43 Rumors

why on earth would anyone buy this? might as well stick with an SLR. Nice way to undermine their entire concept.

if this is the future of M43, I’ll be heading over to Pentax.

Micro Four Thirds is not a viable replacement for 4/3. Small bodies are great for snaps between 8 and 100mm focal lengths, but for macro or for telephoto, a small camera becomes a hindrance. Sometimes, a pro actually needs a big camera body and a real optical viewfinder, or at very least a mirror for phase detect autofocus.

An E-P2 or E-PL1 is not sufficient for wedding photography or wildlife photography.

It’s a great camera, and I’d love to be able to take the right parts for the right job each and every time. The E-P2 is silly because you can’t use the viewfinder and a flash at the same time. How dumb is that?

Current MTF models are small, but I don’t see why Olympus can’t release future MTF models as big as a Nikon D3. Or a Leica S2. Or a Pentax 645D.

An apology if this is a dumb question, but would current m43 lenses (designed for contrast autofocus) work with a phase detect system?
I would love something like this as an option to add to my current m43 gear as, while I really like my GH1, I miss the focus speed and accuracy of a larger dSLR. However, the system would be less attractive if it did not work with all current m43 lenses.

I don’t know why all the negative comments. When the PENs came out, what was the constant cry from some? “Give us a high end weather sealed micro 4/3′s body!”

Now it might be possible this is exactly what Olympus is going to do, but because micro 4/3′s is not the most suitable for the existing high end large 4/3′s glass, this might be the way to have the best of both formats. If they make a tough weather sealed DSLR type body that would include a tough weather sealed removable OVF, mirror box, contrast focus 4/3’s mount unit that would look as good as the HLD-4 grip on the body & when removed, allowing the fitting of micro 4/3’s lenses as well the VF-2 EVF. The micro 4/3′s lenses you already have for your PEN can also be used here.

It is also possible they could make a more universal one for the PEN models.

Please don’t always look for the worst in a possible attempt by Olympus for something that could be a very viable solution for the future.

We wil see if this is what is to happen.

The more I look at this, the more I become convinced that Olympus is coming out with a completely new lens line. The reason I think this is that there is only 20mm to work with from the flange of the micro four thirds camera to the lens mount of four thirds. While it would appear possible that a mirror would fit if it were the same size as the sensor, once you turn it to a 45 degree angle, it would be 18.38mm to give 100 percent coverage.

This means that there is not enough room for the mount, and NO way for 100 percent viewfinder coverage. Swinging a mirror that size around in that space would be a bloody nightmare.

I conclude that this adapter adapts micro four thirds to ANOTHER class of lenses other than Four Thirds.

They just have a need for another few millimeters and they can’t have them. Anywhere the mirror goes that isn’t inside that 20mm by at least 5mm (leaving only 10mm) doesn’t have a clear shot at the ground glass.

Really, what they have is a little over 10 or 12 mm to work with if they tried to do this in between a micro four thirds camera and a Four Thirds lens. It’s just not possible.

However, if they built a DIFFERENT lens with a different flange mounting, it could work fine, and operate even better with their little 0.5x AF adapter that they patented…

@Nathan Don’t pay too much attention to patents. Sometimes they just patent something so others can’t come with a similar solution (or have to pay royalties).

I’m convinced that we will not see the modular camera since it makes no sense financially, and it solves no real problems (in fact, it introduces some) other than offering current FT users an updated model. But it is easier to simply release a worthy E3 successor taht will take then a minimum of another two to three years to be updated… Time enough for Olympus to finally release high-end MTF cameras and lenses and try to convert the few remaining FT users.

Or that’s the only thing that makes sense to me. I don’t see a market for a modular model that will be bigger, more cumbersome and more expensive than current solutions. And seeing the acceptance of MTF, I’m sure Olympus is wishing to kill FT. They just can’t do it right now without a revolt from existing users.

“Data transfer to m4/3 camera from mirror box modul?
And where many pins so is in the cable?”

This might be by removing the MFT mount module (with EVF) & attaching the FT module (with OVF) similar to the way Ricoh changes modules, though perhaps, dropped in vertically. There could then be a multipin connector to achieve this as well as the room for a normal mirror mechanism with appropriate focusing components. This could all be tied in with previous rumours of modular design.

All food for thought!

Let’s forget the current m4/3 lineup for a moment and think about this consept in a new way.
There would be a load of different parts to choose from. One could pic one of several the sensor modules and just stick on that, OR one could add an viewfinder unit and have a larger system with more power.

I bet the design will differ radically from that old Leica.

I bet there will eventually be weatherproof (and shockproof!) modules etc. if the sales go well.

It would be fun to go to a shop and select your favourite sensor module, then add the viewfinder module with the features you prefer, and build your own dream camera!

I think it makes sense to have a camera that is basically light and compact, but can be converted into a fast-focusing but heavier reflex for special purposes – similar to the idea behind the combination of e-p2 and vf2 in contrast to the g1/g2/NX. The main disadvantage is that such a system will probably be more expensive than having two different cameras-and then there is barely no advantage at all.

We are only missing the option to place the buttons!

On E-3, Oly really mixed up the placement of PLAY/AEL/LIVE VIEW -buttons