They saw the response to the "Pen", and may have finally caught on. A retro digital OM might do well also (as many here have long suggested).
If it comes with a 4/3rds sensors, I suspect, however, there will be a lot of disappointment. A FF digital OM will carve out a unique, successful niche for Olympus. They can't win playing Canon's and Nikon's game, but they can if they play their own game.
Not exactly like that, they aren't physically separate sensors. They are manufactured on the same piece of silicon adjacent to each other. It is vastly more expensive to do then just grabbing two smaller sensors and gluing them together. It also requires special RAW converters to use, ACR and LR can't support such a design.
P.S. FF sensors apparently use a slightly different process which is not only on the same chip, but also acts as a single aligned sensor array so RAW converters like ACR/LR don't have any problems.
Lotusm50 wrote:
They saw the response to the "Pen", and may have finally caught on. A retro digital OM might do well also (as many here have long suggested).
If it comes with a 4/3rds sensors, I suspect, however, there will be a lot of disappointment. A FF digital OM will carve out a unique, successful niche for Olympus. They can't win playing Canon's and Nikon's game, but they can if they play their own game.
The success of the Pen and then the X100 could have given them the courage to make a lower production # but higher end retro styled product for their anniversary.
Mescalamba wrote:
Yes exactly like that. Phase One backs are actually stitched smaller sensors (which sometimes can make a bit of problems). It was recently mentioned on pebbleplace.com. Otherwise I think Canon 1D had stitched sensor too. But not sure, I just saw that one half of sensor had banding and other one did not (or much less). Might be just controller.
If one thinks about it, its not that hard. 4/3s are 17x13mm .. some (like in GH2) are bigger, so if you stitch two of those together you have most likely something around 36x28 sensor (that would allow even different crop ratios). And having 36 mpix FF.. well, even when performace of GH2 isnt somehow ground breaking, it would be still multi-aspect 36 mpix FF. Damn, that would be good..
(GH2 has 18 mpix sensor cropped to 16 mpix.. thats why I wrote 36 mpix)...Show more →
I looked at a few prototypes that were based on multiple butted sensors. <shrug>
OM lenses are well built? Hehehehe... Not really, No! Very simple design and while not the cheapest materials ever, still pretty low on the list. Opening about 20 or so of the OM Zuikos along side other makers has taught me about how their build quality stacks up. They aren't total rubbish but they ain't usually great either - given others from the same period.
Anyway if this is a µ4/3 camera it won't accept OM lenses directly. It will need an adapter so in that regard nothing will change. If this is all true it looks to be a pro or semi-pro µ4/3 body - in answer to very many mumblings and requests. If that's what it is I'll buy one for sure (assuming the price is in-line).
I wonder when this thing will release and what the feature set will be like?
I just think it's a shame that this comes in the form of a special edition and not a standard production release model. Or maybe they plan to milk it and then just keep on manufacturing...
So basically to make this camera look like an OM it must have a fake pentaprism casing, because an EVF camera doesnt have a pentaprism.
Also it must have a fake mirrorbox, because an EVF camera doesnt have a mirror.
If they do it, I hope it also has a fake pre-recorded mirror slap, just so there is no doubt just how lame olympus has become.
Lotusm50 wrote:
They saw the response to the "Pen", and may have finally caught on. A retro digital OM might do well also (as many here have long suggested).
If it comes with a 4/3rds sensors, I suspect, however, there will be a lot of disappointment. A FF digital OM will carve out a unique, successful niche for Olympus. They can't win playing Canon's and Nikon's game, but they can if they play their own game.
Yeah, and yet another all new mount and lens lineup (they need AF else it's going to be of very, very limited appeal) is just what we need now. Do they even have the R&D power / production capability anymore after all these financial problems?.. Sorry if I sound like I'm pissing on someone's candle, but I highly doubt FF.
However, I'd love to see a surprising breakthrough for Olympus like that, even though I don't own any OM lenses and actually traded an old OM-1 for a wi-fi dongle a few years back (now stone me... it didn't have any lenses on hand though, nor even a proper focusing screen as it was retooled for medical use. The new owner went through pains to find a focusing screen).
Snopchenko wrote:
they need AF else it's going to be of very, very limited appeal
It might be of limited appeal, but it would also have very, very, very limited competition.
In fact it doesnt get any more limited, there is only ONE non-AF digital camera currently in production: the leica M9.
I dont know how many manual focus users there are out there, but there are a few, and most still shoot film because there is no digicam that is designed for MF. And the first camera maker to make a purely manual focus camera that doesnt cost $7k will get them all. Especially if it has the OM's gigantic viewfinder, which means it would need to be FF.
Of course instead of that, Olympus will make another me-too camera, because Olympus has become the predictable short-term-cash-oriented company that it is today.
Spyro P. wrote:
It might be of limited appeal, but it would also have very, very, very limited competition.
In fact it doesnt get any more limited, there is only ONE non-AF digital camera currently in production: the leica M9.
I dont know how many manual focus users there are out there, but there are a few, and most still shoot film because there is no digicam that is designed for MF. And the first camera maker to make a purely manual focus camera that doesnt cost $7k will get them all. Especially if it has the OM's gigantic viewfinder, which means it would need to be FF.
Of course instead of that, Olympus will make another me-too camera, because Olympus has become the predictable short-term-cash-oriented company that it is today....Show more →
I can certainly understand the sentiment but from the business standpoint (and Olympus is a commercial enterprise; a financially and legally challenged at that) doing that is very probably a suicide. Think about the amount of money that needs to go into R&D, manufacturing and QA - all for a camera that is only appealing (as a MF one) to a very limited slice of uncompromising enthusiasts. And, in your words, doesn't cost $7k - that is, cannot balance out the low production volume through high price.
Snopchenko wrote:
I can certainly understand the sentiment but from the business standpoint (and Olympus is a commercial enterprise; a financially and legally challenged at that) doing that is very probably a suicide. Think about the amount of money that needs to go into R&D, manufacturing and QA - all for a camera that is only appealing (as a MF one) to a very limited slice of uncompromising enthusiasts. And, in your words, doesn't cost $7k - that is, cannot balance out the low production volume through high price.
Market economy is a cruel place after all.
Well, we can say that to Leica who was making losses for 10 years straight before the introduction of the M9, and the shareholders kept covering the losses from their own pockets until they finally succeeded. See what they reckon. Or to Fuji who invested 3 years of R&D on the development of X100 and X1, practically reinventing the wheel to make two cameras that they knew would appeal only to the fringe of a niche market. Seriously, Fuji has always been making cameras for obscure target groups that you needed half a page just to describe them. I mean a gigantic 6X9 rangefinder? Seriously? Who buys these things? Try to get funding from a bank or your shareholders with a business plan like that.
But you are right, the market economy is a cruel place, it takes balls and a vision. Shame Olympus has neither.
That's the point; it's a risk they need to take, like oh say... Sony did with A900 and then with the NEX. Problem is, Olympus is not in a good shape for risky gambles that might sink the company if they fail. I highly doubt they have the will power; a bold executive would have been necessary to stake everything on a new breakthrough, knowing that if it fails, he would have his balls in a vice.
But I guess we just have to wait and see what comes of this.
However, if they're planning to spin-off or sell the photo division, how better to increase the valuation of the company than releasing a hot new enthusiast/pro product with high demand and tens of thousands of lenses already out there?
