OM-1 MkII announced

[vkalia]

1 hour ago, Chris Ross said:

It's not OM system that will be developing the sensors as I understand things.  There's only a handful of places that actually make sensors.  The current OM-1 sensor is a Sony sensor while Nikon also uses Sony sensors, while Canon make their own.  The camera manufacturers then work out the best way to utilise the sensor technology to build their camera around it. 

 

I really think sensor technology has plateaued if you want an example go to DXO mark and look at camera sets like for example Z8/D850/D810 covering about 10 years or Sony A7RV/A7RIII/A7RII.  The Signal to noise curves all sit on top of each other dynamic range is all similar in fact Z8 is about one stop less than D850.  It's not the full story of course but improvements are now very much incremental.

 

What has been advancing is things like readout speed, on chip AF and computational photography, all nice features but not all useful for UW work.  You are still not going to beat the size and weight of lenses for m43 cameras, not to mention the large range of lenses suitable for UW work.

 

Re development - you are correct that sensor R&D isnt necessarily done by the brand.   But the volume sales do play a role in the amount of R&D done (if only by affecting the amortized sensor prices).     Hopefully, Sony will keep applying its sensor tech to the MFT sensor as well.

 

And thanks for that link to the sensor tech - I will go check it out.     Based on my own experience with shooting with modern DSLRs versus older ones (I dont have upgraditis and only change my body every 5-6 years), i have been noticing an improvement and have ascribed it to the sensor output itself.    Based on your info, it seems some of this is more due to be better processing than raw sensor imagery - so learned something new.

 

Good to know, though - and happy to hear the MFT does have hope!      

[TimG]

15 hours ago, vkalia said:

My concern is that in another 4-5 years, we will still be living with 20-24MP sensors while Canon, Sony, et al will be offering 50MP with better noise and DR, with bodies that are only marginally larger than the Olympus.

 

But is having "only" a 20-24MP camera body truly an issue? Does it prevent you from doing something or producing a desired output?

[vkalia]

43 minutes ago, TimG said:

 

But is having "only" a 20-24MP camera body truly an issue? Does it prevent you from doing something or producing a desired output?

 

It isnt a question of being prevented from doing something now, as much as being able to do more.    As the general benchmark of what cameras can accomplish increases (noise, shadow detail, dynamic range), the threshold of quality keeps increasing.    My 6MP Canon DSLR took great images for its time 20 years ago - but my 1D4, R7 and Fuji XT5 do a lot better.        

 

To be more specific, the one thing that matters to me is if the gap in MP count becomes too large.      While i have never been one to chase megapixel count, the gap does become significant at some point.    More megapixels (provided they are of a comparable quality) does provide a greater ability to crop and re-frame, and still have the ability to make decent sized prints.        I mostly shoot with a fisheye lens, and while it works well enough for me that i am not really tempted to change (except for very specific instances), there are times when greater resolution would help me crop and still get a decently large file in terms of PPI - eg, the attached photo of blue ringed octo taken with said fish eye.     

 

Besides, my initial post wasn’t so much that there is a specific, fatal flaw in MFT right now but a general concern that they were falling behind and would continue to do so.       Chris’s counter-argument to that - that sensor tech has plateaued - is valid.      Certainly, the improvement between successive generations of cameras is getting lower and lower.       So maybe i am just worrying too much about what may happen.

 

 

[Davide DB]

I am not getting into the M34/APSC/FF diatribe. I am overjoyed with the features offered by M43 systems.

So far, my personal limitations have always exceeded those of the cameras I have used.

[Jim Laurel]

I agree that there are many appealing aspects to the M43 system. Chief among those was the idea of very small cameras and lenses that had all the functionality of the larger, full-frame system cameras.

I think members of the consortium lost the plot when they began producing camera bodies that are the same size as full frame models. Yes, M43 lenses are always going to be smaller because they cover smaller image circles, which has made them popular for wildlife photography, but for most other users, there’s no size/weight benefit to the system.

If I were a LUMIX program manager, I’d write a spec for something sized like this old GX1 with optional high resolution external viewfinder. Panasonic’s hybrid phase/contrast detect autofocus. A new line of lenses around the size of the old 20mm f/1.7, but with updated focus motors. There’d be a trio of tiny pancakes: a 12mm f/2, an updated 20mm f/1.7, and a 40mm f/2. Each lens in this trio would have a physical aperture dial.

 

I’d approach Kodak to create a partnership to embed simulations of classic Kodak emulsions in the camera for use with its JPG engine. Create, share and download film simulations with IOS/Android smartphone apps, or by copying to a special folder on the SD card. Clearly, this kind of feature is hugely popular.

The camera would do away with a PASM control, and have a traditional shutter speed dial on the top deck. It would still have those modes, but they would be implicit. For example:

• Program Auto: Aperture and Shutter speed set to “A”
• Shutter Priority: Shutter speed selected on top dial, aperture set to “A”
• Aperture Priority: Aperture selected on lens, shutter speed dial set to “A”
• Manual: Aperture and shutter speed both selected.
• Auto or Manual ISO available in all modes

Given the wild popularity of the Leica Q3 and the Fuji X100VI, I’d bet this thing would be an instant hit.

 

10 hours ago, Davide DB said:

I am not getting into the M34/APSC/FF diatribe. I am overjoyed with the features offered by M43 systems.

So far, my personal limitations have always exceeded those of the cameras I have used.

 

Edited May 6 by Jim Laurel

[Chris Ross]

22 hours ago, vkalia said:

 

Re development - you are correct that sensor R&D isnt necessarily done by the brand.   But the volume sales do play a role in the amount of R&D done (if only by affecting the amortized sensor prices).     Hopefully, Sony will keep applying its sensor tech to the MFT sensor as well.

 

And thanks for that link to the sensor tech - I will go check it out.     Based on my own experience with shooting with modern DSLRs versus older ones (I dont have upgraditis and only change my body every 5-6 years), i have been noticing an improvement and have ascribed it to the sensor output itself.    Based on your info, it seems some of this is more due to be better processing than raw sensor imagery - so learned something new.

 

Good to know, though - and happy to hear the MFT does have hope!      

Perhaps, but reducing pixel size to get more MP has it's limitations.  Diffraction is already an issue, cropability has some benefits, however you need to be doing everything right to get those benefits high enough shutter speed and stable camera to prevent motion blur. the lens has to be up to that task etc.

With macro m43 has quite a strong following, I do a lot of land based macro and focus stacking and it's astounding how good the images coming out of OM cameras are.  And for UW use the little Olympus 60mm macro can fill the frame with a subject that needs a closeup diopter yielding 2x magnification on a full frame camera and is far easier to   focus with a macro lens compared to using a diopter. 

The sensor test websites are interesting but obviously not the full picture.  Prior to getting Olympus gear for UW use I had Canon gear, a 1D4, 500mm f4 lens, macro etc.  I'm switching over to mostly using Olympus for land work and have the 300mm f4, 90mm macro, 12-40mm etc.  It's easier to use and way lighter and overall is good enough for my needs.  The only place it is put to the test a little is astro work, but fast lenses that are sharp wide open do help.

I'm actually quite happy with the size of the OM-1, any smaller and it would be hard to hold for my hands,  I have a EM-5 mkII which is very compact but it doesn't get a whole lot of use.

[vkalia]

Fair - we all have our own preferences (and i didnt mean to imply MFT has no merits - i mean, i still use it myself, after all).   Eg, for land based used, i actually prefer slightly larger bodies as they fit my hands better, so the compact size of OM doesnt really add a lot of value, whereas greater ability to crop does.       For land-based, I still prefer Canon or Fuji, depending on what i am shooting.      

 

As an aside, i have been tempted to move from the Canon 500/4 to something lighter.  Now that i am in my 50s, schlepping that big monster around isnt as much fun as it used to be.   🙂      I just picked up a R7 and a RF 200-800 for hand-held bird photography - i am gobsmacked by how good the IS and low noise capabilities of that setup are.   Until a few years ago, i would laughed at the idea of shooting with a f9 lens at 800mm.    Yet here we are.

 

[vkalia]

15 hours ago, Jim Laurel said:

If I were a LUMIX program manager, I’d write a spec for something sized like this old GX1 with optional high resolution external viewfinder. Panasonic’s hybrid phase/contrast detect autofocus. A new line of lenses around the size of the old 20mm f/1.7, but with updated focus motors. There’d be a trio of tiny pancakes: a 12mm f/2, an updated 20mm f/1.7, and a 40mm f/2. Each lens in this trio would have a physical aperture dial.

 

I’d approach Kodak to create a partnership to embed simulations of classic Kodak emulsions in the camera for use with its JPG engine. Create, share and download film simulations with IOS/Android smartphone apps, or by copying to a special folder on the SD card. Clearly, this kind of feature is hugely popular.

The camera would do away with a PASM control, and have a traditional shutter speed dial on the top deck. It would still have those modes, but they would be implicit. For example:

• Program Auto: Aperture and Shutter speed set to “A”
• Shutter Priority: Shutter speed selected on top dial, aperture set to “A”
• Aperture Priority: Aperture selected on lens, shutter speed dial set to “A”
• Manual: Aperture and shutter speed both selected.
• Auto or Manual ISO available in all modes

Given the wild popularity of the Leica Q3 and the Fuji X100VI, I’d bet this thing would be an instant hit.

 

 

I’d buy that, for sure.

 

For everything except nature, i have gone from carrying 2 DSLR bodies with vertical grips and 17-40/4, 24-105/4 and 70-200/4 IS to a Fuji XT body, a 16/1.4 a 23/1.4 and one of the following three:  a 35/1.4, a 16-80/4 or a 70-300.         I find the minimalist nature of the gear works better in terms of helping me “see” photo ops.    

 

Am thinking of getting a Ricoh GR series soon - but something like the above, but with a 24-70 focal range and a fast-ish lens would be absolutely amazing as a general daily-carry camera (right now, for me that’s a Fuji body with a 28mm lens).

[Davide DB]

Jim I totally agree with you.

 

Let me preface this by saying that I have been a Lumix user since the GF1 and I have had all the GH series camera bodies going into the water from the GH2 on. I have had the beautiful GX85 and also the G85. I now have a GH5 that I use for outdoor shooting and a GH5MKII for underwater shooting. 

I embraced the M43 system because the small size of the whole thing is functional for the kind of diving I do.
I could have chosen Olympus but doing only video the Panasonic choice was obvious. I have occasionally used the old Sony A7S and the legendary Canon 5DMKII. I regret not having personally tried the latest Canon cinema cameras. I still remain of the opinion that for video the Lumix in general are always the most complete and user friendly cameras (in this market segment). The individual features may not be the best (AF ouch, ouch, ouch) but it is hard to find in a hobbyist level machine all the video-oriented features that Panasonic camera have. Now Sony and Canon have also adapted but looking back at the menus of the very old GH2, they were science fiction for the other brands in 2010.
Despite this (I have come out 😇) I try to be objective and not be a Fan Boy. Even toward diving I have a very pragmatic approach: they are tools that allow me to achieve my goals and not the other way around.

It is also true that by embracing one system then one becomes a victim of "lock-in" and it is difficult (except at great cost) to change systems or brands.

 

I am convinced that crop sensors are more functional for underwater video. Full frame photography has overflowed into cinematography with the emergence of hybrid mirrorless cameras. A “photographic” camera that also does video but film history was made by S16 and S35 cameras and not FF. The diatribes between crop and FF formats that also plague this forum are all distorted by the fact that we are talking about photography and today everyone assumes that the same object you take pictures with, also does video.

After this loooong introduction I will add some of my own considerations:

 

On 5/6/2024 at 10:15 PM, Jim Laurel said:

I think members of the consortium lost the plot when they began producing camera bodies that are the same size as full frame models. Yes, M43 lenses are always going to be smaller because they cover smaller image circles, which has made them popular for wildlife photography, but for most other users, there’s no size/weight benefit to the system.

 

Completely agree. More like they should have continued to develop two lines in parallel. A “micro” line with the original purpose of the M43 system in mind and then a line with more aggressive features where unfortunately size matters.
Why wasn't this done? Probably because there wasn't enough money, market and companies make big mistakes as well

Reading the forums, most M43 people are calling for just that: a compact rangefinder with PDAF that embodies the M43 spirit.

 

I remember well that when the M43 system was trying to establish itself among professionals, the most frequent criticism was that the camera bodies were too small and uncomfortable to hold for hours during professional sessions. I would also add that you can't judge a book by its cover. So “big” is automatically PRO.
Specifically for Panasonic there is also an important technical detail: the Lumix despite always having codecs and video processing at the highest level, they never overheated. Never, ever under any conditions. To this day all other brands are plagued by the problem of overheating. Incredible that the GH4 while filming in 4K had the exact same body as the GH3 filming in 1080p. Increasing performance, Panasonic was the first to introduce a mirrorless camera with a sealed internal fan (S1H). And indeed the S series is huge even for an FF.

 

Long story short: If you want extreme video features, you probably have minimum dimensions to meet.

 

 

On 5/6/2024 at 10:15 PM, Jim Laurel said:

If I were a LUMIX program manager, I’d write a spec for something sized like this old GX1 with optional high resolution external viewfinder. Panasonic’s hybrid phase/contrast detect autofocus. A new line of lenses around the size of the old 20mm f/1.7, but with updated focus motors. There’d be a trio of tiny pancakes: a 12mm f/2, an updated 20mm f/1.7, and a 40mm f/2. Each lens in this trio would have a physical aperture dial.

 

I’d approach Kodak to create a partnership to embed simulations of classic Kodak emulsions in the camera for use with its JPG engine. Create, share and download film simulations with IOS/Android smartphone apps, or by copying to a special folder on the SD card. Clearly, this kind of feature is hugely popular.

The camera would do away with a PASM control, and have a traditional shutter speed dial on the top deck. It would still have those modes, but they would be implicit. For example:

• Program Auto: Aperture and Shutter speed set to “A”
• Shutter Priority: Shutter speed selected on top dial, aperture set to “A”
• Aperture Priority: Aperture selected on lens, shutter speed dial set to “A”
• Manual: Aperture and shutter speed both selected.
• Auto or Manual ISO available in all modes

Given the wild popularity of the Leica Q3 and the Fuji X100VI, I’d bet this thing would be an instant hit.

 

 

Rumors say that we could have something similar to Fuji X100VI that is the camera of the year.

I, too, think that a camera with these features would be an instant hit. The problem is that designing a camera from scratch is a long process, and perhaps a new current camera that is not an evolution of an existing one was designed at least three years ago. I am making this up, if anyone knows more about the time to market of these items please join in the discussion.

In recent years the compact camera market has been zeroed out by smartphones, but now there is a trend toward compact rangefinder-style cameras that can be carried around with ease. Also a return to “vintage” and toward low resolution, perhaps fueled by influencers on social media.
I was reading that old Fuji compact film cameras are going fast in Tokyo. The few stores that develop film say customers don't want prints but they ask for digital scans and are throwing away the negatives. They are attracted to the vintage, imperfect look of these little cameras. The return of Polaroids in other forms.

We live in strange times. 

 

 

[bghazzal]

41 minutes ago, Davide DB said:

In recent years the compact camera market has been zeroed out by smartphones, but now there is a trend toward compact rangefinder-style cameras that can be carried around with ease. Also a return to “vintage” and toward low resolution, perhaps fueled by influencers on social media.

I was reading that old Fuji compact film cameras are going fast in Tokyo. The few stores that develop film say customers don't want prints but they ask for digital scans and are throwing away the negatives. They are attracted to the vintage, imperfect look of these little cameras. The return of Polaroids in other forms.

We live in strange times.

 

Aaaah, compacts 😍 - Maybe we should start a retro trend and shoot uw video on VHS-C and Hi-8 camcorders? (digitalised to 4K, of course)
Woah, look at the rad overlay and generation-loss on that reef fly-by!

Edited May 9 by bghazzal

[makar0n]

Aaand firmware 1.7 is out for OM1 mk1!  Also specifically listing AF performance improvement.

 

Quote

• AF performance on the main subject has been improved when using(all targets) in S-AF and C-AF mode.
• The menu can now be operated using the(erase) button while shooting, allowing for menu operation with the right hand.
• The composition algorithm for handheld high-res shots has been improved.
• Improve stability of some functions.

 

OM1 mk2 has also received an update - version 1.2

 

Quote

• The composition algorithm for handheld high-res shots has been improved.
• Improve stability of some functions.

 

Edited August 29 by makar0n