Author Topic: More about the new Olympus and Panasonic cameras (Read 2969 times)

voyager · « **on:** May 21, 2011, 09:45:53 PM »

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdigicame-info.com%2F2011%2F05%2F6e-p3e-pl3mini3m43.html

- E-P3 (with a built in viewfinder) and E-PL3 (after only 6 months, a bit strange)
-Released June 3rd
- Same 12 megapixel sensor (also strange, considering Olympus reported making their own new sensor)
- New GF camera smaller and focused on women (how much smaller than the GF2 can you get?)

This blog reported on the E-PL1 and was correct, so we will see what happens with these cameras.

adash · « **Reply #1 on:** May 21, 2011, 10:02:08 PM »

Quote

- Same 12 megapixel sensor

Then I'm staying with my E-P1. Sorry, Olympus, try harder!

lisandra · « **Reply #2 on:** May 21, 2011, 11:19:39 PM »

This can't be true, Olympus can't possibly be that stupid...

lisandra · « **Reply #3 on:** May 21, 2011, 11:24:13 PM »

And what the hell does being a woman have to do with anything?! Is.it gonna have hotshoe lipstick?

voyager · « **Reply #4 on:** May 21, 2011, 11:27:58 PM »

I took it from the 43rumors translation, don't shoot the messenger!

iwimages · « **Reply #5 on:** May 21, 2011, 11:29:28 PM »

Any ideas on what the look of the EP3 is?

Ian

iwimages.com

voyager · « **Reply #6 on:** May 22, 2011, 12:02:39 AM »

Nope, we'll probably get that in the next few weeks though!

popo · « **Reply #7 on:** May 22, 2011, 03:52:16 AM »

Different groups have different needs. Maybe Olympus market research suggests there is a large group of women who are not buying bigger cameras, so a smaller one would help there. It is interesting both Olympus and Panasonic are making possibly ever smaller cameras at the same time.

watkins · « **Reply #8 on:** May 22, 2011, 04:02:30 AM »

this has been changed to FT2 now, as it's from a completely new source. Could be totally wrong.

Luke · « **Reply #9 on:** May 22, 2011, 06:38:32 AM »

Quote from: lisandra on May 21, 2011, 11:24:13 PM

And what the hell does being a woman have to do with anything?! Is.it gonna have hotshoe lipstick?

maybe it'll just be a pair of hotshoes .......

cosinaphile · « **Reply #10 on:** May 22, 2011, 07:32:09 AM »

more evfs ?? has olympus no clue

look at the public reception of the fixed lens x100 due partly to the vf

lisandra · « **Reply #11 on:** May 22, 2011, 10:28:50 AM »

It has to be a false rumor. I don't think oly is so bold as to do the ovf but using the sensor would be company suicide...

lisandra · « **Reply #12 on:** May 22, 2011, 10:30:36 AM »

Quote from: popo on May 22, 2011, 03:52:16 AM

Different groups have different needs. Maybe Olympus market research suggests there is a large group of women who are not buying bigger cameras, so a smaller one would help there. It is interesting both Olympus and Panasonic are making possibly ever smaller cameras at the same time.

how stupid are the women from this survey? The lenses are not gonna change size...

lisandra · « **Reply #13 on:** May 22, 2011, 10:31:50 AM »

Quote from: Luke on May 22, 2011, 06:38:32 AM

Quote from: lisandra on May 21, 2011, 11:24:13 PM
And what the hell does being a woman have to do with anything?! Is.it gonna have hotshoe lipstick?

maybe it'll just be a pair of hotshoes .......

ha!

popo · « **Reply #14 on:** May 22, 2011, 11:29:57 AM »

Quote from: lisandra on May 22, 2011, 10:30:36 AM

how stupid are the women from this survey? The lenses are not gonna change size...

No one said there was a survey, and even then, it was only my speculation on a possible reason. Smaller lenses are certainly possible even if they haven't been realised yet. I still think the true position of mirrorless systems will be in the super-compact niche, and it hasn't quite got small enough for that yet. But I think we're getting closer...

lisandra · « **Reply #15 on:** May 22, 2011, 01:30:48 PM »

Quote from: popo on May 22, 2011, 11:29:57 AM

Quote from: lisandra on May 22, 2011, 10:30:36 AM
how stupid are the women from this survey? The lenses are not gonna change size...
No one said there was a survey, and even then, it was only my speculation on a possible reason. Smaller lenses are certainly possible even if they haven't been realised yet. I still think the true position of mirrorless systems will be in the super-compact niche, and it hasn't quite got small enough for that yet. But I think we're getting closer...

then panny made a wrong choice with OIS

popo · « **Reply #16 on:** May 22, 2011, 02:15:05 PM »

They don't have to put it in, for example most faster/shorter primes from everyone don't have stabilisation. Body IS while a nice to have, will itself add to size. It just shifts where that size might go.

adash · « **Reply #17 on:** May 22, 2011, 09:30:32 PM »

Quote

Body IS while a nice to have, will itself add to size.

By looking at the size of my E-P1, I must say I see no proof for your point...

Agent00soul · « **Reply #18 on:** May 22, 2011, 10:15:30 PM »

Quote from: adash on May 22, 2011, 09:30:32 PM

Quote
Body IS while a nice to have, will itself add to size.
By looking at the size of my E-P1, I must say I see no proof for your point...

Well, the E-PL2 is larger than the GF2 and the Sony NEX, so I think he has a point.

adash · « **Reply #19 on:** May 22, 2011, 10:32:24 PM »

Sony nex can not be compared as its flange back distance is smaller.

voyager · « **Reply #20 on:** May 23, 2011, 01:04:21 AM »

I thought with mirrorless the flange back distance didn't matter.

adash · « **Reply #21 on:** May 23, 2011, 01:56:03 AM »

Quote

I thought with mirrorless the flange back distance didn't matter.

It's 20mm with m4/3 and 18mm with Nex.

popo · « **Reply #22 on:** May 23, 2011, 03:57:51 AM »

Quote from: adash on May 22, 2011, 09:30:32 PM

Quote
Body IS while a nice to have, will itself add to size.
By looking at the size of my E-P1, I must say I see no proof for your point...

You'd have to compare an E-P1 with a hypothetical E-P1 made without IS. Adding IS has to take space up. You need the motion sensors, you need the motors to shift it, and also give it room to actually shift in. It must take space that could be saved if it wasn't there. Now, that space difference can be pretty minimal, but it isn't zero. With bigger bodies you wont notice it, but as they get ever smaller, the proportion could start to increase.

adash · « **Reply #23 on:** May 23, 2011, 11:21:14 AM »

Quote

You need the motion sensors, you need the motors to shift it, and also give it room to actually shift in.

As far as I understand, the actuators are on the sides of the sensor, not behind it. The motion sensors are simple SMD chips (it is also possible that there is one chip for all axes).
BTW, I am not certain, but I suppose the same actuators are used for dusting off the sensor upon power off. So, more or less, they are still there even without IBIS. Or at least one of them is.

Agent00soul · « **Reply #24 on:** May 24, 2011, 12:55:42 AM »

Quote from: adash on May 23, 2011, 11:21:14 AM

BTW, I am not certain, but I suppose the same actuators are used for dusting off the sensor upon power off. So, more or less, they are still there even without IBIS. Or at least one of them is.

This is not correct. The SSWF uses a separate membrane with ultrasonic actuator in front of the sensor (which Panasonic also has).

Author Topic: More about the new Olympus and Panasonic cameras (Read 2969 times)

iwimages

Related Topics

Recent Topics

Recent Gallery