[Samurai]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Its highly unlikely anyone will relase fast zooms for M43, even if someone does, at most it will be f2.8 which will give DOF of f5.6 in FF terms, also lenses will be quite heavy, granted not as much as FF f2.8 zooms but still reasonably heavy. Even zooms for Crop factor aren't light (ie Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 DX).

Are you trying to tell me M4/3 fast zooms will be as heavy as 4/3 fast zooms? Unlikely. I am hoping m4/3 fast zooms (when it comes) will be lighter than 4/3 fast zooms I already own. Until then I will continue using 4/3 lenses whenever I need fast zoom. I have been using 4/3 since 5+ years, so nothing changes on the DOF front for me.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Kinda defeats the purpose of having M43 setup. I doubt there will ever be a fast wide zoom for M43.

I suppose it will be still lot lighter than 4/3 setup. I am hopeful.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Also, I reckon except Nikon/Pentax no one else got EVIL cameras right and both Nikon/Pentax will sell boat loads.

Looks like you are quite uninformed about the EVIL offerings about Olympus, Panasonic, Sony and Sumsung. Olympus has about 7 EVIL models, Panasonic Lumix has about same EVIL models, Sony has 3 models, etc. Right now EVIL camera market is ruled by these 3 companies. In fact, only these companies offer same sensors has their dSLR cameras, so does Samsung, but it is a minor player now.

Nikon/Pentax whom you think will sell EVIL camera by the boat loads, have much smaller sensors, and can hardly hope to deliver dSLR quality pics. Even their DOF will be lot higher as you already understand.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Are you trying to tell me M4/3 fast zooms will be as heavy as 4/3 fast zooms? Unlikely. I am hoping m4/3 fast zooms (when it comes) will be lighter than 4/3 fast zooms I already own. Until then I will continue using 4/3 lenses whenever I need fast zoom. I have been using 4/3 since 5+ years, so nothing changes on the DOF front for me.

I suppose it will be still lot lighter than 4/3 setup. I am hopeful.

Why do you think M43 mount lenses will be lighter than 43 mount lenses ?

Sensor is still the same size, only thing that got changed and significantly affects the lens size is the flange distance which got reduced by 6mm. Which in turns mean, designing same lens from 43 mount to M43 mount will require about 2% more optical glass, unless one is okay with lens not being able to focus closer than 2-3 metres.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Looks like you are quite uninformed about the EVIL offerings about Olympus, Panasonic, Sony and Sumsung. Olympus has about 7 EVIL models, Panasonic Lumix has about same EVIL models, Sony has 3 models, etc. Right now EVIL camera market is ruled by these 3 companies. In fact, only these companies offer same sensors has their dSLR cameras, so does Samsung, but it is a minor player now.

Nikon/Pentax whom you think will sell EVIL camera by the boat loads, have much smaller sensors, and can hardly hope to deliver dSLR quality pics. Even their DOF will be lot higher as you already understand.

Posting at team-bhp always makes me feel, I should completely explaing myself rather than being short.

I never said Olympus/Panasonic/Sony/Samsung failed or they are crap. Yes Olympus/Sony/Panasonic rule the M43 market, but there wasn`t any significant competition out there except Samsung.

Olympus failed at DSLR market, Panasonic never touched DSLR market, Sony is pushing a failed DSLR devision and Samsung never had proper DSLR devision, well except taking Pentax and rebatching them.

Biggest hit for EVIL is FASHION industry, second biggest hit is people migrating from P&S to MILD. Now days every singe makeup artist has an Olympus/Panasonic EVIL kit, why so , when 99% of them got no clue about photography or DSLR`s?? They have it because even the high end compacts will either had Decent IQ or decent lens range and this is where EVIL hit hard, both IQ and decent lens range is there.

Like I said market wanted a small camera with IQ to match, Lx series/G series were all quite the rage but were always orientated at the market where DSLR users wanted something tiny to pocket rather than being easier to use.

Both Pentax and Nikon, identified this Fashion industry need and are just acting on it. Also ONLY Pentax/Nikon have launched EVIL cameras that WILL NOT cannablise there DSLR sales. So effectively only Pentax/Nikon released EVIL cameras for a TARGET market.

Now if this feels like I am un-informed then who cares, my opinion isn`t going to change the world and I am not a writer either. In the end of the day, I will still keep my Nikon kit.

[HellwratH]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Pretty much. DOF is inversely proportional to the Sensor size. As Sensor size increases, DOF decreases, on the same side this doesn't hold true for product shots taken with View Camera or Monorail camera.

If I may, I came across this sometime back and guess what, the DOF of smaller sensors is less than that of a full frame with the same subject distance.

Check this link,
Online Depth of Field Calculator

If you select the camera as Panasonic G1 (micro four-thirds) as the camera, FL as 25mm, selected f-stop as f/1, subject distance as 10 ft, the total DOF is 1.46 ft. Now change the camera to 5D MKII (full frame) and with the same values, and now the total DOF is 2.96ft. 1.5 ft more than micro four thirds .

So what you hear on the internet is true to some extent but they forget to mention one small thing. The DOF with full frame sensor is lesser than that of crop sensor when same POV is maintained and that's because to maintain the same POV, you'll be much closer with a full frame camera (hence altering the subject distance which in turn reduces the DOF).

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Posting at team-bhp always makes me feel, I should completely explaing myself rather than being short.

That is because we don't let people get away with ridiculous statements in this forum. If you want to grandly proclaim only Nikon/Pentax got EVIL camera right, we need to hear the shocking evidence behind it and mull over it.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Why do you think M43 mount lenses will be lighter than 43 mount lenses ?

May be because I own five 4/3 lenses and 2 m4/3 lenses. I see significant difference in size.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Sensor is still the same size, only thing that got changed and significantly affects the lens size is the flange distance which got reduced by 6mm. Which in turns mean, designing same lens from 43 mount to M43 mount will require about 2% more optical glass, unless one is okay with lens not being able to focus closer than 2-3 metres.

Hmm, then do explain the following facts.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I never said Olympus/Panasonic/Sony/Samsung failed or they are crap. Yes Olympus/Sony/Panasonic rule the M43 market, but there wasn`t any significant competition out there except Samsung.

Samsung is a significant competition? I thought Olympus, Sony and Panasonic ARE the competiton, considering they are 3 different companies.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Olympus failed at DSLR market, Panasonic never touched DSLR market, Sony is pushing a failed DSLR devision and Samsung never had proper DSLR devision, well except taking Pentax and rebatching them.

All these are your opinions, they all had their niche customers, you can find them right in this forum.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Biggest hit for EVIL is FASHION industry, second biggest hit is people migrating from P&S to MILD. Now days every singe makeup artist has an Olympus/Panasonic EVIL kit, why so , when 99% of them got no clue about photography or DSLR`s?? They have it because even the high end compacts will either had Decent IQ or decent lens range and this is where EVIL hit hard, both IQ and decent lens range is there.

Not too sure what you are saying here.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Both Pentax and Nikon, identified this Fashion industry need and are just acting on it. Also ONLY Pentax/Nikon have launched EVIL cameras that WILL NOT cannablise there DSLR sales. So effectively only Pentax/Nikon released EVIL cameras for a TARGET market.

When Olympus came out with 4/3 sensor, it was ridiculed because the the sensor was smaller than APS-C. When Nikon does that in EVIL camera, it is because they got it just right? Yeah, right!

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Now if this feels like I am un-informed then who cares, my opinion isn`t going to change the world and I am not a writer either. In the end of the day, I will still keep my Nikon kit.

I feel you are uninformed because you made statements contrary to facts. For example, you say m4/3 lenses can't be lighter than 4/3 lenses. But they are.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by HellwratH

If I may, I came across this sometime back and guess what, the DOF of smaller sensors is less than that of a full frame with the same subject distance.

Check this link,
Online Depth of Field Calculator

If you select the camera as Panasonic G1 (micro four-thirds) as the camera, FL as 25mm, selected f-stop as f/1, subject distance as 10 ft, the total DOF is 1.46 ft. Now change the camera to 5D MKII (full frame) and with the same values, and now the total DOF is 2.96ft. 1.5 ft more than micro four thirds .

So what you hear on the internet is true to some extent but they forget to mention one small thing. The DOF with full frame sensor is lesser than that of crop sensor when same POV is maintained and that's because to maintain the same POV, you'll be much closer with a full frame camera (hence altering the subject distance which in turn reduces the DOF).

If you’re not maintaining the same POV then you are not comparing the same FINAL IMAGE, which kind of leaves the test in vain as you are only viewing cropped image.

Originally Posted by Samurai

That is because we don't let people get away with ridiculous statements in this forum. If you want to grandly proclaim only Nikon/Pentax got EVIL camera right, we need to hear the shocking evidence behind it and mull over it.

I made a statement that is my opinion, which is in-turn from what I see in the market. You don`t agree with it, that is fine, but the fact is both Nikon and Pentax will outsell every other EVIL camera out there. The only SHOCKING EVIDENCE is that both decided to actually research the target markets. Particularly with Nikon the EVIL cameras fill a missing section in their lineup without eating other cameras market. I know what I know because I was at the Nikon Launch event in Melbourne and I listened to what major photography store owners had to say, and these are not Walmart kind people.

Originally Posted by Samurai

May be because I own five 4/3 lenses and 2 m4/3 lenses. I see significant difference in size.

Hmm, then do explain the following facts.

Attachment 823608

Let me quote what I said with important bits in BOLD.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Why do you think M43 mount lenses will be lighter than 43 mount lenses?

Sensor is still the same size; only thing that got changed and significantly affects the lens size is the flange distance which got reduced by 6mm. Which in turns mean, designing same lens from 43 mount to M43 mount will require about 2% more optical glass, unless one is okay with lens not being able to focus closer than 2-3 meters.

If it’s still hard to understand, SAME LENS means same optical design and same number of ED elements and same material used in manufacturing, etc. All of the lenses listed have different optical designs and different materials used in manufacturing, and then some even had different number of elements.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Samsung is a significant competition? I thought Olympus, Sony and Panasonic ARE the competiton, considering they are 3 different companies.

All these are your opinions, they all had their niche customers, you can find them right in this forum.

Yes they are 3 different companies but listing each down in single spreadsheet makes it clear that none of the models were intended to do the same thing. If one wants to do video on M43, Panasonic can`t be beat, if one wants portability Olympus can`t be beat, if someone wants more features Sony can`t be beat. Do you think it’s just coincidence?

Samsung being significant competition because Samsung had the best IQ, but that`s again debatable.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Not too sure what you are saying here.

Originally Posted by Samurai

When Olympus came out with 4/3 sensor, it was ridiculed because the the sensor was smaller than APS-C. When Nikon does that in EVIL camera, it is because they got it just right? Yeah, right!

Those 2 statements go hand in hand. My point is Olympus/Panasonic/Sony/Samsung made EVIL cameras without targeting a proper market, they were just lucky to hit a market that made it successful other than 5-10% of actual EVIL fans.

Nikon and Pentax choose to research there markets and made cameras for those intended markets.

Originally Posted by Samurai

I feel you are uninformed because you made statements contrary to facts. For example, you say m4/3 lenses can't be lighter than 4/3 lenses. But they are.

I made statements that are my opinion, hence the word RECKON. But take it as you wish. Also sorry for being a nit-picker, but I did mention the word SAME LENS.

[tsk1979]

err. why would you want your m4/3 fast lens to have the same construction or elements as a 4/3 lens if you can get same image quality and "fastness" with a smaller lens. Only reason I could think of, is personal satisfaction. For example certain people believe that ambassador is the best car because its heavy, which also makes it the safest car. ABS/airbags/Crumple zones be damned .
That way some people believe that a heavier lens will have better IQ.
As for EVIL, the larger the sensor, the better the IQ, no getting around physics. And guess what panasonic is great in not just video, but also in image quality as long as you do not crank up the ISO.
And as for sony, it beats both panasonic and Oly in IQ not because of some secret conspiracy, but because it has a APS-C sensor in its evil cameras..

As for the Nikon, its ridiclous. They made a product, wherein it was clear to the design team that it should not canniblize their DSLR sales. So they had to make a product inferior to what the competition was, because a product as good as Sony/Oly/Pana etc., would canniblize DSLR sales.

As for failed products and what not, I guess you have something called sales numbers. I do not think any of these EVIL cams can be called failures. Their usage and sales are rising and these companies are doing good in the market.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

You don`t agree with it, that is fine, but the fact is both Nikon and Pentax will outsell every other EVIL camera out there. The only SHOCKING EVIDENCE is that both decided to actually research the target markets.

I don't know what Pentax was thinking (they had nothing to lose), but it is very clear what Nikon was thinking. They have seen how Sony/Panasonic/Olympus are losing their dSLR customers to the EVIL counterparts. Nikon doesn't want that to happen, dSLR sales is their bread and butter. So they made an inferior EVIL camera to discourage such migration.

Talking about fashion crowd buying EVIL cameras, Thom Hogan who never used to look beyond Nikon, now walks around with E-PL1 as his backup.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I know what I know because I was at the Nikon Launch event in Melbourne and I listened to what major photography store owners had to say, and these are not Walmart kind people.

So you heard the marketing pitch, and you think they can't be wrong. But they forget rest of us can read between lines.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

If it’s still hard to understand, SAME LENS means same optical design and same number of ED elements and same material used in manufacturing, etc. All of the lenses listed have different optical designs and different materials used in manufacturing, and then some even had different number of elements.

Why on earth would I need same optical design and same number of ED elements and same materials used in newer lenses? I have been using Olympus camera since 1993, and knowing them I expect them to innovate. I expect newer optical designs, lesser elements, better and lighter materials. Olympus pioneered sensor based IS, sensor cleaning technology, live view, etc. I expect them to innovate constantly.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

err. why would you want your m4/3 fast lens to have the same construction or elements as a 4/3 lens if you can get same image quality and "fastness" with a smaller lens. Only reason I could think of, is personal satisfaction. For example certain people believe that ambassador is the best car because its heavy, which also makes it the safest car. ABS/airbags/Crumple zones be damned .
That way some people believe that a heavier lens will have better IQ.

Not as simple as you put it.

Same sensor size, flange distance reduced by 6mm. Physics says, SAME lens with same optical design needs to increase curvature of the rear element to make it focus closer. That rough 2% increase in optical glass means tiny bit heavier lens. That is for SAME lens with same optical design.

Sure another design might get away with less optical glass but then its not the SAME lens anymore. Also I didn`t said that heavier lens is better.

Originally Posted by Samurai

I don't know what Pentax was thinking (they had nothing to lose), but it is very clear what Nikon was thinking. They have seen how Sony/Panasonic/Olympus are losing their dSLR customers to the EVIL counterparts. Nikon doesn't want that to happen, dSLR sales is their bread and butter. So they made an inferior EVIL camera to discourage such migration.

So let me get this, Nikon makes inferior camera but putting a department aside for it (when they are struggling with DSLR cameras and lenses due to Japan issue) so no one buys the camera and customers goto other manufacturers?

Wouldn`t it be easier to just not make the camera and put those resources toward current issues and getting manufacturing plants (majority of world`s optical glass is still made in Japan) back to 100%. Kinda like what Canon is doing, its well known Canon wants to develop G series into EVIL and then add EFs/EF mount adapters to it. But Canon is sitting down and waiting for Japan issues to be resolved first.

Also just like Olympus, Pentax is a real innovator too and not to mention Ricoh now owns Pentax and Ricoh makes some of the worlds best Optical glass.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Talking about fashion crowd buying EVIL cameras, Thom Hogan who never used to look beyond Nikon, now walks around with E-PL1 as his backup.

Well its well known that Thom doesn`t belong to Fashion industry but can`t he be part of 5-10% niche market?

Originally Posted by Samurai

So you heard the marketing pitch, and you think they can't be wrong. But they forget rest of us can read between lines.

Hold on a minute, Did you read my post?

Once again, Let me quote my post, with important bit in BOLD.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I made a statement that is my opinion, which is in-turn from what I see in the market. You don`t agree with it, that is fine, but the fact is both Nikon and Pentax will outsell every other EVIL camera out there. The only SHOCKING EVIDENCE is that both decided to actually research the target markets. Particularly with Nikon the EVIL cameras fill a missing section in their lineup without eating other cameras market. I know what I know because I was at the Nikon Launch event in Melbourne and I listened to what major photography store owners had to say, and these are not Walmart kind people.

I didn`t listen to Nikon. Major Photography stores I am talking about are Vanbar/Sun Studios/Michaels/etc which sell way more exotic stuff than Nikon EVIL cameras and they don`t usually see mum/dad customers but rather customers that get Film imported from all around the world, need exotic developing supplies, exotic lenses and cameras. Just search any of these camera stores and see what they have to offer.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Why on earth would I need same optical design and same number of ED elements and same materials used in newer lenses? I have been using Olympus camera since 1993, and knowing them I expect them to innovate. I expect newer optical designs, lesser elements, better and lighter materials. Olympus pioneered sensor based IS, sensor cleaning technology, live view, etc. I expect them to innovate constantly.

But thats not my point, I never said Olympus doesn`t innovate, what I said was m43 lenses with SAME design cannot be lighter than 43 mount lenses. Sure Olympus can make thousand new lenses with new and improved designs and be lighter and faster but that doesn`t solve the physics problem of SAME lens remade for m43 will be heavier.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I didn`t listen to Nikon. Major Photography stores I am talking about are Vanbar/Sun Studios/Michaels/etc which sell way more exotic stuff than Nikon EVIL cameras and they don`t usually see mum/dad customers but rather customers that get Film imported from all around the world, need exotic developing supplies, exotic lenses and cameras. Just search any of these camera stores and see what they have to offer..

LOL why should I listen to some exotic store where the only reason for high price is their name. Its like saying that a 10,000$ handbag is of better quality than a 100$ leather handbag just because some silly designer has their name on it.
I would rather look at the samples, than listen to some snob who cares more about the price of equipment than the quality of pictures.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Sure another design might get away with less optical glass but then its not the SAME lens anymore. Also I didn`t said that heavier lens is better.

I just want light and fast zoom lens in m4/3 without compromising quality. I don't care how they make it happen. I run a product company and I have never met a customer who was concerned about how we did it as long the specs met their requirement.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

So let me get this, Nikon makes inferior camera but putting a department aside for it (when they are struggling with DSLR cameras and lenses due to Japan issue) so no one buys the camera and customers goto other manufacturers?

They have taken a gamble, hoping to retain customers via loyalty and brand name.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Also just like Olympus, Pentax is a real innovator too and not to mention Ricoh now owns Pentax and Ricoh makes some of the worlds best Optical glass.

Not really followed Pentax and Ricoh, can you name some of their innovations.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Well its well known that Thom doesn`t belong to Fashion industry but can`t he be part of 5-10% niche market?

I know Thom isn't from fashion industry, but hardcore professionals who never looked beyond Canon/Nikon are now choosing EVIL cameras like E-PL1 as a backup. Let us wait and see what he has to say about Nikon 1 system.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Hold on a minute, Did you read my post?
I didn`t listen to Nikon. Major Photography stores I am talking about are Vanbar/Sun Studios/Michaels/etc which sell way more exotic stuff than Nikon EVIL cameras and they don`t usually see mum/dad customers but rather customers that get Film imported from all around the world, need exotic developing supplies, exotic lenses and cameras. Just search any of these camera stores and see what they have to offer.

Major Photography stores are there for selling cameras and stuff, so they will be making a sales pitch, if not marketing pitch.

Originally Posted by rajb3125

solve the physics problem of SAME lens remade for m43 will be heavier.

In post#228 I already showed you that 4/3 lens and m4/3 lens with same aperture and FL have very different weight and size.

Let me repost that table:



As an user why should I care about their internal construction as long as specs are same?

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

LOL why should I listen to some exotic store where the only reason for high price is their name. Its like saying that a 10,000$ handbag is of better quality than a 100$ leather handbag just because some silly designer has their name on it.
I would rather look at the samples, than listen to some snob who cares more about the price of equipment than the quality of pictures.

You comment says it all and its true to the word.

Just a question, how many times have you visited Vanbar? or Sun Studios for that matter?

The thing is, I listen to Vanbar guys because they provide excellent customer service. They don`t lie about products to sell them. They go out of there ways to help me and to top it off they don`t have high prices, quite reasonable actually. Manager asks for customers feedback before adding new products or cutting off old products.

I listen to the guys there because they are not snobs, they are photographers them selves. You will know it, when you visit the store.

Originally Posted by Samurai

I just want light and fast zoom lens in m4/3 without compromising quality. I don't care how they make it happen. I run a product company and I have never met a customer who was concerned about how we did it as long the specs met their requirement.

So we forget the fact that SAME 43 mount lens will be heavier when made for m43 mount and change the topic

Originally Posted by Samurai

They have taken a gamble, hoping to retain customers via loyalty and brand name.

Not really followed Pentax and Ricoh, can you name some of their innovations.

You might want to read reviews on Pentax Q.

Ricoh makes medical equipment, mostly to do with optics tough. Ricoh ended up buying Pentax this year. As far as journalists are reporting Ricoh has raised the budget for R&D for pentax.

Originally Posted by Samurai

I know Thom isn't from fashion industry, but hardcore professionals who never looked beyond Canon/Nikon are now choosing EVIL cameras like E-PL1 as a backup. Let us wait and see what he has to say about Nikon 1 system.

Well I am hoping the same, he's usually pretty brutal about flaws. So him reviewing Nikon 1 would be only good.

Originally Posted by Samurai

Major Photography stores are there for selling cameras and stuff, so they will be making a sales pitch, if not marketing pitch.

Doesn`t make sense to pitch a camera which is not available for quite some time. Moreover, they didn`t made a sales pitch. Its more of where market is heading and what products consumers want.

Originally Posted by Samurai

In post#228 I already showed you that 4/3 lens and m4/3 lens with same aperture and FL have very different weight and size.

Let me repost that table:



As an user why should I care about their internal construction as long as specs are same?

I just give up mate. I repited my post couple of times, if the point still doesn`t go through then chances are it never will.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

I just give up mate. I repited my post couple of times, if the point still doesn`t go through then chances are it never will.

Sorry to confuse you with facts. When I say same lens, I refer to specs like FL range and aperture. If you still think m4/3 lens will be as heavy as 4/3 lens for similar specs, I have nothing more to say.

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Sorry to confuse you with facts. When I say same lens, I refer to specs like FL range and aperture. If you still think m4/3 lens will be as heavy as 4/3 lens for similar specs, I have nothing more to say.

Sorry mate but I am not confused by facts. If you would have said similar lens, than yes I would have agreed with you. But you said same lens, which doesn't mean similar fl and specs but means exact same copy.

No, I don't think similar spec lens will be heavier, second generation of almost every product (in regards to photography) turns out to be lighter in weight. So no doubt newer lenses with similar specs will be lighter. But then it's not the same lens, it's similar specced lens but not the same lens.

[download2live]

There were two categories in the past DSLR crowd.
Professionals and people who were into it for the sake of clicking a "better picture".
The latter category was catered to by the entry level and to some extent mid level DSLR's.
Every company had it.
Like Nikon's D-40, Olympus E-420 and so on. Mind you we are not talking of Hasselbalds or Aptus etc here.
And for each high end system these companies sold, they sold at least a 100 of their entry level systems.

It is this crowd that is migrating big time over to the EVIL cameras. (Lets face it, 90% of entry level DSLR owners never use it to even 50% of its capability.)
Because they see one clear advantage, an advantage that does not need the hard "path of learning". Size and weight.

Sorry to say but Nikon and Canon were caught with their pants down. They mis-read the market. They had too much invested in their DSLR and lenses business to upset the apple cart. But that does not mean "AVOID CHANGE"!!!

Panasonic was a rather late entrant into the photography business and had no historical baggage to carry. And they came up with radical new cameras like LX3. Olympus followed with EP series and Panasonic responded with G series and GF series. Where was Nikon?
Or Canon? Now when they have seen the writing on the wall they are responding.

Is it too late for them?
Remember the Motorola Mobile handsets in India? Once you lose market share in a hyper competitive market, its difficult to gain it back.

[rajb3125]

Geez, I wasn`t aware of the fact that all the amateurs and advanced enthusiasts died and went to heaven.

Better yet, we should tell this to Nikon/Canon after all, there is no need for 600D/60D/7D/D5100/D7000/D300s anymore. After all pros buy 5D/1D/D700/D3 series and people for sake of better picture will get D3100/1000D.