File :-(, x, )
Project !dashI8UpO.
Sort of want.
>> Anonymous
Explain.
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
     File :-(, x)
Oly's Micro 4/3 camera. I want to strap a hotshoe viewfinder on this.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092208olympus_micro_four_thirds.asp
>> noclue !!2yUmAID3520
DO. WANT.
reminds me of the pen slr ...
>> Anonymous
looks fucking nice.

it all really depends on the trade off of price vs image quality/ usability. i rally cant be fuckied to carry an slr around all the time so something like this would be perfect.
>> Anonymous
looks like an egg sandwhich
>> Anonymous
>>260018

what. you mean the sort of egg sandwiches that are made between two sheets of buffed aluminum with a fucking pancake lens shoved in for good measure.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Helllz yeah, that's what I'm talking about.

Especially if this thing focuses as fast as the G1 apparently does, and assuming that delicious 20/1.7 pancake actually happens, I'm gonna have to get me one of these.
>> Anonymous
>>260023

i have a bad feeling that the focusing and delay from button press to shutter release may be,how should i say,lacking.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>260026
Yeah, that worries me too. Early reports of the G1 are that it focuses as fast as an SLR, though, and focusing is the biggest contributor to P&S shutter lag these days, so I'm hopeful.
>> Anonymous
It looks great and I'm sure it'll perform well, and I'd like to have one (with 20/1.8 and a 40mm Voigtlaender shoe finder) but I'm definitely going for the G1 over this. More of a shooter, which is what I'm looking for, and it's not that hard to throw a camera over your shoulder.

Plus, I bet (from the sort of luxury trim and everything) I bet this is going to be pretty costly.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>260030
>More of a shooter, which is what I'm looking for, and it's not that hard to throw a camera over your shoulder.
In that case, why not just get a full-sized SLR? Unless you're already invested in the 4/3 system, I suppose.
>> Macheath !8b4g0BkNZg
     File :-(, x)
Hold on now, this thing is backwards compatible with regular 4/3rds? At least with an adapter?

Someone has to attach that to this.
>> Anonymous
>>260032
I don't like SLRs that much, the M8 costs what the M8 does, and I really dig EVFs actually.

G1's almost exactly the camera I've been waiting for. Just give it weatherproofing and the ability to use either an RF or EVF (either goes in a swappable slot, EVF goes in the shoe like on the Ricoh GX point and shoots, whatever) and it would be perfect.
>> Anonymous
it looks like a compact to me. is it still an interchangeable lens?
>> Anonymous
>>260035
Yes, I'm pretty sure that's the 25/2.8 on it.
>> Anonymous
the tiny sensor in this means it is doomed to giving poor quality and noisy images that lack good bokeh.
>> Anonymous
>>260036
cool. i didn't know olympus released a lens that looked like that. it's strange. looks like a fixed lens on a compact rather than the normal sort we see nowadays.
>> Anonymous
>>260038
1. It's 4/3rds. It's big enough.
2. >that lack good bokeh

Bokeh is a property of the lens, not of the sensor. While its depth of field is much greater than a DX or even 4/3rds sensor, the lens on the bridge camera I own has excellent bokeh in what out-of-focus areas it does get.
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
     File :-(, x)
>>260035
Yep. Also from the article.

>In addition, users will be able to mount existing Four Thirds System wide-angle, telephoto, and macro lenses on Micro Four Thirds System bodies via an adapter.
>Image sensor diagonal dimensions are the same for both Four Thirds System and Micro Four Thirds System standards.
>> Anonymous
>>260039
Yeah, if it's the lens I think it is, it's a 25mm pancake, which is if I understand a kit option with their E-420. Hopefully that'll be a trend- going back to normal primes as kit lenses.
>> Anonymous
>>260029
Huh? You have a huge DoF anyway so just use manual focus and guesstimate the distance if you need a faster response
>> ponpo !tC/hi58lI.
     File :-(, x)
>>260015

Hell yes, this.
>> noclue !!2yUmAID3520
>>260064
exactly, i was looking for one some months ago on local stores and ebay. it seems getting a net micro 4/3 would be a much wiser choice, also regarding the price o an old pen f.
>> ponpo !tC/hi58lI.
     File :-(, x)
The Zeiss Werra has been thieved

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:09:26 14:31:46Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width520Image Height415
>> Anonymous
Looks promising. Way better than this shit from Panasonic.
I like it`s size, if u4/3 will look like that they will get nice market.
Hopefully they will make fixed hot shoe viewfinders for their primes.
>> Anonymous
>>260118
Just buy the Voigtlaender ones.
>> Anonymous
anything on the price yet? i just saw this on engadget
>> Anonymous
I'm a Canonfag and even I fucking love this.
>> Anonymous
For a point and shoot that looks very nice, although I'm skeptical about image quality, I've always used Fuji compacts in digital.
>> Anonymous
>>260442
Protip:

This has a sensor ~2-3 times bigger than any Fuji compact.

It's basically a DSLR sensor in a compact body with interchangeable lenses. A DP-1 that doesn't fail, basically.
>> BurtGummer !!RRMHFHglFsy
Anyone else noticed the lack of button directions on the back of that camera?

>>260011

is it just because its a prototype or something?
>> Anonymous
I luuurve them because hot damn, it's about time we had a digital camera other than the R-D1 that can take rangefinder lenses.
>> ponpo !tC/hi58lI.
>>260457
Uhh what.
>> Anonymous
>>260457
THIS.

(Too bad it ain't full frame though, to be honest. Guess I'll just buy one eventually, but this micro 4/3rds seems like a very nice product.)
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
>>260461
I suppose it can easily adapt to many other mounts because it has such a small flange distance (the distance from plane to mount). About 50% that of 4/3's. The only problem is the small lens mount diameter but then again, it's already got a small sensor so the edges get cropped off anyway.
>> Anonymous
>>260461
It doesn't have a mirror, so you can use lenses that protrude closer to the sensitive surface. Rangefinder lenses are designed to have a very short Back Focal Length, so they aren't suitable for common DSLRs. This lack of a mirror here lets you use those lenses on this camera.

Example: You can mount a Noctilux 0.95 on this, but you'll never be able to on a Nikon/Canon/Pentax, or even a normal 4/3rds camera.
>> Anonymous
Introducing the first real "bridge" camera.
>> Anonymous
>>260457
And the available focal lengths work out really well... 12, 15, 16-18-21, 18, 21, 24, 25, 35, 40, 50, all will work great on it. 28 and the original Tri-Elmar are kinda meh, thogh.
>> Anonymous
>>260467
Unless you rip apart the mount and J-J-J-JAM IT IN!
>> Anonymous
>>260472
I lol'ed.
>> Anonymous
>>260467

I'm well aware of this, i'm just loling because
a) you're like everyone else saying OMG...M MOUNT??? when probably 5% of the people wishing for this have 0 m-mount lenses.
b) "rangefinder lenses" is a seriously general term.
c) Cool, with the crop factor you'll have to get like a 15mm to have a decent wide
d) There is no other digital camera besides the RD-1 that takes 'rangefinder lenses', huh?
>> Anonymous
Yes sort of want to. Kinda sexy. Great travelling kit.
>> Anonymous
>>260472
Of course. Heh.
>> Anonymous
>>260497
You're right, although it's viable, it's really not that much of an advantage because of the focal lengths.
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>260497
Of course probably noone will shoot exclusively with M lenses on m4/3 but if you already have them, it's a nice plus, and if you don't, you can pick up a couple LTM lenses for cheap as an added bonus. I imagine the cheap Russian 50s would make awesome portrait lenses.

And yeah, "rangefinder lenses" can be left as a really general term. The M mount (and by extension, LTM) is the obvious thing to adapt, but I can imagine people making weirder adapters like Contax, Nikon S, and Prominent.
>> Anonymous
>>260689
>Of course probably noone will shoot exclusively with M lenses on m4/3

I'm planning to, with the possible exception (if it's good and I subjectively like the results) of the 20/1.7. As far as I see it, it's the easiest, fastest way to get to a set-up of good primes.

(I'm the guy from the thread asking about good M 35's. That Summaron you have- do you know if the 2.8 is version has a different optical formula or whatever from your 3.5?)
>> Anonymous
This looks pretty awesome.

I'm a little confused about DOF on these. I know the crop factor is the same but I swear I read somewhere that DOF should be similar to FF cameras because the distance to the sensor is half of the Four Thirds standard.

Cam someone with more knowledge clear this up?
>> Anonymous
>>260901
That sounds like bullshit, do Nikon Fs have less depth of field than Canons EOSes, and Leica Ms have more? Because that would be the case if what you were saying were true, and you KNOW the brandfags would turn that into something.
>> Anonymous
why does anyone give a shit about four thirds
>> Anonymous
>>260954

because they are making interesting cameras that are different from the competition
>> Anonymous
>>260954


Because they're not complete faggot brandwhores like you?
>> Anonymous
This is turning out to be a damn good Photokina. Lots of good new cameras and lenses.
>> Anonymous
>>260966
enjoy ure noisy overpriced camera much?
>> Anonymous
>>260976


You're not very bright, are you?
>> Anonymous
>>261310
brite enuff 2 not spend $$ on a shitty noisy camera i KANT spel
>> Anonymous
>>260976
i bet you've never even seen a four thirds camera, a picture from one, and much less ever used one, M I RITE?

enjoy your useless empty head.
>> Anonymous
>>261315


You ain't sagin' nothing, faggot.

You probably have no idea about the design of Four Thirds. All you see is "lol tiny sensor ololo" and leave it at that. Nevermind the fact that it was specifically designed to improve sensor edge performance and nevermind that the Zuiko lens line is fucking baller.

You poor dumb noise-obsessed pixel peeper.
>> Anonymous
>>261315
haha i know you're a failtroll, but still, the cries of LOL 4/3IS NOISY are grossly exaggerated by canikon faggots who believe themselve to also be sensor design experts, while they'yre fucking their shitty rebel or d40's eyecup. yeah, no.

Is 4/3 noisier than the 5d at iso3200? well of course, but then again, so is everything else, so that's kind of a moot point, isnt it?

All this coming from someone who would never buy an olympus SLR, btw. I <3 pentax.