16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
MEDISN
MEDISN Senior Member • Posts: 1,503
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
6

It's not that any one feature is exclusive to Olympus, it's that cameras like EM1 line and EM5 line offer so many of these features in affordable weather resistant bodies that makes them so attractive.  While other manufacturers play catch-up, Olympus users have been enjoying many of these features for some time.   It's no wonder year after year so much of my work is carried out with Olympus cameras.  They make it easy to meet client demands.  On a personal level, they are engaging and enjoyable to shoot.  Icing on the cake.

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
?
1

shinndigg wrote:

...then why are you so Gaga over the EP7?

Because it's small and has a nice jPEG engine? Because Fuji still doesn't have a small lens equivalent like the Oly 75mm F1.8 which I use from time to time?

Note that I have been banging the drum of defending the unique selling proposition of size and weight for a while. This advantage is reinforced with the G100, EM10MKIV, EP7, EM5.3.

All fo these cameras feel a bit late to the party honestly, but better late than never for both EM10MKIV and EP7.

Your reply implies that the listed advantages are all real in order for me to be "gaga" over the EP7- which is not true.

You see, I can like something in m43rds and accept its tradeoffs, not having to make things up or mis represent advantages vs other cameras, while I can also acknowledge other camera's strengths.

But focus on the argument. Whether I am gaga or not over the EP7 has no relevance to whether the listed advantages are real or not.

Hey, I also like the Fuji X-E4 quite a bit actually. no, I don't have one. Yes, I have an X100V that I may sell simply because as fantastic as it is, seems like either I keep shooting m43rds with the lenses I have or go full on the X100V.

I can recognize the superiority of AF of the Fuji X-E4 and DR/tone/color/ISO while seeing advantages also in an EP7.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
2

MEDISN wrote:

It's not that any one feature is exclusive to Olympus, it's that cameras like EM1 line and EM5 line offer so many of these features in affordable weather resistant bodies that makes them so attractive. While other manufacturers play catch-up, Olympus users have been enjoying many of these features for some time. It's no wonder year after year so much of my work is carried out with Olympus cameras. They make it easy to meet client demands. On a personal level, they are engaging and enjoyable to shoot. Icing on the cake.

I think playing catchup goes many ways. You could say Olympus has been playing catchup in auto focus vs the competitors at least in some areas too, I don't see it as competitors being trying to catch up to Olympus as a sole one way street statement.

And affordable? Dunno, I see affordable competitors too.

I do think the system doe shave some advantages, but the whole list is presented as key Olympus advantages with some half truths thrown in. Telecentricity in m43rds lenses- right.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Guy Parsons
Guy Parsons Forum Pro • Posts: 37,061
Re: Telecentric .... or not.

Guy Parsons wrote:

I am sure that my bunch of old 4/3 lenses stored somewhere are a mix of possibly "telecentric" and impossible to be "telecentric" lenses, due to that rear element measurement.

So it was mainly to do with marketing - the reliable source of most baloney in any industry.

When the sun comes up here in Oz I will look through a few of the old 4/3 lenses to see how they obey the test stated in Wiki as "Image-space telecentric lenses have an exit pupil infinitely far in front of the lens; that is, if one looks in the back of the lens, the image of the aperture is very far away." I'll try to remember to report back on that.

Back again after looking at my old 4/3 lenses.

Lens.................Rear element approx........telecentric (as per view test above)

50/2 macro................23mm.....No, but a very mild effect of aperture seems further away.

35/3.5 macro..............15mm................................No

14-54/2.8-3.5...............19mm.........................No, but very very mild effect like the 50mm

11-22/2.8-3.5................19mm..............................No

14-45/3.5-5.6.................18mm.............................No

40-150/3.5-4.5................21mm.......................No, but very very mild effect like the 50mm

40-150/4-5.6......................13mm...........................No

The last lens came with a very early E-PL1 kit and with the MMF-2 to adapt it to the E-PL1. The rear element needs to be about 22mm or bigger to allow any chance of true image side telecentricity.

So nothing there that leads me to believe that "telecentricity" was a global design feature in the 4/3 lens range. The very mild effect noted on some of the lenses made the aperture look as though it was slightly further inside the lens than where I expected it to be, but certainly not distant as the Wiki page test indicated.

Summary: As usual, the telecentric issue was 99.99% baloney from the marketing people, and people believed it without testing if it was true.

To get the aperture visible, I set the A mode to f/5.6, set a button to DOF preview, then held down the button while removing the lens keeping the camera turned on. That way the aperture stays at f/5.6 on the removed lens and makes it easier to do the view test. No damage happens as pressing the lens release always disconnects power from the lens.

 Guy Parsons's gear list:Guy Parsons's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II +10 more
FingerPainter Forum Pro • Posts: 10,364
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
1

SrMi wrote:

FingerPainter wrote:

SrMi wrote:

FingerPainter wrote:

SrMi wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

Lost all credibility with me on the diffraction howler.

Andrew

Yes, that one is a doozy. As you might know, diffraction is proportional to pixel size, not the sensor size.

Olympus M1.3: 3.36 microns

Sony a7rIV: 3.76 microns

Nikon Z 6: 5.92 microns

Diffraction is an optical property. It has noting to do with pixel size. Sensor size determines the size of the blur produced by diffraction on a print of given size.

From: LENS DIFFRACTION & PHOTOGRAPHY

LOL! I thought so. That bogus article has led a lot of people astray.

I agree that CambridgeInColour occasionally had questionable content. Unfortunately, that article seems to be inaccurate as well.

How about this one?

https://www.scantips.com/lights/diffraction.html

Oh, much better!

Diffraction is an optical effect.

The 2D diffraction pattern is called an airy disk. When the size of the airy disk central peak becomes large relative to the pixel size, it begins to have a visual impact on the image.

Jim Kasson also wrote about pixel pitches and diffraction:

Diffraction and ultimate FF pixel count

I suggest you read Jim's post again. It might help you realize that pixel size isn't an issue for diffraction on current MFT sensors. With Q=2, for f/1.4 you'd need to have a 5.5 GigaPixel MFT sensor.

Thank you for correcting me.

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Re: Telecentric .... or not.

Guy Parsons wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

I am sure that my bunch of old 4/3 lenses stored somewhere are a mix of possibly "telecentric" and impossible to be "telecentric" lenses, due to that rear element measurement.

So it was mainly to do with marketing - the reliable source of most baloney in any industry.

When the sun comes up here in Oz I will look through a few of the old 4/3 lenses to see how they obey the test stated in Wiki as "Image-space telecentric lenses have an exit pupil infinitely far in front of the lens; that is, if one looks in the back of the lens, the image of the aperture is very far away." I'll try to remember to report back on that.

Back again after looking at my old 4/3 lenses.

Lens.................Rear element approx........telecentric (as per view test above)

50/2 macro................23mm.....No, but a very mild effect of aperture seems further away.

35/3.5 macro..............15mm................................No

14-54/2.8-3.5...............19mm.........................No, but very very mild effect like the 50mm

11-22/2.8-3.5................19mm..............................No

14-45/3.5-5.6.................18mm.............................No

40-150/3.5-4.5................21mm.......................No, but very very mild effect like the 50mm

40-150/4-5.6......................13mm...........................No

The last lens came with a very early E-PL1 kit and with the MMF-2 to adapt it to the E-PL1. The rear element needs to be about 22mm or bigger to allow any chance of true image side telecentricity.

So nothing there that leads me to believe that "telecentricity" was a global design feature in the 4/3 lens range. The very mild effect noted on some of the lenses made the aperture look as though it was slightly further inside the lens than where I expected it to be, but certainly not distant as the Wiki page test indicated.

Summary: As usual, the telecentric issue was 99.99% baloney from the marketing people, and people believed it without testing if it was true.

I don't think that's quite right. Back then the issue is that sensors were much more sensitive to light entering directly vs at an angle (i.e. those Kodak CCD's).

To get the aperture visible, I set the A mode to f/5.6, set a button to DOF preview, then held down the button while removing the lens keeping the camera turned on. That way the aperture stays at f/5.6 on the removed lens and makes it easier to do the view test. No damage happens as pressing the lens release always disconnects power from the lens.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Guy Parsons
Guy Parsons Forum Pro • Posts: 37,061
Re: Telecentric .... or not.

Raist3d wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

Summary: As usual, the telecentric issue was 99.99% baloney from the marketing people, and people believed it without testing if it was true.

I don't think that's quite right. Back then the issue is that sensors were much more sensitive to light entering directly vs at an angle (i.e. those Kodak CCD's).

Just so, but my findings are that the bragged about telecentricity didn't really exist in a few lenses that I sampled so really was hardly a real issue. Maybe auto vignetting correction helped.

I never saw any real problems with my E-300 and its Kodak CCD sensor using those non-telecentric lenses that I used to use.

Some people seemed to believe that telecentric design was universal in 4/3, but that again was the power of marketing bulldust.

 Guy Parsons's gear list:Guy Parsons's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II +10 more
OP shinndigg Veteran Member • Posts: 4,472
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
2

Raist3d wrote:

MEDISN wrote:

It's not that any one feature is exclusive to Olympus, it's that cameras like EM1 line and EM5 line offer so many of these features in affordable weather resistant bodies that makes them so attractive. While other manufacturers play catch-up, Olympus users have been enjoying many of these features for some time. It's no wonder year after year so much of my work is carried out with Olympus cameras. They make it easy to meet client demands. On a personal level, they are engaging and enjoyable to shoot. Icing on the cake.

I think playing catchup goes many ways. You could say Olympus has been playing catchup in auto focus vs the competitors at least in some areas too, I don't see it as competitors being trying to catch up to Olympus as a sole one way street statement.

As great as Fujifilm cameras are, other than the XT4, they've been rather lacking in AF. And one could argue that the XT4 is still behind even it's Olympus direct competitors, the EM1 II/III and even the EM5 III.

And affordable? Dunno, I see affordable competitors too.

When it comes to lenses as well?

I do think the system doe shave some advantages, but the whole list is presented as key Olympus advantages with some half truths thrown in. Telecentricity in m43rds lenses- right.

So you throw out the entire premise based on one potential inaccuracy?

-- hide signature --

shinndigg
www.pbase.com/shinndigg

 shinndigg's gear list:shinndigg's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35 Olympus E-510 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 +7 more
Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Re: Telecentric .... or not.

Guy Parsons wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

Summary: As usual, the telecentric issue was 99.99% baloney from the marketing people, and people believed it without testing if it was true.

I don't think that's quite right. Back then the issue is that sensors were much more sensitive to light entering directly vs at an angle (i.e. those Kodak CCD's).

Just so, but my findings are that the bragged about telecentricity didn't really exist in a few lenses that I sampled so really was hardly a real issue. Maybe auto vignetting correction helped.

I never saw any real problems with my E-300 and its Kodak CCD sensor using those non-telecentric lenses that I used to use.

Some people seemed to believe that telecentric design was universal in 4/3, but that again was the power of marketing bulldust.

Well not sure how exactly you verified. What I remember is that it was part of the standard while not so in m43rds.  But at a minimum some were I guess where in m43rds, hard to say who is it.

I can say that I sure see different characteristics with the 4/3rd lenses that are better- micro contrast, no need to do some software corrections, not as easy to get purple fringing, etc.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have

shinndigg wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

MEDISN wrote:

It's not that any one feature is exclusive to Olympus, it's that cameras like EM1 line and EM5 line offer so many of these features in affordable weather resistant bodies that makes them so attractive. While other manufacturers play catch-up, Olympus users have been enjoying many of these features for some time. It's no wonder year after year so much of my work is carried out with Olympus cameras. They make it easy to meet client demands. On a personal level, they are engaging and enjoyable to shoot. Icing on the cake.

I think playing catchup goes many ways. You could say Olympus has been playing catchup in auto focus vs the competitors at least in some areas too, I don't see it as competitors being trying to catch up to Olympus as a sole one way street statement.

As great as Fujifilm cameras are, other than the XT4, they've been rather lacking in AF.

The X-S10, X-E4 have virtually the same AF of the XT4.  The XT3 was upgraded to be ballpark as XT4.  And I had for a while the X-E3 and that was pretty good.

And one could argue that the XT4 is still behind even it's Olympus direct competitors, the EM1 II/III and even the EM5 III.

Nope, because independent testing confirms they are ahead of them. Check out mirrorless comparisons on BIF shooting.

And affordable? Dunno, I see affordable competitors too.

When it comes to lenses as well?

Yes. Fuji has cheaper options, there are also third party options doing lenses and you get what you pay for - fuji lenses overall are pretty good.

I do think the system doe shave some advantages, but the whole list is presented as key Olympus advantages with some half truths thrown in. Telecentricity in m43rds lenses- right.

So you throw out the entire premise based on one potential inaccuracy?

No, as I stated above - some half truths thrown in.  It's not just the telecentricity claim but that's the most onerous one.

It's not that there aren't its pros but the whole list as I said has half truths and clearly is written by someone who's doing an influencer article. And honestly- why? Why the justify again? And just Olympus?

A lot of the list no longer really applies.  And m43rds unique selling proposition- size and weight, has taken a back seat for a while. Only now we have the EM10 MKIV and EP7... and the EM5.3 arriving quite frankly late.   They should focus on making that more pro, level it up fast.  Keep that advantage, because it's what the system reason to be depends on.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 20,359
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
1

"As the iceberg of doom tears away below the DSLR waterline" ...

Excellent!

-- hide signature --

Pedantry is hard work, but someone has to do it ...

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Sigma SD9 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +14 more
SrMi
SrMi Senior Member • Posts: 2,390
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
3

Raist3d wrote:

shinndigg wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

MEDISN wrote:

It's not that any one feature is exclusive to Olympus, it's that cameras like EM1 line and EM5 line offer so many of these features in affordable weather resistant bodies that makes them so attractive. While other manufacturers play catch-up, Olympus users have been enjoying many of these features for some time. It's no wonder year after year so much of my work is carried out with Olympus cameras. They make it easy to meet client demands. On a personal level, they are engaging and enjoyable to shoot. Icing on the cake.

I think playing catchup goes many ways. You could say Olympus has been playing catchup in auto focus vs the competitors at least in some areas too, I don't see it as competitors being trying to catch up to Olympus as a sole one way street statement.

As great as Fujifilm cameras are, other than the XT4, they've been rather lacking in AF.

The X-S10, X-E4 have virtually the same AF of the XT4. The XT3 was upgraded to be ballpark as XT4. And I had for a while the X-E3 and that was pretty good.

And one could argue that the XT4 is still behind even it's Olympus direct competitors, the EM1 II/III and even the EM5 III.

Nope, because independent testing confirms they are ahead of them. Check out mirrorless comparisons on BIF shooting.

I have given up on using AF-C with my XT4, especially in combination with back button focusing. I use AF-C regularly with my M1.3.

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have

SrMi wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

shinndigg wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

MEDISN wrote:

It's not that any one feature is exclusive to Olympus, it's that cameras like EM1 line and EM5 line offer so many of these features in affordable weather resistant bodies that makes them so attractive. While other manufacturers play catch-up, Olympus users have been enjoying many of these features for some time. It's no wonder year after year so much of my work is carried out with Olympus cameras. They make it easy to meet client demands. On a personal level, they are engaging and enjoyable to shoot. Icing on the cake.

I think playing catchup goes many ways. You could say Olympus has been playing catchup in auto focus vs the competitors at least in some areas too, I don't see it as competitors being trying to catch up to Olympus as a sole one way street statement.

As great as Fujifilm cameras are, other than the XT4, they've been rather lacking in AF.

The X-S10, X-E4 have virtually the same AF of the XT4. The XT3 was upgraded to be ballpark as XT4. And I had for a while the X-E3 and that was pretty good.

And one could argue that the XT4 is still behind even it's Olympus direct competitors, the EM1 II/III and even the EM5 III.

Nope, because independent testing confirms they are ahead of them. Check out mirrorless comparisons on BIF shooting.

I have given up on using AF-C with my XT4, especially in combination with back button focusing. I use AF-C regularly with my M1.3.

It would seem me and several reviewers have very different experiences here. But that's ok.

And that doesn't get into the UI and options Fuji has like a selected matrix for continuous AF with feedback that Olympus doesn't have yet (they finally added dynamic squares on the EM1MKII but only full region).

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Guy Parsons
Guy Parsons Forum Pro • Posts: 37,061
Re: Telecentric .... or not.

Raist3d wrote:

Well not sure how exactly you verified.

The test is as specified.

First, the rear element needs to be the same or bigger diameter than the sensor diagonal. Most 4/3 lenses are not.

The the visual test of looking in the rear of the lens to see where the aperture appears to be. If it appears to be in the far distance then it can be considered image side telecentric. In the bunch of 4/3 lenses that I have then most showed none of that effect and a few had a very mild appearance of the aperture seeming to be further into the lens than it actually was.

So the conclusion for me was that none of the lenses was truly image side telecentric and that it was just some marketing baloney that everybody believed but were unaware of how to check and see if the claim was true or not.

What I remember is that it was part of the standard

It was a marketing blurb, but not incorporated in actual lens design it seems.

while not so in m43rds. But at a minimum some were I guess where in m43rds, hard to say who is it.

On that basis none would be "telecentric" in M4/3 because by now the sensor design having oversized and possibly offset microlenses made the desire for image side telecentricity obsolete.

But the magic of a term that nobody understands hangs on. It's exactly the same as believing in fairies, if it makes you feel good then no harm done.

I can say that I sure see different characteristics with the 4/3rd lenses that are better- micro contrast, no need to do some software corrections, not as easy to get purple fringing, etc.

Yes, the more modern designs of the newer image processing chips in the newer cameras allow for more complete corrections to be carried out. That, plus of course more modern lens design allowing a thing like the 12-100/4 to work like a charm through its whole range. Impossible say 10 or 15 years back.

 Guy Parsons's gear list:Guy Parsons's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II +10 more
SUPER-ELMAR
SUPER-ELMAR Contributing Member • Posts: 771
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
3

SrMi wrote:

I have given up on using AF-C with my XT4, especially in combination with back button focusing. I use AF-C regularly with my M1.3.

I shoot aquatic sports - a lot of swim. I found XT4 too slow to acquire subject at the peak of stroke. Only in focus frames were swimmer slipping beneath water - half second too late. Same on 10m dive - unable to acquire fast enough after initiation. Diver halfway through sequence before getting in-focus frames.

EM1X makes quick work of it. Plus 60fps makes for highly detailed illustrative technique feedback for coach to instruct swimmers. Pairs nicely with 40-150 PRO zoom.

 SUPER-ELMAR's gear list:SUPER-ELMAR's gear list
Ricoh GR III Leica M10 Olympus OM-D E-M1X Hasselblad X1D II 50C Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH +5 more
faunagraphy
faunagraphy Contributing Member • Posts: 661
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have

Raist3d wrote:

SrMi wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

shinndigg wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

MEDISN wrote:

It's not that any one feature is exclusive to Olympus, it's that cameras like EM1 line and EM5 line offer so many of these features in affordable weather resistant bodies that makes them so attractive. While other manufacturers play catch-up, Olympus users have been enjoying many of these features for some time. It's no wonder year after year so much of my work is carried out with Olympus cameras. They make it easy to meet client demands. On a personal level, they are engaging and enjoyable to shoot. Icing on the cake.

I think playing catchup goes many ways. You could say Olympus has been playing catchup in auto focus vs the competitors at least in some areas too, I don't see it as competitors being trying to catch up to Olympus as a sole one way street statement.

As great as Fujifilm cameras are, other than the XT4, they've been rather lacking in AF.

The X-S10, X-E4 have virtually the same AF of the XT4. The XT3 was upgraded to be ballpark as XT4. And I had for a while the X-E3 and that was pretty good.

And one could argue that the XT4 is still behind even it's Olympus direct competitors, the EM1 II/III and even the EM5 III.

Nope, because independent testing confirms they are ahead of them. Check out mirrorless comparisons on BIF shooting.

I have given up on using AF-C with my XT4, especially in combination with back button focusing. I use AF-C regularly with my M1.3.

It would seem me and several reviewers have very different experiences here. But that's ok.

And that doesn't get into the UI and options Fuji has like a selected matrix for continuous AF with feedback that Olympus doesn't have yet (they finally added dynamic squares on the EM1MKII but only full region).

As I recall the MirrorlessComparisons article, Fuji AF isn't all that great for BIFs, but with 30fps you end up with more keepers than with Olympus cameras at 18 fps.

Of course, there's a lot more to wildlife than BIFs, and I'm sure that in most other scenarios, Fuji cameras do very well.

-- hide signature --

Formerly known as 'anupamkatkar'.

 faunagraphy's gear list:faunagraphy's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PL6 Nikon D500 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +23 more
Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Re: Telecentric .... or not.

Guy Parsons wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Well not sure how exactly you verified.

The test is as specified.

First, the rear element needs to be the same or bigger diameter than the sensor diagonal. Most 4/3 lenses are not.

The the visual test of looking in the rear of the lens to see where the aperture appears to be. If it appears to be in the far distance then it can be considered image side telecentric. In the bunch of 4/3 lenses that I have then most showed none of that effect and a few had a very mild appearance of the aperture seeming to be further into the lens than it actually was.

So the conclusion for me was that none of the lenses was truly image side telecentric and that it was just some marketing baloney that everybody believed but were unaware of how to check and see if the claim was true or not.

What I remember is that it was part of the standard

It was a marketing blurb, but not incorporated in actual lens design it seems.

while not so in m43rds. But at a minimum some were I guess where in m43rds, hard to say who is it.

On that basis none would be "telecentric" in M4/3 because by now the sensor design having oversized and possibly offset microlenses made the desire for image side telecentricity obsolete.

But the magic of a term that nobody understands hangs on. It's exactly the same as believing in fairies, if it makes you feel good then no harm done.

Well, all I can say is that the 4/3rd lenses really had less optical software corrections and what nots than m43rds lenses, in general.

I can say that I sure see different characteristics with the 4/3rd lenses that are better- micro contrast, no need to do some software corrections, not as easy to get purple fringing, etc.

Yes, the more modern designs of the newer image processing chips in the newer cameras allow for more complete corrections to be carried out.

Except that software corrections aren't the same as having made the optical corrections. For example for Darrell distortion you lose data when you stretch the image around- something 4/3rd lenses in general didn't need to do.

That, plus of course more modern lens design allowing a thing like the 12-100/4 to work like a charm through its whole range. Impossible say 10 or 15 years back.

That's def. true as progress in lens design. But there were definitively 4/3rd lenses that worked great through the range- though the 12-100/4 is definitively special.  I agree it's a pretty good performer.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 45,140
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have

faunagraphy wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

SrMi wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

shinndigg wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

MEDISN wrote:

It's not that any one feature is exclusive to Olympus, it's that cameras like EM1 line and EM5 line offer so many of these features in affordable weather resistant bodies that makes them so attractive. While other manufacturers play catch-up, Olympus users have been enjoying many of these features for some time. It's no wonder year after year so much of my work is carried out with Olympus cameras. They make it easy to meet client demands. On a personal level, they are engaging and enjoyable to shoot. Icing on the cake.

I think playing catchup goes many ways. You could say Olympus has been playing catchup in auto focus vs the competitors at least in some areas too, I don't see it as competitors being trying to catch up to Olympus as a sole one way street statement.

As great as Fujifilm cameras are, other than the XT4, they've been rather lacking in AF.

The X-S10, X-E4 have virtually the same AF of the XT4. The XT3 was upgraded to be ballpark as XT4. And I had for a while the X-E3 and that was pretty good.

And one could argue that the XT4 is still behind even it's Olympus direct competitors, the EM1 II/III and even the EM5 III.

Nope, because independent testing confirms they are ahead of them. Check out mirrorless comparisons on BIF shooting.

I have given up on using AF-C with my XT4, especially in combination with back button focusing. I use AF-C regularly with my M1.3.

It would seem me and several reviewers have very different experiences here. But that's ok.

And that doesn't get into the UI and options Fuji has like a selected matrix for continuous AF with feedback that Olympus doesn't have yet (they finally added dynamic squares on the EM1MKII but only full region).

As I recall the MirrorlessComparisons article, Fuji AF isn't all that great for BIFs, but with 30fps you end up with more keepers than with Olympus cameras at 18 fps.

What I recall from the mirrorless comparisons article is that Fuji AF was clearly better than even the Em1X for BIF.

Of course, there's a lot more to wildlife than BIFs, and I'm sure that in most other scenarios, Fuji cameras do very well.

It's a good point to consider that there's definitively more scenarios than BIF and all cameras may do better or less better depending on it. That's a good point worth considering.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 69,811
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
1

SrMi wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

Lost all credibility with me on the diffraction howler.

Andrew

Yes, that one is a doozy. As you might know, diffraction is proportional to pixel size, not the sensor size.

Olympus M1.3: 3.36 microns

Sony a7rIV: 3.76 microns

Nikon Z 6: 5.92 microns

Are you joking, or is that what you really think?

-- hide signature --

Is it always wrong
for one to have the hots for
Comrade Kim Yo Jong?

SrMi
SrMi Senior Member • Posts: 2,390
Re: 16 Unique Features That Your Camera Probably Doesn't Have
2

bobn2 wrote:

SrMi wrote:

ahaslett wrote:

Lost all credibility with me on the diffraction howler.

Andrew

Yes, that one is a doozy. As you might know, diffraction is proportional to pixel size, not the sensor size.

Olympus M1.3: 3.36 microns

Sony a7rIV: 3.76 microns

Nikon Z 6: 5.92 microns

Are you joking, or is that what you really think?

Unfortunately, I was not joking, and unfortunately, I cannot withdraw that post.

FingerPainter corrected me in an earlier post in this thread.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads