It's official, it is goin to be a digital Pen

[Trius]

The concept of the original Pen was as a "sketch" tool, i.e. a pen with which to sketch. Photographs were to be made with medium format cameras.

The E-P1 (do we KNOW that's the real model designation?) is significantly different in execution since its sensor is capable enough to compete with many DSLRs; hence, it will not be just a "pen". But like the Pen F bodies, it will have top quality glass available -- the Pen Fs can still produce wonderful results partly due to the lenses.

The analogy to the film Pens cannot be taken to its conclusion since the base technology, the requirements of digital capture and user expectations are completely different.

As Colin said, I would LOVE to have a great finder, but I can't see it happening. If Olympus were to include a good finder system (whether optical or electronic) at the expense of the LCD, I would be ecstatic. But you could be sure that the number of units sold would be the number of RFF members currently in the market for a small, interchangeable lens digi ... plus a couple thousand more who haven't found their way here yet. IOW, Olympus would see a loss on this project, and m4/3 would die.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

This "Pen" really has nothing - maybe a name of they choose to call it a Pen -to do with the original Pen. At best, it's a play on nostalgia. However good or bad it may be, this ain't your grandfathers Pen.

 

[gavinlg]

It has everything to do with the pen line. It's a small, interchangeable lens high quality camera and that is the baseline of the pen. A backup for a serious photographer for when his hasselblad is too big, just like the film pens. Seriously, who cares if it doesn't have a viewfinder - using the LCD works extremely well.

 

[Trius]

Pickett, the whole concept grows out of the original Pens ... but after 50 years of technological change you're expecting no changes except sticking a sensor in? C'mon, get real.

 

[Thardy]

Remember the spirit of this Nikon phrase ... Nikon will never produce full frame cameras, we are totally committed to DX.

And later this one from Nikon Owners ... 12 MP is more than enough for a full frame camera... anything more just makes for noisy images.


I have a sneaking suspicion that the NEXT digi-pen will have some sort of VF where you don't have to hold it at arms length to compose a photo.

 

[gavinlg]

Yes, some sort of magical viewfinder that somehow electronically zooms from 14mm to 600mm. All you do is sprinkle some pixie dust on it to initiate the zooming process and the leprechauns actually bring the world closer to you for your 600mm framelines.

 

[Wiyum]

Wiyum, while you can play with the aspect ratio (ala GH1), you also lose some of the sensor when you do. There are always tradeoffs, I guess.

Not on the GH1, nor LX3, for that matter. In both cases, the sensor is large enough to cover the full image circle crop that would be used for a 4:3 chip and a 16:9 chip. As a result, the image is wider (in pixels) in 16:9 than it is in 3:2 or 4:3; it is taller (again, in pixels) in 4:3 than it is in 3:2 or 16:9; and it is wider and taller in 3:2 than it is in 4:3 and 16:9 respectively.

Most cameras that offer multiple aspect ratios offer a number of crops that could be identically achieved by shooting in the chip's native ratio. Not the case with these cameras. And it is possible because there is no optical viewfinder, incidentally. The EVF and LCD can easily show what the chip will see no matter which aspect ratio.

 

[Frankie]

I have a sneaking suspicion that the NEXT digi-pen will have some sort of VF where you don't have to hold it at arms length to compose a photo.

Arm's length photography sucks...to those of us aging yuppies who has the money to buy new toys but must wear reading glasses... It's time this obvous problem being recognized.

 

[Kevin]

My Casio Exilim EX-P700 from 2004 has a small but usable built-in optical viewfinder that zooms in sync with the lens.

 

[gavinlg]

My Casio Exilim EX-P700 from 2004 has a small but usable built-in optical viewfinder that zooms in sync with the lens.

That's because it has a fixed lens, not interchangeable ones.

 

[shadowfox]

it's kind of cute. But, without an optical finder, it's just another P&S. 🙁 A small, discrete camera that you have to hold out in front of you at arms length is no longer discrete.

Equating this with just another P&S is just not right.

The sensor is much bigger. The kind that actually allows you to have different DOF rendering other than "sharp-to-infinity" without having to go macro.

The lenses. This camera is destined to be used with almost all of the best lenses in the world.

If you can't stand composing at arm's-length, use an external optical viewfinder.

Btw, I think composing away from your face allows for more discreet shooting.

 

[shadowfox]

Pany is making a 20/1.7 that looks damn compact.

Btw, whatever Pany makes, you can use directly on this new Olympus. Sweeet!

 

[shadowfox]

I've been with you (and now Colin) all along ... but it's not surprising with an RF crowd. In general we place a high value on viewfinders, to the extent of raging arguments on which M mount has "the best" VF. If Leica came out with a digital CL, there would be complaints about the short baseline. 🙄

Earl, I am with you and Gavin, and all discerning people in this thread. All the way.

I haven't written a lot in this thread because I'm almost to the point of exasperation by all those negative feeling from people who hasn't been using the 4/3rd system as long as I have, and keep coming up with bad points without actual pictures or facts to back them up. Noise this, noise that, DOF control this and that, viewfinder this and that, bla, bla, bla...

It's not just at RFF, all over the photography-related online forums seem to be pre-programmed by who knows what, that somehow the 4/3rd system is maimed-from birth.

 

[scho]

Equating this with just another P&S is just not right.

The sensor is much bigger. The kind that actually allows you to have different DOF rendering other than "sharp-to-infinity" without having to go macro.

The lenses. This camera is destined to be used with almost all of the best lenses in the world.

If you can't stand composing at arm's-length, use an external optical viewfinder.

Btw, I think composing away from your face allows for more discreet shooting.

I can't imagine trying to focus MF lenses on this camera using the LCD at arm's length. If it had an articulated LCD like the G1 it would be more workable at waist level. Something like this:

 

[Pickett Wilson]

"This camera is destined to be used with almost all of the best lenses in the world."

I guess you are referring to adapting it to other mount lenses. I wonder how much appeal that will have beyond the novelty. I can't think of many lenses I'd want to hang off a camera this small. And, once you do, it's not a small camera anymore.

 

[majid]

Pany is making a 20/1.7 that looks damn compact.

I thought it was still vaporware. Otherwise I prefer 40mm-e to 35mm-e. You'd have to get a black E-P1 for them to match, however.

The G1/GH1 comparison is useful.
I think the DP1 comparison is moreso.

Small indeed!

Yes indeed. The DP1/DP2 are big enough to deform my jacket pockets and I have been looking for a belt pouch like the lovely one Leica makes for the D-Lux 4. I hope Olympus or someone else makes one, ideally a sliding holster that does not offer maximum protection but allows you to quickly grab your camera from your waist.

If you look at it in comparison to a G10 and LX3 it totally trumps them. The only real competitor is the DP2,
but it's quirky.

The DP2 has disappointing high-ISO performance, like all Foveon sensors (there are no miracles, the three stacked RGB photosites compete for the same photon flux density as a similar-sized Bayer sensor). Color fidelity is also not oustanding past ISO 400. The lack of resolution loss to Bayer interpolation, combined with the sharp prime optics means amazing image quality in the ISO 100-400 range, however.

I wonder if the IQ will be that different? The LX3 looks pretty amazing for a p&s, even at higher ISOs.

The LX3 pictures are unusably noisy as early as ISO 320, it's not even close. It is also not that much more compact because of the protruding lens barrel base.

I think the small VFs in ythe e-410 and 510 are more a case of physical and optical restraints vs size restraints.

Only the lens aperture and the VF magnification matter. You do need higher magnification for a smaller sensor format, though, and there is a trade-off between brightness and magnification.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the NEXT digi-pen will have some sort of VF where you don't have to hold it at arms length to compose a photo.

I'd rather have Olympus keep the camera size small than try to jam both a LCD and EVF, and end up with a camera as bulky as a G1. It's remarkable they managed to match the DP2 size with an interchangeable lens body (assuming the rumors are true, of course).

Arm's length photography sucks...to those of us aging yuppies who has the money to buy new toys but must wear reading glasses... It's time this obvous problem being recognized.

The main benefit of a VF is that you can mash the camera against your face for added stability vs. shaking arms in arms-length. If the E-P1 has in-body image stabilization, that is less of an issue.

 

[Larky]

Personally I can't shoot through the LCD screen, simply because to me the camera should be glued to my face. I don't care how good the LCD is, it cannot replace the viewfinder for me.

 

[ampguy]

might not be optimized

might not be optimized

Since these cameras do a lot of lens corrections in the body, there's a chance that a lens might not get all of the ideal corrections that a vendor may have put in.

Btw, whatever Pany makes, you can use directly on this new Olympus. Sweeet!

 

[shadowfox]

I can't imagine trying to focus MF lenses on this camera using the LCD at arm's length. If it had an articulated LCD like the G1 it would be more workable at waist level. Something like this:

That picture looks like me holding my E-620 🙂

Chances are, the live-view mode on this new camera will have a mode where you can zoom into the part where you want critical focus to be (a green rectangle that can be repositioned using the cursors).

I can't believe how effective this is especially when using manual focus lenses. So yes, you could focus critically at arm's-length.

 

[Kevin]

The DP2 has disappointing high-ISO performance, ...

Sure thing, bubba.

As if these high iso shots are so disappointing.