 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / August 2008Finally someone realized that we need a smaller format DSLR
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080805/tc_nm/matsushita_olympus_dc_1 Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! -Jim > Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! According to DPReview (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08080501microfourthirds.asp), they will be EVFs not DSLRs. >> Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! > > According to DPReview > (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08080501microfourthirds.asp), they will > be EVFs not DSLRs. Yahoo news getting something wrong? Say it isn't so... :-) On 8/5/2008 5:22 AM jimkramer spake thus: >>> Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> > Yahoo news getting something wrong? Say it isn't so... :-) This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. >> Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! > > According to DPReview > (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08080501microfourthirds.asp), they will > be EVFs not DSLRs. OK, so interchangeable lens P&S with a large-ish sensor. Might be fun.  SignaturePaul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam >>> Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > OK, so interchangeable lens P&S with a large-ish sensor. Might be fun. There is a difference. :- ) Actually, I was wrong above - they don't say they will _all_ be EVFs, just that they're not SLRs. I imagine that a significant few will be attracted by the idea of a non-SLR interchangeable lens camera with a good EVF and live view LCD, but I doubt they'll ever be more than a niche product (unless they're really inexpensive). On 8/6/2008 3:30 AM Wilba spake thus: >>>> Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > they'll ever be more than a niche product (unless they're really > inexpensive). This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. On 8/5/2008 7:42 AM Paul Furman spake thus: >>> Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > OK, so interchangeable lens P&S with a large-ish sensor. Might be fun. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. On 8/4/2008 5:48 AM Wilba spake thus: >> Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! > > According to DPReview > (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08080501microfourthirds.asp), they will > be EVFs not DSLRs. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. On Aug 5, 7:52 am, "jimkramer" <Newsread...@NOFSPAMjlkramer.net> wrote: > http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080805/tc_nm/matsushita_olympus_dc_1 > > Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! > -Jim The Four-Thirds systems was such a big hit that they are now making a Micro Four-Thirds system. Would that be like Two-Thirds? Four Turds is what they should call it. On Aug 5, 7:52 am, "jimkramer" <Newsread...@NOFSPAMjlkramer.net> wrote: > http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080805/tc_nm/matsushita_olympus_dc_1 > > Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! > -Jim The Four-Thirds systems was such a big hit that they are now making a Micro Four-Thirds system. Would that be like Two-Thirds? Four Turds is what they should call it. Think about this; the lenses keep getting smaller and smaller. What's the smallest lens? That's right they will be introducing pinhole cameras next year and make a mint, no optics cost, no need to focus. It will be the Killer-App of the camera world; Matsushita and Olympus will rule from on high! -Jim >The Four-Thirds systems was such a big hit that they are now making a >Micro Four-Thirds system. Would that be like Two-Thirds? You've missed the point. The sensor is exactly the same size as Four Thirds. The camera and lenses can be made much smaller by omitting the mirror and moving the lens mount much closer to the sensor. Obviously the result cannot be an SLR because the mirror has gone. But this new system would make it possible to design a high quality digital rangefinder camera, so watch out for the Panasonic and Leica announcements at Photokina in Köln (Cologne) next month ... >>The Four-Thirds systems was such a big hit that they are now making a >>Micro Four-Thirds system. Would that be like Two-Thirds? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > digital rangefinder camera, so watch out for the Panasonic and Leica > announcements at Photokina in Köln (Cologne) next month ... How is any of that new or different from the current crop of EVF / liveview / Nikon D50 / Epson type cameras? The sensor is too small. I want a larger sensor and I want to be able to control the DOF. That simply doesn't work well with small sensors unless you move into the land of imaginary glass. This is all another marketing ploy by a forth or fifth rate company trying to make sales by selling even cheaper. We, well I actually, do not need another Kodak. We certainly don't need any more of what Leica bodies have offered the digital world. -Jim >> You've missed the point. The sensor is exactly the same size as Four >> Thirds. The camera and lenses can be made much smaller by omitting [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >How is any of that new or different from the current crop of EVF / liveview >/ Nikon D50 / Epson type cameras? The big difference is the sensor to lens flange distance of only 20mm. >The sensor is too small. I want a larger >sensor and I want to be able to control the DOF. That simply doesn't work >well with small sensors unless you move into the land of imaginary glass. Point taken. The smaller sensor does make it easier to design lenses with wider maximum apertures, just not wide enough to restore the control of DOF that you have with 35mm film or full frame digital. >This is all another marketing ploy by a forth or fifth rate company trying >to make sales by selling even cheaper. We, well I actually, do not need >another Kodak. We certainly don't need any more of what Leica bodies have >offered the digital world. I wouldn't describe Olympus or Panasonic as anything other than first rate companies. At least the Four Thirds consortium had the sense to dump Kodak when it became apparent that Kodak could not design a low noise sensor for this format. Panasonic have done that. If they hadn't, the format would have died. If the Panasonic LMOS sensor for Four Thirds was made approximately four times larger to match 35mm film, or Nikon's FX format, it would offer 40MP with surprisingly low noise. >>> You've missed the point. The sensor is exactly the same size as Four >>> Thirds. The camera and lenses can be made much smaller by omitting [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > The big difference is the sensor to lens flange distance of only 20mm. OK, now honestly, why should I get excited about that? Really, what makes that so exciting, than any other manufacturer couldn't have done the same thing? And yet have choosen not to do so? >>The sensor is too small. I want a larger >>sensor and I want to be able to control the DOF. That simply doesn't work [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > with wider maximum apertures, just not wide enough to restore the > control of DOF that you have with 35mm film or full frame digital. Thanks for being honest, I miss having a real discussion about cameras here. :-) > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > dump Kodak when it became apparent that Kodak could not design a low > noise sensor for this format. Sorry in terms of camera sales O & P rank pretty low. And Kodak hasn't done anything right since they released the BWCN400 film. One more failure should suprise no one. > Panasonic have done that. If they hadn't, the format would have died. > If the Panasonic LMOS sensor for Four Thirds was made approximately > four times larger to match 35mm film, or Nikon's FX format, it would > offer 40MP with surprisingly low noise. Now every person I ever spoke to that owned a 4/3's system camera bought it because it didn't cost as much as a Canon or a Nikon. Granted this was back when a bottom of the line consumer DSLR with a kit lens was $1,200. Haven't seen anybody shooting with an Olympus in quite a while now. ?? Now that the entry level Canon and Nikon cameras with a kit lens are >$500 the 4/3's people come along with something that, in theory is cheaper to manufacture, and that the other manufactures have chosen to ignore. Oh wait a whole new lens line for cameras that only we make, that we can sell cheap, we'll make a killing. It is all about selling to a niche market of people who think they want something better than their current P&S yet don't want to spend the money to do so on a real DSLR. Any sample images from the Panasonic sensor? -Jim >> The big difference is the sensor to lens flange distance of only 20mm. >> >OK, now honestly, why should I get excited about that? Really, what makes >that so exciting, than any other manufacturer couldn't have done the same >thing? And yet have choosen not to do so? There's no need for you to get excited. Believe it or not, getting excited is certainly not necessary to contribute your point of view. So you are not overwhelmed? I don't think I am either. But there is just a chance that enough people will be excited about a very compact interchangeable lens rangefinder camera that offers far better image quality than any of the current P&S digitals. Think of it as a digital Contax G Series. >>>The sensor is too small. I want a larger >>>sensor and I want to be able to control the DOF. That simply doesn't work [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Thanks for being honest, I miss having a real discussion about cameras here. >:-) To be even more honest, I don't think many people trading up from P&S digicams will lose too much sleep about having less control of DOF than with APS-C or full frame sensors. Until now, they probably had so much DOF that they didn't realise what it was. ;-) >Sorry in terms of camera sales O & P rank pretty low. And Kodak hasn't done >anything right since they released the BWCN400 film. One more failure should >suprise no one. Olympus and Panasonic are still in the market and still making profits. Panasonic has greatly increased its market share, though its recent DSLRs have been pretty insignificant. This could be just the niche market that Olympus and Panasonic need, rather than competing head on with DSLRs with intrinsically superior formats (APS-C and full frame). >Now every person I ever spoke to that owned a 4/3's system camera bought it >because it didn't cost as much as a Canon or a Nikon. Granted this was back >when a bottom of the line consumer DSLR with a kit lens was $1,200. Haven't >seen anybody shooting with an Olympus in quite a while now. ?? They are much more popular in Europe and the Far East. The US isn't the only market for these guys. >Now that the entry level Canon and Nikon cameras with a kit lens are >$500 >the 4/3's people come along with something that, in theory is cheaper to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >who think they want something better than their current P&S yet don't want >to spend the money to do so on a real DSLR. That last sentence describes its market position with uncanny accuracy. ;-) >Any sample images from the Panasonic sensor? Probably hundreds of thousands on Flickr. All Olympus DSLRs from the E-330 onwards* (including the E3) and the Panasonic L1 and L10 use Panasonic LMOS sensors. *although the E-400 and E-500 used Kodak sensors that showed exactly why Kodak got kicked out of Four Thirds! On 8/5/2008 11:13 AM Bruce spake thus: >>> The big difference is the sensor to lens flange distance of only 20mm. >>> [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > *although the E-400 and E-500 used Kodak sensors that showed exactly > why Kodak got kicked out of Four Thirds! This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. > At least the Four Thirds consortium had the sense to > dump Kodak when it became apparent that Kodak could not design a low [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > four times larger to match 35mm film, or Nikon's FX format, it would > offer 40MP with surprisingly low noise. You mean like the 50MP sensor that Kodak developed which Hasselblad will be using? Methinks Kodak didn't want their product to be sold in the toy department. On 8/5/2008 7:17 PM Annika1980 spake thus: >> At least the Four Thirds consortium had the sense to >> dump Kodak when it became apparent that Kodak could not design a low [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Methinks Kodak didn't want their product to be sold in the toy > department. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. On 8/5/2008 6:50 AM Bruce spake thus: >>> You've missed the point. The sensor is exactly the same size as Four >>> Thirds. The camera and lenses can be made much smaller by omitting [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > four times larger to match 35mm film, or Nikon's FX format, it would > offer 40MP with surprisingly low noise. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. On 8/5/2008 6:35 AM jimkramer spake thus: >>>The Four-Thirds systems was such a big hit that they are now making a >>>Micro Four-Thirds system. Would that be like Two-Thirds? [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > another Kodak. We certainly don't need any more of what Leica bodies have > offered the digital world. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. On 8/5/2008 6:04 AM Bruce spake thus: >>The Four-Thirds systems was such a big hit that they are now making a >>Micro Four-Thirds system. Would that be like Two-Thirds? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > digital rangefinder camera, so watch out for the Panasonic and Leica > announcements at Photokina in Köln (Cologne) next month ... This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. On 8/5/2008 5:45 AM jimkramer spake thus: > On Aug 5, 7:52 am, "jimkramer" <Newsread...@NOFSPAMjlkramer.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Killer-App of the camera world; Matsushita and Olympus will rule from on > high! This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. On 8/5/2008 5:33 AM Annika1980 spake thus: > On Aug 5, 7:52 am, "jimkramer" <Newsread...@NOFSPAMjlkramer.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Four Turds is what they should call it. This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. On 8/5/2008 4:52 AM jimkramer spake thus: > http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080805/tc_nm/matsushita_olympus_dc_1 > > Look out for the next generation of Cell Phone DSLR's! > -Jim This post is off-topic for this newsgroup, rec.photo.equipment.35mm, which is concerned with film cameras that use 35mm film, not digital cameras that look like 35mm SLRs. Please use an appropriate newsgroup for postings on digital cameras. One of the following groups would be a good place for such postings: rec.photo.equipment.digital rec.photo.equipment.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.equipment.digital.rangefinder rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr rec.photo.equipment.digital.slr-system Your cooperation is appreciated to make Usenet a better place. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.