Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Ralph: my choice of the phrase "casual shooter" wasn't the best. I'll respond more this evening -- for now I'm off to coffee and breakfast before I type further. 
bmattock
Veteran
Just about every point and shoot film camera ever made has an optical viewfinder and no mirror. We're not talking about single-lens reflex type viewfinders.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I'm more worried about the price. $900 is a lot of cash in light of something like a Nikon D40x or D60... We're talking abotu $1150 with a viewfinder. Ouch.
gavinlg
Veteran
but those cameras don't have interchangeable lenses. You'd nearly have to bend physics to make a finder that can cover 14-600mm accurately that wasn't based on the mirror. This is by the way at least the 6th time I've made this point and I'm tired of making it.
Last edited:
bmattock
Veteran
You can be as tired as you like. I still want what I want. And I have several non-rangefinder cameras from the 1940's that had interchangeable lenses and a non-zooming viewfinder, such as the Contina IIa with the Pantar replaceable lenses. Not hard at all. And no one says that the optical viewfinder would have to zoom to cover any possible lens you might put on the camera. I have not seen a Leica M with internal framelines for a 200mm lens, but you can put such a lens (coupled, yet) on the camera.
I don't understand why you're 'tired' of telling people not to have the opinions that they have. Opinions are what they are - people have them.
climbing_vine
Well-known
Calling a camera with interchangeable lenses and manual exposure controls a "point and shoot" is sort of... bizarre. Whether it has a viewfinder or not.
MichaelW
Established
Real cameras have a ground glass.
gavinlg
Veteran
But then it wouldn't be a compact camera, it would be the same size as a small DSLR, which would render the whole point of the camera mute. The Canon G10 finder is NOT comparable because a) it's like looking through a straw b) has something ridiculous like 60% accuracy (useless) and c) the Canon g10 has a fixed lens, and d)THIS ONE HAS INTERCHANGEABLE LENSES
. The G1 has an EVF and because of it is a much bigger camera. Again, the digital Pen is meant to be a COMPACT camera.
I sympathize with your problem that stops you from seeing the lcd well, but an optical finder is near impossible on the camera. This is now the 8th time I've said this. if you want an optical finder, buy a bigger camera with a mirror - easy as that.
The sensor is something like 10 times bigger than the canon g10 sensor and something like 7 times bigger than the lx3 one. it is however only matter of millimeters smaller than a canon/nikon/pentax aps-c sensor. note in this diagram the canon g10 and LX3 sensors are smaller than the 1/1.7" sensor. MASSIVE difference. The 4/3rds sensor mainly looses length over an aps-c sensor due to it's 4:3s format, rather than the normal 3:2 format. The 4/3rds sensor is equal in image quality to aps-c sensors and allows for better lenses. This is the 2nd or 3rd time I've said this.
Please never compare an olympus product to that hideous abomination that is the pontiac aztek. I understand you don't like LCDs - better learn to like them because it has one, and it doesn't have an optical finder. If it did have an optical finder, it wouldn't be small/would be much more expensive. pick one or both.
Yes, because the guys from Magnum are inexperienced enough to "attempt" to use ricoh GRDs on the field and get gorgeous pictures out of them - amateurs. The LCD screen in live view mode gets 100% accuracy - the optical VF in the canon g10 (it can have it because it has a fixed zoom lens - for the slow learners) has somewhere around 60-70% accuracy. I'd be inclined to say the LCD is more accurate for composition. The E-P1 has the same 11 point AF system as the Panasonic G1, which is quick and accurate and used without complaint by nearly everyone that has one.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Gavin, you seem to have some inside info. Is there a 600mm lens for this Olympus 4/3 camera? Can we please have some shots? What is it size-like? Well belanced with the camera, I suppose?
Why don't you just admit it would be waày cool if it had an OVF, there's no shame in that. And yes, it would limit the lenses that go on it, but be serious, you're not gonna shoot that 600mm lens while keeping the camera steady at arms length anyway, are you now?:angel:
Oh, and actually, if the Olympus only had had an EVF viewfinder, zooming would be childs' play considering the Panny G1 has it, even when a Leica lens and adapter are used.
The fact that it most likely has no viewfinder at all is a huge mistake with most people who are reading about the camera here on RFF. In My Humble Opinion, that is.
But, all is well that ends well, and we might all be wrong, maybe it has some kind of viewfinder after all and then (only then!) I would consider buying it!
Why don't you just admit it would be waày cool if it had an OVF, there's no shame in that. And yes, it would limit the lenses that go on it, but be serious, you're not gonna shoot that 600mm lens while keeping the camera steady at arms length anyway, are you now?:angel:
Oh, and actually, if the Olympus only had had an EVF viewfinder, zooming would be childs' play considering the Panny G1 has it, even when a Leica lens and adapter are used.
The fact that it most likely has no viewfinder at all is a huge mistake with most people who are reading about the camera here on RFF. In My Humble Opinion, that is.
But, all is well that ends well, and we might all be wrong, maybe it has some kind of viewfinder after all and then (only then!) I would consider buying it!
gavinlg
Veteran
I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that there is no other compact point and shoot with interchangeable lenses and a big sensor with a viewfinder. There will probably never be another one with an optical VF. EVF maybe, but this one doesn't have it. Yes we know it doesn't have one, but people are just saying it over and over and over and over again. Mostly the same people.
We're the ones that are trying to get conversation about the main parts of the camera. It's a freakin revolutionary move by olympus that gives a similar image quality to say a leica m8 but at $900 and at the size of grandmas casio digital.
People are over and over saying I want an optical viewfinder. it's near physically impossible considering the constraints. I've stated why a number of times, and yet people keep saying it, it's not an opinion, it's pigheaded ignorance.
Somebody posted that the camera was designed for a range of lenses from 10mm to 600mm. which would limit the use of a finder in such a small camera. Humbug. Mounting anything much larger than a small zoom on this tiny camera would be ridiculous. I'm not sure who the market is for this camera.
Can't wait to see a Noctilux adapted to this thing.
If you had actually researched a bit you'd see I was right by saying it will have a range of 14-600mm and it will most probably be used for it as well. To be concise: The m4/3rds concept gets rid of the optical mirror which allows the lens mount to be placed closer to the sensor which in turn allows lenses to be built with a much less aggressive retrofocal design, which in turn allows them to be comparatively tiny. That in comparison with the sensor size doubling the equivalent focal length of a lens could probably mean a 600mm equiv f4 that is only 20cms long. Add to that the original 4/3rds lenses can be adapted for use with the m4/3rds body, which means pended firmware upgrades to some of the older ones, any single lens would theoretically be able to be used from the 4/3rds lineup which goes from 14-600mm.
When you use a big lens like the 90-250mm f2.8 or the zuiko 300mm f2.8 you don't hold the body and stabilize the lens with your hand, you hold the lens and stabilize the body with your hand. This means although a small camera may be not as comfortable, there's no problems using a massive lens with one.
I'd love to talk some more about the actual features of the camera!
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Mr. Mod, can you please put a lock on this? Gavin is blowing a gasket on the subject. No need to get offensive, or shout in orange.
infrequent
Well-known
actually the masses don't visit RFF...you are still a minority albeit vocal. the general public made the call on VFs when they decided that digicams were better for them than film cameras.
@fdigital - let it go mate...these guys haven't realised yet that no one is being forced to buy the EP-1. if it doesn't suit your needs, i am sure there are plenty of other pocketable, interchangeable lens systems with a substantial sensor to choose from. if i had nickel for every such options, i would only have a nickel.
morgan
Well-known
Just to keep the viewfinder fires burning, here's a thread on dpreview where someone pointed out some interesting bits around the hot shoe area from the leaked shots. People seem to think it's a popup EVF.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1022&thread=32075734
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1022&thread=32075734
There are several comments about price in this thread, that's as uncertain as the viewfinder discussion.
Patience, all will be revealed in a few days.
Patience, all will be revealed in a few days.
Ralph: my choice of the phrase "casual shooter" wasn't the best. I'll respond more this evening -- for now I'm off to coffee and breakfast before I type further.
I probably should have done the same before posting.
gavinlg
Veteran
Look, no need for that. I'm not here to insult anyone or make enemies. If you want actual realistic and factual information I am always happy to contribute. If you feel like I'm wrecking the thread, I won't post again in this one. Everything I've said has been based off facts - I happen to know a lot about this camera and what olympus have been trying to do with it - I know that from digging through interviews and information. It frustrates me that I have now accumulated a great number of posts explaining things over and over again that cannot be done under the constraints of the camera and yet people keep bringing them up, post after post.
I don't go on a car forum and say in the "New Toyota yaris/vitz Thread" and post 100 times "if the car doesn't have rocket boosters so it can reach the furthest reaches of space I'm not interested. It's not a real car unless it has rocket boosters"
gavinlg
Veteran
Whoops you caught me out I actually do have inside information on the 600mm lens for this olympus m4/3rds camera. Here's a sneak pic:
You connect it with this little jiggy here:
And the IS takes care of keeping the camera steady with that lens on it. I have actually shot with the 300mm f2.8 zuiko before, and yes it's pretty easily handhold-able.
And finally, HELL YEAH i'd like an optical viewfinder, I just know it's not going to happen, and it doesn't really distract me from the fact that this cameras good points outweigh it's compromises. Chances are you'll never find a perfect camera - all of them will be compromised in some way.
You obviously know a great deal about this camera. Why be frustrated? Time will tell what the features and demand are for this new beast. It may be revolutionary, or it may be a white elephant. Oly has made their bed with it. If they are right great, if not, someone will come up with the next new best thing since sliced bread in about 2 months.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
As a closing argument, let me just repeat once more what got me into this discussion in the first place: not having any viewfinder would defeat the point of the Pen retro-styling.
Now, when mounting a lens like that, would it defeat the point of the Pen retro styiling, or would it not?
I rest my case.
Enjoy the 'Pen', Gavin.
Now, when mounting a lens like that, would it defeat the point of the Pen retro styiling, or would it not?
I rest my case.
Enjoy the 'Pen', Gavin.
Sparrow
Veteran
Why thank you; I have always worried about becoming uninteresting in my old age