Those who call the EP-1 a

By death, I dont mean literal death... naturally these things are gradual. And like I said above, its not as much the E-P1 being a do-all camera (it definitelty isnt) but its the idea that when EVF become as fast and reactive as OVF, theyll be replacing them in dslr size bodies... and then we wont have to deal with shutter actuation limits, we'll be able to judge white balance and have a live histogram right in the VF. I think the new Panny was the first step in that direction-- even more than the E-P1. The timeline? Who can say? I'd guesstimate that in 50 yrs or less EVF dslr will outnumber OVF dslr... and thats as far as I can go. Technically, we shouldnt even use the term dslr at that point... more like evf professional interchangeable lens cameras!

--
http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com
 
OK... 50 years bet I won't take - you may be young enough but I am not going to be around THAT long, LOL. Also, with today's rate of technology development, who the heck knows what is going to be next big thing that no one even thinks about today.

Anyway, I stand by my point of view - EP-1 and its breed is NOT a replacement for DSLR, but whole separate thing. In my view, it's a bridge between P&S and DSLR, aimed partially at DSLR users looking for backup/travel system and mostly at P&S users who look for more but are not ready for the big leap. As such breed, they won't replace either but (hopefully) will bite their share of both. If successful, they will bring more attention to Oly DSLRs by bringing in P&S crowd and introducing them to Oly technology and 4/3 format and creating natural transition. Very good thing, hope it plays out this way.
 
Well, I picked 50 yrs because I think there's going to be many people who stick to their beloved cameras for a long time period even after the industry ceases production of same. Sorry for the misunderstanding, I have to agree that I dont think a camera of the E-P1's form factor is going to replace DSLR, but I do feel that the OVF in DSLR will one day be replaced with a rapid EVF of a breed like what we have seen in the G1 and GH1. I for one would like to see the white balance in the preview as well as a live histogram and a manual focus which magnifies the image in the EVF. I think there are some definite advantages to going with an EVF, and some disadvantages too (which I hope will be ironed out in the future.)

--
http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com
 
...aren't taking into consideration the underlying elements brought together to make this camera... those elements being the Olympus e-30's photographic guts.

I'm afraid that I must agree with you. The SLR in the DSLR is a bit of a throwback to an earlier time from my perspective. The digital camera manufacturing industry is essentially hamstrung into continually providing the optical viewfinder in the hopes that they properly appease the old guard of photography... so that beautiful and expensive cameras can still get moved off the shelves.

I do fully intend to plunk the cash down on the e-p1 as soon as the reviews (hopefully) validate my suspicions that this is a game changing piece of hardware. near professional imaging in a near pocketable camera.

To make an analogy, as in high performance vehicles: the capability of the car almost always exceeds the capability of the driver. This camera will more than likely follow suit.

just a few opinions... this is also my first post. good evening to you all.
 
Well, if you suggest to define "death of DSLR" as a day when industry stops making them and offer shorter timeline for that, I still will take the bet :)

However, if you say now that EP-1 won't replace DSLR, that negates statement that "DSLR's days are numbered" and I can withdraw the offer.

As for EFV vs OVF... come on, it's been discussed and argued about what, zillion times already? Let's not obfuscate things, our subject at hand is: whether this new breed of cameras, with or without EVF added, is DSLR killer or not. I say not. It's in its own class.
 
I agree... this is a new class of camera (and thats why it has garnered so much more interest). If the OVF of the DSLR gets replaced with an EVF-- it wont be a DSLR anymore, hence the reason why I stated "the death of the DSLR." Even Dpreview feels that way, as I saw it stated in the Initial preview they did for the Panny G1-- where they praised Panny for taking "the first step" in this direction.

--
http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com
 
I would think that an LCD on an autofocus camera would be better for older eyes.

1) The image is much bigger than an image in a finder.
2) It is viewable with both eyes.
3) DOF is shown properly without reducing the image brightness.
How old are you?

For most people over 40 critical focusing on an LCD inches away from
the face is near impossible. At least it is for me. I dare say a
large percentage of the people interested in a camera like this (I
include myself) are over 40 and only having the option of using an
LCD at arms legth is not appealing. An EVF or optical finder with
dioptric corrrection is a real plus when your eyes get older.

--
Jonathan
 
Sorry. I have tried. Can't see the screen in the Algarvian sun, can't track the object, can't see enough detail to compose. Absolutely horrid.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
 
the mirror box will be dead for any except very specialist cameras. I will have replaced my D3, and probably my D5, D7 and D9 with an DV1, which will have an EVF.

The viewfinder, on the other hand, is not going anywhere. Backscreens are for clever shots (very useful as an add on) and people who know no better.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
 
Whether the EP-1 is called a "pro camera" or an "amateur camera" or even a "hot dog" isn't what's important to me. What is important is how it can be used, and whether it makes the sort of photography I prefer easier to accomplish.

Superficially, the EP-1 has some compelling specifications: reasonably large sensor; interchangeable and probably excellent lenses; rather compact size and moderate weight. But upon closer examination, it wouldn't help me do my sort of work and would possibly make it more difficult.

Why? The lack of a viewfinder. This isn't a question of technology for me. I don't particularly care if the viewfinder is electronic, or optical, based on a moving mirror, or simply a decent wireframe. But I want something that is usable in adverse lighting conditions, and that can be used for subjects that don't stand still. If this viewfinder were to allow me to frame my photographs with accuracy, so much the better.

Many posters have commented that people above 40 y/o generally have difficulty using a camera equipped only with an LCD other than by holding it at arms' length. I'm one of those, and despite the dismissal of that issue by other-presumably younger-posters, it's very real for me. Of course, all I'd need to do to be able to see the LCD held close to my face is put on my glasses before using the camera.

Has any of the commentators thought about how the extra time involved to get those glasses in play would detract from the spontaneity that is often one of photography's virtues as an art form?

For the many photographers who don't make photos that are spontaneous, dependence on an LCD for framing may be adequate, though from what I've read--and experienced with similar viewing systems--you won't find it very useful when the sunlight hits it.

While the new Olympus Pen may be an interesting first effort, as a working tool for photographers, as a device for recording our world as events occur, I'd say it's less of a pen than a quill; a modern pen is instantly ready, easy to use, and doesn't interfere with the creative process. A quill, on the other hand, requires a good deal of effort to employ, is cumbersome in use (though lightweight and rather elegant in design), and makes the creative process much less spontaneous and smooth.

Now that Olympus has produced the EP-1, perhaps with its next effort it can design and manufacture the EP-2, a real pen, a useful tool, for the serious photographer.
 
--I've seen this brought up by several of the LCD haters, and I'm trying to figure it out.

How can peering through a small tunnel allow a person to track a moving object any better than looking at it on a 3" screen?

I come at this from the underwater end of things.. having to track moving critters while setting up the shot (as well as having to track while waiting for the shutter lag on some of my earlier cameras). Apparently when Oly first came out with a live view DSLR divers loved it, they later changed how it operated, shutting live preview down while the mirror was up or something along those lines, and it became somewhat useless. Since there's no mirror involved in this camera, I'd suspect it should be live all the time and able to track moving objects through the duration of the picture taking process. I'd think that trying to track a moving subject, especially one that is erratic, would be very difficult if it gets out of the frame and your face is planted directly in the backside of a camera.

Feel free to educate me on why a LCD can't be used for subjects that don't stand still.
 
--From personal experience I can say that there's a HUGE difference between a 3# LCD and one substantially smaller in those regards. I had a sp350 and loved the LCD screen (I'm thinking 2.5-2.7 inch screen), it broke down and I tried going back to my old 8080 and couldn't believe how hard the LCD was to use.. lot smaller. Now I'm using a Canon G9 and it's 3" screen and it's fabulous. My wife tried it, had a real tough time with a 2.25" screen but did great with mine and bought herself one. There's a huge difference once you get up to that larger screen.

I'm thinking those grumping about LCD screens that haven't tried a 3" screen might find their tones change once they have. I can see that at some point there are going to be people who are seriously far sighted and it just won't work, but that's the breaks.
 
Louis,

if EVFs develop enough (and they probably will), most likely you are right. My feeling though is, it will happen for the other reasons and result in other outcomes than size decrease. Balance with serious glass and having all the controls conveniently located on the camera body will dictate size comparable with today's DSLRs; switch from OVF to EVF will be done mostly to get rid of complicated moving parts and to add functionality to the viewfinder. Smaller camera bodies will have their place below bigger ones of course, just as they do today.

Just my feeling.
 
I think this thread is getting away from the main topic. My main
reason for saying this camera is not a P/S is because it has manual
controls. Im not trying to say this particular camera or even one
like it will replace dslrs. What I am saying is that a camera with
the form factor of a dslr will replace OVF with EVF... something fast
and reactive like the new Panny's...

--
http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com
Couldnt agree more. Here in this size manual control that will effectively change the look of the image
 
Backscreens are fine for that. Also studio work (I used my Bronica with the WLF indoors).

I loved having a swivel backscreen for that 2% of shots where it was useful. For the other 98% it would have been a PITA.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
 
Backscreens are fine for that. Also studio work (I used my Bronica
with the WLF indoors).

I loved having a swivel backscreen for that 2% of shots where it was
useful. For the other 98% it would have been a PITA.
I dunno. I think the biggest problem with current screens isn't the form factor, but issues of performance in sunlight and of course latency.

Lotta guys are really starting to get mileage out of the little Panasonic as a video rig, though. I saw this a few days ago:

http://vimeo.com/4630484

Illya Friedman's really been tricking them out with PL mounts, matte boxes and the like. Still haven't seen anyone using the viewfinder on one.

This gave me a chuckle recently:

 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top