended sensors are a good idea.

Lets hope they make it work.

Snip
Klarno said:
--
http://www.photoklarno.com
Click to expand...
--
Jon
 
I can use my 50mm f/1.8 from 1974 on any 4/3 or m4/3 camera with adapters supplied from Olympus. Likewise, 4/3 lenses can be used on m4/3 cameras, also with an adapter built and supplied by Olympus. Is there any indication whatsoever that they will not support their users in the future?

Now, try a Nikon AF D lens on a D3100 (no, it won't autofocus), or a Nikon AIS lens on the same camera (sorry, won't even meter). Or a Canon FD lens on an EOS camera (sorry, won't mount, no adapter possible).

Olympus takes great care of their users. No need to worry.

--
Jorgen, my name is Jorgen
 
Jon Stock said:
Klarno said:
I like the idea of on-sensor PDAF, as it eliminates focus inaccuracy vs. having two independent optical paths. It's the same deal with CDAF--it's simply more accurate, and works in dimmer conditions, to be focusing on the sensor rather than having an image going through a neutral density filter down a separate path to a separate PDAF sensor.
Click to expand...
Exactly
Jon Stock said:
But alas, I don't think anyone's answered this question about the Fuji PDAF system: wouldn't it be terrible to have dead PDAF pixels on the sensor, getting mapped out? Granted it's about a 1 in (how ever many pixels the camera has) chance that that happens to be the pixel that dies. But then, it could be more likely that the PDAF pixel dies because it's a more complex pixel. It could increase overall costs simply because of the added quality control required to get a sensor with all of the PDAF pixels fully functioning, and then that says nothing to pixels that need to be mapped out later. Who knows how the PDAF-on-sensor would translate to the higher costs of a larger sensor.
Click to expand...
I mentioned the pixel mapping as a way to "hide" dedicated AF sensors in the chip. I am not sure that the fuji blended sensors are a good idea.
Click to expand...
the word is interpolated

and it needs to be flexible, for one of the assets of CDAF is its flexibility. And this is true of E5 right now, you can select liveview using CDAF, and you can steer the CDAF point around the screen, touch screen would make that much easier
Jon Stock said:
Lets hope they make it work.
Click to expand...
there are only really 2 ways to go, phased CDAF on the sensor is one of them

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
 
zakk9 said:
I can use my 50mm f/1.8 from 1974 on any 4/3 or m4/3 camera with adapters supplied from Olympus. Likewise, 4/3 lenses can be used on m4/3 cameras, also with an adapter built and supplied by Olympus. Is there any indication whatsoever that they will not support their users in the future?

Now, try a Nikon AF D lens on a D3100 (no, it won't autofocus), or a Nikon AIS lens on the same camera (sorry, won't even meter). Or a Canon FD lens on an EOS camera (sorry, won't mount, no adapter possible).

Olympus takes great care of their users. No need to worry.

--
Jorgen, my name is Jorgen
Click to expand...
the Nikon F mount has far less compatibility problems than you make out in your post, you say how a 50mm/1.8 can be used with an adaptor on a 4/3rds body but fail to mention it needs to be manually stopped down and focused manually, yet a Nikon AF D lens on one certain body needs to manually focussed.....with out an adaptor
--
Maggie Thatcher, your boyz took a hell of a beating
 
illy said:
zakk9 said:
I can use my 50mm f/1.8 from 1974 on any 4/3 or m4/3 camera with adapters supplied from Olympus. Likewise, 4/3 lenses can be used on m4/3 cameras, also with an adapter built and supplied by Olympus. Is there any indication whatsoever that they will not support their users in the future?

Now, try a Nikon AF D lens on a D3100 (no, it won't autofocus), or a Nikon AIS lens on the same camera (sorry, won't even meter). Or a Canon FD lens on an EOS camera (sorry, won't mount, no adapter possible).

Olympus takes great care of their users. No need to worry.

--
Jorgen, my name is Jorgen
Click to expand...
the Nikon F mount has far less compatibility problems than you make out in your post, you say how a 50mm/1.8 can be used with an adaptor on a 4/3rds body but fail to mention it needs to be manually stopped down and focused manually, yet a Nikon AF D lens on one certain body needs to manually focussed.....with out an adaptor
Click to expand...
The Nikkor 50/1.8 is a current autofocus lens from Nikon, still it lacks important functionality, namely AF, with Nikon's best selling camera bodies. The Zuiko 50/1.8 was introduced 40 years ago, before AF was even invented, and was discontinued 10-20 years ago. Still Olympus makes converters for this and all other OM lenses. Nikkors from before 1977 can't even be mounted on current bodies without being modified.

Remember when the E-510 was introduced, and didn't support IS on legacy lenses? As soon as Olympus understood that this was an issue for many people, they upgraded their firmware, even if it didn't mean a single extra lens sale for them.

Apart from Pentax, it's hard to find a camera manufacturer with a better support for legacy glass. And btw., I'm a Nikon user, with four F-mount bodies and countless lenses.

--
Jorgen, my name is Jorgen
 
zakk9 said:
illy said:
zakk9 said:
I can use my 50mm f/1.8 from 1974 on any 4/3 or m4/3 camera with adapters supplied from Olympus. Likewise, 4/3 lenses can be used on m4/3 cameras, also with an adapter built and supplied by Olympus. Is there any indication whatsoever that they will not support their users in the future?

Now, try a Nikon AF D lens on a D3100 (no, it won't autofocus), or a Nikon AIS lens on the same camera (sorry, won't even meter). Or a Canon FD lens on an EOS camera (sorry, won't mount, no adapter possible).

Olympus takes great care of their users. No need to worry.

--
Jorgen, my name is Jorgen
Click to expand...
the Nikon F mount has far less compatibility problems than you make out in your post, you say how a 50mm/1.8 can be used with an adaptor on a 4/3rds body but fail to mention it needs to be manually stopped down and focused manually, yet a Nikon AF D lens on one certain body needs to manually focussed.....with out an adaptor
Click to expand...
The Nikkor 50/1.8 is a current autofocus lens from Nikon, still it lacks important functionality, namely AF, with Nikon's best selling camera bodies. The Zuiko 50/1.8 was introduced 40 years ago, before AF was even invented, and was discontinued 10-20 years ago. Still Olympus makes converters for this and all other OM lenses. Nikkors from before 1977 can't even be mounted on current bodies without being modified.

Remember when the E-510 was introduced, and didn't support IS on legacy lenses? As soon as Olympus understood that this was an issue for many people, they upgraded their firmware, even if it didn't mean a single extra lens sale for them.

Apart from Pentax, it's hard to find a camera manufacturer with a better support for legacy glass. And btw., I'm a Nikon user, with four F-mount bodies and countless lenses.

--
Jorgen, my name is Jorgen-
Click to expand...
the OM's need an adaptor the AF-D on entry level bodies doesn't, go above the entry level with Nikon and it AF's.........the OM on an E-5 will still need an adaptor still need to be stopped down and still need to be manually focused, i can then stick the AF-D on something like my F90x and get full functionality, the F mount is very well supported.
--
Maggie Thatcher, your boyz took a hell of a beating
 
Big Ga said:
Raist3d said:
in a new pro specced micro four thirds type body/or hybrid/whatever.

I think as long as they do this and this is what they indicated they are trying to do (get the 4/3rd lenses perform well on contrast AF, etc.), I wouldn't fear for my lenses nor I would worry about it since bodies come and go, and lenses stay.
Click to expand...
I need a bit more convincing on this 'lenses stay' thing.

For example. At the time, I really couldn't work out why Oly introduced the 14-54 MK2 SWD. Its not as if the original version is a slow or noisy lens. In fact, its the opposite. Its quick and silent. There was nothing wrong with it.
So why change the design?

Could it be that they KNEW back then that at some point, mirrorless was going to be the way ahead, and the SWD mark2 version was needed to get it to work at all properly?

This is conjecture of course, but like I say, I can't currently think of a logical reason to spend money re-designing an otherwise good lens, when there are a whole bunch of other gaps in the lineup crying out to be filled. Unless they were doing damage limitation and preparing for the future when they knew what was going to happen. Which is that original 14-54 lenses just won't work properly on the newer bodies.
Click to expand...
True but they weren't going to go after the 150 F2.0 prime and redesign it, nor did they redesign the other SHG's. BTW, the 14-54 MKII is not SWD. It supports contrast AF and has the circular aperture for the round bokeh.

--

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo
 
papillon_65 said:
Pentax_Prime said:
j..

My advice to the OP is to consider a system change while his lenses are still worth something. Nothing destroys resale value of optics like a diminishing system with which to use them on, a lack of new influx of buyers (let's be real honest - the E-5 isn't gonna attract anyone to Olympus), and a lack of impending bodies which can take full advantage of them. I'd expect resale value to drop quickly - perhaps until the E-5 reaches reasonable prices (at this point it's a $900 camera with a $1600 pricetag).

-Prime
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I could not agree more
papillon_65 said:
My advice to you would be to learn to post about things you know about instead of talking nonsense about things you don't.
Click to expand...
... about things someone knows about,

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=37658167

Sergey_Green wrote:

I think this might help you, if you do not believe me,

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=28401314

papillon_65 wrote:

Do you seriously think that 1 stop (in fact slightly less, will make any noticeable difference?)

Sergey_Green wrote:

A stop is not why the lenses on larger formats resolve better.

papillon_65 wrote:

Never mind - you clearly don't understand as usual.

Surely.

--
- sergey
 
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