Olympus Ep1- Not Strictly A Range Finder

Ray Kilby

Ray Kilby

Established
Local time
9:24 PM
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
64
I am putting a link here for anyone interested in the Olympus EP1 that with an adapter lets you put on Leica M glass as some of you out there might be interested. I am still getting to know this camera, and the pictures are not particularly interesting nor are they a scientific and measured test, just a random play to be honest with some randon tweaking. I have used the Olympus 14 to 42 and two M lenses, the 28 Elmerit 2.8 and the Sumicron 1:2 50mm.

I sort of don't have a fully thought out opinion at the moment. I guess it's as good as the canon G9 and in someways much better. But there are some odd colours in the end of focus that worries me a little. But the B/W is fabulous. Also you can by flicking through the info button have get the setting that allows you by pressing the OK button to zoom in to help with manual focusing with an M lens. (You do need to open up to do it easilly) So its very possible, but a bit long winded! All That said, its great fun, especialy the ability to super impose in camera.

http://gallery.me.com/raykilby#100359
 
Not strictly a rangefinder?

I think "Not at all a rangefinder, in any way" is closer to the truth..
 
4/3s chips do not justify or show the capabilities of Leitz, Zeiss, or Voigtlander glass. Honestly, and in "real" use, I find the lenses that were designed for these cameras to perform best.

The EP1 nor the Panasonic G1, no matter how some people which it could be or how much fun it allows them to use their M glass, are substitutes for the M8.
 
Last edited:
The EP1 is "Not a rangefinder camera" in that it lacks one. It may be considered a direct view camera if one ignores the electronics that generate the view.

An ARCA Swiss owner is unlikely to agree. :)

yours
FPJ
 
Last edited:
kbg32 said:
4/3s chips do not justify or show the capabilities of Leitz, Zeiss, or Voigtlander glass. Honestly, and in "real" use, I find the lenses that were designed for these cameras to perform best.
Click to expand...

An interesting thought. Can the software of a digital be, in effect, tuned or biased to work best with a given set of lenses? If so, is it being done? Is software used to overcome specific lens deficiencies or faults?
 
kbg32 said:
4/3s chips do not justify or show the capabilities of Leitz, Zeiss, or Voigtlander glass.
Click to expand...
True, but then neither do my photographs!:D

I just got my M adapter in the post when I returned home from work today...weather in London is so dull I haven't had a chance to use it yet. Personally I'm really excited about using my Industars, Leica, Canon and Zeiss glass on a digital sensor.

Not concerned about maximum capabilities - I don't think TriX shows the lenses at their highest resolution either! But I love it in my M6

I've already seen the wonderful swirly bokeh from my Canon 35/1.5 on a shot of the back garden - I'm hooked.

Ray - liking the shots - looks like your having fun too;)
 
"Are you just talking about Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations?" Errr. I think so. I am not one for technical language Sam N, so my apogolies. Basically, when the image begins to go soft as the focus drops away in the background there seems to be some colour cast, albiet tiny on the edge of some images, such as leaves on a tree. Is that what is ment by Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations? If so, then that's it. It's not on everything, and can certainly be dealt with in photoshop. But it is there.

"I think "Not at all a rangefinder, in any way" is closer to the truth.." yes you are correct. I have used an M6 for years and have had an M8. I knw it's not a range finder. The title was am attempt at humour. Sorry if that offended. It was not intended too.

I am also aware that it's not an M8 and I am sort of regreting getting rid of mine a while back because I had so much trouble with it and became disapointed with Leica's help. Thats not to say I didnt love it, but I stopped putting it in my bag when going on jobs because I couldn't rely upon it. So I purchased some Ziess lenses for my Nikon that I could.

I just posted the thread because I know some of you range finder guys like me are interested in this camera. Thgought it might be fun.

Thanks for the nice comments too by the way.

Ray
 
thanks for the input ray, sorry if some are negative but the 4/3rds can be a sensitive subject for some.
i opted for a g1 with the m adapter but, like keith, i prefer the camera with the lenses that were designed for it. not that putting my m lenses on it isn't fun but if i am going to use an auto everything camera then i also like the auto focus too.
for me, i'm hoping than olympus or panasonic come up with something closer to a real rangefinder in the future.
 
But folks with Leica lenses want a digital camera to use their lenses on and the Pany G1 and E-P1 are all they can afford. There seem to be a lot of people using film rangefinders only because they can't afford a digital RF, not because they really want to use film. Kind of interesting.
 
used rd1s are getting affordable, at least compared to new 4/3rds gear.

one of my rd bodies was about the same price as the ep kit...course no lens was attached...
 
I think it is great that one can use lenses by other makers on the G1 and the digi Oly Pen, crop factor or no crop factor.
This is a bonus plus .
No one should poop on anyone's parade.
 
kbg32 said:
4/3s chips do not justify or show the capabilities of Leitz, Zeiss, or Voigtlander glass.
Click to expand...

Heh. I can't respond with anything more elaborate. :)

Honestly, and in "real" use, I find the lenses that were designed for these cameras to perform best.
Click to expand...

Best "for you" of course, since everything is relative in photography...
 
I've spent this evening going through my lenses to see which ones, if any, dont fit - so far..

Jupiter 12 35 mm - rear element too big
Summicron 50/2 DR wont focus at infinity -but can be used for close-ups
Screw mount Summitar - works but can't be collapsed
Elmar 90/4 collapsible - works but can't be collapsed

....:p
 
Back Alley, Saying that a lens isn't as good as you might hope it would be on another body, is in my opinion absolutely fine. It is, quite probably true, as I am currently finding out. Its also OK I think to say a camera is rubbish, that's an opinion. Even dare I say not liking a photo, is sort of OK too. Though I'd tend to only talk about photographs I like as it's more useful and rewarding. But to correct you over a title because you miss the irony or the humour and be a little, dare I say 'snide' is well, snide. Even if some one doesn't know the difference between something and another, you sort of make a point of being helpful. Well I try to do that, though maybe not always sucessfully. I would like to think that Kida, who is 23 is trying to be helpful and just sort of over shot because, well he's 23. Have you seen Kida's pictures by the way, I really like them. They are really lively and fun and he has a good eye.

Ray
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom