E-pl1 screen sux?

Started Aug 9, 2010 | Discussions thread
papillon_65 Forum Pro • Posts: 27,030
Re: Ok, we disagree.


As far as manual focus, slr lets you see without glare what you are focusing on. If you add a low res electronic view finder to m4/3 it does not buy you much becaue it is low resolution, being able to see what you focus on is a strenth of DSLR which smokes m4/3s in that catogory whether the 4/3 uses the rear screen or added evf which also ads bulk and weight.

I guess you've never used the vf-2 then because low resolution it isn't and it beats the pants off any ovf I've ever used for functionality.

If AF and manual focus is not that important, then a point and shoot does a pretty good job for snapshot, and is much less bulky. To me it seems like point and shoot and dslr have it covered while m4/3 sits in the middle and is not portable like P&S but not up to the quality/feature/and performance of a dslr. This may change in the future but right now m4/3s lack to much over a dslr and is a lot bigger than point and shoots pocket ability. IMHO.

It seems to me people are trying to replace a dslr with a m4/3 and it just doesn't hack it, just as trying to replace a m4/3 with a point and shoot and you try to do more advanced shooting, p&s does not stack up. But thats my opinion, and I guess we disagree.

I understand the benifits of m4/3 but as DX and EF-S dslrs become smaller and smaller as history has shown us with more area for pixels because of the larger sensor, the m4/3 format will only diminish on its main advantage, size and weight. DSLR may never get the lenses and sensor distance to lens down (camera depth)to the size of m4/3 but I know they can shrink a dslr down pretty close the size of a m4/3rd with EVF and still have live view and video. But to each his own. That is just how I see it.

Your own website does a better job showing the huge limitations m4/3rds have over DSLRs, and you do not even talk about using f2.8 lenses or better for even better AF. Dynamic range, low noise high ISO, lack of controls, lack of lenses, lack of flash, really what do you buy a decent camera for if it is not these things. I thought price was an advantage but you are right, those lenses are expensive. Why would anyone invest in a system with so lacking when they can carry around a few more points and have something superior?

•Limited lens choices ( This is rapidly improving ).

•Lens cost ( Still expensive but I expect this to fall as they become more popular ).
•Slower FPS.
•Slower auto focusing ( Generally improving with newer models ).

•No OVF ( Newer models now have the capability to attach high quality EVF's though ).
•No weatherproofed options.
•Lack of external controls ( Not an issue for me but might be for some ).
•Lack of telephoto options at longer focal lengths.

•No fast zooms ( although all the zuiko fast zooms can be used with slower AF performance ).

•Some IQ disadvantages against higher end DSLR's ( Dynamic range and shallow dof ).
•Less leeway to process in raw ( Due to less DR ).

•Less flash capability ( Although this is getting better with wireless flash support as in the E-PL1 ).
•Most LCD's more difficult to use in bright light than an ovf.
•Bodies are not cheap ( although prices are now starting to drop ).
•Accessories are expensive ( Prices are now starting to fall though ).

Well I see you cherry picked one side of my explanation on the differences between m4/3's and 4/3's so I guess you've kind of set your stall. The amount of m4/3's camera's being sold and people giving up DSLR's to use them indicates that there are plenty of people who disagree with you.

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow