Could it be that side by side with the current offerings (nostalgia aside) they don't compare ?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Why is Olympus one of the last brands to make a large-sensor mirrorless?
- Thread starter dark goob
- Start date
Rich Evans
Well-known member
You mean small sensor right?
So you are not saying MicroFT is bad but you want something bigger because? Can it be because *it is* better?
Agreed. I have been a long time of the opinion that Olympus should just join FE mount.
No. Sony is Sony. Olympus is Olympus.
The 5 axis is hogwash. Minolta introduced the first image sensor stabilization and guess who bought Minolta? Sony did.
That is my entire problem with the Micro Four Thurd fans. It does not matter one iota that facts exist just that "muh MicroFT is waaaaaayyy better than medium format LULZ".
Again Minolta created sensor stabilization. Not Oly.
And about the sensors: Why. in. heavens. name. would. Sony. do. that?
Sony also sells sensors to Olympus/Nikon/Fuji/etc. Nikon released a much better camera, the d850, with sensors from Sony.
Oh boy here it comes....
Maybe they don't have the money and expertise? I mean, Sony is a big conglomerate, Pentax/Ricoh as well, Canon as well, Panasonic as well.
What is OIympus besides the camera division? Some medical things here, some microscopes there. There is only enough company energy to get into the highly competitive market.
Finally we agreed in something. My first full frame camera was an Oly OM-3 and was fantastic. I do hope Oly joins FE mount because it is where the action in lenses are happening right now.
Doesn't matter what you hate or not. Full frame is the 35mm standard, and the sensors are that size. If you have some quibble why not go after the medium format one.
You see? This is the irritating part of you fanboys in the other side. This argument is just a way to justify gear envy that you guys have of larger sensors and this entire post proves this point.
Since Olympus does not make a full frame sensor camera you "hate" the term but at the same time want them to release a "larger sensor" camera. What does that mean? APS-C? Full Frame?
OMG!!!!1
Martin.au
Forum Pro
Have you thought about finding some other way to release your frustrations Rich?
I mean, you've got some reasonable arguments in the mix there, but it's kinda hard to see them amongst all the frothing.
I mean, you've got some reasonable arguments in the mix there, but it's kinda hard to see them amongst all the frothing.
fishy wishy
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 9,358
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 6,647
If the terms "Full Frame" and "Crop Sensor" annoy you that much, you need to get out more. Seriously. They are common parlance now and it's not a fight worth fighting. It would be like telling us to call gays "homosexuals". Technically correct but it's too late.
Full Frame is according to the popular 35mm standard, you'll have to get used to it. Smaller than that is Crop. Larger than that is the nebulous Medium Format, which can mean anything from 50% more sensor area to 6x7cm.
Rich Evans
Well-known member
Whats wrong? Did I make fun of your man toy of choice and now you are pissy?
Also its more than what I could say about your "argument" and fanboyism darling. If you don't like it don't read it.
So far, Canon is the last brand to make a large sensor mirrorless. (Assuming, by "large" you mean FF). When Panasonic releases theirs, they'll be last. If Olympus ever makes one, then you can say they're the last.
- Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com
tbcass
Forum Pro
Why do you care? Rather than be so tied to a specific brand jut invest in one ot the other FF mirrorless cameras available. If Olympus did come out with a FF system it wouldn't be compatible with what you have anyways.
Yes, what is “large sensor “? 35 mm is actually “small format” in photography. Which makes aps-c “tiny format”
Holger Bargen
Veteran Member
Both companies are very different. Olympus was the first brand goind digital - Pentax was the last brand doing this step.
I expected that Olympus would rule the digital world but they did not make it.
We have cameras and we have lenses. Both have to be designed and the lens design seems to be more tricky to me.
The old lenses are not far behind the new ones in terms of IQ. For this reason I find a revival of classic stellar models a good way to overcome shortages in a new lens line.
And as both companies - Olympus as well as Pentax - had stellar lenses in their history, and both companies could have a little bit more lenses to offer they are in a similar situation.
Lenses for ML cameras can have same desing as DSLR cameras if you exclude extreme wide angle lenses where design with ML cameras is much simpler than for DSLR cameras.
The old stellar products would be attractive lenses that could be offered for a lower price compared to the latest models. And the companies would get some time to develop upgrades for each lens class that are top notch.
There is a new generation of lenses that outperforms even the old stars. But these models are very expensive, very large and heavy. They are not for everyone - but there will be people who prefer the top noth design. To give a new line a start it would be better to have updated classics than make people wair for years until the new lineup is at the market.
Best regards
Holger
I think they just don't GAF about the photography scene as a whole or about conquering it at a broad level. I think the photography business is mostly a hobby for them, and m4/3 is as much into the overall market as they want to get.
Perhaps Olympus is also less defensive about the system than a lot of users, and feels m4/3 is good enough to meet the vast majority of photography needs, so don't see a reason to go bigger, too.
Really, in the end, the manufacturers are all in it to make money, and are committing to meeting the company's needs and the shareholder expectations above all else, so they are going to optimize around those rather than what a few thousand enthusiasts want.
All that said, I would love to see an Olympus FF system (m4/3 body and FF body with the same controls and menus, sweet!). But I am not going to spend much energy hoping for that.
Perhaps Olympus is also less defensive about the system than a lot of users, and feels m4/3 is good enough to meet the vast majority of photography needs, so don't see a reason to go bigger, too.
Really, in the end, the manufacturers are all in it to make money, and are committing to meeting the company's needs and the shareholder expectations above all else, so they are going to optimize around those rather than what a few thousand enthusiasts want.
All that said, I would love to see an Olympus FF system (m4/3 body and FF body with the same controls and menus, sweet!). But I am not going to spend much energy hoping for that.
bobn2
Forum Pro
In the sensor world, FT, APS-C and 24x36 are all 'large'.
Not only that, but my understanding is that among primates, human males are the most generously 'blessed.' All the others 'shoot with 1/2.3" sensors,' so you are all lucky all the way around and should just stop fighting about m4/3 vs 'FF.' .
bobn2
Forum Pro
Hence the question "is that a Canon you have in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?"Not only that, but my understanding is that among primates, human males are the most generously 'blessed.' All the others 'shoot with 1/2.3" sensors,' so you are all lucky all the way around and should just stop fighting about m4/3 vs 'FF.' .
Shouldn't that be, "Is that a dSLR in your pocket?"?Hence the question "is that a Canon you have in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?"Not only that, but my understanding is that among primates, human males are the most generously 'blessed.' All the others 'shoot with 1/2.3" sensors,' so you are all lucky all the way around and should just stop fighting about m4/3 vs 'FF.' .
Continually amazed that for some archaic reason, so many assume the sensor of a modern camera must be the same size as a piece of film from 40 years ago and any manufacturer not making that size must secretly wish the were and striving to get to that point knowing that all people also agree that size senor must be the holy grail of all current and future sensors to be taken seriously in photography.
The only way I could see Olympus even thinking of FF would be a top of the line camera that crops to accept all currently mFT lenses with no usage sacrifice and slowly introduce FF lenses. OR introduce the often discussed square sensor, croppable to mFT lenses and hope that having a square sensor would be enough of a differentiator to make them stand out even a bit from Canon, Nikon and Sony. If they can't differentiate from those three monsters, whats the point of getting in the ring?
Personally, based upon nothing other than my thoughts, if I was Olympus, I would be pushing some sort of software AI that eventually can make all the physical advantages of FF in terms of DoF replaceable by software modeling. Maybe that is not even possible, but lots of things don't seem possible and 10 years later exist. Would be interesting if a camera's auto-focus point actively can record focus distance for the primary focus, and another 200 points passively record distances throughout the image and that information is utilized by the software to emulate DoF. Just thinking outloud.
The only way I could see Olympus even thinking of FF would be a top of the line camera that crops to accept all currently mFT lenses with no usage sacrifice and slowly introduce FF lenses. OR introduce the often discussed square sensor, croppable to mFT lenses and hope that having a square sensor would be enough of a differentiator to make them stand out even a bit from Canon, Nikon and Sony. If they can't differentiate from those three monsters, whats the point of getting in the ring?
Personally, based upon nothing other than my thoughts, if I was Olympus, I would be pushing some sort of software AI that eventually can make all the physical advantages of FF in terms of DoF replaceable by software modeling. Maybe that is not even possible, but lots of things don't seem possible and 10 years later exist. Would be interesting if a camera's auto-focus point actively can record focus distance for the primary focus, and another 200 points passively record distances throughout the image and that information is utilized by the software to emulate DoF. Just thinking outloud.
Basket Case
Well-known member
- Messages
- 142
- Reaction score
- 94
I think smartphones will succeed in doing that to Olympus m4/3 before Olympus does that to FF.
bobn2
Forum Pro
I quite agree. I don't think that there was ever anything that special about the 110 frame size.
Guy Parsons
Forum Pro
Indeed, and it should have been called QF sensor size as in Quarter Frame to differentiate it from the HF Half Frame or FF Full Frame or PMF Peculiar Medium Format sensors.I think that some have forgotten or don't know that m43 is the same size as 110 film.
Regards..... Guy
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum