I would not completely agree on some of the things you say, David.
I don't know of any camera maker that is on a 9 month pro camera
replacement calendar or even consumer and mid level DSLR models.
I am surprised to see that you would consider sensor dust to be so
important. About 90 percent of DSLR users deal with it without
problems and consider it a minor, but occasionally needed task like
cleaning a lens. It would seem to me that ergonomics and image
quality are more important since there is little you can do about
those items once you buy the camera.
Matsushita in the case of the sensor has not demonstrated any special
technology advantage. Large pixel size still seems to be the main
determinant of image quality with small variations given by on-chip
or in-camera chip processing. A 4/3 sensor with 8MP has pixels almost
exactly the same as the pixels in a 12 MP APS chip like the one in
the Nikon D2X. Both are noisy above ISO 800 with a slight advantage
to the Nikon in the tests I have seen. A full frame 12MP like the one
in the Canon 5D, a medium priced camera, moves quality even higher
with the lower noise floors that enable higher dynamic range without
the excessive noise reduction that obscures detail. Now whether you
need that level of quality is up to you.
A second point in this area is that when pixels get really small as
in small digicams Matsushita is more clueless than other camera
makers when it comes to dealing with digital noise. Fairly
consistently they choose a crude level of noise reduction that
completely obliterates fine and not so fine detail. If they had
discovered some new tech in this area I believe they would have
demonstrated it here, as FujiFilm did.
As I pointed out before, slotting the E-3 in the mid range, leaves a
hole at the pro level. So your E-4 speculation could be right. Or
not. They could have decided, seeing the sales figures for Canon 1Ds
and Nikon D2X cameras compared to the midrange models of their lines
that there is no profit in it. Olympus has clearly stated their goals
as enough sales to clearly capture the number three spot. While a pro
E-4 might make them look more like the big two, it might really
gobble up scarce development money needed to produce the high sales
models needed to meet their sales goals.
But as you said, let us see what happens.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On / September 4, 2007 CE, at 9:04 AM, David Irisarri wrote:
>
>
> Bearing in mind Olympus is smaller than NIKON or CANON, they cannot
> produce professional cameras every nine months, changing only some
> small
> stupid features and adding or coping others like Live View. R&D is
> very
> expensive and every product must be studied very carefully before
> being
> launched.
>
> It seems the most important drawback from DSLR is dust and being
> honest,
> the only real solution here is SSWF. The rest are simply
> disgusting. At
> the same time, Olympus has done a big effort to produce professional
> lenses for digital market. They are really outstanding. Everybody has
> seen Color Foto Zuiko Digital tests ;-)
>
> Fourthirds sensor is much smaller than full frame so technology is
> much
> higher inside fourthirds sensors (to get same noise and resolution of
> full frame sensors). It´s not very difficult to guess that
> evolution of
> R&D on this type of sensors is slower vs full frame sensors. Every
> step
> is critical to create something new from the base.
>
> Olympus is really doing a great job to get something in a near future.
> What? Much higher quality a much lower price. Smaller, lighter and
> better quality is the key. I also think price will be around $2000 but
> technologically will be better than 40D and D300.
>
> Taking into account technology evolution, I bet a forthcoming E-4
> in one
> year and a half. If not before.
>
> Let´s see what happens.
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|