Micro 4/3rds Pen leak

Well, it seems I missed out on much of the "fun" and things have gotten civil 'round these parts, but a couple of points that I feel are worth making.

1. People on RFF like to shoot with rangefinders. People have plenty of reasons to like rangefinders. Some love the glass, some love the ergonomics, some love rangefinder focusing. Some people like that the cameras are much smaller than SLRs, are quieter, and are more discreet. By and large, we all place a premium on the technical quality of the photos our cameras produce.

For many of us, the E-P1 captures the most important aspects of a rangefinder *for us,* but in an affordable, digital body. The camera will be small, discreet, portable, and quiet relative to a DSLR. These are aspects many of us have been looking for, and have only been available in P&S cameras like the LX3 or G10. This camera has a much larger sensor than those cameras, and interchangeable lenses to boot, especially great for those of us that adore primes. The resulting camera captures exactly what many of us love about rangefinders, at the expense of some niceties that we're not as attached to. For others on this forum, the camera is throwing out the baby and keeping the bathwater. That's personal taste. But those that suggest that this camera is missing the point as some sort of statement of fact are looking only through their own narrow lens of what such a camera needs to be. This is a very attractive camera for many rangefinder users, and with good reason. It isn't an RF, so it falls short of 100% interest; so be it.

2. Many seem to think that this camera is an insult to the Pen heritage. I understand their point: this isn't a digital Pen F. Such a camera would be a lovely thing indeed; for some reason, it seems such a camera can't be made.

But the Pen F, in its day, was a revolutionary beast. It dispensed with much of the conventional wisdom of the day (Half-frame! Scandal!) in order to deliver an interchangeable lens camera of high quality at a shockingly small size. This camera takes a rather different approach, but it also dispenses with conventional wisdom (no OVF? No mirror? Scandal!) in order to deliver an interchangeable lens camera of high quality at a shockingly small size. It captures the spirit of the Pen F, if not the execution. Again, the resulting camera may not be for everyone. I'm sure the half-frame concept was a sore point for many in the sixties. Yet, the camera found an audience, and I'll wager this one will as well.

Look at the scale comparison with an LX3, a G1, or a DP2. This thing is tiny, and if it handles and performs like Olympus' cameras of the past two years, it'll deliver far more quality in its small body than it has any right to. Some of us find that exciting.

Finally, a few quick nagging points: We don't know the price, we merely have a rumored MSRP at launch. Street price will almost certainly be less, and in three months' time, it'll be even less. This always happens. We also don't know the aspect ratio. As I've stated elsewhere, the m4/3 standard allows for any aspect ratio, it merely specifies an image circle. The rumor mill suggests that this camera will likely have either the G1 sensor or the GH1 sensor. The G1 sensor is 4:3, and that certainly makes sense for the Pen heritage (portrait-oriented, if they were going to get really serious about their homage; I hope they don't). The GH1 sensor, though, like the LX3 sensor, covers 4:3, 3:2, and 16:9, all without any of these being mere crops of the other. These are all very real possibilities for this camera.

These are my stories, and I'm sticking to them.
 
Wiyum said:
Well, it seems I missed out on much of the "fun" and things have gotten civil 'round these parts, but a couple of points that I feel are worth making.

1. People on RFF like to shoot with rangefinders. People have plenty of reasons to like rangefinders. Some love the glass, some love the ergonomics, some love rangefinder focusing. Some people like that the cameras are much smaller than SLRs, are quieter, and are more discreet. By and large, we all place a premium on the technical quality of the photos our cameras produce.

For many of us, the E-P1 captures the most important aspects of a rangefinder *for us,* but in an affordable, digital body. The camera will be small, discreet, portable, and quiet relative to a DSLR. These are aspects many of us have been looking for, and have only been available in P&S cameras like the LX3 or G10. This camera has a much larger sensor than those cameras, and interchangeable lenses to boot, especially great for those of us that adore primes. The resulting camera captures exactly what many of us love about rangefinders, at the expense of some niceties that we're not as attached to. For others on this forum, the camera is throwing out the baby and keeping the bathwater. That's personal taste. But those that suggest that this camera is missing the point as some sort of statement of fact are looking only through their own narrow lens of what such a camera needs to be. This is a very attractive camera for many rangefinder users, and with good reason. It isn't an RF, so it falls short of 100% interest; so be it.

2. Many seem to think that this camera is an insult to the Pen heritage. I understand their point: this isn't a digital Pen F. Such a camera would be a lovely thing indeed; for some reason, it seems such a camera can't be made.

But the Pen F, in its day, was a revolutionary beast. It dispensed with much of the conventional wisdom of the day (Half-frame! Scandal!) in order to deliver an interchangeable lens camera of high quality at a shockingly small size. This camera takes a rather different approach, but it also dispenses with conventional wisdom (no OVF? No mirror? Scandal!) in order to deliver an interchangeable lens camera of high quality at a shockingly small size. It captures the spirit of the Pen F, if not the execution. Again, the resulting camera may not be for everyone. I'm sure the half-frame concept was a sore point for many in the sixties. Yet, the camera found an audience, and I'll wager this one will as well.

Look at the scale comparison with an LX3, a G1, or a DP2. This thing is tiny, and if it handles and performs like Olympus' cameras of the past two years, it'll deliver far more quality in its small body than it has any right to. Some of us find that exciting.

Finally, a few quick nagging points: We don't know the price, we merely have a rumored MSRP at launch. Street price will almost certainly be less, and in three months' time, it'll be even less. This always happens. We also don't know the aspect ratio. As I've stated elsewhere, the m4/3 standard allows for any aspect ratio, it merely specifies an image circle. The rumor mill suggests that this camera will likely have either the G1 sensor or the GH1 sensor. The G1 sensor is 4:3, and that certainly makes sense for the Pen heritage (portrait-oriented, if they were going to get really serious about their homage; I hope they don't). The GH1 sensor, though, like the LX3 sensor, covers 4:3, 3:2, and 16:9, all without any of these being mere crops of the other. These are all very real possibilities for this camera.

These are my stories, and I'm sticking to them.
Click to expand...

If only this was the first post in the thread... :)
 
Rule 1) No (accurate!) OVF, no sale.
Rule 2) See rule 1.

William
 
Yeah, brilliant post Wiyum. I agree 100% but would have great difficulty wording it as diplomatically and perfectly as that.
 
Last edited:
wlewisiii said:
Rule 1) No (accurate!) OVF, no sale.
Rule 2) See rule 1.
Click to expand...

I know a lot of people who will not use a RF because of no accurate through the lens viewing. They say it is not possible to "feel" the coverage of a lens, especially really wide angles unless you are seeing through it. We all have our preferences and thankfully we still have choices.
 
Rayt said:
We all have our preferences and thankfully we still have choices.
Click to expand...

Ray, I am very happy to agree with that as I think that's what has predominately been lost in this thread.

William
 
Well, I'll happily use this with external OVFs with that 35 equiv and my CV 40/1.4 on an adaptor - which would be perfect for low-light casual portraits that I like doing at social occasions. I'm not too concerned about precise framing so long as it's conservative. I'll cheerfully crop - 80mm equiv is just about right.

We also don't know if there will be an EVF or not. I've kept away from the G1 because it's too big.
 
The division here is simple,those who are working up from a point and shoot and the rest of us,my preconceptions and predujices are pretty well built in unfortunatly and can cloud what may well be an advance in design.
A rangefinder would take space to put on ,but then so what.This idea that the camera should be so small,why?..no idea.You want to pretend your picking your nose when really youre photographing someone ?you deserve that camera shoved up your nose.
This is just another missed opportunity ,with yet another gang of yes men making excuses for a large company out to make money,why?no idea...............Neil.
 
This idea that the camera should be so small,why?
Click to expand...
Because I'm carrying a baby, his stuff, a film RF and a few lenses and I want a digital for casual stuff that can use the existing lenses and an M8 is several times too expensive - and too damn big - for what I want. Hell, some days my GR-D is too big. I'm looking forward to the new iPhone because at least then I can always carry a half decent camera.

This is just another missed opportunity ,with yet another gang of yes men making excuses for a large company out to make money,wh
Click to expand...
That's right, insult people whose needs don't match yours: argument by being an ass is always a winning technique.
 
taxi38 said:
The division here is simple,those who are working up from a point and shoot and the rest of us,my preconceptions and predujices are pretty well built in unfortunatly and can cloud what may well be an advance in design.
A rangefinder would take space to put on ,but then so what.This idea that the camera should be so small,why?..no idea.You want to pretend your picking your nose when really youre photographing someone ?you deserve that camera shoved up your nose.
This is just another missed opportunity ,with yet another gang of yes men making excuses for a large company out to make money,why?no idea...............Neil.
Click to expand...


...no. There are plenty of ways to approach this. I, for one, shoot with a Nikon D700 most of the time. I adore that camera in nearly every conceivable respect, but it is a big camera. I shoot primes, and taking it out with my four primes is a full ordeal. That's an ordeal I'm willing to contend with when I want to go out photographing, but I don't do it as often as I'd like due to the bulk. I don't take the D700 with me everywhere I go because of the bulk. The E-P1 I could take with me everywhere, with an extra prime even, without a second thought.

Will I give up my D700? No. But I also want a camera that I can bring with me the rest of the time. Thus far, the compact P&S cameras that are small enough all require sacrifices I'm not willing to make. The E-P1, by all appearances, requires none (again, for me). The implication that this means I'm a photographer trying to weasel my way up from the great unwashed of P&S cameras, and that I wouldn't like this if only I'd ever used a "real" camera, is both presumptuous and insulting.

Am I a "yes man?" I guess so. I've been saying for 5 years that if only someone would make a "carry-everywhere" sized camera that shoots RAW and delivers good results at higher ISOs, then I'd buy it. Never did I imagine I could get primes in the bargain. As long as it ends up meeting those criteria, I'll gladly buy it, and won't think twice about declaring my affection for such a camera. I've been searching for a tool that meets my needs; this looks closer than anything yet.
 
Seems like my dream for a Oly 35 RC is real. Just add an external VF and let the AF do the rest...
 
Teo ,Im with you 100% if its fast enough,but its not going to be.

Wiyum,to be honest Im a little bored with people finding their D700 or whatever too heavy and big to take out.Im not in a position to own such cameras(am honestly pleased that you can)and am looking for "a"camera.After promising to maybe to be that camera many people feel let down again by a massive mutinational pandering to a lower denominator.You find me "presumptuous and insulting"well its not against you,its the machine that really pxsses me off,all the best to you,.Neil.
 
My main camera is a 5d, and I find that and an L prime a pig to carry around all the time. The smaller camera is perfect for me because I can carry it around all the time and still have great image quality.

I think you'll find there's tens of thousands, if not millions of people with that view.
 
fdigital said:
My main camera is a 5d, and I find that and an L prime a pig to carry around all the time. The smaller camera is perfect for me because I can carry it around all the time and still have great image quality.

I think you'll find there's tens of thousands, if not millions of people with that view.
Click to expand...
No........really?
 
Well, having owned both the d700 & Panasonic G1, I can handily say the G1 is amazing in the situations you don't want to be carrying a D700.

And yes, the d700 IS heavy, and its not the kind of camera you simply take everywhere. One also has to realise, I don't want to take my D700 to all places simply because it is a very expensive piece of equipment. It's size & appearance would make it even more of a target. When I bring my g1 along to parties, no one ever asks how much it is. Every second person who sees the d700 asks how much it costs. To me thats an indicator of how those cameras are percieved. Also everyone knows they're being photographed with the D700 because you have to bring it to your eye. Unless you like to compose very poorly.

Of course, the D700 does things the Pen D can never hope to. Extreme low light, fast focusing etc. I would definately say good DSLR's give you the same feel of being part of the camera that an M6 does. The g1 takes away a bit of that control, but really, if you want a very serious photo taking machine you should get a d700 or an M6. The g1 (and by extension the Pen D) are just great, compact high quality non SLR photo taking machines. Having owned an m8 (briefly, that was a mistake!) I can say, The g1 & Pen D are like the Canon Q17's & Oly XA's of our generation. Awesome value & high quality.

To put it in perspective, here's some photo's from a bonfire with the D700
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=117109&id=640124688&l=f73477a8e3

Compared to camping in a place I've never been with the g1

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=113638&id=640124688&l=ce9030de60

I wasn't really keen on taking my camera to a place 3 hours away when the plan was to become less than sober upon arrival. However at the bonfire I was close to home so I can be certain the d700 will be fine. When I measure the months of retail slave labour I did to afford something like that, you'll understand it comes with a bit of paranoia of not damage, but theft.

I was actually waiting for the Pen D to come out, but Olympus simply took wayyyyyyy too long, they didn't even announce a demo product or lens lineup, I wouldn't call their mockup without ANY writing on it much help at all. They didn't even have a firm date. I'm tossing up wether to sell my G1 but I doubt it'd go for much anyway. I'm also skeptical as to how well Oly can make that rear LCD, I think everyone might have forgot that Panasonic makes excellent video cameras & thus has expertise in the area of good LCD's. I think maybe Oly's LCD may be it's weak link, but it remains to be seen.

Well, those are my thoughts. Either way, exciting times ahead for all!
 
Can someone please enlighten me? What exactly does "real/serious" photography look like?

I "seriously" photograph all the time with a point and shoot. Quite a few folks I know do?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom