Rumours of three new Olympus micro-4/3rd cameras

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by RichA, Jun 15, 2011.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Olympus's two main failings and they are major, and why they continue
    to languish behind Panasonic are their lack of built-in, high-
    resolution EVFs and their second-rate focusing systems in the
    micro-4/3rds cameras. The sensors take a back seat. Nothing else
    that distinguishes them from Panasonic matters anywhere near as much.
    No, I don't CARE if their JPEGs are better. If Panasonic didn't have
    a perpetual problem with inventory and deliveries, Olympus would be

    I am finally 100% sure that Olympus will announce not two but three
    new PEN cameras! They will all use the same new (Olympus redesigned?)
    Panasonic sensor (more about the sensor in future posts). And here is
    a short description of each camera:

    1) E-PM1
    “M” stays for “Mini”. It is smaller than the Panasonic GF2 (Click here
    to see it) and a bit bigger than the new Panasonic GF3. The good news
    is that the mini still maintains the built-in stabilization!

    2) E-PL3
    It is just a bit wider and thicker than the E-PM1. It’s thicker
    because for the very first time there is a tilt LCD screen! But it has
    no built in flash unlike the “older” Olympus E-PL2.

    3) E-P3
    Has no tilt LCD but gains a built in flash. The advantage over the E-
    PL3 are the manual controls and body quality. It has almost the same
    body design as the current Olympus E-P2. No built in viewfinder a là
    Olympus XA (Click here to see it on eBay).
    RichA, Jun 15, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    No, the sensor has always been Olympus' biggest problem.

    After an exceptionally painful episode when Olympus' partner, Kodak,
    failed to produce a decent Four Thirds sensor with more than 5 MP,
    Olympus allied with Panasonic, exchanging the certainty of a rapid
    demise at Kodak's hand for the prospect of a delayed strangulation by

    The refusal of Panasonic to provide Olympus with sensors of greater
    than 12 MP has killed the E System Four Thirds DSLRs. Now that
    Panasonic offers two ~16 MP sensors in Micro Four Thirds but only
    offers Olympus an older 12 MP sensor, progress has stalled.

    In desperation, Olympus has designed its own state of the art sensor
    for Micro Four Thirds, but in even greater desperation has chosen
    Panasonic to fabricate it. So the stranglehold is still in place, and
    death is merely postponed.
    Bruce, Jun 15, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Is that what happened? It's not because Olympus "believes 12
    megapixels is idea for micro 4/3rds?"
    RichA, Jun 15, 2011
  4. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    Olympus has no option but to believe that. Where else is Olympus
    going to source its sensors? Kodak? Sony? Samsung?

    Olympus is stuck with Panasonic, and the company can only buy what
    Panasonic is prepared to make and sell. What an appalling situation,
    where your only possible sensor supplier is also your strongest and
    most direct competitor.
    Bruce, Jun 15, 2011
  5. 12MP is *too much* for a Micro Four Thirds sensor; I'd be
    considerably happier with a 6MP version myself. This is
    not a camera for people making 60x48 inch prints! It's a
    camera for people making web photos and occasional
    8x10s of the very best of them, and 6MP is marvelously
    adequate for that.

    (Among the wall prints I made for work, all 20x30, there
    are images from 6 and 10 MP APS-C sensors, 12MP
    full-frame sensors...and one from the tiny sensor in
    an LX3. There aren't visible technical differences
    between them. So for most any purpose, you could
    really go far past 8x10 with even a 6MP M4/3 sensor.)
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jun 15, 2011
  6. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    That's an interesting point of view, David. In some ways I wish the
    megapixel race wasn't taking place, because the most recent superzooms
    would be far better cameras with 6 MP sensors rather than 14 MP.

    But it is all about marketing, and the public perception is that more
    megapixels are always "better". Perhaps they need to be reminded that
    their "Full HD 1080P" televisions and monitors are only 2.1 MP.
    Bruce, Jun 15, 2011
  7. []
    Agreed on both points, Bruce.

    David J Taylor, Jun 16, 2011
  8. RichA

    Bowser Guest

    Fill Factory.
    Bowser, Jun 16, 2011
  9. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    Oh yeah?

    Possibly FillFactory's greatest claim to fame was the sensor range it
    made under contract to Kodak. My Kodak DCS Pro 14n has one. What has
    FillFactory done since then in the field of photography?

    Cypress acquired the company in 2004. What has Cypress done since
    then in the field of photography?

    Some of the company's best people seem to have left to join Cmosis in
    Belgium in 2008. What has Cmosis done since then in the field of

    Which sensor manufacturer are you going to suggest next? Philips?

    I think I'll stick with my original list. ;-)
    Bruce, Jun 16, 2011
  10. RichA

    Bowser Guest

    Geez, get some fiber in the diet!

    Yeah, those Kodak FF models were, well, horrible.
    Bowser, Jun 16, 2011
  11. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    On the contrary, they were, and still are, excellent professional
    tools. Had Nikon not taken steps to make their production by Kodak
    impracticable, they would have lasted much longer than they did ...
    the Nikon N80-based SLR/n was produced for only a few months before
    Nikon cut off supply of N80 bodies and stopped production.

    The DCS Pro SLR/c with Canon EF mount was made for Kodak by Sigma,
    based on the Sigma SA9/SD9 body. The SLR/s body was an abomination,
    but like the Nikon F-mount 14n and SLR/n it is still in very strong
    demand because of its excellent image quality.

    My 14n is old, quirky and has many faults, but it is still my #1
    favourite DSLR ever. It is definitely my first choice for any work
    where ISO 80/160 is appropriate. My D3 takes care of higher ISOs but
    the low ISO image quality is not as good. Colour rendition is the
    best and most natural of any DSLR I have ever used apart from the
    Olympus E-1, which also had a Kodak designed sensor.

    Not horrible. Not remotely.
    Bruce, Jun 16, 2011
  12. Outside 100% crops, the difference is very small. Inside
    100% crops, noone seesy the photo anyway.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Jun 16, 2011
    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.