E-20 review: Olympus dropped the ball

[Dr. Gonzo]

It's not like we didn't half see this coming, but Olympus really did blow something good with the E-20. Folks, get your E-10 orders in now because there is going to be a major run on them very soon. My random ramblings:

I am starting to think that Sony CCD just sucks. At 5 megapixels in a 2/3 package, maybe I shouldn't be surprised that it does.

Lack of a larger buffer is totally inexcusable. Something HAD to be done about the write times on the E-20 to keep its edge; of all the options available the buffer bump might have been the cheapest "solution". In fact, a buffer bump can really smooth over a lot of other taller engineering hurdles. No camera ever suffers from a larger buffer.

The reduced LCD coverage -- my GOD, what are they thinking? When you're dealing with the LCD, that 100% frame view if nothing else is going to help you minimize the frustration Phil encountered in slow shot-to-shot ... and they reduce it TO 87% ?!?!?!?

Chromatic aberrations -- I don't know if this is a CCD issue or a lens issue (what's the story with that lens anyway, Phil says it is the identical lens, however the E-20 lens pulls more resolution than the E-10 lens [so he seems to suggest]) Anyway CA SUCKS ... and will really diminish the quality of the TCON-300, let alone the TCON-314 combo IMHO. And certain types of shots will definitely suffer. Image 15 and 19 are ATROCIOUS. Image 18 isn't so hot either. The E-10 has virtually no CA!

I think the progressive mode "skipped field" explanation Phil offered is inaccurate... however the truth, if I understand it correctly, is much uglier. Bottom line is that the progressive mode is hardly accpetable, and I don't think I'd consider it usable.

The E-20 is a lateral move from the E-10, no other real way to put it. The review is based on a pre-production camera (and seems to have a little bit of an identity crisis, calling itself a REview at times and a PREview at others), but I don't expect that most of these major glitches can be ironed out before production. I suppose one could hope.

Olympus really seems to have shot their wad with the E-10, in terms of this type of camera. Perhaps the Kodympus SLR is receiving more attention than we know about. The fact that the E-20 cannot clearly be classed as "better than the E-10" is a major failure on Oly's part, IMO.
--(A disappointed, but not surprised) Dr. G.

P.S. FL-40 flash listing -- I saw it both in the E-10 and E-20 listed as "coming with hand-grip bracket" or something. What exactly does that mean? My retail-box FL-40 didn't come with anything but a wide-angle lens add-on.

 

[Jeff Morris]

Dear Doc,

Why do you knok the Sony CCD? It seems to produce good results i the 707 and the E-10 shots seem to look real ggod. The shot of the D-40 IMHO showed very good detail.

 

[JP Photography]

I agree, I said this 6 weeks ago, did not need a review, but now the review makes it worse, a step backwards !!!, watch those pre- order cancelations.

The best always,
JP Photography

It's not like we didn't half see this coming, but Olympus really
did blow something good with the E-20. Folks, get your E-10 orders
in now because there is going to be a major run on them very soon.
My random ramblings:

I am starting to think that Sony CCD just sucks. At 5 megapixels in
a 2/3 package, maybe I shouldn't be surprised that it does.

Lack of a larger buffer is totally inexcusable. Something HAD to be
done about the write times on the E-20 to keep its edge; of all the
options available the buffer bump might have been the cheapest
"solution". In fact, a buffer bump can really smooth over a lot of
other taller engineering hurdles. No camera ever suffers from a
larger buffer.

The reduced LCD coverage -- my GOD, what are they thinking? When
you're dealing with the LCD, that 100% frame view if nothing else
is going to help you minimize the frustration Phil encountered in
slow shot-to-shot ... and they reduce it TO 87% ?!?!?!?

Chromatic aberrations -- I don't know if this is a CCD issue or a
lens issue (what's the story with that lens anyway, Phil says it is
the identical lens, however the E-20 lens pulls more resolution
than the E-10 lens [so he seems to suggest]) Anyway CA SUCKS ...
and will really diminish the quality of the TCON-300, let alone the
TCON-314 combo IMHO. And certain types of shots will definitely
suffer. Image 15 and 19 are ATROCIOUS. Image 18 isn't so hot
either. The E-10 has virtually no CA!

I think the progressive mode "skipped field" explanation Phil
offered is inaccurate... however the truth, if I understand it
correctly, is much uglier. Bottom line is that the progressive mode
is hardly accpetable, and I don't think I'd consider it usable.

The E-20 is a lateral move from the E-10, no other real way to put
it. The review is based on a pre-production camera (and seems to
have a little bit of an identity crisis, calling itself a REview at
times and a PREview at others), but I don't expect that most of
these major glitches can be ironed out before production. I suppose
one could hope.

Olympus really seems to have shot their wad with the E-10, in terms
of this type of camera. Perhaps the Kodympus SLR is receiving more
attention than we know about. The fact that the E-20 cannot clearly
be classed as "better than the E-10" is a major failure on Oly's
part, IMO.

--
(A disappointed, but not surprised) Dr. G.

P.S. FL-40 flash listing -- I saw it both in the E-10 and E-20
listed as "coming with hand-grip bracket" or something. What
exactly does that mean? My retail-box FL-40 didn't come with
anything but a wide-angle lens add-on.

 

[Jeff Morris]

Dear Doc,

Why do you knok the Sony CCD? It seems to produce good results i
the 707 and the E-10 shots seem to look real ggod. The shot of the
D-40 IMHO showed very good detail.

knock not knok, duh..

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

The most obvious aspect would be noise. The 707 Sony applies noise reduction to its images, so credit the image processing, not the sensor.

Dear Doc,

Why do you knok the Sony CCD? It seems to produce good results i
the 707 and the E-10 shots seem to look real ggod. The shot of the
D-40 IMHO showed very good detail.

 

[Jim K53618]

Well for of all I'd like to thank Phil for getting a hold of a E20 and putting the review up so quick, even with some errors, its forgivable. It didn't even look like he could get a E20 to review for awhile. Not that this review will help Oly much.

Gonzo I agree with you here. Unfortunately this upgrade was pretty much a quickie to get a 5MP on the shelves in time for sake of keeping up with the pack. Unlike the E10, it seems very little real thought went in to the design on the E20. The only thought I can see is, "now how can we produce a 5MP version of the e10 and cut our production costs at the same time?", in which case oly was successful in their goal.

It's not like we didn't half see this coming, but Olympus really
did blow something good with the E-20. Folks, get your E-10 orders
in now because there is going to be a major run on them very soon.
My random ramblings:

I am starting to think that Sony CCD just sucks. At 5 megapixels in
a 2/3 package, maybe I shouldn't be surprised that it does.

I agree, but can't help feeling it could be a little better then this one. The noise here is about the same as the d7!

Lack of a larger buffer is totally inexcusable. Something HAD to be
done about the write times on the E-20 to keep its edge; of all the
options available the buffer bump might have been the cheapest
"solution". In fact, a buffer bump can really smooth over a lot of
other taller engineering hurdles. No camera ever suffers from a
larger buffer.

This was sinply a quick upgrade at the lowest cost for OLY!!!

The reduced LCD coverage -- my GOD, what are they thinking? When
you're dealing with the LCD, that 100% frame view if nothing else
is going to help you minimize the frustration Phil encountered in
slow shot-to-shot ... and they reduce it TO 87% ?!?!?!?

This was sinply a quick upgrade at the lowest cost for OLY!!!

Chromatic aberrations -- I don't know if this is a CCD issue or a
lens issue (what's the story with that lens anyway, Phil says it is
the identical lens, however the E-20 lens pulls more resolution
than the E-10 lens [so he seems to suggest]) Anyway CA SUCKS ...
and will really diminish the quality of the TCON-300, let alone the
TCON-314 combo IMHO. And certain types of shots will definitely
suffer. Image 15 and 19 are ATROCIOUS. Image 18 isn't so hot
either. The E-10 has virtually no CA!

I believe the extra 1MP on the same chip had some to do with this, still I can't help feeling that very little R&D was done on the e20, and it could have been a lot better then this!

I think the progressive mode "skipped field" explanation Phil
offered is inaccurate... however the truth, if I understand it
correctly, is much uglier. Bottom line is that the progressive mode
is hardly accpetable, and I don't think I'd consider it usable.

This could be the only saving grace for the e20, and if this fails, well...

The E-20 is a lateral move from the E-10, no other real way to put
it. The review is based on a pre-production camera (and seems to
have a little bit of an identity crisis, calling itself a REview at
times and a PREview at others), but I don't expect that most of
these major glitches can be ironed out before production. I suppose
one could hope.

I don't think Oly will change much.

Olympus really seems to have shot their wad with the E-10, in terms
of this type of camera. Perhaps the Kodympus SLR is receiving more
attention than we know about. The fact that the E-20 cannot clearly
be classed as "better than the E-10" is a major failure on Oly's
part, IMO.

I totally agree. This was a quick lets get a 5MP model out there as fast and cheap as we can with next to zero R&D.

The E10 is definitely the one to get! Stock up people, they will be in high demand!

Jim K.

--
(A disappointed, but not surprised) Dr. G.

P.S. FL-40 flash listing -- I saw it both in the E-10 and E-20
listed as "coming with hand-grip bracket" or something. What
exactly does that mean? My retail-box FL-40 didn't come with
anything but a wide-angle lens add-on.

 

[Jeff Morris]

Don't you fellas think the E-20 is just a natural step for Oly as in their"C" series? The sad thing is they could of reduced the number of "Cons" in Phil's review without spending to much money. I do not think Oly listens to their customers. (I do think they follow these threads.)

 

[Jason Busch]

Dr. Gonzo,

That's what it feels like anyway.
My toes are throbbing.

Jason Busch

 

[Jim K53618]

Don't you fellas think the E-20 is just a natural step for Oly as
in their"C" series? The sad thing is they could of reduced the
number of "Cons" in Phil's review without spending to much money.
I do not think Oly listens to their customers. (I do think they
follow these threads.)

Oly listens to their customers, but doesnt acknowledge them : )

They are perhaps just as arrogant as Sony. After dozens of successful consumer models, they feel they know better. What they did to the E20 is equal to digital blasphamey! The E10 was THE camera to beat! I can't tell you what Oly beat in socially acceptable terms : )

On the plus side, as bad as the e20 is, its still better then the d7 : ))

Jim K

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

On the plus side, as bad as the e20 is, its still better then the
d7 : ))

Well the heinous CA actually makes me wonder about that. And if the E-20 makes Gonzo wonder if it's better than a D7, Olympus has real problems.

Dr G.

 

[Jim K53618]

On the plus side, as bad as the e20 is, its still better then the
d7 : ))

Well the heinous CA actually makes me wonder about that. And if the
E-20 makes Gonzo wonder if it's better than a D7, Olympus has real
problems.

Dr G.

Don't worry, after the initial shock and disappiontment settles, and you come back to your senses, you will be able to see it is better then the d7. Still, I wouldn't recomend either, but if push leads to shove...

Jim K

 

[Jeff Morris]

The D& has so many serious problems...

The only good thing about the D7 is that it becomes a hand warmer in cold weather!

 

[Bob Graham]

The sad thing is- when the E-10 sells out, then everyone won't
have a choice but to buy the E-20. So Olympus still wins.

This is a real slap in the face.

BG

 

[DavidMillier]

Agree with most of this - E20 looks like a stop gap.

One point thoough: Had my E10 for just over 3 weeks now and I took one shot which was a well lit landscape with the bare branches of a dead tree pushing down from the top of the frame sillouetted agianst the sky. When I printed it to 10*8 i noticed that close around the sharp edges of the branches was a purplish 'glow' or ghosting. I assume this is the chromatic abberration and if so it was very obvious in the shot.

It's not like we didn't half see this coming, but Olympus really
did blow something good with the E-20. Folks, get your E-10 orders
in now because there is going to be a major run on them very soon.
My random ramblings:

I am starting to think that Sony CCD just sucks. At 5 megapixels in
a 2/3 package, maybe I shouldn't be surprised that it does.

Lack of a larger buffer is totally inexcusable. Something HAD to be
done about the write times on the E-20 to keep its edge; of all the
options available the buffer bump might have been the cheapest
"solution". In fact, a buffer bump can really smooth over a lot of
other taller engineering hurdles. No camera ever suffers from a
larger buffer.

The reduced LCD coverage -- my GOD, what are they thinking? When
you're dealing with the LCD, that 100% frame view if nothing else
is going to help you minimize the frustration Phil encountered in
slow shot-to-shot ... and they reduce it TO 87% ?!?!?!?

Chromatic aberrations -- I don't know if this is a CCD issue or a
lens issue (what's the story with that lens anyway, Phil says it is
the identical lens, however the E-20 lens pulls more resolution
than the E-10 lens [so he seems to suggest]) Anyway CA SUCKS ...
and will really diminish the quality of the TCON-300, let alone the
TCON-314 combo IMHO. And certain types of shots will definitely
suffer. Image 15 and 19 are ATROCIOUS. Image 18 isn't so hot
either. The E-10 has virtually no CA!

I think the progressive mode "skipped field" explanation Phil
offered is inaccurate... however the truth, if I understand it
correctly, is much uglier. Bottom line is that the progressive mode
is hardly accpetable, and I don't think I'd consider it usable.

The E-20 is a lateral move from the E-10, no other real way to put
it. The review is based on a pre-production camera (and seems to
have a little bit of an identity crisis, calling itself a REview at
times and a PREview at others), but I don't expect that most of
these major glitches can be ironed out before production. I suppose
one could hope.

Olympus really seems to have shot their wad with the E-10, in terms
of this type of camera. Perhaps the Kodympus SLR is receiving more
attention than we know about. The fact that the E-20 cannot clearly
be classed as "better than the E-10" is a major failure on Oly's
part, IMO.

--
(A disappointed, but not surprised) Dr. G.

P.S. FL-40 flash listing -- I saw it both in the E-10 and E-20
listed as "coming with hand-grip bracket" or something. What
exactly does that mean? My retail-box FL-40 didn't come with
anything but a wide-angle lens add-on.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Interesting... maybe post the shot if you can, but in another thread. It'd be a good topic for discussion.

Agree with most of this - E20 looks like a stop gap.

One point thoough: Had my E10 for just over 3 weeks now and I took
one shot which was a well lit landscape with the bare branches of a
dead tree pushing down from the top of the frame sillouetted
agianst the sky. When I printed it to 10*8 i noticed that close
around the sharp edges of the branches was a purplish 'glow' or
ghosting. I assume this is the chromatic abberration and if so it
was very obvious in the shot.

 

[Jawed]

The CA is terrible, LOL.

If it really is CA, then I wonder if it has something to do with the distance between the rear of the lens and the CCD, with the image splitter in the middle. I suspect (but don't know) that this distance is much larger than it is in other digicams.

Hard to tell.

It does look like a lens-imager mismatch. Which curiously doesn't affect resolution. I suspect it is an exaggerated effect at wide angle.

Jawed

 

[Jukka Jarnberg]

ditto

 

[Ken Huckeba]

If you look at this, it's a very very poor showing. Most new cameras meet with blathering idiot enthusiasm from their previous owner base. This is the strangest one I've seen. Perhaps we were expecting some common sense from Oly to listen to our gripes and whines. They clearly did not. I said in the other post that I rarely print larger than 8x10. I don't have a reason for increasing image size. I've already been frustrated to tears by missing some important shots by the painfully slow buffer. The E-20 will only exacerbate the problem. I DON'T want to go to a very very expensive system but it's looking more and more like I may have to.

I think the worst thing for a consumer is to be ignored. Oly clearly had no intentions of addressing our needs and desires. Had they taken care of a few simple requirements, I'd be buying an E-20 yesterday. If I could go to an eight shot buffer with quick write time, count me in. If I could go to 1600iso, I'd be burnin' up the credit card right now. If I could take a day shot at 80iso and it be completely noise free, the UPS guy would be knocking at my door.

Oly didn't do address any one single shortfall of the E-10. THIS is why we feel gipped. I wanted to say this because many of you are wondering why we're knocking the E-20. If you don't print large, get the bargain of 2001 and get an E-10, the E-20 is of no consequence.

 

[DavidMillier]

er, how do I post a picture on this forum

Agree with most of this - E20 looks like a stop gap.

One point thoough: Had my E10 for just over 3 weeks now and I took
one shot which was a well lit landscape with the bare branches of a
dead tree pushing down from the top of the frame sillouetted
agianst the sky. When I printed it to 10*8 i noticed that close
around the sharp edges of the branches was a purplish 'glow' or
ghosting. I assume this is the chromatic abberration and if so it
was very obvious in the shot.

 

[Jack40001]

Chromatic aberrations -- I don't know if this is a CCD issue or a
lens issue (what's the story with that lens anyway, Phil says it is
the identical lens, however the E-20 lens pulls more resolution

The E-20 produces CA in almost every picture that I inspected,
but some pictures are nearly unusable, because of it.
I think it must be the lens, since the DiMAGE 7 has the same sensor,
and the pictures it produces are better than the E-20 pictures.

The E-20s vissible stepping in edges are likely the result of out-of-date image processing technique, not the lens.

Jake.

--
(A disappointed, but not surprised) Dr. G.