What new insights in the Olympus interview?

[Jay Turberville]

"They are two separate systems with two different basic user
benefits; Micro Four Thirds is all about compact wide lenses whereas
standard Four Thirds is about compact telephoto lenses."

Is it just me or does this worry anyone else? Obviously the 2X crop
from the 4/3 makes telephoto lenses more attainable for mere mortals
on tight budgets like me but I'd hate to think there isn't going to
be any wide angle development going on for the E system.

A little. The didn't say 4/3 was poor for wide angle, they said it wasn't the best for "compact" wide angle. Here the m43 is better. But here's the problem. m43 is more compact for telephoto also. And without the flipping mirror, it may be superior for certain kinds of telephoto work as well.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Jay Turberville]

Many good digicams hace video and nobody uses it, and this has been
going on for years.

How many have good video?
How many have good low ISO video?
How many have good or excellent lenses with wonderful DoF options for video?

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Jay Turberville]

2) 4/3 is maintained as the flagship system. MFT is designed to
compete with high end compacts and does not step on the E system feet.

If they hold to this, I think it will prove to be a huge tactical error.

3) Olympus is independent from Panasonic in its R&D efforts. IMO it
is a good thing.

I disagree. I means more odd semi-compatibilities and increased user confusion. When is 4/3s not 4/3s? How compatible is compatible? Big mistake.

4) Olympus take a rather liberal approach to timetables and roadmaps.
To me this implies they concentrate on image quality and not on
features.

This tells me that they don't understand how their limited and highly price divided lens selection is hurting them big time.

5) A healthy approach to video on SLR. Another indication that
improving image quality is the main goal in R&D.

No. They had an opportunity to take the lead in this area and instead let Nikon, Canon and now Panasonic charge forward. Big oopsy!

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Rriley]

only lenses and a subset got asked. But thanks DPREVIEW for trying
anyway.

yes thats true

To me the biggest insight here is that Olympus is free to shop around
for sensors, so I think we are going to see a Kodak return here. I
would love for a Fuji EXR sensor in this space, but I don't see it
happening.

that was always the case, and still is
we still want/need those additional 2 stops iso performance
only another sensor can deliver that

and we need to rework the image engine DR away from those clipped highlights

I think Kodak will be back at some point. Maybe even as soon as the
tweener.

well shrug i dont care who it is, but we need to get on it, as it takes 18 months from sensor inception to saleable product

I also think reducing the weather sealing on the E-30 is a mistake.
If Olympus wants to keep the E-3 high end, they need to refresh it,
and make the E-30 more competitive.

thats a problem when all your sensors are pretty much the same isnt it

--
Riley

no one notices the contrast of white on white

 

[Rriley]

2) 4/3 is maintained as the flagship system. MFT is designed to
compete with high end compacts and does not step on the E system feet.

If they hold to this, I think it will prove to be a huge tactical error.

or if what is written proves to be the reality
i have some doubts that this is the case

3) Olympus is independent from Panasonic in its R&D efforts. IMO it
is a good thing.

I disagree. I means more odd semi-compatibilities and increased user
confusion. When is 4/3s not 4/3s? How compatible is compatible?
Big mistake.

yes they could shortcut some R&D by sharing what each other know
and keep the format on track without rework and incompatibility

4) Olympus take a rather liberal approach to timetables and roadmaps.
To me this implies they concentrate on image quality and not on
features.

This tells me that they don't understand how their limited and highly
price divided lens selection is hurting them big time.

i thought that was weird too, if they target FT for long lenses, then where are they? Add to that, usually the wide disposition sells more than long

To me the most satisfactory thing they can do is increase FT sensor size to the max they can use within the specification. Thats means a 20x15mm FT sensor. They need to realise that all FT is going to do is compete with APSC from here, b/se if you need small, there are going to be better alternatives.

5) A healthy approach to video on SLR. Another indication that
improving image quality is the main goal in R&D.

No. They had an opportunity to take the lead in this area and
instead let Nikon, Canon and now Panasonic charge forward. Big oopsy!

yes, and letting one thing slide doesnt mean they are engaging the other. There is plenty to do IQ wise that needs to be done, ie recentering the DR to reduce highlight clipping. Not a problem for experienced users, but an issue for new users and the less able, this will be so for mFT too.

--
Riley

no one notices the contrast of white on white

 

[Franka T.L.]

Well, I had yet to find a decent fix focal wide angle in the lineup, nor is there a true nominal tele ( not short tele , should be more like the Sigma 70 macro up to 100mm and so far only the Sigma 105 macro is there )

As all System type DSLR goes. the ability to customize for individual need is the key. And many ( me included ) buy into the 4/3 for its supposed package size/weight / bulk advantage. Sure those nice mid range and PRO grade lens deliver the quality, but once they are mounted the whole package is no longer light and compact. Beside I prefer to work with fix focals. And fix focals is far and wide much easier to do than Zoom, but yet to this day, we had what ...

As for the m4/3, its clear Oly rush that prototype at the 59th minute of the 11th hour. All the wording indicate pretty much it won't be available any soon. For all what's been told. Since neither the 4/3 and M4/3 are likely to gain proper lens lineup and that would mean the only thing left for it all is for me to gather a couple of fix focals ( the 50 Macro, and perhaps the Sigma 150 Macro ) and likely needing to use MF lens adapted. That is not going to be a problem for me since I prefer MF anyway.

So if OLY want business, I can only ask - where's the lens and I don't mean the kit or any zoom ...

--

• Franka -

 

[Rriley]

As for the m4/3, its clear Oly rush that prototype at the 59th minute
of the 11th hour. All the wording indicate pretty much it won't be
available any soon.

i dont think this is true at all, the talk is they are 2 yrs in on it. I think they have the sensor and lenses selected, but they are still configuring the body. The mockup was to see if people would go for a body without an EVF, unfortunately most people seem to think thats ok, thats not for me however

--
Riley

no one notices the contrast of white on white

 

[Art_P]

is the 90-250 +EC-20
but that will have to wait till I win the lottery
--
Art P



Select images may be seen here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8131242@N04/

 

[beuler]

ighMany good digicams hace video and nobody uses it, and this has been
going on for years.

How many have good video?
How many have good low ISO video?
How many have good or excellent lenses with wonderful DoF options for
video?

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

I take your point, but video is not just about IQ, it is a whole different process that requires different ergonomics. To me a hybrid stills/video cam is a bit like a motorized bicycle, too heavy for bicycle and too slow to be a motorbike. They have been around for years, the tech is simple and cheap and no one buys them.

Also, those who care enough about video to value IQ, low/high ISO, DoF and excelent lenses are the ones who buy dedicated video cameras.

 

[HarjTT]

Hi Riley

"To me the most satisfactory thing they can do is increase FT sensor size to the max they can use within the specification. Thats means a 20x15mm FT sensor. They need to realise that all FT is going to do is compete with APSC from here, b/se if you need small, there are going to be better alternatives."

Personally i think they should have got Pana to produce a 20x15mm FT sensor for the E3 but whose to say the one in g1 is not at that size already ?

Cheers

Harj

: o )>

 

[Jay Turberville]

I take your point, but video is not just about IQ, it is a whole
different process that requires different ergonomics. To me a hybrid
stills/video cam is a bit like a motorized bicycle, too heavy for
bicycle and too slow to be a motorbike. They have been around for
years, the tech is simple and cheap and no one buys them.

Also, those who care enough about video to value IQ, low/high ISO,
DoF and excelent lenses are the ones who buy dedicated video cameras.

Actually, we contract out to shooters who own many tens of thousands of dollars of dedicated video equipment. And it is true that these folks won't be getting rid of their video cameras. But I can almost guarantee you that many of them will be adding a video capable DSLR to their setup. I can also guarantee you that the $60K HD camera with $20-30K Canon lens that one of our shooters uses is fairly weak in low light and has pretty nasty chromatic aberration that would embarass many compact digital owners. For these folks, spending a few thousand dollars to get large format cinema HD capabilities that you can use in many situations will be very attractive.

A good video system requires that two things be added to a DSLR with video capabilities.

1) Video optimized lens options

2) A video grip that adds controls, extends I/O options and increases power and storage. A huge amount of video shooting is done on very large tripods and other mounts with wired remote controls - some of which cost more than most DSLRs Ergonimics is often a matter of spending the money on the right remote control

Video enabled DSLRs put the DSLR within two steps of offering a complete digital imaging system. One of the real issues with DSLRs and pro video that you don't mention but that matters a lot is that of work flows and media support/compatibility.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Rriley]

Hi Riley

hi Harj

"To me the most satisfactory thing they can do is increase FT sensor
size to the max they can use within the specification. Thats means a
20x15mm FT sensor. They need to realise that all FT is going to do is
compete with APSC from here, b/se if you need small, there are going
to be better alternatives."

Personally i think they should have got Pana to produce a 20x15mm FT
sensor for the E3 but whose to say the one in g1 is not at that size
already ?

well you made me look, and I did find this
http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/whitepaper.html
quote

4.System Outline

The Four Thirds System refers to an interchangeable-lens type photography system based on an imaging sensor with a diagonal length of 21.63 mm, which is half the diagonal length of the 135 film format (36 mm x 24 mm).
unquote

as you would be aware from sophisticated EXIF of E3 files,
http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/
the imager is the same diagonal dimension.

--
Riley

no one notices the contrast of white on white

 

[sushiboy]

I must say to me it was most reassuring. A few points to make:

1) Olympus are fully commited to the 4/3 standard, perhaps more than ever. That includes bodies and lenses.

2) 4/3 is maintained as the flagship system. MFT is designed to compete with high end compacts and does not step on the E system feet.

3) Olympus is independent from Panasonic in its R&D efforts. IMO it is a good thing.

4) Olympus take a rather liberal approach to timetables and roadmaps. To me this implies they concentrate on image quality and not on features.

5) A healthy approach to video on SLR. Another indication that improving image quality is the main goal in R&D.

--
Best regards,
Jack Lee,
Denmark, EU

 

[Ehrik]

i thought that was weird too, if they target FT for long lenses, then
where are they? Add to that, usually the wide disposition sells more
than long

Is there something missing here?

To me the most satisfactory thing they can do is increase FT sensor
size to the max they can use within the specification. Thats means a
20x15mm FT sensor. They need to realise that all FT is going to do is
compete with APSC from here, b/se if you need small, there are going
to be better alternatives.

That would be like saying that the sensor is too small, losing face
and sort of giving a nod to the competitors' choices. And it would use
a part of the image circle that's of less quality. And it would confuse
the crop factor which wouldn't be the nice round 2.00x anymore.
All for a quite insignificant increase in imaging area.

I just can't see the benefit worth all the drawbacks.

There is plenty to do IQ wise that needs to be done, ie
recentering the DR to reduce highlight clipping. Not a problem for
experienced users, but an issue for new users and the less able, this
will be so for mFT too.

I didn't expect you of all people to miss the opportunity to write:

"... but an issue for new users, DPR and the less able,"



Just my two oere
Erik from Sweden

Pixel density is not and never has been the issue for noise. -ejmartin

 

[T_Rav]

I believe you'll notice that the photos of the E-?? do not have the little door-locks (for the memory slots and the battery) like the E-1/3 and Pentax K-10/20 have. I believe this means that any weather sealing in the E-?? will most definitely be somewhat compromised compared to the E-1/3 - and the Pentax.

Taking a close look at the following photo:



Indicates that the memory slot is sort of a two-action design:

1. Apply pressure to the middle of the memory slot door while...
2. ...sliding the door backwards

This minor change in the memory slot door may be all one might expect of weather sealing.

===

In addition to this, other photo enthusiast sites on the Internet indicate that the body is a metal subframe with a polycarbonate shell (like the E-4xx and 5xx). Several videos are out there showing people actually handling it. From those videos it appears that the E-?? is a little larger than the 520.

It could be that they've also slightly improved the articulating viewfinder sealing problem reported by some E-3 owners.

===

One small observation (for those who have enjoyed studying the photo): You probably have noticed that all of the buttons on the model shown at Photokina are quite clearly marked. The body looks basically 'ready for press'. It appears that many of the icons, buttons and other details are basically from the standard Olympus parts bin.... except for one detail that is strangely devoid of ALL detail and has clearly been modified from the standard Olympus parts bin...

... the dial on the left shoulder.

It is completely unmarked. If the dial is a 'standard' dial (like what's on the 4xx or 5xx series) then it has been intentionally made blank.

I am assuming this dial to be the mode dial - but the question is why would Olympus feel the need to obscure the standard mode dial if maybe there wasn't maybe something interesting to hide?

I would say that this new 'tweener' is a slightly grown-up 520 with one or two tricks up its sleeve that we are not aware of.

 

[PaulSnowcat]

Because my Mp3 Player and my BIG headphones can reproduce musisc like no phone can, because my digital SLR can take pictures like no cell phone can, because my cell phone is tiny and thin and still it can work without a recharge for more then a week, because it does not wastes it's battery on doing things a cell phone is NOT supposed to do, it's only a phone with no camera, no internet, no MMS.

A dedicated thing is ALWAYS a better performer, then a universal one, so I want my camera to be able to take pictures, and take them good, and NOTHING more.
--

Your soul and heart are the true optics that make a picture, not lenses and camera.
My photo page http://public.fotki.com/snowcat8/

 

[OM 6Ti Plus]

Taking a close look at the following photo:



===

One small observation (for those who have enjoyed studying the
photo): You probably have noticed that all of the buttons on the
model shown at Photokina are quite clearly marked. The body looks
basically 'ready for press'. It appears that many of the icons,
buttons and other details are basically from the standard Olympus
parts bin....

is that common to the E3 or E520?

I would say that this new 'tweener' is a slightly grown-up 520 with
one or two tricks up its sleeve that we are not aware of.

 

[PaulSnowcat]

5) A healthy approach to video on SLR. Another indication that
improving image quality is the main goal in R&D.

thread don't want this feature. When Olympus introduced the first
camera with dust removal, the others were laughing at "us", and now
they have virtually all incorporated similar systems. It seems to me
we're in the inverse situation now. I had actually hoped Olympus
would be the first to introduce HD-videos in their DSLRs, it would
have shown its capabilities in staying innovative.

Well... I really really don't want video in my DSLR. I am not against it, I just see no use for it. Before my first dslr, I used a Pana FZ-30. It had a good video function, with good (for it's time) performance, working zoom and AF durign video, and so on. I shot a video only ONCE to test the feature. And yes, it was good, pleasant, and so on, but after i tested it I never used it even a single time. So i really don't care of wether i have a movie mode in DSLR. More of that, if a company does not spend it's money to develop that feature, it means that it's money are spent on taking pictures, which IS useful for me.

So i DON'T want to see movie mode in Olympus, and i DON't want it to join mindless megapixel race, wcih is now beginning for DSRLs. Progress and competition are not always a good thing, they can be a curse...
--

Your soul and heart are the true optics that make a picture, not lenses and camera.
My photo page http://public.fotki.com/snowcat8/

 

[amalric]

I am no engineer but sometimes I wonder if some features like Liveview and CD AF were not actually pushed on us in preparation for Panny's video HD. The EVF certainly is.

Now if i were really paranoid I would even ask myself if certain limitations of panny sensors such as DR or noise at high ISO are not the result of a video oriented design of the Panny sensor.

Can somebody help?

Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

 

[JonathanF]

Now if i were really paranoid I would even ask myself if certain
limitations of panny sensors such as DR or noise at high ISO are not
the result of a video oriented design of the Panny sensor.

That seems stretching it a bit far, don't you think? Canon have pretty good video mode too.

To all those opposed to video for various reasons, many of which are more rational than the above, I can only say be careful what you wish for. The trend is set, not having video in your brand would in time lead to its decline, and your demise.
--
JonathanF
Oly E-510, 11-22, 14-54, 18-180, TCON-17, FL-36
Canon S1IS, Casio QV-3000