Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

Life line thrown to Olympus 4Thirds owners.


Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
6 Nov 2012 8:17PM

Quote:So...Four Thirds was not a raging success


Your words not mine, has Pentax dslrs been a ragging success or Sony ?

Olympus arrived late, they had a choice, follow Canon, Nikon, Pentax or move in there own direction, they moved in there own direction and it paid off.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
6 Nov 2012 10:02PM
Why would Olympus go back to making DSLRs? They are the past. They have served pros and enthusiasts well for about 60 years - it is old technology. The future is unlikely to have a flapping mirror in it! Smile
keith selmes 11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
6 Nov 2012 10:12PM

Quote:DSLRs? They are the past. They have served pros and enthusiasts well for about 60 years -
60 years ???? Grin
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
6 Nov 2012 10:16PM
Oops................................ "SLRs". Grin
mdpontin 10 6.0k Scotland
6 Nov 2012 10:24PM
Paul, the comparison with Sony and Pentax isn't relevant. We're talking about Four Thirds versus Micro Four Thirds.

As I understand the history of the format, the hope was that Four Thirds would define a new format for digital SLRs, not based on legacy formats such as 35mm (film) and APS-C (film). Whether the hope ever existed that it would some day rise to challenge the biggest camera makers in the business is beside the point. I suspect the ambition was a little more modest and realistic than that. The problem that I think they faced was that the advantages of Four Thirds were generally marginal. The difference in size/weight between Four Thirds and APS-C wasn't a game-changer for many people, and when you combine that with the available systems being more limited and not being from either of the two most recognised names in the industry - Canon and Nikon - it was never likely to break many moulds.

With Micro Four Thirds, there seems to be significantly more interest and excitement. Presumably that's down to a combination of things, such as that the cameras and lenses can be significantly smaller than for APS-C dSLRs, the image quality on the latest Micro Four Thirds systems, particularly the Olympus OM-D, is now quite clearly comparable with APS-C, and cameras such as the OM-D E-M5 are exciting products in their own right, generating more buzz than has been seen for a while.

It makes perfect sense, if there's any validity in the observations and assumptions that I've made, that the manufacturers of these systems will see a more promising future in Micro Four Thirds and so that is where they will concentrate their resources. If that's where the profits are to be made, that's where they'll invest.

It's possible that they might produce new Four Thirds kit at some point, but it's hard to see why they would. Developing new, competitive products takes time and money. They'll do it if they see a realistic chance of it being profitable, but only then.

The point I was trying to make was that it's not about Olympus - or anybody else - "changing their mind". It's simply about business - they have to spend their development budget on producing products which people will buy. It looks to me as though that's Micro Four Thirds, rather than Four Thirds.
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
6 Nov 2012 10:26PM
M4/3 is the leading mirrorless format. I'll bet Canon and Nikon wish they had thought of it first! Wink

Anyone ordered a Canon EOS M yet? Tongue
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
7 Nov 2012 1:56AM

Quote:Paul, the comparison with Sony and Pentax isn't relevant. We're talking about Four Thirds versus Micro Four Thirds


Why Verses ? there are both the same system, just with a change of mount and a removel of the mirror, its still the same 4/3 sensor and so on, personally I`d be happy if they stopped making 4/3 dslr`s tomorrow, but I guess they still need to support the dslr and its users.


Quote:As I understand the history of the format, the hope was that Four Thirds would define a new format for digital SLRs, not based on legacy formats such as 35mm (film) and APS-C (film). Whether the hope ever existed that it would some day rise to challenge the biggest camera makers in the business is beside the point


It was never there intention to challenge anyone, they set out with a new set of rules, it took a few years and its now paid off.
mdpontin 10 6.0k Scotland
7 Nov 2012 8:14AM
Versus. As in compare and contrast. We all know they're based on the same core system, but there are differences! That's why there's a difference in name, and why an earlier poster commented that he had invested in 4/3 and wouldn't be drawn into M4/3.

Of course it was their intention to challenge. They need to make sales, and the way they do that is to convince people to buy their product rather than somebody else's. That said, I said that their expectation was not that they'd challenge the big boys in the sense of knocking them off their top perch.

I thought all this was clear enough from the context of my previous posts, Paul. Somehow you always seem to end up arguing that black is white, or taking meanings that aren't there.
kodachrome 3 530
7 Nov 2012 9:10AM
I have to agree with most comments made concerning the 4thirds and M4T formats.
Currently Panasonic are having the best M4T sales according to one report in AP.

Olympus have always played catch up with the APS-C cameras. I think Olympus when they started out making digital cameras was to carry on their legacy of smaller than average SLR cameras like the old OM series. They certainly achieved this but the consequence was they were lagging behind the APS-C cameras in performance and were always [and still are to a point] playing catch up. The OM-D EM-5 is an absolute cracker and has almost cought up, but most reviews say it still lags behind [only by a short head] the APS-C cameras, it also needs to come down in price, or they need to bring out a budget version, now that would make sense.

I have great respect for my E-510 and E-450, and will never sell them no matter how dated they are, they just take lovely pictures period. HOWEVER, my little Sony SLT A37 is smaller and lighter than my E-510 and easier to use, has a in EVF menue to die for and dare I say it, takes outstanding pictures with less noise than both my Olympuses.

The big question is, will the big boys move over to M4T format, I doubt it because of their huge world wide fan base and cost. They may though introduce a more compact SLR but I think like Sony will stay with APS-C sensor size because of its superior performance. Sony recently announced a billion Yen programme to develop and produce new APS-C sensors for a world market, so I doubt M4T is on their agenda even though they supply Olympus now, which is a one off in my view.

I'm sure there are equally compelling arguments for both formats, and the latest Panasonic G5 adverts on TV are very very tempting.There is also some excellent glass being made now for M4T, including Leica. Mind you, they don't have the monopoly on top German glass as Carl Zeiss make a few high end lenses for Sony.

The only camera not conforming to convention is Samsung, they have a small compact and light NX20 DSLR with a EVF and APS-C sensor. I think this is could be the general direction that the DSLR could be going.
The camera industry is going through a long period of evolution and it is way off being done yet.
Watch this space as they say.
Peter
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
7 Nov 2012 1:18PM

Quote:OM-D EM-5 is an absolute cracker and has almost cought up, but most reviews say it still lags behind [only by a short head] the APS-C cameras


Don't you mean a little behind full-frame ? Wink
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
7 Nov 2012 2:48PM

Quote:The only camera not conforming to convention is Samsung


But it is.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
7 Nov 2012 3:10PM
You could argue that the 4/3 sensor is the only one that really conforms, 35mm never conformed to the film used Smile

4/3 comes very close including the characteristic dof of its lenses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0shWr-oon4
lemmy 7 2.0k United Kingdom
7 Nov 2012 3:13PM

Quote:Mind you, they don't have the monopoly on top German glass as Carl Zeiss make a few high end lenses for Sony


Some Zeiss lenses are made in Germany but many are made for them by Cosina in Japan. Lenses like the Distagon 24mm f2 ar4e made For Zeiss by Sony rather than vice versa. And a lot of Leica equipment is made in Portugal but finished in Germany.

Globalisation, eh?

On the other hand, I just bought a Martin guitar, a well know American make, because it sounds so lovely, . I expected it would be made in Korea or somewhere. But no - it is actually made in America. Then I thought, well I bought it for the sound, who cares where it was made?

I well remember as a Fleet Street photographer how many guys fitted Canon 35mm f2 lenses to their Leica Ms - preferring the Japanese glass to the German. Heresy at the time. But pressmen never were ones to worry too much about photographic tradition.
kodachrome 3 530
7 Nov 2012 4:55PM
I should think the US made Martin was a touch expensive, are copies made in the far East.

I have a collection of Fender Stratocasters, but only one made in the USA. The Japanese made ones are superior in build quality, finish and in some cases playability & sound. The very cheap end now like the Squires are made in China but are surprisingly of very good quality and cheap.

If you think the arguments about 4thirds/M4T is getting hot, you should look at the 4thirds forum, people are booking in for counselling, it gets really heated on occasions, I stay out of it and read the posts for entertainment.

Lemmy, you are right about the old 35-mm glass, Canon [and some times Nikon] in particular out performed most German lenses. Tests in AP used to always score Canon higher. Minolta made the first zoom for Leitz, and I heard recently that some of the CZ zooms are made by Tamron. Cosina in the old days was entry level stuff, but they are now part of the Tokina/Cosina group. There was an awful lot of milk bottles made in the old days as well.
lemmy 7 2.0k United Kingdom
7 Nov 2012 6:31PM

Quote:There was an awful lot of milk bottles made in the old days as well.


Yes, wan't there? But before the days of pixel peepers, when you judged from a 12x10 print, they were more acceptable than they would be today. And in spite of all the technical wizardry we have, I don't see that the photographs themselves have improved at all.

The Martin, no more expensive that similar quality made in the east. I've been looking for a decent acoustic for a long while and tested and tried all sorts of prices and makes. But the Martin, it has exactly the sound I want to hear. I was prepared to pay up to 2500 to 3000 and tried Lowden and Collings and lots of top makes. The Martin has just the liveliness and responsiveness that I was looking for and missing in the dearer (and cheaper) models. Highly personal!

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.