Four-thirds?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Charles Schuler, Jul 14, 2004.

  1. Anybody know if this movement is still alive? Any products on the horizon?
    Thanks in advance.
     
    Charles Schuler, Jul 14, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Charles Schuler

    Justin Thyme Guest

    "Charles Schuler" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Anybody know if this movement is still alive? Any products on the

    horizon?
    > Thanks in advance.

    The olyympus e1 is already out, using the fourthirds system. apparently
    kodak and fuji both have products on the horizon, and i have heard a
    _rumour_ that nikon may be coming on board. I personally doubt the rumour,
    considering one of nikons big features with their dslr is their
    compatibility with film, but the rumour was from a fairly reliable source
    who would be in a position to know.
    >
    >
     
    Justin Thyme, Jul 14, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>,
    says...
    > Anybody know if this movement is still alive? Any products on the horizon?
    > Thanks in advance.


    Nothing past Oly's foray. No one seems to be jumping in after them.
     
    Brian C. Baird, Jul 14, 2004
    #3
  4. Charles Schuler

    Sabineellen Guest

    >
    >The olyympus e1 is already out, using the fourthirds system. apparently
    >kodak and fuji both have products on the horizon, and i have heard a
    >_rumour_ that nikon may be coming on board. I personally doubt the rumour,
    >considering one of nikons big features with their dslr is their
    >compatibility with film, but the rumour was from a fairly reliable source
    >who would be in a position to know.


    Why not. If they use the tiny sensors for their compacts, then why not adopt
    the 4/3 for some middle-grade camera.

    I personally hope that the 4/3 will soon become a standard for non-DSLR
    cameras, as well as legacy-free DSLRs.
     
    Sabineellen, Jul 15, 2004
    #4
  5. Charles Schuler

    Skip M Guest

    "Brian C. Baird" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > > Anybody know if this movement is still alive? Any products on the

    horizon?
    > > Thanks in advance.

    >
    > Nothing past Oly's foray. No one seems to be jumping in after them.


    Gee, before there actually were any cameras in that format, it sounded like
    the Charge of the Light Brigade, with Fuji, Kodak and, I thought, Pentax,
    poised to forge ahead.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Jul 15, 2004
    #5
  6. Charles Schuler

    Bouser Guest

    I believe it will be the APS of digital. Why bother with a smaller sensor
    with limited lens selection when you can get a sub-frame digital from Nikon
    or Canon that's better, cheaper, and has a much larger lens selection? I
    dont' see the point, especially considering the price. A 5MP DSLR with a
    smaller sensor than the 10D but more expensive? Why?

    "Charles Schuler" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Anybody know if this movement is still alive? Any products on the

    horizon?
    > Thanks in advance.
    >
    >
     
    Bouser, Jul 15, 2004
    #6
  7. Charles Schuler

    Steve Hix Guest

    In article <otjJc.197$SD3.124@okepread06>,
    "Skip M" <> wrote:

    > "Brian C. Baird" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > In article <>,
    > > says...
    > > > Anybody know if this movement is still alive? Any products on the

    > horizon?
    > > > Thanks in advance.

    > >
    > > Nothing past Oly's foray. No one seems to be jumping in after them.

    >
    > Gee, before there actually were any cameras in that format, it sounded like
    > the Charge of the Light Brigade, with Fuji, Kodak and, I thought, Pentax,
    > poised to forge ahead.


    Kodak makes the sensor. I'd be surprised if they came out with a camera,
    frankly, given their current struggles staying afloat.

    Olympus is introducing more lenses (and they did publish a roadmap for
    more, at least one of the roadmap list has been announced, the 150mm
    f/2). Rumor has a more budget-level body coming out later this year.
    (We all know what rumors are worth.)

    Sigma has announced it will be offering lenses in 4/3 mount (despite the
    Predd-thing, they aren't all bad lenses).

    Fuji's part of the 4/3 consortium...no telling what they'll do. They've
    marched to their own band for a very long time; not huge consumer
    mindshare, but they make some good kit.

    Pentax? Who can say; they've made more than one mistake in the digital
    market, such as the high-end dSLR that shared a sensor with the Contax N.
    Not that they ever shipped it (and the N has been a less than stellar
    performer, as near as anyone can tell).

    Takes a while to push out a new design; they may all be waiting to see
    of Olympus is going to do OK. Sort of like penguins at the edge of an
    iceflow...waiting to see who will fall in first and in doing so,
    checking for leopard seals.
     
    Steve Hix, Jul 15, 2004
    #7
  8. Charles Schuler

    Lourens Smak Guest

    In article <pckJc.81668$%_6.77668@attbi_s01>, "Bouser" <>
    wrote:

    > I believe it will be the APS of digital. Why bother with a smaller sensor
    > with limited lens selection when you can get a sub-frame digital from Nikon
    > or Canon that's better, cheaper, and has a much larger lens selection?


    The main problem with your rant is that it is the E-1 that is better,
    and cheaper. (cheaper when looking at an entire outfit). Personally I
    think the sensor-size/image-quality link isn't there. There are some
    full-frame camera's that suck, like the Contax N1 and the hit-or-miss
    shooting Kodak 14n.

    > I
    > dont' see the point, especially considering the price. A 5MP DSLR with a
    > smaller sensor than the 10D but more expensive? Why?


    Look around a bit on the web; many people who switched from 10D to E-1
    are extremely happy with that. Here's a link to help you:
    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=9470254
    (check the entire thread; pretty interesting)

    Lourens
     
    Lourens Smak, Jul 15, 2004
    #8
  9. Charles Schuler

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: Steve Hix NVALID

    > they may all be waiting to see of Olympus is going to do
    > OK. Sort of like penguins at the edge of an iceflow.


    I was thinking lemmings at the edge of a cliff ... hard to see how this format
    will gain much market share ...
     
    Bill Hilton, Jul 15, 2004
    #9
  10. Lourens Smak wrote:

    > Look around a bit on the web; many people who switched from 10D to E-1
    > are extremely happy with that. Here's a link to help you:
    > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=9470254
    > (check the entire thread; pretty interesting)


    Good comments. The particular implementation of the 4/3 concept that
    Olympus has delivered is a very good one. If Olympus continues to
    support it, it shouldn't matter to current owners what happens in the
    rest of the industry.

    If later, everyone is going with full frame 12mp cameras, and no-one
    else takes up the 4/3 concept for its compactness and ease of use, then
    fine, people can sell their E1s and move on. No great loss, though,
    they've been shooting with a great camera for a few years.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Jul 15, 2004
    #10
  11. Charles Schuler

    Steven Wandy Guest

    > I was thinking lemmings at the edge of a cliff ... hard to see how this
    format
    > will gain much market share ...
    >

    If you tried the camera you might understand why users are in love with the
    system. (Myself included.)
     
    Steven Wandy, Jul 15, 2004
    #11
  12. In article <>,
    says...
    > > I believe it will be the APS of digital. Why bother with a smaller sensor
    > > with limited lens selection when you can get a sub-frame digital from Nikon
    > > or Canon that's better, cheaper, and has a much larger lens selection?

    >
    > The main problem with your rant is that it is the E-1 that is better,
    > and cheaper. (cheaper when looking at an entire outfit). Personally I
    > think the sensor-size/image-quality link isn't there. There are some
    > full-frame camera's that suck, like the Contax N1 and the hit-or-miss
    > shooting Kodak 14n.


    The Oly E-1 is a decent dSLR, but it isn't any better than the
    competition. When you take the camera as a whole, it performs well, but
    its limitations are quite apparent. If you like a niche product, it's
    for you, because the 4/3 format is going nowhere fast.
     
    Brian C. Baird, Jul 15, 2004
    #12
  13. In article <7UxJc.77875$>,
    says...
    > If you tried the camera you might understand why users are in love with the
    > system. (Myself included.)


    Like I said, it's a great niche product. It works well. However, it
    really isn't any lighter, the lens selection is limited and the noise,
    resolution and feature set of the camera doesn't beat the competition.

    If you like the camera, I doubt you like the 4/3 format aspect. You
    probably like the environmental seals, the performance of a decent dSLR
    and aren't bothered by the limited lens selection. But the fact
    remains, whether you like the camera or not, the 4/3 format is a dead
    end technology wise.
     
    Brian C. Baird, Jul 15, 2004
    #13
  14. Charles Schuler

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >> hard to see how this format will gain much market share ...

    >From: "Steven Wandy"
    >
    >If you tried the camera you might understand why users are in love with the
    >system. (Myself included.)


    I'm sure it's a nice system, but the real question is whether or not enough
    people will buy it to make it economically feasible for the partners to keep
    supporting it with new lenses and bodies.

    Anyone know what the sales figures are for 4/3 systems? Nikon recently
    announced they are ramping up production on the D70 to 80,000 units per month,
    almost a million a year. This is almost a billion dollars per year in gross
    sales. What is the 4/3 volume, 80,000 per year? Canon probably sells as many
    or more dRebels and 10D's as Nikon does D70's. All this money leads to more
    research and development and new, better products down the road.

    4/3 has two main problems to overcome ... first, so many people interested in
    this level of photography already have lenses for Nikon or Canon or other 35 mm
    systems that will fit dSLR bodies. I've got EF lenses from 17 mm to a 500 f/4
    L for example, so a Canon dSLR makes a lot more sense than switching to 4/3.

    Second, they are locked in to a small APS sized sensor, no matter if larger
    sensors become economical in a few years. Sure it's competitive with the 6
    Mpix dSLR sensors now but how long before Canon brings out an 8 Mpix sensor
    (I'm using the Mark II right now ... if they could get that sensor in a 10D
    class body it would be a real sales winner) and in 3-5 years who's to say that
    10-12 Mpix models will be more affordable than the 1Ds is now? This is the
    fatal flaw of 4/3 and it's the same fight as earlier between APS and 35 mm,
    which APS lost so badly.

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Jul 15, 2004
    #14
  15. Charles Schuler

    Lourens Smak Guest

    In article <MIxJc.47219$>,
    Gary Eickmeier <> wrote:

    > If later, everyone is going with full frame 12mp cameras, and no-one
    > else takes up the 4/3 concept for its compactness and ease of use, then
    > fine, people can sell their E1s and move on. No great loss, though,
    > they've been shooting with a great camera for a few years.


    Exactly; I have an E-1, but I'm not married to Olympus.

    And, I don't even care if no-one else takes up the 4/3 concept. I don't
    like 3d-party lenses and stuff (they're usually disappointing) and I am
    confident, having seen the roadmap, that the near future will bring all
    I need as far as lenses are concerned.

    Lourens
     
    Lourens Smak, Jul 15, 2004
    #15
  16. Charles Schuler

    Lourens Smak Guest

    In article <>,
    Brian C. Baird <> wrote:

    > But the fact
    > remains, whether you like the camera or not, the 4/3 format is a dead
    > end technology wise.


    Why? because you own a dozen lenses that were designed for 35mm? While
    you wait for the affordable full-frame dust-collector, we move on. It's
    just time for something new.

    The funny thing is, the old 35mm lenses that you so desparately want to
    keep, don't even provide 11MP of image-information. (well, some of them
    do, at F8) I recently shot with the 1Ds + 16-35 L at F2.8, and you have
    lots of pixels, but you probably don't even have 5MP of actual image
    info, and the corners just simply suck. The E-1 kicks ass at F2.8.
    At 8 or 10MP, the quality of the system will really start to show.

    ;-)
    Lourens
     
    Lourens Smak, Jul 15, 2004
    #16
  17. Charles Schuler

    Bouser Guest

    "Lourens Smak" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <pckJc.81668$%_6.77668@attbi_s01>, "Bouser" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > I believe it will be the APS of digital. Why bother with a smaller

    sensor
    > > with limited lens selection when you can get a sub-frame digital from

    Nikon
    > > or Canon that's better, cheaper, and has a much larger lens selection?

    >
    > The main problem with your rant is that it is the E-1 that is better,
    > and cheaper. (cheaper when looking at an entire outfit). Personally I
    > think the sensor-size/image-quality link isn't there. There are some
    > full-frame camera's that suck, like the Contax N1 and the hit-or-miss
    > shooting Kodak 14n.


    I just priced the E-1 against a Canon, Nikon, and Fuji DSLR, and at B&H it's
    more expensive. There's five lenses listed, as well. Compare that to the
    selection for the competition and it pales in comparison. Don't get me
    wrong, it's a nice rig, but I can't see where it's competitive. Please
    explain how it's better. The reviews I've read don't agree.

    >
    > > I
    > > dont' see the point, especially considering the price. A 5MP DSLR with a
    > > smaller sensor than the 10D but more expensive? Why?

    >
    > Look around a bit on the web; many people who switched from 10D to E-1
    > are extremely happy with that. Here's a link to help you:
    > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=9470254
    > (check the entire thread; pretty interesting)


    I read the thread, and then read the review, where they find the camera OK,
    but nothing great. The reviewer noted higher noise levels above ISO 800 than
    the compeition, AF speeds about the same, maybe a little slower, and you
    need to shoot RAW to really get the most out of it. The sample images showed
    an amazing case of the jaggies, and less resolution than the competition (a
    10D). Sorry, I can't see where this camera offers anything to justify it's
    high price, and neither did the reviewer, who damned it with faint praise,
    and awarded it the "recommended" rating, compared to the "highly
    recommended" rating for two competitors (the 10D and D70). Why spend more
    for less?

    >
    > Lourens
     
    Bouser, Jul 16, 2004
    #17
  18. Charles Schuler

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Bill Hilton
    <> wrote:

    > 4/3 has two main problems to overcome ... first, so many people interested in
    > this level of photography already have lenses for Nikon or Canon or other 35
    > mm
    > systems that will fit dSLR bodies. I've got EF lenses from 17 mm to a 500 f/4
    > L for example, so a Canon dSLR makes a lot more sense than switching to 4/3.
    >
    > Second, they are locked in to a small APS sized sensor, no matter if larger
    > sensors become economical in a few years. Sure it's competitive with the 6
    > Mpix dSLR sensors now but how long before Canon brings out an 8 Mpix sensor
    > (I'm using the Mark II right now ... if they could get that sensor in a 10D
    > class body it would be a real sales winner) and in 3-5 years who's to say that
    > 10-12 Mpix models will be more affordable than the 1Ds is now? This is the
    > fatal flaw of 4/3 and it's the same fight as earlier between APS and 35 mm,
    > which APS lost so badly.


    the main problem for me, is the camera is essentially the same size as
    the rebel/d70/*ist.

    since the sensor is smaller, give me a camera that is *noticably*
    smaller, not the same size. if the camera is essentially the same size,
    then i want a bigger and better sensor. plus, there are a LOT of
    nikon/canon/pentax lenses around, new and used.
     
    nospam, Jul 16, 2004
    #18
  19. Charles Schuler

    Justin Thyme Guest

    "Brian C. Baird" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > The Oly E-1 is a decent dSLR, but it isn't any better than the
    > competition. When you take the camera as a whole, it performs well, but
    > its limitations are quite apparent. If you like a niche product, it's
    > for you, because the 4/3 format is going nowhere fast.

    if it's limitations are apparent, what are they? while I don't own one, i
    have had the opportunity to use one for a day, and all i can say is that it
    was a beautiful camera. Beautiful photos, nice to hold, and great to use. I
    got to play with an EOS300D and a D70 also, and they are just not in the
    same league as the olympus (admittedly they are only 2/3 the price). I was
    shooting in broad daylight through to dusk, and even at dusk with the camera
    on ISO 800 the photos it took were gorgeous with bugger all noise. Fast
    autofocus, fast response, and very fast burst capabilities. Unfortunately I
    didn't have the opportunity to keep any of the photos I took with it
    (dammit, cos there were some real nice ones).
    The only gripe I have with it is that the lenses didn't have mechanical
    coupling for their manual focus, so when you turn the focus dial, the lens
    doesn't respond immediately and as precisely as I would like. I hate these
    type of manual focus lenses with a passion, but the camera's AF was good
    enough (even when shooting closeups) that I didn't really feel the need to
    use MF.
    When the time comes that I buy a DSLR though, I'll still be getting an
    istD - even though the camera isn't quite as good as the E1 I have quite a
    range of good pentax glass, and the istD is closer to my price range.
    >
     
    Justin Thyme, Jul 16, 2004
    #19
  20. Charles Schuler

    Skip M Guest

    "Bouser" <> wrote in message
    news:IaEJc.82648$JR4.80674@attbi_s54...
    >
    > "Lourens Smak" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > In article <pckJc.81668$%_6.77668@attbi_s01>, "Bouser" <>
    > > wrote:
    > >
    > > > I believe it will be the APS of digital. Why bother with a smaller

    > sensor
    > > > with limited lens selection when you can get a sub-frame digital from

    > Nikon
    > > > or Canon that's better, cheaper, and has a much larger lens selection?

    > >
    > > The main problem with your rant is that it is the E-1 that is better,
    > > and cheaper. (cheaper when looking at an entire outfit). Personally I
    > > think the sensor-size/image-quality link isn't there. There are some
    > > full-frame camera's that suck, like the Contax N1 and the hit-or-miss
    > > shooting Kodak 14n.

    >
    > I just priced the E-1 against a Canon, Nikon, and Fuji DSLR, and at B&H

    it's
    > more expensive. There's five lenses listed, as well. Compare that to the
    > selection for the competition and it pales in comparison. Don't get me
    > wrong, it's a nice rig, but I can't see where it's competitive. Please
    > explain how it's better. The reviews I've read don't agree.
    >
    > >
    > > > I
    > > > dont' see the point, especially considering the price. A 5MP DSLR with

    a
    > > > smaller sensor than the 10D but more expensive? Why?

    > >
    > > Look around a bit on the web; many people who switched from 10D to E-1
    > > are extremely happy with that. Here's a link to help you:
    > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=9470254
    > > (check the entire thread; pretty interesting)

    >
    > I read the thread, and then read the review, where they find the camera

    OK,
    > but nothing great. The reviewer noted higher noise levels above ISO 800

    than
    > the compeition, AF speeds about the same, maybe a little slower, and you
    > need to shoot RAW to really get the most out of it. The sample images

    showed
    > an amazing case of the jaggies, and less resolution than the competition

    (a
    > 10D). Sorry, I can't see where this camera offers anything to justify it's
    > high price, and neither did the reviewer, who damned it with faint praise,
    > and awarded it the "recommended" rating, compared to the "highly
    > recommended" rating for two competitors (the 10D and D70). Why spend more
    > for less?
    >


    I'm glad you said that about the sample images, I was afraid it was just me.
    I looked at some of the images posted by one of the participants in the
    forum, and thought they were marginally better than similar images I've
    taken with my D30, not up to what my wife's 10D is capable.
    I find it interesting that the impressions that the users have is so
    different from the reviewer's.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Jul 16, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Paul D. Sullivan

    Is the Four-Thirds project the answer for DSLR's?

    Paul D. Sullivan, Aug 19, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    658
    Mike Engles
    Aug 21, 2003
  2. Todd Walker

    Re: 300D as a 'Four Thirds' killer?

    Todd Walker, Aug 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    42
    Views:
    997
    Todd Walker
    Sep 16, 2003
  3. Alan Browne

    Re: 300D as a 'Four Thirds' killer?

    Alan Browne, Aug 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    321
    Lionel
    Aug 21, 2003
  4. Bernhard Mayer

    Re: 300D as a 'Four Thirds' killer?

    Bernhard Mayer, Aug 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    317
    Jim Townsend
    Aug 29, 2003
  5. Bruce
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    1,594
    John Turco
    Sep 25, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page