1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Olympus E system to go mirrorless

Discussion in 'News - Discussion' started by Damien_Demolder, Feb 22, 2010.

  1. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    I think it is the general conclusion of the technical editor who shot with both bodies real world test as well.
    She did raise the line test in the article but pointed out it was a extreme test. My only other point is that the 7D is a Canon therefore they must be happy with it performance to put their name on it. The mirrorless would have the same or better performance of the 7D.
  2. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    But the 7D is pretty much the exact opposite of what you're proposing; yes, it has a fairly high pixel count, but a lot lower than your proposal, and crucially, on a sensor much, much bigger than a bridge camera's - as I've pointed out, Canon are reducing pixel counts on cameras with tiny sensors. The 7D has interchangeable lenses, and doesn't have digital zoom. And far from abandoning the reflex finder, the 7D has a 100% coverage, 1x magnification reflex finder - they've gone in the opposite direction to what you suggest in every way, and produced AP's camera of the year, and this forum's camera of the year as a result. I've no doubt that there will be a lower-end mirrorless EOS at some point, but it will retain interchangeable lenses and a larger sensor. Bridge cameras? Very much yesterday's solution to a problem that no longer exists.
  3. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member

    Err, Andy, I think you;re the only one in the world who likes photographing the scales on springtails. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
  4. Roy5051

    Roy5051 Well-Known Member

    Sorry, I do not understand this sentence. What was the problem, and why does it not now exist? Surely people who buy Bridge cameras do so for the long zooms in the small bodies - when do you think we may get similar sized zooms/bodies in interchangeable-lens cameras?
  5. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Bodies are there now, long zooms are a problem in themselves, not a solution.
  6. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    It just occurred to me why mirrorless is coming. Three letters FPS. With a mirror there is physical mechnical limits to how fast you can get the mirror out of the way
    to let the light to the sensor. Mirrorless does not have that problem therefore you can have say 20MP with 30+ fps. There are already bridge cameras that offer very high FPS. Casio (yes the calculator people) have one with really high speed modes.
  7. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Except that it's not actually that easy to design a sensor that will turn off and on and evacuate electrons that quickly, especially at higher pixel counts, larger sensor sizes and with CMOS sensors. Nikon have moved away from this type of concept in their lower-end DSLRs and back to mechanical shutters so as to allow improved image quality and noise control. Anyway, who actually needs speeds in advance of the 10 fps currently available with reflex cameras? For those that do, I suspect the pellicle mirror provides a more intelligent future.
  8. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    Sounds like a case of "don't confuse me with the facts, my mind's made up!"

    The facts are though that choosing the right lens will always give a better result than an over extended general purpose zoom.

    Cropping will never give as high a quality result as will getting it right in camera.

    An optical viewfinder will always use less power than an EVF and will show a clearer image.

    There will always be people who sacrifice quality for convenience, hence MP3. If you are more interested in convenience than quality the DSLR is not for you, probably the M4/3 system likewise.

    The reflex mirror will disappear from photography only when, if, something better comes along. Currently the EVF is not that "something better" and those who value quality are buying more DSLRs to prove it.
  9. AGW

    AGW Well-Known Member

    This thread cant be very good for Olympus's marketing.....

    On the front page of the forum it becomes abridged to....

    "Re: Olympus E system to go..."

    The ending is missleading!

  10. Roy5051

    Roy5051 Well-Known Member

    Look at the specification of the new Panasonic G2 - it has an EVF with 1,440,000-dots - do you think that may be good enough for the sceptics?
  11. beejaybee

    beejaybee Marvin

    A couple of orders of magnitude short for me.
  12. DaveS

    DaveS Well-Known Member

    Depends on the angle superintended by the EVF screen. Provided each RGB cluster is less than half the eye's resolution (About 1 Minute of arc)so that the distance between them is less than the eye's resolution then increasing the number of dots beyond that would be less than pointless since it will increase the cost of the EVF and the computing power needed to run it.
    Even a 1920x1080 resolution would be pushing it.
  13. DaveS

    DaveS Well-Known Member

    Um . . . . That should have been "subtended" :eek:
  14. Roy5051

    Roy5051 Well-Known Member

    I still didn't understand it!!
  15. beejaybee

    beejaybee Marvin

    Yes. But a dark line on a light background can be seen when it subtends about 10 arc seconds, and a bright point on a dark background can be seen when it's even smaller. (I can see Sirius perfectly well without optical aid, the diameter of Sirius is micro arc seconds!) It's these clues that the eye uses for judging focus.
  16. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    In reply to FPS and mirrorless. If Panasonic are correct and they have grabbed a nice
    chunk of the market then Canon have got to be looking at 43 with EVF. I would not
    be surprised to see a 43 at 20MP with 20FPS and a 3MP EVF by 2012. If Canon don't
    then it will Panasonic and the G4. The Casio is 9MP at 40FPS. Therefore around
    1080MB is generated per second. To do 20MP at 20FPS around 1200MB is generated
    a data transfer rate increase of 11% to solve in 2 years. I think the engineers can
    do that especially if they are Canon people.

    In relation to EVF, look at the history of photography before SLRs photographer had to
    use plate camera with the image upside. Then you had TLR which gave you a similar view
    to the lens but it was reversed you point left and the image moved right. Then rangefinder
    but they again only gave you a similar view to the lens. So your composition might be
    a bit off especially if you was close to the subject. SLR allow you to see the lens view
    but when shooting action your view blanked out because of the mirror having to move up to
    get light to film. EVF offer the the option of a uninterrupted view of what you are shooting
    if you have the processing muscle onboard the camera.

    Does anyone know if the G1/G2 takes a breath ie EVF stops when shooting? I know the bridge
    camera do. But that is because they skip on processing performance.
  17. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    One huge problem with live view/evf is noise. For these systems to work the sensor has to remain powered which means it gets hot. A hot sensor is noisy sensor and over an extended shooting period image quality will deteriorate. Also, a hot sensor will have its life reduced for a number of reasons. All of which also requires energy. This energy has to come from the battery so battery life is compromised, both in terms of time between charges and ultimate life due to the high number of charge cycles.

    In the days of film there were SLRs that did not need batteries, for the manufacturers to attract the owners of such cameras to the new electronic versions they had to have long battery lives. The electronics of an SLR are very energy efficient, the electronics of monitor screens are very inefficient by comparison.

    Today a DSLR needs no power to view a scene or to focus, you can still focus manually, obviously you need power to capture the image. The same is true of every other type of camera, range-finder, TLR, View camera etc. Only the finder-less/EVF camera is so battery dependent that you can't even see what the picture might look like without using power.

    If you can't see that as a major disadvantage, may I suggest a week's holiday with a single battery and no charger in, say, Rome or Florence. I have done it with a DSLR, can you do it with an EVF camera?
  18. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    A fair point, but who would really be that silly? ;)
  19. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    My son for starters - recenly was due to to join him in Rome for the second half of a holiday and got a frantic message "could you bring adaptors and chargers for Italian sockets :eek:

    I was not easy to arrange but I managed it

    Just goes to show that you may be able to run a successful IT company but organising the small things still needs help

  20. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    I am not sure about the noise issue and sensor being active long. I have not seen
    any evidence from my cameras. Before digital you had to remember to bring and carry
    enough film especialy if it was something special. These day even with dSLR you
    still need spare batteries ready charge because they tend to be li-on custom made.
    There are power saving tricks for EVF. Like it only coming on when it detects your
    eye is looking in. Power save mode if you forget to switch off. dSLR use a fair
    amount of energy mechnically moving a mirror every time you shot. Yes, true while you
    are not shooting the dSLR will use less power. But I tend to shoot alot so that not a
    issue :). Finally with the new Lithium AA batteries I have shot over 1000 images without
    changing them. They last a very long time.

Share This Page