Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Panasonic G-1 - micro 4/3 camera

Subject: [OM] Re: Panasonic G-1 - micro 4/3 camera
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 21:18:05 -0700
Andrew Fildes wrote:
> The different LCD format would not only allow the use of standard display 
> modules but the 'dead space' allows for an information bar at top or bottom. 
> That was one thing I liked about the Leica M8 - instant readout of the 
> shutter speed, aperture and ISO on a strip across the top of the review would 
> be nice.
>   
Just went through the dpreview preview. It does exactly what you want 
with a status bar along the bottom and can be wet to any of the three 
formats.

> Designs have gone very conservative in recent years - in effect, almost all 
> the cameras now available are VERY similar to the last of the film cameras, 
> in both SLR and compact designs. 

Exactly. Where form truly follows function, that's fine with me, but 
where it avoids finding new forms to match new functionality, it's 
frustrating.
> The exception are the handbag compacts like the Oly mju 1040 sitting on my 
> desk right now and I suspect that the ultraslim large LCD designs are 
> acceptable to the public because of the prevalence of devices like cell 
> phones, Palm Pilots and iPods which are not dissimilar.
>   

I suspect this is a case where the form made posible by new technology 
is so compelling that it breaks through previous norms. At least 
initially, the buyers for these designs were young people with no sense 
of traditional camera forms, or at least no attachment to them.

The Oly D-460 sitting on my desk is certainly a slavish copy of the 
stylus film cameras, although bigger. Hard to blame them for trying 
reduce FUD to make digital seem just like the cameras their customers 
were used to.
> This is one of the reasons that I'm collecting (rather haphazardly) the weird 
> designs of the mid-nineties to early noughties - I do not think that we'll 
> see their like again. The opportunity to really rethink and redesign the 
> camera as we know it has perished under the storm surge of consumer market 
> conservatism. 

I'm more optimistic than you. I'm hoping one of the smaller players, 
especially if share is slipping, will take a risk on something new.
> If there is to be something clever done with micro-TwoThirds, a rangefinder 
> is my last, best hope.
>   

This is something I've heard a lot. I'm not sure I understand. Do you 
mean, in effect, a mechanical rangefinder camera with digital sensor in 
place of the film? Or something that emulates the small size and form 
factor of classic rangefinders, and uses an optical viewfinder (fixed 
magnification?), with or without LCD, but with AF?

It's my impression that AF is more accurate than a mechanical 
rangefinder, but I've never used any of the premium rangefinders. I use 
only the central AF spot on my digital cameras and they seem to be very 
accurate.

Its also my understanding that WA coverage with a rangefinder depends on 
the overall FOV of the optical finder or requires an auxiliary finder; 
and that tele framing is simply a small frame in the center of the fixed 
magnification viewfinder.

None of that seems very appealing to me. One of the reasons I've never 
been attracted to rangefinders compared to SLRs.

I think micro 4/3 should be able to emulate the size, noise, quickness 
and unobtrusiveness of the classic rangefinder cameras, but can also 
improve on them by taking advantage of new technology. I honestly think 
that twist and tilt LCDs are far superior for candid/street photography 
to any sort of viewfinder that requires sticking the camera in front of 
your face to take the shot. Their ability to extend viewpoints over the 
edge of things, over head and down to ground level without acrobatics 
also seem to be an advantage over conventional rangefinder design. I 
certainly find them wonderful to use.

Is this a nostalgia thing that has nothing to do with facility in 
capturing images? I can understand that, although if that's what it is, 
why not just shoot film with the real thing?

I've combined bits from two Oly Sixes into one that appears fully 
functional and acquired some 120 film. The GE and Weston meters are 
still accurate enough. I also found out how to calibrate the Walz 
auxiliary rangefinder reasonably well, too.  Now I just have to get out 
and try it. That's harder than I thought, so far. ;-)

Moose

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz