What matters for the younger generation of photographers is to be constantly connected in your virtual social world. They care less about sensor size, High ISO and Megapixels than we “older” people do. Portable devices like [shoplink 46152 ebay]Google Glass (they are to buy here on eBay)[/shoplink] could completely change the photographic industry. And it looks like not only Google but also Olympus is aware of that. The image on top comes from the newly published Olympus patent (JP2013/075623) describing a Google Glass alike device having actually two transparent screens on each eye.
Why should we “old generation” photographers using MFT camera care about it? Well according to previous Olympus patents you will be able to display live view images from your MFT camera directly on the head mount display on the Glass. You will no longer have to use the EVF or LCD screen to take pictures and review them. This is how you could take your pictures in a couple of years from now!
55 Responses
Younger people also care less about privacy.
++++++++++++++
57 Y O and I like this glasses. I even would prefer a bio chip&sensor to be inserted in my nose and send the pics to my brain for pp. Pics coudl be recovered with a pen drive using ears device usb port 5.0.
Yeah, but focus peaking would suggest that m43 still have a dinky sensor!
I used an 8×10 view camera and everything else is just tiny. There’s no comparing an 8×10 contact print to anything else, especially the full frame 35 mm format, which is barely postage stamp size.
This turns out to be SPYING since no one sees you taking the photo.
Photography is made to be done via a traditional camera that is to be held
by the photographer and “seen” (or visible) by those photographed (even if
we tend to be stealthy sometimes)…
Who the hell are you to say what photography is made for? That’s so ridiculously narrow-minded.
those people who are paranoid about SPYING don’t generally care if suspect carries camera or not.
I live in America. The NSA tracks my every movement and I live in a surveillance state. But if you point your camera at me when I’m at Disneyland I will bust your face.
America! F%#k yeah!
For difficult macro work, or putting your camera into dangerous positions, this would be amazing. You could shoot over a cliff or next to a moving vehicle without having to put yourself in danger. You could drone mount your camera, or just run around a studio moving lights and see what was changing from the cameras perspective… This is already possible with an ipad/iphone on the panasonic models but having your hands freed up would be really nice.
i see possibilities in upskirt photography, optimal exposure finaly
Yes! Finally!
that would explain why olympus also has a shoe cam patent.
that’s a joke. upskirt photography is extremely creepy. sorry, had to say it.
I don’t know where you live, but in many countries women may wear pants.
What makes you think he’s talking about women? Maybe he lives in Scotland or Saudi Arabia.
the sony playmemories app and probably other smartphone apps from the other mfrs already allow using the phone as a viewfinder. and i wouldn’t be surprised if there were already a google glass app for this either already available or in development by sony or samsung.
I’m sorry, but everyone wearing this kind of glasses looks dumb to me. (And I don’t even enter the region of privacy)
valid opinion. but most likely irrelevant.
Bullshit. The young generation cares.
At least those interested in photography. The division isn’t between the younger and the older generations but between those who care about real photography and those who just want to share their pictures with their friends.
I agree, it’s not an old vs young issue, it’s a photographer vs collector/compulsive consumer issue. You (and every other troll on this site) clearly don’t know a single thing about photography, at all. Photography is not, and never was, about DR, ISO, sensor size, DOF, FPS or any other marketing slang…Even if you do not consider photography an art form, the truth is, the value of this medium is measured by the value of photographs and photographs are valued by their composition, desired exposure (not necessarily a correct exp), contextual value i.e. the significance of its timing and place (this is why de-contextualizing photos by nuking backgrounds through thin DOF is utterly stupid) and cultural significance, even in genres such as fashion, product photography or macro…this is a content-centric industry, you won’t get paid based on the exif data, you’ll get paid based on HOW you delivered the desired content.
Sensor size or any other of those marketing terms have nothing to do with good photography, they’re just an anecdote for gearheads, that’s it. Every respectable photographer has argued in favor of this posture time and time again through history, and even in these technologically obsessed times, all over the internet, there’s no serious professional out there who would argue that gear comes first instead of skills. There’s a reason why we still treasure the works of all those legendary photographers of the past and that reason is not HIgh ISO, DR or sensor size, etc…Cameras today are leagues beyond the capabilities of what the masters used in the past so why isn’t everyone’s photos considered masterpieces ? it’s not the camera it’s the photographer, that’s why this still applies to contemporary photogs.You don’t see huge billboards with exif data next to a photo in a gallery, no one in the real world cares about your gear. Talking about all this tech slang is not going to make a difference in the quality of your photos, it’s just an excuse that people use to compensate for the lack of skills, it means you’re still stuck on your entry level consumer mentality, why learn composition if I can boast about my camera’s 50Mpx FF sensor with ISO 1Billion ? Only practice will make you an actual photographer, and more practice will make you a better one.
So unfortunately for FF trolls, large(r) sensor cameras are just not versatile enough to allow for continuous everyday practice, they will not make you a better photographer on the basis of its sensor, you simply won’t use them on a daily basis, they’re good as a niche tool for dedicated scenarios but not the best for polishing your skills in your daily routine.
Large sensor = large glass = less portability = less gear at hand = less adaptability = less chances = no photos
Large(r) sensor images might seem to make a difference on lightroom at 100% but they don’t make any difference in the real world, where you’ll want to show your work either through a screen on Flickr or facebook or whatever, which means low res or through a print, in which case the DR of FF won’t make a difference because the medium can’t handle it.
“Large sensor = large glass” is wrong. What a pity, you seemed to know so much.
Are you implying that a large sensor does not require an equivalently large image circle ? oh, please, humor me.
Ever heard about telecentricity ? Sure, there are small FF lenses in existence, but they were mainly designed for film, not digital sensors, and mostly for RF for what it’s worth. Film is much more forgiving than digital in regards to the way it handles light at extreme angles (non perpendicular). Leica can afford to (somewhat) compensate for this but it comes at a price. When the A7 was announced everyone was jumping in joy at the prospect of using leica glass on a proper FF mirrorless but then reality hit them hard when aberrations started to appear on some lenses. For most people though, they’ll use native lenses, and those will not be RF sized, that for sure.
At the end of the day smaller lenses allow for a smaller gear footprint on your bag, that means you can either travel lighter or for the same weight of FF/APS-C you can carry more gear, this is critical for anyone who doesn’t just take cat photos. More gear means you’re better prepared, which means more opportunities and thus more keepers. Lighter gear means a high probability of always having the camera at hand. You can swallow all the marketing you want but IQ reached a sufficient level on pretty much all platforms years ago, it’s not 2004 anymore, there’s no point on getting off to specs when there’s so little difference (0.7ev) between formats, might as well have the best of both extremes (portable vs maximum IQ) and use medium format along m4/3, anything in between is a waste (IMO),
What FF does allow is more leeway in the editing phase, there’s more data for recovery, but that just means you didn’t have the skill to nail the shot in-camera the way you intended in the first place .Either that or your line of work does not rely just on the usual exp. adjustments but on heavy PP lie compositing and masks and whatnot, which doesn’t sound as the usual genres that FF advocates use for their arguments against m4/3, like (indoor) sports (high iso and reliable AF-C tracking)…
That telecentrity buzz was started by Olympus just because they didn’t have good sensors at the moment, now they have Sony’s. BSI have already have hit 1″ consumer cameras, so after a few years that “light at extreme angles” worry will be history.
Sure,sure, telecentricity is a myth created solely by Olympus in an attempt to cover up their mistake, no one else in the industry even knows the term much less being affected by it /sarcasm
we’ll see what Olympus marketeers will say when they get BSI sensor before APS-C crowd would 🙂
There is major difference between “laws of physics” (which you don’t seem to know) and particular shortcomings of early sensors.
I thought Oly’s best body has a Panny sensor?
“Are you implying that a large sensor does not require an equivalently large image circle ? oh, please, humor me.”
Grammar aside, no, a larger image circle does not imply larger glass…
You can have small lenses with larger sensors. Smaller sensors do not offer any advantages per se, expect they are cheaper. Then, the practice shows M43 systems outpricing better competitors, and obviously failing in the markets.
Incredible. I don’t even mention FF and you see it as an attack against m43. Of course, Photography isn’t about sensor size. I do agree with you.
I can, nevertheless, find this patent incredibly stupid because it focuses on vanity, on a consumer approach that has nothing to do with photography but much more with “oh look I can do stupid glasses too”. I’d rather see Olympus focus on more crucial things…
The usual suspect still won’t get it, but well done.
Caring about photography and shooting with a m4/3 camera are mutually exclusive statements. You can’t possibly do both at the same time.
Real photographers use film… oh wait…. film for those who needs to share photos quickly, real photographers shoot glass plates…
The distinction between “younger” and “older” generaton is at least laughable.Anyone who cares about photography, regardless the age, is going to be concerned about the media through he/she delivers. As for the forementioned gadget, i could see some uses but limited nonetheless. Surely not a breakthrough…
This + Drone cam = epic.
Olympus had a video glasses on display at PMA back on ’02. This is a logical extension of that.
I’ve wondered for a while why someone doesnt do this for a remote EVF. Make a tiny camera like the EMP or GM, and have a bluetooth EVF on glasses so you can hold it above your head, or down low, and still compose. They already have bluetooth apps on these cameras. An accessory glasses mount EVF would be simple and awesome. And brilliant… BRILLIANT for street photography. Look one direction and shoot another! Seems like a no brainer, and lord knows Olympus has been a bit stagnant in the innovation department lately.
You can already do this with with smartphones and the latests m4/3 models, I don’t see why this is anything special or different.
Well, considering the patent is 5 years old, back then the it WAS special and different. The patent that Olympus just received is for a dual transparent screen implementation.
Yeah I remember, I’m actually wondering if they’ll come in conflict with google at some point, afaik Oly’s implementation was seen long before I even heard of G.glass. Anyway, now that we have smartphone connectivity I don’t see the benefit in some tiny translucent projection, there’s no added benefit vs a smartphone, in fact, you loose touchscreen capabilities (most of them anyway) and then there’s the fact that the display is fixed to your head instead of a standalone device that you can put anywhere if needed. These glasses are only useful for verifying composition and not much else.
Smartphones are good for remote shooting, not so much as an accessory EVF. Besides, I’m not saying this is a replacement for apps, but a smartphone requires at least one hand to operate, and framing while using the smartphone is cumbersome to say the least. Maybe it has no benefits for the way you shoot, but street shooters would LOVE this. The ability to shoot where you aren’t looking is fantastic for candids. Or imagine a concert. Hold your camera above the crowd and frame and shoot. Much better than staring up at a tilting screen. Or shooting while active (skiing, cycling), keep you eyes forward and glance up and right to frame. Any company that creates a small camera with an accessory EVF like this will sell loads. Making it a weather proof “tough” camera would be a bonus. Maybe you wouldn’t have a use for it, but plenty of folks would.
Thats because you have no imagination. You must be old.
Olympus should stick to rectoscopy, which is where their expertise lies. 9 out of 10 proctologists recommend Olympus.
You really know a lot about this stuff uh? You seem to enjoy going to the proctologist alot.
LOL. Do you think a GH4 with a Noctitoy will be sharp enough in the corner for a rectoscopy? I wonder what DXO says.
lol
Nokia 808 sensor is nearly as large as 43. So there is no reason to say that smart glasses imply bad photo camera.
Nearly as large? Like a Pinto is nearly as large as a Mack Truck?
43 is nearly as large as APS-C. Nokia 808 sensor is nearly as large as 43. Like that.
4/3 is 68% of APSC
“Nearly” is a bit of a stretch
And the lens is a real Ziess killer on the Nokia 808! – haha
well…. the 808 lens not only carries Zeiss name, but it IS a real Zeiss. Maybe it’s worse than Distagons or the Otus, but it easily outresolves M43: http://blog.gsmarena.com/nokia-808-pureview-vs-olympus-e-pl2-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii-vs-apple-iphone-4s-38mp-shootout/
The Otus is a Distagon… but don’t let me stop you from acting like you know what you are talking about.
Cheers!
No. The Otus is a retroprojection objective, like the Distagons, but an Otus is an Otus and a Distagon is a Distagon. Thanks for schooling us and teaching us crap.
your rude personal remarks don’t make M43 outresolve Nokia 808