dotcomdot wrote:
Then I tried it out.. man-o-man.. the news gets
worse and worse.. it sounds like its already broken or something.
Then the anti-dust buster feature.. what a scam.. it really doesn't
work at all. So.. what did I buy? First was sold on Canon, then
decided Nikon.. had my wallet out.. and then another guy says..
hey.. have you tried the Olympus E-1? I knew of it.. many good
comments, but only 5 Megapixels.. I said. .yeah, but its only 5.
Then I tried it.. it was a marriage made in heaven
Since no-one has owned an A100 long enough to find out whether the anti-dust feature works in practice - and one published test used the most ridiculous situation to create dust which appears to have been a shower of highly adhesive pollen - you are basing your opinion on very little indeed.
In the E-1, you have the only camera on the market which can actually produce noise at its highest ISO setting similar to the A100 - at half the pixel count. It's a very nice camera to use, but its viewfinder has a real 0.48X magnification compared to a real 0.56X of the A100, albeit showing an accurate 100 per cent view, amost unique in DSLRs but very necessary to make maximum use of 5 megapixels.
The A100 isn't 'already broken'. It can shoot over 100 JPEGs at 2.3 fps (it claims 3 fps, but to get that you have to use manual focus and a fast shutter speed) before shutting down and warning you that such a long sequence is overheating the CCD. It can shoot not the 3 raw files in sequence it claims to, but up to 12 with a typical fast CF card. It's got the fastest image to card transfer of any DSLR yet made - ANY yet made, in any class or at any price - and the camera is ready to shoot again only 2 seconds after completing the sort of run mentioned above. What this means in practice, with realistic bursts of 5-6 frames to catch a moment in action shooting, is you are always ready for the next shot.
There is one fault with the A100, and that is its 1600 ISO setting. The 800 is fine. Every other aspect of the camera is well up to any opposition, from metering to focusing; it has the greatest dynamic range, at 8.7 stops, of any camera in its class at ISO 100. The 40-zone metering, and the DRO+ function, are quite remarkable - and if you feel inclined to trash DRO+, your E-1 also has it, but only if you get Olympus Studio or Olympus Master software, where the same Apical Ltd process is licenced and called something like auto contrast adjustment or auto tone adjustment. The A100 does this in-camera in 0.5 seconds.
It's not perfect, but the E-1 despite its excellent qualities of build, weatherproofing and handling is not perfect either. I know which camera I would rather use for a double page spread landscape or architectural shot, because I have used both for this purpose. The E-1 will just get there with great care in raw processing and subsequent sharpening for repro. The A100 will do it every time with detail that simply isn't present in the E-1 file.
When I tested the E-1 it was with the original very expensive top grade lenses, including the excellent 50mm f2 macro (but no real wide-angle as they had not made one at the time). A100s have been sent out for test with cheap plastic kit lenses; Olympus has only just started getting that sort of lens made for them, issued with their later models. The E-1 launch and press trials would be similar to the A100 being launched with the 16-80mm Zeiss lens and the reviewers also handed a 100mm f2.8 macro.
As a working professional camera, I have no doubt at all - the A100 wins over the E-1, despite the apparently more rugged and professional build of the E-1 body.
David
.
