Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Boater wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Boater wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:53:19 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:20:19 -0500, Boater
wrote:

About $8000 for the body only. (Yikes)

24,5 Megapixel in FX-Format
3D Color Matrix II, Center-Weighted and Spot Metering
1 - 7 fps
1/8000 to 30 seconds shutter
ISO equivalency 100 to 1,600
2 lb 11 oz / 1220 g
Price est. $7,995 USD body

Another FX-format camera means that Nikon will jump back with
both feet into the production of full-frame lenses, updating
some of the current ones and introducing new ones.
Ain't gonna matter. 4/3rds is going to rule the world.
Will that be at the same time or just after eTech Evinrudes
"capture" a larger market share than Yamaha four-strokes? :)

Same theory actually - the better things are fewer in number.

It's an age old axiom that consumer sheeple like you get suckered
with
every day.

What are the advantages of the 4/3rd system vs Canon or Nikon?



Well, it has a smaller sensor than the DX cameras!

I really have no idea what the 4/3rd group is selling as their
advantages, but I had it was a way for those with smaller market
share to be able to group together to allow them to compete against
Nikon and Canon.


There's a good if lengthy rundown on DP Review:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse3/page35.asp is the
conclusion page.


Interestingly, the camera is the same size as the Nikon d300

Olympus 5.6" x 4.6" x 2.9 " 1.9 pounds
Nikon 5.8 4.5 2.9 2 pounds

I'm sure it is a fine camera. Olympus knows how to build cameras. The
advantages of Four-Thirds format in semi-pro cameras remain to be seen.

That seemed to be a fairly objective review (very unusual for most mags
and web sites selling ads) and highlighted the pros and cons I have read
elsewhere.

For what it is worth, for a number of years, Nikon definitely trailed
behind Canon in both high end and point and shot digital cameras. It
was not until recently that they seemed to be the leader/innovator in
DSLR, including the prosumer and pro cameras. My guess is the state of
the art and the best in category camera will jump back and forth between
Canon and Nikon and neither will remain the top dog long enough enough
to get anyone to sell all of their glass to change brands. Today, it
looks like Nikon's aggressive design improvements has pushed it ahead of
Canon in the consumer and prosumer DSLR market.

As far as the consumer P&S market. in 2007 Nikon lagged behind Canon,
Sony, Kodak, Samsung and Olympus in that order. It wasn't till 2008
that Nikon really started to come up with competitive P&S cameras and
expanded it's line of low end DSLR. Coupled with an aggressive
marketing campaign, it will be interesting to see what that does to the
overall market share for digital cameras. I would be willing to bet
that Nikon exceeds Canon sales for the first time in a number of years.

From reading about the 4/3's system, it definitely has many advantages
and are used by some professionals whose needs are meet by the current
lens offered by Olympus. If you are a looking for a prosumer camera,
and have a large investment in Olympus glass, most amateurs would have a
hard time changing systems, especially if they prefer shooting in jpg vs
RAW and are not regularly shooting in low light, where Canon and Nikon
have the advantage.

Since it really isn't the camera or the glass that takes the photograph,
a first class award winning photograph can be taken with any camera,
including a hand made pin hole camera. Normally you only see passionate
arguments between Canon and Nikon users, so it is is nice to see someone
being passionate about Olympus. If you look at B&H enduser reviews,
they love the E-3.


I meant to add that I dumped my Nikon D200 because I simply could never
get used to "DX." It was always creating conflicts between my eyes and
what they thought they should see and what remains of my brain, which
was trying to figure out why a 28 mm fixed focal length lens was a 42 mm
lens, sort of. The camera, though, is fabulous.

Now, I am back to "full frame" digital, and the conflict between my eyes
and my brain, at least on the focal length issue, is resolved. I also
like the much higher ISO performance.

-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------