Quote:
Originally Posted by Matsu
What's interesting about them is that they include a focal length reducer of .5x. This is cool because it restores the correct field of view to legacy 35mm lenses while simultaneously speeding them up to provide equivalent apertures.
|
Another thing it would do, unless badly designed, is increase by nearly a factor of two the spatial resolution for equal MTF. Yay! Which is not to say you'll get better sharpness in the final photo of course (twice the magnification, etc.), just that you won't get much worse sharpness (as is the case when using legacy 35 mm lenses on small Micro Four Thirds sensors now).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matsu
Please note, this is by no means a more compact set-up. It's even bigger (lens plus reducer) but it gives you the same exposure through a smaller sensor, at least in theory.
|
Though we should be clear that it doesn't solve the problem of noise/dynamic range caused by small sensors at base ISO. But in light-limited and depth-of-field-limited scenarios it would equal a full-frame setup, in terms of noise - assuming equal sensor efficiency (still not achieved by Micro Four Thirds).
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM
I think the biggest letdown of CES is the E-PL2. Olympus is still using the same old 12MP sensor that is three years old now with almost no improvement in image quality at high ISO. Does Olympus really think that adding new "art filters" is going to sell the camera?
|
It looks like Panasonic isn't selling their new 16-megapixel sensor to Olympus. Since Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds need all the momentum they can get before the big boys release competing products, I can't imagine Panasonic is doing this willingly - maybe they have yield issues with their new sensor?