E-1 - most reviled camera in history

[Dave Knadler]

...isn't relevant until we see how the images compare to current DSLRs. Until then, I can't see much to criticize in this system.

Well, it took the second wave of concerted, deliberate FUD
postings to get my attention...

And now I'm wondering why SO MANY non-Oly owners
have taken to repeatedly bashing this new beginning in
digital cameras.

Has anyone else noticed that all the 'the E-1 costs too
much' postings showed up in about 12 hours - bam -
just like that? Sure, there were a few posts before,
but all of a sudden, LOTS of posts screaming that the
E-1 HAD to cost less than the 10D and a crappy
consumer (not even a pro-sumer!) lens.

A more paranoid person would be screaming 'conspiracy!'.
But I've seen too many (really well-done) X Files episodes
to go that far..

But it wouldn't surprise me at all that C/N have someone,
somewhere posting some FUD. I've seen it several times
before on this wonderful thing we call the internet.

But there's even alot of REALLY CLUELESS 'not-a-photographer's
repeating total nonsense ad nauseum.

This is proof positive to me that Oly really struck a home
run with this offering! Geez! I just can't wait to get my
hands on one!!!!

I'd be interested in hearing from those few of you who
have an open mind, and an understanding of the balsy
move Oly has made!

--
http://www.pbase.com/davek/

 

[photovoyager]

A "focal reducer" is a positive lens in the optical path that
concentrates light onto a smaller sensor, provided the "main" lens
has a wide enough coverage circle to permit this.

Ah... Works very nicely.

Now, how come we don't have more cameras with these things built-in?

Was there a problem with the E2/2N/3/3s image quality?

Well, maybe they had a lot of them in the warehouse...

LOL . The F4 was a magnificent camera, but its focus, AF, etc. were a little dated by the end of the 1990s...

Besides, by the time the E3 came out, Kodak already had their DCS 5xx and 6xx cameras which had a very important feature lacking in early D-SLRs like the E-series (at least I THINK they didn't have it) - an LCD display for reviewing images!

Regards,
photovoyager

 

[Jon Ragnarsson]

If it said Canon instead of Olympus on the prism house, and 3D instead of E-1 on the body, it would have been flavor of the month in the Canon DSLR forum.
J.

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

A "focal reducer" is a positive lens in the optical path that
concentrates light onto a smaller sensor, provided the "main" lens
has a wide enough coverage circle to permit this.

Ah... Works very nicely.

Now, how come we don't have more cameras with these things built-in?

Three reasons.

First, it's really hard to build a "one size fits all" focal reducer. Performance is tied very tightly to the location of a lens's exit pupil (the point in the lens that light seems to radiate from) and the size and location of the rear element. If you design one to work well with wide angle lenses (exit pupils around 50-80mm) with small rear elements that enter the camera slightly, it won't work well with telephotos (exit pupils over 100mm) with large rear elements located far from the focal plane. A "compromise" design ends up not performing really well for any lens.

Second, it would add 25-50mm of depth to the camera, and change the handling markedly from a regular SLR.

Third, a lot of DSLR "early adopters" were sports shooters, and they tend to actually like the FOV crop factor, like a full time, high quality teleconverter.

Was there a problem with the E2/2N/3/3s image quality?

Yes, for the above reasons.

Well, maybe they had a lot of them in the warehouse...

LOL . The F4 was a magnificent camera, but its focus, AF, etc.
were a little dated by the end of the 1990s...

Don't know. Maybe its components were easier to work with and modify than the F5.

Besides, by the time the E3 came out, Kodak already had their DCS
5xx and 6xx cameras which had a very important feature lacking in
early D-SLRs like the E-series (at least I THINK they didn't have
it) - an LCD display for reviewing images!

I can see how that would be useful.

--
Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Lorne Miller]

If it said Canon instead of Olympus on the prism house, and 3D
instead of E-1 on the body, it would have been flavor of the month
in the Canon DSLR forum.
J.

I totally agree with you on this point, as I've said in several other threads, it mystifies me why so many who obviously aren't Oly fans, but diehard supporters of whatever they are using, see it neccessary to come to this forum and so vehemently trash a camera they haven't even physically seen or held. As you say, if it had a Canon or Nikon logo on it there, quite likely, would be no bickering whatsoever.

I will repeat what Jono has said, I think a lot of folks have invested a fairly large sum into other brands, and can't accept the fact that maybe their system won't make the cut when compared to the new 4/3 system, so they're doing the best they can now to debunk it before it even gets off the ground, it must obviously soothe their conscience and ease any guilt factor, or they wouldn't spend so much time over here attacking this camera and defending themselves.

Lorne Miller

 

[photovoyager]

if it had a Canon or Nikon logo on it there, quite likely, would be no
bickering whatsoever.

Sure there would be... Between the Canon and Nikon zealots ;-)!

It's worse with film cameras, you've got the FIERCELY loyal Minolta and Pentax folk too !

Regards,
photovoyager - wondering WHY people are so devoted to their camera brands...

 

[Tan35125]

At first glance, I read your heading as "metal" instead of
"mental". So I thought "well, Canon did it..."

I really need this 4 day weekend.

The last time I was in the US, I fell asleep watching the fireworks at Oakland, CA because I was totally exhausted from the flight. Pity.

Happy barbecueing!

 

[Capital Man]

And now I'm wondering why SO MANY non-Oly owners
have taken to repeatedly bashing this new beginning in
digital cameras.

The Canon and Nikon owners are AFRAID that the superior performance of the Oly will set a new standard, making their "investments" in Canon and Nikon obsolete.

[Here's a word to the wise: a digital camera is not an "investment" of any sort. It's an expense.]

 

[NarrBL]

Yes, have a happy Fourth, Joe. Qutie a good post, and appreciating a few things too.

Clive

I really need this 4 day weekend.

You can't discount the fact that at least ONE of the naysayers is a
complete imbecile who seems to get off on spouting one moronic
statement after another ;-)

Now, I know you don't mean me...

I guess if you're kind, you'd just call
him a nutcase.

Well, I'm guilty on that one (Aspergar's syndrome) but I'm a nut on
the side of good. (Hey, maybe I should trademark that. "A nut on
the side of good". Or does it work better with "lunatic"?)

"Be afraid, be very afraid", the Internet can be a scary place.

Yes, sometimes you run into a bright "lime green" homepage first
thing in the morning.

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

--
Ciao!

Joe

 

[NarrBL]

Joe, this is interesting. I wonder if you would comment on the optical issues of using a prism. Although the optical location is different for this intriguing split design you and Eamon are tweaking between you, it's somewhat like what Minolta have done in the Dimage X line.

I have one of the early ones, and combine great pleasure in its subtlety and availability in grabbing the picture one sees, with considerable disappointment some of the time with the optical and related sensor performance.

Prisms aren't in the casuation of funny edges on color highlights or general blow-out phenomena, but there has been writing several times about whether they can lead to the decided edge softness of the X/Xi/Xt line.

I wonder what you would say about that, as it hasn't necessarily made sense to me that what is in effect a mirror could cause that problem - perhaps it is more related to truly tiny element diameter in that camera.

If answer is as I suspect, then this 'half-sideways' and 'prime swapping only of front objectives' idea sounds quite intriguing. Less cost besides weight and size for the swappable part. Also, and perhaps a factor in your intuition, the extra-collimating-for-digital-sensor elements on the back of the lense wouldn't be duplicated, nor contribute to the depth of the assembled camera.

Regards

On a tangential topic, Joe, allow me to impose on your lens
expertise. If I win the Lotto, could we develop a digicam with a
4/3rds or APS size sensor with a fixed lens/supplemental focal
adapter system that would give good quality. What I'm thinking is
the equivalent of a 35mm f/2.0 (35mm format terms) built into the
camera and a screw-on or bayonet-on focal reducer to give the
equivalent of 20-24mm, and another adapter (a focal extender?) to
give the equivalent of 70mm-100mm. But with good quality results.

I think it could be done. But it wouldn't be easy.It would be the
first step towards the "digital rangefinder" a lot of perple keep
crying out for.

And could we make them a reasonable size? (The ones for current
digicams like the Coolpix series are already pushing the upper
envelope of my ideal size.)

They're always going to be annoyingly big. Wide and teleconverters
that go in front of the lens are "infinite conjugate" designs, they
act like telescopes or reverse telescopes. A front "objective"
group of lenses to give you the desired image coverage, and a rear
"occular" group that acts like a "eyepiece" for the camera's "eye".

Alternately, could we (err ... you) design an optical system like
the old Kodak Retina IIc/IIIc systems had where the front element
of the built-in lens is interchangeable with auxiliary front
element mechanisms that change the lens focal length.

Now, that is a good solution. It would be very cool to have the
lens's "rear section" complete with rear focusing movements, and a
telecentric "relay lens" mounted in the camera, sideways, and a
mirror or prism so the front part of the lens could face forward. A
slim package like a rangefinder camera, with relatively small
interchangable "front" lenses.

(Again, I'd
want angles of view equivalent to 35-40mm, 20-24mm-ish, and
70-100mm-ish on a 35mm film camera.) Again, obviously, we'd want
good quality results.

Should be a lot better than the current crop of small sensors and
zooms with frighteningly large ratios. A small camera with small,
light primes would really show what contrast and sharpness were all
about.

What are the chances? (Not of me winning the Lotto; I know what
those chances are.)

Well, it could be built, and I bet it would sell, but it would hav
to be someone with money starting a new camera company. The
established ones are always going to have somethign else to spend
their R&D money on (like extending their existing systems) that
will have higher ROI.

--
Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[John Mason]

Well, it took the second wave of concerted, deliberate FUD
postings to get my attention...

And now I'm wondering why SO MANY non-Oly owners
have taken to repeatedly bashing this new beginning in
digital cameras.

Has anyone else noticed that all the 'the E-1 costs too
much' postings showed up in about 12 hours - bam -
just like that? Sure, there were a few posts before,
but all of a sudden, LOTS of posts screaming that the
E-1 HAD to cost less than the 10D and a crappy
consumer (not even a pro-sumer!) lens.

A more paranoid person would be screaming 'conspiracy!'.
But I've seen too many (really well-done) X Files episodes
to go that far..

But it wouldn't surprise me at all that C/N have someone,
somewhere posting some FUD. I've seen it several times
before on this wonderful thing we call the internet.

But there's even alot of REALLY CLUELESS 'not-a-photographer's
repeating total nonsense ad nauseum.

This is proof positive to me that Oly really struck a home
run with this offering! Geez! I just can't wait to get my
hands on one!!!!

I'd be interested in hearing from those few of you who
have an open mind, and an understanding of the balsy
move Oly has made!

--
John Mason - Lafayette, IN

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

At first glance, I read your heading as "metal" instead of
"mental". So I thought "well, Canon did it..."

I really need this 4 day weekend.

I think we all do.

Definitely...

You can't discount the fact that at least ONE of the naysayers is a
complete imbecile who seems to get off on spouting one moronic
statement after another ;-)

Now, I know you don't mean me...

No - he means someone who is always right, and I've caught you out
at least once.

Happens to us all, at times...

I guess if you're kind, you'd just call
him a nutcase.

Well, I'm guilty on that one (Aspergar's syndrome) but I'm a nut on
the side of good. (Hey, maybe I should trademark that. "A nut on
the side of good". Or does it work better with "lunatic"?)

A lunatic on the side of good . . . .sounds better I think, but I
think you only qualify for nut.

Dang. "A nut on the side of good" just doesn't have the ring...

Incidentally, I've grown to appreciate your posts,

Thanks. It's mutual.

and although I'm
only half willing to accept your debunking of the 'designed for
digital' tag (only half, because I don't think they ever said that
they would start from nothing).

The phrase "designed from the ground up" occurs several places, like here:

http://www.olympusamerica.com/e1/index.html

I think that, as I have, you've
come to realise that, as long as the image quality is up to the
hype, this camera is rather a class act.

I hope it does...

p.s. you never answered the weight reply (remember - 21-200mm but
who cares actually).

Dang. Now I have to go looking through the old posts...

After the holiday.

Have fun.

--
Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

At first glance, I read your heading as "metal" instead of
"mental". So I thought "well, Canon did it..."

I really need this 4 day weekend.

The last time I was in the US, I fell asleep watching the fireworks
at Oakland, CA because I was totally exhausted from the flight.
Pity.

Bummer.

Happy barbecueing!

Yup. Veggie burgers on the grill.

Then, the most important part, fireworks...

--
Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

Yes, have a happy Fourth, Joe. Qutie a good post, and appreciating
a few things too.

Thank you. I try.

Do the Swiss have any "patriotic" holidays where they get as crazy as we do in the US? Do you blow up as much stuff?

--
Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[NarrBL]

Absolutely - they do. I generally live in Basel (in Oregon though for some family matters these months), and there are quite a few instances of fireworks, actually - not to mention other celebrations.

National Day (independence) is 1 August - and you see quite extensive fireworks over and on the Rhine. Lots of robust celebration otherwise and 'independent' explosions all around this time....and it seems to me a few others also. Flags are every day, as you probably know.

Not with explosives but as locally patriotic as is essential, and full of other dominant sounds and celebration is the several days of Fasnacht near the end of winter - a variety of Carnival that goes back at least to medieval times and the guilds which also organised as protective armies for the city - hence the marching, drums, and other martial aspects.

People spend all year in clubs preparing costumes and music for this, and I've found it is a completely moving and mysterious, surely familial rite. As a note, families themselves have their separate evening march, for those not ready for costumed clubs. They try to think of everyone.

Should say, I'm not Swiss, just a resident generally with ever increasing appreciation - for what Swiss people make and become as always in their individuality, and what being in that corner of continental Europe lets me understand with the multiple cultures present that they are intent on at home and in their relationships - which for me seem towards things we all interest in. It's challenging every day - and worth it.

Regards

Do the Swiss have any "patriotic" holidays where they get as crazy
as we do in the US? Do you blow up as much stuff?

 

[NarrBL]

found a pretty locally-orientated site with a nice intro in English -
http://www.fasnacht.ch/?pm_1=21&mid=21

If interested, look around for some photos, videos etc. - particularly in Multimedia and the Fasnacht im Rückblick menu, which means in retrospect - drill down for picture items for each year.

Grützi...

 

[photovoyager]

And why shouldn't it be?

Regards,
photovoyager

 

[John Mason]

though the extremely light amount of traffic on their forum say the new firmware has improved things some

would be better if the base sensor wasn't so noisy in the first place

then they wouldn't have all the weird "I'm a painting not a picture" artifacts even at ISO 80.

And why shouldn't it be?

Regards,
photovoyager

--
John Mason - Lafayette, IN

 

[Jono Slack]

Hi Joe

You can't discount the fact that at least ONE of the naysayers is a
complete imbecile who seems to get off on spouting one moronic
statement after another ;-)

Now, I know you don't mean me...

No - he means someone who is always right, and I've caught you out
at least once.

Happens to us all, at times...

No it doesn't - Tony is never wrong . . .oops I let the cat out of the bag.

I guess if you're kind, you'd just call
him a nutcase.

Well, I'm guilty on that one (Aspergar's syndrome) but I'm a nut on
the side of good. (Hey, maybe I should trademark that. "A nut on
the side of good". Or does it work better with "lunatic"?)

A lunatic on the side of good . . . .sounds better I think, but I
think you only qualify for nut.

Dang. "A nut on the side of good" just doesn't have the ring...

Incidentally, I've grown to appreciate your posts,

Thanks. It's mutual.

Agreement isn't vital!

and although I'm
only half willing to accept your debunking of the 'designed for
digital' tag (only half, because I don't think they ever said that
they would start from nothing).

The phrase "designed from the ground up" occurs several places,
like here:

Well, I'm still not sure that this means quite the same thing - you can design a car from the ground up, but it doesn't necessarily mean that all the parts were designed from 'scratch'. Still, it's semantics, and, frankly, not very important (except the bit about the f2 limit maybe).

http://www.olympusamerica.com/e1/index.html

I think that, as I have, you've
come to realise that, as long as the image quality is up to the
hype, this camera is rather a class act.

I hope it does...

p.s. you never answered the weight reply (remember - 21-200mm but
who cares actually).

Dang. Now I have to go looking through the old posts...

After the holiday.

Don't worry - like all these things, it isn't that important (unless you have a bad back).

Have fun.

and you

kind regards
jono

--
Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

found a pretty locally-orientated site with a nice intro in English -
http://www.fasnacht.ch/?pm_1=21&mid=21

Wow, that's a great link. I especially love the folks in strange costumes playing flutes. I play flutes, make flutes, and love photographing flutists.

If interested, look around for some photos, videos etc. -
particularly in Multimedia and the Fasnacht im Rückblick menu,
which means in retrospect - drill down for picture items for each
year.

I'll do it Monday when I'm on a machine with a faster internet connection.

--
Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com