Open discussion on new format/camera

Hi Guys,

It seems very strange to me that with the upcoming release of this new camera that the 'collective' has not been discussing the pros and cons of such a radical new approach?

Personally I see it as an absolute 'no brainer' for underwater use. It has a very large screen with live view that is not hamstrung in anyway by shutter lag that seems to be the main complaint of the P&S fraternity. No mirror to pivot out of the way, so no 'lag' time. It also houses the Olympus/Zuiko lenses that are reputed to be 'second to none' as far as optics are concerned.

Apart from the fact that no major housing manufacturer has expressed any interest in this camera yet, I can't see why it wouldn't be the perfect upgrade for a P&S exponent, or more importantly, for an old git like meself that can't see close enough to count me fingers. . . .

Now, I could be out on a limb here, and looking like a complete dickhead, but what does The Forum think of this units prospects. . . . .

Please join in folks...

Bruce...

I think it's great to see Panasonic moving into a new area here. While I haven't heard how the camera performs, you're right Bruce in that it may become the next logical step for P&S owners, to the extent that they may never move onto 'traditional' dSLR's. I guess this will depend on image quality these cameras end up being capable of producing though.

It would be great to see housing manufacturers pick this camera up, however, I don't think it will be too long before other camera companies join in. Canon have said that they're looking at 'participating' in this new technology (link).

Ryan.

I think it's great to see Panasonic moving into a new area here. While I haven't heard how the camera performs, you're right Bruce in that it may become the next logical step for P&S owners, to the extent that they may never move onto 'traditional' dSLR's. I guess this will depend on image quality these cameras end up being capable of producing though.

 

It would be great to see housing manufacturers pick this camera up, however, I don't think it will be too long before other camera companies join in. Canon have said that they're looking at 'participating' in this new technology (link).

 

Ryan.

The problem is that housing manufacturers cannot see beyond canon and nikon. And the two big player play safe, so radical changes are coming from smaller players (Panasonic is actually big but its photo division is small).

By the way I mentioned this camera weeks before in the sony a900 thread as another very promising but totally ignored camera for UW purpose.

But I bet that the olympus version will have UW support (at least from Oly)

The new DMC-G1K (I presume you are speaking of) looks like a really nice camera, and state-of-the-art when it comes to it's live view implementation. For me, I am not ready to give up my viewfinder. Given a choice for most situations I prefer my camera held in close looking through a viewfinder for composing my images. Now if this camera incorporated a viewfinder and was in effect a rangefinder camera as well, I would consider buying one.

The new DMC-G1K (I presume you are speaking of) looks like a really nice camera, and state-of-the-art when it comes to it's live view implementation. For me, I am not ready to give up my viewfinder. Given a choice for most situations I prefer my camera held in close looking through a viewfinder for composing my images. Now if this camera incorporated a viewfinder and was in effect a rangefinder camera as well, I would consider buying one.

It has a high resolution electronic viewfinder. According to the previews it's not that bad.

It has a high resolution electronic viewfinder. According to the previews it's not that bad.

Definitely worth looking at, I think. From the perspective initially proposed in this thread, moving up from a P&S, I think this looks like a great camera. From the perspective of someone who already has a Canon or Nikon DSLR I don't see any real attraction to moving to this format, as the new Canon / Nikon models are incorporating similar features and more, without huge differences in camera size in the consumer ends of their lines.

I have always been an Olympus fan, so I think they they are the most innovative company when it comes to squeezing the most quality out of the most compact package.

without huge differences in camera size

I think the difference in camera (and hopefully lens) size is significant. I can imagine a very compact system around this camera.

Cameras like the D40 /D60 are pretty compact as well. I carry my daughters D40, and I'd probably drop it if it were much smaller.

Definitely worth looking at, I think. . From the perspective of someone who already has a Canon or Nikon DSLR I don't see any real attraction to moving to this format, as the new Canon / Nikon models are incorporating similar features and more, without huge differences in camera size in the consumer ends of their lines.

Hi Jeff,

In my case, I am looking at this new camera as a replacement for my Nexus housed Nikon D70S. The reason being that I am losing the old age fight with presbiopia.

I'm now at +2.5 and my normal distance vision is perfect. I have corrective lenses in my masks and sometimes get the feeling of being sea-sick from changing vision from +2.5 to normal and then back to +2.5. It gives mwe the whirlies. . . .

Anyway, after the quality of a DSLR, it kinda 'irks' me to have to downgrade to a P&S. My current line of thinking is to give one of the aftermarket viewfinders a go and see if this can help with my vision problems. I'm hoping that a $500 fix will be better than a complete system change over.

Bruce...

Hi Bruce,

Thanks for starting this discussion.

Ultimately, the questions are: how easy is it to use, how is the image quality, and will it be as versatile as other DSLR's.

Another point about the size (for underwater shooters): after the camera is housed, mounted on a base/tray, and 2 strobes attached, is it going to feel smaller than a housed E420 or even a Digital Rebel? I personally don't think so.

Cheers

James

Hi Jeff,

In my case, I am looking at this new camera as a replacement for my Nexus housed Nikon D70S. The reason being that I am losing the old age fight with presbiopia.

I'm now at +2.5 and my normal distance vision is perfect. I have corrective lenses in my masks and sometimes get the feeling of being sea-sick from changing vision from +2.5 to normal and then back to +2.5. It gives mwe the whirlies. . . .

Anyway, after the quality of a DSLR, it kinda 'irks' me to have to downgrade to a P&S. My current line of thinking is to give one of the aftermarket viewfinders a go and see if this can help with my vision problems. I'm hoping that a $500 fix will be better than a complete system change over.

Bruce...

Yeah, I sympathize with you, having just had to get a new stronger bifocal prescription in my mask. I could not dive or photograph without it.

I also could not function without my GS viewfinder on my Subal D200 (never mind a D70) and one of the main reasons I'm thinking of housing my D700 is the larger viewfinder. The bigger the better as far as I'm concerned. I'm not sure that LiveView on a 3" screen is better than a large viewfinder though. I could be shown that I'm wrong, I'm just not sure an LCD solves our problem, it's rather that whatever screen or viewfinder we have it must fill the largest amount of our field of vision when looking at it.

Ultimately, the questions are: how easy is it to use, how is the image quality, and will it be as versatile as other DSLR's.

 

Another point about the size (for underwater shooters): after the camera is housed, mounted on a base/tray, and 2 strobes attached, is it going to feel smaller than a housed E420 or even a Digital Rebel? I personally don't think so.

I think those are exactly the questions.

I agree with James that the overall size of the rig may not be much different, and even if it is it won't make the camera easier to use. If the camera has to use 4/3 lenses then it will be constrained to mostly the same size as the 4/3 system. Ease of use is also determined by controls, bouyancy, and finder optics. The size of the body doesn't determine those characteristics, it determines ease of travel.

Image quality will always lag larger formats. This new system may ultimately offer something good enough, but the downgrade is hardly exciting.

Versatility is where this new camera fails. There's not a single lens for the new mount that's interesting underwater. Maybe in the future, but not now.

Regarding presbyopia, that's what the finder diopter is for. I have presbyopia, I have perfect far vision thanks to lasik, and I have no problem using viewfinders as long as the diopter adjustment is right. Perhaps the range just isn't enough.

I found with the Subal 180 finder that I could back away from the eyepiece and it would work better for me. I haven't found that with the Inon 45 for whatever reason. It's possible that a magnified finder with a proper diopter adjustment could solve the problem or reduce it enough to where a low power mask is all that's necessary. I wouldn't bail out on viewfinders altogether without giving the options a try. I'd rather have a lens that works and struggle with the finder than be able to compose images that I do not want.

Yeah, I sympathize with you, having just had to get a new stronger bifocal prescription in my mask. I could not dive or photograph without it.

I also could not function without my GS viewfinder on my Subal D200 (never mind a D70) and one of the main reasons I'm thinking of housing my D700 is the larger viewfinder. The bigger the better as far as I'm concerned. I'm not sure that LiveView on a 3" screen is better than a large viewfinder though. I could be shown that I'm wrong, I'm just not sure an LCD solves our problem, it's rather that whatever screen or viewfinder we have it must fill the largest amount of our field of vision when looking at it.

A question to the mathematicians and scientific 'learned' folks among us?

I realise tha Panasonic are 'in bed' with Olympus on this deal and are using Olympus' lenses for the new camera.

Now we all know about 'cropping factors' etc., and that Olympus' is around the 2.0 mark, but will this be any furthe affected by the lack of mirrors

or penta prisms, etc.??

The other concern/thought of mine is within relation to the use of current Olympus four thirds lenses on this new G1 camera.

Will the use of an adapter, to allow the larger diameter and different mounts, of the current crop of lenses alter any of the existing mathematicals? i.e. cropping factor, focal length???

Just thr ramblings of an unsound mind . . . .

Bruce...

BTW, Thanks Jeff, I will have to have alook around. I'm unsure as to 45' or 180'.

UM, I think that Craig just about answered everything here while I was typing it out... Thanks Craig!

Hi Bruce,

 

Thanks for starting this discussion.

 

Ultimately, the questions are: how easy is it to use, how is the image quality, and will it be as versatile as other DSLR's.

 

Another point about the size (for underwater shooters): after the camera is housed, mounted on a base/tray, and 2 strobes attached, is it going to feel smaller than a housed E420 or even a Digital Rebel? I personally don't think so.

 

Cheers

James

This is the mock-up of the olympus implementation of micro 4/3:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/photokina...us/DSC_0705.jpg

I think, it would be possible to design a significantly smaller housing for this camera than the current DSLR ones. Add only one smaller strobe and you have an easy to trawel with rig with not much picture quality compromise.

The lens adapter allows 4/3 lenses without crop factor but it precludes extension tubes and teleconverters. Most of the flexibility of existing 4/3 systems lenses is available but that's less than what your Nexus D70 offers. The big loss is in the shorter macro range, though a good midrange zoom could be an effective substitute.

I'd think the Sigma 17-70 macro would be great on 4/3. The 18-50 macro is available and is faster. Either would be good for portraits and offers pretty good macro magnification given the crop factor.

The lens roadmap of panasonic is not really underwater friendly. Let's hope olympus comes up with a better plan.

I, too, have presbyopia. I have no trouble looking through the viewfinder on my D300 in the housing but the huge LCD on the back of the camera is so blurred as to only be useful for giving a rough idea of exposure. Using a camera with live view instead of a viewfinder would be worse for me than a dSLR.

In keeping this discussion going, I just noticed that Olympus showed a mockup at Photokina to try to demonstrat how "streamlined" the new format could be. Check out this link:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092208...four_thirds.asp

While something this small might be bit problematic (e.g, how easily could one adjust aperture and shutter speed given the control layout), it does speak to the potential for developing very small camera bodies to operate with SLR lenses . . .

Mike

In keeping this discussion going, I just noticed that Olympus showed a mockup at Photokina to try to demonstrat how "streamlined" the new format could be. Check out this link:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092208...four_thirds.asp

 

While something this small might be bit problematic (e.g, how easily could one adjust aperture and shutter speed given the control layout), it does speak to the potential for developing very small camera bodies to operate with SLR lenses . . .

 

Mike

I posted a link for this mockup above, without any reply. The majority of UW-photogs seems to be not that excited. But I am.

The panasonic G1 makes not much size difference but the olympus does. I think it's a great opportunity to have comparable image quality to the recent entry level DSLRs in a very compact size. I'm sure olympus will make fantastic macro lens for this system.

By the way there is a short review-like article about panasonic G1 in the Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/technolo...nted=1&_r=1

Panasonic G1 is a nice try but the full advantage of this system will be shown in future models. I think we will discuss micro 4/3 a lot in 2009.

[snip]

I think we will discuss micro 4/3 a lot in 2009.

I am intrigued with the possibilities of the Micro Four Thirds (MFT) system. After reading some reviews for the Panasonic G1, I think I will wait and see what Olympus releases in '09. The G1 shutter lag is a slow compared to SLRs though it is faster than digicams.

I miss my ole F4 sports finder view. It was full frame and I could extend the housing out a full arms' length to distance myself from skittish critters and still compose in the v/f. My first digital venture into u/w photography was a CP 9500 (?) in a homemade housing. I like the view, the rest ugh! I would like to try live view on a 3" screen with out a shutter lag penalty.

I don't think the two MFT kit lens are of much interest u/w, but some of the existing 4/3 lenses for MFT camera with adapter might be:

35 mm macro @ 1:1 or equivalent to 2:1 in 35 mm format.

7-14 zoom

8 fish eye