Reading mode: Light Dark

I figured out the mockup!

Go to last post
Don't be knocking that E-300, Joe! I think the reason it sold better than the E-1 was the price point. If they price this new pro model out of the market, no ones going to buy it, either.
--
Theresa K
http://theresak.smugmug.com/
 
I think the E1 probabaly sold BETTER than the E300.

The great error with the E1 was continuing to produce it for a year or so AFTER sales stopped dead (when 5MP became outdated) and to try to maintain prices in the face of a warehouse full of unsold cameras.

With the E300 they we slighly less daft in that, when it became clear it wasn't going to sell, they reduced the price until it more or less did.

With the E330 and E500 they more sensibly produced the number they could actually shift.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://www.pbase.com/acam/
 
and we all know stealthy costs big time!

Prepare your wallet...I just wish it was coming out this year!

Dan
 
...from an otherwise 99% sensible person [based on the many posts i've read of yours. among the best records on any on the forums]. feeling impish today? wonder why you're slumming it on the oly forums anyway beyond the need to keep abreast professionally speaking?

whether this camera looks good or not is surely a matter of personal opinion. accumulated personal opinions may aggregate into a consensus one way or another. that will make for a factual statistic. there's already disagreement, however. that's also factual.

for the record, i also think it's ugly. i think every dslr i've ever seen is ugly. i think the e-300/330's are the least ugly, almost to the point of ok/neutral looking. my aesthetic opinions about these things are worthless. your aesthetic opinions are worth more [probably, given your status as an engineer/designer of photo equipment---form follows function ideals, etc] but that is very faint praise.

it's only in aggregate that any of these opinions mean anything, and then only as the lowest common aesthetic denominator enabling a corporation that makes use of it to sell more units and increase shareholder value. this is why the modern world is becoming increasingly ugly, ugly, ugly. much more 'democratic', if you can call such a feedback loop an artifact of democracy, but still really ugly.
 
the Joe Wisniewski I knew was a great guy. I lost contact with him when the company we worked for went bankrupt. I don't remember where he was from originally and it could well have been the Detroit area.

Anyway if he was an example of what Wisniewskis are, then you are a good bunch of folks.
--
BJM
 
And a more serious theory to account for one aspect of the new camera's appearance, the reappearance of the left hand side of a conventional camera "box"...

E-1 had a shutter comparable to a Nikon D100 (1/180 sec sync, 1/4000 sec top speed). That was unusual for a "pro" camera: in the pro category Nikon and Canon were both at 1/250 sec sync and 1/8000 sec top speed. On film cameras, this was the spec for both the top models (Nikon F5, Canon EOS 1v) and the next models down (Nikon F100, Canon EOS 3). And now Nikon's at that level on both D2X and D200, so it's becoming the "baseline" for even intermediate cameras, let alone pro.

How can Oly get to that level? E-300/330 is a high quantity camera, so Oly can have a custom shutter (and the sideways moving mirror) built for it, especially considering that the E-3XX shutter isn't exactly a high performer.

E-1 had a pretty much stock shutter, but it wasn't a large, high performance model. That helped them get away with E-1 styling, no "left side" of a conventional camera. But if they want something that really moves for an E-3, that has specs comparable to a Nikon or Canon, they've got two choices. They can either catch up to Nikon and Canon, and do it in a form factor that lets them keep the E-1 "no left side" style, or they can adopt a more conventional shutter design (either have someone like Sanyo "clone" a D200 shutter, or buy something from Nikon, Canon, or Pentax). I'm betting the budget at Oly isn't that large for a small quantity camera, even if it is a "flagship", so they're going to float a more "conventional" appearance at us to make it easier to actually build a high performance camera.

--
Normally, a signature this small can't open its own jumpgate.

Ciao! Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
praised it endlessly someone else would chime in that we're a bunch of mindless sycophants and fanboys. To which someone else would chime in with, "Very insightful."

It's ugly, as you agreed, and people are saying so. Big deal. People are entitled to their opinions just as you were in your post.

Oly

P.S. I have every confidence that the final product will sport multiple enhancements and aesthetic improvements.
 
Joseph S. Wisniewski said:
And a more serious theory to account for one aspect of the new
camera's appearance, the reappearance of the left hand side of a
conventional camera "box"...

E-1 had a shutter comparable to a Nikon D100 (1/180 sec sync,
1/4000 sec top speed). That was unusual for a "pro" camera: in the
pro category Nikon and Canon were both at 1/250 sec sync and 1/8000
sec top speed. On film cameras, this was the spec for both the top
models (Nikon F5, Canon EOS 1v) and the next models down (Nikon
F100, Canon EOS 3). And now Nikon's at that level on both D2X and
D200, so it's becoming the "baseline" for even intermediate
cameras, let alone pro.

How can Oly get to that level? E-300/330 is a high quantity camera,
so Oly can have a custom shutter (and the sideways moving mirror)
built for it, especially considering that the E-3XX shutter isn't
exactly a high performer.

E-1 had a pretty much stock shutter, but it wasn't a large, high
performance model. That helped them get away with E-1 styling, no
"left side" of a conventional camera. But if they want something
that really moves for an E-3, that has specs comparable to a Nikon
or Canon, they've got two choices. They can either catch up to
Nikon and Canon, and do it in a form factor that lets them keep the
E-1 "no left side" style, or they can adopt a more conventional
shutter design (either have someone like Sanyo "clone" a D200
shutter, or buy something from Nikon, Canon, or Pentax). I'm
betting the budget at Oly isn't that large for a small quantity
camera, even if it is a "flagship", so they're going to float a
more "conventional" appearance at us to make it easier to actually
build a high performance camera.
Click to expand...
First off, let me unequivocally state that I like the styling, period, and the lack of a PASM dial is of absolutely no consequence; nor does it mean that things would be menu driven as a result. The same can be achieved by an additional button and the control wheel; far simpler and easier to implement, and to use.

As for the somewhat more conventional design, you may well be right that it has something to do with the shutter design, but it may also have something to do with a larger LCD. How much larger can you go with the current design, before you have no room for controls on the back?

Cheers

Ray
--
http://www.australianimage.com.au
 
I was talking to some friends inside Olympus and they told me that the E-1 shutter was made by an independent compnay that made the 1D and D2X shutters. All these shutters are rated "pro" and willl last 150,000 cycles.
So, none of these companies made that shutter, they outsourced it.
--
Thomas J. Kolenich
 
I don't care how it looks! If it has the right specs AND the right price, I will buy one.

If, then, it performs according to expectations, it will have my unconditional love! But I don't promise to be faithful - to cameras, that is! ;-)
--
Antonio

http://ferrer.smugmug.com/
 


I would.. if he asked me nicely... tho I wouldn't kiss him until he shaved!! :-)
 
GURL said:
Just put them behind the LCD, where there is enough space to hide
an entire keyboard (this will happen, but who is ready for that?)
Click to expand...
Casio was the first to use a touch screen LCD on a compact digicam.

--
Normally, a signature this small can't open its own jumpgate.

Ciao! Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top