Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/08/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Interesting. One of the reasons put forward for the original 4/3 system by Olympus years ago was the need (with telecentric lenses suited to digital sensors)for a much bigger lens throat to sensor ratio than had been needed for film. This micro 4/3 system means either they were wrong or the pressure to make smaller cameras and the public acceptance (in general) of the quality of film lenses on digital sensors means that they can be less exigeant than they thought and still produce saleable products. I await with interest....... Frank --- David Rodgers <drodgers@casefarms.com> wrote: > > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08080501microfourthirds.asp#press > > I found the naming a bit interesting. Nothing > "micro" about a shorter > flange distance, smaller lens mount, or two more > contact points. Maybe > it just sounds photoish like Micro-Nikkor. They > should have called it HD > FourThirds. The HD for Half Distance but people > would have assumed it > meant High Definition (and who in their right mind > doesn't want that)! > > OTOH, make a camera with a four thirds chip that > looks and handles like > this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_CL or this > http://www.contaxcameras.co.uk/gseries/gseries.asp > and you can call it > whatever you want. I'm sold already. Olympus or > Panaleica certainly know > how to make small, high performance, fast primes. > > Please don't make us rely on Live View for framing. > I don't want a > glorified P&S. I want an optical viewfinder, > although the rangefinder > can be electronic (i.e. LED). > > DaveR > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for > more information >