Olympus E system goes mirrorless in 2 years!

[bbodine9]

This would be quite a change but seems totally possible given the advances we have seen lately. Link: http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...n_two_years_probably_news_295133.html?aff=rss

 

[raymondluo]

Love it when they start talking about electronic shutters. Here's a company that get's it, albeit not at first.

 

[Godfrey]

This is the sort of thing I've been waiting for since 2002. When Olympus ships a body comparable to the E-1 and E-3 bodies in Micro-FourThirds,or if Panasonic does first, I will buy it: it will be become my standard camera.

The G1 is very close already.

 

[ptomsu]

Same for me! If any of them brings a mirrorless FT camera, I will buy it! For sure!

 

[Jonas]

OK, somebody explain to me, what's the big deal with a mirrorless FT camera compared to a µ4/3 camera? I want a more rugged version of the G1 with some improvements, I don't want a longer register distance. I guess there is something I don't understand here.

 

[photoSmart42]

OK, somebody explain to me, what's the big deal with a mirrorless FT camera compared to a µ4/3 camera? I want a more rugged version of the G1 with some improvements, I don't want a longer register distance. I guess there is something I don't understand here.

Agreed. The thing Oly and Sony are missing on their announcements of mirrorless FT/APS-C cameras is the size of the lenses. That's a major selling point of the m4/3 system (which is made possible by the mirrorless design, not because the mirrorless design is the driving factor).

It'll be interesting to see how it all plays out. Will smaller FT/APS-C cameras sell in spite of having to fit the regular FT/APS-C lenses on them? Who knows, but at least it's apparent to everyone that at least some of the big players are recognizing the m4/3 format as a threat, which is good for everyone (more competition = better products and lower prices).

 

[Godfrey]

OK, somebody explain to me, what's the big deal with a mirrorless FT camera compared to a µ4/3 camera? I want a more rugged version of the G1 with some improvements, I don't want a longer register distance. I guess there is something I don't understand here.

I expect that if/when they go completely mirrorless, the body will be micro-fourthirds mount and full access to the FT lens suite through an adapter, just as we do today with the G1 and other mFT bodies.

I doubt seriously that they will make a mirrorless FourThirds-mount body. There's no point to that .. you can't reduce the size of the body if you do, and you eliminate the benefits of the short register possible with a mirrorless body. In essence, the way I read this is that FourThirds system is evolving to a new lens mount spec with an all-electronic viewfinder/etc.

Same sensor format, same lenses ... plus new ones that could only be created for the shorter register mount. Pretty much how I've imagined it all along.

 

[Jonas]

I expect that if/when they go completely mirrorless, the body will be micro-fourthirds mount and full access to the FT lens suite through an adapter, just as we do today with the G1 and other mFT bodies. (...)

OK. Then we are thinking along the same lines.

/Jonas

 

[Diane B]

Thanks for clarification. That would make me happy.

Diane

 

[Jonathon Delacour]

I expect that if/when they go completely mirrorless, the body will be micro-fourthirds mount and full access to the FT lens suite through an adapter, just as we do today with the G1 and other mFT bodies.

I doubt seriously that they will make a mirrorless FourThirds-mount body. There's no point to that .. you can't reduce the size of the body if you do, and you eliminate the benefits of the short register possible with a mirrorless body. In essence, the way I read this is that FourThirds system is evolving to a new lens mount spec with an all-electronic viewfinder/etc.

Same sensor format, same lenses ... plus new ones that could only be created for the shorter register mount. Pretty much how I've imagined it all along.

Excellent analysis. Perhaps some of the new lenses could be primes -- although given the Olympus obsession with zooms for the FourThirds mount, that could turn out to be a forlorn hope.

 

[Brian Mosley]

Alternatively, this could pave the way for a trine sensor 4/3rds camera.

Cheers

Brian

 

[pellicle]

Hi

well, wearing my cynical market analysis cap for a moment ...

Agreed. The thing Oly and Sony are missing on their announcements of mirrorless FT/APS-C cameras is the size of the lenses.

some of the lenses (Panas 7-14 mm for instance) do stand out as being smaller

however for many it seems to me they don't make any significant size reduction. I think in particular in the telephoto area it won't make any difference as 200mm is not limited by focal flange distance

The 9-18mm to me seems to simply be slimmer than the existing 9-18 with a telescoping section to make it the same length, slightly more annoying to use (lock and unlock) and more fragile.

That's a major selling point of the m4/3 system (which is made possible by the mirrorless design, not because the mirrorless design is the driving factor).

but the market is about as deep as f1 on a 80mm lens, they will see (insert Homer Simpson voice) "mirrorless ... ouhhh" and follow the fellow with the one shoe (Life of Brian reference)

the question of why mirrorless is significant will escape them.

my reading of that announcement is that Oly will stand to gain cost benefits in manufacture of their low end cameras, stuff like the E-3 will likely remain mirror cameras as I don't think they've sorted out how to 5 frames / sec and have you see the oncoming target just yet, but if they have ... well

ok ... that's enough market cynicism from me for the morning