Panasonics Micro 4/3rds Mirrorless DSLR

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Actually, what interests me most about this is the dpreview discussion of the new EVF technology exclusive to Panasonic (and thus available to Leica).

 

Dpreview reports it as MUCH bigger and brighter than the Olympus 420 SLR viewfinder.

 

The late, great Minolta A2 had an EVF with double the resolution of the others at the time (including Digilux 2) and was actually pretty decent. Better than some SLR's screens (but no, not the R9 or SL screens).

 

No reason at all that M lens can't be used, unless the camera goes wacko if it can't electronically sense a mounted lens (and I assume something could be chipped into the 5-6mm adapter to take care of that).

 

2X crop factor is still an issue with wide lenses designed for 35mm - even a 21 'lux ASPH ends up being a $6000 wide normal ("42mm"). OTOH mount a 135 f/4 TeleElmar and you have a nice $400 "270mm f/4". - And the TeleElmar has the resolution to handle the 2x crop.

 

Sorry guys - LOTS of Lumix cameras have skipped the "Leica" name on the lens. Just as lots of Leica's are not made by Panasonic. They have a working partnership, not total bondage to one another.

 

For me? Nah - I hate the 4/3rds frame shape (put up with it on the D2 becasue it was the only game around at the time), want as big a sensor as I can get, and prefer a window view to any kind of screen. It WILL be interesting to see if a) the Panny has any legs, and what Leica does with the format and technology - if anything.

[stunsworth]

Isn't it going to be noisier than the fill sized 4:3 camera?

[adan]

The sensor is still the same size, Steve - 4/3rds. Just the back focus spec has changed. Like Leica M vs. Leica R.

 

Pixel count will have its usual effect though - this one is 12+ effective Mpixels I think, something like 4000 x 3000.

[stunsworth]

Thanks, I assumed it was a smaller sensor. I'll go to the back of the class now.

[Guest stnami]

.sorry the back is full, you have to stay in the front row

[adan]

Steve - understandable, from the rather silly name. I guess "Micro" is supposed to reinforce the idea that with no mirror the lenses can be much smaller. Which is true, but it seems for the moment that the max apertures tank along with the size.

 

No "Vario-Summicron 28-90mm f/2-2.8" on these babies - yet.

[stevelap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Isn't it going to be noisier than the fill sized 4:3 camera?

 

No, same size sensor. It might be noisier than other APS-C based micro/hybrid small digital cameras though.

[magd0328]

I find this a bizarre development. The 4/3rds system was launched with much fanfare about how the standard mount-sensor distance and small chip size allowed light to strike the sensor at ~90 degrees. New lenses were designed with this in mind. Now this 'advantage' has been removed, but the disadvantage of the small chip size remains. I'm not impressed.

[mjh]

I find this a bizarre development. The 4/3rds system was launched with much fanfare about how the standard mount-sensor distance and small chip size allowed light to strike the sensor at ~90 degrees. New lenses were designed with this in mind. Now this 'advantage' has been removed, but the disadvantage of the small chip size remains.

It isn’t clear whether Micro FourThirds does in fact lose this advantage. After all, it doesn’t really depend on the flange distance. The real issue is whether the Micro FourThirds mount can support near telecentric lenses as well as the FourThirds mount can. You can always build near telecentric lenses, regardless of the diameter of the mount, but with the smaller throat (38 rather than 44 mm), it might be more difficult to avoid vignetting. This only hinges on how large a rear lens you can fit within a given throat diameter, so it might be possible to retain the FourThirds advantages. It is still too early to tell.

[Riley]

just to field a few points

the EVF is said to be around the size of a FF OVF, circa 0.70, or 1.4x the crop

 

the sensor offers user selectable 3x2, 4x3, and 16x9

its bigger than they claim anyway,

i think it must be about 18.7 x 14.025mm based on E3 sensor size

they are saying its new, b/se it looks cleaner at iso1600

 

fastest lens offered on it to date is 20/1.7

 

given the signature on the lens, there are some doubts that Leica are a part of this

[luigi bertolotti]

New products with something new are always interesting, at least by "marketing curiosity"... shall this G1 have success ? If so, Leica could even, in the right moment, try to make something on this... add an adapter (or make a simply modification of flange) and you have a sort of Digital CL... which can accept SOME M lenses (and CV, of course... enjoy the 12/15 mm to have a decent WA) and costs... boh ?

 

BTW, sorry for my ignorance, but how is focusing on a EVF ? Is it really as good or better than onto a SLR mirror/prism ?

[Bob Ross]

Actually, what interests me most about this is the dpreview discussion of the new EVF technology exclusive to Panasonic (and thus available to Leica).

 

Dpreview reports it as MUCH bigger and brighter than the Olympus 420 SLR viewfinder.

 

The late, great Minolta A2 had an EVF with double the resolution of the others at the time (including Digilux 2) and was actually pretty decent. Better than some SLR's screens (but no, not the R9 or SL screens).

 

No reason at all that M lens can't be used, unless the camera goes wacko if it can't electronically sense a mounted lens (and I assume something could be chipped into the 5-6mm adapter to take care of that).

 

2X crop factor is still an issue with wide lenses designed for 35mm - even a 21 'lux ASPH ends up being a $6000 wide normal ("42mm"). OTOH mount a 135 f/4 TeleElmar and you have a nice $400 "270mm f/4". - And the TeleElmar has the resolution to handle the 2x crop.

 

Sorry guys - LOTS of Lumix cameras have skipped the "Leica" name on the lens. Just as lots of Leica's are not made by Panasonic. They have a working partnership, not total bondage to one another.

 

For me? Nah - I hate the 4/3rds frame shape (put up with it on the D2 becasue it was the only game around at the time), want as big a sensor as I can get, and prefer a window view to any kind of screen. It WILL be interesting to see if a) the Panny has any legs, and what Leica does with the format and technology - if anything.

Hi Andy,

There is a menu item that alows the shutter to fire with no lens attached. That was the first thing that I looked for.. The adapter makers need the actual registration measurement and they can get that from the 4/3rds>M4/3rds adapter.

The format aspect ratio will probably be familiar to medium format shooters, who use 645 or cropped 6 X 6.

The EVF is quite amazing in the specs. The 1,440,000 dots translates to 1359 X 1059 dots and the A2's EVF had 640 X 480 dots. I don't know the size of the actual screen yet, so I can't do any lp/mm numbers, but I think it is close to what a 300dpi print would show.

The styling of the G1 seems to be aimed at the Pany FZbers, to give them a comfortable upgrade feeling. An interview with an Oly official commented that the EVF gave many options on where the viewfinder could be placed. He may have been giving a hint know what we would see first. Another coment by a dealer who saw the camera(s) months ago was that "another body with no brand" had a very different look. The rumor is that Oly's verion will show up in October.

The unknown for now is how the new 12MP sensor is going to behave.

Bob

[Bob Ross]

New products with something new are always interesting, at least by "marketing curiosity"... shall this G1 have success ? If so, Leica could even, in the right moment, try to make something on this... add an adapter (or make a simply modification of flange) and you have a sort of Digital CL... which can accept SOME M lenses (and CV, of course... enjoy the 12/15 mm to have a decent WA) and costs... boh ?

 

BTW, sorry for my ignorance, but how is focusing on a EVF ? Is it really as good or better than onto a SLR mirror/prism ?

If Leica were to take a basic M4/3rds body, replace the lens mount with an M mount, it wouldn't be part of the M4/3rds standard and remarks that they weren't going to do a M4/3rds camera would be true, though a little sneaky. Extra attention could be give to manual focus to make it even more user friendly. Manual focus on the new EVF is supposed to be good plus you can magnify the image on any part of the image to really lock the focus. I don't know how fast it would, but it would be accurate.

BTW, I read that folks using Live View on DSLRs were encountering aperture focus shift, because they weren't stopping down to check focus. It was a close focusing situation. So, we aren't the only ones with theat quirk.

Bob

[mjh]

The EVF is quite amazing in the specs. The 1,440,000 dots translates to 1359 X 1059 dots and the A2's EVF had 640 X 480 dots.

The way I understand the specs, the EVF is 800 x 600 pixels. As these are 480,000 full-colour pixels (red, green, and blue are displayed sequentially), they are equivalent to 1,440,000 pixels of an ordinary LCD panel.

[luigi bertolotti]

If Leica were to take a basic M4/3rds body, replace the lens mount with an M mount, it wouldn't be part of the M4/3rds standard and remarks that they weren't going to do a M4/3rds camera would be true, though a little sneaky. Extra attention could be give to manual focus to make it even more user friendly. Manual focus on the new EVF is supposed to be good plus you can magnify the image on any part of the image to really lock the focus. I don't know how fast it would, but it would be accurate.

BTW, I read that folks using Live View on DSLRs were encountering aperture focus shift, because they weren't stopping down to check focus. It was a close focusing situation. So, we aren't the only ones with theat quirk.

Bob

 

My idea is that the rumored "Digital CL" could indeed be announced, but as a member of the Panaleica breed... so they can confirm that Leica in itself does not intend to join the 4/3rds club and invest their own engineering skills onto, but still giving users the way to have a M lenses compatible and not too costly camera (the 24 f 3,8 could be a decent normal for 4/3... ) .

[luigi bertolotti]

The way I understand the specs, the EVF is 800 x 600 pixels. As these are 480,000 full-colour pixels (red, green, and blue are displayed sequentially), they are equivalent to 1,440,000 pixels of an ordinary LCD panel.

 

Me too interpreted like this the spec... and imho 800x600 is well sufficient for an EVF, expecially if "VF zooming" preserves the pixel definition (I think it so)

[Bob Ross]

The way I understand the specs, the EVF is 800 x 600 pixels. As these are 480,000 full-colour pixels (red, green, and blue are displayed sequentially), they are equivalent to 1,440,000 pixels of an ordinary LCD panel.

You are correct Michael, my error. We sort of have to drift into the "X3 land of Foveon" to cut through the given description. The apparent resolution to the eye will probably seem to be 960,000.

Do you have any idea what the screen dimension is? I inclined to guess at 0.44" which is the same size as a 2/3" sensor.

Bob

[Bob Ross]

My idea is that the rumored "Digital CL" could indeed be announced, but as a member of the Panaleica breed... so they can confirm that Leica in itself does not intend to join the 4/3rds club and invest their own engineering skills onto, but still giving users the way to have a M lenses compatible and not too costly camera (the 24 f 3,8 could be a decent normal for 4/3... ) .

Going to a 4/rds sensor size would solve the problem of a cheap body stealing sales from the M8. I think the 28 Elmarit Asph would also be nice as a standard.

Bob

[adan]

> Digilux 2 (and most other 2/3rds-sensor EVFs): 235,000 pixels, about 240 x 320 x 3 colors

> KoniMinolta A2, 920,000 pixels, 480 x 640 x 3 colors

> Lumix G1, 480,000 tricolor pixels (effective 1,440,000), about 600 x 800 (by the math of those above)

 

not all EVFs are equal.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[dkCambridgeshire]

Would it now be possible for a Canon FD to Micro Four Thirds adaptor to be made?

 

And why would it be useful? ... To enable use of Canon FD 50/1.2L and FD 85/1.2 L lenses with the new format. Similarly for anyone wanting to use a budget f1.2 lens maybe a Minolta adaptor too. A Minolta adaptor is available for the regular four thirds format but requires permanent attachment after dismantling the original Minolta lens mount.

 

Cheers

 

dunk