Tedolph can save Olympus!

All things must pass.

red pencil wrote:

Alexis D wrote:

It should help to analyse why Fuji can continue releasing the XE1, 2, 3, and 4, and apparently doing well, compared to M43 equivalents, e.g. GX8, GX9... PEN F, PEN F 11, E-P7...

Bigger sensor makes people feel more comfortable with their purchase

Bigger sensor essentially the same size bodies.  The X-E4, and also the X-S10, is also very small, about the same as the GX9 and PEN F.   People feel more comfortable with purchasing brands that show more commitment and that have a clearer future.   What M43 has is a lot of diehard fans.

Alexis D wrote:

red pencil wrote:

Alexis D wrote:

It should help to analyse why Fuji can continue releasing the XE1, 2, 3, and 4, and apparently doing well, compared to M43 equivalents, e.g. GX8, GX9... PEN F, PEN F 11, E-P7...

Bigger sensor makes people feel more comfortable with their purchase

Bigger sensor essentially the same size bodies. The X-E4, and also the X-S10, is also very small, about the same as the GX9 and PEN F. People feel more comfortable with purchasing brands that show more commitment and that have a clearer future. What M43 has is a lot of diehard fans.

The x-e4 is a very tempting camera, but not weather resistant (so weather resistant lenses don't matter) and no ibis. Ep7 basically the same size but has ibis. :/

Every brand has diehard fans, but if you spend too much time in forums you'll think everyone who owns a particular brand is a die-hard fan.

pdelux wrote:

tedolf wrote:

victorav wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Now that the dust has settled with the Olympus spin off Tedolph freely gives his plan to Olympus. The plebeians here correctly asses that m4/3 is just not competitive with other larger formats unless it takes advantage of its reduced size potential. Right now this plays out in wildlife photography mostly. Others have noted that Fuji has carved out a niche even without any real advantage in the APS world probably due to the control layout. Leica (and now Nikon) play the retro card and that seems to succeed.

So, here is the plan: Olympus uses the old E-p5 body, takes out the flash and drops in the optical rangefinder from the Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders and makes three lenses with rangefinder cams on the back, the 17mm f/2.8, the 20mm f1.7 and a 42.5mm f1.7. In every other regard it is just the old e-p5 with the EVF accessory port.

Checks all the boxes: Retro, Rangefinder, Compact but still can use all the m4/3 lenses.

Done.

Tedolph

Maybe just stick an evf on the ep5.

They did. It was called the Pen F.

Then they stopped selling it.

Tedolph

And they missed the opportunity on the EP7 --- instead put a built in flash.

The E-P7 name is a misnomer, it is really an E-PL11 and is some sort of b@stard child of Pen Lite and Pen-F but born down to a price.

victorav wrote:

I've seen it marked as discontinued though? Left over stock in circulation I guess?

And that tells you everything you need to know. The just didn't sell in large enough numbers then, why would they now? They'd probably sell 6 or 7 to the exceedingly vocal Olympus fans in here, and not many more.

victorav wrote:

Alexis D wrote:

red pencil wrote:

Alexis D wrote:

It should help to analyse why Fuji can continue releasing the XE1, 2, 3, and 4, and apparently doing well, compared to M43 equivalents, e.g. GX8, GX9... PEN F, PEN F 11, E-P7...

Bigger sensor makes people feel more comfortable with their purchase

Bigger sensor essentially the same size bodies. The X-E4, and also the X-S10, is also very small, about the same as the GX9 and PEN F. People feel more comfortable with purchasing brands that show more commitment and that have a clearer future. What M43 has is a lot of diehard fans.

The x-e4 is a very tempting camera, but not weather resistant (so weather resistant lenses don't matter) and no ibis. Ep7 basically the same size but has ibis. :/

But the X-E4 has vastly better AF and better image quality. It share the same image quality of the top of the line and same AF of the top of the line. I can't say that about the E-P7 as much as I like it.

While IBIS is nice to have. Better fast accurate AF is better.

Every brand has diehard fans, but if you spend too much time in forums you'll think everyone who owns a particular brand is a die-hard fan.

No, not everyone.

Guy Parsons wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

It was the second time Olympus has done a faux Pen-F. The first time was the E-3, which had a side flipping mirror and porro-prisms like the original Pen F. It was about twice the size, though.

No, that was the E-300, mine still works but gosh it is huge after using my E-P5 for so long. 8MP of CCD Kodak sensor. Nice results.

Beg pardon, yes, it was the E-300.

The original F had a rotary FP shutter, which didn't cause shake.

Had a Pen FT back years ago, really jewel like camera that none of the digitals has ever managed to successfully copy in style and feel.

The strange thing of course was that it was half frame across the film. So to take landscape shots you held it portrait mode, and to take portrait shots you held it landscape style.

Traded my Pen FT and lenses in on some 6x6 medium format gear and was much happier with the results.

bobn2 wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

It was the second time Olympus has done a faux Pen-F. The first time was the E-3, which had a side flipping mirror and porro-prisms like the original Pen F. It was about twice the size, though.

No, that was the E-300, mine still works but gosh it is huge after using my E-P5 for so long. 8MP of CCD Kodak sensor. Nice results.

Beg pardon, yes, it was the E-300.

It was an curious attempt in the era of big/bulky electronics trying to fit in a certain size.

One interesting fact (for some) is that the E-300 TTL flash relied on a test flash just after the mirror got out of the way and before the shutter ran. The TTL test flash was metered off the closed shutter which was grey coloured. Then the shutter opened and the exposure flash happened when it was fully open (for first curtain sync).

The side effect of that was that the TTL and exposure flashes were only about 6 millisec apart and thus were too close together to allow S2 slave flashes to work as they need at least about 50 millisec between flashes to be able to count them reliably.

Been there done that with my E-300, S1 slave flashes failed because it triggers on the TTL pulse, S2 flashes fail because the two pulses are too close together so the S2 slave never fires.

When M4/3 came along they changed the period between TTL test pulse being measured and the first curtain flash pulse to something like 120 millisec so now S2 slaves work reliably.

Note: Memory might be hazy on the flash timing numbers as it was a long time ago, I used to record the flash pulses using a solar cell plugged into the audio input, then look at the timing of the resulting recorded signal to see the flash pulse spacing.

Raist3d wrote:

victorav wrote:

Alexis D wrote:

red pencil wrote:

Alexis D wrote:

It should help to analyse why Fuji can continue releasing the XE1, 2, 3, and 4, and apparently doing well, compared to M43 equivalents, e.g. GX8, GX9... PEN F, PEN F 11, E-P7...

Bigger sensor makes people feel more comfortable with their purchase

Bigger sensor essentially the same size bodies. The X-E4, and also the X-S10, is also very small, about the same as the GX9 and PEN F. People feel more comfortable with purchasing brands that show more commitment and that have a clearer future. What M43 has is a lot of diehard fans.

The x-e4 is a very tempting camera, but not weather resistant (so weather resistant lenses don't matter) and no ibis. Ep7 basically the same size but has ibis. :/

But the X-E4 has vastly better AF and better image quality. It share the same image quality

As current fujin apsc, not gfx.

of the top of the line and same AF of the top of the line. I can't say that about the E-P7 as much as I like it.

You should read the first line: "very tempting" for the reasons you described.

Ep7 issues the 20mp sensor, so current best sensor available in MFT cameras, not so much on the af side.

While IBIS is nice to have. Better fast accurate AF is better.

Depends on what you shoot. Em10 mkiii af is mediocre at best, but I have yet to be in a situation where s-af fails me.

Every brand has diehard fans, but if you spend too much time in forums you'll think everyone who owns a particular brand is a die-hard fan.

No, not everyone.

That's my point...

-- 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

tedolf wrote:

Now that the dust has settled with the Olympus spin off Tedolph freely gives his plan to Olympus. The plebeians here correctly asses that m4/3 is just not competitive with other larger formats unless it takes advantage of its reduced size potential. Right now this plays out in wildlife photography mostly. Others have noted that Fuji has carved out a niche even without any real advantage in the APS world probably due to the control layout. Leica (and now Nikon) play the retro card and that seems to succeed.

So, here is the plan: Olympus uses the old E-p5 body, takes out the flash and drops in the optical rangefinder from the Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders and makes three lenses with rangefinder cams on the back, the 17mm f/2.8, the 20mm f1.7 and a 42.5mm f1.7. In every other regard it is just the old e-p5 with the EVF accessory port.

Checks all the boxes: Retro, Rangefinder, Compact but still can use all the m4/3 lenses.

Done.

Tedolph

Hi!

I can't see anything but bright future for this roadmap!:-D

A s l a

tedolf wrote:

red pencil wrote:

Alexis D wrote:

It should help to analyse why Fuji can continue releasing the XE1, 2, 3, and 4, and apparently doing well, compared to M43 equivalents, e.g. GX8, GX9... PEN F, PEN F 11, E-P7...

Bigger sensor makes people feel more comfortable with their purchase

Once you crop the image to fit most common print sizes, e.g. 5x7", 8x10", 8.5x11", 11x14", 16x20" an APS sensor is putting about the same number of pixels on print as a 4/3rds sensor. So effectively, the APS sensor is no bigger than the 4/3 sensor especially if it is Canon.

Not really

The highest resolution commercial mFT sensor is 20MP and 3888 pixels high. Most APS-C sensors are 24MP and 4000 pixels high, but there are also 26MP ones (Fujifilm) which are 4160 pixels high. The Canon 90d is 32.5MP and 4640 pixels high.

Any of those will put more pixels on the print than an mFT camera, especially if they are Canon (90D, at least).

In terms of sensor area, it is whatever is the long side and 13mm high for mFT, 14.8mm for Canon and 15.6mm for the rest. All will give a larger used sensor area than mFT.