Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Out of Focus area > The lounge

The lounge Relax, take a break from photo and camera talk - have a chat about something else for a change. Just keep it clean and polite!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 22nd February 2010
Nick Temple-Fry's Avatar
Nick Temple-Fry Nick Temple-Fry is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,395
Thanks: 17
Thanked 190 Times in 142 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

OK - lets assume that Olympus move to mirrorless cameras with electronic shutters.

That removes all the moving parts other than the shimmy/shake of swf and IS. Everything else will just be chips/circuits that can be rolled off a production line and stuck/screwed together.

No moving parts, nothing to wear out, hardly any mechanical tolerances at all to worry about. Wouldn't that mean

1) massive saving in manufacturing cost/development cost
2) increase in mtbf to say 15yrs.

So should we be looking for the E-7 to be competitively priced on introduction at say £400, with a 10yr manufacturers guarantee.

Now that would be something to look forward to

Nick
__________________
Nick Temple-Fry

Medicine as a science ranks somewhere between archaeology and economics.

www.theChurchPhotographer.co.uk 90 Churches -- Fairford St Mary's, exceptionally splendid
www.temple-fry.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 22nd February 2010
Zuiko's Avatar
Zuiko Zuiko is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dunmow, Essex
Posts: 22,133
Thanks: 1,987
Thanked 3,164 Times in 2,472 Posts
Likes: 3,423
Liked 4,474 Times in 2,125 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Nice idea, Nick, but you know as well as I that we will actually end up paying more! There must be some mysterious inverse law of nature at work here.
__________________
John

"A hundredth of a second here, a hundredth of a second there — even if you put them end to end, they still only add up to one, two, perhaps three seconds, snatched from eternity." ~ Robert Doisneau
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 22nd February 2010
padgreen's Avatar
padgreen padgreen is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 148
Thanks: 4
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Hmm, you be careful what you wish for. The AP website is reporting an interview with Olympus America's Product Manager who is quoted as saying that 4/3rds will be mirror-less in two years.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...ws_295133.html

Personally, I think this would be an absolute disaster. I like an OVF (read won't buy a camera without one) and can't imagine that a EVF will ever be better. I'm willing to accept that I may eventually be proved wrong on this. However, this may also turn out to be the second time that Olympus committed commercial suicide with its SLR's development plans. I fear that the second is the more likely.

What do others think about this?
__________________
Cheers

Padgreen
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 22nd February 2010
E-3's Avatar
E-3 E-3 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 727
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Quote:
Originally Posted by padgreen View Post
Hmm, you be careful what you wish for. The AP website is reporting an interview with Olympus America's Product Manager who is quoted as saying that 4/3rds will be mirror-less in two years.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...ws_295133.html

Personally, I think this would be an absolute disaster. I like an OVF (read won't buy a camera without one) and can't imagine that a EVF will ever be better. I'm willing to accept that I may eventually be proved wrong on this. However, this may also turn out to be the second time that Olympus committed commercial suicide with its SLR's development plans. I fear that the second is the more likely.

What do others think about this?
I may keep my Canon just in case
__________________
Regards James.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 22nd February 2010
padgreen's Avatar
padgreen padgreen is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 148
Thanks: 4
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

I may ultimately have to switch but to who I really don't know. Every other DSLR has a 3:2 aspect ratio and I prefer the 4:3 of Olympus E system and can't afford a medium format DSLR.

I would like to be proved wrong and no doubt, some people like the idea of a 4/3rd camera without an OVF. Over on Ian's other Olympus site, Four Thirds User, this news is being reported by one of the Administrators as "Great News."

I stand by my original comment. I fear this may turn out to be a disaster.
__________________
Cheers

Padgreen
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 22nd February 2010
Howi Howi is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 180
Thanks: 6
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 4
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

A DSLR without an optical view finder and no mechanical shutter, must be the obvious way to go, Olympus leading the way again....
On the surface, I think ELV's have got to improve substantially, but it is only a matter of time before they do.
The future may not be how we want it, but it is certainly going to be a rollercoaster of a ride.
I wonder if Oly are brave/foolish enough to bring out a replacement to the E-3 that has no mirror or mechanical shutter?????

hmm! interesting...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 22nd February 2010
Kiwi Paul
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Why do you see it that way?
If the EVF is developed and works as intended it may be completely transparent and appear as if you are looking through an OVF except there will be the option of having lots of information overlayed through the viewfinder (camera parameters, histogram etc). I see that an an advantage.

Paul
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 22nd February 2010
Nick Temple-Fry's Avatar
Nick Temple-Fry Nick Temple-Fry is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 4,395
Thanks: 17
Thanked 190 Times in 142 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuiko View Post
Nice idea, Nick, but you know as well as I that we will actually end up paying more! There must be some mysterious inverse law of nature at work here.
But why John?

In 2 years time evf will be mature technology with 3+yrs production experience/development. The front end costs will have been met by m4/3.

The electronc shutter - well yes, that'll be newer, but actually how much of an advance is it?

And all that manufacturing complexity associated with optical viewfinders and mechanical shutters will be gone.

If Olympus choose to set future expectations around this technology, then shouldn't we as customers say we expect that this physically simpler product will have a markedly lower price. As customers we are responsible for demand, it is the manufacturers responsibility to meet it.

At the end of the day all Olympus will need to make specially for the E-series are the physical spacers to hold the m4/3 technology in a camera with a greater depth to sensor and the slightly different lens mount. (Oh and a few new logos).

Nick
__________________
Nick Temple-Fry

Medicine as a science ranks somewhere between archaeology and economics.

www.theChurchPhotographer.co.uk 90 Churches -- Fairford St Mary's, exceptionally splendid
www.temple-fry.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 22nd February 2010
padgreen's Avatar
padgreen padgreen is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 148
Thanks: 4
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howi View Post
I wonder if Oly are brave/foolish enough to bring out a replacement to the E-3 that has no mirror or mechanical shutter?????

hmm! interesting...
Herein lies the problem. If Olympus bring out an E5, or even E7 (assuming that the E5 does have an OVF) and it is not absolutely perfect and I mean perfect ie does everything that an OVF does but only better I don't think they will get a second chance and many people will just switch.

Sure, Olympus is an innovator. However, there are some features that it can introduce and you accept they get will get better as time goes on. These feature are handy but won't stop you buying a camera if they are not perfect: buyers can live with the imperfection. I would say Live View is the key example. The Level in the E30 is another. However, I really don't think replacing an OVF with a EVF is in the same ball park. Using an OVF is absolutely central to the DSLR experience. So central that if the electronic replacement is not better first time around, I won't live with the imperfection. I just won't buy the camera.
__________________
Cheers

Padgreen
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 22nd February 2010
forester
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Lets look at history, not so long ago, when every one shot “film” and along came “digital” the vast amount of people said it will never replace 35mm film.
Then we had “live view” and many said “I will never use it” and then of course we have HD video on SLR’s ( which I personally hate).
It is all in the name of progress. We will see.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 22nd February 2010
Zuiko's Avatar
Zuiko Zuiko is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dunmow, Essex
Posts: 22,133
Thanks: 1,987
Thanked 3,164 Times in 2,472 Posts
Likes: 3,423
Liked 4,474 Times in 2,125 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Temple-Fry View Post
But why John?

In 2 years time evf will be mature technology with 3+yrs production experience/development. The front end costs will have been met by m4/3.

The electronc shutter - well yes, that'll be newer, but actually how much of an advance is it?

And all that manufacturing complexity associated with optical viewfinders and mechanical shutters will be gone.

If Olympus choose to set future expectations around this technology, then shouldn't we as customers say we expect that this physically simpler product will have a markedly lower price. As customers we are responsible for demand, it is the manufacturers responsibility to meet it.

At the end of the day all Olympus will need to make specially for the E-series are the physical spacers to hold the m4/3 technology in a camera with a greater depth to sensor and the slightly different lens mount. (Oh and a few new logos).

Nick
I totally agree with you, Nick, that this should be the case but I'm a hopeless old cynic and will believe cheaper prices when I see them.

It's probably all academic for me anyway; finances will probably dictate that I continue to use an E3 long after the E5 has come and gone and everyone else is happily enthusing about the new mirrorless E6!
__________________
John

"A hundredth of a second here, a hundredth of a second there — even if you put them end to end, they still only add up to one, two, perhaps three seconds, snatched from eternity." ~ Robert Doisneau
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 22nd February 2010
Zuiko's Avatar
Zuiko Zuiko is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dunmow, Essex
Posts: 22,133
Thanks: 1,987
Thanked 3,164 Times in 2,472 Posts
Likes: 3,423
Liked 4,474 Times in 2,125 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Quote:
Originally Posted by padgreen View Post
I may ultimately have to switch but to who I really don't know. Every other DSLR has a 3:2 aspect ratio and I prefer the 4:3 of Olympus E system and can't afford a medium format DSLR.

I would like to be proved wrong and no doubt, some people like the idea of a 4/3rd camera without an OVF. Over on Ian's other Olympus site, Four Thirds User, this news is being reported by one of the Administrators as "Great News."
I stand by my original comment. I fear this may turn out to be a disaster.
That would be me!

I honestly believe that this is the shape of things to come for all cameras in the future and we would all be complaining if Olympus were perceived to be playing catch-up to Canikon yet again. Surely it's a good thing if Olympus are able to adapt to the new technology and reap the benefits quicker than their rivals? However, I do agree that it has to be right before it is introduced at all levels.

Regarding the state of play with existing EVFs I agree that they still need improving but they are getting very close. I'm actually very impressed with the EVF on my Panny G1, not just for it's smoothness, clarity and brightness but also for its size (an unexpectantly large viewing image). I wouldn't want it as a replacement for the OVF in my E3 but I much prefer it to the OVF in my E500. That's how good it is, and it seems realistic that the technology will soon at least equal the finder of even the E3.

For me, that's not the issue. Of greater concern is that more work needs doing on the Oly autofocus (so far Panasonic are significantly better) and in particular the compatibility of existing E-Series lenses needs to be resolved. But I'm sure it can be and so, apparently, are Olympus.

Others may take a different view, and I fully understand why, but from my perspective I still maintain it is great news, not least because the statement contains an unequivical commitment to the future development of the E-System, which to my mind is far better than quietly allowing it to wither on the vine while all the R&D resources are directed at Micro Four Thirds.
__________________
John

"A hundredth of a second here, a hundredth of a second there — even if you put them end to end, they still only add up to one, two, perhaps three seconds, snatched from eternity." ~ Robert Doisneau
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 22nd February 2010
padgreen's Avatar
padgreen padgreen is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 148
Thanks: 4
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Hi

I certainly agree that it's important that Olympus continue to innovate and support the 4/3rd system and not just play catch-up with Canon/Nikon. I just hope that if this is the way things are going that you're right, but I remain highly sceptical.

I'd totally agree about focus speed, that is the other reason why I'd never consider a micro 4/3rd's camera as a carry round: the other being the lack of an decent OVF.
__________________
Cheers

Padgreen
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 23rd February 2010
Zuiko's Avatar
Zuiko Zuiko is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dunmow, Essex
Posts: 22,133
Thanks: 1,987
Thanked 3,164 Times in 2,472 Posts
Likes: 3,423
Liked 4,474 Times in 2,125 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Quote:
Originally Posted by padgreen View Post
Hi

I certainly agree that it's important that Olympus continue to innovate and support the 4/3rd system and not just play catch-up with Canon/Nikon. I just hope that if this is the way things are going that you're right, but I remain highly sceptical.

I'd totally agree about focus speed, that is the other reason why I'd never consider a micro 4/3rd's camera as a carry round: the other being the lack of an decent OVF.
I appreciate your scepticism and concerns and in the final analysis you may well be proven right. But do keep an open mind because anything is possible in this rapidly developing industry.

I once sneered at digital when 6mp was state of the art and the first Canon DSLRs in particular produced a rather artificial "plastic" look at a very expensive price. Very self righteous was I, with my Bronica and 120 roll film Velvia. I was subsequently shocked when DSLR technology advanced more in three years than I anticipated it would in fifteen and prices dropped like a stone. I'm sure that it continues to be the case that whatever seems barely possible today will be taken for granted tomorrow. But I may be wrong!

Interesting times, though, don't you think?
__________________
John

"A hundredth of a second here, a hundredth of a second there — even if you put them end to end, they still only add up to one, two, perhaps three seconds, snatched from eternity." ~ Robert Doisneau
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 23rd February 2010
Dick Bowman Dick Bowman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: N/a
Posts: 124
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Re: Shouldn't Mirrorless/Shutterless Cameras be a lot Cheaper

Maybe I'm missing the point, but for me the viewfinder does two things.

Shows me that I've aimed in the right direction
Shows me that I've set the zoom so that the composition is about right

Arguably it's also shown me that I have the things I want in focus (but there are other aids for this).

Which makes me feel that - for me - the optical viewfinder is an archaic hangover from days when it had to be done that way, because nothing else really worked properly. I will say that the E-3 viewfinder was a revelation, and I'd expect an EVF - to be viable - to offer a similar step forward in terms of size/clarity and also make the peripheral numbers/flashers and so forth more useable. It might also be good to be able to step away from the classic SLR format - because an EVF would surely not need to have so much of its infrastructure in the optical path.

But that's just what I think...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
E-System Mirrorless? Adagio The lounge 7 24th February 2010 01:51 AM
But they don't use cameras Zuiko The lounge 1 18th January 2010 08:34 PM
Cameras + For sale... Xpres For sale or wanted small ads 13 27th November 2009 02:36 PM
Cameras Bill Gordon Site news 25 31st December 2008 01:22 AM
Studio Flash Kits- the cheaper scale scanny Flash 3 13th November 2008 01:05 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:06 PM.


© The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger