Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: MFT: the decline of the empire  (Read 18728 times)
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #20 on: May 12, 2010, 02:56:16 AM »
ReplyReply

I have nothng to add.

Rob C
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8188



WWW
« Reply #21 on: May 12, 2010, 06:06:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Don't think so.

Most people buy these babies with the zoom lens kit, and the Sony is much larger. Actually why buy the Sony when you can get a DSLR with about the same size and a real viewfinder???

I think that the real threat would come from a bit smaller than m4/3.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
barryfitzgerald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 607


« Reply #22 on: May 12, 2010, 07:53:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Slight over reaction here I think.
I've never been a 4/3 fan nor likely will I be. However micro 4/3 does seem much more "what it should have been" from the start. So I feel that they are on a fairly stable path with micro 4/3

Sony has had a very mixed performance in cameras over the years. These offerings scream "point and shoot", micro 4/3 (or even the Samsung NX to a lesser degree) look to be aiming for the enthusiast. As far as I can see in the non photographer real world, very few p&s users have any comprehension of what advantages a larger sensor, lens choices..DOF or anything of that nature.

My conclusion is that Sony are doing something similar to their "APS-C DSLR" range. Over simplification..and looking around I'd say they are struggling to even keep users DSLR land (APS-C now), let alone appeal to new ones. The very lowest models A230-380 were pretty much laughed off the market..but they proved one point and very well..that there isn't a massive market for dumbed down p&s DSLR's. I doubt very much these new NEX models will be taken very seriously by enthusiasts..they look pretty weak on a handling and controls points of view..not to mention unbalanced with tiny bodies and not that small lenses.

So micro 4/3 fans panic is over as Sony have it in their heads that most camera users are newbies and they are not even trying to court those who are semi serious or at least trying to learn etc. We also need to dump "EVIL".. ILC (interchangeable lens compact) is far more logical. EVIL suggests a viewfinder and an electronic one..the NEX models have no EVF not even an add on.

I'll start to take Sony seriously when they start making serious products. At the moment the only thing they do that fits that is FF DSLR, everything else is IMO (as a Minolta user still) a bit of an insult to the ideas and concepts of that camera company. Sony are too busy ripping stuff out of cameras to do much damage in the market.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #23 on: May 12, 2010, 08:50:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: barryfitzgerald
Slight over reaction here I think.
I've never been a 4/3 fan nor likely will I be. However micro 4/3 does seem much more "what it should have been" from the start. So I feel that they are on a fairly stable path with micro 4/3

Sony has had a very mixed performance in cameras over the years. These offerings scream "point and shoot", micro 4/3 (or even the Samsung NX to a lesser degree) look to be aiming for the enthusiast. As far as I can see in the non photographer real world, very few p&s users have any comprehension of what advantages a larger sensor, lens choices..DOF or anything of that nature.

My conclusion is that Sony are doing something similar to their "APS-C DSLR" range. Over simplification..and looking around I'd say they are struggling to even keep users DSLR land (APS-C now), let alone appeal to new ones. The very lowest models A230-380 were pretty much laughed off the market..but they proved one point and very well..that there isn't a massive market for dumbed down p&s DSLR's. I doubt very much these new NEX models will be taken very seriously by enthusiasts..they look pretty weak on a handling and controls points of view..not to mention unbalanced with tiny bodies and not that small lenses.

So micro 4/3 fans panic is over as Sony have it in their heads that most camera users are newbies and they are not even trying to court those who are semi serious or at least trying to learn etc. We also need to dump "EVIL".. ILC (interchangeable lens compact) is far more logical. EVIL suggests a viewfinder and an electronic one..the NEX models have no EVF not even an add on.

I'll start to take Sony seriously when they start making serious products. At the moment the only thing they do that fits that is FF DSLR, everything else is IMO (as a Minolta user still) a bit of an insult to the ideas and concepts of that camera company. Sony are too busy ripping stuff out of cameras to do much damage in the market.
The Maxxum 7D was IMO one of the best ever camera design.

Well, I'm not specially a Sony fan to be honest, but read carefully the Review in Imaging ressource and you'll see that they take this product quite seriously.
The Imaging ressource is amongs the websites I can trust or recommend.
Michael's here first impression does not seems bad at all, at least talking about the overall concept.
I think we may have some surprises when he will review the camera in operation. The "who is it for" may change on the field.

Cheers.




Logged
PierreVandevenne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


WWW
« Reply #24 on: May 12, 2010, 10:02:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
I think we may have some surprises when he will review the camera in operation. The "who is it for" may change on the field.
Cheers.

And apparently, the sensor is going into pure video cameras as well...
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #25 on: May 12, 2010, 10:09:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PierreVandevenne
And apparently, the sensor is going into pure video cameras as well...

To me that seems like the more interesting product.
Logged
hsmeets
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 182


« Reply #26 on: May 12, 2010, 12:32:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I've troubles placing these kind of camera's

1) they are well above the budget and needs of P&S users. And these camera's are still too big with a zoom lens attached for those users.
2) for users of the bigger DSLR's that want quality in a smaller package: these camera are still too big with a zoom lens attached to make a difference to the small entry level DSLR's. They can also reuse the lenses they have and don't need to buy lenses for a new mount.
3) there is also a paradox: we got so used to the SLR design that we are programmed only to regard SLR designs as a serious camera, but on the other hand we want smaller/compacter/better designs but what we have now still can not break through this paradox.

Yes, people will buy these camera's, no doubt, but I have a real hard time too understand why. "Flesh nor Fish" as way say in the Netherlands


Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #27 on: May 12, 2010, 12:46:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: hsmeets
I've troubles placing these kind of camera's

1) they are well above the budget and needs of P&S users. And these camera's are still too big with a zoom lens attached for those users.
2) for users of the bigger DSLR's that want quality in a smaller package: these camera are still too big with a zoom lens attached to make a difference to the small entry level DSLR's. They can also reuse the lenses they have and don't need to buy lenses for a new mount.
3) there is also a paradox: we got so used to the SLR design that we are programmed only to regard SLR designs as a serious camera, but on the other hand we want smaller/compacter/better designs but what we have now still can not break through this paradox.

Yes, people will buy these camera's, no doubt, but I have a real hard time too understand why. "Flesh nor Fish" as way say in the Netherlands
Agree 100%.
In fact, my Pentax KX is just a little (very little) bigger, with a proper K mount. (means pancackes lens line).
I think it is a matter of style, of feeling, these cameras reminds the good old rangefinders, but they are way far from being an M.
The only m4/3 camera I think is really a special tool is the GH design not so much the fashionable GF.
In fact, in my understanding of what a good system is, I rather get (if I could) an M9, even a 8, and get the GF1 as backup.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2010, 12:55:04 PM by fredjeang » Logged
douglasf13
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 547


« Reply #28 on: May 12, 2010, 04:07:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
Don't think so.

Most people buy these babies with the zoom lens kit, and the Sony is much larger. Actually why buy the Sony when you can get a DSLR with about the same size and a real viewfinder???

I think that the real threat would come from a bit smaller than m4/3.

Cheers,
Bernard

  This camera is tiny with the prime lens on it.  Check this video:  video look at NEX-5

  The NEX-5 with primes (whether Sony or converted M lenses) is what I've been wanting as a complement to my DSLRs, although I hope Sony does bring an external EVF at some point.  

 
-image from Imaging Resource
Logged
douglasf13
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 547


« Reply #29 on: May 12, 2010, 04:17:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
Don't think so.

Most people buy these babies with the zoom lens kit, and the Sony is much larger. Actually why buy the Sony when you can get a DSLR with about the same size and a real viewfinder???

I think that the real threat would come from a bit smaller than m4/3.

Cheers,
Bernard


  Come to think of it, Bernard, imagine if Nikon (or someone else) made a fullframe, 24MP version of this type of camera.  You could cut down on so much weight with your current setup for landscapes.  Attach the little guy to the end of your 14-24mm, zoom in to focus check like with your D3x's live view (the NEX has this,) and you'd be all set. Plus, no MLU to deal with.       This kind of camera could be an awesome small option for landscape shooters, since fast AF isn't a necessity, and so many landscapers use live view to focus nowadays.  Interestingly, the NEX mount is only a millimeter or two smaller in diameter than Alpha mount, so fullframe is possible....whether we actually see that in the future is anyone's guess.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8188



WWW
« Reply #30 on: May 12, 2010, 04:44:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: douglasf13
Come to think of it, Bernard, imagine if Nikon (or someone else) made a fullframe, 24MP version of this type of camera.  You could cut down on so much weight with your current setup for landscapes.  Attach the little guy to the end of your 14-24mm, zoom in to focus check like with your D3x's live view (the NEX has this,) and you'd be all set. Plus, no MLU to deal with.       This kind of camera could be an awesome small option for landscape shooters, since fast AF isn't a necessity, and so many landscapers use live view to focus nowadays.  Interestingly, the NEX mount is only a millimeter or two smaller in diameter than Alpha mount, so fullframe is possible....whether we actually see that in the future is anyone's guess.

Yes, that is indeed true, but it is not going to happen in the short future, is it?  

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8188



WWW
« Reply #31 on: May 12, 2010, 04:46:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: douglasf13
This camera is tiny with the prime lens on it.  Check this video:  video look at NEX-5

  The NEX-5 with primes (whether Sony or converted M lenses) is what I've been wanting as a complement to my DSLRs, although I hope Sony does bring an external EVF at some point.  

 
-image from Imaging Resource

True from this angle, but look at it from the side and the gap is already smaller. The thickness is the main issue in terms of pocketability, right?

Anyway, I think that most of the people will want the zoom lens.

The LL community is a tiny niche that will obviously want the pancake lens though. Agreed on that, although the Olympus with in-body stabilitzation is IMHO a better choice.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #32 on: May 12, 2010, 04:51:19 PM »
ReplyReply

The auto-panorama feature looks pretty cool. I wonder how long it takes for Sony or Panasonic or someone else to come up with an autopano feature which is not limited to horizontal or vertical dimension: just jam the shutter down and wave the camera around until you get a pano in the hundreds of megs  Combine with auto-bracketing, DOF blending and a paint mixer for added fun.

It's always funny to see some of the best innovation coming from manufacturers not well-known for their cameras, such as Sony, Ricoh, Casio, Samsung and Panasonic, who are not afraid to try something truly new, and don't have the burden of legacy systems.
Logged

pete_truman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 116


WWW
« Reply #33 on: May 12, 2010, 05:45:53 PM »
ReplyReply

A thought. Imagine it is the year 2020 and you are holding a current high end camera. What does it look like and what does it do? It will be small, lightweight and resolution will no longer matter as it's good enough for anything. The difference between stills and video will be irrelevant as a still is just a snapshot in time.

Maybe the micro 4/3 format is just one step on that path.

For me it certainly is. I've now sold off almost all my Canon gear and lenses and enjoying using a lightweight micro 4/3 kit. The overall IQ is excellent too. No, not as great as a 1Ds Mk3 and 85mm f1.2 L lens, but not that far off in prints. On the web or iPad almost impossible to tell the difference.

Just a thought...
Logged

Pete Truman
douglasf13
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 547


« Reply #34 on: May 12, 2010, 05:50:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
True from this angle, but look at it from the side and the gap is already smaller. The thickness is the main issue in terms of pocketability, right?

Anyway, I think that most of the people will want the zoom lens.

The LL community is a tiny niche that will obviously want the pancake lens though. Agreed on that, although the Olympus with in-body stabilitzation is IMHO a better choice.

Cheers,
Bernard

  You're probably right about the public and zooms.

  I went and handled the Olympus EPL-1 a few weeks ago, and I was disappointed at how big it was.  I shoot my A900 with a 50mm lens a majority of the time, and I couldn't legitimize how the Olympus could save me all that much space when considering the IQ difference.  With primes, the NEX is smaller and has a sensor size directly in between the two.  Plus, I like that it looks more like a P&S, so it doesn't attract as much attention.  Here in Los Angeles, people think I'm paparazzi if I put a lens bigger than the 50 on my A900...and that's WITHOUT the vertical grip. lol.

  Here are some more size comparisons from IR:



« Last Edit: May 12, 2010, 05:50:44 PM by douglasf13 » Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5161


« Reply #35 on: May 12, 2010, 08:41:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: douglasf13
BTW, the lenses aren't as big as they look, it's just that the body is so small that proportions are difficult to judge:
That compares lenses of about equal focal length (the NEX one is actually slightly shorter, 16mm vs 17mm): no surprise that they are similar in length. The far more relevant comparison is between lenses offering equal FOV, like the Olympus m4/3 14-42 vs Sony E-mount 18-55mm. There the lengths are about 42mm and 60mm respectively, so total camera-with-lens depths differ by about the same 25% factor as the linear format size. Also, I suspect that the Sony 18-200 at right here

looks utterly corpulent beside the Panasonic 14-140 HD:
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #36 on: May 12, 2010, 09:33:32 PM »
ReplyReply

IHNJH,IJLS "utterly corpulent".
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5161


« Reply #37 on: May 12, 2010, 10:20:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PierreVandevenne
And apparently, the sensor is going into pure video cameras as well...
Indeed, just weeks after Panasonic announced that will be putting the video-oriented 4/3" sensor of the G1H into a video camera, Sony has now announced plans to do likewise with its new video-oriented APS-C HD sensor, but maybe a more consumer oriented model. Both coming late this year. Where is Canon?
Logged
MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #38 on: May 12, 2010, 10:39:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
The LL community is a tiny niche that will obviously want the pancake lens though. Agreed on that, although the Olympus with in-body stabilitzation is IMHO a better choice.

Cheers,
Bernard

NEX 7 will have IBIS (and an EVF).

I'd say the sensor is at least 2 stops better than the current m43 offerings at high ISO.  If they can get a small 35/1.8 out soon that would rock the world. . .
Logged
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1259


« Reply #39 on: May 12, 2010, 11:08:29 PM »
ReplyReply

I have the Panasonic system with both an GF1 and a GH1 and five lenses. I can get all of that, plus a charger, several batteries and a Mac Air, into a bag smaller than the average briefcase. The problem (as I see it) with the Sony system is it gives up a little bit of smallness (in their lenses -- the size difference of the bodies isn't significant) to get a little more image quality. But if I want more image quality than you get with m4/3, I'd want significantly more -- I'd go  to my Nikon FF and accept the size penalty. The basic thought of M4/3 isn't ultimate image quality, it's size, with quality good enough for most publication, and that's what you get. I agree, if you're a guy who walks around with one camera body with a pancake lens, then the Sony is as good as the M4/3. If you have to run some place with a *system,* it isn't, because it's bigger and heavier. I actually think Sony would have been better off joining the consortium, and making a m4/3, than going off with a unique and brand-new mounting system. One thing I'm curious about: will their lenses cover FF? That would be an interesting possibility -- eventual FF bodies -- but I suspect the lenses are made specifically for the sensor size, like Nikon's DX lenses, and won't cover full frame. Two other notes: a big deal is being made about the slight size difference in the bodies...but Sony has only an exterior flash. It's supplied with the body, but if you put it on, the Sony is as big or bigger than the Panasonic. Sony also (according to DP Review) cut down the tripod mount until it is inadequate; and even if they hadn't, I wouldn't have had a lot of confidence mounting one of those big honking zooms on that tiny body, on a tripod. That can be fixed in the next iteration, at the price of getting larger.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad