Open discussion on new format/camera

Oh, one more thing - Seatool & Nexus have E3 housings. May be they will produce an Oly MFT.

Oh, one more thing - Seatool & Nexus have E3 housings. May be they will produce an Oly MFT.

Ikelite also supports olympus. I'm sure that oly will also provide an UW-housing for it. If they have a good lens roadmap I would really consider to buy into the system. The m4/3 version of the 35mm macro and the 8mm fisheye would be fine as a beginning.

There is a bit of excitement over the G1 by Leica rangefinder camera enthusiasts due to the short BF distance that allows room for lens adapters. The downside is the 2x crop factor. OTOH, the 75/1.4 becomes a '150'/1.4!

Tom

There is a bit of excitement over the G1 by Leica rangefinder camera enthusiasts due to the short BF distance that allows room for lens adapters. The downside is the 2x crop factor. OTOH, the 75/1.4 becomes a '150'/1.4!

Tom

Tom,

For the non-industry types que est "BF"? - "short BF distance "

Tom,

For the non-industry types que est "BF"? - "short BF distance "

back focus

The body is very thin.

Decided to check out the "electronic viewfinder" as an Optometrist.

So I went down to Sammy's and spent an hour with the camera and one of their excellent staff.

A bit of background on camera optics.

The image through the viewfinder on a SLR is focused at optical infinity. If your distance vision is properly corrected you see the image clearly.

Focusing on a LCD is another matter. It takes a lot of accommodating to focus on one. Even the best ones have a resolution that sucks in comparison with a decent optical viewfinder making the focus that much harder.

If you are over 50 you can't do it. No matter how perfect your distance vision is. You have to use your reading prescription. This is the dreaded presbyopia. Your reading prescription has to be focused at the correct distance and has to be in a position that you can actually see through it to view your LCD screen.

Had to laugh at the poster who has "perfect vision due to their LASIK surgery" Well, no. Lasik, if you don't get the blue light special, can focus your eyes for any particular focal distance. If your under 45 and the lasik is focused for optical infinity then you can see all distances well. When you get over 50, though you won't see anything up close without a reading prescription. You could have one eye focused close and the other far away. You have to pick where up close you want that eye fixed and there are other complications to doing so.

The summary of all this is it can be hard to see an LCD (which is what an EVF is) if you are over 50.

So can you see the EVF on the Pano G1?

In a word yes. The EVF has a diopter dial that goes +4 to -4. I shot with each of my eyes. One had a contact lens focused at distance. By adjusting the diopter dial I was able to see the viewfinder clearly and shoot the camera. The other eye had a bifocal contact lens in it. This lens works well for computers, gauges and such. But it doesn't focus well on LCD screens if you hold them too close. With a different adjustment of the diopter dial I was once again able to see the EVF clearly on the G1.

The LCD or EVF on the G1 shows you where the camera is focused. It appears to me you should be able to shoot this camera with your distance vision if you are over 50. You should of course test the camera for yourself hands on. I did not shoot and print out any photos.

I would still prefer an optical viewfinder. I got an auxiliary voigtlander optical viewfinder for my LX3. It slips into the standard hotshoe on the top of the LX3 and is very compact.

Anyway if you don't want to read all the above and you are over 50: the Panasonic G1 with it's EVF appears to function fine without needing your reading glasses.

Ikelite also supports olympus. I'm sure that oly will also provide an UW-housing for it. If they have a good lens roadmap I would really consider to buy into the system. The m4/3 version of the 35mm macro and the 8mm fisheye would be fine as a beginning.

In terms of domes required for fisheye or WA fotography what determines the size of the dome? the focal length? In that case it it right that the dome sizes would be the same as for equvalent 4/3 lenses, and thus advantages in size body thickness and thus overall size of the housing, right ?

/O

Hi Bruce!

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?

I'm following the mFT system with great interest. I haven't had time to test the camera topside yet. There is more to come from Olympus. I'm looking forward to provide a housing for one of those.

Helge ;-)=)

In terms of domes required for fisheye or WA fotography what determines the size of the dome? the focal length? In that case it it right that the dome sizes would be the same as for equvalent 4/3 lenses, and thus advantages in size body thickness and thus overall size of the housing, right ?

 

/O

Ikelite offers its big dome port for the olympus 8mm FE lens which is rather big. I don't know how big the dome port is offered for the original olympus housings.

HI!

Ikelite offers its big dome port for the olympus 8mm FE lens which is rather big. I don't know how big the dome port is offered for the original olympus housings.

The original Olympus port seems a bit strange to me. It allows an angle of about 100° maximum. This would be ok for the 11-22mm lens for which they provide a flat port. It is too narrow for the 7-14mm that isn't positioned properly when using the Olympus extension ring. Nevertheless it works quite well with the 8mm FE lens. The outer diameter is < 7" as far as I remember. Haven't got one here to take an exact measure.

Panasonic announced an mFT version of the 7-14mm f4 so we'll be able to compare directly. I hope there'll be an 8mm FE too. This lens is my personal favourite when shooting UW wides.

Helge ;-)=)

Both Athena and Inon Make Domes for the Olympus as well. I just received the 9-18mm lens I ordered. I was somewhat shocked by how small it is. It looks identical to the 14-42mm lens with a WA element on the end. It only weighs slightly more than the 14-42mm.

The Olympus dome port is 170 mm and uses the same glass as the Athena 170 mm port. Athena also makes a 220 mm port which is best for the 7 to 14 mm zoom.

Inon's port is small and very nice but is designed only for the 8 mm fisheye lens.

Olympus says the 9 to 18 works well with the 170 mm dome and no extension. I have not been able to test this combination because I am still waiting for the lens to arrive.

Although these cameras should allow for a very small housing it seems that the ports would remain about the same size since no change is being made in the sensor size over the existing 4/3 camera bodies and current ports could be interchanged.

Phil Rudin

The Olympus dome port is 170 mm and uses the same glass as the Athena 170 mm port. Athena also makes a 220 mm port which is best for the 7 to 14 mm zoom.

 

Inon's port is small and very nice but is designed only for the 8 mm fisheye lens.

 

Olympus says the 9 to 18 works well with the 170 mm dome and no extension. I have not been able to test this combination because I am still waiting for the lens to arrive.

 

Although these cameras should allow for a very small housing it seems that the ports would remain about the same size since no change is being made in the sensor size over the existing 4/3 camera bodies and current ports could be interchanged.

 

Phil Rudin

Can I assume that the design of a compact dome port is possible only when it's specifically designed for a certain lens (eg. Inon's port for 8mm FE)?

On the other hand a universal dome port should be large. Am I right?

Hi!

... I just received the 9-18mm lens I ordered. I was somewhat shocked by how small it is. It looks identical to the 14-42mm lens with a WA element on the end. It only weighs slightly more than the 14-42mm.

I tested the lens topside. It's a lot value for money.Let us know how it performs UW.

Helge ;-)=)

Hi!

Can I assume that the design of a compact dome port is possible only when it's specifically designed for a certain lens (eg. Inon's port for 8mm FE)?

On the other hand a universal dome port should be large. Am I right?

It's a bit more complicated. A WA dome is a lens. The water(-glass)-air border has a refracting effect. The result is a spherical virtual image of the world outside. Depending on the dome diameter (the diameter of the glass sphere, not the vertical measurement of the dome) infinity is projected into another distance. The larger the diameter the further away will be infinity. Average domes show UW-infinity around 300mm. It depends on the close focus ability of the lens if you need a diopter to be able to focus properly.

The image is spherical, that means bent inward towards the corners. A WA lens is built to produce a flat image of a flat surface. This leads to problems (corner sharpness) if the DOF can't cover for the bending. A larger dome gives a less bent image.

All this may be degraded further by a wrongly positioned lens.

The conclusion is: The larger the dome, the better the chance for good image quality.

An FE lens, in contrast, produces a flat image of a spheric surface. To an FE lens, the virtual image caused by a dome is "natural". It therefore causes far less problems. The wider DOF and usual close focus ability helps too. You may use a smaller dome without risking image quality.

Helge ;-)=)

Hi!

 

It's a bit more complicated. A WA dome is a lens. The water(-glass)-air border has a refracting effect. The result is a spherical virtual image of the world outside. Depending on the dome diameter (the diameter of the glass sphere, not the vertical measurement of the dome) infinity is projected into another distance. The larger the diameter the further away will be infinity. Average domes show UW-infinity around 300mm. It depends on the close focus ability of the lens if you need a diopter to be able to focus properly.

The image is spherical, that means bent inward towards the corners. A WA lens is built to produce a flat image of a flat surface. This leads to problems (corner sharpness) if the DOF can't cover for the bending. A larger dome gives a less bent image.

All this may be degraded further by a wrongly positioned lens.

The conclusion is: The larger the dome, the better the chance for good image quality.

 

An FE lens, in contrast, produces a flat image of a spheric surface. To an FE lens, the virtual image caused by a dome is "natural". It therefore causes far less problems. The wider DOF and usual close focus ability helps too. You may use a smaller dome without risking image quality.

 

Helge ;-)=)

Many thanks for the explanation. It means that it's possible to design a compact specific port for the 8mm FE. I could imagine a compact kit with the MFT version of the 35mm macro and the 8mm FE together with the really compact olympus camera version (mockup shown). If there would be compact housing specifically designed for this rig it would be a really nice compact alternatives for DSLRs without much IQ compromise. ( a kind of digital nikonos)

Hi!

... It means that it's possible to design a compact specific port for the 8mm FE. I could imagine a compact kit with the MFT version of the 35mm macro and the 8mm FE together with the really compact olympus camera version (mockup shown). If there would be compact housing specifically designed for this rig it would be a really nice compact alternatives for DSLRs without much IQ compromise. ( a kind of digital nikonos)

Yes, it could be done. The tricky part is the glass for the dome. There are jst a couple of molds around. Nearly all of the European anufacturers use the same glass from the same distributor for their domes. A mold may cost up to 6000 USD or more. You need quite a batch to get a reasonable priced dome in the end. I am working on a proper dome for the 8mm FE for quite some time. I talked to lots of people to find somebody who has an appropriate mold on stock from another project. Then it's only a few 100 bucks for a prototype. One of hte manufacturers said that they can do it just with the mold, no expensive post-processing. I'll have a try later on this year. If it works thos will result in a compact but optimized FE-Port.

What Nikon did with the UW 15mm WA was taking a topside design and fitting it an optimized front lense and dome all-in-one. That's why it is that amazingly good (and why you can't use it top-side).

The term "Digital Nikonos" came to my mind several times. With this technology it could be possible.

Helge ;-)=)

Does anyone know when Olympus will release their first MFT camera? The Panosonic G1 may be cool, but it uses contrast AF vs. phase difference as in the E3. There is a blurb somewhere that says the Oly MFT will use the E3 AF. I hope Oly bumps the LCD res.by 4x like the newer Nikons.

Hi!

Does anyone know when Olympus will release their first MFT camera? The Panosonic G1 may be cool, but it uses contrast AF vs. phase difference as in the E3. There is a blurb somewhere that says the Oly MFT will use the E3 AF. I hope Oly bumps the LCD res.by 4x like the newer Nikons.

Olympus hasn't published a certain date but there should be a first model available in Q1 or Q2 2009. The policy of Olympus is to block all information until the press release date. There have been people sacked for a powerpoint slide leaking info about the E-3.

I don't know if Olympus is able to provide the same AF as used in the E-3. The AF used in DSLRs needs an AF sensor that uses information split of the image. Usually this is done with a semi-transparent mirror. In the new design there is not much space left for such a mirror since the main goal was to cut down mirrors. The contrast AF in the E-520 is quite good, the E-30 is said to have an improved version. I think that mFT will continue to have contrast AF but (hopefully) much better than we know of today. At least that's what I heard when talking to Olympus representatives recently.

Helge ;-)=)

The increased number of leaks sign that the new olympus MFT camera will be released soon (maybe tomorrow):

http://43rumors.com/ft5-fullsize-of-the-whitebeige-e-p1/

It will be quite small. Even smaller than the canon G10:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jdhodges/3604153157/sizes/o/

Now it's up to the housing manufacturers to make compact housings. I hope oly will also produce interesting small MFT lenses appropriate for UW photography. This could be the digital equivalent of nikonos IMHO.