Recently I went into semi-retirement from the commercial print/fashion world to pursue other photo-related projects. Having done that I also decided I wanted to "lighten the load" with my photo gear since I no longer have jobs that dictate having so many pieces of stuff and such specialized equipment. [ Just how often can you actually use a 1200mm lens? ] laughs

I've been in search of a new camera system that would give me the simplicity I wanted without sacrificing the pro-type quality I've become accustomed to. Although I considered using a simpler setup with one of my film bodies or, using a pro-sumer digital body but none of those options fully met my imaging needs. Almost on a whim I decided to try the new Olympus E-1 to see what it would do, and here's my impressions after 200 images:

On first holding the camera (with the extra battery grip already attached at the dealer) it felt as "real" and purposeful as any of my pro bodies (1D-s, 1V-HS, F3, F5). The control layout is straightforward and the control actions give very positive and predictable feedback - when you move a dial or push a button you KNOW you've just done that action.

The viewfinder is extra bright, as bright or brighter than my brightest pro body the 1D-s, and the rear LCD is also bright with great contrast and quality. In fact, it's the best LCD backpanel display I've seen on any camera, period.

Although the lens selection is weak to say the least, I chose the 50mm f/2.0 macro, 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5, and the 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5 and the EC14 1.4x converter. At the moment, the 11-22mm lens has not yet arrived at the dealer. So how does it all perform? Well...

I don't pay to post images here but I'll do my best to describe the results - those that are interested I can email examples to you directly later this week. It's a 5 meg-pix body and I expected results to be on par with the D100 or 10D, but from my own tests I think it's actually a few steps better and here's why:

First, all my images are shot RAW and converted with Olympus Studio - I read the DPreview on this and learned about the moire and other problems when shooting fine JPEG's.

Using Olympus Studio default settings, default color settings, manual white balance in camera with manual exposure based on my Sekonic meter readings, out of the camera images are...stunning. Contrast, color balance, saturation and skin tones are actually BETTER than my 1D-S! Say it aint so, not the venerable flagship of the company I've been shooting with since 1986??!! I was shocked, to say the least, but results are what they are and the images don't lie. In fact, in order to get the same great color balance from my 1D-S I have to shoot in Color space 3 - high chroma and bump up saturation in PS during conversion to get the same deep, rich color from the Canon. What??? No way!! A $7000 camera outperformed by a $1700 body? It gets better, read on.

Depending on your subject type and shooting style, digital noise from the camera is either your friend or your mortal enemy, most here I think consider it to be the latter and we're always trying to get rid of or diminish it as much as possible. Noise is both the E-1 strong AND it's weak point:

At any ISO setting there is more noticeable noise than either a 10D or 1D-S however this extra noise isn't exactly all bad - but again, this has more to do with my personal preference in imagery than actual "better technology". I'll explain:

At higher ISO settings [400 or better] noise from the Canon takes on a greenish-brown hue and affects the overall color of the image especially in low-light/long shutter exposures. In the E-1 however, noise takes on the exact color of the image, not adding or taking away color hence the noise looks exactly like film grain! Now that's the kind of noise I don't hate to have, and that can be used as a tool to create a look or "feel" to an image, especially when converting to B&W! Finally, a digital camera that acutally behaves like film would at high ISO's!! Wow. This is the first digital body I've shot [with exception to the LEAF back for my Mamiya] that produces an image that doesn't look like a digital file, in fact the richness of color is damned near the scans of some of my most favorite chromes.

Now the quality of the color balance and the noise characteristics of the E-1 are so far superior to my Canon, but it is still "just" a 5 meg-pix body and it can't compare in ultimate resolution to a 1D-S file - Canons' flagship still has the market cornered in that department. However, I've printed a 20x30 from my local pro-lab from a RAW E-1 file and there's no way you could tell it came from a lowly 5 meg-pix body, thanks mostly in part to it's colorless film-like noise characteristics.

The E-1 system cannot compare to the complexity and lens selection of any other SLR system, period. However, the ED glass Zuiko lenses are incredibly sharp and I'd say images from the 50-200mm Olympus are on par with my Canon 70-200mm IS "L".

The E-1 can't replace an entire pro system mainly due to the lack of lens selection [more bright primes are what is needed, currently the only primes are the 50mm f/2.0 and a 300mm f/2.8 but the 3 ED Zuiko zooms are perfect and cover every needed focal length] the relatively low resolution and the 4-thirds system will cause some to be wary and suspicious of image quality, but if you want an amazing all around digital system that is light, has super color characteristics and looks as close to film as possible give the E-1 a look.

Personally, after comparing this to the D100 and 10D images I've shot, the E-1 is a definite step up in image quality and I think it will become my primary camera of choce, even over my 1D-S. And yes, I'm considering selling my remaining 1D-S and Canon equip, but need to test the E-1 further...

Robert

Robert

thanks for a thorough review of this system , I have had this in my hand as well , and I must say they really got the ergo and the feel right , your assessment of its performance coming from using the best of the best is refreshing esp in a forum where loyalty to a fault is on display daily

J

Hi John,

I'll admit, blind loyalty to Canon's equipment was a major stumbling block in considering my options, but once I decided to let the images do the talking I'm having to eat my own words - I told everyone at the pro-shop where I bought the camera that "...no way can this thing outperform my 1D-S...". Good thing I didn't place any bets on that!

Robert

5 year canon shooter here...When I went digital I had thought about the E-1, but the lack of other lenses kinda made me stick with canon.

I have seen images from this thing, and I agree....they are NICE! too bad it won't use my canon glass....

I can't agree more with you, Rob ... in the past 19 years of my photographic experience, I've made TWO major mistakes with equipment: buying the 1Ds, selling the Fuji S2. The E-1 is absolutely a stunning beauty ... I didn't buy simply because I've got too much already.

Here's a couple of E-1 shots taken by Hironobu Mochizuki in Shanghai, China - Hironobu is one of both Canon and Nikon's first beta testers:

Robert-

I remember that even my Olympus E10, when shooting RAW, would produce photos with the characteristics you describe. Never was there any sort of digital artifact, whether it be stair-stepping, blotchy color noise, or moire. Hearing about the E1 makes me think I'll buy another olympus one of these days, especially if their wide-angles are up to par. The sample shots here have fabulous colors.

Simon-

I'm loving the S2 - the next Fuji will probably set the benchmark for quality once again. It's too bad to hear that the 1Ds isn't up to par. It looks like APS sized sensors really do perform better than 35mm sensors, doesn't it?

Mark

Canon is a "big" company ... totally different corporate culture from Nikon's, they used to have multiple teams at their Ayase R&D center working on similar projects - there were different prototypes of the next 1D using different sensors so there were different rumors ... the latest ones are Kxxx I truly believe the 1Ds is a camera "to be finished" - not only problematic sensor, but also AF, metering, DSP etc. Nikon on the other hand, is a much smaller company - they set up a target and gear up with the whole company's resources working on it - same applies to Olympus ...who will release two more 4/3 DSLRs in the '04 ... I'm not only interested in the next S2 but also their 4/3 offerring ...

The new 1D surely has some "wow" specs. but I believe that not many working pros will really enjoy them ... it'll be more likely another fancy gadget for the rich amateurs.

Sounds like they tweaked the image quality of the E1 since pre-production. All the pre-production shots I saw looked more like they came from a consumer P&S camera than a digital SLR. That's pretty good news for Olympus then. I was really worried that they would croak after investing so much in this camera.

It sounds like Olympus has a Chroma Noise Reduction type action built into the E1. That'll produce noise that has the same color of the subject, so it looks like film grain as you pointed out. If you find some way to post your images online here, I'd love to see them. The E1 looks like a nice camera, but it's a shame how the lenses are limited to the small sensor.

Ben,

Actually, I was a bit concerned with the smaller sensor/total image real estate available, but as I shoot more and more with it I really am enjoying it much more than the 1D-s. In fact, aside from color reproduction quality there are other things which I find superior to any of the Canon digital's that I've shot.

For example, autoflash - I almost never use on-camera strobes for anything other than family snapshots or those quickie events that are for personal use. One thing that has always disappointed me with Canon even with the film cameras is the inherent lack of accuracy with any auto-flash metering. Unlike Nikons' 3D Color Matrix metering (F5) which can "almost" be counted on to get superb auto-flash results especially in low light situations, Canon's is more easily fooled than Nikon's and the overall performance is, well...disappointing at best.

To a pro like myself auto-flash is a no-no unless it's a situation that just cannot be setup with manual settings (or allows the time to set it up) so Canon's weakness in that area never really bothered me that much, just an annoyance that it was never as good as Nikon.

Olympus however seems to have nailed the auto-flash capablities in the E-1 system with the FL-50 flash unit and I would easily put the results on-par with the Nikon 3D Color Matrix metering system. Like any auto-exposure system it can be easily fooled, but no more so than Nikon's best.

The FL-50's controls and setup menus are much easier to navigate than Canon and I find them more intuitive.

With respect to lenses, I'm finding that the current lens lineup covers everything I need (not everything everybody needs however) and with the announced edition of 4 more lenses this year I'm sure that nobody would be left out from their favorites.

With over 400 test images the E-1 has made itself my primary camera of choice over the 1D-s. I've decided if I need a large output file from a 35mm type job I'll shoot film. I won't get rid of the Canon system however because lens selection and quality are still king for 35mm film, but when it comes to any digital work the Olympus is the tool of choice for me now. Heck, I've now got to change my signature here!! (big laughs).

Hi Robert!
I'm curious about how you set up the E-1 to get your results. Did you use the factory defaults or did you change any of the many settings to a custom setup?

I've been considering getting an E-1 and I think you've tipped the scales for me.

Rick

There're simply too many cameras in the world outperforming the 1Ds.

But not all of us shoot only in JPEG mode...

When a serious professional shooter talks...people listen. Mr. Lane I want to thank you for your report of the Olympus camera. I think it will enlighten more than one in this forum.
Olympus, under the direction of Mr. Matrani (maybe spelled wrong) produced some of the best optics there was. I was not very happy with the bodies though and I never thought they were actually built to professional specs.
The fact that noise and chroma has been so well addressed with the new camera is encouraging and most probably the way others will follow. I use a D-100 and I have been frustrated at times due to the chroma and noise in the underexposed areas shooting JPEG. I have not tried RAW but it is my understanding that noise is more prominent when using RAW.
I have used Canon but I honestly did not like the colors or the magenta cast imparted to so many pictures. I discussed it with Canon but I never got a straight answer from them. I guess that due to the present state of the art we are not going to have the "perfect" digital but things, from what you have reported from the E-1, are getting better and that is very encouraging.
Hopefully, in the near future, we will have excellent JPEG files to work with and Raw will be an option, not the necessity it is right now.
William Rodriguez
Miami, Florida.

William,
You have a huge misconception about the capabilities of the D100. I had been a long time Medium Format Shooter... both Hassy 6x6, Pentax 645, and Hassy Xpan as well as a Nikon 35mm shooter. Last year I took by Pentax, Xpan, and rented D100 to Saguaro National Park. I figured that I would compare my slide output (all velvia) from the 645 camera to the D100 as well as do some stiching to compare with the xpan. Well, I didn't get to the stitch test, but I did a huge head to head comparison with 645 film. I shot the D100 in raw uncompressed at ISO200 and the pentax with Velvia. I did both night, dawn and dusk photography. If you shoot w/ the mirror up function, and low noise setting in raw, you will see no noise. The D100 is noiseless as at low iso's and has a much larger dynamic range that slide film.

Because of this experience, I sold all of my medium format gear!!! I now have 3 D100 bodies. If you are not happy with the noise performance with your camera, you need to change how you are using it.
regards,
bruce
http://www.owlseyenaturephotos.com

This crap changes so fast it's hard to ever know what's going to work in the next iteration, but I've learned from long experience: never discount Oly. They continue to maintain a stable of engineers that know what photographic imaging is all about. When it comes to P&S, Oly rocks...

Greetings,

I guess Oly must have fixed / enhanced the image quality from the initial roll out at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway - where pros got to test the camera. As Ben Horne said, the images weren't any better than point and shoot.

I'm glad to hear of your experiences. I started in digital with OLy and still have my E-10 equipment. I was initially very dissapointed with the images from the E-1 !! I also think that the pricing is on the high side, though Canon "L" lenses aren't cheap either. I think there is still a lot to "weigh" if this is going to be your primary system. I would also hope that OLy has fixed their rather quirky software issues in general ..

Best Regards,
Ron

A lot of talk, no examples.
But, each to their own.
Not concerned one way or another.
Certainly some of the E1 images I was "shown" here looked too good to be true.
I am not a believer yet........

Hi Robert: I read your article on the Olympus E1 (shocking results).
Your article has helped convince me to look into the possibility of purchasing the E1 camera and 50-200mm lens including the teleconverter 1.4 extender. I presently own the Olympus E20 and I am very happy with it. Can you recommend a reliable website for purchasing said camera with reasonable price? I have been noticing prices vary from (body) $1.400 to $1.900.

Any other info you can furnish on the E1 would certainlky be appreciated.

Thanks Paul

Yes Bruce, you are correct. I just finished shooting several Hotel Ballrooms with low light conditions, (2 sec at iso 200) with noise reduction, Mirror up and RAW, and there is very little noise in the shadows. And with the Nikon Capture editor you can decrease this to almost nothing. Jpegs are ok for fun stuff, but you can't beat Raw for the serious stuff. Yes it is a litle more work, but with digital and all the settings to get the perfect image you can screw up. On one of the interiors I just shot I forgot to change the WB that I had made in the studio and the images were way to warm. But in Raw it is an easy fix. I have an E-10 and although slow, images were very good, but the results and rightups on the E-1 were not Impresive, so I went with the D-100 (plus I have Nikon lenses) I have been doing Digital for 9 years & my first Digital camera was $24,000 and it is a 4 mp and I still use it today. Like film cameras, you can't always get 1 camera to do it all.
Chet