View Full Version : 3 dSLR's from Oly this spring?
not quite a new tidbit, maybe. a report says here today that the top of Oly told a Newspaper, Nikkei;
Oly plans to double its dSLR sales from 250 to 500 K next fiscal year which starts from April.
3 models to be introduced this spring.
The Nikkei interpretes these 3 models to be:
- a successor to E-1
- E-400 or its minor-changed version (so it will be globally available soon)
- a successor to E-330
,which are I think reasonable.
I wonder what Panasonic is going to do with the E-330 successor.
yoshi
Looking forward to the E-1 replacement, although I don't think I'll be in a position to buy one this year.
not quite a new tidbit, maybe. a report says here today that the top of Oly told a Newspaper, Nikkei;
Oly plans to double its dSLR sales from 250 to 500 K next fiscal year which starts from April.
3 models to be introduced this spring.
The Nikkei interpretes these 3 models to be:
- a successor to E-1
- E-400 or its minor-changed version (so it will be globally available soon)
- a successor to E-330
,which are I think reasonable.
I wonder what Panasonic is going to do with the E-330 successor.
yoshi
Hi Yoshi,
The E-330 is a nice camera - but it hasn't fully exploited the live view capabilities and it has a small image buffer. With live view, I'm hoping to see a live histogram and more accurate preview colour balance, so it can be used as a live white balance monitor. I also wonder if the secondary live view mode, using a view-only CCD and a semi-silvered mirror, is the way to go - we'll just have to see
Ian
The newspaper, Nikkei, says;
***************
- Oly’s revenue exceeds one trillion yen (or US$8.3 billion) for the first time in this fiscal year closing at the end of March.
- Recovery of digital camera business contributes to this record high profit performance.
- On the other hand, in the medical equipment businesses where Olympus has so far enjoyed stable profitability, Olympus will face with much more immense competition from the new emerging merger, Hoya and Pentax.
So Nikkei interviewed Oly’s CEO about their growth stragety.
Nikkei: It looks like imaging division (digital camera division) is in good shape?
CEO: During the past year all manufacturers have seemingly lowered the inventory level of compact digicams and this reduced the burden of the price lowering competition. On top of this we could get benefits of internal cost reduction activities and the currency depreciation against other major currencies.
Niikei: How long do you expect the booming of dSLR markets will continue?
CEO: We donot anticipate that the price levels of compact digicams will largely further go down. Of course, features such as Mp size will improve, while the price would not go up largely, it means actual price-down (to manufacturers). So in terms of monetary value, the increase of revenues from compact digicams will, I’m afraid, slow down. On the other hand we can expect two-digit percentage growth for dSLR markets so we will focus on these markets.
For Christmas sales season, we suffered from shortage of assembly parts for dSLR’s and were forced to revise our sales target for this fiscal year from 400K to 250K units. For the coming spring sales season, we will introduce 3 new models and aim at 500K units in the next fiscal year. We are determined to become a significant player in this market like the Big 2.
Nikkei: Hoya and Pentax merge…
CEO: We are competing agains Pentax in both imaging and medical equipment businesses. The merger will give more competitive powers to Pentax but we will continuously and aggressively pour sufficient cash flows into R&D. In this sense we won’t change our strategies in a massive way. …
******************
The interview further continues but my interests are narrower and limited to cameras. :rolleyes: so finish here.
my remarks: He did not reply to the Q “until when?” directly but we can guess he judges at least one more year.
The mock-up of E-1 successor is attached for convenience. - not a part of the article.:)
Hi All
How did you get the idea that the E330 was to be updated?
Hmmm... I agree that there'll probably be 3 new dSLRs... but I'd have said we'd see an E-3, a E410 and E510! Rumours of the names have been bouncing around the DPR Oly SLR forum now & again.
That would make sense to me... the new 'Pro' camera, the E-400 replacement 'E410' would be the world-wide model to replace the europe-only E400... and the E510 would be the 10MP version of the over 1 yr old E-500... the '10' from the number denoting the MP count!
That's what I'm expecting!
But I'd also think it possible to see 'live view' percolating into other non-E300/330 body shapes and for them to get rid of the E300/330 line if they can as the bottom end of the 4/3rds range is 'entry-level' heavy.
What's the main difference between the 330 and 500 and 400? It's basically the same firmware in a different body shape with that body having 1 unique selling point.
E400 = small,
E330 = live view,
E500 basic, good value-for-money camera.
There's scope for those 3 to be rolled into fewer 'lines'.
That's imho! :-)
Hi All
How did you get the idea that the E330 was to be updated? Hmmm... I agree that there'll probably be 3 new dSLRs put I'd have said E-3, E410 and E510! Rumours of the names have been bouncing around the DPR Oly SLR forum now & again.
That made sense to me... the new 'Pro' camera, the E-400 replacement 410 would be the world-wide model to replace the europe-only E400... and the 510 would be the 10MP version of the over 1 yr old E-500... the '10' from the number denoting the MP count!
That's what I'm expecting!
But I'd also think it possible to see 'live view' percolating into other non-E300/330 body shapes and them get rid of the E300/330 line if they can as the bottom end of the 4/3rds range is entry-level heavy.
What's the main difference between the 330 and 500 and 400? It's basically the same firmware in a different body shape that has 1 unique selling point. E400 + small, E330 = live view, E500 basic, good value-for-money camera. There's scope for those 3 to be rolled into fewer 'lines', imho.
That's imho! :-)
Hi Paul and welcome to DPNow!
The E-400 and E-500 are undeniably very similar. They both use the same family of Kodak sensors (albeit different resolutions) and sub-system/buffer. It's a little confusing that the more expensive E-400 has less external controls than the cheaper E-500 and that the lower resolution E-500 has more ISO noise than the higher resolution E-400, but the are indeed closely related.
I don't have any privileged information, but I do think live view will be a big selling point for Olympus this year. Could the E-400 be the last Olympus DSLR without live view? - it's an interesting proposition. Live view shouldn't automatically mean a lot of extra build expense - all compact digicams are live view after all. The electromechanical moving sensor image stabiliser is another interesting development from Olympus. Pentax has shown that this kind of feature needn't mean a big price premium either.
Let's leave the pro-spec model; a lot is already known, but much is also completely unknown. But it's been promised and we should see it at PMA in just 6 weeks.
So to the E-330. Although it shares a very similar user interface to the E-400/500, practically everything else is different; the sensor, the live view modes, the reflex system, etc. The buffer management is also more primitive than the E-400/500 and my guess is that it doesn't use the same ASIC as these two. The E-330 chassis is used by Panasonic and Leica, so it's not likely that it will be retired and there is room for a lot of improvement, so I think a revised and enhanced E-330 is very logical.
I use an E-330 a lot and I really miss the live view when using other DSLRs.
Ian
Hi All
How did you get the idea that the E330 was to be updated?
Hmmm... I agree that there'll probably be 3 new dSLRs... but I'd have said we'd see an E-3, a E410 and E510!
Hi Paul, nice to listen to other voices. :) When we take into account the date of introduction of each model, your estimate is of course logical.;)
In Japan, E-500 is selling well, so I guess less needs for model change but this is just a simple guess. One drawback of E-500 seems the small viewfinder, so adding a live view finder is in that sense quite reasonable estimate IMO.
And E-400 is not introduced here, you know. In order to avoid possible cannibalization between E-400 and E-500, Oly will perhaps need some diferentiation between the two.
My personal interests are rather;
i) if or not Panasonic shows more comittment to the 4/3rds system. If they also introduce those 3 models, especially the flagship, Pany can be considered an important player in the 4/3rds group. At the moment, they have just half-comitted IMHO. - quite different from Sony's firm comittment to Alpha-mount.
ii) why 3 models at one time? - of course, it is mainly because Oly had postponed introduction of some modles in the past. But does it justify the 3 models introduction this spring? Do they want to got to the other extreme?
iii) of course, what sigma is going to do? - is another interest to me but they are extremely busy in final preparation of their SD-14 so most likely no 4/3rds body from them? Just some lenses?
what do you think?
yoshi
Hi Paul, nice to listen to other voices. :) When we take into account the date of introduction of each model, your estimate is of course logical.;)
In Japan, E-500 is selling well, so I guess less needs for model change but this is just a simple guess. One drawback of E-500 seems the small viewfinder, so adding a live view finder is in that sense quite reasonable estimate IMO.
And E-400 is not introduced here, you know. In order to avoid possible cannibalization between E-400 and E-500, Oly will perhaps need some diferentiation between the two.
My personal interests are rather;
i) if or not Panasonic shows more comittment to the 4/3rds system. If they also introduce those 3 models, especially the flagship, Pany can be considered an important player in the 4/3rds group. At the moment, they have just half-comitted IMHO. - quite different from Sony's firm comittment to Alpha-mount.
ii) why 3 models at one time? - of course, it is mainly because Oly had postponed introduction of some modles in the past. But does it justify the 3 models introduction this spring? Do they want to got to the other extreme?
iii) of course, what sigma is going to do? - is another interest to me but they are extremely busy in final preparation of their SD-14 so most likely no 4/3rds body from them? Just some lenses?
what do you think?
yoshi
Hi Yoshi, from my conversations with Panasonic people from Japan, I see a lot of enthusiasm for Four Thirds. Several Leica-branded lenses have already been announced, though these are mainly high-specification and likely to be expensive. I think the Lumix DMC-L1 and expensive Leica brand lenses do not fit Panasonic's general strategy of mass market sales, so I consider their early products as a kind of way of earning a reputation as a serious minded camera company, not just a consumer electronics company making cameras. Affordable and innovative models must surely be on the way - including Lumix-branded lenses, I would expect. Panasonic has also invested heavily in producing the live view sensor used in the L1, Leica Digilux 3 and the Olympus E-330.
With Sigma, it's harder to say, though many more of their lenses are being made available with the Four Thirds mount now. Their president has been quoted as saying that they will consider a Four Thirds mount camera, but the priority was to get the SD14 finished.
I'm very curious to see how Kodak fits into the future of Four Thirds. Can they ignore the DSLR market? They make most of the sensors in the Four Thirds family, but if live view is the future for Panasonic and Olympus, maybe they could make their own inexpensive Four Thirds consumer model, maybe based on the E-500?
Fujifilm is also associated with the Four Thirds standard, though we've heard next to nothing from them and, as far as I can see, they have not contributed anything to date.
Ian
[QUOTE=Ian;9618]Hi Paul and welcome to DPNow!
Hiya Ian
I'm actually a long time visitor who'd deleted the cookie cache and has had re-register as he couldn't remember his details.
The E-400 and E-500 are undeniably very similar. They both use the same family of Kodak sensors (albeit different resolutions) and sub-system/buffer. It's a little confusing that the more expensive E-400 has less external controls than the cheaper E-500 and that the lower resolution E-500 has more ISO noise than the higher resolution E-400, but the are indeed closely related.
Yep, there was an interview with a japanese manager when the E400 came out in 'europe only' and his message to Asia, US of A, etc was don't worry boys, a better version of the 400 will be along shortly (PMA07) and it will 'repay your patience many times over' or words to that effect.
He also intimated that PMA 07 would be 'like chapter 2' of the 4/3rds system, What has gone before being chapter 1, and tha the new E400 with the smaller lenses would be the start of it.
A few 'reviewer' type guys around the web (Like yourself Ian) have heard rumours that there's to be a small camera sub-system in 4/3rds. Well that is the blue ringed lenses and the squarish form, equi-distant shouldered prism E400. A form that the 'small' prototype E3 shares!
[I]I don't have any privileged information, but I do think live view will be a big selling point for Olympus this year. Could the E-400 be the last Olympus DSLR without live view? - it's an interesting proposition. Live view shouldn't automatically mean a lot of extra build expense - all compact digicams are live view after all.
For them to loose the 300/330 shape would need them to hve a different way of splitting the light-path. If they can do that, they'll loose the porro-mirrord cameras.
I wonder if they can place a LV sensor in the eye-path after the prism. [where the dioptre ajustments are] Then it's a case of substituting 'the eye' for the LV sensor.. you could even physically slide the LV sensor in there so as to form a shutter in one action. That stops stray light entering the prism! Incorporate the electrics to turn the sensor & screen on and it could be done neatly in one movment.
To use a LV camera, you just turn a dial by the OVFer and it turns on... what could be simpler than that?
It just remains to see if the can place the sensor AFTER the prism? It would be the way to do it.. then you're not splitting light, just dircting it... and the AF system is as it was for ordinary SLR operation!
It's a simple idea, that has great possibilities.. but we'd need an optical engineer to tell us if it could be made to work!
[I] The electromechanical moving sensor image stabiliser is another interesting development from Olympus. Pentax has shown that this kind of feature needn't mean a big price premium either.
Of course... I'd expect that in every Oly dSLR from now on. Remember the 'patience repaid many times comment' from the manager?
Oly are smart to do this... it turns every lens you have bought or will buy in future into an IS version overnight! I know they say 'lens based' is better as it can be tuned for the individual characteristics of particular lenses but... the body-based system is very economical (you only have to buy it once)
Let's leave the pro-spec model; a lot is already known, but much is also completely unknown. But it's been promised and we should see it at PMA in just 6 weeks.
Why? what do YOU know Ian? LOL I don't know squat about it! There's a guy on the DPR forum who's seen it and it seems to be, from reading his cryptic comments, a better version of the E1! I'll be disapointed if that is so.
I don't care for MP quantity as long as it has image quality by the bucket... and that includes high ISOs! [The sensor in the E400 supports pixel binning so maybe we'll see higher frame rates and better high ISO's with a smaller MP count due to this?]
I don't care for multipe focus points in SAF... but you need them in CAF and a method to opt between these points with your thumb. It needs a nipple/joystick/multi-pad before it needs a 'press a button and turn a dial! Without a easy way to control FP choice, you may as well stick with centre-point only... and then FP quantity means nothing anyway!
But the talk of a additional pro model above th E1 is very interesting! Except before they do that they need the technology to put in it! :-) [The guys who's seen the E3 says Oly have prototyped a 17 point AF module! I'm not saying that's what we'll see.. nor how it worked.. nor what 'pattern' they was in. But their R&D is trying!]
So to the E-330. Although it shares a very similar user interface to the E-400/500, practically everything else is different; the sensor, the live view modes, the reflex system, etc. The buffer management is also more primitive than the E-400/500 and my guess is that it doesn't use the same ASIC as these two. The E-330 chassis is used by Panasonic and Leica, so it's not likely that it will be retired and there is room for a lot of improvement, so I think a revised and enhanced E-330 is very logical.
Maybe... but if they can iplement LV 'my way' [LV sensor after the prism] we'll not NEED to see the 330 shape again!
It's that word 'if' again! LOL
I use an E-330 a lot and I really miss the live view when using other DSLRs.
Yes, LV got a bad rep bcos they implemented the modes in a clunky way... but I personally can't wait till I can frame using a screen and have a 100% accurate representation of WYSIWYG! Throw in a real-time pre-view h/gram of what you'll get 'post-shot' but presented 'pre-shot' and ''my name in Paul and I'm a live-view-aholic''
The best thig Oly did on the 330 was that articulating screen the worst thing about it is that lack of 'twist' to it... and I don't know what panny was thinking omitting a articulating screen from theirs?:confused:
Roll on Mar 4th! :-) Sorry it's such a long read! My bad!
Yoshi said "In Japan, E-500 is selling well, so I guess less needs for model change but this is just a simple guess. One drawback of E-500 seems the small viewfinder, so adding a live view finder is in that sense quite reasonable estimate IMO.
And E-400 is not introduced here, you know. In order to avoid possible cannibalization between E-400 and E-500, Oly will perhaps need some diferentiation between the two."
Wasn't that my point? That there's 3 low-end oly cameras, 4 if you count the 300, that have been essentially the same camera but with the one unique selling point.
The 300 was an 'all rounder', the 500 was a prismed version of that, the 330 offers LV in the same 3FPS for 4-5 RAW/ unlimited jpg buffer and the 400 is a very small version of the E500!
I believe if Oly can implement live view mode A in a prismed camera, we won't see the porro-mirrored shape again. (everyone said it was 'ugly' anyway)
Ian said "Hi Yoshi, from my conversations with Panasonic people from Japan, I see a lot of enthusiasm for Four Thirds. Several Leica-branded lenses have already been announced, though these are mainly high-specification and likely to be expensive. I think the Lumix DMC-L1 and expensive Leica brand lenses do not fit Panasonic's general strategy of mass market sales, so I consider their early products as a kind of way of earning a reputation as a serious minded camera company, not just a consumer electronics company making cameras. Affordable and innovative models must surely be on the way - including Lumix-branded lenses, I would expect. Panasonic has also invested heavily in producing the live view sensor used in the L1, Leica Digilux 3 and the Olympus E-330."I agree with that a lot. Panny joins the dSLR market and guess what names are in the same sentence as the newcomer? It's only two of the more reputables names in photographic optics... Leica and Olympus!
Talk about buying 'street cred'... panny have jumped in with both feet and are now virtually indistinguishable from two of the best known names in quality photography! That's not bad going!
I'd think panny are serious about 4/3rds.. they're the only one who's committed themselves into the standard with bodies, lenses and flash units that work 'system-wide'.
The good thing about 4/3rds is that any of the non-dSLR brands can produce a body for it and theres a ready made lens range out there for it!
Hi All
How did you get the idea that the E330 was to be updated?
Just a note: the original Japanese (http://www.camera-info.net/cic_report/news_070125.html) states that the three new models will be successors to the E-1, E-400, and E-330.
Best wishes.
Hi Hokuto and welcome to DPNow!
Yoshi also translated the news for us here :)
I'm curious to know if you think the E-400 will be significantly different - it's already pretty new?
Ian
Just a note: the original Japanese (http://www.camera-info.net/cic_report/news_070125.html) states that the three new models will be successors to the E-1, E-400, and E-330.
Best wishes.
Hi Hokuto, yes, you are right and thanks for reminding me of it. :)
May I just add that the estimate is made by Nikkei and not specifically mentioned by the CEO, Mr. Kikuchi,in the interview. So I take it as an important but not the final information.
I also appreciate the link you gave, as I have not read it before.
The real original is, as you know, the article on Nikkei morning edition of Jan25th, as the site article properly refers to it. I also wanted to give a link to the original article here in the web but it was a paid site so I cannot.
When I think of the Four Thirds System, I often have to wonder why a theoretically superb sytem like this cannot be more widely accepted by the global markets. The year 2006 was apparently an unsatisfactory year for Olympus in terms of market share decline in dSLR (in Japan)- but a good year in the sense that Panasonic, Leica and Sigma joined in the 4/3rds group in a meaningful way.;)
yoshi
Thanks for clearing that up ... E410 & E510 anybody? :-)
Yoshi said: I often have to wonder why a theoretically superb sytem like this cannot be more widely accepted by the global markets.?
I think price has A LOT to do with it. A lot of Oly dSLRs are perceived as 'expensive' when released.
E1, E330 and E400 have all be 'like that'... and the non-photo magaizine buying public just go into a shop and ask for a dSLR. They probably don't care who makes it as long as it's the right price for them.
If you're offered a £400 dSLR and 2 lenses [samsung, low-end Nikon, etc] or one for £500 or £600... you know what they'll go for!Oly, on the other hand, offers a feature-packed tool' or one with a one-off special characteristic which they hope people will pay a premium for. i.e the 330 offered 'live view' and it was 'compactness' with the 400!
Another aspect MUST BE that going with the big two is 'the safe bet'!
'Size of sensor' must come into it somewheres... probably it only influences 'those in the know photographically'?
What do you think Yoshi? Are you in Japan?
Thanks for clearing that up ... E410 & E510 anybody? :-)
Yoshi said: I often have to wonder why a theoretically superb sytem like this cannot be more widely accepted by the global markets.?
I think price has A LOT to do with it. A lot of Oly dSLRs are perceived as 'expensive' when released.
E1, E330 and E400 have all be 'like that'... and the non-photo magaizine buying public just go into a shop and ask for a dSLR. They probably don't care who makes it as long as it's the right price for them.
If you're offered a £400 dSLR and 2 lenses [samsung, low-end Nikon, etc] or one for £500 or £600... you know what they'll go for!Oly, on the other hand, offers a feature-packed tool' or one with a one-off special characteristic which they hope people will pay a premium for. i.e the 330 offered 'live view' and it was 'compactness' with the 400!
Another aspect MUST BE that going with the big two is 'the safe bet'!
'Size of sensor' must come into it somewheres... probably it only influences 'those in the know photographically'?
What do you think Yoshi? Are you in Japan?
The sensor size issue is a red herring as the vertical dimension of a Four Thirds sensor is very close to the APS-C sensors in other DSLRs. The area ratio is magnified by the fact that the other sensors have a wider aspect ratio. But in any case, it's the photosite size that counts and the sizes of these on Four Thirds sensors are in the same ball bark as rival DSLR sensors of similar resolution. The sensitivity of Four Thirds sensors is way ahead of any compact or bridge-type digital camera.
That said, until the E-330 and the E-400, Four Thirds DSLRs did suffer from disproportionately noisy images. I believe this was because less noise reduction was applied and the image processing sub-system in earlier cameras was not as advanced as some of the rivals. The E-330 and, especially, the E-400, have gone some way to putting that right.
Ian
The sensor size issue is a red herring as the vertical dimension of a Four Thirds sensor is very close to the APS-C sensors in other DSLRs. The area ratio is magnified by the fact that the other sensors have a wider aspect ratio. But in any case, it's the photosite size that counts and the sizes of these on Four Thirds sensors are in the same ball bark as rival DSLR sensors of similar resolution.
Yes, you're right Ian.. but so we get equal 'noise' from both formats, the potosites should be the same size, right?
Whch would mean the 4/3rds camera will always be 1 or 2 MP behind that of a 3:2 sensor.. simply bcos the 3:2 camera has more pixels in the longer sides of that format.
So 4/3 will always have:
a, worse 'noise' given the same pixel count as 3:2
b, Fewer pixels but with the same noise.
Such is life!
The sensitivity of Four Thirds sensors is way ahead of any compact or bridge-type digital camera.
Yes, but that comparison also applies to the bigger formats to 4/3rds! What goes around comes around! LOL
That said, until the E-330 and the E-400, Four Thirds DSLRs did suffer from disproportionately noisy images. I believe this was because less noise reduction was applied and the image processing sub-system in earlier cameras was not as advanced as some of the rivals. The E-330 and, especially, the E-400, have gone some way to putting that right.
Ian
I disagree.. (a bit)... I think 4/3rds has a rep as being as 'noisy' as they used the same or more pixels than APS (3:2).
My humble opinion is Oly should accept this MP quantity disdvantage it has with APS (3:2) and just produce camera that always have the same pixel size as competition. [I'm all for image quality and I'd hoped the company that produced the 'only 5MP' E1, but with great IQ, would be of a similar POV.]
Instead, they appear to have taken the lack of sales from the E1 as caused by it's MP count and then set this as their main criteria in a camera. Ever since the E1 we've mainly had equal or bigger MP counts than the competition (the exception being E330).
Oly seems to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. They can't 'educate' the punters to expect the same IQ but with less MP as that would tip them off to the inherrent disadvantage of 4/3rds.
Instead, they match MP counts with the 3:2 formats and that leads to smaller, noisier sensors. There's all pain with little gain in 4/3-land.
As I said earlier, they need to make this disadvatage into an advantage. The only area I can see them doing this is in a telephoto/sports/wildlife camera with excellent IQ, fast frame rates, a decent MP count and noise performace at the higher ISOs.
hereth endeth the sermon.:)
The sensor size issue is a red herring as the vertical dimension of a Four Thirds sensor is very close to the APS-C sensors in other DSLRs. The area ratio is magnified by the fact that the other sensors have a wider aspect ratio. But in any case, it's the photosite size that counts and the sizes of these on Four Thirds sensors are in the same ball bark as rival DSLR sensors of similar resolution.
Yes, you're right Ian.. but so we get equal 'noise' from both formats, the potosites should be the same size, right?
Whch would mean the 4/3rds camera will always be 1 or 2 MP behind that of a 3:2 sensor.. simply bcos the 3:2 camera has more pixels in the longer sides of that format.
So 4/3 will always have:
a, worse 'noise' given the same pixel count as 3:2
b, Fewer pixels but with the same noise.
Such is life!
Hmmm, you can't rate noise precisely. Although it can be measured, its subjective effect is much less precise. Noise can be traded against resolution, too. There is also the manner in which the photosites are built - Kodak's sensor is supposed to have extra large photosites because of the full frame transfer feature (burying the electronic circuitry under the photosites to enable them to have larger areas to capture photons). CMOS sensors have relativel small photosites because the surface tracks surrounding them are so space-consuming. But that hasn't stopped Canon from delivering very noise-efficient CMOS sensors.
The sensitivity of Four Thirds sensors is way ahead of any compact or bridge-type digital camera.
Yes, but that comparison also applies to the bigger formats to 4/3rds! What goes around comes around! LOL
I think that relates to the bit above - so, I don't really agree :)
That said, until the E-330 and the E-400, Four Thirds DSLRs did suffer from disproportionately noisy images. I believe this was because less noise reduction was applied and the image processing sub-system in earlier cameras was not as advanced as some of the rivals. The E-330 and, especially, the E-400, have gone some way to putting that right.
Ian
I disagree.. (a bit)... I think 4/3rds has a rep as being as 'noisy' as they used the same or more pixels than APS (3:2).
Again, I think it's too simplistic to make the pixel density relate precisely to the noise characteristics. There are too many factors and pixel density is not = to photosite size.
My humble opinion is Oly should accept this MP quantity disdvantage it has with APS (3:2) and just produce camera that always have the same pixel size as competition. [I'm all for image quality and I'd hoped the company that produced the 'only 5MP' E1, but with great IQ, would be of a similar POV.]
Instead, they appear to have taken the lack of sales from the E1 as caused by it's MP count and then set this as their main criteria in a camera. Ever since the E1 we've mainly had equal or bigger MP counts than the competition (the exception being E330).
Oly seems to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. They can't 'educate' the punters to expect the same IQ but with less MP as that would tip them off to the inherrent disadvantage of 4/3rds.
Instead, they match MP counts with the 3:2 formats and that leads to smaller, noisier sensors. There's all pain with little gain in 4/3-land.
As I said earlier, they need to make this disadvatage into an advantage. The only area I can see them doing this is in a telephoto/sports/wildlife camera with excellent IQ, fast frame rates, a decent MP count and noise performace at the higher ISOs.
hereth endeth the sermon.:)
I was not looking forward to trying the E-400 becuase, like you, I thought that an extra 2MP over the already noisy E-500 was going to result in even more noise, but the E-400 is perceptively less noisy than the E-500 in normal use. Olympus has improved the signal processing in the E-400 for a start. It's catching up where it wasn't so well developed.
Look at the pixel density of the Nikon D2X - it's really quite close to the E-400. The D2X does not have a reputation for poor noise, does it? What it does have is a very sophisticated image processing sub-system.
Many people think that the Four Thirds sensor dimension is too small, but I say, no it isn't and, at last, I feel I'm beginning to be proved right.
Ian
If you're offered a £400 dSLR and 2 lenses [samsung, low-end Nikon, etc] or one for £500 or £600... you know what they'll go for!Oly, on the other hand, offers a feature-packed tool' or one with a one-off special characteristic which they hope people will pay a premium for. i.e the 330 offered 'live view' and it was 'compactness' with the 400!
yeah, you pointed it out properly, I think. The steep growth of DSLR market
is made possible simply because more people enter into this market segment in the past year or two. Of course, it cannot be denied that some existing dSLR users just add some backup ones lately but it does not look like the most relevant reason, though. The success of Nikon D40 is a good evidence of it.
When new entrants support the growth of dSLR's , then it is quite natural that many of them are more price conscious. It's a very rational decision making factor. Choosing a completely new system means a long-lasting total investment so inevitably many people including myself become more price conscious.
Another aspect MUST BE that going with the big two is 'the safe bet'!exactly.;) In a relatively small city where i live, it's not that easy to have a look of Oly dSLR's at electronics shops. I have almost no difficulties in having a look of new products from Canon or Nikon, though with a little bit time lag - say a month or two, compared to a large city. It's not necessarily easy to find Oly's dSLR, however. When i have a chance of going to a bigger city such as Tokyo, I try to go to a big camera shop or sometimes a maker's service center where I can touch and actually handle those cameras.
The ease of availability seems to be quite important for being a significant player in the market. Oly is far & far behind the Big 2 and also in the recent days behind Pentax. Sony is also well represented here. But no Oly, no Panasonic dSLRs, though lots of compact digicams for sure.
'Size of sensor' must come into it somewheres... probably it only influences 'those in the know photographically'?Do you remember the never ending arguments during film days as to which film size was the best - large format such as 8x10, 4x5 inches, or medium format 6x 9/8/7/4.5 cm or 35mm cameras? In that argument framework, 35mm cameras had always disadavantages as far as the film size matters. Especially so, as during the film days, the sensor size more directly related to a sort of IQ. For example if you use a same film, you can always say MF is better than 35mm and LF is better than MF. I understand this argument framework also applies to digital equipment as well. So when this issue is talked about from this viewpoint, I find myself less interested in the argument framework. More important thing is how you want to use a camera for what kind of photos you want to take - and from that view points, what cameras best suit my needs? - that seems to be more relevant & useful discussion framework. By the same token if you find different needs in future, then it's also logical to review your gears as well.
In the landscape pictures, it was often said/recommended by some professionals until few decades ago that if you really want to take landscape pictures, then go to either LF or MF eventually.
In the real world, however, it was 35mm cameras that gained most popularity even in landscape photos.
Improvements of film quality, better body and lenses designs and much wider choice possiblity of bodies/lenses/all sorts of accessories as well as portability, all supported 35mm cameras. The film size was not the most relevant element - so it looks to me at least.
In a sense, it seems true that the larger the better BUT how important it is for my photo taking is completely another story, IMHO.
It's true when you say "sensor size" matters somewhere.
How and to which extent it matters - there seem to be many kinds of answers.;):)
Hopefully you do not take me wrong. I have no intension at all to say, the smaller, the better as far as the sensor size is concerned. I just love more choice possibility.
What do you think Yoshi? Are you in Japan?[/quote]
yes, I'm a Japanese and a hobby photographer living in Japan. I once had a long profile until DPNow was renewed half a year ago or so. Will try to make a new one, though I'm not that much excited about it.:o ;) :D
yoshi
P.S. I'm afraid this posting becomes sooo long.
Hi Yoshi,
I'd mostly agree what you said. When reading it, an old thought struck me. You mentioned not being able to actually 'try' an Oly in your small town. So there'll be many little reasons why someone would buy non-Oly rather than actually choose olympus. In fact, there's statictically more chance of soeone NOT buying an oly than buying one, right?
So here's a little company like Olympus. What strategy would you take?
If it were me, I'd offer unique, strong selling point cameras and I'd leave the mas 'box shifting' to those who want it. It'd be a more 'bespoke' line with fewer caneras sold in quantity. That would mean each would cost more in order to maintain a profit.
[i.e. a company could sell a mikkion 'x's and make 1p profit on each wich would get them a million pennys.
Or they could make a 100,000 'x's and hope for 10p profit on eac to get the same million... there's 2 ways to do it!]
I believe Oly has gone with the latter strategy... they KNOW they won't be one the shelves of small town cameras shops, there's comparitivly fewer owners who would 'recomend by word of mouth'... That would leave 'advertising' and would ential guys actually seaching for an Olympus bcos that model had exactly what he eeded.
In short, Olympus doesn't attract the casual buyer!
Seen like that, the unique selling point camera with the high price bodies make a level of sense. IMHO. :-)
Another thing that struck me was your tale of film formats.. tat bigger LF & MF was always acknowledged to be better but yet the film world still settled on the smallest format bcos of ease of use, practicality, etc.
While I think there could/should be paralells with 4/3rds and the bigger APS/35mm formats, I don't think that'll happen. I don't see enough 'daylight' between them so as someone would go smaller over the bigger formats. There's just not enough 'draw' in 4/3rds over APS, etc. All 3 are just too similar, imho.
I could be wrong... 'soccer mum' may get up one morning and find an excrutiating need to have images with sharp corners and no vignetting! ;-)
Take care!
In the landscape pictures, it was often said/recommended by some professionals until few decades ago that if you really want to take landscape pictures, then go to either LF or MF eventually.
In the real world, however, it was 35mm cameras that gained most popularity even in landscape photos.
My favorite "camera quote" is the one by Brett Weston, "Anything more than 500 yards from the car just isn't photogenic."
Yes, size and weight are important factors, Yoshi, which is one reason I went with 4/3 as well (although the real size/weight benefits haven't been as forthcoming as I initially thought, at least not until the appearance of the E-400).
ところで、どこに住んでいるんですか？私は神奈川県の北端で東京まで通勤している。
よろしく。
北人
May I just add that the estimate is made by Nikkei and not specifically mentioned by the CEO, Mr. Kikuchi,in the interview. So I take it as an important but not the final information.
Thanks, unfortunately, I don't get the Nikkei, so I didn't see the original interview, only the report on it that I linked to. But I did translate an interview with Watanabe Akira (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=20246190) several months ago that pointed out the same general trends. I'm really hoping that PMA indeed is a pleasing experience for Oly fans, since I've got a good deal of Yen saved I'd like to spend on a new pro body--if the noise issue is decently improved.
When I think of the Four Thirds System, I often have to wonder why a theoretically superb sytem like this cannot be more widely accepted by the global markets.
I think much of it has to do with the superior marketing skills of Canon. Olympus seems content to be be a niche player right now, even though they've shown their intent to double their dSLR output next year. I agree that there's lots of hope yet for the 4/3 format. The NYT had an article (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/27/technology/27chip.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) just yesterday about Intel's recent advances in reducing noise (electron leakage) in silicon chips, and I would imagine (or hope) that has implications for sensor technology as well.
Ian said: Kodak's sensor is supposed to have extra large photosites because of the full frame transfer feature (burying the electronic circuitry under the photosites to enable them to have larger areas to capture photons). CMOS sensors have relativel small photosites because the surface tracks surrounding them are so space-consuming. But that hasn't stopped Canon from delivering very noise-efficient CMOS sensors.
I don't know how to tackle you on this one... expet to pose a question. Do you think if all the other brands out there now in dSLR-land made a 4/3 camera, that these new cameras would have better high ISOs than the current Olys?
I may agree with you that the canons had 'better noise'.. but the rest? I don't think so..
You mentioned ''pixel density is not = to photosite size''. Well that's the big unknown isn't it as no sensor maker has ever published sizes of their wells or scale drawings thereof. We're left with the size of the 'pixels' in the CFA.
Bcos of that, we can't compare the CMOS to the NMOS accuately, all we have subjective human judgment. What is great NR for some guy is a plasticky canon-look to the other.
I just know a basic truism: The smaller the pixel, the worse IQ, DR, noise, etc, it'll have.
I was not looking forward to trying the E-400 becuase, like you, I thought that an extra 2MP over the already noisy E-500 was going to result in even more noise, but the E-400 is perceptively less noisy than the E-500 in normal use. Olympus has improved the signal processing in the E-400 for a start. It's catching up where it wasn't so well developed.
I just want them to use the NR improvments to keep the MPs at last years level and lets progress up the IQ tree with cameras that have, gasp, ISO 800 that isn't 'boosted' thru a menu entry!
When will they stop with the ISO100-400 (with 800 to 1600 thru boosting)?
Even now with the unreleased cameras, unless I miss my guess we're gonna see the high ISO's but that'll be with less MPs (I think they'll 'bin' pixels to get high ISOs like te new P&Ss they've released)
Look at the pixel density of the Nikon D2X - it's really quite close to the E-400. The D2X does not have a reputation for poor noise, does it? What it does have is a very sophisticated image processing sub-system.
I thought it did! LOL (which only proves my point further that small pixels are bad! ;-))
Many people think that the Four Thirds sensor dimension is too small, but I say, no it isn't and, at last, I feel I'm beginning to be proved right.
Jeez.. just what the world needs.. a demented camera reviewer! LOL
I think you can claim those plaudits and proudly wear that crown when the world has taken up 4/3rds camera and canikon are slashing their workforce and holding 'firesales' in current dSLRs! Until then, I'd keep any rightous 'feelings' in a safe place! :-)
Oh come on Ian, don't let the debut of the L1/D3 sway you! I admire a devout E1 owner like the next man but at best, that's wishful thinking taken to extreme!
Whatever they do to 4/3rds can alo be done to APS and 35mil!
No seriously, (I was joshing you there! :-))
Ok, so lets go 4 yrs hence to a world where they've made great leaps in NR. What will the world be like?
Yes, the 4/3rds system will be able to fulfill a 2 page magazine spread @ ISO3200 with the IQ of 100! But APS will be able to do the same at ISO6400 while 35mil is at ISO12800! The first two will have better IQ from the lens than the latter.
What else?
Yes, 4/3rds will be 'enough' but APS/35mil will be 'enougher'!
Anything else I missed? I'm sorry, I can't see any 'systematic advantage' 4/3rds has got over APS/35mil! I can see things Olympus has over the others brands... but not 4/3rds!
[a demented camera reviewer.. what an idea! ;-)]
So here's a little company like Olympus.
Hi Paul, nice to hear from you again.
Well, let me allow to say Oly is not a small company. It's true that the dSLR market share is much smaller than the Big 2 but Oly does is big enough to be
more aggressive in camera businesses. Actually Oly is a much much bigger company than Nikon when talking about the whole company size. I though it was twice as large as Nikon, tho necessary to check it.
In short, Olympus doesn't attract the casual buyer!
that's right. You already mentioned the conclusion so nothing more to add.:rolleyes: Oly has failed to attract those buyers so camera/electronics shops do not want to exhibit Oly dSLRs. They want to use the shelf space for others. Quite simple, isn't it?
Many potential buyers are observing what steps Oly is going to take in order to make the Four Thirds viable again.
yoshi
Hi Hokuto san,
I learned Brett Weston is a son of Edward Weston who loved 8x10. I tried to understand his words but difficult. I think mountains much over 500 yards in a early morning is very nice/photogenic as a background. Maybe he wanted to imply something else.:\
As to your question I will send a e-mail to you later.
so you live in Japan but not Hokuto city in Yamanashi prefecture...:)
yoshi
Hi Hokuto san, again. I also go to dcwatch site very often but failed to read that article of Watanabe san. I'm sure I was away home for long period around this time of the year. After reading the japanese site I'm a bit disappointed that he seems to be satisfied that E-400 is about the same size as the OM series. There should be no such a satisfaction IMHO.:(
yoshi
Hi Yoshi - do you think the E-400 is too small?
Here is a comparison (http://dpnow.com/3006.html):
http://images.dpnow.com/3006/images/e400preview03.jpg
Ian
Hi Ian, I have to admire how beatutiful OM4 is! - though my preference is OM4TiB, a later model - OM4 consumes battery quite a lot, don't you think?
well, about the size of E-400, it looks to me so so OK. But there are many voices here saying that since the Four Thirds system uses a smaller sensor, the cameras should be also smaller than APS-C counterparts. This voice is mainly among existing users of E series cameras. The 4/3rds system uses a smaller sensor than APS-C but the mount diameter is not that small at all to make the IQ better, so not that easy to make it even smaller, I guess.
Yeah, OM4 is very beautiful indeed.
yoshi
I think to have a built in flash makes the pentaprism bulge bigger than it could be. The modern style is for rounded features and for plenty to grip. At least on the grip, the E-400 is not following the trend.
A Four Thirds camera could be even smaller, I'm sure - but would it sell? Olympus might be 'testing the water' with the E-400 :)
Ian
Hi Yoshi/Ian
Some rumours have appeared on th DPR oly forum:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=21868708
and a 4/3rds forum:
http://www.4-3system.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=125&forum=7
Quote:
"Hi Olympians,
I was at an Olympus dealer event today and spoke an Olympus
representative who was at the internal briefing for the thing to come
this year. This is an excerpt from what to expect as far as he could
remember all that was said. He also reminded us that he had received an
E-400 training just a month before it's introduction and in that
training the E-400 was supposed to have live preview, so Olympus Japan
is know to change any possible detail up to the last minute.
3 new bodies:
E-410. I think this will be what the E-400 was supposed to be. Grossly
the same as the E-400 but with Live preview (don't know about A and/or
B)
E-510. Follow up of the E-500 Live preview and in-body image
stabilisation
E-x. Finally. Unknow if this will be at PMA to view or even handle.
Available from july/august. Faster AF, More AF points (maybe 12-14), 5-6
fps and larger buffer. Live preview with more robust screen. in-body
Image stabilisation. at least 10mpix. Different sensor than that of the
E-400 however. Nothing known about noise or body size. Would be nice if
the size stays the same. E-1 handling will be continued in this body.
>will allways have 3 types of DSLR's available:
S series for Small
G? series for enthousiasts
P series for professionals.
6 new lenses:
180?-500mm (f= xx-6.3)
12-60mm abouf f=3.5
14-35mm
3 other lenses, most likely zooms, not fixed focal lengths
New flashes with wireless possibilities
That's about all I can remember."
So theer's your 3 cameras (and as I thought) with their new naming convention:
E-410S, E-510G and E-1P.
I thought the porro cameras would go as soon as they could do LV with a prism... there was just no compelling need beyond LV and once that could be done a different, traditional way...
Although I didn't 'see' them doing this, I can now and it makes so much sense. 10MP bodies same as the competition... the unique selling point that is LV... in-body IS in them all, more & faster focus points, etc. We all knew we'd see those improvments if you'd thought about it.
I'd expect pixel binning to get high ISOs!
The wireless flash capability is interesting as well. The excisting FL50/ owners will be pixxed! LOL Expect a glut of FL50's to be on Ebay! LOL! [I wonder if you could enable wireless via firmware update? They'd probably need the hardware pre-installed, riht? What chance of Oly being that foresightful?]
The most interesting, and I don't know why I didn't see this either, is the 180-500/Fx-6.3 zoom! I wonder if this will be a 'mid' grade lens to take over from where the 50-200 leaves off? I know it's no f2.8-3.5 lens but you couldn't lift a 180-500/2.8-3.5 lens and add to eight, public transport costs from selling your car to get it.
So 11-22, 14-54, 50-200 and 180-500! 22-1000mm! Yep, don't know why I didn't consider Oly taking the mid range onwards as well as competing with the bigmas of the standard.
Yes, that lens has me excited as I'd probably get one of them before the bigma/135-400, et al.
That 510G, will it be 'sealed & dustproof' to go with the mid tier of lenses? Pentax made a plastic body that was sealed! I'd prefer metal but...
I'd need the E-1p for my 'sports' but that's gonna 'cost' so I expect it'll be the 510 for me. I'd accept that though if it had more than 3FPS and a way of controlling the focus points speedily. [I'm sorry for the repetition on that but the way I see it, the VFer and the focus & shutter button is HOW you control the camera. The VFer and s/button speak for themselves! Controlling the focus point controls 'the image' and if you can't control 'auto point choice', you get the image what the camera gives you!]
But, hopefully, good news for 4/3rds! It sounds like the E-1P ison the right lines! :)