Micro 4/3 an alternative to digital M? (Merged)

[rosuna]

I can only "prove" an interesting point: I can argue without insulting. It is a valuable lesson for you.

I can also give reasons that support my opinions. This new "micro" system has advantages: smaller size. Image quality will not be affected, because the sensor size is the same. This will erode the sales of miniature reflex cameras like the E420. The 4/3 system presents the size as its basic advantage, and now comes this new concept with smaller size, probably price, and the same sensor. I doubt the E3 alone will be able to sustain the entire system.

[andybarton]

Let's keep this civil, guys.

It's only a camera!

[Riley]

no problem andy, lets just clear the table

i just didnt see any proof yet, im sure its coming

something that relates to the facts
Four Thirds | Micro Four Thirds | Benefits of Micro Four Thirds
Four Thirds | Micro Four Thirds | Standard | Whitepaper (Summary of Standard)
ƒIƒŠƒ“ƒpƒX‚ƃpƒiƒ\ƒjƒbƒNAuƒ} ƒCƒNƒƒtƒH[ƒT[ƒYƒVƒXƒeƒ€v‹KŠi‚ð”*•\

[AlanG]

Originally Posted by sdai

You can adapt any lens you like to the camera but it will only focus on contrast, which is a complete lackluster "feature" taking away all the fun.

It does make you wonder how any other type of AF could be incorporated and work with live view. But of course it could have a small semi silvered mirror that moves in and out when fast focus is needed along with a phase detect sensor. Since it uses an EVF, the loss of light in the mirror area could be compensated for.

No camera specifications have been annonced but it seems to me that there will be the opportuinity for a number of creative possibilities.

[rosuna]

Originally Posted by AlanG

It does make you wonder how any other type of AF could be incorporated and work with live view. But of course it could have a small semi silvered mirror that moves in and out when fast focus is needed along with a phase detect sensor. Since it uses an EVF, the loss of light in the mirror area could be compensated for.

No camera specifications have been annonced but it seems to me that there will be the opportuinity for a number of creative possibilities.

The Contax G cameras had autofocus lenses, and no mirror... How that system was designed?

[Riley]

Originally Posted by AlanG

It does make you wonder how any other type of AF could be incorporated and work with live view. But of course it could have a small semi silvered mirror that moves in and out when fast focus is needed along with a phase detect sensor. Since it uses an EVF, the loss of light in the mirror area could be compensated for.

No camera specifications have been annonced but it seems to me that there will be the opportuinity for a number of creative possibilities.

its CDAF
Askey over on the dark side claims
"And obviously I can't *say* anything but lets *expect* the contrast detect AF to be a lot better than you've experienced so far."

[sdai]

Originally Posted by rosuna

The Contax G cameras had autofocus lenses, and no mirror... How that system was designed?

It uses an electronic rangefinder.

[AlanG]

Originally Posted by rosuna

The Contax G cameras had autofocus lenses, and no mirror... How that system was designed?

My understanding is that it used an electronic version of a rangefinder employing an external phase detection device. I guess this could be a method used by someone making any camera too, but it doesn't seem that likely to me in the upcoming models.

Contax G User Pages

A company such as Leica could certainly make use of this technology (from Panasonic and Olympus) and work with it to design a camera that is sort of a 21st century electronic M.

Frankly, I don't see where else they can go so maybe this is why there was so much hush hush about waiting for Photokina. But it seems as if everyone else is announcing their new products early, perhaps to drive up interest in actually going to their booths to see these newly announced products?

The news from Phase One, Hassy, and Leaf certainly would encourage me to stop by their booths if I were looking for MF gear. If they hadn't pre-announced I might have simply assumed that they were just selling the same old stuff. So what about it Leica? (Not that I'll be there but I will check it all out at PhotoPlus Expo in NY.)

[AlanG]

Originally Posted by Riley

its CDAF
Askey over on the dark side claims
"And obviously I can't *say* anything but lets *expect* the contrast detect AF to be a lot better than you've experienced so far."

Most likely. I was speaking hypothetically.

[Bob Ross]

Originally Posted by sdai

You can adapt any lens you like to the camera but it will only focus on contrast, which is a complete lackluster "feature" taking away all the fun.

Take a look at the AF system on the Digilux 2/Pany LC-1. It is a hybrid system using Phase Detection externally and Contrast Detection internally for a coarse-fine focus method. I think Nikon also used this arrangement. Now, if you put a MF lens on the camera (if you can) most likely the focus confirmation would be from Contrast Detection only. Contrast Detection is slow, but it can be very accurate, since it is a confirmation loop electronically and self corrects at the focus plane (imaging senor). Phase Detection is a proxy unit like the RF on the M8, separated from the imaging senor. I think AF technology has advanced since thos earlier examples.
Bob

[lct]

Already asked this elsewhere but how could an EVF camera be considered a rangefinder? The EVF 'sees' behind the lens. It is unable to let us view what's hapenning out of the frame because its FoV cannot be wider than the focal length. So the only way to shoot both eyes open with it is to choose a 50mm equiv. lens. Am i missing something again?

[andybarton]

It could give the effect of a rangefinder view if the image recorded was further cropped so that you could see outside the "frame" as you can with an M.

So, the recording area of the chip would be about the size of your little finger nail.

IMHO, this is as far from a rangefinder as is a Digilux 2.

[vieri]

Originally Posted by mym6is12

There is more than enough flange distance ( 7.95mm spare ) to make a M mount adapter.
If should be easy from the likes of Voigtlander to make a line of MF lenses that fit directly.

There would seem to be a lot of mileage in this concept. Digital CL ?

In my view, the problem is not in the flange distance, obviously there is enough room to fit an adapter and such. The problem is - and probably only the specifiers of the Micro 4/3 know about it at this point - how to make these old lenses work; the new lenses will all be motorized, of course, and AF will probably be of the contrast type (P&S like), and aperture will be also electrically controlled; with M lenses, you might have a focus confirmation light, and the possibility to do stop down metering and/or meter a la M8, but for this you need an a la M8 light meter in the cameras... anyway, all is feasible, wether someone will do it and wether it will be seriously usable in the real world is another story. I for one wouldn't like an EVF with a focus confirmation light - not having a real VF would most likely be a deal breaker for me, no matter how good the EVF is. As well, M lenses' focal lengths aren't quite suitable for a 2x crop except for tele use: great to have a 180 mm f2 FOV equivalent, or even a 270 mm f2.8 FOV equivalent, but wide angle & normal is definitely not there with the actual lens lineup. Would you enjoy a 36 mm f4 FOV? Or a 30 mm f4.5 FOV equivalent? Or a 24 mm f5.6 FOV equivalent? If Leica is embracing such a concept, they better be developing something real fast, 25 Summilux - like, in the 10-20 mm range (20-40 mm equivalent) to be useful. 10 mm f2.8, 14 mm f2, 17 mm f1.4 are needed to bring us back to M - equivalent on film.

We'll see, anyway these are good times for us photographers. So much to choose from

[sdai]

Originally Posted by andybarton

It could give the effect of a rangefinder view ...

To get the effect of a rangefinder view you'll need two overlaying images, so there'll be two EVFs, or may be two sensors one sits behind the other, you move this way, he moves that way.

Olympus seems to have a lot of great ideas with bad implementation, how they will handle with this one remains to be seen. As many has pointed out, this has a great potential to replace a rangefinder camera but since it is not a rangefinder camera and all the fun using a rangefinder camera is with a real rangefinder, also it's 4/3 sensor will never outsmart the M's 1.33x or FF sensor in the future ... I'm curious to see how many current M users will actually accept it.

Regarding contrast AF, last time I heard about it was at the PIE show two or three years ago, a Nikon rep says it's already good enough to be put into their DSLRs so I will have no doubt about it usability, it's simply a different kind of beast.

[mjh]

Originally Posted by rosuna

The Four Thirds is dead. This is an all new system.

Neither is FourThirds dead, nor is Micro FourThirds an all new system – for one thing, it shares the same sensor size with FourThirds. The FourThirds DSLR system will continue to evolve, with Micro FourThirds addressing a market that hasn’t succumbed to the DSLR steamroller yet (actually 93 percent of the market, according to Olympus and Panasonic), so their different needs might be better served by a new type of camera. I suppose that FourThirds and Micro FourThirds will share components such as the wireless flash system.

[mjh]

Originally Posted by lct

Already asked this elsewhere but how could an EVF camera be considered a rangefinder?

An EVIL camera cannot, but there is not reason why one couldn’t build a part electronical, part opto-mechanical rangefinder – the actual rangefinder would continue to be an opto-mechanical device, but focusing would be electronically controlled. The Micro FourThirds standard would allow for such a design.

Still, I am pretty sure that all the Micro FourThirds bodies will be EVIL.

[sdai]

Nikon, Canon, et al all use 35mm film (now 35mm FF sensor) as their standard format yet everybody considers they're different systems.

With a mount change and especially the omission of mirror, prism, and the finder, it is a new system IMO.

The E-420, E-520 are now going for 400-550 dollars, I'm hoping their cost cut in parts and simplified assembly process can be reflected in the retail prices of the new "micro" cameras. Maybe they can be had for 200-300 dollars each? ...

[Riley]

Originally Posted by mjh

Still, I am pretty sure that all the Micro FourThirds bodies will be EVIL.

thats our take elsewhere too, as yet tacitly supported
we think there is a ev finder rather like that of the ricoh
certainly if this isnt it, its coming very soon, there will be variants from the group, its a collaborative effort

think too of the impact on video cameras with this size sensor and available lenses

[manolo]

I will only buy 3 lenses for this:

25 nuctilux
21 summilux
15 summicron

[earleygallery]

4/3 IS DEAD!!

Makes a nice change from hearing FILM IS DEAD!!



Any links about this? The ones above don't work.