Olympus Officially Ending the 4/3 Product Line

Winder · 03-10-2017, 04:50 PM

In memoriam: Olympus brings down the curtain on the Four Thirds system: Digital Photography Review

I sold my E-3 almost 10 years ago when it was obvious then it was a dead system. I hope that ending 4/3 will free up Olympus to develop a FF 4/3 mirrorless so they can finally bring all of those FF mirrorless lenses that they have patented into production.

Kunzite · 03-11-2017, 01:49 AM

What is a FF 4/3?

p38arover · 03-11-2017, 02:11 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

What is a FF 4/3?

Equivalent to the old Olympus half frame 35mm?

**Rondec** · 03-11-2017, 03:44 AM

It always seemed like the four thirds cameras were pretty pricey and very much so if you looked at their f2 zooms.

Winder · 03-11-2017, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

What is a FF 4/3?

A sensor with a diagonal of 43mm but in the 4/3 format. The image circle of what we call FF is basically 43mm with some variation from different manufacturers. The mirrorless lenses that Olympus has been filing patents on project a 43mm image circle. The question is, is Olympus working on lenses or the Sony FE or a new larger 4/3 mirrorless. Olympus needs to go larger if they want to regain market share.

**Rondec** · 03-11-2017, 07:29 AM

Originally posted by Winder

A sensor with a diagonal of 43mm but in the 4/3 format. The image circle of what we call FF is basically 43mm with some variation from different manufacturers. The mirrorless lenses that Olympus has been filing patents on project a 43mm image circle. The question is, is Olympus working on lenses or the Sony FE or a new larger 4/3 mirrorless. Olympus needs to go larger if they want to regain market share.

Would they need a new mount to do that? I guess they would need a bunch of new lenses anyway if they went that route.

Winder · 03-11-2017, 07:58 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

Would they need a new mount to do that? I guess they would need a bunch of new lenses anyway if they went that route.

Yes. The lenses in the patents are for a larger mount, but it isn't clear if they are for the Sony FE mount or a new mount. They may have been part of the Sony/Olympus deal that has since been dissolved or they might be part of a new system that Olympus is working on. Sony and Fuji have shot up to the #1 and #2 position in mirrorless sales. Olympus and Panasonic keep falling. Olympus needs to do something and really they need a larger format system. I think they will continue with 4/3 format since it appeal to a lot of people. 645 is 4/3 so adding a FF 4/3 option between M4/3 and 645 works. It would be 4x larger than their current m4/3.

Kunzite · 03-11-2017, 08:18 AM

Originally posted by Winder

A sensor with a diagonal of 43mm but in the 4/3 format. The image circle of what we call FF is basically 43mm with some variation from different manufacturers. The mirrorless lenses that Olympus has been filing patents on project a 43mm image circle. The question is, is Olympus working on lenses or the Sony FE or a new larger 4/3 mirrorless. Olympus needs to go larger if they want to regain market share.

All right, thanks.
I don't see them introducing a new mount (what would happen with the current one?), but who knows...

**Rondec** · 03-11-2017, 09:41 AM

Olympus is in a tough state. The price of larger sensor cameras (APS-C and full frame and even MF) have been dropping. At the same time, every company needs a flagship that they can get 1100 or 1200 for.

And consumers are smarter too. A 300 mm lens really is still a 300mm lens, regardless of the format you mount it on. You do get a little bit of digital zoom with higher density pixels, but it isn't the 2x difference that the micro four thirds used to bandy about. Still, as a walk around camera with nice sized glass, micro four thirds is hard to beat.

reh321 · 03-11-2017, 09:56 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

....
You do get a little bit of digital zoom with higher density pixels, but it isn't the 2x difference that the micro four thirds used to bandy about....

Are you sure of that??

I did considerable research before I purchased my Q-7 in Dec 2014 and my K-30 in June 2015, including putting together a spreadsheet. That spreadsheet shows the diagonal of a FF sensor to be 43.3mm, while the diagonal of an MFT sensor is 21.6mm, which looks like 2:1 within rounding issues to me.

**Rondec** · 03-11-2017, 11:07 AM

Originally posted by reh321

Are you sure of that??

I did considerable research before I purchased my Q-7 in Dec 2014 and my K-30 in June 2015, including putting together a spreadsheet. That spreadsheet shows the diagonal of a FF sensor to be 43.3mm, while the diagonal of an MFT sensor is 21.6mm, which looks like 2:1 within rounding issues to me.

But the point is that if you are shooting with a K-1 and crop to APS-C size sensor, you have what, 15 megapixels? Basically a K5. The K3 gives a little extra pixel density over that, but it is not any 1.5x. The crop factor for MFT is 2x, it is just that that doesn't really make the lenses longer and you could easily crop a full frame image down to a four thirds frame. The only extra reach you get is whatever digital zoom you get from the fact that the pixels are closer together on smaller sensors than on full frame.

wildman · 03-11-2017, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by Winder

Olympus needs to go larger if they want to regain market share.

I really wonder, in the long run, if bigger is better is where the camera market is going.to be in, say, 5 years.
Just my own subjective feeling but I get the sense that the next generation may be moving to smaller, lighter, faster more responsive and sophisticated gear.
Sheer raw visual technical excellence, while important, is not everything especially for the next generation.

Winder · 03-11-2017, 07:38 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by wildman

I really wonder, in the long run, if bigger is better is where the camera market is going.to be in, say, 5 years.
Just my own subjective feeling but I get the sense that the next generation may be moving to smaller, lighter, faster more responsive and sophisticated gear.
Sheer raw visual technical excellence, while important, is not everything especially for the next generation.

Bigger has been better since the dawn of photography. Small cameras have always been about practicality. The move to smaller formats as been due to limitations in technology and high costs. Technology is over coming those limitations and costs are falling making cameras based on larger sensors more affordable. Cameras are getting smaller. Look at the Sony A7 series or the Fuji GFX. The GFX and the new Hassy have reduced MF to the size of a DSLR. The A7 line puts a FF sensor in a camera body that is smaller than the Pentax K-3. Cameras are getting smaller, but the sensors are getting larger.

Sheer raw technical excellence has never really been that important. Look at the work of Henri Cartier-Bresson,Walker Evans, or Vivian Maier.

wildman · 03-11-2017, 08:47 PM

Originally posted by Winder

Bigger has been better since the dawn of photography. Small cameras have always been about practicality.

I lack your sense of certainty - time will tell...

reh321 · 03-11-2017, 10:11 PM

Originally posted by Winder

Bigger has been better since the dawn of photography. Small cameras have always been about practicality. The move to smaller formats as been due to limitations in technology and high costs. Technology is over coming those limitations and costs are falling making cameras based on larger sensors more affordable. Cameras are getting smaller. Look at the Sony A7 series or the Fuji GFX. The GFX and the new Hassy have reduced MF to the size of a DSLR. The A7 line puts a FF sensor in a camera body that is smaller than the Pentax K-3. Cameras are getting smaller, but the sensors are getting larger.

Sheer raw technical excellence has never really been that important. Look at the work of Henri Cartier-Bresson,Walker Evans, or Vivian Maier.

Your first and last sentences could duel.

03-11-2017, 01:46 PM	#12
wildman Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Flyover America Posts: 4,469	Originally posted by Winder Olympus needs to go larger if they want to regain market share. I really wonder, in the long run, if bigger is better is where the camera market is going.to be in, say, 5 years. Just my own subjective feeling but I get the sense that the next generation may be moving to smaller, lighter, faster more responsive and sophisticated gear. Sheer raw visual technical excellence, while important, is not everything especially for the next generation. Last edited by wildman; 03-11-2017 at 01:58 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
You command line, I command line, we all command line for Linux. (^o^ ) <3	The Squirrel Mafia	General Talk	74	10-27-2018 06:20 AM
Olympus E-PL2 Officially Released	jct us101	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	23	02-27-2011 02:37 AM
NEW PRODUCT: Canon, Olympus, and Nikon unveil App-e-ture: the app store for your digi	johnmflores	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	3	04-06-2010 10:58 PM
On-line product manuals	tpeace	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	3	06-18-2008 11:15 PM

03-10-2017, 04:50 PM	#1
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Olympus Officially Ending the 4/3 Product Line In memoriam: Olympus brings down the curtain on the Four Thirds system: Digital Photography Review I sold my E-3 almost 10 years ago when it was obvious then it was a dead system. I hope that ending 4/3 will free up Olympus to develop a FF 4/3 mirrorless so they can finally bring all of those FF mirrorless lenses that they have patented into production.

03-11-2017, 01:49 AM	#2
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	What is a FF 4/3?

03-11-2017, 02:11 AM	#3
p38arover Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Western Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,084	Originally posted by Kunzite What is a FF 4/3? Equivalent to the old Olympus half frame 35mm?

03-11-2017, 03:44 AM	#4
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	It always seemed like the four thirds cameras were pretty pricey and very much so if you looked at their f2 zooms.

03-11-2017, 07:15 AM	#5
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617 Original Poster	Originally posted by Kunzite What is a FF 4/3? A sensor with a diagonal of 43mm but in the 4/3 format. The image circle of what we call FF is basically 43mm with some variation from different manufacturers. The mirrorless lenses that Olympus has been filing patents on project a 43mm image circle. The question is, is Olympus working on lenses or the Sony FE or a new larger 4/3 mirrorless. Olympus needs to go larger if they want to regain market share.

03-11-2017, 07:29 AM	#6
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by Winder A sensor with a diagonal of 43mm but in the 4/3 format. The image circle of what we call FF is basically 43mm with some variation from different manufacturers. The mirrorless lenses that Olympus has been filing patents on project a 43mm image circle. The question is, is Olympus working on lenses or the Sony FE or a new larger 4/3 mirrorless. Olympus needs to go larger if they want to regain market share. Would they need a new mount to do that? I guess they would need a bunch of new lenses anyway if they went that route.

03-11-2017, 07:58 AM	#7
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617 Original Poster	Originally posted by Rondec Would they need a new mount to do that? I guess they would need a bunch of new lenses anyway if they went that route. Yes. The lenses in the patents are for a larger mount, but it isn't clear if they are for the Sony FE mount or a new mount. They may have been part of the Sony/Olympus deal that has since been dissolved or they might be part of a new system that Olympus is working on. Sony and Fuji have shot up to the #1 and #2 position in mirrorless sales. Olympus and Panasonic keep falling. Olympus needs to do something and really they need a larger format system. I think they will continue with 4/3 format since it appeal to a lot of people. 645 is 4/3 so adding a FF 4/3 option between M4/3 and 645 works. It would be 4x larger than their current m4/3.

03-11-2017, 08:18 AM	#8
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Winder A sensor with a diagonal of 43mm but in the 4/3 format. The image circle of what we call FF is basically 43mm with some variation from different manufacturers. The mirrorless lenses that Olympus has been filing patents on project a 43mm image circle. The question is, is Olympus working on lenses or the Sony FE or a new larger 4/3 mirrorless. Olympus needs to go larger if they want to regain market share. All right, thanks. I don't see them introducing a new mount (what would happen with the current one?), but who knows...

03-11-2017, 09:41 AM	#9
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Olympus is in a tough state. The price of larger sensor cameras (APS-C and full frame and even MF) have been dropping. At the same time, every company needs a flagship that they can get 1100 or 1200 for. And consumers are smarter too. A 300 mm lens really is still a 300mm lens, regardless of the format you mount it on. You do get a little bit of digital zoom with higher density pixels, but it isn't the 2x difference that the micro four thirds used to bandy about. Still, as a walk around camera with nice sized glass, micro four thirds is hard to beat.

03-11-2017, 09:56 AM	#10
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by Rondec .... You do get a little bit of digital zoom with higher density pixels, but it isn't the 2x difference that the micro four thirds used to bandy about.... Are you sure of that?? I did considerable research before I purchased my Q-7 in Dec 2014 and my K-30 in June 2015, including putting together a spreadsheet. That spreadsheet shows the diagonal of a FF sensor to be 43.3mm, while the diagonal of an MFT sensor is 21.6mm, which looks like 2:1 within rounding issues to me.

03-11-2017, 11:07 AM	#11
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by reh321 Are you sure of that?? I did considerable research before I purchased my Q-7 in Dec 2014 and my K-30 in June 2015, including putting together a spreadsheet. That spreadsheet shows the diagonal of a FF sensor to be 43.3mm, while the diagonal of an MFT sensor is 21.6mm, which looks like 2:1 within rounding issues to me. But the point is that if you are shooting with a K-1 and crop to APS-C size sensor, you have what, 15 megapixels? Basically a K5. The K3 gives a little extra pixel density over that, but it is not any 1.5x. The crop factor for MFT is 2x, it is just that that doesn't really make the lenses longer and you could easily crop a full frame image down to a four thirds frame. The only extra reach you get is whatever digital zoom you get from the fact that the pixels are closer together on smaller sensors than on full frame.

03-11-2017, 07:38 PM - 1 Like	#13
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617 Original Poster	Originally posted by wildman I really wonder, in the long run, if bigger is better is where the camera market is going.to be in, say, 5 years. Just my own subjective feeling but I get the sense that the next generation may be moving to smaller, lighter, faster more responsive and sophisticated gear. Sheer raw visual technical excellence, while important, is not everything especially for the next generation. Bigger has been better since the dawn of photography. Small cameras have always been about practicality. The move to smaller formats as been due to limitations in technology and high costs. Technology is over coming those limitations and costs are falling making cameras based on larger sensors more affordable. Cameras are getting smaller. Look at the Sony A7 series or the Fuji GFX. The GFX and the new Hassy have reduced MF to the size of a DSLR. The A7 line puts a FF sensor in a camera body that is smaller than the Pentax K-3. Cameras are getting smaller, but the sensors are getting larger. Sheer raw technical excellence has never really been that important. Look at the work of Henri Cartier-Bresson,Walker Evans, or Vivian Maier.

03-11-2017, 08:47 PM	#14
wildman Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Flyover America Posts: 4,469	Originally posted by Winder Bigger has been better since the dawn of photography. Small cameras have always been about practicality. I lack your sense of certainty - time will tell...

03-11-2017, 10:11 PM	#15
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by Winder Bigger has been better since the dawn of photography. Small cameras have always been about practicality. The move to smaller formats as been due to limitations in technology and high costs. Technology is over coming those limitations and costs are falling making cameras based on larger sensors more affordable. Cameras are getting smaller. Look at the Sony A7 series or the Fuji GFX. The GFX and the new Hassy have reduced MF to the size of a DSLR. The A7 line puts a FF sensor in a camera body that is smaller than the Pentax K-3. Cameras are getting smaller, but the sensors are getting larger. Sheer raw technical excellence has never really been that important. Look at the work of Henri Cartier-Bresson,Walker Evans, or Vivian Maier. Your first and last sentences could duel.