Canon, Pentax, Nikon, Konica-Minolta, and now Leica have gone digital
without increasing the size of the mount. New wide angle designs for
those cameras have done just fine. Mostly it is easier to use a
larger mount for lots of things like contacts for auto-focus,
exposure systems, larger lens barrels to accommodate focusing motors
and anti-shake systems, not to mention spreading the torque of a big
lens on the camera body over a larger area. Olympus did not invent
the idea. It essentially has a mount not much different in size from
any other DSLR maker. Nikon with one of the smaller mounts has been
one of the more effective in dealing with color aberration and light
fall off. The Oly digitals are great. I just hate the we invented it
here hype.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Jul 28, 2005, at 4:24 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>
> Is it that the wide angles are weak or is it that the wide angles are
> weak in conjunction with the full frame digital sensor? After all,
> isn't this what Oly was trying to convince us was the driving force
> behind the 4/3 format?
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|