Reading mode: Light Dark

E-System ( camera and lenses ) announced

Go to last post
Christmas?

Steve's news-item says late Q3, early Q4 (September/October).... That is not Christmas... Of course it could slip and slip just like any other high-tech product, but that's another story....

Does it mention Christmas elsewhre ??

The text:
======
The Olympus Digital SLR System will be officially unveiled at a major
New York City press event on June 24, 2003, when complete product
features and specs will be revealed. The Olympus Digital SLR System
will then be introduced to the market at competitive prices in the late
third or early fourth quarter of 2003.

The URL
=====
http://www.steves-digicams.com/pr/olympus_03022003_43slr_pr.html
graham said:
graham said:
Dr. Don Sandell said:
heavyweather said:
I knew in the morning that this would be anounced today also.

I am waiting for the prices on the lenses and for the specs oif hte
camera.
Click to expand...
I'll bet it's NOT going to be a price leader.
Click to expand...
--
Graham

http://www.graham.uk.net
Click to expand...
--
Graham

http://www.graham.uk.net
Click to expand...
 
And it will remain a multiplier until Olymous, Kodak, or Fuji delivers at least one lens that is smaller or lighter than the equivelant lens on a 35mm system.

Right now, all they have are four warmed over, leftover 35mm lenses.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=4516436

And a body that wern't bigger than the 35mm based systems (like the new Pentax *ist D) would be another plus.

Ciao!

Joe
jk said:
whats also good if the rumor i hear is true that the system will be
avalaible under 1000 dollars, i hope that part of the rumor is true
Shumin said:
Where did you read the lenses could cover 24x36mm frame?
Ludwig Beck said:
I am disappointed that there is a lens focal length magnification
factor. I thought they might design dedicated and smaller cheaper
lenses.

The Lenses seem to cover the full 35 mm format. Maybe just leaving
the door open for full frame sensors. That would make a mockery of
the long awaited 3/4 system.

Ludwig
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
beam me up scotty

im giving it all shes got captain
Click to expand...
 
It looks like it'll be > 40mm. Take a look at



there is a marker for the image plane left of the LCD. If you measure that to the lens mount, it's about 186 pixels. The 14-54 lens on the camera have a diameter of 294 pixels. Since the lens have a 67mm filter size, lens would have a diameter of 67-69mm. This would translate into registration distance ~ 42.4 - 43.7mm

No converters I guess. Dang.
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Unfortunatly, one of the few solid pieces of information we have
about the 4/3 system is that its registration distance (film to
flange distance, or lens mount to image plate distance) is pretty
much the same as 35mm full frame. That's why Kodak and Olympus keep
harping on how the 4/3 system "fixes" the angle of incidence
vignetting problems in full frame digitals like Canon 1Ds and Kodak
14n. Now, it would be nice if they used a registration distance
just a bit shorter than conventional 35mm. For example, Olympus's
OM lens mount is 46mm, while Nikon is 46.5mm, Canon is 44.0mm, and
Pentax is 45.5.
Click to expand...
 
Shumin said:
there is a marker for the image plane left of the LCD. If you
measure that to the lens mount, it's about 186 pixels. The 14-54
lens on the camera have a diameter of 294 pixels. Since the lens
have a 67mm filter size, lens would have a diameter of 67-69mm.
This would translate into registration distance ~ 42.4 - 43.7mm

No converters I guess. Dang.
Click to expand...
Well, maybe Nikon, Oly, and Pentax converters. No Canon. Then again, since Canons have electronic diaphragm controls, I wouldn't expect Canon converters anyway.

Nikon and Pentax converters would probably be stopped down metering. I wouldn't want to see the mechanism that allows those converters to have wide open metering.

I'd guess an Oly converter would probably allow wide open metering, because they'd use the same stop down mechanism as an OM.

Ciao!

Joe
 
Would be good if the Companies would use plain language eg around October 2003, or has that 12 month calendar not become popular yet?
digicammania said:
Steve's news-item says late Q3, early Q4 (September/October)....
That is not Christmas... Of course it could slip and slip just like
any other high-tech product, but that's another story....

Does it mention Christmas elsewhre ??

The text:
======
The Olympus Digital SLR System will be officially unveiled at a major
New York City press event on June 24, 2003, when complete product
features and specs will be revealed. The Olympus Digital SLR System
will then be introduced to the market at competitive prices in the
late
third or early fourth quarter of 2003.

The URL
=====
http://www.steves-digicams.com/pr/olympus_03022003_43slr_pr.html
graham said:
graham said:
Dr. Don Sandell said:
heavyweather said:
I knew in the morning that this would be anounced today also.

I am waiting for the prices on the lenses and for the specs oif hte
camera.
Click to expand...
I'll bet it's NOT going to be a price leader.
Click to expand...
--
Graham

http://www.graham.uk.net
Click to expand...
--
Graham

http://www.graham.uk.net
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Graham

http://www.graham.uk.net
 
theponja said:
This is the link

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1046615859.html

Only mokup for now, but interesting

Regards
ThePonja
Click to expand...
Well this puppy has to sport a 7-8 mpixel sensor and a price well below 1K for me to consider buying into their system.

I would much rather spend my cash for a Canon or a Nikon and buy into their system. Hell, even the *ist looks good and might be cheap.

3/4 system is not going to last while Canon and Nikon are pushing the envelope twords a full size 35mm sensor. Bigger sensors, less noise and better images. Right now, without knowing the specs I would rather throw down the extra $500 and buy into the 10D. At least the lenses I buy from Canon will endure.
 
Someone said somewhere that they were basing the first lenses on old Olympus lenses in order to speed up the delivery time (and probably cut costs)... So that could explain why they look like 35mm lenses....
Joseph S. Wisniewski said:
Right now, all they have are four warmed over, leftover 35mm lenses.
Click to expand...
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
And a body that wern't bigger than the 35mm based systems (like the
new Pentax *ist D) would be another plus.
Click to expand...
This may be strategic thinking. Since the cameras won't be available until September/October/or_later, it would be foolish for announce something that would give their competitors plenty of time to react to.

Hypothetically: If they said they are going to use the 5mp Kodak sensor in a body that sells for $500 in October, that would have given Pentax/Canon/Nikon plenty of time to react to.... Almost seven months!
 
Shumin said:
What are you talking about? The 2x factor is just saying lenses for
the 4/3 system have the same coverage angle as lenses twice the
focal length on a 35mm system.

Where did you read the lenses could cover 24x36mm frame?
Click to expand...
Actually I am only guessing.

So you are saying that a 50 mm focal lenght lens is actually a shorter focal length?

Should they not say then focal lenght (50 mm equivalent on 35 mm)

Ludwig
 
Ludwig Beck said:
Shumin said:
What are you talking about? The 2x factor is just saying lenses for
the 4/3 system have the same coverage angle as lenses twice the
focal length on a 35mm system.

Where did you read the lenses could cover 24x36mm frame?
Click to expand...
Actually I am only guessing.

So you are saying that a 50 mm focal lenght lens is actually a
shorter focal length?

Should they not say then focal lenght (50 mm equivalent on 35 mm)

Ludwig
Click to expand...
They do say that. The 300mm 2.8 is a 600mm equivalent on 35mm.

--
I am not willed to buy a DSLR for the current price!!
http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=530177
 
To count as a "multiplier" the lenses would have to be lenses designed with the focal length and coverage suitable for another format.

Whatever they look like, these are not lenses designed for another format and misused with the 4/3 format so no multiplier.

However, it isn't obvious that the oly will really bring lightweight/small size. It looks very much like an E10 with interchangeable lenses and the E10 is not really smaller or lighter than a 35mm SLR system. I was rather hoping that we would get something that makes it worth investing in a new system such as a camera 1/2 the size of my D100.

A few years ago Minolta produced a fixed zoom SLR for the 110 format that was very compact. Pentax made an interchangeable lens SLR that was spy camera sized. Whilst the Pentax was too small I would have thought the Minolta was the size to aim for (roughly Nikon 5700 size).
Joseph S. Wisniewski said:
Right now, all they have are four warmed over, leftover 35mm lenses.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=4516436

And a body that wern't bigger than the 35mm based systems (like the
new Pentax *ist D) would be another plus.

Ciao!

Joe
jk said:
whats also good if the rumor i hear is true that the system will be
avalaible under 1000 dollars, i hope that part of the rumor is true
Shumin said:
Where did you read the lenses could cover 24x36mm frame?
Ludwig Beck said:
I am disappointed that there is a lens focal length magnification
factor. I thought they might design dedicated and smaller cheaper
lenses.

The Lenses seem to cover the full 35 mm format. Maybe just leaving
the door open for full frame sensors. That would make a mockery of
the long awaited 3/4 system.

Ludwig
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
beam me up scotty

im giving it all shes got captain
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I didn't think about that.
This element is not mentioned in the list.
That would be graet. A digital life for my Zuikos :)))

Olympus OM Zuiko 200mm f/4
Olympus Zuiko 28mm 2.8
Olympus Zuiko 50/1.8
Vivitar 2x teleconverter

Great 800mm :)))
56 is not bad too.
Uses Zuikos are really cheap anyway.
Good for people like me that don't depend on autofocus.
Jez Cunningham said:
Is that an OM lens adaptor in the picture?
Click to expand...
--
I am not willed to buy a DSLR for the current price!!
http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=530177
 
I am not very familiar with the inner workings of the E10 / 20. I know it has a partially reflecting mirror. Two questions:

1. Does it have a mechanical shutter?

2. Does it use the imaging CCD for autofocus or a different sensor?

Thanks,

Ron
Petteri Sulonen said:
Petteri Sulonen said:
How good is the autofocus on the E10 and E20 cameras?
Click to expand...
Not bad for a contrast-detection system. Terrible, compared to
"real" SLR's with phase-detection AF. If the AF is legacy from the
E-10/E-20, the E-system is dead in the water.

Petteri
Click to expand...
 
Joe,

Out of curiosity, do you know the registration distance of the Leica SM or M mount?

Ron
Joseph S. Wisniewski said:
Now, it would be nice if they used a registration distance
just a bit shorter than conventional 35mm. For example, Olympus's
OM lens mount is 46mm, while Nikon is 46.5mm, Canon is 44.0mm, and
Pentax is 45.5.
Joe
Click to expand...
 
graham said:
If it is much like a E20, and going buy the photos it might not be
a very light system. One of the photos looks like a 2X converter
to me, that would help to make a set of glass a bit lighter /
cheaper.
Click to expand...
I have used an E-10 since they came out ($ 2000 ) and generally still like the camera. What I miss are the extreme wide angle shots.

So I am disappointed, that they did not initially come out with at least a 20 mm equivalent lens.

Ludwig
 
Ludwig Beck said:
graham said:
If it is much like a E20, and going buy the photos it might not be
a very light system. One of the photos looks like a 2X converter
to me, that would help to make a set of glass a bit lighter /
cheaper.
Click to expand...
I have used an E-10 since they came out ($ 2000 ) and generally
still like the camera. What I miss are the extreme wide angle shots.

So I am disappointed, that they did not initially come out with at
least a 20 mm equivalent lens.

Ludwig
Click to expand...
Me too, but for starters the 28-108mm lens should be a great all rounder. You don't have that option with other less than full frame DSLRs. If the 100-400 is priced reasonably the whole spectrum is basically covered with fast glass. I'm sure a WA lens will be developed eventually.

Regards, Maxven
 
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