Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [OM] 4/3 is real!!

Subject: RE: [OM] 4/3 is real!!
From: "George M. Anderson" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 12:29:26 -0800
Someone has contacted me about another potential drawback to the 4/3 system
vis-a-vis 35mm, and that is Depth of Field being too deep on the 4/3 even
when wide open.  Anyone care to comment on this?
It makes sense to me now that I think about it.  DOF being inversely related
to both focal length and image size at the focal plane.  This person dumped
an E-20 because the DOF couldn't be made shallow enuf for his/her taste.
Maybe this can be alleviated  quite a bit since the 4/3 sensor is, IIUC, 4
times the area of the E-20s AND that Oly has designed a (35mm equiv) 100/2.0
macro for it (and I see what appears to be an extension tube in the system
photo.)  How much will this help? Anybody know?

George

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of George M. Anderson
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 11:53 AM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [OM] 4/3 is real!!
>
>
> Tom;
>
> I agree with a lot of what you're saying.  But Olympus is not a fringe
> player in the digital photo market.  Oly has been, at times, the market
> leader. Course the Nikon and Canon top-o-the-lines, whatever they're
> designated, are the ones to beat now.  But the E-20 remains one
> of the best
> values in the digi-photo market.  And this new 4/3 system may just put Oly
> back in the driver's seat, especially if they are right about the
> lens/sensor relationship providing superior results.  I wonder
> how much that
> 600/2.8 will cost?
>
> George
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Tom Scales
> > Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 11:18 AM
> > To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [OM] 4/3 is real!!
> >
> >
> > Promising, perhaps, but the Pentax is already here and will have a film
> > 'sibling'.  I'm very interested and will keep watching the
> rollout of the
> > Pentax.  Might be my next solution.  Can someone point me to the Pentax
> > mailing list?
> >
> > My problem is that I can't see investing in a system from a
> fringe player.
> > As much as I hate to say it, Olympus is not mainstream and never will be
> > again -- if they ever truly were.
> >
> > On the other hand, the E-20 is an excellent camera.  I used it
> > yesterday to
> > shoot my daughter's first soccer game of the season. I prefer the
> > OM system,
> > but honestly don't have the money (film, processing, etc) or time
> > (scanning,
> > etc) to spend right now -- so the E-20 is it.
> >
> > Pros:
> >
> > - Instant gratification. The images still need a little work, but mostly
> > cropping and a little USM. 5mp is plenty to crop from for a web image.
> > - No film and processing - no cost, no wait time
> > - Excellent results.
> >
> > Cons:
> >
> > - Shutter lag. Prefocusing helps a lot, but you still have to
> > anticipate too
> > much
> > - Write lag. You can only shoot a limited number of shots before
> > you have to
> > wait on the camera. BAD design.
> > - Zoom range. It just doesn't 'get out there' far enough. Much
> of the game
> > was on the other side of
> >
> > I'm not sure I really even care that much about removeable
> > lenses.  Give me
> > a 24-300 and I'll be happy :)
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > P.S. The shots are very 'snapshot-ty', but you can see them at
> > http://www.scalesfamily.com/Shelby/st030301/webpages-best/Index.htm
> >
> >
> > > Yep, it looks nice.
> > >
> > > Imagine a system covering 28 thru 400 mm plus 600mm ALL at
> F/2.8! Plus a
> > 100
> > > F/2.0 macro thrown in for good measure. (oops, just saw the zooms are
> > > f/2.8-3.5, bummer)
> > >
> > > How about a matched 2x for the 600 giving 1200 f/5.6 (wish list)
> > >
> > > Nothing wider than 28 is  hole though.  They said part of the
> purpose of
> > > this was better digital wide angles. Let's hope they're up next.
> > >
> > > And it looks like the battery compartment thing on the bottom
> > which makes
> > > the thing look so huge, is an option.  So it really is E-20 size with
> > > theshort-range zoom on it.
> > >
> > > But speaking of the E-20, it has a 35-140 F/2.0-2.4 ie a full stop
> > brighter
> > > lens.  How come big brother's lenses are slower?
> > >
> > > Anyway, it does look promising.
> > >
> > > George
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
> >
> >
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>


< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz