Edward Castro wrote:
It's a 12.3MP Live-MOS sensor, there typical one.
Here some info I don't like!
Screen size: 3", 230k pixels!
If they want us to use the LCD screen for composition, why not give us 920k resolution!? High end P&S are giving us 420k screens and higher. IF it turns out true, this is a joke.
It seems to be a strange mix of high-end and low end spec. A 230k screen is silly, even the (apparently cheaper) G1 is 460k. At the leaked pricepoint it should be 920k.
But the leaked specs indicate an ISO 100-6400 expanded range (200-3200 native) and a 14 RAW buffer, fairly good specs for any camera at the leaked pricepoint.
Edward Castro wrote:
Lotusm, once I visited xitek forums, the pictures popped up. Before that I got a big picture saying no direct linking or something to that effect.
To me this is the compact I've been waiting for, but not the price I've been waiting for. Just to expensive. I won't pay more then $700 for this camera.
The kit I'm hoping for is the camera, 17mm and viewfinder.
I'd rather have the 1.5 stops faster 20/1.7 that is supposedly coming out later in the year. There are also rumors of a smaller M43 camera from Panasonic.
If it is the same 12.3mp sensor from the E-30 and E-620, it'll be pretty good at ISO800, and useable at ISO1600. Not quite as clean as the latest APS-C cameras, but pretty nice with an F/1.7 lens.
Sam N wrote:
I'd rather have the 1.5 stops faster 20/1.7 that is supposedly coming out later in the year. There are also rumors of a smaller M43 camera from Panasonic.
If it is the same 12.3mp sensor from the E-30 and E-620, it'll be pretty good at ISO800, and useable at ISO1600. Not quite as clean as the latest APS-C cameras, but pretty nice with an F/1.7 lens.
The G1 also uses the same sensor, it was the first body with it.
I'm looking forward to the 20/1.7 but I'll likely also get the 17 (especially if the rumoured ~$100 without VF is true).
I also agree with MAWZ on the leaked high/low spec, but the screen does follow the rest of the Oly lineup.
Which only shows how Oly sometimes just doesn't get it. The E-30 and E-620 should have had 920k LCD's, at least the E-30 (which has the worst screen in-class despite being the newest body in-class, everything else at its pricepoint except the end of life K20D has 920k 3" LCD's). Oly has the best Live View implementation in-class compromised by some of the worst LCD's.
The 17 will be decent for outdoor shooting. The 20 f/1.7 will be the equivalent of a 40 f/3.5 on full frame, which makes it actually usable indoors in a lot of situations (besides being a great focal length IMO). Can't wait for the reviews.
Uh, I don't think you understand f-stop equivalents... f/1.7 is always f/1.7. Your field of view will be that of a 40mm lens, and you'll have more DOF due to the shorter focal-length. I don't want to derail this thread with another flamewar about this issue, but just thought you should know.
Highlights:
- 3 inch LCD (resolution not listed...)
- 12.3mp sensor
- 720p video
- in-body IS (at least it seems like that's what it's saying)
- very similar to E-620 / E-30 in terms of art filters, in-camera RAW development, etc.
- supports multiple aspect ratios (4:3, 3:2, 16:9, square), but I don't think it's an actual multi-aspect sensor like the GH1's. It's probably just cropping the top from 4:3.
Too bad about the motion jpeg... but otherwise looks like a nice spec sheet if it's true.
mawz wrote:
Which only shows how Oly sometimes just doesn't get it. The E-30 and E-620 should have had 920k LCD's, at least the E-30 (which has the worst screen in-class despite being the newest body in-class, everything else at its pricepoint except the end of life K20D has 920k 3" LCD's). Oly has the best Live View implementation in-class compromised by some of the worst LCD's.
Yes indeed. Further, at least the E620 and E30 have a optical viewfinder so you can see clearly and confirm focus reasonably accurately. On this E-P1 you ONLY have the rear LCD and a the low resolutions 230K is really inadequate for these functions. With 920K LCD's readily available, and given the price point of this camera and market for this camera, it is truly odd that Olympus would cut corners here with the cheap part and limit the usability of the camera. If the LCD is only 230K, it will be quite disappointing, and would have to think twice about purchasing one.
Sam N wrote:
Uh, I don't think you understand f-stop equivalents... f/1.7 is always f/1.7. Your field of view will be that of a 40mm lens, and you'll have more DOF due to the shorter focal-length. I don't want to derail this thread with another flamewar about this issue, but just thought you should know.
Highlights:
- 3 inch LCD (resolution not listed...)
- 12.3mp sensor
- 720p video
- in-body IS (at least it seems like that's what it's saying)
- very similar to E-620 / E-30 in terms of art filters, in-camera RAW development, etc.
- supports multiple aspect ratios (4:3, 3:2, 16:9, square), but I don't think it's an actual multi-aspect sensor like the GH1's. It's probably just cropping the top from 4:3.
Too bad about the motion jpeg... but otherwise looks like a nice spec sheet if it's true.
Sam N wrote:
Uh, I don't think you understand f-stop equivalents... f/1.7 is always f/1.7. Your field of view will be that of a 40mm lens, and you'll have more DOF due to the shorter focal-length. I don't want to derail this thread with another flamewar about this issue, but just thought you should know.
f/1.7 is f/1.7, but in DOF terms, an f/1.7 lens on Four Thirds has about the same DOF as an f/3.5 lens on FF.
Kit lens looks decent. Distortion at the wide end is bad, but that should be simple enough to correct. Might even be enough to make me wait for the panasonic 20mm...
Sam N wrote:
Uh, I don't think you understand f-stop equivalents... f/1.7 is always f/1.7.
I understand the concept perfectly, and perhaps better than you based on your comment. Using a 20mm f/1.7 will be equivalent to using a 40mm f/3.5 on full frame. That goes for the focal length, the DOF, and the light-gathering and -transmitting abilities of the lens as used on the particular system. f/1.7 is just a descriptor of a physical relationship, whereas the amount of light hitting the sensor is what drives image quality. An f/1.7 lens (at max aperture) on m43 will transmit as much light to the m43 sensor as a FF lens at f/3.5 will transmit to a FF sensor.
I also don't want to derail this thread, so thank you for that sentiment. Like I said, the 20 f/1.7 will suit me fine. I don't think the f/5.6 equivalent 17 is going to be good for indoor work, except maybe for architecture if the anti-shake really kicks butt-- love the FOV but not the slowness, so I'm hoping for a faster prime there.
Regarding higher ISOs, it looks to me like the ISO 800 should be usable, and ISO 1600 in a pinch, though the latter shows marked softness due to noise reduction. We'll see what the reviews have to say on this-- almost all samples were shot at ISO 200.
