Future [edit: OMS] Flagship [not the only possible one in the pack]

[Ainisru]

If there's one direction they're completely ignoring right now, it's the compact segment. No answer to the ZV-1, ZV-1 II, ZV-E10, ZV-E10 II, the X-M5, Z30, or Canon's G7X III.

How has Canon beaten both OM Systems and Panasonic with their upcoming PowerShot V1? It's essentially a M4/3 compact with a 3:2 aspect ratio sensor with a decent zoom range with a decent aperture, beats Panasonic's game at video offerings, likely going to have onpar autofocus like the latest OM flagship, has a built-in ND filter, and a 1/2000 leaf shutter.

This is quite the threat. The PowerShot V1 is a strong base if they ever wanted to pivot into an advanced enthusiast camera at anytime.

--
I like cameras, they're fun.

 

[Skeeterbytes]

Is there anything really wrong with 20mp? I know I take photo's and sell them and I have never had a 20mp image or less....be a distraction for my sales. If you set up the shot to being with and shoot it as your lens dictates, you shouldn't have to crop..... No one really needs higher than 20mp.

My 4/3 journey has progressed from 10 to 12, 16 and now 20 MP. Each advance has been welcomed in part because the lenses are good enough to warrant pushing image detail, and further gains in DR and ISO ceiling have been part of the package. Fast processing and big, fast SD cards also help unlock these extended capabilities.

My expectation is the next image size bump will continue this progress, while also presuming at some point there's a theoretical ceiling to the format but we're not yet there.

HHHR, THR, image stacking all produce marvelous results when leveraged properly, which has be thinking reaching the limit is a ways off.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[macrophoto_markus]

For megapixels, let me explain this first : the OM-1's sensor already has 80M photodiodes, but no one can utilize 'full potential' from them. From output data, it is just an 20MP sensor. One more thing is - no one is worried about the 50~200M photodiodes in current smartphones. If that is possible on a smartphone, it will be the same on a 4/3 format.

A new image sensor is a matter of cost, but it is also a proof of OMDS' will to survive. What's worse : OMDS should develop (or place new order) their sensor even harder than competitors because they are counting their survival on Computational Photography. (look at the shiny CP button on OM-3 that replaced AEL.) The performance of image sensor will be more fatal to OMDS because their emphasis on Computational Photography is mainly based on compositing images through multiple shooting 'in milli-seconds'. Their sensor should be better in every aspect, including SPEED.

Ironically, current Computational Photography in OMDS lineup is based on the SLOWEST Stacked-BSI in the ILC market. Compared to other big guys that read 40~50MP 14-bit RAW in 1/180~1/270s, current OMDS' 20MP RAW in 1/125s readout, even in 12-bit, is just too slow. (There is no excuse for the OM-1 being Quad-Pixel. The Canon R5Ⅱ also has DPAF, so its photodiode count is about 90M.)

The only reason I complain about the current sensor is because of OMDS' concept of Computational Photography. I believe that the 'one-of-the FASTEST FSI' sensor (2016~) from the E-M1Ⅱ (still used in OM-5) or the current (2022~) Stacked BSI in OM-1 was the best choice for OMDS.

If forthcoming OM-5Ⅱ uses current Stacked BSI, that would be welcomed as a proper 'trickle-down'. However, OM-1 Mark Ⅲ is a different story. If OM-1 Mark III comes out with legacy core components, it does not live up to their own concept. Then they have no reason to be respected neither in a businessman's perspective or an engineer's perspective. (We already know one example. It is called 'E-M1X'.)

The (Micro) FourThirds has been asked to use the newest sensor technology from the beginning, and while the system has almost always failed to, still there is no future without new sensor development.

_

In Short: If OMDS wanted to be lazy about their image sensor, they would be better give up the Computational Photography concept. But do they have any choice?

Is there anything really wrong with 20mp? I know I take photo's and sell them and I have never had a 20mp image or less....be a distraction for my sales. If you set up the shot to being with and shoot it as your lens dictates, you shouldn't have to crop..... No one really needs higher than 20mp.

For you.

Any wildlife shooter that has used a higher resolution sensor would disagree, not everyone shoots "easy" subjects where you can take your time to compose to the finest little detail. 20mp are quite limiting both for cropping and if you want to retain fine details in wider scenes, although MFT is also limited by slow diffraction limited lenses in many instances, so the higher resolution sensor wouldn't add more detail in some cases.

Given OM is so focused on wildlife and macro it's strange they still stick to 20mp sensors and don't offer faster lenses.

 

[StevoPhilo]

Is there anything really wrong with 20mp? I know I take photo's and sell them and I have never had a 20mp image or less....be a distraction for my sales. If you set up the shot to being with and shoot it as your lens dictates, you shouldn't have to crop..... No one really needs higher than 20mp.

There isn't anything wrong with 20mpx. At this point sensor tech is stagnant so the only thing these companies can offer is more MPX. The issue is diffraction comes much sooner on m43. So they can't go too high or we'll have bigger problems instead. I do think live ND partially solves that problem for us.

For you.

Any wildlife shooter that has used a higher resolution sensor would disagree, not everyone shoots "easy" subjects where you can take your time to compose to the finest little detail. 20mp are quite limiting both for cropping and if you want to retain fine details in wider scenes, although MFT is also limited by slow diffraction limited lenses in many instances, so the higher resolution sensor wouldn't add more detail in some cases.

Given OM is so focused on wildlife and macro it's strange they still stick to 20mp sensors and don't offer faster lenses.

What do you mean by faster lenses? I assume you mean auto focus?

 

[macrophoto_markus]

Is there anything really wrong with 20mp? I know I take photo's and sell them and I have never had a 20mp image or less....be a distraction for my sales. If you set up the shot to being with and shoot it as your lens dictates, you shouldn't have to crop..... No one really needs higher than 20mp.

There isn't anything wrong with 20mpx. At this point sensor tech is stagnant so the only thing these companies can offer is more MPX. The issue is diffraction comes much sooner on m43. So they can't go too high or we'll have bigger problems instead. I do think live ND partially solves that problem for us.

Hence why the slow lenses are an issue. 25-30mp would still be a lot better than the current 20mp sensors.

For you.

Any wildlife shooter that has used a higher resolution sensor would disagree, not everyone shoots "easy" subjects where you can take your time to compose to the finest little detail. 20mp are quite limiting both for cropping and if you want to retain fine details in wider scenes, although MFT is also limited by slow diffraction limited lenses in many instances, so the higher resolution sensor wouldn't add more detail in some cases.

Given OM is so focused on wildlife and macro it's strange they still stick to 20mp sensors and don't offer faster lenses.

What do you mean by faster lenses? I assume you mean auto focus?

No, aperture. All of their wildlife lenses effective apertures are rather slow and hence are diffraction limited quickly. I'm pretty sure the 90mm macro is diffraction limited above >1x magnification even on the current 20mp sensors at its sharpest aperture, too.

 

[StevoPhilo]

Hence why the slow lenses are an issue. 25-30mp would still be a lot better than the current 20mp sensors.

I agree. Panasonic did a fine job with their newer sensor. I'm sure OM will follow suit on their next generation of cameras.

What do you mean by faster lenses? I assume you mean auto focus?

No, aperture. All of their wildlife lenses effective apertures are rather slow and hence are diffraction limited quickly. The 90mm macro is diffraction limited above >1x magnification even on the current 20mp sensors.

I'm not an avid wildlife or macro shooter; I'm not sure how big of an issue this really is. However, I don't think creating faster lenses is a better option as the advantage of MFT would practically be non-existent. A 300mm f2.8 would be so much larger and way more expensive. From a business stand point, they wouldn't sell very many and as a result cost more than their FF counterparts.

 

[macrophoto_markus]

Hence why the slow lenses are an issue. 25-30mp would still be a lot better than the current 20mp sensors.

I agree. Panasonic did a fine job with their newer sensor. I'm sure OM will follow suit on their next generation of cameras.

What do you mean by faster lenses? I assume you mean auto focus?

No, aperture. All of their wildlife lenses effective apertures are rather slow and hence are diffraction limited quickly. The 90mm macro is diffraction limited above >1x magnification even on the current 20mp sensors.

I'm not an avid wildlife or macro shooter; I'm not sure how big of an issue this really is. However, I don't think creating faster lenses is a better option as the advantage of MFT would practically be non-existent. A 300mm f2.8 would be so much larger and way more expensive. From a business stand point, they wouldn't sell very many and as a result cost more than their FF counterparts.

I am not so sure about that, the Sony Full Frame 300 f2.8 is just 200g heavier than the Olympus 300 f4, I don't know about others but I really do not care for such tiny differences, that's about the weight of my iPhone. Faster lenses doesn't mean they can't offer slower lighter weight lenses, too, especially since they already exist, anyway.

I think the lenses being too slow to resolve higher resolutions kind of defeats the purpose of MFT as well, for macro the 2x crop is nice to get more pixels on the subject, their only high magnification option (OM 90mm + teleconverters) being so slow and diffraction limited kind of limits its useability quite a bit and the benefit of the higher pixel count is lost over FF. And we haven't even looked at the APS-C options yet, the Canon R7 at 32.7mp or the 40mp Fuji bodies with e.g. the Laowa 65mm 2x or the 25mm 2-5x f2.8 lenses will resolve much more detail while also having a higher pixel count, and being lighter (and smaller!) than the OM 90mm, despite having the same effective magnification due to the higher pixel counts of those bodies.

 

[Jaime100]

For megapixels, let me explain this first : the OM-1's sensor already has 80M photodiodes, but no one can utilize 'full potential' from them. From output data, it is just an 20MP sensor. One more thing is - no one is worried about the 50~200M photodiodes in current smartphones. If that is possible on a smartphone, it will be the same on a 4/3 format.

A new image sensor is a matter of cost, but it is also a proof of OMDS' will to survive. What's worse : OMDS should develop (or place new order) their sensor even harder than competitors because they are counting their survival on Computational Photography. (look at the shiny CP button on OM-3 that replaced AEL.) The performance of image sensor will be more fatal to OMDS because their emphasis on Computational Photography is mainly based on compositing images through multiple shooting 'in milli-seconds'. Their sensor should be better in every aspect, including SPEED.

Ironically, current Computational Photography in OMDS lineup is based on the SLOWEST Stacked-BSI in the ILC market. Compared to other big guys that read 40~50MP 14-bit RAW in 1/180~1/270s, current OMDS' 20MP RAW in 1/125s readout, even in 12-bit, is just too slow. (There is no excuse for the OM-1 being Quad-Pixel. The Canon R5Ⅱ also has DPAF, so its photodiode count is about 90M.)

The only reason I complain about the current sensor is because of OMDS' concept of Computational Photography. I believe that the 'one-of-the FASTEST FSI' sensor (2016~) from the E-M1Ⅱ (still used in OM-5) or the current (2022~) Stacked BSI in OM-1 was the best choice for OMDS.

If forthcoming OM-5Ⅱ uses current Stacked BSI, that would be welcomed as a proper 'trickle-down'. However, OM-1 Mark Ⅲ is a different story. If OM-1 Mark III comes out with legacy core components, it does not live up to their own concept. Then they have no reason to be respected neither in a businessman's perspective or an engineer's perspective. (We already know one example. It is called 'E-M1X'.)

The (Micro) FourThirds has been asked to use the newest sensor technology from the beginning, and while the system has almost always failed to, still there is no future without new sensor development.

_

In Short: If OMDS wanted to be lazy about their image sensor, they would be better give up the Computational Photography concept. But do they have any choice?

Is there anything really wrong with 20mp? I know I take photo's and sell them and I have never had a 20mp image or less....be a distraction for my sales. If you set up the shot to being with and shoot it as your lens dictates, you shouldn't have to crop..... No one really needs higher than 20mp.

For you.

Any wildlife shooter that has used a higher resolution sensor would disagree, not everyone shoots "easy" subjects where you can take your time to compose to the finest little detail. 20mp are quite limiting both for cropping and if you want to retain fine details in wider scenes, although MFT is also limited by slow diffraction limited lenses in many instances, so the higher resolution sensor wouldn't add more detail in some cases.

Given OM is so focused on wildlife and macro it's strange they still stick to 20mp sensors and don't offer faster lenses.

Perhaps.... I can remember doing wildlife photography with my old Canon Rebel with 18mp and being able to print nicely in color and at 18" x 12+".... Maybe people have just become a bit spoiled at expectations or maybe spoiled isn't the word but 'anal' might be. Not in a bad way, but obviously with more MP, the output demands are higher. But looking at my hummingbird in flight shots that have won a few awards, I don't think 18mp was that bad

I think that many people use / demand/ want more MP so they can simply crop and still have high resolution. With wildlife photography it used to be where the skill of the photographer to 'get close' , understand habitats, birding behavior etc....have the patience to wait it out as the birds came to them etc (all done with little cropping) , is somewhat lost on todays' high MP camera's and increased focal length. Photographers have become a bit lazy maybe, and have lost a bit of skill given the technology out there.... But again, that is natural given advancements. You can most likely say that using BW film in the 1930's with their cameras was difficult and the skill they used/had, was vastly greater than mine.


jim lehmann https://jimlehmann.squarespace.com

 

[ikolbyi]

OMS uses Sony MFT sensors and Sony does not have a replacement on the published roadmap. You would see the new sensor before a new camera featuring it.

Panasonic 25mp saw enhancements from the GH6 to GH7/G9.2. It is possible Panasonic will further tweet with very minor improvements this sensor. I would not expect a fresh release here neither.

 

[James Stirling]

OMS uses Sony MFT sensors and Sony does not have a replacement on the published roadmap. You would see the new sensor before a new camera featuring it.

Panasonic 25mp saw enhancements from the GH6 to GH7/G9.2. It is possible Panasonic will further tweet with very minor improvements this sensor. I would not expect a fresh release here neither.

Sony does have a few m43 sized sensors used for industrial and commercial purposes, not sure if they are applicable to stand alone cameras. Though it did not seem to come to fruition the Sharp 8K camera from 2019 used some variant of a four thirds sensor back in 2019 with 33mp. The development seemed quite far down the road and the sensor obviously existed as there is footage to show this

We take Sharp's upcoming 8K Micro Four Thirds camera for a spin - Newsshooter

Sharp caught everyone by surprise when they announced that they were developing an 8K Micro Four Thirds Camera. This is the world's first Prosumer 8K camera

www.newsshooter.com

 

[macrophoto_markus]

For you.

Any wildlife shooter that has used a higher resolution sensor would disagree, not everyone shoots "easy" subjects where you can take your time to compose to the finest little detail. 20mp are quite limiting both for cropping and if you want to retain fine details in wider scenes, although MFT is also limited by slow diffraction limited lenses in many instances, so the higher resolution sensor wouldn't add more detail in some cases.

Given OM is so focused on wildlife and macro it's strange they still stick to 20mp sensors and don't offer faster lenses.

Perhaps.... I can remember doing wildlife photography with my old Canon Rebel with 18mp and being able to print nicely in color and at 18" x 12+".... Maybe people have just become a bit spoiled at expectations or maybe spoiled isn't the word but 'anal' might be. Not in a bad way, but obviously with more MP, the output demands are higher. But looking at my hummingbird in flight shots that have won a few awards, I don't think 18mp was that bad

With technology advancing expectations change, I am sure the macro wildlife images I take now would have been exceptional 20 years ago (because these deep focus stacks just weren't possible), but they are just mediocre now, OM can't expect people being satifsfied with decade old image quality (EM1 II from about 10 years ago basically produces the same looking images as the OM1 II) for top dollars forever, why spend 7500$ on the big white if you can't put it on a high resolution sensor?

I think that many people use / demand/ want more MP so they can simply crop and still have high resolution. With wildlife photography it used to be where the skill of the photographer to 'get close' , understand habitats, birding behavior etc....have the patience to wait it out as the birds came to them etc (all done with little cropping) , is somewhat lost on todays' high MP camera's and increased focal length. Photographers have become a bit lazy maybe, and have lost a bit of skill given the technology out there.... But again, that is natural given advancements. You can most likely say that using BW film in the 1930's with their cameras was difficult and the skill they used/had, was vastly greater than mine.

I think this has always been a somewhat flawed argument, anything that enables me to stay further away from wildlife is a bonus, it's less intrusive and prevents people from getting too close, wildlife photographers have caused quite a bit of damage to wildlife in the past, even to the point that they were mentioned in some of our ecology lectures. Also getting closer to a certain behavior or species is simply not possible oftentimes, at least not if you want to follow the law, being able to crop more and stay further away from animals is always a positive, never a negative.

 

[lunic]

[ATTACH alt="E-M1 mark ii uses "IMX270" which is never been listed on Sony Semiconductor's website."]3726685[/ATTACH]
E-M1 mark ii uses "IMX270" which is never been listed on Sony Semiconductor's website.

Nope. Not every Sony Semiconductor's image sensors for digital cameras are listed on their website.

We may think current Stacked BSI in OM-1 is "exactly" the IMX472 on Sony Semicon. website, but it is more likely a 'twicked' version of it.