Discussion in 'Photography & Video' started by vindicator, Jan 16, 2012.
TBA - Possibly the most relevant camera of the decade.
Zomg I hope so
here's hoping for a move away from 4/3
Why would they do that?
Because SLRs are not relevant.
I think he's talking about the sensor format, not the difference between MFT and FT.
Especially since Olympus have MFT cameras and lenses already, were part of creating MFT, etc.
Hmm.....presumably it'll be m4/3, since the original 4/3 mount is basically dead, which would mean mirrorless and EVF.
If it has decent hand-on controls (aperture ring on lenses with A position for shutter priority, shutter control on body with A position for aperture priority, like the Fuji X's) and is cheaper than the X-Pro1 I guess it could be interesting.
I'd like to see them make a useable EVF.
The GH2 EVF has been called the best there is (not sure if it's still true), and that's really sad because imho it is a piece of shit and not useable for focusing. It's also really irritating on the eye. (Everything else is awesome though).
as awesome as the idea is, i think there are some flaws...
if its the shape of the OM, it will be larger than the current line up of m4/3
apart from metal body and retro looks, what advantage would an OM-D give if its to use m4/3 and not a larger sensor?
only thing is integrated EVF, and probably be larger than Panny GH2...
16MP makes sense, if they borrow the sensors from Panny's GH2, G3 or GX1 which are about 16
Nope, the A77 is MUCH better. Still has crushed blacks and clipped highlights, but it's quite useable now.
If it's shaped too much like an OM, that's a huge failing right there - lets be frank, they were never pretty cameras, and without a power grip they have many of the same handling issues as current m4/3 cameras.
If it's going to be big, we can only hope they include a decent grip!
Hands on controls are worth everything to some people, even if CaNikSony can't seem to see it. I don't care how big it is, a decent lens is never going to fit in my pocket anyway. Just give me access to the controls that matter.
i'm sure they won't, i just don't like the concept of 4/3 as oly's whole reason for it is smaller cameras, which is stupid because there are cameras with apsc sensors that are just as small as 4/3 cameras.
i want more rangefinders, the new GX1 or whatever by canon makes me realise they are unlikely to release one any time soon though.
2 years in and he's already calling it.
Totally disagree with everything in this post. OMs were some of the nicest SLRs of their day and still hold up.
And as if they had any handling issues jeeez they're a dream to use.
And smaller, lighter, and easier to design and much less expensive (to make) lenses using less glass. Though they haven't seemed to pass these cost savings onto customers.
We're arguing about a camera of which we haven't even seen the specs of yet!
at first i was
then i was
"The body is magnesium dust and water" hahahaha
Hey, I'm not bashing the OM's. I'm bashing the OM bodyshape - it's a brick without a grip. The user interface, such as it was, is superb, in that it gets out of the bloody way and only does the things you need it to.
So it will be an EVF camera.
And yet it will have a fake pentaprism casing, even though this has no reason of existence, because EVF cameras dont have prisms. However, idiotic customers need the camera to look like an OM because someone told them OMs looked cool. So they need a fake pentaprism.
I can only assume it will also have a fake mirrorbox, without a mirror in it, because EVF cameras dont have mirrors.
I hope it will also have a fake (recorded) mirror slap, so there is no doubt what a lame company Oly has become
Maybe the empty mirrorbox can double up as an ashtray?