Four Thirds to get smaller and lighter system sibling

[Atlasman]

Originally Posted by Graham

The Micro FT size is very appealing and as it will produce images of equal or improved quality, this will become a serious consideration.

Thanks Ian for the News

I think we can expect E-3 equivalent image quality--if my understanding is correct, getting the lens closer to the sensor helps improve image quality (helps control CA?)

[zts]

Originally Posted by Ian

... Reality can always be surprising - in either a good or a bad way. But we do need Olympus and Panasonic to follow up with the promises that they won't abandon the existing Four Thirds user base.

Ian

Exactly. And not just that they "won't abandon the existing Four Thirds user base", but they need to assure us that they'll keep the meaningful R&D resources in place for the original platform and take care of the professional and prosumer needs in terms of the high-end camera bodies and glass. The announcement of the Micro pretty much kills the E-4xx and probably the SP-5xx UZ lines. While the miniaturization trend is exciting for significant number of consumers whose priority is to take great pictures of their grandpa's birthday, the pro and advanced users are more concerned about the IQ ... and quite frankly we still have to see a compact that consistently delivers anything close to the IQ of a full body DSLR. If there is any luck, the Micro will perform maybe on the level of the G9 @ 80 ISO in terms of noise and IQ ... maybe even better with the quality glass from the original 4/3. Darn, it's so hard to imagine putting a substantial piece of glass like the 12-60 on the tiny Micro body . Anywho, I can see it as a solid, even excellent street shooter, but not much more than that. Hopefully I'm wrong and there's much more to it than I can see at this point -- so far I see it as this will probably help Oly's bottom line at least in the short run, but it doesn't do much for me or most peeps on this site except creating a concern about the future of the original 4/3 platform.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Atlasman

I think we can expect E-3 equivalent image quality--if my understanding is correct, getting the lens closer to the sensor helps improve image quality (helps control CA?)

Mmmmm - this is a great un-answered question. On the one hand I understand that it could be helpful, but on the other the, so-called, telecentric aspect of Four Thirds could be compromised.

We'll just have to wait and see...

Ian

[Atlasman]

Originally Posted by Ian

Mmmmm - this is a great un-answered question. On the one hand I understand that it could be helpful, but on the other the, so-called, telecentric aspect of Four Thirds could be compromised.

We'll just have to wait and see...

Ian

Are you referring to existing glass or m4/3rds designed glass?

[joachim]

Originally Posted by Ian

Mmmmm - this is a great un-answered question. On the one hand I understand that it could be helpful, but on the other the, so-called, telecentric aspect of Four Thirds could be compromised.

We'll just have to wait and see...

Ian

Ian,

the position of the last lens vertex (where the last lens element sits) and of the exit pupil (from where the rays are projected out) have nothing to do with each other. Just think about the Zeiss lens of the Sony R1 (24-120 equiv). The last vertex was just in front of the sensor. Being able to construct the lens closer to the sensor gives the lens designers more freedom to play, you just need a pretty large rear element. However due to the smallish size of the 4-3rd sensor the rear element doesn't need to be that large to facilitate an exit pupil which is quite remote from the sensor.

In general I think being able to construct the lens closer to the sensor has to be a good thing. If there is no benefit for a particular lens design, you can still have a lens, whose rear vertex is quite a distance away from the sensor. In short it does no harm.

[Wickster]

I was hoping they were developing a system that would compete with the super expensive Mark IIIs and D3s, or a successor to the E-3 that would handle much higher ISO setting with less noise and capture more frames per second for sports photography and the like.

I was holding out on the E-3 (from my E510) thinking that an E-4 or E-5 would be announced soon. Guess I'll wait and see what kind of cameras comes out from this technology.

There was a mention of a lens adaptor somewhere, would that adapter work from traditional 4/3 to Micro 4/3 or the other way around?

I'm not too fond of small cameras at all, but that's just me though, it might grow on me someday.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by joachim

Ian,

the position of the last lens vertex (where the last lens element sits) and of the exit pupil (from where the rays are projected out) have nothing to do with each other. Just think about the Zeiss lens of the Sony R1 (24-120 equiv). The last vertex was just in front of the sensor. Being able to construct the lens closer to the sensor gives the lens designers more freedom to play, you just need a pretty large rear element. However due to the smallish size of the 4-3rd sensor the rear element doesn't need to be that large to facilitate an exit pupil which is quite remote from the sensor.

In general I think being able to construct the lens closer to the sensor has to be a good thing. If there is no benefit for a particular lens design, you can still have a lens, whose rear vertex is quite a distance away from the sensor. In short it does no harm.

You are of course right

Above all, the reduction in physical size of Micro FT lenses facilitated by the shortening of the lens - sensor distance is truly remarkable, based on lens mock-ups I have seen.

Ian

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Wickster

I was hoping they were developing a system that would compete with the super expensive Mark IIIs and D3s, or a successor to the E-3 that would handle much higher ISO setting with less noise and capture more frames per second for sports photography and the like.

I was holding out on the E-3 (from my E510) thinking that an E-4 or E-5 would be announced soon. Guess I'll wait and see what kind of cameras comes out from this technology.

There was a mention of a lens adaptor somewhere, would that adapter work from traditional 4/3 to Micro 4/3 or the other way around?

I'm not too fond of small cameras at all, but that's just me though, it might grow on me someday.

After speaking to a senior figure at Olympus UK this evening, Photokina next month should reveal some long term E-System (DSLR) strategies.

The adapter is basically a spacer to mount standard Four Thirds lenses onto a Micro Four Thirds body. This is needed because Micro FT lenses mount closer to the sensor.

The spacer adapter retains full electronic communications with the body.

Ian

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Atlasman

Are you referring to existing glass or m4/3rds designed glass?

The new lenses.

Existing lenses should perform optically the same as with existing Four Thirds bodies.

Ian

[joachim]

Originally Posted by Wickster

There was a mention of a lens adaptor somewhere, would that adapter work from traditional 4/3 to Micro 4/3 or the other way around?

The adapter is to fit present 4-3rd lenses to Micro-4/3rd bodies. The other way round is not so easy, it would need to have optical elements and would act as a tele converter. Hope this answers your question.