Because an active fantasy life is healthy...

[david-w]

<p><i>they could replace the back off of a an OM with one only slightly thicker that could easily contain an APS or full frame sensor</i></p>

 

<p>...</p>

 

<p><i>*sigh* if only olympus would consider straying from the 4/3rds long enough to even make a pro body with an APS sized sensor</i></p>

 

<p>So, they should create a new body, a whole new mount, a new lens line, lose their current Sigma/Panaleica support.. all to add ~2mm or so of width onto the sensor?</p>

 

<p>In reality, APSc and 4/3 are essentially the same. Take a couple of RAWs from the E510 and say the Nikon D80 at any ISO and compare them side by side. The differences caused by sensor size basically do not exist.</p>

 

<p>I think everyone has got it into their heads that 4/3 is noisy and somehow limited in comparison to APSc. Perhaps this was due to the late timing of the E-1 which ended up competing with a newer generation of cameras than it was designed to do. As a result it had less resolution and was more noisy than its contemporaries. Technology marches on, however.. and the new bodies are proof that anything lost by going 4/3 is barely worth measuring, especially when stacked up against the other variables such as the quality of the excellent Zuiko lenses.</p>

[GerrySiegel]

"I always hated processing film and paper: that's not photography, that's tedium."

 

My sentiments too, Godfrey. Digital has freed up a lot of creative energy for those who don't love the smell of fixer..Aloha, Gerry. PS.

Give the E system a little more time. They are improving things as we talk...smaller companies can be more nimble as they don't need to carry all the legacy freight.

[shadowfox]

Patrick, cool dream and diagram!

But why chop off the whole left side of the body?, I know you don't need film cavity anymore, but leave it there, it can host a second battery or something.

[patrick j dempsey]

Just because it makes it the same width as the Oly 35RC or the Oly Pen cameras... and because I agree with Maitani's philosophy of making a camera as small as possible and controls as large as possible... which seems to be the opposite philosophy of everyone else... especially designers of dSLRs. Also, it keeps your nose off the camera, which is something that people with big noses have been suffering with since day 1 with SLR's. ;-)

[Rob F.]

How about a design that doesn't saw off the left half of the camera--so it can handle in the old familiar way. There must be something that needs to go in the left half, like a battery or some electronics, and a place to mount a control or two.