Olympus declares 12 megapixels is enough

[Ehrik]

This means, Olympus are willing to give up the tele advantage.

The tele (and macro) advantage doesn't come from the crop factor, but from the pixel density.

The 15 Mp Canon 50D has about the same pixel pitch as a 10Mp 4/3rds camera, so a 300mm lens on the Canon has the same reach as a 300mm lens on the E-3 (assuming equally sharp lenses, but Canon's tele lenses are highly regarded).

A 12 Mp 4/3rds sensor will have similar pixel pitch to an 18Mp Canon APS-C sensor. If Oly stop at 12, there is a clear risk of losing the tele reach advantage to a future 60D, D400, K30D or A750.

And all this comes from the misconception that smaller pixels give worse image quailty. There is no evidence of this. Worse pixel quality, yes, but not image quality. 12Mp will not extract all that the lenses can offer. It's a bad idea.

Just my two oere
Erik from Sweden

 

[Martin Frost]

12 MP is a real tipping point for 4/3 I think. It provides the bast
balance of resolution vs overall image quality even with APS. And
heck from everything I've seen of the new Panny 12mp sensor it is
much better than the old 10mp sensor since it take severe
underexposure to get even a hint of banding while my 510 bands at
every opportunity... which is weird considering my 330 doesn't band
so much...

25MP is great with FF though I must say and I'm happy with my A900
for what it can do. Sony actually has made a group of lenses that can
keep up with a 25MP sensor and while not cheap aren't Leica M or RED
expensive (of course getting them at 30-50% off at CC closeouts
doesn't hurt either .)

The problem is, the better zuiko D lenses are 20 MP able and why not deliver the

resolution of the lens. On the other hand, big Dynamic Range would also be good and currently more important if this would be solved now.

currently 12MP is a good number and Panasonic will surely
continue to increase the MP number as we are used from Panny,
so whatevery Oly wants, I expect that Oly may also ( perhaps
more slow than Panny ) increase the MP numbers.

regards
Martin F.

3xPanasonicL10

 

[zuikowesty]

I was thinking exactly the same thing re: the Mhz race of a few years ago. As another poster just said, Oly needs to find a way to make 12MP 4/3 look better than Canikon's 15-16M APS sensors, and then market that quality advantage and get people off the numbers comparison game. Perhaps a big campaign inviting the public to demo the Oly against the competition live, and then have a print lab on-site to provide immediate 8x10 samples for comparison.

--
Shawn Wright
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zuikowesty/

 

[JoannaK]

I don't think the 4/3rds system will die to m4/3rds for three reasons.

1. Panasonic is clearly staking its claim on the 'high end' of
m4/3rds while Olympus is taking the budget route.

Seems likely.. If no-one takes budget, there's not much hope for µ4/3 to be any mainstream. HD-video recording camera is nice and a lot more economical than similar size imagers on Videocams, but still a niche.

2. I think the E-620 will be a massive hit and sell as much as or
more than Olympus's m4/3rds debut model.

I do hope 620 sells well. It is innovative, has really amazing set of features, price is good and there seems to be very little direct competition at the moment.

3. The 4/3rds system can possibly do something completely different
like a 3 sensor layout whereas m4/3 can't fit that in. This would
necessitate CDAF alone but would still fit in 4/3 bodies

Or they could finally make the real E-10/20 successor ... With full time Ovf+liveview.
(just kidding, I think?)

 

[ulrichvonlich]

I don't think the 4/3rds system will die to m4/3rds for three reasons.

1. Panasonic is clearly staking its claim on the 'high end' of
m4/3rds while Olympus is taking the budget route.

2. I think the E-620 will be a massive hit and sell as much as or
more than Olympus's m4/3rds debut model.

I certainly don't hope the 4/3rds system to die. But if Olympus DSLRs will have only CDAF some day, what's the point of keeping the OVF and the mirror? I heard people complaining about the Nikon 51 point AF system being not fast enough. I guess I'm just too old school to understand it.

3. The 4/3rds system can possibly do something completely different
like a 3 sensor layout whereas m4/3 can't fit that in. This would
necessitate CDAF alone but would still fit in 4/3 bodies

3 sensor layout? I hope it would still look like a camera.

 

[Martin Frost]

or switchable.

Yes, switch a P&S 1/2.3" sensor at the place of the 4/3" sensor, and this way make a "tele switch" when high-iso is not required.
--
regards
Martin F.

 

[zuikowesty]

3. The 4/3rds system can possibly do something completely different
like a 3 sensor layout whereas m4/3 can't fit that in. This would
necessitate CDAF alone but would still fit in 4/3 bodies

Perhaps you've hit on the secret here... they will stay at 12Mp, but have 3 sensors, just like better video cameras. That would certainly go a long way to improving DR and noise levels. If you've ever used 3 sensor video cameras, you'll know what I'm talking about - the difference is dramatic.

--
Shawn Wright
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zuikowesty/

 

[simpy]

or switchable.

Yes, switch a P&S 1/2.3" sensor at the place of the 4/3" sensor, and
this way make a "tele switch" when high-iso is not required.

Oh please. Then they're better off just installing a 48MP sensor and downsampling to 12MP by default. When you flip your 'tele switch' they would switch to using the central 12MP.

Simon

 

[Stujoe]

6-8MP was enough for me on any camera and I really wish they would have held the line at the recent 10MP level instead of going to 12MP. But at least they appear to be ready to hold the line now.

--
Stu
D40x, E510, TZ4
.

 

[Ross]

Every company has trained consumers to
believe bigger is always better. End of story. The first companies to
challenge their conditioning of the masses will face a large uphill
psychological battle.

Oly needs to market similar numbers for other aspects of IQ. Like a
DR index, a Color Accuracy index, etc. Yes these numbers already
exist but they need to go into the mass market consciousness. Then it
will be less of a MP race and become a DR and CAccuracy race.

--
Leon . http://picasaweb.google.com/travelfotografer

I agree, they do need to do a "You don't need more MPs" advertising line.

For the full framers or the 35 equivalent standards, who pixel crunch, 12MP 4/3rds would scale up to about 48MP in 35eqv and if you are after fine detail, they should compare a quarter crop of a 25MP FF image, to a 12MP 4/3rds image....@ 100%, of course.....LOL
The remarks about print size in the article are a key point.
--
Bob

 

[Brian Mosley]

--
Join our free worldwide support network here :
http://www.ukphotosafari.org/join-the-ukpsg/

UK, Peak District Local Olympus Safari Group : http://snipurl.com/bqtd7-ukpsg

 

[duartix]

Amen.
--
Duarte Bruno

 

[AussieAndo]

My biggest issue with anything over 8Mpx is trying to get a monitor large enough to do worthwhile 1:1 image editing!

I struggle with my 20" and 10Mpx. Maybe quad 24" screens are the way to go

 

[dodger421]

12mp is more than enough, I'm happy with 10 to be honest, I struggle to see any extra detail from a friends d300 images over those from my e3. In fact the only thing I really want from Olympus is a screen as large and detailed as the d300's....

The most interesting part was that about autofocus, I wonder what Olympus have up their sleeves, and whether their mft camera will have claims of fastest autofocus speed? We'll just have to wait and see I guess.
--
Cheers, Neil
http://www.nwilsonphoto.co.uk

 

[geoson]

--

Between the 620 and this announcement, Olympus may have finally rediscovered what makes an "Olympian". Now let's all wait for m43.

 

[LJohnK]

--
John K
(Oly E510, E520 & rest of gear in profile if interested)

 

[round glass]

I personally believe they should stop at 12mp as well -- for now.
Perhaps for 2 or 3 generations of improvement at that resolution.

But to say "12mp is enough for the E system" and "we won't compete...."
is very different than saying the above.

Eventually, resolution will have to increase.

Jan

 

[William Gordon]

And I completely agree, 8 was good enough.
Thanks for the link.

--
Bill Turner
Eschew Obfuscation, Espouse Elucidation
Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Infrared Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/wmdt131/ir_photos

Actually Bill, 5 was enough in the E-1. I still say that it isn't/wasn/t the number of pixels but the quality!
--

Bill Gordon

 

[Gary Papilsky]

I am very pleased they are going to focus on quality sensors instead of more meaningless pixels that fall short of a quality image. I like what Fuji has done with their sensors.

It is funny, I get comments all the time about what great color and quality my pictures have compared to the other photogs that shoot along side of me. So this just goes right in that direction. More and more I have noticed the lack of quality in images being produced by high ISO mega pixel cameras.

Focusing on making the best quality sensor/image at 12 mega pixels is just what I was hoping for.
--
Gary S P



http://www.garysworld.net

 

[Goffen]

hope they can convince the avg. buyer also !

Goffen