I don't know enough about sensors and electronics to really have any
idea if there is any advantage (size & weight wise) to the 4/3 sensor,
but all of the initial PR stuff from Olympus indicated that there would
be one. But even if one grants that there would not be much advantage
with the bodies the lenses are not any smaller or lighter either.
Comparing the 4/3 system lenses to offerings from other makers shows
that there is no real difference weight wise.
for me, one of the initial attractions of the 4/3 system was the claims
by Olympus that the system would be smaller and lighter than competing
systems, a claim I don't think the 4/3 system has lived up to.
Jim Couch
Johann Thorsson wrote:
> I can't see why a smaller sensor should make the body much smaller. It
> still requires much the same electronics, hardware and batteries as the
> other brands. My understanding was that the lenses would really be the
> things that they could make smaller due to the crop factor?
>
> J
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|