On Fri, Aug 17, 2012, at 02:07 PM, Moose wrote:
> Is it possible that Moose hit it on the head about the need to move
> already built lenses?
>
> Referring back to his lectures on the economics of manufacturing, the R&D
> for the E-5 and for the sensor system in the
> E-M5 are already spent and allocated. If the tooling for the E-5 is still
> in place or storage, making a slightly updated
> E-5 body with the serious new sensor system could be quite low
> investment.
This would be just fine for a dork like me.
> It would be interesting to see a new pro body from the ground up, I
> suppose. But my imagination doesn't see what there
> is to improve on most aspects of the E-5 other than the inadequate sensor
> system. (If you have an E-5, and love the
> sensor system and IQ, I'm not talking about you, but about the pros and
> serious amateurs who stayed away in droves.)
Are the pros and "serious" amateurs not staying away now? Oh yes, the
OM-D. Will that bring them to the E-system?
I am curious as to your opinion of Dawid's latest post and his
assessment of the E-5. It is always so difficult to determine what is
going to bring to awareness anyone not willing to see. Not referring to
you, I hope you realize, but people who just don't get off the bell
curve from time to time.
I guess the enticement would have to be something that has the scent of
the OM-D about it. Electronic VF? Similar OM modeling? Similar
feature set? All of above?
> Unless they can put it on a serious diet. I know, I know, SERIOUS
> cameras, the ones PROs use, are big and heavy. Yes,
> that has been true for a long, long time, like since the beginning. But
> will it hold, in the face of recent developments?
Maybe. In the waning days of OM, the lenses overwhelmed the bodies,
which were really perfect with the f2.8 variants. Sort of a mismatch.
Same thing in the offing with 4/3? Not too much point in a super light
body with big hunky SHG glass. Personally, I'd like to hope that there
is a future for optical viewfinders, SLRs, interchangeable screens, etc.
I'm inclined to hope for your minimalist revision with maybe an
OM-D-ish restyling (if not resizing). If the OM-7 were the size of a
OM-4T with a MD, I'd be tickled.
> And how true will it be in the near future of the portions of the pro and
> serious amateur market that a new, high end
> 4/3 body might have a chance with?
>
> I doubt most pros LIKE hauling around a bunch of big, heavy equipment.
> They have done so for the simple reason that
> that's what has delivered quality images and physical reliability. We've
> already seen the shift when the 5D (and the
> later Nikon equivalent) appeared.
>
> All will be revealed ...
I'm kind of excited that there is *something* that will apparently be
revealed.
Joel W.
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Accessible with your email software
or over the web
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|