Rumour: E5 successor in 2013

Discussion in 'Micro 4/3 News and Rumors' started by Nepherim, Dec 20, 2012.

  1. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Vassilios
    I still don't know what they have in mind... What would make sense would be to introduce a "pro" version in the OM-D line by mid-2013 and offer an advanced FT to m4/3 converter along the way.

    If they announce in a clear way how they intent to do it, perhaps this would lead to a new lease of life for older FT lenses. I know of a lot of exclusive :43: users (meaning, no prior FT ownership) that would like to have lenses like the 12-60mm or the 50-200mm available to our system. If Oly would guarantee that those lenses could AF at the same speed levels as the average native :43: lens, that would make them desirable to many customers. I don't paricularly care that they'd be heavier than a native :43: lens; they are still quite small compared to equivalent DSLR lenses.

    Let's face it: Oly isn't going to migrate a host of FT lenses to :43:. Simply, not enough resources for that. Having a high performance converter option could instantly enrich our system by at least half a dozen splendid lenses and give Oly valuable time to invest in other areas.
     
  2. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Dara
  3. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Vassilios
    Could you change it as a mod? Because this thread isn't getting the attention it should, IMHO.

    Adding to my previous comment, and this is relevant also to the other thread you started: it seems to me that Olympus waited until they had the technology to implement "full" FT lens compatibility, without resorting to a solution like the A-mount adapter for Sony NEX. In other words, they waited for on sensor PD-AF to become sufficiently fast and accurate :confused: (a large question mark here).

    The other observations still stand: currently, comparing test videos of adapted FT lenses with my experience with DSLRs, speed is aprox. the same when a DSLR focuses native lenses using CD-AF ("live view"), which makes sense, since it's the exact same situation. If the new "pro" camera achieves adapted FT speeds in the ballpark of current :43: lenses, we are not going to see fast :43: zooms from Olympus any time soon, at least until current FT lens stock is exchausted. This move buys them time, to develop other :43: products, even expand to larger systems with Sony cooperation (e.g. Zuiko lenses for E and A mount, or a possible new mirrorless mount).
     
  4. Henk

    Henk Mu-43 Regular

    197
    Aug 18, 2010
    the Netherlands
    I wonder why it is not possible to make a chipped adapter which converts CD-AF signals to PD-AF signals vice-versa. You could have the best of both worlds: the accuracy of CD-AF and the speed of PD-AF?

    That said, I find I have a higher keeper rate of the GH2/ LUMIX G VARIO
    100-300mm combo than I used to have with the E-3/ ZUIKO DIGITAL
    ED 50-200mm combo. Just because of a more accurate autofocus system.

    The 50-200mm (and my other HG and SHG 4/3 lenses) are only used in MF mode on the GH2.If ever.:smile:
     
  5. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I have no idea what Olympus is up to here, but if they plan to release an E-6, or whatever, that is compatible via adapter with m4/3s lenses I think it would be a great decision. I know the conventional wisdom is to make 4/3s lenses perform better on m4/3s bodies, but the size proposition becomes an issue, especially when you add in an adapter. On the other hand, adding an adapter and an m4/3s lens to a DSLR-type body is less of an issue. Those adapted lenses would need to work on the E-6 as they do on m4/3s bodies.

    I can see an E-6 scaled back a bit, to be closer to GH3 in size. Still weather-sealed. Gives those who prefer DSLR interface an Oly option. Gives sports/action shooters an option that allows them to use their existing lenses and not need a totally different system.

    I'd be all over that camera, and waving goodbye to my Canon gear very quickly.
     
  6. Henk

    Henk Mu-43 Regular

    197
    Aug 18, 2010
    the Netherlands
    I wonder why it is not possible to make a chipped adapter which converts CD-AF signals to PD-AF signals vice-versa. You could have the best of both worlds: the accuracy of CD-AF and the speed of PD-AF?

    That said, I find I have a higher keeper rate of the GH2/ LUMIX G VARIO
    100-300mm combo than I used to have with the E-3/ ZUIKO DIGITAL
    ED 50-200mm combo. Just because of a more accurate autofocus system.

    The 50-200mm (and my other HG and SHG 4/3 lenses) are only used in MF mode on the GH2.If ever.:smile:
     
  7. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    Given register distances, you would need it to be able to mount m4/3 natively, and have an adapter to mount 4/3. Same as we do now, so I am not sure what the difference will be. Bigger body, or better PDAF conversion (or possibly using PDAF, and converting the CAF m4/3's?). Or maybe there is some kind of screw-in section that allows the mounting post (or sensor)to move between 4/3 and m4/3 flange distances? I thought the big "thing" with 4/3 was still the optical prism and that is why the distance is shorter now. How would you put a mirror and still have ~20mm register?
     
  8. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Vassilios
    It's funny that you mention speed, because just the other day we had some unofficial AF speed "competition" with my gf: her D5100 vs my OM-D.

    The Oly (even with 12-50 kit zoom) had a comfortable upper hand on the Nikon every time; we are talking a moderately lit living room here. What I'm saying is, CD-AF is now really fast, both on Olympus and Panasonic implementation. PD-AF is still better for moving targets. But the point here is, older lenses are not optimized for CD-AF.

    It's not "difficult" to make the adapter you mention, Sony did it for NEX by using a translucent mirror, like on their SLT cameras. This has the PD sensors on board and, of course, all the lens connections.

    Users say it is quite efficient, but it's bulky and adds weight. I believe on sensor PD-AF technology should be solid enough by next year, to offer the same level of efficiency.
     
  9. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Dara
    The issue isn't signals. The issue is the motors in the lenses.

    CDAF is an iterative process. The lens is trying to move the focus to the distance of maximum contrast. To do so, it must overshoot that point, then readjust back, overshooting it in the other direction. This process repeats many times, but each time the adjustments are smaller, so that you converge on correct focus.

    To do this quickly, the focus motor in the lens must be able to very quickly make lots of back and forth adjustments. This is unlike with PDAF, where the motor makes a much smaller number of adjustments, and usually all in one direction.

    The main reason why CDAF is slow with older lenses is that the motors can't perform this 'dance' as quickly as one newer lenses because they aren't designed for these sorts of repeated adjustments in different directions. The lens design plays a role too - larger, heavier focusing elements are simply much harder to shift back and forth quickly. I don't think there's anything that better signaling will help. Short of redesigning the lens motors and focusing elements, the only solution is to somehow implement PDAF in the body (or adapter via a mirror as Sony has done).

    As somebody pointed out in the other thread, the Sony solution won't work directly because there's not enough space for a full mirror in the adapter. Perhaps some sort of a truncated mirror...
     
    • Like Like x 3
  10. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Vassilios
    I don't understand this. The NEX system has the shorter flange distance of any system, IIRC. But a similar design for :43: would be rather smaller anyway; Sony's system has to deal with lenses designed for APS-C and FF, I guess with FT lenses it would be much less bulky. We are talking a fixed pellicle mirror, not a moving one, right? But, I'd take on sensor PD-AF anytime, instead.
     
  11. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I'm going to answer all of that by just saying that I am clueless about this stuff and should not have posted in the first place! :smile:
     
  12. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Dara
    In the Sony design, the mirror is sensor-sized, so for a m4/3 it would be 17.3x13mm. It has to be at an angle to bounce some of the light back to the AF sensor in the adapter. But once you angle it sufficiently to reach the AF sensor, it will end up sticking out well beyond the adapter.

    lead-sony.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Henk

    Henk Mu-43 Regular

    197
    Aug 18, 2010
    the Netherlands
    Oh, I wasn't thinking of an adaptor with a mirror. Only a chip with software that translates the CD-AF algorithm to the PD-AF algorythm vice versa and uses the sensor CD of the camera.

    I know that native mFT lenses on a mFT body focus faster than FT lenses on a FT body so I think it's only to keep the owners of SHG and HG FT glass on board that Olympus may develop a hybrid model.
     
  14. Omega

    Omega Mu-43 Regular

    62
    Oct 3, 2012
    Came here to show exactly this picture. Although I'm wondering how it would work considering that SLT technology from Sony is only available to....Sony.
     
  15. DonParrot

    DonParrot Mu-43 Regular

    71
    Oct 7, 2011
    Well, I assume you never used FT lenses?
    If you had, you wouldn't think that this was the case.
    Only two of the µFT lenses - the PannyLeica Summilux 25 1.4 and the M.Zuiko 75 1.8 - play in the same league as the FT HG lenses, let alone the SHG range, so offering all the µFT camp the chance of making use of these wonderful lenses takes the entire system to a clearly higher level.


    To date, FT was hampered by its inferior, always outdated sensors and µFT by its small range of really great lenses. The 'One Beautiful System' will solve both these problems at one go: Fantastic cameras equipped with an excellent sensor and combined with some of the most outstanding lenses money can buy - the future looks bright.

    Still, I hope Oly have found a way to quickly AF their FT lenses on µFT cameras without having to use a huge, ugly SLT adapter as the one used by Sony. Apart from making the entire combination extremely clumsy, I've found nobody who was able to tell me what I have to do to keep the adapter's foil that is used as mirror tidy.
     
  16. Henk

    Henk Mu-43 Regular

    197
    Aug 18, 2010
    the Netherlands
    E-3 + ZD 50-200mm, ZD 50mm, ZD 7-14mm, ZD 11-22mm, ZD 14-54mm, ZD 8mm :smile:
     
  17. DonParrot

    DonParrot Mu-43 Regular

    71
    Oct 7, 2011
    Okay, sorry. But then, it's even more difficult to understand that the OBS is just for those who still own FT lenses. I'd combine my E-M5 with the 12-60 SWD, the 50-200 SWD or the 150 2.0 right away if they would AF/C-AF properly. I even kept my 50-200 SWD as I believed Toshi Terada's promise that this camera would come one day. And here we are!
     
  18. Henk

    Henk Mu-43 Regular

    197
    Aug 18, 2010
    the Netherlands
    It's okay. I still have these lenses and some of them are being used occasionally. But always in MF mode which I find very convenient with the Panny mFT cameras. And I find MF with these lenses is more accurate than AF.
     
  19. DonParrot

    DonParrot Mu-43 Regular

    71
    Oct 7, 2011
    Ah, I understand. That's unfortunately no option for me as I'm shooting nearly solely (fast) moving subjects, persons and animals. Therefore, I'm desperately waiting for the OBS camera.