Probably not a big deal but just about every single review on this camera goes out of its way to make a big deal about its metal construction. For instance, The very first page of the E-P1 preview at Dpreview is both misleading and in error in stating that the camera has all metal construction:

"Not that we're complaining; for years now we've been imploring every manufacturer who would listen to us to build a non-reflex interchangeable lens camera around a large sensor, and the E-P1's styling (and all metal construction) harks back to the glory days of the mechanical camera in the 60's and 70's, when men were men and cameras were built like swiss watches (a design trend started by Panasonic with cameras like the LC-1 and LX series, if truth be told)."

Here is how the camera is constructed - metal body panels only, all plastic structure.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=32207680

What bothers me most about this is not the use of plastic in the camera but the poor journalism, false promotion. I really thought this camera had a stainless steel construction by everything written.

Something tells me Olympus did the research and found that their plastic/composite has plenty of strength to hold things together, while reducing the weight of the camera. I doubt they anticipate people mounting big, heavy lenses on it. The metal body panels, if secured in an intelligent way, will likely bolster the strength as well and provides that nice, solid, cold feeling.

I agree that the journalism/promotion is misleading, but I don't see it as a show-stopper.

Unless you open the actual body, you can't tell the fabrication material; sure they said it was metal, but I am sure they also thought the same.

I don't see the big deal with the construction: The plastic-fantastic will certainly last as well as the metal core, and I welcome the lighter weight personally. The exterior is where the real beating will occur, and that is metal from what I understand.

No big deal with the construction as far as I'm concerned, just that it has been misrepresented.

that's very nice plastic construction too.

dasrocket wrote:
Unless you open the actual body, you can't tell the fabrication material; sure they said it was metal, but I am sure they also thought the same.



Agreed, I'm sure journalists/bloggers thought that it was all-metal... not that it was responsible of them to say so, but I really doubt it was intentionally misleading.

It doesn't really bother me so much. As long as it can handle knocking around during commutes it's fine, actually better due to weight. As long as it's durable who cares? If they start crumbling I'll start complaining.

What a relief! It really will be an M8 beater then. I was worried it was going to be another brick ;-)

for god's sake richard give it a break!

brainiac wrote:
What a relief! It really will be an M8 beater then. I was worried it was going to be another brick ;-)

ROFLMAO

Richard is for Leica what ISO1600 is for Canon.

brainiac wrote:
What a relief! It really will be an M8 beater then. I was worried it was going to be another brick ;-)

Made my day! xD

But it doesen't have a VF :/

ulrikft wrote:
But it doesen't have a VF :/

I was really hoping for a super-high-res EVF when the rumor was first leaked.

thrice wrote:
for god's sake richard give it a break!

Well, he's right. The M8 is quite a brick. Not that small that you'd like to think if you haven't held it.

I have, and I have an M6, I noticed my 350D more when I had it.

The way richard finds excuses to unproductively attack leica though, you'd think they killed his family.

thrice wrote:
I have, and I have an M6, I noticed my 350D more when I had it.

The way richard finds excuses to unproductively attack leica though, you'd think they killed his family.

I suppose it was written with a twinkle in his eye. Anyway, it's not a very small and light camera. But still very nice.

You know, the funny thing is that I have read reviews of the E-P1 where much is made about how heavy it feels for its size. Of course, that then is attributed to it's all metal construction.

thrice wrote:
for god's sake richard give it a break!

Don't worry Thrice, Brainiac is not going to get one: He can't use it at 12,800, f.1.4

dasrocket wrote:
thrice wrote:
for god's sake richard give it a break!

Don't worry Thrice, Brainiac is not going to get one: He can't use it at 12,800, f.1.4




You guys kill me.. Can't wait for the next page. I love my M8 and my 5dII. They are so different in process up to exposure point that the photos are just different. I feel the photo in Leica mode and shoot for consistency in Canon mode. I print more of my Leica shots for my own walls. I get paid with my Canon shots.

I think you earn the photo with the Leica. It is a joy to use.

Sorry to pollute the thread. It was meant to be a joke and a relief from all that heavy discussion.

Savarin wrote:
dasrocket wrote:
thrice wrote:
for god's sake richard give it a break!

Don't worry Thrice, Brainiac is not going to get one: He can't use it at 12,800, f.1.4




You guys kill me.. Can't wait for the next page. I love my M8 and my 5dII. They are so different in process up to exposure point that the photos are just different. I feel the photo in Leica mode and shoot for consistency in Canon mode. I print more of my Leica shots for my own walls. I get paid with my Canon shots.

I think you earn the photo with the Leica. It is a joy to use.

I feel the same for my 1D classsic and my OM-1, but the XSi sees more use when the light is not that well-controlled.

The E-P1's construction is appropriate for the other elements of the system ... just take a closer look at the 14-42mm kit lens or 17mm kit lens. Do they look like something requiring a metal body?

UCSB wrote:
The E-P1's construction is appropriate for the other elements of the system ... just take a closer look at the 14-42mm kit lens or 17mm kit lens. Do they look like something requiring a metal body?

Well, Olympus does make a big deal about compatibility with both the standard 4/3rds system lenses and some of those are fairly large/heavy, enough so that a proper metal lens mount on the E-P1 would have been desirable. The "system", according to Olympus is larger than just those two lenses. Olympus even makes an OM lens adapter, so add those lenses to the system as well.

Come on, Zuikos ain't that huge

alexandre wrote:
Come on, Zuikos ain't that huge

Some can be heavy relative to a tiny body like the E-P1 and would put a strain on a weak lens mount. They are often larger than you might expect given the format. For instance, the SWD 12-60, a lens I once owned and one that I'm sure will find its way onto someone's E-P1, weighs over a pound. That might not sound like much, but add the adapter and your looking at putting some strain on the lens mount. Plenty of 4/3rds users will be putting their glass on the E-P1 and some of these lenses can be quite heavy. The 7-14 is close to 2 pounds. Just something to keep in mind as these lenses are fully compatible and promoted by Olympus for use on the E-P1.

hey the EOS 3 was polycarbonate and I don't remember that being considered inferior. It would survive knocks that would damage a metal 1V sometimes. A lot more impact resistant than the metal alloy.