Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 29, 2012, 6:20 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

well that was always going to be the thing
lenses are held by the physics of the situation, and tele lenses or zooms into the telephoto scale were never going to be all that different in size. The cameras were going to be thinner, but then perhaps there were ways of dealing with that as an issue anyway. When it comes to the ergonomics of the matter the GH2 to GH3 generational growth demonstrates that mirrorless sizes were too small to be useful.

More frightening, this adventure has been so poorly thought out, that its impossible to fit a mirror such as that in an SLT within the space between the sensor and the rear of the lens, the distance between the sensor stack and the rear of the lens is way to short to even consider it. Worse yet, the difference between 43rds mounts and mFT mount registers is also not enough to provide room for an SLT adapter type solution of the type that Sony put forward.

Olympus not being a sensor producer could never have guaranteed pdAF on sensor configurations would appear, therefore had taken leave from reality on the continued life of 43rds lenses making decisions that they would know would never work on the technology they had, all the while strangling supply of SLRs from their own product sheets. Basically we were screwed from day one of mFT's appearance 4 yrs ago and cheered the thing all the way

Last edited by Rriley; Nov 29, 2012 at 6:23 AM.
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2012, 5:59 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,531
Default

I think Woodford is being naive if he thought a real and drastic change was going to happen in any corporate culture especially within such a short time period. Its back to business and no surprise, although I thought they might want to have waited a little longer before getting back to what would be normal business operation.

m43, I think we know was kick started by Pana and they were leading this from the start and I think Oly were always playing catch up right upto getting the OMD out of the door. I think the writing was on the wall the minute they made that announcement leaving m43 as the only option for E4xx/5xx/600 and 30 shooters. If we see an E-7 how long will that last .. will they just put last years OMD tech into a E3/E5 shell and be done with it ? I don't want to use an adapter to be able to get decent AF (possibly not even up to the E3 standards) on a $2000k lens. If the AF with the adapter isn't up to par will OLy simply stick their heads in the sand and pretend that theres nothing wrong.. and its all down to user error or just state thats the best that we can do .. please buy an m43 lens .. and by the way lens hoods cost extra .. ooo and if you want a black lens, those are special editions and cost several $100 more... ...

Last edited by HarjTT; Nov 29, 2012 at 6:04 PM.
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 8:06 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HarjTT View Post
I think Woodford is being naive if he thought a real and drastic change was going to happen in any corporate culture especially within such a short time period. Its back to business and no surprise, although I thought they might want to have waited a little longer before getting back to what would be normal business operation.
The regular folks in Japan that I communicate with on the JT blog, were astonished that gaijin like Woodford (or you and me) were surprised by what Oly did. Their phrase is "Japan Inc." which represents the set of business rules that Japanese corporations follow (and the government recognizes) but which are not written down. They include never telling anyone outside of senior management what business and financial decisions the company is making, and never expecting to be punished for any consequent bad results.

I would be pretty agitated about where the Oly 4/3 system is going (i.e. not going) except that at my age I expect that what I have will work fine for me for a long time. I suppose in the back of my mind I always remembered what Oly did to their OM customers, and also I understand Japan Inc. to some extent. But I'm still annoyed, if for no other reason than that eventually I'll need to get my expensive equipment serviced.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 8:07 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rriley View Post
Olympus not being a sensor producer could never have guaranteed pdAF on sensor configurations would appear, therefore had taken leave from reality on the continued life of 43rds lenses making decisions that they would know would never work on the technology they had, all the while strangling supply of SLRs from their own product sheets. Basically we were screwed from day one of mFT's appearance 4 yrs ago and cheered the thing all the way
Excellent points!

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 1:52 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,531
Default

Hi Ted

Part of me can't believe that after working 20years+ at Olympus that Woodward isn;t aware of how "Japan Inc" works and that he expected some kind of miracle change. It wasn't going to happen and I'm sure if it had we all would have been amazed by it.

I've been wondering recently how many FT43 users are actually left ..tens of thousands, thousands or just 100's and if so what happens if no E-7 shows up. We'll have a fair amount of SHG users with some very expensive door stops esp if theres nothing to pair them up with. How many EXs/E30's do you think are in circulation or possible resale at anyone time ? Will an adapter really be able to provide fast and accurate AF's with the SHG/HGs esp if paired up with something the size of the OMD? What about battery power will the M43's have enough juice without a battery grip to be used with adapter+lens+TC ? Personally, I'm a bit cynical with the whole thing and think every announcement by Oly is just all smoke and mirrors - loads of hot air and nothing more.

On another totally different note .. looks as if theres strong rumours of a Pro level 7D MK11 from Canon on the way aimed specifically at sports and wildlife togs. Thats exactly the market FT should have been aiming for but hey what do we know
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 5:33 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Harj, I'm an optimist who is inclined to take people at face value. BUT unlike RRiley or you, I'm not a working pro photographer so I don't have any pressure on my use of my gear.

I do think the Oly managers in their camera organization who have said they were producing a pro body that will allow 43 glass to be used well, meant what they said when they said it. It's possible that Sony will impose other ideas such as shutting down 43 DSLR camera production to reduce losses, but somehow I don't think that will happen. Sony takes a long and sometimes altruistic view - thay have produced classical music CDs for years at a loss, stating that their other music sales makes enough profit to cover that. So although I have a significant investment in SHG glass I'm planning to wait and see. But as I said, I'd have a different view if i were a pro tog depending on my gear to make the mortgage payments...
__________________
Ted

People are made to be loved and things are made to be used. The confusion in this world is that people are used and things are loved. (Unknown author)
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 5:35 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkurkowski View Post

I would be pretty agitated about where the Oly 4/3 system is going (i.e. not going) except that at my age I expect that what I have will work fine for me for a long time. I suppose in the back of my mind I always remembered what Oly did to their OM customers, and also I understand Japan Inc. to some extent. But I'm still annoyed, if for no other reason than that eventually I'll need to get my expensive equipment serviced.

Ted
I realize that I no longer have a Oly fourthirds camera system and probably should avoid commenting. But, after all the years that I owned Olympus equipment, I can't help but get agitated at the leadership of Olympus for basically totally disregarding their user base, by not making the necessary updates to the auto focus system, while working with the appropriate sensor manufacturers to resolve noise/highlight/ low dynamic range issues. Instead, they kept pumping out new bodies with incremental improvements-none of which addressed the real problems.

Then, without much of any concern, they went micro fourthirds. This change in direction, effectively killed any further investment in 43 development.

I too, am too old to be getting cranked up about it, but I can't help myself, since whenever I look at some of the bird images I'd taken with the E-30+50-200mm combo, I still am amazed at the clarity and sharpness of those images.

Problem was that it took me 100 attempts at getting 1 completely in focus
image when the damn bird was in flight.

The more I read and think about Olympus and their management, the more
p-ssed off I get.

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 8:23 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

At its core the issue of one of 'direction', they just don't know where they are going with 43rds, all they do seem to want to do is starve it and get rid of it. Even Sony decided they needed both mounts to continue forward, I do not see this any differently.

The situation is simple in itself when you look at what Harj says about 7D. Olympus should dump the Ex nomenclature, refresh the SLR end with a single body they update every 2 years. Make it a performance camera that clicks out 10 fps, its weatherproof, not so big, not so heavy, not so costly as Ex.

Its just a shame that this wasnt better thought out from the beginning, they could have had a camera that could use both mounts, but the design for mFT they settled on excluded this usefulness.
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 10:04 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,901
Default

LOL. Reminds me of the movie "Grumpy Old Men"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rriley View Post
....................
.................................................
Olympus should dump the Ex nomenclature, refresh the SLR end with a single body they update every 2 years. Make it a performance camera that clicks out 10 fps, its weatherproof, not so big, not so heavy, not so costly as Ex.
...................
LOL. You didn't realize it, but you basically just described the OMD-EM5.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2012, 11:41 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven R View Post
LOL. Reminds me of the movie "Grumpy Old Men"


LOL. You didn't realize it, but you basically just described the OMD-EM5.
grumpy dont describe me, positively rampant would be closer...

if its an OalphabetEM5 with a 43rds mount that focuses thats fine
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:19 AM.