Yet another SLR format

"Olympus and Matsushita [<i>maker of Panasonic brand cameras</i>] have announced a new digital camera format that

will

make digital SLRs smaller and lighter."<p>

 

No word yet on the exact specs, but it's called "Micro Four-Thirds"<p>

 

<a href="http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/216756">http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/216756</a>

"* Image sensor diagonal dimensions are the same for both Four Thirds System and Micro Four Thirds System standards. "

 

Not so much a new format, but a new mount

Saw this earlier.

 

It can still use their other lenses.

 

It sounds like their version of Canon's EF-S Lenses.

They dud up the electrical contacts though from 9 to 11...

 

-Mario

Well, the graphics on the www.four-thirds.org website shows that the micro 4/3 format is not a SLR format (there's no mirror), but there is an extension/adapter that will allow for the older 4/3 lenses to work with the new u4/3 mount.

 

So, this is not a case of making dSLRs smaller---it's just making digital cameras smaller.

It's not really an "xLR" since it's not a reflex system.

 

Basically it's an interchangable lens camera which uses "Live View" for composition. Just like a P&S camera, you hold it out in front of you and compose on the LCD.

 

So it's an interchangable lens "P&S" with a four-thirds sized sensor and no optical viewfinder.

 

It's an interesting idea, though I'm not sure what market segment it's aimed at. In principle you should be able to mount just about any older manual focus lens on it with the right adapter,

The Micro 4/3rds system brings the possibility for eye-level EVF, not just rear LCD at an arms length.

 

It would be neat to have a digital Olympus Pen F, eh? With an adapter, maybe even the original Olympus Pen F SLR

lenses might fit, and then we'd have the only full half frame out there! Olympus liked moving the viewfinder to

the left anyway, like a rangefinder, leaving air space for our nose, and an EVF might be perfect in this

position. If I recall, The Olympus Pen F-series half-frame SLRs were the best selling camera of their type in

their time. Neat to see if we might get a digital version using the original lenses!

 

And, with the plentiful adapters for old lenses of any type to the 4/3rds system, this might be a neat pocketable

1/2-frame digital for Minolta SR-series lenses and other orphaned antique manual focus systems, too.

 

The fun is back!

"...The Micro Four Thirds System is a new standard based on combining Live View shooting with the Four Thirds System..."

 

They don't mention EVF, though I guess it's possible. No EVF probably enables a smaller (and cheaper) camera to be built.

 

My guess is this will be even more of a niche format than 4/3 is now.

Hardly. This will be much much more than a niche format unlike the initial 4/3'rds format. It offers a significant reduction in size making a truly compact camera with DSLR quality. The initial 4/3rds system offered users little not available in other DSLR's while having a minor sensor-size related disadvantage. Lot's of people have been screaming for a quality compact. This answers that call. It's a shame that Canon does not see this, or too stubborn to accept it. (no, the G9 is grossly inadequate).

<i>Lot's of people have been screaming for a quality compact.</i><p>Some people on web forums have. In the general market, very few people seem concerned because they print at 4x6 or look at photos on the web and aren't looking for anything more in terms of quality, hence the aggressive pixel density marketing. Back in the 35mm days, there were a few "quality compacts" and they were generally known as "cult cameras" because of the tiny market for them.

[[They don't mention EVF, though I guess it's possible. No EVF probably enables a smaller (and cheaper) camera to be built. ]]

 

It could be an add-on EVF like the Ricoh GX100/200 series or an optical finder like the Sigma DP1.

Lots of people haven't been screaming for a quality compact. As Jeff says, a few people on a few photography forums

have. They probably represent much less than 0.1% of the photography market.

 

Micro 4/3 might have a chance if it was really cheap (as it could be). If you could buy the body for $250 and the

lenses were in the $100 region I can see a few people buying them. I might even buy one myself! However if they

price it on a par with a DSLR, even a low end DSLR, I just don't think it will sell well. The average amateur doing

holiday snaps will be more than happy with a P&S. The serious amateur will want a DSLR for many reasons. Small

size isn't a big issue there. So who buys into a micro 4/3 sytstem? Possibly the same people who think about the

Leica M8 but who can't afford one! Maybe some street shooters. Maybe some serious photographers who want a

small second camera for travel.

 

As I said, if the camera (and the lenses) are cheap enough, it may do OK. I know you may be able to mount your full

size (D)SLR lenses on it with an adapter, but if you're going to do that, you've then lost the advantage of overall size.

 

Just look at the market for the aforementioned Ricoh GX100/200 series cameras or Sigma DP1. They're not exactly

selling like hot cakes.

As one of the people on the forums who has been screaming for something like this, I do think it will do well. There are many people who didn't go to 4/3's because the size of the camera to sensor ratio is so awful. Also, because of the 4/3's lens depth, fast wide lenses will be expensive and cumbersome for 4/3's. With Micro 4/3's the cameras and lenses will be cheaper to make which should come back to the user. And a Micro 4/3's camera with full-sized 4/3's lenses would hardly lacks size benifits... a camera body the size of the screen on the back of a full size 4/3's camera? come-on... thats TINY. You are basically talking about an LCD screen mounted to the back of the lens! The theoretical mock-up on the press released images does not show any kind of viewfinder other than the large rear LCD, but it does show what appears to be a hot-shoe or accessory-shoe. With an optical VF this camera would be like a smaller version of one of the Cosina Voigtlander bodies... maybe they could add contacts to the hot-shoe or beside it, to add a digital read-out into the optical view finder to show basic information like AF confirmation, aperture and exposure... that would make it possible to turn off the rear LCD and save battery life... it's certainly a possibility!

There has been a few small digital p&s types that met the "that's interesting" criteria, but until now nothing that has interested me enough to buy one. A key for me be able to use some existing 35mm lenses, more specifically ones I have. It will be a stretch to get people to buy lenses for it.

 

In the flange to sensor distance diagram, would this allow any existing rangefinder mount lenses to be used? It would be tough to market it if you had to buy new lenses. Ok, that is for say, film camera users that want a decent dp&s.

I hope it doesn't have a mechanical shutter, although I suspect it will. This is the type of camera I've been ranting about on and off for a while: a camera as silent as a compact but with the quality and versatility of a 'proper' camera. This would be great for courtrooms, film sets etc. and would make blimps redundant.

Bob,

 

Count me in the minority. If this format lives up to the promise of a smaller and lighter 4/3 camera, I'm all for it. I'd love to see a G9 size camera with a 4/3 sensor and interchangeable lenses. The 4/3 sensor is a significant step up in IQ from the G9 sensor, and if the camera has a decent EVF (this is a huge unknown) and a few small and light lenses, I'd love it. I think they're on the right track with this one, unlike the original 4/3 SLRs, which were utterly horrible (for me, anyway).

Yeah, I'm thrilled at the idea of a quality compact, but as mentioned above, the market in general is hardly screaming for

them. Hasn't been for years. The really nice film compacts--Hexar, 35ti, T4, G2, etc.--were never big mainstream sellers. The

cost of R&D for digital makes this kind of low volume project even tougher to justify.

 

The Epson RD-1 is good niche economics example--they used cheap parts (a Bessa body and D70 sensor, not even a built-

in motor, you hand to wind on between shots), priced it to the moon, sold a respectable number to desperate rangefinder

fans pre-M8, and still didn't make enough money to continue the project.