Olympus announced the SZ-10, the VG-110 and the 3D VR-330
Although this is not a Micro Four Thirds related news it is interesting to note that Olympus announced their first 3D compact camera with super zoom. Don’t know if that means that future m43 cameras will be able to do 3D too. Don’t know why I can’t get excited about 3D…and you?
Read more at Engadget!
Share
Recent comments
Comment from Joe: See a good 3D TV with a good 3D source a...
Comment from Jim: Thats because you have not played CRYSIS...
Comment from Andreas Aronsson: I am fascinated by (stereoscopic) 3D and...
Comment from Jim H.: IT'S THE PHOTOGRAPHERS' FAULT. Most 3D...
GreyOwl
2 years ago |3D does’nt do a thing for me either Admin. It seems to be a minority interest at the momment, as far as I can see.
leendert
2 years ago |Beautiful design for a super zoom!
GreyOwl
2 years ago |3D with only one lens? How can that be???
Ross
2 years ago |Digital filter. 3D is good for giving you a headache.
Ganec
2 years ago |Probably you have to create 2 snapshots: create first, step a little to the side and create second.
(simmilar as it is with panorama)
MacT
2 years ago |I really, really like the design. But 2.3 is not a camera for me.. As for 3d I feel same as you
Helge Hackbarth
2 years ago |As an operator of a 3D oriented website (3D-Kraft.com) at least I see a growing interest for 3D solutions but I may be a little bit subjective regarding this topic.
For the VR-330 I only see an halfhearted approach as it neither has a stereo lens system nor provides a autostereoscopic display like the Fujifilm Real 3D W3. So I can not imagine how it will allow to shoot in 3D when the scene in front of the camera is in motion.
x
2 years ago |Well, said. So far the only serious 3D cameras are the Fuji W1 and W3
admin
2 years ago |Yes it’s subjective. May I am wrong, but I simply don’t like 3D
Brod1er
2 years ago |Olympus should get credit for this. They have managed to launch a 3d camera without wasting any time or money designing 3d features like double lenses- unlike the suckers at Sony fuji etc :-p
3d cameras- file under chocolate teapot/ joke
Jim
2 years ago |Thats because you have not played CRYSIS in 3D – then you’ll get it
…. and the transition to photography will be easy 
– but like other jim said – you need the right image – you need to compose for 3D – not everything works in 3D – just like images that can work in B/W might not work in colour!
TR
2 years ago |Not one bit interested in 3D. Hope olympus m4/3 team does not waste time on it.
Medved
2 years ago |Be more interested in a (M)FT sensor, with a raw output jumping from ISO 500 to ISO 800 iso limit in low light (reference to DxO labs), at least… Actually, It would be enough, maybe not on par with a K-5 but for most applications, it would give more versatility. (i-e gaining approximately one stop in low light.)
Jim H.
2 years ago |IT’S THE PHOTOGRAPHERS’ FAULT. Most 3D photographers just don’t get it. I’m a stereo (aka: 3D) photographer, and yet most 3D does nothing for me either. The best photographs, stereo or otherwise, should make the viewer forget, at least for a moment, that it’s a photograph. It should seem real, and most stereo photographers instead are caught up in the coolness of the whole thing, which puts the technology and technique at the centre of attention. This is just so wrong! Everyone seems to think that the camera is the biggest hurdle, but the problem has never been the camera. Anyone can take stereo photos with the camera you now own using the “cha cha” technique. I’m sure the new Olympus 3D camera will be great, but yet another camera doesn’t address the real issue. Historically the biggest downfall is in the viewing, and most viewing techniques fail miserably. Technically they all work; glasses, slide shows, cross-eyed viewing, print stands; they all work … but not well enough. So far the only worthwhile viewing method I have tried, and one that will impress the unimpressed, is a back-lit, medium format, stereo slide viewer. It’s crystal clear, wrap-around image is like IMAX on steroids. Using it to look at a well composed photo you do not think “gee, that’s kinda cool”, but instead think “my God, it’s like I’m right there”. This is something only stereo photography can achieve. But an image in a hand held viewer is hard to share. It’s a treat for the sensations that only one person at a time can experience, and since often every person (especially a first-timer) will spend a minute or two just looking while everyone else has to wait, it’s takes a while to get through a room. Other, not-too-bad options include a high-end professional slide projector arrangement, or the latest 3D TV. They are okay, but frankly in most cases you’d be better off using the projector or TV to show regular 2D photos instead. The best viewing experience you’ll find on a computer monitor is “mirror assisted”, which takes a bit more work on the part of the web publisher, so it’s not common despite the better results. I’m sure the Fujifilm lenticular digital picture frame will also be okay, but if given a choice between a 8 inch 3D image or an 11×14 inch 2D print, you’re better off with the larger 2D print. In the digital age the only worthwhile viewing option is a digital stereo-scope, the digital equivalent of the analog stereo slide viewer. An example is the Cyclopital 3D Viewer which runs US$700. That’s more expensive than the camera, like many lenses are more expensive too.
I’ve never tried it, but if it’s close to what I get with my MF slide viewer then it’s worth it, and all the cheaper digital options are worthless. If Olympus truly wants a game changer then along with its new 3D camera it needs a digital stereo scope with a very big, very high resolution image that can pull you right into the scene. That’s what it will take to make 3D photography into something more than a gimic.
Andreas Aronsson
2 years ago |I am fascinated by (stereoscopic) 3D and has always been, even though I never did any real investment before the W3 camera came out. Now I’m totally in love with it despite it being pretty much a low end compact times two. I think this is what makes it so fun to use, it’s like a normal point and shoot.
The VR-330 might save .mpo files, but it will not feel like using a 3D camera :/ I could take 3D pictures like that with any of my cameras and build .mpos in post. Even the W3 is better for that kind of shooting as you can see the results at once on the screen!
Otherwise I think, and as is mentioned above, that it is how to display the pictures that is the big hurdle for 3D right now (and perhaps since always), at least that is how I feel after getting a 3D camera!
Joe
2 years ago |See a good 3D TV with a good 3D source and your “What’s the big deal about 3D” questions will go away. When done right, it’s simply jaw-dropping.