Olympus micro 4/3ds a few weeks away

[jonoslack]

Hmmmm ....

I wonder if the sensor will be EXACTLY the same as that of the G1? It would be great if the issue of poor corner sharpness with wide Leica-M bayonet lenses were resolved. My G1 is fantastic with any Leica glass over 50mm and almost unusable with anything below 35mm. I might even be persuaded to get over losing the articulated LCD and EVF (which I really like) of my G1 if the corner sharpness got fixed by the Oly camera..

HI Geoff
I would have expected it to have the same sensor as the E620/E3 . .. but maybe that IS the same as the sensor in the G1. The corner sharpness is certainly an issue - it's interesting that it isn't a problem with the M8, which is using a great deal more of the imaging circle than 4/3. I wonder whether it's a physical sensor issue, or something to do with processing the file and lens correction?

Whatever, I quite agree, here's hoping!

 

[pellicle]

I wonder if the sensor will be EXACTLY the same as that of the G1? It would be great if the issue of poor corner sharpness with wide Leica-M bayonet lenses were resolved.
... if the corner sharpness got fixed by the Oly camera..

I could be wrong but I had the impression that this was caused by the reduced flange distance of the M lenses (about 7mm longer than that of the G1) and the angle of the incident light reaching the sensor (something about telecentric [kept deliberately vague here to avoid potential maths discussions on the allowance of off 90deg and telecentricity or near-telecentricity])

I understood it was a limiting factor in the Leica digital and the reason why they didn't make a M series with a 5D sized full frame sensor. 35mm SLR makers have been lucky with their (by and large) > 44mm registration distance ... translated well to digital!

 

[pellicle]

Hi

The corner sharpness is certainly an issue - it's interesting that it isn't a problem with the M8

ok ... just incase people didn't know, from dpreview:

Leica, obviously keen to solve this problem, took a three pronged approach with the M8:

1. Don't use a full frame sensor - at this time it would be cost prohibitive and too complex to produce a sensor which can cover the entire 36x24 mm frame and still work with rangefinder lenses. For this reason the M8's sensor measures 27x18 mm (or 1.33x crop).

2. Use offset microlenses - instead of placing all microlenses directly over the photodiode they are gradually offset as you get closer to the edge of the frame (see below).

3. Know which lens is being used and apply some software correction - all new M series lenses now carry a six-bit code which allows the M8 to identify which lens is used and (optionally) apply a 'final stage' software based vignetting correction (for RAW images the lens used is simply recorded, no change is made).

Below is a diagram provided by Leica which does some way to explaining how microlenses at the edge of the frame are offset from the photodiode below them, compared to a normal microlens / photodiode combination in the center of the frame.

 

[jonoslack]

Hi



ok ... just incase people didn't know, from dpreview:

HI There
Thanks for that - to be honest I don't thing the software correction is relevant, as you still get sharp corners even without lens identification - and you get sharp corners with RAW files as well.

I thought that more of this was to do with vignetting than softness, it should also be much less of an issue with 4/3 because the sensor is so much smaller.

I don't really see why the lack of 'telecentricity' (put in quotes to avoid complicated maths discussion ) should make the corners soft, but I can certainly see why it would cause vignetting.

 

[pellicle]

Hi

Thanks for that - to be honest I don't thing the software correction is relevant, as you still get sharp corners even without lens identification - and you get sharp corners with RAW files as well.

...


I don't really see why the lack of 'telecentricity' (put in quotes to avoid complicated maths discussion ) should make the corners soft, but I can certainly see why it would cause vignetting.

me not know much more either ... me just simple fella

I'm trying to get some samples of any image taken on a G1 with a Heliar 12mm and on film too. I wish to scan the film and compare the same areas of the image to see if it makes a sods difference (or we're all just too pikky no we have cameras with built in 4000dpi scanners sans the film).

 

[Ranger 9]

And don't forget these great features:

-- Antigravity neckstrap lugs for all-day comfort!

-- Flux capacitor so you can go back in time and get the shots you missed!

-- Delivered on the back of a magic unicorn that poops Wiis!

 

[kweide]

Ranger, you forgot:

-- dynamic sized sensor
-- selectable noiselevel ( instead of ISO )
-- air supported anti shake Chassis
-- virtual VF with 90° Option
-- self learning Adaptall Adapterrings for all Lenses
-- 2 - 240 mm f 1.1 as Kit lens

 

[monza]

Yes and no hump and it must fit in your pocket. And not just any pocket, it must fit the little coin pocket as offered by Levi Strauss.

 

[pellicle]

...And not just any pocket, it must fit the little coin pocket as offered by Levi Strauss.

oh jeezus ... I'll never be able to get it out without taking my pants off AND it'll fall on the floor when my wife hangs them over a chair !

 

[monza]

OK, I'll compromise, it can be no bigger than an iPhone.

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

oh jeezus ... I'll never be able to get it out without taking my pants off AND it'll fall on the floor when my wife hangs them over a chair !

Oh dear you are a lucky guy. I always have to put my own pants over the chair.
BTW I am looking forward to this new camera too. I need an EVF. I hope this will not be to big of an extra hump on the flashconnection.
Michiel

 

[pellicle]

Oh dear you are a lucky guy. I always have to put my own pants over the chair.

but she only does it when ferreting around the bedroom for her lost clothes!

 

[Audii-Dudii]

I'm trying to get some samples of any image taken on a G1 with a Heliar 12mm and on film too.

You mean this one?

Probably not, as this is the (rare, NLA) Nikon F-mount version and not the more common LTM version. The elements are supposed to be the same, though, just recessed further into the mount.

No photos with it yet, unfortunately, as the DMW-MA1 adapter arrived today and I was just trying it out in the yard. Perhaps this weekend?

 

[pellicle]

You mean this one?
...
... this is the (rare, NLA) Nikon F-mount version and not the more common LTM version. The elements are supposed to be the same, though, just recessed further into the mount.

ok, yes I was meaning the LTM version. I'm quite interested in the part I underlined. Do you mean Nikon rangefinder mount? I wonder how they could recess the mounts differently and not effect the registration distance and keep the same optical formula?

looking forward to seeing your images ... you don't happen to have a film camera for that lens do you? I'd love to see an image from both (happy to pay for film and processing costs if you could send me a negative and a file)

 

[Audii-Dudii]

I'm quite interested in the part I underlined. Do you mean Nikon rangefinder mount? I wonder how they could recess the mounts differently and not effect the registration distance and keep the same optical formula?

No, the F-mount was used on the Nikon SLRs. Because the lens register for Nikon SLRs is 46.5mm or roughly 18mm greater than the lens register for Leica's rangefinders, the Heliar's lens elements have to be recessed further into the lens body by the same 18mm in order for the lens to focus properly.

I bought my copies of the Nikon F-mount 12mm and 15mm CV lenses to use with my DMC-L1 via a 4/3-> F-Mount adapter (clunky though this setup is) and am now able to also use them on my G1 in combination with the DMW-MA1 adapter. Of course, this setup means the front edge of the lens now extends approx. 10mm further than the LTM versions would, but as I already own these lenses and I can still use them on my L1 as well as my G1 (which would not be the case if I had LTM versions), it doesn't make any sense to replace them.

you don't happen to have a film camera for that lens do you? I'd love to see an image from both (happy to pay for film and processing costs if you could send me a negative and a file)

Unfortunately, I don't have any Nikon SLRs on hand, either film or digital. I'll ask around, though, as I may be able to rustle up one among my friends.

 

[jonoslack]

oh jeezus ... I'll never be able to get it out without taking my pants off AND it'll fall on the floor when my wife hangs them over a chair !

Don't worry, it'll be completely shock and scratch proof, and also totally sealed, so that when your wife puts your jeans through the washing machine it'll still come out perfect (actually, it'll be a good way to get off the nose grease).

Thank you Klaus and Ranger 9 - There's something very special about anticipating a new camera . . .

 

[Ranger 9]

Ranger, you forgot:

-- dynamic sized sensor
-- selectable noiselevel ( instead of ISO )
-- air supported anti shake Chassis
-- virtual VF with 90° Option
-- self learning Adaptall Adapterrings for all Lenses
-- 2 - 240 mm f 1.1 as Kit lens

Personally, I'd just as soon bag all this camera stuff entirely and go with a photo version of Doctor Who's psychic paper: Just show it to people and they THINK they're seeing whatever picture they want to see.

As long as they don't pay me with psychic checks...