usher99@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Doesn't quite look like a G9 killer yet. I hope it has a niche.
I'm not particularly interested in this design. I'm not interested in a
slightly smaller DSLR - and it isn't really much smaller than an E-420
and weighs the same - unless features, performance and IQ are not
compromised.
I love twist and tilt displays, but this one is weird. Although the
sensor and EVF are 4:3, the LCD is 3:2. I can imagine two reasons.
First, I can imagine marketing considerations demanding a 3.0" LCD,
while size and design constraints - including the EVF - limit the
vertical space available for the LCD.
Also, Panny has shown a consistent bias toward wide format ratios on
their digicams, using odd sensor sizes to support 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 all
in one camera. In any case, it's too confusing seeming for me. Pick your
sensor size/format, show it all at once and let me do my own framing and
cropping.
But I do think micro 4/3 has the potential to do some radical and
wonderful things to camera design, perhaps finally letting the potential
of digital go beyond simply digital sensor systems into genuinely new
design concepts and posibly the revival of old ones that are still good.
Dpreview says it clearly "From the outside it looks for all the world
like a conventional SLR (albeit a very small one) - we're told that the
design (complete with faux prism 'hump') is deliberately conservative;
Panasonic's research has shown that its target market (particularly in
Japan) still prefers a camera that looks like a camera is supposed to,
and wasn't going to risk falling at the first hurdle by producing
something too radical."
> The DP-1 doesn't look very good in comparison though.
It looked bad to me without the need for any sort of comparison. I can't
imagine having the interest or patience to use a camera with such
compromised performance.
> Oly should come out with their own version---the lack of IS is a problem and
> it is a still a bit chunky.
>
I suspect the Micro 4/3 idea is mostly Panny's, but I do hope that Oly
chooses to bring a more creative approach to the table. There's a lot of
potential - and a lot of challenges.
Take for example your comments about lack of IS and chunky design. The
E-520 is 15mm thicker than the E-420. I'm guessing most of that is for
the in-camera IS. The A650 is 13mm thicker than the G9, for the twist
and tilt LCD. Add both, and your camera gets at least 25mm thicker -
REALLY chunky. To get both features in an attractive package will
require some innovative engineering.
On the other hand, once you are free of the mirror box, why does the EVF
have to be a permanent part of the camera? And lets not be tethered to
one that has to mount to the body. How about a wireless EVF with
headband mount and an alternative using the TV "glasses" technology Oly
already has, but only for one eye? HUD projected on eyeglasses?
With that dead space behind the lens, is it possible to emulate Leica
and Rollei and make a collapsible lens - but AF, of course? Maybe a
short zoom? :-)
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|