Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 25 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 245
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    461

    4/3rds: Its own form factor

    I have committed to the 4/3rds DSLR format.
    The new (yet unnamed) OLYMPUS E-1 (replacement) made it easy.

    When we argue about formats, it long ago became clear to me that cross format comparisons are utterly useless.
    Why not compare 4 x 5 or 8 x 10 to 6x7 or 35mm?
    Because the logic atending the argument is usually flawed in that no such comparison can be made.
    The same goes for 4/3rds Vs. 35mm.
    4/3rds is 1 to 1 format unto to itself.
    Even as 4/3rds has been "compared" to 35mm, like 645 medium format, 4/3rds is its own standard, separate and apart from 35mm.
    It is too easy to say "4/3rds has a 2 to 1 lens to sensor ration so a 50mm 4/3rds lens equals 100mm in 35mm terms".
    Not so. 50mm in 4/3rds is 50mm in 4/3rds format-period.
    12Mpxl in 4/3rds format is 12Mpxl.

    I chose 4/3rds for the lenses and in-body image stabilization.
    First the lenses: 3 majors and two third-party lens makers will be cranking out a "plethora" 4/3rds lenses by 2008.
    Moreover, 4/3rds "Pro" lenses come with uber fast apertures: a 600mm f/2.8 for example. A 35-100mm f/2 "PJ" lens for another.
    A 90-250 f/2.8 zoom for another.
    Soon enough, the 4/3rds wide angle lens stable will cover from 7mm (in 4/3rds format) to 40mm.

    I have chosen to accept the 4/3rds system on its merits.
    But then so has LEICA, which speaks volumns for me.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,056
    the project named E-P1 now fairly certainly to be called E-3 will be released Oct 17.

    I have to agree that 4/3rds is indeed its own format, but there are a few necessary caveats. We still need to have comparative lens focal lengths, so there is a need to negotiate with 35mm EFL (equivalent focal length). And with that comes the usual 'crop factor' term, and again really only useful in 35mm comparisons. The actual crop factor is 1.92x however.

    The key differential is that the system doesnt crop lenses (by using the centre portion with legacy glass) unless of course you choose to use OM or other lenses which is a by-product. But this is probably also true to Nikon who have DX lenses, the issue is that there is not exclusive use of DX format glass.
    Riley

    Pentax 110 auto SLR

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Razr
    It is too easy to say "4/3rds has a 2 to 1 lens to sensor ration so a 50mm 4/3rds lens equals 100mm in 35mm terms".
    Not so. 50mm in 4/3rds is 50mm in 4/3rds format-period.
    I'm something of a linguist, and this is mincing words in my opinion. Sure 50mm in 4/3 is 50mm in 4/3... what of it? All that sounds like is some kind of "justification" of the 4/3 merits, which it doesn't need on grounds like this. people are still more familiar with the focal length of a 35mm, and since it doesn't seem like Canon, Nikon or any of the other 3:2 folks are switching over it's not like 4/3 terms will become the industry standard. So... what's so important about 4/3 terms being "true" in 4/3 terminological framework?

    Which is not to say that Olympus doesn't make a good product; they do. And maybe 4/3 will become cheaper and more practical, if so, good. But just because 4/3 has its own form factor doesn't mean a thing... I mean, who cares where the form factor is? It just doesn't strike me as important.
    Last edited by fionndruinne; 09-10-2007 at 11:42 PM.
    Nikon D40 + kit lens

    Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 D AF(...or not)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,056
    Quote Originally Posted by fionndruinne View Post
    I'm something of a linguist, and this is mincing words in my opinion. Sure 50mm in 4/3 is 50mm in 4/3... what of it?
    im thinking what i attempted to illustrate was that 50mm in 4/3rds is 100mm EFL

    Quote Originally Posted by fionndruinne
    All that sounds like is some kind of "justification" of the 4/3 merits, which it doesn't need on grounds like this. people are still more familiar with the focal length of a 35mm, and since it doesn't seem like Canon, Nikon or any of the other 3:2 folks are switching over it's not like 4/3 terms will become the industry standard. So... what's so important about 4/3 terms being "true" in 4/3 terminological framework?
    i dont disagree with that, hence the caveats.... about recognition of EFL

    Quote Originally Posted by fionndruinne
    Which is not to say that Olympus doesn't make a good product; they do. And maybe 4/3 will become cheaper and more practical, if so, good. But just because 4/3 has its own form factor doesn't mean a thing... I mean, who cares where the form factor is? It just doesn't strike me as important.
    well umm, if you dont care, why respond...
    Riley

    Pentax 110 auto SLR

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Riley
    well umm, if you dont care, why respond...
    Because I'm responding to the fact that I don't see the logic used. But don't take my above post as too harshly critical, it's not meant to be so. And sorry, I mistakenly quoted you before. Oops.
    Nikon D40 + kit lens

    Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 D AF(...or not)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,056
    no need to be sorry
    its all good
    Riley

    Pentax 110 auto SLR

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,364
    I would consider one of the 4/3 dslrs if they did not have Canon ISO 3200 performance at ISO 400.
    The fast and convenient lens lineup is promising.
    US Navy--Hooyah!

    Nikon D700/D300|17-35 f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8, Sigmalux, 80-200 f/2.8, 16 f/2.8 fisheye,

    Lots of flashes and Honl gear.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    461

    4/3rds: on its own

    Quote Originally Posted by Riley View Post
    the project named E-P1 now fairly certainly to be called E-3 will be released Oct 17.

    I have to agree that 4/3rds is indeed its own format, but there are a few necessary caveats.
    I propose the caveats are only there if one wants to cross compare 4/3rds with some other format.
    We still need to have comparative lens focal lengths, so there is a need to negotiate with 35mm EFL (equivalent focal length).
    Not true. 4/3rds is and is designed from the ground up as 4/3rds, not to be lightly (or even frivolously) compared to other small formats.
    And with that comes the usual 'crop factor' term, and again really only useful in 35mm comparisons. The actual crop factor is 1.92x however.
    You know the next statement is 100% true:
    4/3rds has no "crop factor" in that it cannot be used by any other format which makes the argument moot-if not superfluous.
    I do agree some will insist on making the invidious comparisons, but they will end up with equally superfluous data.
    The key differential is that the system doesnt crop lenses
    CORRECT! But the absolute most accurate way to say that is 4/3rds only uses 4/3rds lenses.
    (by using the centre portion with legacy glass) unless of course you choose to use OM or other lenses which is a by-product.
    No way I or most of us new to OLYMPUS DSLR cameras and lenses are going to delve into old fashioned lenses.

    As I noted, my overriding reason for choosing the 4/3rds system was rooted in the ultra fast glass... and a chance to rent and shoot LEICA glass.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Razr
    I propose the caveats are only there if one wants to cross compare 4/3rds with some other format.
    Sure... no one will want to compare 4/3 with, say, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony... any of the manufacturers which make up the vast majority of DSLRs sold and used. Just because people are far more likely to be familiar with either 35mm terms or the relevant crop factors (1.5x, 1.6x) than with 4/3, doesn't mean anything?
    Nikon D40 + kit lens

    Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 D AF(...or not)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    Not sure what the so called ultra fast glass is when the higher ISO performance leaves a lot to be desired, though.

    If you really would want fast glass f2.8 and f4 lenses on other DSLRs will give you more performance. The lower light focussing will be better than the current Olympus DSLRs, the higher ISOs will be much better usable.

    And rent Leica glass? Leica's famous lenses are not compatible with 4/3's mount. The few lenses that Leica has for the 4/3's are nothing magical, so it does not really add something to the platform over other platforms.

    And just because you cut off the sides of the photo (3/2) to make 4/3, why would all of a sudden a comparison to other DSLRs be impossible?
    The crop factor is a good way of determining what focal lengths will mean, and just how small the sensor of the 4/3's platform is.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •