OLympus / Leica announce micro-four thirds

[NikosR]

This sounds exciting and promising. It should allow for smallish digicams with the 4/3 sensor and interchangeable lenses. Let's see what the APS-C guys have in store...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08080501...ofourthirds.asp

In a related thread Askey is implying that some product announcement is not far away and that he has 'seen' a real product. Contrast AF (obviously) but much faster than usual... I can't wait to find out.


EDIT: Sorry the title should read Olympus / Panasonic..

[Czornyj]

I'd love to have one in an usual rangefinder body, with some nice, wide Biogons, and ultrafast f/1 (or even faster ) primes! My Mamiya 7 is considerably small and light, but still doesn't fit in my pocket...

[PSA DC-9-30]

Brilliant. I want a high-quality compact in the worst way, but I'm less than excited about the current offerings from Canon, Ricoh, and Sigma. Hopefully the body will be weather sealed (perhaps even a submersible version with rubber armour??), and if a tiny 35-70mm equivalent with decent macro capability were available, I'd be thrilled.

[Ray]

That is good news. The problem with the current 4/3rds sytem as I see it, is that any weight and cost advantage comes at the price of slightly lower performance. The exceptional Zuiko lenses on a top-of-the-range E-3 body, that are the equal of any Canon APS camera, are approximately the same weight and cost.

[Dale_Cotton]

Mike Johnston is going to be kicking himself around the block for having taken his first vacation just when something this similar to his Decisive Moment Digital is announced. :)

Personally, I'd love to be excited by this but my concerns so far drag down the upside for me:

1. Phil Askey's comments and the mention of LiveView both point to an EVF instead of an optical range finder. The inherent parallax problem and longer focal length limitations of the range finder design probably rule it out. But do you really want to live with EVF? From what I've read both speed and resolution would have to be much improved just to become tolerable ... and it still wouldn't be your grandpa's M3.

2. Some combination of the smaller pixel pitch inherent in 4/3 and the historically noisy Panasonic Live MOS sensor technology have always eaten into DR/ISO.

3. Olympus and Panasonic would have to make large strides in the AF department to meet expectations based on Canon and Nikon dSLRs.  

4. Micro 4/3 implementations will be measured against the current state of dSLRs in IQ and usability by pros and prosumers, and against the current state of compacts in pocketability and ease of use by general consumers.

Of course we'll just have to wait to see what the first implementations actually look like, but if any of you are more optimistic I'd love to hear your counter arguments.

[NikosR]

Mike Johnston is going to be kicking himself around the block for having taken his

3. Olympus and Panasonic would have to make large strides in the AF department to meet expectations based on Canon and Nikon dSLRs. 

4. Micro 4/3 implementations will be measured against the current state of dSLRs in IQ and usability by pros and prosumers, and against the current state of compacts in pocketability and ease of use by general consumers.

I agree to all your other points apart from these two. AF will most certainly be not comparable to dSLR phase detection systems but as long as they are faster than the current state-of-the-art in digicams that will be fine with me. Remember, it is total camera response not only AF that give the digicams their bad reputation.

With regards to your last point, it depends again where you're coming from and on your expectation. For me, IQ on par with current Olympus dSLR offerings will be more than fine on a digicam. In terms of pocketability as long as it is the size of the Sigma DP-1 will be again OK with me.

I believe the make or break will be what target market for these cameras and, hopefully, camera systems will be addressed to. This will have a bearing on their features , UI and system choices: The serious photog who would like to have a serious compact to complement his dSLR(s) or the rank amateur who wants something better but  finds the dSLRS too intimitading and large?

[Quentin]

I hope we see a state of the art, no compromise rangefinder emerge from this announcement.  Goodness knows there have been enough false starts but still no true highish-end pocketable rangefinder has been made with image quality comparable with a decent dslr, save the oddball Sigma SD1 (very good but to quirky, no interchangeable lens) and the Leica ( poor value for money if its not your main camera).

Bring it on and I'll bite.

Quentin

[NikosR]

Some preliminary pics from, I suppose, some kind of presentation in Japan. A new lens mockup is shown next to a 'normal' 4/3 lens and some images of the mount and the adaptor.

Anybody with a knowledge of the language who can enlighten us further?

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/dslr/2008/08/05/8979.html


The only thing I don't expect these cameras to be is RF. EVF yes, LCD only yes, attachment EVF or OVF yes. But no RF unfortunately.

[NikoJorj]

In a related thread Askey is implying that some product announcement is not far away and that he has 'seen' a real product.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The french magazine Chasseur d'Images confims [a href=\"http://www.chassimages.com/accueil/Sommaire.xml?info=1261]on their website[/url] : a product announcement is due, not in the days to come (this concerns advanced compacts, and it is unclear whether there will be a 4/3 sensor in it or just a compact one), but quite soon, they say.
They are usually well informed of 'official' leaks.

And to answer Dale, as long as these cameras are pocketable enough and not too expensive (not too far from the G9/GX100 on both points), they will be compared to these advanced compacts, not to DSLRs.
For me, EVF is too big a hassle to compare it to a reflex viewfinder, no way. But I'll be glad to be surprised!

[Er1kksen]

Dale, it's not supposed to be DSLR performance. You would buy one of these for the reasons you might have bought a canon G9 or similar high-end compact, and many of the performance compromises will no doubt be similar, but the flexibility (due to interchangeable lenses) and image quality (larger sensor) will not.

I'm interested in the idea of using my current zuiko lenses (via adaptor) to shoot video, as that's hinted for the future...

[Dale_Cotton]

NikosR, NikoJori, and Er1kksen: you make good points that M4/3 has an opportunity to grab share from the same market segment as the G9, DP-1, etc. But this is a niche market and involves scavenging from their own LX3, FZ50, etc., customers. What Oly and Panny want is to place M4/3 as that step up from a P&S that would be compelling to Jane & Joe Public, who are presently intimidated by dSLRs. It may be that the absence of the characteristic finder hump combined with a smaller/lighter-than-dSLR form factor will have that effect.

Regarding the finder, it occurs to me that the real opportunity here would be to give us back the tilt-able LCD so many have been crying out for in conjunction with Live View. This also harps back to the Coolpix 950 series and the F707 series swivel designs that had such a loyal following. Not that I expect them to do it, unfortunately.

[BJL]

NikosR, NikoJori, and Er1kksen: you make good points that M4/3 has an opportunity to grab share from the same market segment as the G9, DP-1, etc. But this is a niche market ...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=213181\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Compared to DSLR sales volume, this is a "niche" the size of the Grand Canyon.(*) The announcement from Olympus and Panasonic make the point that the compact digicam market is vastly larger than the DLSR market (93% vs 7%), and that upgraders from digicams that are a main target of Micro FourThirds. If just 1% of current digicam buyers upgrade to the far larger sensor and interchangeable lenses of such a system, that would be about a 14% share of the current interchangeable lens digital camera market, about twice the current total sales volume of FourThirds (or of Sony or Pentax/Samsung DSLR's).


P.S. I have to say that I find it hard to understand Michael's pessimism based on the Sigma DP-1 (tied to one lens of one focal length and f/4) and the Leica M8 (a vastly more expensive system with no AF). I do see the possibility of Leica branded bodies and lenses for this system, alongside the very different digital M series rangefinders and lenses.


(*) [Edit] The DP-1 is in a small niche, but that is due to being stuck with a single lens and a single focal length.

[NikoJorj]

Regarding the finder, it occurs to me that the real opportunity here would be to give us back the tilt-able LCD so many have been crying out for in conjunction with Live View.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=213181\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

E3 bears that, and that could be a welcome add-on (if durable enough) to the µ4/3 (do qwerty keyboards have the mju greek letter at hand?).

[macgyver]

For everyone wondering about the 'below par' (my phrase, not yours) high ISO quality when compared to APS-C cameras...get a grip. I'm willing to be that anything we see from this could produce better quality than the tiny digicam sensors that all forays into this field (other than the sigma) have produced.

Then again, I may very well be wrong, those 4/3'rds sensors are fairly small, but I guess we will have to wait and see...

[Er1kksen]

Interesting point raised on another forum: The lensmount-to-sensor distance on m4/3 is less than that of the leica M rangefinders. Many current 4/3 DSLR users enjoy the use of Leica R lenses via adapters. It would be possible to use leica M lenses with such an adapter on these bodies (and since there are adapters for nearly anything that can be adapted to anything, this will happen). Sure, it's not quite the same due to the 2x crop, but still... the first breath of new life for leica and other-branded M-mount lenses for those who can't afford an M8.

[NikoJorj]

The lensmount-to-sensor distance on m4/3 is less than that of the leica M rangefinders.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=213294\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes! There is a probable caveat : the press release mentions some kind of evolution in the camera-body interaction (seems they have the video feature in mind), let's hope that won't prevent the use of manual lenses.
In this case, with EVF only and some kind of contrast detection AF, working at real aperture shouldn't be any problem at all (unlike with a dSLR!) and AF assist could be readily available.
Obviously, the ability to change aperture during a video will be compromised. Can some kind of sensor trickery compensate this?

[BJL]

Yes! There is a probable caveat : the press release mentions some kind of evolution in the camera-body interaction (seems they have the video feature in mind), let's hope that won't prevent the use of manual lenses.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=213347\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The announcements mention possibly adding functionality through two extras electrical contacts. They also mention full backward compatibility with FourThirds SLR lenses through an adaptor; the only gap is that FourThirds SLR lenses might not support with some of the additional features of Micro FourThirds. (My guess is something like power zoom for use in movie mode.)

I see no hint there of removing any backward lens compatibility, such as the current partial compatibility with non-FourThirds lenses.

[NikoJorj]

I see no hint there of removing any backward lens compatibility, such as the current partial compatibility with non-FourThirds lenses.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=213436\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You're right : if it's already possible to use manual lenses on a 4/3, it should alse be the same on a µ4/3.

[DarkPenguin]

1. Phil Askey's comments and the mention of LiveView both point to an EVF instead of an optical range finder. The inherent parallax problem and longer focal length limitations of the range finder design probably rule it out. But do you really want to live with EVF? From what I've read both speed and resolution would have to be much improved just to become tolerable ... and it still wouldn't be your grandpa's M3.

Optical finders in most compacts are WYGIWYG.  At least an EVF would be WYSIWYG.

2. Some combination of the smaller pixel pitch inherent in 4/3 and the historically noisy Panasonic Live MOS sensor technology have always eaten into DR/ISO.

ISO 1600 on an E3 is still better than your typical compact at base.

3. Olympus and Panasonic would have to make large strides in the AF department to meet expectations based on Canon and Nikon dSLRs.

A. I doubt it applies as the AF type will likely be a lot different.
B. They have.  Try an E3 with a 12-60 lens.

4. Micro 4/3 implementations will be measured against the current state of dSLRs in IQ and usability by pros and prosumers, and against the current state of compacts in pocketability and ease of use by general consumers.

Okay.

Of course we'll just have to wait to see what the first implementations actually look like, but if any of you are more optimistic I'd love to hear your counter arguments.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=213156\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It is all guesswork right now.

[Atlasman]

Dale, it's not supposed to be DSLR performance. You would buy one of these for the reasons you might have bought a canon G9 or similar high-end compact, and many of the performance compromises will no doubt be similar, but the flexibility (due to interchangeable lenses) and image quality (larger sensor) will not.

I'm interested in the idea of using my current zuiko lenses (via adaptor) to shoot video, as that's hinted for the future...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=213165\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you plan on shooting sporting events, then this would not be the camera for you.

What stops me from using most of the small-sensor p&s is the lack of subject isolation and of course, ISO performance.

I too am looking forward to coupling some of my 4/3rd lenses to, hopefully, a camera with IS and EVF (swivel, like the videocams).