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

[sean_reid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wonder if they can put in an optical viewfinder or if we are going to have to rely on the live - view from the LCD?

 

I see no reason why a window finder (with or without a rangefinder) couldn't be used with this standard.

 

Cheers,

[martinb]

Agree with Sean. Leica M's doesn't have mirrors either and I see no reasons we can't get an optical finder in a micro 4/3 camera. An alternative is to use an external finder in the hotshoe.

There might be EVF finders too but maybe with 1mp + resolution and I'm sure they´re going to be pretty decent..

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[daveleo]

I am not quite clear about this micro 4/3 lens mount.

Will Leica M or screw mount lenses be adaptable to it?

 

I have several Leica screwmount lenses (CV 15 mm and 35mm) and an M adapter to fit them on my Bessa-T's (film cameras). I love the lenses but don't shoot film any more.

 

Now my Digilux-2 is out with a sensor failure and I am pondering the future.

 

If I could get Leica screwmount lenses mounted through an adapter onto a small digital camera, life would be perfect. These lenses are very small and excellent.

 

Any speculation about this?

 

regards,

[sdai]

You guys should take a look at this picture, the so called micro lens won't be much smaller than the original 4/3 lens at all.

 

And you want to add accessories such as external finders, flashs, adapters, converters to it? LOL

 

Don't be fooled by Olympus again ... I'm not sure whether they're insulting their customers' intelligence or their own.

 

[vondauster]

Where to start with his thread. First off, the 4/3rds system is alive and well. I use a couple of E-3s professionally, and find the image quality and handling to be very good indeed. The Olympus lenses are excellent.

 

Olympus has delivered on the "more compact camera/lenses" potential of the system in my opinion with the E-420 and the very good 25mm f2.8 (50mm eqiv) lens.

 

The point of the Micro 4/3 systems from my perspective is serious competition for cameras like the (slow, limited) DP-1. I for one would love the size and simplicity advantages that such a camera would provide. If Oly/Leica/Panasonic provide a collection of decent primes, I will be delighted! Is there any serious doubt that such a camera would provide better image quality than a tiny sensor digicam?

[dominic]

"First off, the 4/3rds system is alive and well. I use a couple of E-3s professionally, and find the image quality and handling to be very good indeed. The Olympus lenses are excellent."

 

""""""""""""""""""""

Well, it's possible that the E3 is a good camera FOR YOU, but the huge drop of the sales (and profit) of the Imaging division is such that, globally, the E-System is a big commercial flop, a flop which questions the future of Olympus Corp. as a whole. See the drop of the share at the Tokyo stock exchange last monday.

 

In fact, Oly has lost interest in the E-reflex system and Panasonic appears as the new leader of the micro-E system.

 

I bet that Pana is going to take over the Imaging division of Oly.

[vondauster]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, it's possible that the E3 is a good camera FOR YOU, but the huge drop of the sales (and profit) of the Imaging division is such that, globally, the E-System is a big commercial flop, a flop which questions the future of Olympus Corp. as a whole. See the drop of the share at the Tokyo stock exchange last monday.

 

In fact, Oly has lost interest in the E-reflex system and Panasonic appears as the new leader of the micro-E system.

 

I bet that Pana is going to take over the Imaging division of Oly.

 

Well, business wise you may be right, although it occurs to me that everything you said could have been said about Leica recently, even Panasonic taking them over! :-)

 

I stand by my comments on the E system. Left Canon for it, and have never looked back.

[pelikan1931]

the whole 4/3 thing reminds me of the APS saga some while ago.

[vondauster]

the whole 4/3 thing reminds me of the APS saga some while ago.

 

Well, I do not think that's a fair comparison. The 4/3rds sensor is not in any way significantly smaller than any "APS" sized sensor in dozens of cameras, including the Canon 40D, Nikon D300, Pentax 20D, etc, etc. Film APS was a dummied-down system analogous to instamatic film from the 1960s, designed for consumer convenience.

 

In my opinion, the only knock one could make regarding the format itself is that it is not "full frame" 35mm. Neither are the cameras listed above, neither is the sensor in the DP-1. One could say the 4/3rds system will never rise above the so-called "prosumer" camera class because of this.

 

Finally, unlike the APS film cameras, the 4/3rds cameras will never become orphaned by the lack of film...

[Riley]

Well, it's possible that the E3 is a good camera FOR YOU, but the huge drop of the sales (and profit) of the Imaging division is such that, globally, the E-System is a big commercial flop, a flop which questions the future of Olympus Corp. as a whole. See the drop of the share at the Tokyo stock exchange last monday.

 

In fact, Oly has lost interest in the E-reflex system and Panasonic appears as the new leader of the micro-E system.

 

I bet that Pana is going to take over the Imaging division of Oly.

 

olympus dropped 34% canon 13% and nikon 23%

we call it r e c e s s i o n

[lct]

...The 4/3rds sensor is not in any way significantly smaller than any "APS" sized sensor...

50% smaller than APS-C sensors if i'm not wrong but 4/3 bodies are not 50% less bulky by far, see the tiny Pentax K20D for instance. Reason why the 4/3 format has no future i'm afraid but this does not alter the fact that Zuiko lenses are often superb indeed. Too bad they're not done for 'normal' APS-C cameras though.

[rosuna]

50% smaller than APS-C sensors if i'm not wrong but 4/3 bodies are not 50% less bulky by far, see the tiny Pentax K20D for instance. Reason why the 4/3 format has no future i'm afraid but this does not alter the fact that Zuiko lenses are often superb indeed. Too bad they're not done for 'normal' APS-C cameras though.

 

Do you thing the new Micro 4/3 system has future?

[lct]

Do you thing the new Micro 4/3 system has future?

For those who like EVFs or don't need VFs perhaps.

[Riley]

50% smaller than APS-C sensors if i'm not wrong but 4/3 bodies are not 50% less bulky by far, see the tiny Pentax K20D for instance. Reason why the 4/3 format has no future i'm afraid but this does not alter the fact that Zuiko lenses are often superb indeed. Too bad they're not done for 'normal' APS-C cameras though.

 

based on these ideas what you really need is a micro medium format, the whole idea of small is, its small

 

and as we dont know how big mFT bodies are, you would have to be wrong in your size estimate. As to the sensor, when you correct for format differences (3x2 v/s 4x3) 4/3rds is linearly16.1% smaller than canon apsc

[luigi bertolotti]

I think this is a tentative to give a second opportunity to a standard that until now hasn't really caught on... but the fact they are dealing with a design fit for compact-P&S size isn't a good sign... ok, they probably could engineer a camera with the size of a P & S and a bigger sensor... but this means to struggle in a very price-sensitive market... an admittion that 4/3 isn't appreciated in the higher slices of the market.

[lct]

...when you correct for format differences (3x2 v/s 4x3) 4/3rds is linearly16.1% smaller than canon apsc

Not sure to comprehend what this correction means but the surface of 4/3 sensors is 50% smaller and their crop factor is 2x vs 1.5x for APS-C aren't they?

[adan]

Sdai: To be fair you need to compare the 4/3rds lens PLUS its adapter to the m4/3 lens alone. The M4/3 lens is a little smaller - but it mounts on a body 1/2 as thick as regular 4/3.

 

(Just as an M 90 APO is longer than an R 90 APO - the SLR body has a lot more backfocus so the lens alone is stubbier)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Riley]

Not sure to comprehend what this correction means but the surface of 4/3 sensors is 50% smaller and their crop factor is 2x vs 1.5x for APS-C aren't they?

 

Areas SQUARE the value difference and exaggerate the size difference

linear size gets thing back to perspective

 

Sensors of different image formats with same crop factors have different sensor area.

these two sensors have same crop factors and different areas

3x2: 22.2mm(W) x 14.8(H) 26.68(DIAG) 43.3/26.68 = 1.6229, Area 328sqmm

4x3: 21.344(W) x 16.008(H) 26.68(Diag) 43.3/26.68 = 1.6229, Area 341.68sqmm

 

you need to correct the format to the same areas: 4x3 chip same area as a hypothetical Canon APSC:

these two sensors have same areas but different crop factors

4x3: 20.912(W) x 15.684(H) 26.14(DIAG) 43.3/26.14 = 1.656, Area 328sqmm

3x2: 22.2(W) x 14.8(H) 26.68(DIAG) 43.3/26.68 = 1.6229, Area 328sqmm

 

in linear form the 4/3rds chip has to grow 16.1% in width and height to equal the 'area' of a 4x3 Canon by:

18 x 13.5 = 243

18 (x1.1618) x 13.5 (x1.1618)

=20.9124 x 15.6843 = 327.996, < this chip represents a hypothetical 4x3 Canon APSC chip, same area

 

you also claimed that

but 4/3 bodies are not 50% less bulky by far, see the tiny Pentax K20D for instance.

 

yet even by your measurements it goes like this

K20D 142 x 101 x 70 = 1,003,940 cubic mm

E420 129.5 x 91 x 53 = 624,578 cubic mm or around 62%

the mFT from images seen looks to be around 2/3 the size of E420 or about half the size of APSC bodies

[thrid]

Do you thing the new Micro 4/3 system has future?

 

I think 4/3rds can maybe have a future in compact cameras and point and shoot bodies.

As the megapixel count continues to rise in these two categories the need for a bigger chip will become more pressing.

But I don't think it is the solution for a digital CL.

 

The problem for 4/3rds is that companies like Nikon or Canon may decide to simply migrate older or entry level versions of their APS chips in to these bodies. This would make sense. Why reinvent the wheel? Rumor has it that Nikon may release a highend P&S with the 10MP APS sensor from the D60.

 

But I don't see how 4/3rds will survive in the near future as consumer and prosumer bodies hit 16MP. If I remember correctly that is about the limit for APS to maintain receptors that are big enough to provide clean high iso images and good DR. 4/3rds already has a difficult time competing at 12MP.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Riley]

Sdai: To be fair you need to compare the 4/3rds lens PLUS its adapter to the m4/3 lens alone. The M4/3 lens is a little smaller - but it mounts on a body 1/2 as thick as regular 4/3.

 

(Just as an M 90 APO is longer than an R 90 APO - the SLR body has a lot more backfocus so the lens alone is stubbier)

 

he also forgets to mention thats a 40-150 zoom equivalent to 80-300mm EFL which is already pretty short next to APSC lenses, shown here on the right. The mFT 40-150 then might be about half the size of APSC lens of the same FL