Interview with Olympus Product and Marketing Manager

The new 16mp Live MOS image sensor produces lower noise at High ISO and boasts Dynamic Range that is a 1/3 improvement over current sensors. Combined with an advanced TruePic VI image processor, the results ensure superb color fidelity , at high resolution, sensitivity and colour accuracy.

It makes one wonder how they're getting 1/3 better dynamic range.

 

Wha.. wait...

So in other words, even if they didn't make a PDAF solution they DID make a C-AF solution? Great start! That means that once all the native lens collection is complete, we will have fast S-AF and C-AF with native lenses allowing us to completely replace a full DSLR system. And speaking of completing that lens lineup...

So they are considering every lens right up to the super-telephotos that were available in the Four-Thirds lineup. Nothing I didn't already know, but it's nice to hear it straight out of the horse's mouth (not saying that Toshi is a horse, but you know... xD ).

A couple more points of interest...

Exciting development here, of course...

Good to hear it confirmed that the weather sealing is the same as the Best-In-Class weather sealing system found on the E-1, E-3, and E-5. Again, nothing I didn't already expect but it's good to hear it straight out of the horse's mouth.

 

It uses the same 35 point focus system as the E-PM1, but it has improved 3D tracking for moving subjects? This is the part I'm interested about. It's a pain in the arse to track anything that moves with CDAF. I wonder if this will be comparable to the Nikon 1 system?

 

The focus peaking thing sort of pisses me off. It reminds me of the focus-assist lamp Olympus refused to employ until the most recent round of cameras, even though it was standard on nearly every P&S and probably cost them about $5 to engineer in.

I'm not an engineer, but I can't imagine focus peaking would be that hard to implement--didn't Sony even do it as a firmware update? With CDAF systems you know what's in focus, so why is it hard to highlight those areas with peaking? And the argument that Olympus prefers magnified focus is just silly because that's in no way incompatible with peaking. Why not give the user both?

 

It could be a pure marketing decision. Olympus probably doesn't want legacy glass to be that useful so you're forced to buy native AF lenses.

 

That's a very good point! I don't see any other reason for not adding focus peaking feature to its cameras.

 

Because a new user might think the red pixels mean the camera is defective? :tongue:

 

as a former canon user, I asked the same thing of some of my DSLRs...

 

"CS: Will peak focus be coming soon?
TT: Maybe in future. I feel that magnified focusing is still better"

ME: Maybe in the future Olympus will have a new Product and Marketing Manager. I feel that the current one is a moron.

 

magnified live view is a far better user experience compared to focus peaking.

 

hmm... you obviously don't understand what product marketing is about - its about promoting the key features the company decided to include in their product and hammering home a consistent message.

No product manager is never going to say during a launch that they could have done something different.

I wish everybody would shut up about focus peaking...most people hadn't even heard of it 6 months ago and now everybody is speaking as if it is a must have technology.... a panacea for all focussing problems.... its not.... if you want that feature so much then buy a nex...


K

 

Thanks Kevin, and let's not forget the use of a viewfinder for focusing... This is the way we've done it for so many decades, and yet it's now somehow an "unusable" method against focus peaking? Focus Peaking is not a new technology, it's been around for a long time in the world of videography, while viewfinders have always been the choice of photographers (sometimes with aids like split focusing screens, sometimes without). There's a reason for that... as much as people rave about Focus Peaking on the NEX, and as much as I think it's a worthwhile technology to add to still photography, the fastest method of focus I know is still to look through a high-quality optical or high-resolution electronic viewfinder, and snap to focus with experience and technique - along with trust in myself. This is an age-old method which can't even be used on a Sony NEX except for the very latest high-end body (the NEX-7, of course).

Focus Peaking is great, but as you say it hardly makes or breaks a system. I always thought it was a "good idea", but the more I hear it ranted about the less I want to even see it in our cameras anymore, lol.  

 

If they think magnification is still better, they should have at least added picture-in-picture magnification like the Lumix series. Even in the NEX, the magnification view would exit at half-shutter press.

 

I think people want focus peaking because the current MF system is inefficient and is screaming out for some kind of help.

On my old film SLR, I could just raise the camera, verify exposure, twist the barrel and shoot.

Now I raise the camera, hit the magnify button to bring up the green box, hit it again to magnify, hunt for my subject, get angry because it won't go <5x, rotate the barrel, rack it back and forth until my brain realizes that the grainy image isn't going to get any sharper, shrug my shoulders, hit the button to demagnify while hopefully keeping the camera the same distance from the subject, maybe go for AE lock, recompose hurriedly before something moves, and shoot.

Then I go to adjust ISO or EV comp with my 4-way buttons only to realize I'm still in pre-magnify mode just moving that little green box around on the screen. I sometimes hit magnify a third time to demagnify if I can't keep my grip while pressing OK with my thumb.

I'm getting better at this little dance, but it sure seems like it could be more elegant. Perhaps I'm doing it wrong? (really, I'd like to know)

 

While reading your post, it sounded like you were describing me! I'm probably never going to get used to it though. The funny thing is, it looks like the new Key Line art filter works almost exactly as focus peaking, where edges are highlighted/exaggerated. I mean, the algorithm is there! It just seems they used that algorithm, turned it into something kiddy, and put it in a pro body. Just lots of things about the OM-D seem so contradictive

 

Ah, the irony... I guess the solution is to not use tracking for things that move!