mawz wrote:
That would be Nikon and Leica, not Nikon and Canon. Canon, Minolta and Olympus introduced their 'Professional' systems around the same time, in 1971-1972. Prior to that the Professional 35mm systems were the Nikon F and the Leica M. FD mount was around long prior to that, but without the higher-end body that it needed to be a Professional system. It finally got that with the F1.
My (very hazy) recollection is that the F1 predated the OM-1 into more widespread use, but then my high school photography teacher at the time had a Canon! We were also not into rangefinder camera, so that could also be affecting my memory. Wikipedia says March of 1971 for the F1, and 1972 (unspecified) for the OM-1.
Hmm. Sony + Olympus partnership is possibly in the works. Is Sony the one fabricating the new 16MP Olympus sensor? Will Sony mirrorless cameras get some of that great Olympus AF and optics technology (Olympus has a lot of expertise here that Sony desperately could use with their NEX lenses)?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Will Sony mirrorless cameras get some of that great Olympus AF and optics technology (Olympus has a lot of expertise here that Sony desperately could use with their NEX lenses)?
Presumably, "optics technology" is why Sony have Zeiss on board (not to mention Tamron), but they really don't seem to make much use of Zeiss. The idea that Sony might have to go get more optics tech, would suggest that all might not be not right between Tokyo and Oberkochen.
mawz wrote:
That would be Nikon and Leica, not Nikon and Canon. Canon, Minolta and Olympus introduced their 'Professional' systems around the same time, in 1971-1972. Prior to that the Professional 35mm systems were the Nikon F and the Leica M. FD mount was around long prior to that, but without the higher-end body that it needed to be a Professional system. It finally got that with the F1.
Yup! they all (C, N, M, O) came on-line with something professional-ish at about the same time! I felt Nikon, Pentax, and Contax were at the same point with their offerings myself tho actually. The F to me wasn't pro-ish but the F2's and 3's were.
What made Oly what it was to us then at that time was their size innovation! First out of the gates with the Pen 1/2 frame SLR in like 1960 with it's rotary shutter and then bumping the big boys during the first notable SLR boom, with the first at Off The Film metering (for flash too) system, 1st with an ergonomic layout that set the Shutter and Aperture both as rings inline with the lens, and etc. all while maintaining the smallest-ish system size. And this continued on with many other firsts like having the fastest flash sync in the world, gaining a reputation of having the world's sharpest lens selection, first with a multi-sampled spot metering system - which could also average itself with OTF metering, and etc. and yet while still maintaining the "compact" design concept.
But we all knew at the time that Oly wasn't alone in these kinds of things... First TTL, Fastest (vertical) shutter, highest ASA offsets, quick-change auto-film threading, 1st AF, 1st fully AE, 1st apochromatic lens designs or fluorite element incorporation, and so on and so forth, all belonged to other companies. They were just a little smaller, a little lighter and a little cheaper (in some cases). There were advantages and disadvantages to shooting olympus exclusively. It can't really be said that they bested Nikon and Canon. At least not in the same way that coming out with a compact lightweight mirrorless FF design would today.
Lotusm50 wrote:
Presumably, "optics technology" is why Sony have Zeiss on board (not to mention Tamron), but they really don't seem to make much use of Zeiss. The idea that Sony might have to go get more optics tech, would suggest that all might not be not right between Tokyo and Oberkochen.
Olympus probably has more experience with small, compact optics vs Zeiss perhaps?
There is probably nothing to all this with regard to cameras/ lenses as Sony may just be interested in the medical part of Olympus.
All this speculation about Olympus' commercial motivation for resurrecting the OM brand is ridiculous: consumer photographic makes up about 15% of it's total revenue. With the current attention re: their corporate governance, simply 'milking the OM brand' for good PR would appear to be a pretty insufficient way to paper over the misappropriation of more than a billion dollars!
Having said that, I don't think the OM-D will quite be the flagship some are expecting, in the sense of a direct competitor to the pro SLRs of the day, but in a smaller format - more than anyone, I wish it would. (A while back I wrote a blog entry on the demise of Olympus purely as a *camera* manufacturer; oddly, in the week before the current scandal came to light: - the demise of Olympus
For years, in the film days, they were all I used, and covered everything I needed covered. The OM4Ti is still my dream camera, and a digital approximation that would let my 21mm Zuiko be a 21mm Zuiko (not to mention tons more other great Zuiko glass) would be much more than welcome! I've said it in other places: the only things I need from a camera are to be able to adjust 1) aperture 2) shutter speed 3) spot meter target 4) exposure comp - with the camera at my eye. Have been using a Pentax K5 and their own excellent small primes lately after giving up on Canon 5D and 5DIIs as "digital backs" with adapted Zuikos. I hate those giant plastic bricks of crap ergo.
If this can be done with the camera at my eye (and weather sealing a bonus) you get my money. Fuji Pro X-1 looks a *cracker* of a camera.
Sorry long post - longtime lurker, first time respondent.
yerknickers wrote:
the only things I need from a camera are to be able to adjust 1) aperture 2) shutter speed 3) spot meter target 4) exposure comp - with the camera at my eye. Have been using a Pentax K5 and their own excellent small primes lately after giving up on Canon 5D and 5DIIs as "digital backs" with adapted Zuikos. I hate those giant plastic bricks of crap ergo.
If this can be done with the camera at my eye (and weather sealing a bonus) you get my money. Fuji Pro X-1 looks a *cracker* of a camera.
Sorry long post - longtime lurker, first time respondent. ...Show more →
Welcome to FM yerknickers. Are you hoping the OM-D will be FF or just indicating that this is what you'd like to see? I ask this because I think the rumors are pretty solid that it will be a MFT format body and honestly I don't see Olympus making a FF anytime soon because then they'd have to create a whole new lens lineup. Since Fuji, Sony, Samsung and Pentax are all making bigger sensors (or better put - "using" bigger sensors), I think it would be more likely that a FF mirrorless will be coming from one of them.
But even more than a FF mirrorless, I'd really like to see someone come out with an interchangeable back where you can swap out sensors. This way, as technology increases with the sensor, you don't have to replace the entire camera. Ricoh kind of got it with their GXR system but I'm not sold on it because the sensor is permanently mounted to the lens. I realize their are technological hurdles to manage with a swappable back, but this would be ideal. I would have paid a nice chunk of money to have replaced my 1D Mark II sensor with the 5D many years ago
Well, I'd *love* a Zuiko-ready FF platform, but I don't think the OM-D will be it. I guess I'm really in love with the core value proposition of OM more than undyingly wedded to my Zuikos: small, light, but extremely robust. I want an unobtrusive cam that can still deliver high quality, while leaving *me* in control.
That said, I used an E-P2 in conjunction with the other stuff while travelling in '10 and thought it was *almost there*. With the rumoured (and known, i.e. AF) improvements to the PEN series, the OM-D is sure to be a nice piece of kit no matter how you slice it. But will it be better than that Fuji? Already night shots on Flickr that look wonderful, and someone needs to get my money in March (presently without digital - luckily I still love shooting film, but can't for paying gigs).
So, with current/next generation 4/3 sensor, and weather sealed versions of the 12/2 and 45/1.8 would I be happy? Sure.
PS. Announcement this week (apparently) of Sony merger/acquisition of Olympus, so Oly will no longer be shackled to the Panasonic sensor supply, despite having belatedly figured out how to get the best out of one-generation-old tech each time Panasonic bump their own product cycle...
I see your point yerknickers. It took me a while to rid myself of film as well. It sounds like you started in photography earlier than I ('92 was the first time I began using a camera seriously) and almost all of my gear was the "new" autofocus stuff. I shot with my dads old Minolta and 50mm lens that had a split screen viewfinder (not sure what it's called but you new the image or subject was in focus with the two screens lined up) and that was a really cool system. Since then I have used, almost exclusively, AF gear and not until I bought into the Nikon system with the D700 did I truly begin to appreciate just how good AF can be.
I saw one other post on this rumored Sony/Olympus merger, is this for real? If it is then that is great news for Olympus because Sony has the money and technical know how to make fantastic sensors.
yerknickers wrote:
But will it be better than that Fuji? Already night shots on Flickr that look wonderful, and someone needs to get my money in March (presently without digital - luckily I still love shooting film, but can't for paying gigs).
I think that will be tough but as long as it's at least decent, it may be enough since the rumored price is about half that of the Fuji X Pro 1.
Tariq, I'd say the Panasonic 16MP sensor used lately is "decent", but the rumor mill shows this as being something "new" so if they can get a little better than what Panasonic has now for high ISO IQ then I'd really like that
If the news about a Sony/Olympus merger comes to fruition, then I think by 2013 we could see some MAJOR improvements to Oly's sensors, and quite possibly, I wonder if the "new" sensor used in the OM-D is not, in fact, a Sony
wjmeyer wrote:
Tariq, I'd say the Panasonic 16MP sensor used lately is "decent", but the rumor mill shows this as being something "new" so if they can get a little better than what Panasonic has now for high ISO IQ then I'd really like that
If the news about a Sony/Olympus merger comes to fruition, then I think by 2013 we could see some MAJOR improvements to Oly's sensors, and quite possibly, I wonder if the "new" sensor used in the OM-D is not, in fact, a Sony
I did not read the rumor as an outright merger. Is that right?
Interesting, thanks for the link. I think either way it could mean that Oly will start using Sony sensors, which I think will be a good thing for them.
carstenw wrote:
Sorry, but that just makes no sense. If the best compact lens for such systems would have a slightly larger register distance, then that is easily built into the lens itself.
Which would then make the lens not so compact due to the added "distance", Right? Anyways I am not an expert in this topic. This was my understanding based on a few earlier discussions, but I could be wrong.
Lotusm50 wrote:
Presumably, "optics technology" is why Sony have Zeiss on board (not to mention Tamron), but they really don't seem to make much use of Zeiss. The idea that Sony might have to go get more optics tech, would suggest that all might not be not right between Tokyo and Oberkochen.
Also most people can't afford a Zeiss lens that would buy into the NEX. They aren't all alt gear afficianados.
curious80 wrote:
Which would then make the lens not so compact due to the added "distance", Right? Anyways I am not an expert in this topic. This was my understanding based on a few earlier discussions, but I could be wrong.
the added distance would be exactly the difference in mount registries. if sony were to steal the design for samsung's 30/2 pancake the sony version of the lens would be exactly 7.5mm longer than the samsung version. in my book that is still a very compact pancake lens (29mm length) and much better than what sony has brought out so far.
sebboh wrote:
the added distance would be exactly the difference in mount registries. if sony were to steal the design for samsung's 30/2 pancake the sony version of the lens would be exactly 7.5mm longer than the samsung version. in my book that is still a very compact pancake lens (29mm length) and much better than what sony has brought out so far.
