Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Ralph, I don't disagree with your assessment. But there is one difference, in that the 4/3 and m4/3 standards are open, not proprietary. In the past manufacturers developed mounts (to the "open" 35mm standard!) not just for technical reasons, but to lock out competition. 4/3 m4/3 is different in that sense.
Both Canon and Nikon have at least three "standards" ... "full" frame (which Nikon said they wouldn't do but was forced to by the market), APS-x, and p&s sized sensors. I don't see the issue here. They would have to develop new compact lenses? How is that not both a boon for the photographer as well as a possibility for profit?
OK, I guess I could disagree with your assessment.
In terms of R&D and manufacturing budget, Olympus has always been behind CaNikon, and has always been a bit slower off the mark, at least in going to the market. They take their time and always introduce something that is at least mildly interesting. I don't recall them promising, at the initial introduction of 4/3, when they would bring out a compact camera with DSLR quality. And this is just the first step. It may not suit your time frame (and it really hasn't suited mine), but hey, that's our expectation, nothing else. Did you ever expect them to come out with a system that easily allowed M mount lenses to be used?
Failed miserably? Don't think so.
Both Canon and Nikon have at least three "standards" ... "full" frame (which Nikon said they wouldn't do but was forced to by the market), APS-x, and p&s sized sensors. I don't see the issue here. They would have to develop new compact lenses? How is that not both a boon for the photographer as well as a possibility for profit?
OK, I guess I could disagree with your assessment.
In terms of R&D and manufacturing budget, Olympus has always been behind CaNikon, and has always been a bit slower off the mark, at least in going to the market. They take their time and always introduce something that is at least mildly interesting. I don't recall them promising, at the initial introduction of 4/3, when they would bring out a compact camera with DSLR quality. And this is just the first step. It may not suit your time frame (and it really hasn't suited mine), but hey, that's our expectation, nothing else. Did you ever expect them to come out with a system that easily allowed M mount lenses to be used?
Failed miserably? Don't think so.
I just want to hear from people who actually use the E-P1 that all the talk about slow AF is off the mark so I can buy one without question. Of course, I am thinking that a CV 15 will look very good on the front of it, being so wide and with the extra DOF because of the small sensor, focusing will be totally unnecessary, so it will be a super fast shooter.
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
Good grief ... even a 6-year-old can see this. The D3 image has been brightened and dodged and the EP1 image has been sharpened.
There's no doubt about it.
Attachments
jke
Well-known
I have no connection to this photographer, but they seem to have gotten their hands on an E-P1 during some sort of group promotion in NYC. Here are some ISO samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thedigitalstory/sets/72157619851048782/
And then 13 shots extra:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thedigitalstory/sets/72157619847739758/
Doesn't look bad. Based on this very limited sample size, it isn't a Canon 5D, a Canon 50D, or perhaps even the most current digital Rebel, but then those are larger sensor cameras. But it does look like a nice step up from P&S cameras in a similarly sized package. The camera might be better compared to the G10 or the Sigma DP2. Or more directly to the Panasonic G1, to which it should be nearly identical I would think. Size still looks like the key selling feature with the adaptability to other lens lines (and thus the interchangeable lens mount) & larger than P&S sensor being a close second or third.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thedigitalstory/sets/72157619851048782/
And then 13 shots extra:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thedigitalstory/sets/72157619847739758/
Doesn't look bad. Based on this very limited sample size, it isn't a Canon 5D, a Canon 50D, or perhaps even the most current digital Rebel, but then those are larger sensor cameras. But it does look like a nice step up from P&S cameras in a similarly sized package. The camera might be better compared to the G10 or the Sigma DP2. Or more directly to the Panasonic G1, to which it should be nearly identical I would think. Size still looks like the key selling feature with the adaptability to other lens lines (and thus the interchangeable lens mount) & larger than P&S sensor being a close second or third.
Last edited:
nzeeman
Well-known
those are originals from imaging resource site. they didnt do it to show oly is better because they reviewed d3 long before ep1 came out so those are not shots made for comparing those two cameras. also they never modified photos on their site before. check out whole galleries for those two cameras and you will see...
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
There's just no way I'm going shell out that much money for a piece of aluminum-wrapped plastic which has been mass-produced by robots. You can jump on the hype bandwagon, be an early adopter and perform viral marketing until your fingers ache ... it just ain't gonna happen.
What peeves me most are the false marketing claims made by Olympus. Next come those cheap image comparisons posted on dpreview which clearly try to deceive.
Eagerly awaiting the Samsung announcement,
Kevin
What peeves me most are the false marketing claims made by Olympus. Next come those cheap image comparisons posted on dpreview which clearly try to deceive.
Eagerly awaiting the Samsung announcement,
Kevin
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
Kevin, when I think of Samsung, I think of cheap plastic products mass-produced by robots. Used to be a consumer electronics technician.
Actually, I have no dog in this fight; I'm happy with my G1 (also plastic, mass-produced by robots,) but find the banter over the E-P1 interesting, given the hype over the G1 just a few months previous.
I dunno, I have an Olympus Pen D, from the 1960s, in the closet right now. Yea, it has some metal on the outside, but plastic, too. It can't be all metal and weigh that little. There's the old saying: "yesterday ain't what it's all cracked up to be."
Now my Retina IIIC, that's metal. So heavy that you can't comfortably pocket it in your jacket, without a suitable counterweight in the other side, or you'll be listing to starboard. Can't have lightweight, inexpensive and not plastic. Pick any two.
~Joe
Last edited:
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
Judging by this overly ambitious price you would think this cam must be a rare hand-made metal object d'art. The robots are here to make things cheaper, not more expensive. Used to be an olive picker.
We've seen this corporate insanity before, however. In early 2008 Sigma introduced a high quality compact at more than four times its actual value. Silly people bought them in the beginning, of course, but now the smart buying majority are snapping them up at the correct price/value of roughly 200 euro. You can be sure that even at this price point Sigma is still making a decent profit!
By all means, buy an EP1 now - at hyper-inflated prices - and show us all your pretty pictures taken with it. Be sure to get a lens adapter as well and tell us how beautiful your classic lenses render on the EP1's brilliant sensor.
But please don't insist that this camera is a good value for the money ... because at this price it definitely is not!
We've seen this corporate insanity before, however. In early 2008 Sigma introduced a high quality compact at more than four times its actual value. Silly people bought them in the beginning, of course, but now the smart buying majority are snapping them up at the correct price/value of roughly 200 euro. You can be sure that even at this price point Sigma is still making a decent profit!
By all means, buy an EP1 now - at hyper-inflated prices - and show us all your pretty pictures taken with it. Be sure to get a lens adapter as well and tell us how beautiful your classic lenses render on the EP1's brilliant sensor.
But please don't insist that this camera is a good value for the money ... because at this price it definitely is not!
250swb
Well-known
Well they aren't obliged to follow, thats why I said they wouldn't for practical and financial reasons.
But lets not forget manufacturers are constantly taking each other on in direct terms with bridge and P&S cameras. Every month there is some tweak in the market, be it functions, format, pixel count, size etc. This is rapid development compared with even the regular redundancy rate of Canon DSLR's. Prototyping and getting goods to market is so much quicker nowadays, with many market decisions made around tactics rather than restrictive lead times. I would bet that R&D departments in all the major camera companies are now looking at the possibilites of a separate line that follows the m4/3 formula, if not the actual format. It may simply replace the bridge camera in the market altogether.
Steve
Last edited:
btgc
Veteran
So I see discussion has turned on route "why so high price for plastic camera" While most of us like and use heavy metal bricks, technologies have improved since then. Cogwheel made from high quality plastic can be wear resistant as metal piece - another question is why make cheap digicams which will not break; that would be total failure of whole industry. Everyone knows this, like they know about their new cars and houses - they aren't built to last forever.
Back to price - I guess that materials build smallest fraction of price, while most of it is made by finances for engineers, marketing people, office crowd, covering daily expenses of industry and sure, income.
And it's quite clear - when first and last strawberries of season are sold, they cost A LOT more than between. Buyers know this
While most of us like and use heavy metal bricks, technologies have improved since then. Cogwheel made from high quality plastic can be wear resistant as metal piece - another question is why make cheap digicams which will not break; that would be total failure of whole industry. Everyone knows this, like they know about their new cars and houses - they aren't built to last forever.Back to price - I guess that materials build smallest fraction of price, while most of it is made by finances for engineers, marketing people, office crowd, covering daily expenses of industry and sure, income.
And it's quite clear - when first and last strawberries of season are sold, they cost A LOT more than between. Buyers know this
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
The discussion hasn't made any turns at all. Only a road stop or two has been made to rest and point out that corporate and internet marketing is trying to fool us into believing that this camera is a great value for the money.
You're making another false assumption that all buyers know the things you speak of. As a general rule, however, older and experienced buyers know this but not all younger buyers do.
"why so high price for plastic camera" should have been written "why so high price for a mass produced camera".
You're making another false assumption that all buyers know the things you speak of. As a general rule, however, older and experienced buyers know this but not all younger buyers do.
"why so high price for plastic camera" should have been written "why so high price for a mass produced camera".
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I'm convinced. Kevin knows best.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I think it's all very simple. If you have the money to play with the latest toys, do it! Of course it's about the marketing. We are a group of folks who use outrageously expensive old film cameras and lenses. What's another $800 for a big P&S?
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Well, the price wasn't my point.
Hacker
黑客
Size comparison with the Leica M8.2:
ZeissFan
Veteran
The price of this camera is too high. But I think it will come down. I would find it ore appealing at $450-$500. It's still just an advanced P&S, as I see it.
(I'm still intrigued by the camera, by the way.)
(I'm still intrigued by the camera, by the way.)
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
Price will come down. It is the first of its kind after all. But I still want one. I'll wait for the first store nearby to get my greasy hands on one.
OdDbaLL
Established
I walked down to my local Jessops and had a look at one today. It's bigger than I imagined, and I'm not trying to start a war here, but my first reaction was to look in the VF that wasn't there. It's definitely soaked up the RF pedigree.
It's quite a solid feeling body. A nice kind of heft. The kitted zoom lens looked solid enough but nothing to write home about.
What really didn't work for me though was that the rear is just chock full of those usual cheap twiddly digtal buttons. The hands on feeling is very busy, and it's quite the kaleidoscope of switch types from buttons, to twirly wheels, to multidrectional pads and knurled knobs. They must have half a dozen different suppliers lined up. AF speed seemed fine just trying it out in the shop (which isn't much of a test). Manual focusing was fine aswell but not something I could really see myself doing.
In the end though it's going to be the Sigma DP2 that I'll order next week. That should tide me over digitally til that mythical full frame Leica M comes along.
It's quite a solid feeling body. A nice kind of heft. The kitted zoom lens looked solid enough but nothing to write home about.
What really didn't work for me though was that the rear is just chock full of those usual cheap twiddly digtal buttons. The hands on feeling is very busy, and it's quite the kaleidoscope of switch types from buttons, to twirly wheels, to multidrectional pads and knurled knobs. They must have half a dozen different suppliers lined up. AF speed seemed fine just trying it out in the shop (which isn't much of a test). Manual focusing was fine aswell but not something I could really see myself doing.
In the end though it's going to be the Sigma DP2 that I'll order next week. That should tide me over digitally til that mythical full frame Leica M comes along.
NickTrop
Veteran
LCD-only focusing an framing that you have to hold a foot away from your noggin' to frame/focus... "soccer mom framing"? The more I think about it, the more I think this a deal breaker. C'mon - are you kiddn' me? That's fine for a little digital point-n-shooter - perfectly acceptable, not for a camera in this class, in this price range, that purports to be a serious "pro-sumer" model. Never liked optional optical finder in a hotshoe - kluge, imo. That said, Oly is on the right track... it's just not for me.
Ajax
Jonathan Eastland
Manual Focus Asist on EP1
Manual Focus Asist on EP1
Hi,
Just thought you might be interested.
I have just finished my initial review of the E-P1 for the BJP (British Journal of Photography) due for publication in a fortnight. The report contains references to the use of Leitz/Leica glass on this model as does my earlier report on the Lumix G1 (BJP 10/06/09). Both cameras came with kit lenses which from both an overall product construction perspective and optically are lightweight polysomething with moulded glass/acrylic elements. Results up to 20inches wide at 300ppi are o.k. but way behind what it's possible to get with old mechanical glass of almost any brand...Pentax Takumars, 1960s Nikons, 1950s or earlier Leitz fitted to either of these new cameras - you just need to know how to tweak the files once on screen.
Anyway, enough of the blabber. Here's a link for those who might be interested in using older mechanical lenses on the E-P1. The set up method is quick and works great with everything I tried on it from M and R lenses to modern Zeiss and Voigtlander using a variety of differently sourced mechanical adapters - mostly cheap ones from China.
Link:
http://www.ajaxdigest.blogspot.com/
best and regards
Jonathan Eastland
Manual Focus Asist on EP1
Hi,
Just thought you might be interested.
I have just finished my initial review of the E-P1 for the BJP (British Journal of Photography) due for publication in a fortnight. The report contains references to the use of Leitz/Leica glass on this model as does my earlier report on the Lumix G1 (BJP 10/06/09). Both cameras came with kit lenses which from both an overall product construction perspective and optically are lightweight polysomething with moulded glass/acrylic elements. Results up to 20inches wide at 300ppi are o.k. but way behind what it's possible to get with old mechanical glass of almost any brand...Pentax Takumars, 1960s Nikons, 1950s or earlier Leitz fitted to either of these new cameras - you just need to know how to tweak the files once on screen.
Anyway, enough of the blabber. Here's a link for those who might be interested in using older mechanical lenses on the E-P1. The set up method is quick and works great with everything I tried on it from M and R lenses to modern Zeiss and Voigtlander using a variety of differently sourced mechanical adapters - mostly cheap ones from China.
Link:
http://www.ajaxdigest.blogspot.com/
best and regards
Jonathan Eastland