Thanks for the long explanination. Sorry, I still think it is that simple. I
just compare E-3 with other DSLR, they also have 1/8000s, much bigger mirror
and bright viewfinder, metal body. Now you are telling me, a small shutter
curtain need more material, a smaller mirror need a big pentaprism,
otherwise we cannot achieve the same like others who already there? I
believe if technologies are not available now, it is just inside Olympus
only.
Everything in front of us is clearly visible, Olympus is not delivering what
they promised, looking at the DZ8mm, it is much bigger than others and price
is not cheaper either (ok, I still purchased one, I would have purchased the
7-14 if it is not that BIG!).
Please understand we take the small sensor in sacrificing something (noise
at least) but we gain nothing. No smaller camera/lens, no cheaper price,
what did we get? Yeah! we got some top-pro lenses that take a fortune to buy
and a strong body to carry.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "khen lim" <castanet.xiosnetworks@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> It does sound like you're right but I have to disagree. I do wish it was
> this simple. On paper and in principle, a small sensor has a chain benefit
> of everything else being small but once demands on performance become
> higher, these principles will take a hit. In the case of the E-3, this was
> apparent during the development stages.
>
> Let's have a look at that mirror you referred to. The need to offer 1/8000
> sec max shutter speed forces the entire 'direct drive' assembly to be
> re-evaluated and that includes not just the shutter mechanism but also the
> entire mirror box. If a small mirror was first designed to support 1/4000
> sec, doesn't logic suggest that something needs to be done to beef up the
> mirror, change the mirror, toughen the mirror etc etc to help it to cope
> with a speed that is now twice as fast? I think so.
>
> OK. Now let's look at the pentaprism. In the E-3, the development team
> knew
> of the experiences that many including those here in the List complained
> about 'tight,' tunnel-like etc etc. How do you bring in more light to
> brighten it? How do you enlarge the view so that people stop complaining
> it's tunnel like? It's not as simple as moving a few rows in a cinema to
> look at a wider screen. So something needed to be done to the prism
> itself.
> I will assure you that the first course of action was to retain the same
> prism and try to extract as much as they can without resorting to a larger
> solid glass prism that has higher refractive index and larger light flux.
> What I'm saying here is that we should consider giving the engineers the
> benefit of the doubt that they always have Mobility in their mind and they
> do try their best to get the most without allowing the camera to gain
> weight
> and/or size.
>
> Next, shutter mechanism. Olympus did succeed in this area as they learned
> the trick from Maitani with the OM. They simplified the mechanism by
> removing as many gears as they could and replace them with a direct
> closer-in-contact cam. This helped to lighten the mechanism BUT once it is
> lighter, it was also more vulnerable in other ways. So the mechanism
> itself
> had to be toughened also.
>
> One other thing. With all these secondary vibrations coming through, a
> very
> compact camera body has a larger tendency to send them straight to the
> sensor and cause problems. These harmonic problems cannot be dealt with by
> any in-camera or, worse, in-lens Image Stabilisation system. Simply put,
> the
> gyro measures a completely different pattern of vibrations. So if we are
> to
> have a compact body, the components are going to be more tightly tucked in
> the way of one another. And this brings about additional solutions to help
> create paths for these vibrations to be channeled away from the sensor.
> These paths can add weight and girth.
>
> There are a lot of 'black-art' type sciences involved today in the making
> of
> a DSLR that make it so different from even a high-end film SLR such as the
> OM-4. There is every wish within Olympus to aim for that and they're
> trying
> to do that. Until technologies are available that give the necessary
> breakthrough, we just have to soldier on with whatever improvements that
> come their way. After all look at every other 'complex' industry like
> automobiles...to get to where we are with CVT, air-con that works all the
> time, auto cylinder shutdown, commonrail diesel etc etc etc, it took the
> industry decades to achieve. Those who lived during periods where these
> weren't at all possible technologically would probably have moaned in the
> way we all are about our cameras today.
>
> So take heart. They will come. Cut them some slack.
>
> K.
>
>
>
>
> --
> "To sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards of people" - Emily
> Cox
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|