Finally someone realized that we need a smaller format DSLR

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Wilba, Aug 4, 2008.

  1. Wilba

    Wilba Guest

    Wilba, Aug 4, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Wilba

    jimkramer Guest

    jimkramer, Aug 5, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Wilba

    jimkramer Guest

    jimkramer, Aug 5, 2008
    #3
  4. Wilba

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Aug 5, 2008
    #4
  5. Wilba

    jimkramer Guest

    The Four-Thirds systems was such a big hit that they are now making a
    Micro Four-Thirds system. Would that be like Two-Thirds?

    Four Turds is what they should call it.


    Think about this; the lenses keep getting smaller and smaller. What's the
    smallest lens? That's right they will be introducing pinhole cameras next
    year and make a mint, no optics cost, no need to focus. It will be the
    Killer-App of the camera world; Matsushita and Olympus will rule from on
    high!
    -Jim
     
    jimkramer, Aug 5, 2008
    #5
  6. Wilba

    Bruce Guest


    You've missed the point. The sensor is exactly the same size as Four
    Thirds. The camera and lenses can be made much smaller by omitting
    the mirror and moving the lens mount much closer to the sensor.

    Obviously the result cannot be an SLR because the mirror has gone. But
    this new system would make it possible to design a high quality
    digital rangefinder camera, so watch out for the Panasonic and Leica
    announcements at Photokina in Köln (Cologne) next month ...
     
    Bruce, Aug 5, 2008
    #6
  7. Wilba

    jimkramer Guest

    How is any of that new or different from the current crop of EVF / liveview
    / Nikon D50 / Epson type cameras? The sensor is too small. I want a larger
    sensor and I want to be able to control the DOF. That simply doesn't work
    well with small sensors unless you move into the land of imaginary glass.

    This is all another marketing ploy by a forth or fifth rate company trying
    to make sales by selling even cheaper. We, well I actually, do not need
    another Kodak. We certainly don't need any more of what Leica bodies have
    offered the digital world.
    -Jim
     
    jimkramer, Aug 5, 2008
    #7
  8. Wilba

    Bruce Guest


    The big difference is the sensor to lens flange distance of only 20mm.


    Point taken. The smaller sensor does make it easier to design lenses
    with wider maximum apertures, just not wide enough to restore the
    control of DOF that you have with 35mm film or full frame digital.


    I wouldn't describe Olympus or Panasonic as anything other than first
    rate companies. At least the Four Thirds consortium had the sense to
    dump Kodak when it became apparent that Kodak could not design a low
    noise sensor for this format.

    Panasonic have done that. If they hadn't, the format would have died.
    If the Panasonic LMOS sensor for Four Thirds was made approximately
    four times larger to match 35mm film, or Nikon's FX format, it would
    offer 40MP with surprisingly low noise.
     
    Bruce, Aug 5, 2008
    #8
  9. Wilba

    Paul Furman Guest

    Paul Furman, Aug 5, 2008
    #9
  10. Wilba

    jimkramer Guest

    OK, now honestly, why should I get excited about that? Really, what makes
    that so exciting, than any other manufacturer couldn't have done the same
    thing? And yet have choosen not to do so?
    Thanks for being honest, I miss having a real discussion about cameras here.
    :)
    Sorry in terms of camera sales O & P rank pretty low. And Kodak hasn't done
    anything right since they released the BWCN400 film. One more failure should
    suprise no one.
    Now every person I ever spoke to that owned a 4/3's system camera bought it
    because it didn't cost as much as a Canon or a Nikon. Granted this was back
    when a bottom of the line consumer DSLR with a kit lens was $1,200. Haven't
    seen anybody shooting with an Olympus in quite a while now. ??

    Now that the entry level Canon and Nikon cameras with a kit lens are >$500
    the 4/3's people come along with something that, in theory is cheaper to
    manufacture, and that the other manufactures have chosen to ignore. Oh wait
    a whole new lens line for cameras that only we make, that we can sell cheap,
    we'll make a killing. It is all about selling to a niche market of people
    who think they want something better than their current P&S yet don't want
    to spend the money to do so on a real DSLR.

    Any sample images from the Panasonic sensor?

    -Jim
     
    jimkramer, Aug 5, 2008
    #10
  11. Wilba

    Bruce Guest


    There's no need for you to get excited. Believe it or not, getting
    excited is certainly not necessary to contribute your point of view.

    So you are not overwhelmed? I don't think I am either. But there is
    just a chance that enough people will be excited about a very compact
    interchangeable lens rangefinder camera that offers far better image
    quality than any of the current P&S digitals. Think of it as a
    digital Contax G Series.

    To be even more honest, I don't think many people trading up from P&S
    digicams will lose too much sleep about having less control of DOF
    than with APS-C or full frame sensors. Until now, they probably had
    so much DOF that they didn't realise what it was. ;-)


    Olympus and Panasonic are still in the market and still making
    profits. Panasonic has greatly increased its market share, though its
    recent DSLRs have been pretty insignificant. This could be just the
    niche market that Olympus and Panasonic need, rather than competing
    head on with DSLRs with intrinsically superior formats (APS-C and full
    frame).


    They are much more popular in Europe and the Far East. The US isn't
    the only market for these guys.


    That last sentence describes its market position with uncanny
    accuracy. ;-)


    Probably hundreds of thousands on Flickr. All Olympus DSLRs from the
    E-330 onwards* (including the E3) and the Panasonic L1 and L10 use
    Panasonic LMOS sensors.

    *although the E-400 and E-500 used Kodak sensors that showed exactly
    why Kodak got kicked out of Four Thirds!
     
    Bruce, Aug 5, 2008
    #11
  12. Wilba

    Annika1980 Guest

    You mean like the 50MP sensor that Kodak developed which Hasselblad
    will be using?

    Methinks Kodak didn't want their product to be sold in the toy
    department.
     
    Annika1980, Aug 6, 2008
    #12
  13. Wilba

    Wilba Guest

    There is a difference. :- )

    Actually, I was wrong above - they don't say they will _all_ be EVFs, just
    that they're not SLRs.

    I imagine that a significant few will be attracted by the idea of a non-SLR
    interchangeable lens camera with a good EVF and live view LCD, but I doubt
    they'll ever be more than a niche product (unless they're really
    inexpensive).
     
    Wilba, Aug 6, 2008
    #13
  14. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm,
    which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital
    cameras that look like 35mm SLRs.

    Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One
    of the following groups would be a good place for such postings:

    rec.photo.equipment.digital
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system

    Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Aug 8, 2008
    #14
  15. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm,
    which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital
    cameras that look like 35mm SLRs.

    Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One
    of the following groups would be a good place for such postings:

    rec.photo.equipment.digital
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system

    Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Aug 8, 2008
    #15
  16. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm,
    which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital
    cameras that look like 35mm SLRs.

    Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One
    of the following groups would be a good place for such postings:

    rec.photo.equipment.digital
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system

    Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Aug 8, 2008
    #16
  17. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm,
    which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital
    cameras that look like 35mm SLRs.

    Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One
    of the following groups would be a good place for such postings:

    rec.photo.equipment.digital
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system

    Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Aug 8, 2008
    #17
  18. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm,
    which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital
    cameras that look like 35mm SLRs.

    Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One
    of the following groups would be a good place for such postings:

    rec.photo.equipment.digital
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system

    Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Aug 8, 2008
    #18
  19. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm,
    which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital
    cameras that look like 35mm SLRs.

    Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One
    of the following groups would be a good place for such postings:

    rec.photo.equipment.digital
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system

    Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Aug 8, 2008
    #19
  20. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm,
    which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital
    cameras that look like 35mm SLRs.

    Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One
    of the following groups would be a good place for such postings:

    rec.photo.equipment.digital
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr
    rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system

    Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place.
     
    David Nebenzahl, Aug 8, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.