Well, this page also confirms that the viewfinder is included in the kit and otherwise is only a $100 option. Nice! Curious as to why Amazon does not list it as such.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Olympus really nailed both the color and in-camera image processing based on the samples in my opinion. The images do appear sharper than previous Olympus cameras that use the same or similar sensor, no doubt due to the weaker low pass filter. A few things I have noticed. There is a focal plane shutter so the camera is not silent like, for instance, a Sigma Dp-1 or Dp-2. The shutter also remains open, exposing the sensor so this could be a possible issue with an interchangeable lens system as the sensor would be more apt to get dirty than most interchangeable lens systems where the shutter normally covers the sensor when changing lenses. The focal plane shutter also means your highly restricted on the sync speed. One of the cool things about he Sigma Dp's is that you can sync with your strobes at any shutter speed, not that these cameras would normally be used with strobes but it is a cool option. Shooting speed and raw buffer (10 frames at 3FPS) looks to be outstanding with the EP-1, really putting the Sigmas to shame.
Here is a sample of the shutter sound from the EP-1:
Sensor dirt is not an issue on the G1, which shares the normally-open shutter and SSWF anti-dust system with the E-P1. One thing Oly nailed with the original E-1 and has kept up is their world-class dust removal. None of the other systems are as effective.
Sync speed is a mild issue, but really everything else in-class in the DSLR world is within a 1/3 stop of the G1 and E-P1.
mawz wrote:
Sensor dirt is not an issue on the G1, which shares the normally-open shutter and SSWF anti-dust system with the E-P1. One thing Oly nailed with the original E-1 and has kept up is their world-class dust removal. None of the other systems are as effective.
Sync speed is a mild issue, but really everything else in-class in the DSLR world is within a 1/3 stop of the G1 and E-P1.
Yes, Olympus has a great anti-dust system. The problem with the totally exposed sensor would not show up until more fixed focal length lenses become available. At the moment, there are not many interchangeable lenses in the native micro 4/3rds mount so the likelihood of the issue showing up would be low. I expect this particular camera might actually see more use by pros wishing to travel light or shoot street stuff. If more fixed lens options become available and users are changing lenses in the field under who knows what conditions, this camera will be more susceptible to dust, sand, etc. than other cameras due to the design (not shared with the other Olympus SLR's where the sensor does have some protection by the closed shutter).
This aperture argument is a lot of blather. Don't compensate for the sensor size twice. The usable iso limit will be less than an APS-C or full frame camera, and we all know about where. Adjusting the aperture brightness expectations would be compensating for that limitation twice. We can expect iso 800 to be about equivalent to 3200-6400 on APS-C/full-frame. The apertures are what they say on the box. Depth of field is greater due to focal lengths, not virtual apertures.
weekh wrote:
Hold your horses!
The D-lux 4 / LX3 with the built in lens is only half the weight of the Pen body.
I'm aware of that. But camera weight doesn't bother me. I'm used to lugging around a 5DmkII and a bag full of lenses on my shoulder. This thing is a feather by comparison.
I just pre-ordered this from a local store. I say pre-order, I'm just first on the list. I'm very excited about this camera and what it offers. I currently have a 2xBody Nikon bag and loathe carrying it around to some places. I was considering the Canon G10 or Panasonic LX3 until I heard about this little gem.
I'm exited
Edward Castro wrote:
Body only is $750
w/ 14-42mm $799 w/ 17mm pancake + viewfinder $899 ($150 extra for lens and a viewfinder is a great deal)
I'm sold on that!
Does anyone know how good the in-body stabilization is on these cameras? 2 stops or so? It would be nice to be able to hand-hold with the 17mm (or 20mm when it comes out) at 1/15 or lower for non-moving scenes.
cgiff wrote:
I'm sold on that!
Does anyone know how good the in-body stabilization is on these cameras? 2 stops or so? It would be nice to be able to hand-hold with the 17mm (or 20mm when it comes out) at 1/15 or lower for non-moving scenes.
On the SLR's it's 2-3 stops with a hard lower limit around 1/8 of a second for body-IS. On the G1 the limit seems to be about 1/2 second, which is a good 4 stops with the 14-45 OIS at 14mm, assuming a 1/30 speed as the baseline for a good shot based on the 1/FL rule and a 35mm equivalent of 28mm for the lens.
I would expect the E-P1's in-body IS to be slightly less effective than the OIS system in my 14-45, but not significantly so. Losing the mirror is a major win for reducing camera shake.
mawz wrote:
Losing the mirror is a major win for reducing camera shake.
I've still never seen any demonstration of 'mirror slap' blurring an image in any visible way, even on the massive Pentax 6x7. Mirror slap blur on 35mm is a popular myth in my experience.
This, I believed, is a beginning of OM's "trojan horse" warfare, that will eventually pulling Canon & Nikon users over to OM's DSLR bodies, if we're buying enough (another word for "too many") OM's lens for this Pen body. I hope that Canon will counter with G1X body, a little bit larger than G9/G10 - and a adapter for any Canon's lens. It will hurt the Rebel line definitely, but it might prevent further "bleeding".
BTW, I was the owner of the Pen-F in 1970 and so happy about it, since it save my film
cost, due to it half-frame picture capture
Sam tran wrote:
This, I believed, is a beginning of OM's "trojan horse" warfare, that will eventually pulling Canon & Nikon users over to OM's DSLR bodies, if we're buying enough (another word for "too many") OM's lens for this Pen body. I hope that Canon will counter with G1X body, a little bit larger than G9/G10 - and a mouth for any Canon's lens. It will hurt the Rebel line definitely, but it might prevent further "bleeding".
That's my 2-cents of the day.
-Sam
I expect we will see both Canon and Nikon jump on this larger sensor/ Compact camera bandwagon sooner rather than later.
brainiac wrote:
I've still never seen any demonstration of 'mirror slap' blurring an image in any visible way, even on the massive Pentax 6x7. Mirror slap blur on 35mm is a popular myth in my experience.
The issue with mirror slap seem to exist only in a restricted range of shutter speeds, above 1/30th or so the shutter freezes it, below 2 seconds or so it doesn't occur long enough to affect the exposure.
If I can handhold the G1 effectively at 1/2 second, and a comparable SLR at 1/8, there has to be some reason for the difference and the mirror is the only mechanical difference there. Which argues that it is the reason for the issue. Also mirror slap blurring is proven to exist (compare a shot done with MLU vs one without at 1/15 even on a tripod. There will be a difference in sharpness. Now try it at a half second, the difference will be larger). It's just much less significant that many claim, especially the 67 mirror slap acolytes.
Sam tran wrote:
This, I believed, is a beginning of OM's "trojan horse" warfare, that will eventually pulling Canon & Nikon users over to OM's DSLR bodies, if we're buying enough (another word for "too many") OM's lens for this Pen body. I hope that Canon will counter with G1X body, a little bit larger than G9/G10 - and a adapter for any Canon's lens. It will hurt the Rebel line definitely, but it might prevent further "bleeding".
-Sam
As a long time Canon user, I'm interested in the E-P1, however, I'm even more interested to see what kind of equivalent camera Panasonic releases. I recently purchased the LX3 and was quite impressed with it and the GH1 is intriguing. I like the E-P1 in general, but there are a few things like the 230K LCD (I know this resolution from the Mark III and it's not enough for critical focusing), slow AF in low light and my uncertainty about how effective MF implementation is with the AF lenses, currently keeping me from really liking the Oly. And there isn't a black body...
I would buy into a micro 4/3 system as a compact addition to my Canon gear. I don't believe I would make a wholesale switch. There are just too many lenses available from Canon without equivalents, though admittedly, the Oly lenses seem to have a reputation of being more consistently excellent across the board than Canon's.
If Canon entered with a 'micro' APS-C camera of their own, for it to be truly compact it would require a new lens system. Therefore it would be necessary to buy into such a system pretty much from point A, meaning it wouldn't necessarily be my automatic first choice even though I own an extensive EOS system.
mawz wrote:
On the SLR's it's 2-3 stops with a hard lower limit around 1/8 of a second for body-IS. On the G1 the limit seems to be about 1/2 second, which is a good 4 stops with the 14-45 OIS at 14mm, assuming a 1/30 speed as the baseline for a good shot based on the 1/FL rule and a 35mm equivalent of 28mm for the lens.
I would expect the E-P1's in-body IS to be slightly less effective than the OIS system in my 14-45, but not significantly so. Losing the mirror is a major win for reducing camera shake.
If I can handhold this at 1/8 I will be more than happy. Thanks for the info.
And re: Canon/Nikon competition, if they do come out with a competitor they better bring on some pancake primes too, because that's a lot of the allure. If I'm happy with the E-P1 it would take an FX camera of similar size from Can/Nikon to bring me back.
Obviously for professional work I'll be sticking with my "big" gear, but for personal/carry-everywhere photography I couldn't be more excited.
mawz wrote:
The issue with mirror slap seem to exist only in a restricted range of shutter speeds, above 1/30th or so the shutter freezes it, below 2 seconds or so it doesn't occur long enough to affect the exposure.
If I can handhold the G1 effectively at 1/2 second, and a comparable SLR at 1/8, there has to be some reason for the difference and the mirror is the only mechanical difference there. Which argues that it is the reason for the issue. Also mirror slap blurring is proven to exist (compare a shot done with MLU vs one without at 1/15 even on a tripod. There will be a difference in sharpness. Now try it at a half second, the difference will be larger). It's just much less significant that many claim, especially the 67 mirror slap acolytes. ...Show more →
Show me. I used Hasselblad, Rollei 6008, Pentax 6x7, Mamiya 6, Contax, Nikon and Canon 135 for years and I've still never encountered it to the extent that it spoiled sharpness in a picture. Admittedly digital is getting sharper than film, so it could start to become visible, but I've still never seen any clear demonstration of the alleged phenomenon on DSLRs. The camera is much much heavier than the mirror, even in the case of a Pentax 6x7, and it seems to me that the mirror's energy would always be absorbed before the exposure gets under way. I'm not saying the phenomenon doesn't exist, I'm just saying that it's probably too small an effect to be visible even with some of the worst culprits. Couple that with the fact that I've never seen it in 25 years, even when looking for it, and I think it's a bit of a myth. I have an open mind though, so if you know of any clear demonstrations of it I would be as interested as the next person. Certainly for a 2x crop camera I wouldn't expect it ever to be significant until 50 megapixels or more.
brainiac wrote:
Show me. I used Hasselblad, Rollei 6008, Pentax 6x7, Mamiya 6, Contax, Nikon and Canon 135 for years and I've still never encountered it to the extent that it spoiled sharpness in a picture. Admittedly digital is getting sharper than film, so it could start to become visible, but I've still never seen any clear demonstration of the alleged phenomenon on DSLRs. The camera is much much heavier than the mirror, even in the case of a Pentax 6x7, and it seems to me that the mirror's energy would always be absorbed before the exposure gets under way. I'm not saying the phenomenon doesn't exist, I'm just saying that it's probably too small an effect to be visible even with some of the worst culprits. Couple that with the fact that I've never seen it in 25 years, even when looking for it, and I think it's a bit of a myth. I have an open mind though, so if you know of any clear demonstrations of it I would be as interested as the next person. Certainly for a 2x crop camera I wouldn't expect it ever to be significant until 50 megapixels or more....Show more →
here's some good info from Bob Atkins. It's tripod-oriented, a situation where mirror vibrations only affects longer lenses.
photo.net/photo/nature/mlu.html
Handheld will be affected at lower focal lengths compared to tripod-bound, even with IS.
