Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Something like this?
Hmmm I am honestly not sure how the E-5 would do this now after several years of several 4/3rd bodies. Here's another thought: maybe 4/3rds SGH glass is being discontinued? The e-5 being the last 4/3rds, this makes sense- put out the E-5 and drive demand for the lenses to get them to move (margins on lenses probably higher than camera though the E_5 probably has a good margin on it), and finally sell remaining stock.
Is it really that strange? How many people are really buying the E-5 then the SHG glass? Think about it- that glass is not what sells everyday, and they need to move it out. Release the e-5, get it out of stock and prepare the way for the full micro four thirds switch soon. They are going to be coming with "pro glass" for micro four thirds, the first one just announced as a mockup. They are going to redo the entire line (equivalent-wise, not quite 1 y 1 but range wise). There's no reason to continue producing 4/3rds lenses after E-5 and as a company you would like to take out all the stock lenses.
The E-5 at least in USA sure isn't selling that much. At least the big dealer in LA had them all on special order and seemed more like Olympus has been trailing the supply. The E-5 is a camera aimed at the 4/3rds owner with 4/3rds glass (even Olympus publicly said this), there aren't much incentives to being new people in.
Hope springs eternal doesn't it?I was told I should receive my SHG glass next week. Already more than a week late then ..... hmmm
Hope this is a good sign WRT there is high demand for SHG glass and that for Olympus this is a sign to continue the 43 system - especially with an E7 with still OVF
It's not happening. The only chance I give it is if the E-5 does indeed fly off *and* the new president sees something in this. The new president is the wild card. I want to know if he plans to trim Olympus Imaging or do a final "push" to "do what it takes" to make a dent in the market.
Of course it means products also. How else do you execute on the strategies that the company setup for each division. Also he is going to have to take a close look at Olympus Imaging because Olympus Imaging has been loosing market/revenues constantly now for like four years, accelerating that trend in the last year and a half including now in the red. He's going to have to take a look at the division and fix, sell or kill. Olympus the company is not going to keep an unprofitable division like that for too long. This was said before also by the company higher management.
Well they are the ones consistently saying there's no more 4/3rds in the future (after E-5, now even said by themselves). Unless something drastic direction wise happens, that's the last of the 4/3rds. It makes no sense then to make expensive lenses in that line if the system is getting canned.
Yup. I mean, that's part of my big frustration with the E-5. The e-5 took a good camera (E-3) and tweaked it/optimized it (though carried some quirks like its user interface/ergonomics), made it to 2011 with a 2008 sensor. But by the way I wouldn't even say a Sony sensor, a GH2 sensor would have been enough. It would have surpassed the resolution of the 16/18 MP competitors, has no banding, and allows the ISO advantage to be kept close enough that a faster aperture or lens could bring the camera very close to what competitors can do.
Correct. I honestly don't know where the truth lies here, but the rumors talk about a contract where Olympus had to buy Panasonic. Allegedly such contract expires this year. I have no idea if this is true honestly, and a lot are talking about it as if it was confirmed/done deal but I haven't seen it confirmed.
You have to consider why such contracts exist to begin with. There's probably good reasons here. But the hope you talk about is yes- a better sensor- for the upcoming Pens and Pen Pro. Unless something *drastic* happens, 4/3rds is no more. On the good side- the lenses you buy now Olympus is trying to make them work on the new Pen Pro. Now, trying and actually doing it are two different things. I think they will do it, and if that's the case, I wouldn't worry too much about no more bodies. Lenses carry on.
there is no higher than the CEO, the CoB (chairman of the board) hires him on behalf of the board, but likely the board are not in full time employment of Olympus, even the president answers to the CEO
actually to be specific what they said until recently was pertinent to SLRs/mirrorless, now they say Pen/Pen Pro. If they had a real Pen with real controls in the first place they wouldnt even have the concept of Pen Pro. I doubt it will replace E5 in function just range positionraist3d said:
both GH1 and GH2 have exhibited bandingraist3d said:
without new bodies, then lenses or not much like Contax its all over.raist3d said:
I am sorry but they have indeed said pen. They have said several things actually but one of them is "the future is Pen." This was either the Olympus Europe head guy or Terada-san himself.
The GH1 can but it's very mild. The GH2 I have yet to see banding anywhere. If you have a link to that I would appreciate for my reference. I have downloaded RAWS and pushed them significantly (ISO 6400 2-3 stops up) and I have yet to see banding evidence. Regularly on the other sensors that exhibit banding this would bring up banding in the shadows (as the article I linked previously in Luminous Landscape on the E-3 talked about). And this is the 2nd issue with banding- if you get it is bad, but if you have to post process for any reason, there's often no latitude for doing so.
Following that logic, then it is. But the idea here is that yes, 4/3rd lenses are discontinued, but can work on the new Pen Pro. There will certainly be new lenses on the Pen Pro (or whatever name they come up with).
You have to ask yourself who knows more about Olympus strategy: an Olympus sales representative or the Olympus whole Europe Camera marketing guy. And Olympus sales representative or the Company CEO (that's the one that said if Imaging doesn't turn around by 2015, it's over for them). And Olympus sales representative, or Mr. Terada-san himself, the head of the DSLR (that includes Pen) of Olympus Japan/HQ.
Again, what that representative is saying is quite irrelevant having so many people of Olympus way over his position at the company saying the other things. Though if he said Pro M43, that doesn't contradict what Olympus has been saying.
That's what I have been saying
The only concern I have there is that they really do it, that they actually do work very well. But they have said this themselves, that this is one of their top priorities. As it should be, because if that doesn't happen, the PR backlash is going to be big from the 4/3rds owner.I think as far as the new president is in, we will see drastic changes soon. I would expect by years end we should be seeing some different directions. At least marketing has to change it tune.
your just not good at the concept of agreement are you
Well people seem to have trouble stopping GH2 from banding with video, but almost any camera you can mention you can find out it bands if you bother to look for it. The same was revealed about 5DII and 7D as it was with GH1 which bands fairly readily above ISO800. You had that discussion on those principles with Jonas with whom you disagreed. It suspect wont go any better with meraist3d said:
I think the flaw in their plan is, that AF will not be as good with these lenses than would be on a conventional SLR. If thats the case even initially, enthusiasm for them will quickly disappear as there will almost inevitably be a better replacement from mFT. All of a sudden you have no bodies and in reality no lenses either.raist3d said:
Please refrain from making silly commentary, thanks. I don't see why I should agree when it's not what they said. And I know it's Terada. Most people on the internet when they resort to correct spelling mistakes are looking for some stupid fight.
Again, where is the GH2 banding? If it's for video, at what ISO's? That still doesn't take away a superior sensor from what the E-5 has, and I haven't seen banding on stills. Like I said, you can get banding on CMOS, but if it's really hard it's irrelevant. The E-5 bands rather easy.
That is possible.
I think that's a possible outcome. I think the other outcome is possible also. That's why I say that I hope they manage to do what they are saying.
So what do you make of the e-410 then, which has "hot" ISO 100 and lower than expected ISO 1600?
Not sure why DxO has to make any cameras to understand the engineering issues involved in dynamic range- at least far better than preview. As for photos they have to take a bunch if they want their RAW converter be worth anything.
I don't have to take it up with him at all. I don't have to do anything. Andy is not an authority in this subject and DXo is. It's that simple. But for the record, I have taken it up to preview before to Phil and Simon.
The fact that RAW converters when they don't support cameras show the truth of what is going on- that the ISO's are pushed is very telling. Now, you can comply with the standard and get that exposure at the respective ISO, but what will happen is that cameras that are actually more sensitive to light/better sensors will show less noise. This is why the 620/e-30 and forward have so much more noise than the resolution increase from 10-12 megapixels would have suggested. An E-3 has noticeable more shadow range than the E-30 and forward. The real reason is that ISO push on the other cameras, which comply with the ISO standard as you say but then you get that noise.
I don't argue that DXo are the only ones right. There are other reviews that mention the noise in the E-5 and some that don't but then they go ahead and compare JPEGS between cameras. At that point a better JPEG engine will do a better result and it's well known the Olympus JPEG engine is at the top (Fuji's the other). But as far as the sensitivity of the sensors, you can even forget about conforming to an ISO then- it's the measured signal to noise ratio with standardized light. I don't know how much more accurate it can get for a comparison and the other things they mention they do.
You are more than welcome to say that, though I provided full instructions on how to reproduce some of the testing I do myself, only to be called names, which quite frankly, doesn't seem very logical to me.
Normalized sensitivity data is important because that's all the data you get at a given intensity to do any derived data. The derived data varies greatly in JPEG but not in RAW as far as being exclusive to each brand.
Please refrain from making suppositions as to "what I supposedly know" that you want to prove and allegedly implicitly agree with because that's simply nonsense.
It's actually quite useful. Like I said, I have been able to corroborate their expected noise/iso's/DR relative to the cameras I have. They do not cover banding situations though.
Not really. This is all pretty linear and it's arbitrary where the manufacturers set it to.
I am sorry but I don't believe you are in any shape or form to call it this way, more so when you can't even show due process yourself with a camera like I did with the 620 and draw.
I don't see how that changes anything, or has to do with much
Well keep in mind Panasonic already solved the AF issue with contrast AF. Their GH2 is really fast in AF. If you meant them supporting the 4/3rd lenses, you should check out how fast the Panny Leica F1.4 focuses. AFAIK, most if not all Panasonic 4/3rd lenses can do fast contrast AF. So right now the GH2 supports that better, much better, on micro four thirds than Olympus does.
