Delivering on the Promise of the 4/3 System?
by Wesley Fink on December 24, 2007 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- What's New with Wes
When we were taking a look at the new Digital SLR cameras for our recent Digital SLR Buyers Guide the Olympus E-510 proved to be a really impressive entry - except for one serious flaw. This small, fast, reasonably-priced 10 megapixel DSLR came with kit lenses that were also very small and much better quality than we normally see in kit lenses from the bigger players. It also featured Live View, which was pioneered by Olympus, body-integral Image Stabilization that worked with any lens, and automatic sensor cleaning, which was also pioneered by Olympus but which is now finding its way into cameras from all the makers.
We were reminded how far the 4/3 system had developed with the E-510 and made a mental note to take a closer look at the Olympus E-3 to see if Olympus could finally fix their biggest issue. The E-3 is the Pro level DSLR which had been announced as a replacement for the four year old and seriously out-of-date E-1, and no there was never an E-2.
This photo shows the new E-3 with the 12-60 SWD lens beside the current E-410 with standard 14-42mm lens. The E-3 is about the same size as a Nikon D300, where the E-410/510 are the smallest production DSLRs available today. The magnesium body and weather-sealing adds size and weight to the E-3 but ergonomics are still excellent. The top Pro lenses like the 12-60 SWD are also weather-sealed which adds size and weight.
I have toyed with the 4/3 digital SLR system several times since it was introduced in 2003, shrugged my shoulders and gone back to Nikon or Canon (or lately Sony/Minolta or Pentax). Frankly, I had about given up on 4/3, but when Olympus dropped the E-3 on us a few weeks ago it showed us that 4/3 really could be all that was promised when it was introduced. The current E-410/E-510 answer the original 4/3 promise of small, while the new E-3 breaks new ground in 4/3 system performance.
ANY DSLR system is about lenses in the end, and Olympus 4/3 is blessed with superb optics. To get an idea of how really great the new Olympus glass is you need to use some of the top 4/3 lenses. If you are skeptical a computer site like AT can know anything about photography, then be my guest and read a few of the big photo sites like dpreview, imaging-resource, or dcresource. They all have finally admitted in reviews of the E-410 and E-510 that Olympus has the best kit lenses of any camera maker, and that yes the Olympus claim that lenses designed for digital produce better quality images is proving to be true. www.slrgear.com, which is affiliated with imaging-resource, even went so far as to test most of the current Olympus lenses after being so impressed with the kit lenses.
The Olympus issue has never been glass, nor has it been mount, since the 4/3 mount is all-electronic with a motor in every lens just like Canon. It has really been the options you had (or rather didn't have) in camera bodies to use with this excellent Olympus glass. As great as the current E-410 and E-510 really are, they are still saddled with the serious handicap of an ancient and not particularly sensitive 3-point autofocus system, and there just wasn't a choice of anything better from Olympus. That is until the E-3.
The E-3 takes Olympus AF from outdated technology to state-of-the-art, and as soon as the new 11-point, all cross sensor, dual-plane AF module makes its way down the food chain, no one can ignore Olympus any more. Perhaps Olympus can also find a way to move the terrific E-3 feature of AF with manual touch-up down the food chain as well - because the other big Olympus issue is that stupid "Manual focus by wire" feature and Manual Focus select by menu. Canon has offered the manual touchup after auto-focus as a feature on Pro models for some time and it is good to see Olympus doing the same with their E-3 body and lenses – and SWD (Supersonic Wave Motor) lenses in particular.
There are currently 32 lenses available for the 4/3 system plus teleconverters, extension tubes, etc. You can find a complete listing and specifications at http://www.four-thirds.org/en/products/lense.html. Four of the lenses are from Leica, and these include the fast normal 25mm f1.4 and three lenses that feature Optical Image Stabilization, which they call Mega O.I.S. This makes the 4/3 system the only one I am currently aware of that has both body integral mechanical stabilization and optical stabilization as options. This could be the equipment needed for a very interesting test comparison of mechanical vs. optical I.S. to try provide answers to an argument based on emotion more than fact. I have tried the Leica 14-50mm f2.8-3.5 on the E3 and both the IS and Optical I.S. worked very well individually. However, when both were activated they seemed to cancel each other out and were not effective.
Another interesting lens is the new Leica 14 -150mm f3.5-5.6 Mega O.I.S. This features a Leica brand lens with an equivalent 28mm-300mm focal length with built-in Optical Image Stabilization. Lenses that have super long focal length ranges generally make too many compromises, but this Leica walk-around lens is really intriguing with 4 aspherical and 1 ED elements used to correct lens aberrations.
Another interesting lens is the new Leica 14 -150mm f3.5-5.6 Mega O.I.S. This features a Leica brand lens with an equivalent 28mm-300mm focal length with built-in Optical Image Stabilization. Lenses that have super long focal length ranges generally make too many compromises, but this Leica walk-around lens is really intriguing with 4 aspherical and 1 ED elements used to correct lens aberrations.
I am completely and totally impressed with the E-3. All the lenses are designed for 4/3 mount and for best performance on a 4/3 camera - they aren't 35mm film designs. No other camera in its class offers the combination of effective live-view, built-in image stabilization, the best auto sensor cleaning you can buy, an articulating LCD that can fold away for protection (AND a top LCD for basic data that is missing from the Sony A700), a built-in pop-up flash, effective dust and splash sealing of the camera AND the lenses, a popularly-priced zoom that covers the equivalent of 140mm to 600mm and does Macro up to equivalent life size (70-300mm), MUCH improved noise reduction that goes to ISO 3200, user-programmable Auto ISO that can cover the full ISO range (Canon still stubbornly refuses to fully offer this option), and the best range of available lenses DESIGNED FOR a digital camera system.
At first it looks like the 10 megapixel Live MOS sensor is a bit pedestrian for a new Pro camera until you do the sensor math. The truth is that 4/3 and APS C sensors are almost exactly the same height, and the only real difference is the width for 4:3 is around 18mm compared to the 22.2mm for the 35mm shape 2:3 ratio APS C sensor. Put another way if you take a 10 megapixel 4/3 sensor and filled in the sides to 2:3 ratio the sensor would have 12.5 megapixel resolution. This means a 10 megapixel 4/3 sensor is very similar in resolution in the shared photo (4:3) area to a 12 megapixel APS C sensor. There is no substantive difference in the size of a 4/3 sensor and an APS C, and those who think the 4/3 is much smaller need to do some research. This was demonstrated recently by PopPhoto in a review of the Panasonic DMC-L10 and the Leica 14-50mm F3.8-5.6. They found resolution for the L10 as 2350 lines at ISO100, which out-resolves the Sony 12.2MP A700 (and presumably the Nikon D300 which uses the same sensor). The difference is ratios and diagonals. 4/3 tries to match photo sizes and the 4/3 ratio yields a smaller diagonal and APS C tries to match the shape of 35mm with a 3:2 ratio and a larger diagonal (image circle). Olympus, Leica, and Panasonic also use a Panasonic MOS sensor and not the Canon or Sony used by everyone else.
The E-3 is a bargain for a true PRO grade camera - and it is easily built as well as the Nikon D3 or the top Canons which are $5000 or more. However, most will find the E-3 expensive unless they are serious photo hobbyists or Pros, and Olympus needs to move the E-3 refinements down to E-510 price levels as fast as they can.
This time around I bought an E-3 and a 12-60mm f2.8-4.0 SWD - and the tiny little excellent-quality kit lenses for when the 12-60mm weighs too much and I can compromise just a little on quality. The system has been quickly filled out with other 4/3 lenses and accessories. It now sits beside my Canon and Nikon equipment, and one of those systems will liquidated.
The E-3 is a great piece of creative engineering, an area Olympus is known for. After all they invented auto-sensor cleaning and live view - features which are now finding their way to every DSLR. This is the best Olympus camera EVER, and once you have used it you will be hooked.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
46 Comments
View All Comments
crazedmodder - Tuesday, December 25, 2007 - link
Cool, thanks guys. I've looked at the imaging-resource review and have been waiting patiently for the dpreview to come up :D. I'm kind of partial to Olympus, I'm not really a pro or anything but I love taking pictures and I have no real specific aim as to one thing that's important to me but I do know that I need better night shooting than I have now. I actually bought my E-330 to shoot cars but just take pictures of anything. The articulating screen on the E-3 seems really useful, I've made large use of the E-330's folding screen and could imagine the types of shots you can get with the E-3. Anyways thanks guys and Happy Holidays!Wesley Fink - Tuesday, December 25, 2007 - link
The Image Stabilization has the option of off, full IS or vertical only IS for panning. As for long eposure noise and High ISO noise I have not yet done a true noise test as you will see at dpreview or dcresource. Subjectively noise at ISO 1600 is better than the E-410 (also a 10 megapixel sensor) is at ISO 800. The E-410 is better than the E-330 at high ISO noise, so you get the message that the E-3 is a big leap forward in reduction of high ISO noise from your E-330.Even ISO 3200 on the E-3 is useful for smaller prints, but the noise at ISO 3200 is definitely visible. I have my ISO Auto range set to 100-1600 because I trust the image quality in that range on the E-3. I will manually select 3200 when I need it.
BTW imaging-resource has done a full E-3 review, and it sounds like dpreview will have a full E-3 review shortly, since they used the E-3 in their noise comparison shots in the Sony A700 review just posted. You may find the comparisons in that review will give some insight to your noise questions since dpreview compares the Nikon D300, Canon 40D, Olympus E3, and the Sony A700.
Lezmaka - Monday, December 24, 2007 - link
You acknowledge that Anandtech is a computer website and not a photography website. I would suggest that if you are going to make posts outside the main scope of the website, you shouldn't assume people know what you're talking about. A brief mention of what 4/3 actually is and how it's different from what other camera makers do would be helpful.I have made similar suggestions for DailyTech, but it seems like you actually know what you're talking about, whereas DT just seems to repeat keywords and buzzwords from the source articles and probably couldn't provide brief explanations anyway.
Wesley Fink - Monday, December 24, 2007 - link
Thanks for the suggestion. I added the sensor discussion and diagram hoping it would help readers to understand what 4/3 and APS C represent.I have also done several articles on AnandTech that lay the basic digital photography background to better understand blogs like this one. My suggestion for readers who want more background is to read "Digital Photography from 20,000 Feet" under the Digital Cameras tab at the top of this page.
flho - Monday, December 24, 2007 - link
Sorry Wesley but slrgear.com is affiliated with Imaging Resource (http://www.imaging-resource.com/)">http://www.imaging-resource.com/) not dcresource (www.dcresource.com)Wesley Fink - Monday, December 24, 2007 - link
Corrected. Imaging-resource was also in my list of sites and the first draft correctly stated the affiliation. Somewhere in edit it was changed. Thanks for pointing out the correct affiliation.