What is Olympus Hiding ...?

The eventual arrival of the fabled global shutter (delivered by a unicorn) could see a design rethink as then there's no FP shutter to accommodate.

Nano4/3 anyone?

Regards..... Guy

Photostyle said:

bobn2 said:

Photostyle said:

One could ask what Oly is hiding to make this claim : that the next Oly camera will outperform the Fuji XT-3 ? look here, what do you think it could be ?

https://www.43rumors.com/ft5-the-new-e-m1x-will-outperform-the-fuji-x-t3/

Click to expand...

'Outperform' without some context is meaningless. It surely won't 'outperform' in ever aspect of performance, it likely will in some. They aren't 'hiding' anything. This will be a perfectly normal camera with one or two original feature. I'm sure it will be very good, as are most Olympus cameras. Very unlikely to be a game-changer - just the next play in the game.

Click to expand...

What about the claim that it has som kind of technology that no other camera has ?

Click to expand...

Features is not the same as technology. Could simply be even faster FPS which for the vast majority will be meaningless over an XT3.

I really think Olympus is about to make either a little brilliant camera (thin OMD em5 MKII) or a major major mistake.

Photostyle said:

Global Shutter or Organic Sensor or both ?

https://www.43rumors.com/ft5-the-ne...es-not-available-on-any-camera-on-market-yet/

Click to expand...

Danielvr said:

Danielvr said:

One could ask what Oly is hiding to make this claim : that the next Oly camera will outperform the Fuji XT-3 ?

Click to expand...

Sony, Panasonic and others have IBIS now, a huge competitive advantage, presumably licensed to them by its inventor, Olympus.

Click to expand...

Where do you get this idea? Sony developed their own (a tear down was done and it's pretty different tech). Pentax had more axis IBIS well before Olympus. Does that mean Pentax licensed it to them? No necessarily.at all.

IBIS alone is not a patentable invention- its particular implementation is.

Danielvr said:

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Oly negotiated an equally significant technological benefit in return, for instance the right to introduce the next generation sensor well in advance of others on the occasion of their centennial.

Click to expand...

Given the recent comments on Panasonic talking about the challenges in putting the organic sensor at a lower tier, I really doubt it.

Danielvr said:

Danielvr said:

Danielvr said:

Sony, Panasonic and others have IBIS now, a huge competitive advantage, presumably licensed to them by its inventor, Olympus.

Click to expand...

No.

Click to expand...

They may not have invented the concept, but Olympus holds multiple patents on sensor based stabilisation (as do other companies, e.g. Canon). The fact that Olympus was the first (and only one for several years) to offer sensor stabilisation in modern cameras makes it likely that they hold some key patents.

Click to expand...

Some patents but key patents depends on the implementation. And Pentax had more axis sensor IBIS well before Olympus did.

Danielvr said:

Danielvr said:

Olympus normally sources sensors from Sony.

Click to expand...

Olympus has a special corporate alliance with Sony (5% owner of Oly and 51% owner of Sony-Olympus Medical Systems), so that would only increase chances that Oly will get some special favors if Sony happens to have a next-gen sensor in the works. There's also the age-old rivalry between Sony and Matsushita (Panasonic) that might tempt Sony to give Oly a small leg-up here.

Click to expand...

Keep in mind- Panasonic has been also using Sony sensors that you see in the PenF and EM1 mKII. In fact, they were *first* before Olympus (GX8). So while it's an interesting theory, I don't think the history here proves the point in this case.

Danielvr said:

Finally, the introduction of a new generation of sensors is simply long overdue. The last significant step ahead in both dynamic range and resolution was made in 2012 with the 16MP E-M5 (to which the Pen-F and E-M1 II of 2016 added some resolution). If the centennial model does not significantly improve on that, I'd be very disappointed. There are still other areas where it could break new ground (G4 and full Wifi connectivity, 16-bit HEIC images, custom shooting envelopes, etc) but I think a new sensor would be the most essential and most expected improvement at this point.

Either way: We will see.

Click to expand...

Definitively and it won't be too long. I think Olympus is going to make either a real sweet fast tight OMD EM5 MKIII or a major catastrophic mistake.

I shoot GX9 and I am fine with the hit you mentioned- I accept it. I want a smaller quieter kit but I don't delude myself for a second I am outpacing the Fuji X-T3 or a Nikon Z when it comes to the image quality file from the sensor.

John Byrne said:

I have personally viewed his Physchology Degree along with his accountancy degree -- you owe John a huge apology, he is a good and honest man with major health issues.

In addition to the above he is extremely proficient in "computer" related matters too. I am proud to call him a friend.

John Byrne

Click to expand...

Thank you, John. Very kind of you.

is being compared with a rumor, with a camera that doesn't exist yet, not announced, a concept- and that camera that is not shipping today somehow beats the X-T3.

Let's think about that for a full five minutes

John Byrne said:

I have personally viewed his Physchology Degree along with his accountancy degree -- you owe John a huge apology, he is a good and honest man with major health issues.

In addition to the above he is extremely proficient in "computer" related matters too. I am proud to call him a friend.

John Byrne

Click to expand...

Just as a side note, I don't think anyone is questioning that he might not have a degree in psychology (the irony of it notwithstanding); rather, they are questioning that he ever worked as a psychologist, as he has claimed.

Great Bustard said:

John Byrne said:

I have personally viewed his Physchology Degree along with his accountancy degree -- you owe John a huge apology, he is a good and honest man with major health issues.

In addition to the above he is extremely proficient in "computer" related matters too. I am proud to call him a friend.

John Byrne

Click to expand...

Just as a side note, I don't think anyone is questioning that he might not have a degree in psychology (the irony of it notwithstanding); rather, they are questioning that he ever worked as a psychologist, as he has claimed.

Click to expand...

As usual, Joe, you are (deliberately?) failing to understand the difference between being qualified and possessing a practising certificate.

One can be qualified, and be employed in a field, without ever possessing a practising certificate.

I did possess a practising certificate in accounting, and have not in psychology, but hold tertiary qualifications in both. I have never said differently.

Meanwhile, you (and Bob, and others) make pronouncements on all sorts of subjects in which you patently understand little. However, I must have missed where any of you have ever stated whatever qualifications you might hold, or any proof of any description that you actually hold it/them.

BTW, John Byrne's post was utterly unsolicited by me, or anyone else. He told me this morning that he just got heartily sick of your collective behaviour ...