[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

And you'll find that then noise then is identical despite the higher photon current per pixel for 4/3. You may also think in terms of binning four pixels into one.

I'd like to continue the discussion here, but looks like not everyone shares the interest, so let me ping you offline. I get your point now but I have one more question

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Olympus & Panasonic combined had LESS market share (DSLR) than Pentax, and yet both tooled up for what looks like a very successful venture.

What I am wondering is how interesting m4/3 would be if some quality compacts would come up. I would imagine the majority of the market is into P&S and doesn't care about interchangeable lenses.

[falconeye]

No matter what you say[...]

dnas, your case is hopeless.

Your inability to listen reminds me of only one other case: RH.
In comparison however, I wonder if RH wasn't actually a very comprehensive guy You just lost your privilege to discuss with me.

After only 39 posts in this forum, you manage to be on my ignore list. Congratulations.


And now I say: No matter what you say, it doesn't matter because you just disappeared from my universe.

PLOPP

[NewRsoul]

Just to add a thought that popped into my head!

I was looking at Auto110 items on Ebay, and up popped an 'adapter' for Auto110 lenses to uFT, which got me thinking - If others can build an adapter (and it quotes will focus to infinity) and IF it covers the image circle required (big if?) then why can they use this as a basis for a ILC of some discript?

Peter

link. Adapter Pentax Auto 110 - OLYMPUS PEN E-P1 E-P2 E-PL1 on eBay (end time 02-Jun-10 13:30:51 BST)

[dnas]

dnas, your case is hopeless.

Your inability to listen reminds me of only one other case: RH.
In comparison however, I wonder if RH wasn't actually a very comprehensive guy You just lost your privilege to discuss with me.

After only 39 posts in this forum, you manage to be on my ignore list. Congratulations.


And now I say: No matter what you say, it doesn't matter because you just disappeared from my universe.

PLOPP

I notice that falconeye is "attacking the man" rather than "attacking the discussion". I raised points which he didn't want to discuss. I posted links that he didn't look at, let alone discuss.
I have listened to him, and raised my own counter points. If I think something is wrong, should I just listen and not disagree?
Anyway, good luck to him.

[dnas]

What I am wondering is how interesting m4/3 would be if some quality compacts would come up. I would imagine the majority of the market is into P&S and doesn't care about interchangeable lenses.

That's an interesting point......

I suppose by "quality compacts", you mean larger sensors, like on the Panasonic LX3, and the Canon G11? Or the even larger sensor on the Sigma DP1?

The disadvantage would be the lack of ability to have a zoom of more than 4x - 5x.

The market in Japanese likes micro 4/3, but we have to attempt to understand why. Are people wanting to upgrade from P&S to interchangeable lens cameras, without the large size of a DSLR? The Panasonic G1/GH1/G2 are clearly styled as very small DSLR size and shape. But the Olympus E-P1, E-P2 and E-PL1, plus the Panasonic GF1 are small enough with pancake lens, to be pocketed in a coat pocket. So do people want the convenience of pocketing the camera, but with the option of fitting larger lenses when they want to?

[falconeye]

If others can build an adapter (and it quotes will focus to infinity) and IF it covers the image circle required (big if?)

When µFT was launched, I probably was the first to mention that the Auto110 form factor is what µFT ought to be. It even has a mirror...

The µ in µFT should be spelled 'midi', not 'micro'.

Yes, the FT and Auto110 image circles are the same.

P.S.
I have to embedd the image from the auction (thanks for the link) because it just again shows how large µFT cameras really are, how big the opportunity to compete with P&S they missed really is.

[IMGWIDELEFT]http://george-orwell.us/micro/adapter_pentax_110_j2.jpg[/IMGWIDELEFT]

---

Last edited by falconeye; 05-05-2010 at 06:41 AM.

[aliquis]

While I prefer standards and therefor would had been happy with it all stop with micro four-thirds and have all the brands join Samsung have already shown that you can make a camera of similar size with an APS-C-sensor, which in that case may make more sense.

Multiple mounts suck however, this was a great opportunity do drop them

(And well, I guess Panasonic and Olympus have shown that you can get "as good" pixel performance with a smaller sensor.)

IMHO Panasonic got a lead against everyone right now.

[gazonk]

While I prefer standards and therefor would had been happy with it all stop with micro four-thirds and have all the brands join Samsung have already shown that you can make a camera of similar size with an APS-C-sensor, which in that case may make more sense.

The NX10 isn't really that compact, it sort of misses the point. And I don't really understand the point of the 38 mm lens mount of m43 - that's bigger than the 37 mm of the Asahiflex 35 mm camera!

A really bold move from Pentax would be to create an APS-C camera with a short flange distance and a mount diameter in the 25mm - 30mm range. Maybe they could even consider making a somewhat larger flange distance than m43 - with a flange distance of 27-30 mm it should be possible to even make real DSLRs with the new mount - and they could sell the super compact lenses to the m43 crowd! Think of a real pentaprism camera with LX-like retro looks - but the whole camera shrunk by the crop factor 1.5 in every direction

[falconeye]

A really bold move from Pentax would be to create an APS-C camera with a short flange distance and a mount diameter in the 25mm - 30mm range. Maybe they could even consider making a somewhat larger flange distance than m43 - with a flange distance of 27-30 mm it should be possible to even make real DSLRs with the new mount - and they could sell the super compact lenses to the m43 crowd! Think of a real pentaprism camera with LX-like retro looks - but the whole camera shrunk by the crop factor 1.5 in every direction

Yes, either this or put an FF sensor into a mount meant for it.

Would do you think is more likely to happen?

Anyway, the current APS-C style SLRs only make sense within a camera system offering both APSC and FF.

[gazonk]

Yes, either this or put an FF sensor into a mount meant for it.

Would do you think is more likely to happen?

Which I think is more likely to happen? I think a K-7-style body with an FF sensor is quite probable. On the other hand, Hoya-Pentax may decide that getting into the small camera market is more urgent. And if they approach that market with a significantly smaller mount AND a larger sensor, and manage to make the first camera with the new mount visibly smaller than the E-P1 and GF1, they may grab market share.

And did I mention it should come with a 28 mm pancake?

[gazonk]

...and btw. there will initially be two new cameras, the M-x for the DSLR downsizers and the all automatic M-e for the P&S upgraders ;-)

(edit: in case you didn't see the smiley and think I have any substantial information - I'm just dreaming)

[gazonk]

I hope I got the scaling right: Here's how the LX compares size-wise with the GF1 and the E-P1, and how a LX scaled by the crop factor of the K-7 sensor would compare to them:

[falconeye]

I hope I got the scaling right: Here's how the LX compares size-wise with the GF1 and the E-P1, and how a LX scaled by the crop factor of the K-7 sensor would compare to them

That's an amazing size comparison. Thanks for it.

1/1.53 is smaller than one would guess

If you now could add the scaling to actual FT size and a real Auto110 ... :ugh:

[dnas]

Here are some comparative sizes, a superzoom P&S, a micro 4/3 G1 and a Nikon D70:



The micro 4/3 is more similar in size to the superzoom P&S.

And with a Pentax K10D. (The G1 has a Nikon 85mm F1.8 on it)



The GF1 is about the same size as the G1, minus the EVF bulge at the top, and the hand hold on the side. So yes, it IS quite a bit smaller than a DSLR.