The Unbelievable Camera

[Godfrey]

My Olympus E-1 was manufactured in October 2003. Today, I stuck a 1965 Leitz Summicron-R 50mm f/2 on it and went for my morning walk with friends.

Holy Cow! How can such an ancient camera and even more ancient lens produce such beautiful photographs?

Olympus E-1 + Leitz Summicron-R 50mm f/2
ISO 800 @ f/2 @ 1/125 second​

There's a fine line between great specs and a great camera.

G

 

[helen.HH]

Wow, looks Fab !
When i had my oly E1 ( big Beautiful beast , waterproof and who knows maybe bullet proof too, back in 2008)
that was what I used, The r summicron 50...
Stellar Combo indeed !!

 

[f16sunshine]

Great subject + Excellent photographer = nice results 😀

 

[giellaleafapmu]

Yep, the E-1 is a hell of a camera, I really cannot understand what's in the heads of Olympus designers, they made the perfect ergonomics, almost perfect sensor (for its time), perfect lenses (and they had more ones for larger formats already designed if they wanted) camera then never followed the first model with anything even remotely comparable.

GLF

 

[Godfrey]

Yep, the E-1 is a hell of a camera, I really cannot understand what's in the heads of Olympus designers, they made the perfect ergonomics, almost perfect sensor (for its time), perfect lenses (and they had more ones for larger formats already designed if they wanted) camera then never followed the first model with anything even remotely comparable.

Well, I had the E-5 as well and it was a better performer than the E-1 in every measurable way. I sold the E-5 when I closed my business as I could still get 80% of what I paid out of it, and the E-1 was already depreciated to the point where I couldn't get anything worth selling it for, never mind that I just enjoy shooting with it now and then.

But I have to say, the ergonomics of the camera and the feel of E-1 photos remains simply amazing. "If only..." is easy for us to say, but if only they had produced exactly the same thing as the E-1 with a 10Mpixel sensor and faster data system, I'd have been quite satisfied with it. I'm still satisfied with the E-1 just as it is after 13,000 photos: it strikes a very sweet balance, what a great camera ought to do.

G

 

[GaryLH]

That a nice shot.
Gary

 

[giellaleafapmu]

Well, I had the E-5 as well and it was a better performer than the E-1 in every measurable way. I sold the E-5 when I closed my business as I could still get 80% of what I paid out of it, and the E-1 was already depreciated to the point where I couldn't get anything worth selling it for, never mind that I just enjoy shooting with it now and then.

But I have to say, the ergonomics of the camera and the feel of E-1 photos remains simply amazing. "If only..." is easy for us to say, but if only they had produced exactly the same thing as the E-1 with a 10Mpixel sensor and faster data system, I'd have been quite satisfied with it. I'm still satisfied with the E-1 just as it is after 13,000 photos: it strikes a very sweet balance, what a great camera ought to do.

G

What I meant is that the E-1 was a competitive camera against anything which was available at the moment it was launched and that it was a really innovative design, independently on whether one happens to like it or not, where later models were less and less competitive if compared with other brands and seemed to me a step backward in design as if the marketing office of Olympus got scared and decided than instead of a smaller professional body with an innovative design was better to produce a camera which despite having a smaller sensor was almost as large as Nikon and Canon Full Frame offering and copied their ergonomics too. I don't have the E-1 but have the E-3 and of course the image quality is better than the E-1 and has nice stuff such as tilting screen and image stabilization but I simply don't get same feeling as with the E-1 so I skipped altogether the E-5 and moved back to Nikon (and recently for fun to Pentax). Looking in retrospective maybe already the E-1 was a step back from the E-10 and E-20 which more than ten years ago already had the semitransparent mirror and snappy live view and tilting screen which is very closed to today Sony's technology.

GLF

 

[Range-rover]

Just because it old doesn't mean it won't take great pictures! We can't let those
camera manufacturers dictate to us when a camera is older we have to trade it
in for the new model, that's what they would love all of us to do. keep it and enjoy
it.

Range

 

[peterm1]

I have often admired the E 1 but have never used it. I do however still own a Panasonic L1. Another blast from the past that still takes wonderful photos. And it shares some technology with some of the earlier Olympus cameras such as the E-1 and E 300 including of course the 4/3 sensor and also the sideways mirror.

 

[Frida]

shush!!! There won't be anything to talk about on the RFF if everyone finds out the camera they already own takes great images.

So true. It's amazing how much you can do with old gear once you forget about the new stuff.

 

[zuiko85]

My first DSLR was an E-300 with the 8mp Kodak sensor. I sold it when I got my E-410 but now regret that decision. The E-300 pictures were just better somehow than the panny sensor in the 410.

I'm temped to get an E-1 body and the grid focusing screen just so I can see to manual focus my legacy OM Zuikos. You sure can't nail manual focus on the 410's screen more than about 25% of the time.

 

[Godfrey]

What I meant is that the E-1 was a competitive camera against anything which was available at the moment it was launched and that it was a really innovative design, independently on whether one happens to like it or not, where later models were less and less competitive if compared with other brands and seemed to me a step backward in design as if the marketing office of Olympus got scared and decided than instead of a smaller professional body with an innovative design was better to produce a camera which despite having a smaller sensor was almost as large as Nikon and Canon Full Frame offering and copied their ergonomics too. I don't have the E-1 but have the E-3 and of course the image quality is better than the E-1 and has nice stuff such as tilting screen and image stabilization but I simply don't get same feeling as with the E-1 so I skipped altogether the E-5 and moved back to Nikon (and recently for fun to Pentax). Looking in retrospective maybe already the E-1 was a step back from the E-10 and E-20 which more than ten years ago already had the semitransparent mirror and snappy live view and tilting screen which is very closed to today Sony's technology.

GLF

In their defense, the body design of the E-3/E-5 models was a direct result of Olympus research with their professional user community, the people for whom these cameras were developed. The move to a more "Nikon/Canon like" shape and design was a direct result of what those pros requested. The bigger hump was a result of the oversize prism needed to get viewfinder brightness up, and the request for a built in flash as a system controller.

I skipped the E-3 as by the time I was ready to buy, the E-5 had already been announced. The E-5 sensor is significantly improved over the E-3, and all the rest of the camera's operations were substantively refined. It fit my business needs perfectly. If I hadn't closed the business, I'd still be working with it.

Their new E-M1 looks to be the fusion camera I was expecting. I might just have to have one!

G

 

[maitani]

the E1 CCD look of the superb kodak 5mpx sensor is unique (and has rather 'big pixels') for a 4/3sensor camera.

it gives M9 like results at base iso, a reason I never sold my E-1, when i want 'colour' and 'daylight' it's still E-1 for me. also the raw's take a huge treatment in every area. (unlike E3/E5 files, which fall apart quickly in the shawods and highlights)

at iso 800 the grain is very filmlike and rather subtle.

the camera made me fall in love with this system, but every following release, was rather a disappointment.

the whisper quiet shutter sound alone is worth nowdays asking prices.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

In their defense, the body design of the E-3/E-5 models was a direct result of Olympus research with their professional user community, the people for whom these cameras were developed. The move to a more "Nikon/Canon like" shape and design was a direct result of what those pros requested. The bigger hump was a result of the oversize prism needed to get viewfinder brightness up, and the request for a built in flash as a system controller.

I skipped the E-3 as by the time I was ready to buy, the E-5 had already been announced. The E-5 sensor is significantly improved over the E-3, and all the rest of the camera's operations were substantively refined. It fit my business needs perfectly. If I hadn't closed the business, I'd still be working with it.

Their new E-M1 looks to be the fusion camera I was expecting. I might just have to have one!

G

The bump doesn't bother me, the thing I like about the E-1 is that it doesn't have anything to the left of the lens, which gives to me a nicer grip, and the shape of the grip on the right part with a very square portion on which to rest the fingers and a nicely shaped back part which fits like a glove to my hand. Also I like the placement of buttons, the one touch WB and quick swap between M/AFs/AFc and a dedicated button to set the AF point, instead of having to set the function button to some function and look in the menu for the others. Anyway, it is clear now what the mistake from Olympus was: they should have asked RFF how to design the camera not the pros! 😀

GLF

 

[Godfrey]

...Anyway, it is clear now what the mistake from Olympus was: they should have asked RFF how to design the camera not the pros!

🙂

Well, I'm surely not selling mine. I'll use it 'til it no longer works.

Reflecting: I still have my 11-22 and 35 Macro lenses. Combine them with the Leica R lenses from 50 to 180 mm and, dang!, I have a complete coverage system still!

As maitani said, at base ISO it produces a look very similar to the M9, and the coarser renderings at higher sensitivity are actually quite pleasing ... IMO, no doubt due to the heavy AA filter and relatively low resolution. I've found that, like the M9, with the latest Adobe raw converter, I can get very nice results even at ISO 1600-3200. And the mirror/shutter is so nice and quiet.

Definitely one of the great cameras of the Early Digital Age. 🙂

G

 

[David Hughes]

2003; ancient! WFMAT...

 

[rbsinto]

"The two most important things in photography are this."
Said as he pointed to the lens.
"And this."
Said as he pointed to his head.
"And everything else is just commentary."

 

[Godfrey]

The E-1 was still on my desk this morning when I saw this shot and had to grab it...

Olympus E-1 + ZD 35mm f/3.5 Macro
ISO 400 @ f/3.5 @ 1/60 sec​

Espresso on my birthday morning. Mmm.. ;-)

G

 

[Godfrey]

2003; ancient! WFMAT...

WFMAT?

G

 

[robert blu]

Is it the camera? Is it the lens? Is it the subject? Is it the photographer? I do not know and don't care but they are both very nice photos!
robert
PS:I specially love the moka for the morning coffee!