Olympus E-P1 classic rangefinder Micro Four Thirds: it's a beaut!

[Hocus Eye.]

I was most interested in this camera until I saw the price. I think that Olympus have seriously blundered here. The maximum they should have priced it at was £400. There are dSLRs at less than that. Olympus itself is selling the E620 with 14- 42 lens kit at £596. Anyone who already has a D420 upwards who is looking to have a pocket camera to go with it would be better advised to go with the 25mm pancake lens (expensive yes, but small) to put on their existing camera. I bought my E420 with that lens and have had no problems getting it into my jacket pocket. My Ricoh R5 has had a lot less use since I got the E420.

I might get an E620 once they are available secondhand. I have a 50mm (100mm equivalent) f/2 portrait /macro Olympus lens which is the dog's dangly bits and two such small dSLR cameras carried out and about each with a different lens would be no great difficulty. I have an adaptor for the OM lenses and a long OM zoom that I haven't used since last summer.

Sorry Olympus, I am staying with my Ricoh until you get your pricing sorted.

 

[editor]

E-P1 video recording examples here: http://www.photographyblog.com/articles/olympus_e-p1_videos/

 

[editor]

The camera goes on sale in Jessops next Thursday (25th).
http://www.photographyblog.com/news/olympus_pen_ep-1_to_hit_shelves_next_week/

 

[Piers Gibbon]

i like the fact that it can take old olympus om lenses...simply because my dad has a few of those

hmm could be an amazing prezzie to give him..but sheesh..the price!

my lx3 is still rocking my world hugely...

 

[Refused as fuck]

Leave your sexual deviances out of this thread, please.

 

[editor]

Leave your sexual deviances out of this thread, please.

Hi. This a forum for discussing cameras.

 

[Paul Russell]

Oh, it's the launch thing tonight featuring David Bailey (I know: who's he?) isn't it?

 

[Biddlybee]

Nor a million miles from my Mamiya rangefinder

(and hundreds of other 1960s cameras )

e2a: the $900+ price tag being bandied about is worrying, though. Especially with the way that dollars usually get translated into pounds

I love that case

 

[editor]

I'm thinking that it's a little bit bigger than I imagine it to be, but damn those retro lines are seductive! Good to see that they've wheeled Bailey out for the launch - he's been linked with Olympus since the days of the mighty OM1.

I'd love a digital version of the Olympus XA, mind.

 

[Refused as fuck]

Hi. This a forum for discussing cameras.

Hello. I was making a joke about his camera getting his rocks off.

 

[George & Bill]

we're talking about a DSLR-sized sensor stuffed inside that retro compact body

Except, no - the camera has a 2x crop factor, meaning the sensor's a fair bit smaller than on most dslrs, which have a 1.5 or 1.6 crop factor.

Meaning that the rangefinder has gone from being basically equal to the slr in the days of film (because they were both 35mm), to its very clear inferior at the present stage of digital development.

Don't get me wrong - it looks nice, and I would love to get my hands on one. But when you compare it to what you can get from a dslr for the same money, it does look like another piece of jewellery for people who can afford such things.

Most serious photographers will wait for rangefinders that genuinely do have dslr-sized sensors - that'll be the point at which to get excited.

 

[winjer]

But when you compare it to what you can get from a dslr for the same money, it does look like another piece of jewellery for people who can afford such things.

How about comparing the output instead of the specifications?

Most serious photographers will wait for rangefinders that genuinely do have dslr-sized sensors - that'll be the point at which to get excited.

Keep up, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M8

 

[Stanley Edwards]

...

Also, from www.dcresource.com

"Manual focus allows you to set the focus distance yourself, though that can be difficult, since there are no distance markings on the lens, nor are any displayed on the LCD."

Hmm...

That's a huge omission. Out of my list on that point alone. Never use autofocus, so have no interest in speed of that, but blimey! How can you leave out something so important on a camera harking all retro?

 

[stowpirate]

Or better still get a real rangefinder camera - or not

 

[winjer]

Unlike that one?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Or better still get a real rangefinder camera

That be a viewfinder camera.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

Not only is that camera above not a rangefinder camera but nor is the E-P1 which is the topic of this thread. People are using the term 'rangefinder' as shorthand for a small compact that is not an SLR. This must be very confusing to anyone who doesn't understand what is going on.

 

[stowpirate]

Not only is that camera above not a rangefinder camera but nor is the E-P1 which is the topic of this thread. People are using the term 'rangefinder' as shorthand for a small compact that is not an SLR. This must be very confusing to anyone who doesn't understand what is going on.

It might as well be referring to the camera above as it has nothing at all in common with a rangefinder camera. Digital compact equals rangefinder has got to be some form of joke? The M8, RD-1 you can manually focus as you can with a DSLR. A point and shoot guessamatic Leica 1 it maybe

 

[George & Bill]

How about comparing the output instead of the specifications?

You wanna punt that the output will be as good as what's available from comparably-priced (or ever much cheaper) 1.5 crop dslrs? Be my guest. Even if it is, you're still buying into a system that by dint of the size of the sensor (which can't be changed from one model to the next if you want to keep your lenses), will always keep the boffins pedalling twice as hard just in the hope of keeping up.

Keep up, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M8

35mm rangefinders could/can be had for a comparable cost to 35mm slrs. Is the digital M8 comparable to dslrs of the same, or even half the price? Er, no.

 

[winjer]

You wanna punt that the output will be as good as what's available from comparably-priced (or ever much cheaper) 1.5 crop dslrs? Be my guest.

You're still just comparing specifications, the output will depend on the camera, the lenses and most importantly the photographer, so a smaller camera will sometimes be at an advantage, as with 35mm vs 120 etc.

35mm rangefinders could/can be had for a comparable cost to 35mm slrs. Is the digital M8 comparable to dslrs of the same, or even half the price? Er, no.

Apples/oranges.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Not only is that camera above not a rangefinder camera but nor is the E-P1 which is the topic of this thread. People are using the term 'rangefinder' as shorthand for a small compact that is not an SLR. This must be very confusing to anyone who doesn't understand what is going on.

I mentioned this way back in the thread.

 

[George & Bill]

You're still just comparing specifications, the output will depend on the camera, the lenses and most importantly the photographer, so a smaller camera will sometimes be at an advantage, as with 35mm vs 120 etc.

OK so you just don't know what you're talking about. The size of the sensor has an inherent effect on the camera's ability to gather light. There are no two ways about that.

The ability of the photographer has got nothing to do with how good the camera is, which is what this thread is about.

Apples/oranges.

Any more meaningless catchphrases you'd like to share?

 

[stowpirate]

R-D1xG should be half the price of an M8

http://theonlinephotographer.typepa...009/02/welcome-news-for-rangefinder-fans.html

http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=NewsDesk_Internal&article_num=022709-1

Now that is a real camera

 

[winjer]

The ability of the photographer has got nothing to do with how good the camera is, which is what this thread is about.

You're not talking about how 'good' the camera is, only how its sensor compares to another sensor, which is pointless. You're also ignoring the difference in lens design.

I have to assume the only reason you posted at all was to have a go anyone who buys an E-P1 for not being a 'serious' photographer. I can't imagine why.

 

[George & Bill]

You're not talking about how 'good' the camera is, only how its sensor compares to another sensor, which is pointless. You're also ignoring the difference in lens design.

I have to assume the only reason you posted at all was to have a go anyone who buys an E-P1 for not being a 'serious' photographer. I can't imagine why.

It should be clear that the reason I posted was that the article linked to in the OP claimed that the E-P1 has a "DSLR-sized sensor" - which is not the case. Like it or not, the size of the sensor has an innate and inescapable effect on the image quality that a camera is capable of achieving.

There may be lots of things to recommend this camera, and there's nothing to suggest I want to have a go at anyone who may buy one. My point is not that it's a bad camera, but that the system will not be comparable to dslr systems as 35mm rangefinders have been comparable to 35mm slrs. It's a shame you can't grasp this.

 

[Vintage Paw]

Buy it for me?
I'll let you lick me whenever you want.

*takes shirt off*

I would consider this ...

 

[Paul Russell]

Apparently, Bailey's first words at the launch were "Wow, it's got a viewfinder" and "Can't I have it in black?" !

 

[cybertect]

It should be clear that the reason I posted was that the article linked to in the OP claimed that the E-P1 has a "DSLR-sized sensor" - which is not the case.

Er, there's no rule that it has to be 35mm full frame, or even APS-C to qualify, is there?

The EP-1 has the same size sensor that Olympus, Panasonic and Leica use in their 4/3 DSLRs. They are single lens reflex bodies (mirror, prism, viewfinder, etc.) with a digital sensor. Sounds like a DSLR-sized sensor to me.

It's only 20% smaller by area than the Foveon used in Sigma's SD15 DSLR (only 0.8 mm shorter, most of that is made up in the length difference between 3:2 and 4:3 aspect ratios) and only 30% smaller than Canon's APS-C sensors.

In comparison, the 4/3 sensor is four times bigger than the 1/1.7" sensor used in better quality compacts like the Canon G10 and ten times bigger than the 1/2.5" sensors used in lower end digicams.

 

[George & Bill]

Er, there's no rule that it has to be 35mm full frame, or even APS-C to qualify, is there?

The EP-1 has the same size sensor that Olympus, Panasonic and Leica use in their 4/3 DSLRs. They are single lens reflex bodies (mirror, prism, viewfinder, etc.) with a digital sensor. Sounds like a DSLR-sized sensor to me.

It's only 20% smaller by area than the Foveon used in Sigma's SD15 DSLR (only 0.8 mm shorter, most of that is made up in the length difference between 3:2 and 4:3 aspect ratios) and only 30% smaller than Canon's APS-C sensors.

In comparison, the 4/3 sensor is four times bigger than the 1/1.7" sensor used in better quality compacts like the Canon G10 and ten times bigger than the 1/2.5" sensors used in lower end digicams.

I wasn't aware that Olympus used such small sensors on their DSLRs - but fair point, in that case. Doesn't make the E-P1 any better, of course - rather, it shows why Canon and Nikon have the DSLR market sewn up. Nor does it alter the fact that the EP-1 is not a camera, like so many film rangefinders were, that offers the same amount of sensitive material as the best (or even the second-best) contemporary SLRs.

 

[Refused as fuck]

Saw it in the shop window and stood there gawping with lust for about half an hour. The price-tag made me wet myself, though.