Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/02/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Feli, Not shure if this is a mistake. I think the noise issue will be worked out soon, newer sensors and newer softwares will make it disappear. If 4/3 can survive, it could be the future's standard for "digital x-small format", as Alastair pointed out, like the 24x36 format became a standard after Leica released the Leica-I. And I dont talk about "professional" and "consumer" formats, but about bigger and smaller formats. The 4/3 system allows slightly smaller bodies and especially significantly smaller and faster lenses than APS-C or even fullframe systems. That's what rangefinders offered compared to SLR's, too. Now Olympus-E offers the range of 28mm-200mm (35 eq.) in two zooms lenses with each f=2.0 (the 35-100 is released, the 14-35 is announced for pma). Forget this on a fullsensor or APS-C system except if you have a personal assistant who carries your 20kg lens bag. Another Leica digital camera with APS-C would rival the digital M and DMR too much. That's why I think 4/3 could be the right choice for a Digilux-3 kind of camera. We'll see... Didier >I like the idea of Leica making some cash out of designing lenses for >Panasonic. >But I think it would be a mistake to join 4/3 as a camera format. > >I doubt that anyone will be able to make a high megapixel 4/3 chip, that >delivers clean >high ISO images. The receptors are just too tiny. It's difficult enough to >pull that off with an >APS (x.15) size chip and the 4/3 format is even smaller (x2). Leica should >stick to APS (x1.5), >APS-H (x1.33) and full frame (x1).