-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Next Panasonic MF3 body?
- Thread starter TRP
- Start date
-
- Tags
- olympus om-d e-m1
Adrian Harris
Veteran Member
I agree 100%. I have been hoping for a remote viewfinder for a decade (to mount in front of one eye) that would allow the camera user the freedom to take some great angles.
... But it won't happen
R
Raist3d
Guest
You get no argument with me on that.
Yes, but for a camera at that price tier as a stills camera you won't find it that competitive vs what's around.
OR maybe they won't do that, and keep the S1 line the one capable of doing that for product differentiation.
jrsforums
Senior Member
Not ‘eye mounted’, but use cell phone with Panasonic App.I agree 100%. I have been hoping for a remote viewfinder for a decade (to mount in front of one eye) that would allow the camera user the freedom to take some great angles.
... But it won't happen
Astrotripper
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,676
- Solutions
- 14
- Reaction score
- 12,107
This is normal when commercializing new technology. You don't start with the mass produced consumer products.I am sure no one on this forum will complain at the £30k asking price for a m43 camera with this sensor
If this ever hits consumer products, it will be a lot less expensive. The real question is if it is feasible to use this tech in a consumer camera. A sensor tech that works wonders in a specialized video camera might not necessarily be well suited for stills.
But a smaller size of 4/3 sensor would definitely make it a lot easier to use this tech there than in an FF sensor.
Alas, not expecting to see this in an MFT camera (or any photo camera) anytime soon (maybe never).
This is normal when commercializing new technology. You don't start with the mass produced consumer products.I am sure no one on this forum will complain at the £30k asking price for a m43 camera with this sensor
If this ever hits consumer products, it will be a lot less expensive. The real question is if it is feasible to use this tech in a consumer camera. A sensor tech that works wonders in a specialized video camera might not necessarily be well suited for stills.
But a smaller size of 4/3 sensor would definitely make it a lot easier to use this tech there than in an FF sensor.
Alas, not expecting to see this in an MFT camera (or any photo camera) anytime soon (maybe never).
Adrian Harris
Veteran Member
I do at times and frequently on the end of a long pole, but it has many drawbacks.Not ‘eye mounted’, but use cell phone with Panasonic App.I agree 100%. I have been hoping for a remote viewfinder for a decade (to mount in front of one eye) that would allow the camera user the freedom to take some great angles.
... But it won't happen
-- -
Adrian
A
AllFlawed
Guest
Likewise the mocking every complaint raised on a camera forum as a first world problem cliche artists.
Last edited:
Because we have high resolution screens now and on 4k TV you can see every fault in current 20MP sensors.
Because all sensors are Bayer which means their real resolution is lower than it seems. Especially color suffers.
Because current cameras have no AA filter which lowers their real resolution (due to how analog-digital conversion works, the only reason cameras without AA filters seem better is because the AA filters were not perfect and blurred images too much, removing AA filter was a compromise not everyone likes). For that reason having pixels go beyond diffraction level will actually be beneficial because it will work like AA filter (as is having screens where pixels are not discernable to the eye, like the retina displays).
Because when you can have a possibilty to do a 2x high resolution crop that is high MP you may save on weight and price of MC14 and MC20 and it works with every lens you have. All your lenses suddenly have capability of twice the reach at a bit lower but still often acceptable quality and resolution.
Because algorithms love to have more information - be it fixing rotation or lens distortions, aligning images for HHR shots or noise reduction, it works better when algorithms have more megapixels to work with (you should have tried working with old 4/3 files, even correcting rotation in post to make horizon even caused visible blurring due to low resolution).
Because rising MP always in the history of 4/3 and later m43 lead to better image level quality and DR even if pixel level quality was the same or worse.
Because all sensors are Bayer which means their real resolution is lower than it seems. Especially color suffers.
Because current cameras have no AA filter which lowers their real resolution (due to how analog-digital conversion works, the only reason cameras without AA filters seem better is because the AA filters were not perfect and blurred images too much, removing AA filter was a compromise not everyone likes). For that reason having pixels go beyond diffraction level will actually be beneficial because it will work like AA filter (as is having screens where pixels are not discernable to the eye, like the retina displays).
Because when you can have a possibilty to do a 2x high resolution crop that is high MP you may save on weight and price of MC14 and MC20 and it works with every lens you have. All your lenses suddenly have capability of twice the reach at a bit lower but still often acceptable quality and resolution.
Because algorithms love to have more information - be it fixing rotation or lens distortions, aligning images for HHR shots or noise reduction, it works better when algorithms have more megapixels to work with (you should have tried working with old 4/3 files, even correcting rotation in post to make horizon even caused visible blurring due to low resolution).
Because rising MP always in the history of 4/3 and later m43 lead to better image level quality and DR even if pixel level quality was the same or worse.
Last edited:
Orangorill
Well-known member
That's another area where I'd like to see some improvement. I got into MFT in 2016, and I was a little surprised to see an app that looked like it was straight out of 2010. It still looks like that. Has it been updated at all the last few years?Not ‘eye mounted’, but use cell phone with Panasonic App.I agree 100%. I have been hoping for a remote viewfinder for a decade (to mount in front of one eye) that would allow the camera user the freedom to take some great angles.
... But it won't happen
Connecting to it is beyond fiddly, it randomly disconnects sometimes, it lacks options such as fullscreen view, and it doesn't work particularly well in landscape mode. Honestly, I occasionally wish I just had my old Canon IR trigger instead of this mess.
My cameras use wifi; maybe the app is a lot better with bluetooth. Guess I should give that a go sometime.
Impressive in the amount of supporting information you put together that makes it clear that more megapixels are not only very desirable but an absolute necessity to even gaze at our very primitive pictures of today without pain... but almost everything you stated here is either theoretical or has absolutely no practical value in everyday use when just enjoying looking at pictures in a "normal" way.
Wasabi Bob
Leading Member
- Messages
- 680
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 425
Panasonic sold their manufacturing facility, but they are still actively designing sensors. Your comments suggest that are no longer interested in sensor technology, which is NOT the case. That part of the business is called ODM, they design it and have it built by another party.
jrharvey592
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 343
- Reaction score
- 271
For sure its all just speculation and guesswork on my part. Who knows what panasonic has up their sleeves.
PlumShots
Leading Member
[No message]
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum