Hi Peter,
Nice to hear from someone who has used both. Could you expand your
comments a little please? It's not often reality creeps into these
comparisons and it's grealy appreciated.
David.
--
Hi David,
I am not sure what you want me to expand on but I will give it a try.
As far as the pixel count. Somehow this has gotten into a male macho thing where we have to have tons of pixels. At 6mp, my Canon 10D allows me to make commercial prints for sale up to 20x30. If something larger is needed, then I can concede that the 11mp 1Ds would be needed. But I can run my whole studio and never use my medium format film cameras anymore and just use my 2 10D cameras.
Also, the frame size of the 10D when printed, needs to be cropped. All 35mm negatives need to be cropped when printed. This needs to be done to fit the paper sizes of 16x20, 11x14, 8x10 & 5x7. When your crop these files to fit these commercial paper sizes you are effectively making the Canon 10D a 5mp camera. Cropping means "cutting out". If I cut the ends of my file size off enough to make an 8x10 print, then I have cut the 10D down to a 5mp camera.
The E1, already is just about at the 8x10 print size in the ratio of it's file. I don't need to cut off the ends of the file to make my prints. So in effect, I get to keep all of the 5mp pixels and the 10D and the E1 become almost a wash in the pixel department.
I will also say this, people who are printing directly out of PhotoShop are printing with at least 3 year old technology. How far have digital cameras progressed in the last 3 years? There are printing programs out there that take your prints to super high quality levels that PS can't even touch. A program like "Qimage" runs circles around PS for printing, yet it only costs $40.00.
I also mentioned camera performance. If I am doing a wedding or any kind of event, I need the camera to focus quickly and accurately. With the Canon 60, you needed to jump through all kinds of hoops and invent all kinds of workarounds to get it to focus properly. The E20 focuses much better than the D60. As soon as I had the opportunity I changed out of the D60. If the E1 gives you that feeling that it is a solid performer and can at least "grab" the picture, then it is a keeper. The 3 bulbs in it's AF light, and the ability to switch to the FL50 for focus assist makes it sound like there was thought given to this.
For high end hobbyists, this means when you shoot your kids parties, your camera will get shots indoors in lower light that the other digicams just will not be able to get. if the E1 operates at just digicam levels of performance, it will not be adapted by professionals and high end hobbyists.
Speaking of lower light. Lower light means flash for professionals. If you ever had the opportunity to shoot a Canon 10D or Canon 1D at 800 ISO with a flash unit that has a diffuser on it, you will know what I am talking about. It is almost like shooting at ISO 100 (or ISO 80) outside on a bright sunny day. The pictures come out excellent and professional and your mind is not worried about messing up the shots because of low lighting. At wedding receptions, or darker sporting events, this is absolutely necessary.
The quality level when shooting at ISO 800 also needs to be remarkable. The E20, at ISO 320, has a noise level of 2.51 in it's pictures. The Canon 10D at ISO 800, has a noise level of 2.1. At ISO 400 the 10D has a noise level 1.4. At ISO 1600 the 10D has a noise level of 2.4. ALL of the ISO noise levels of the 10D are lower than the E20's ISO 320. What is that about? The E1 needs to erase that and match the 10D. If I can't pump up the E1 to ISO 400 or 800 to get the light into the camera and come out with clean pictures to sell to my brides or corporations do you think I am going to add an E1 to my team? They will need to sell those 90,000 cameras to someone else - lol.
So what is appealing about the E1 when there are other high quality cameras on the market? First, the angle of light hitting the sensor. On 35mm cameras, the very center of the film or sensor has the light rays coming in on a straight line. As you move from the center, the light rays bend at an angle as they hit the film plane. The E1 has designed it's lenses so that the entire sensor has the light coming in on a straight path. The center, and all the way to the edges have the light rays coming in and hitting the sensor straight on. To do this with the 35mm lenses, you would need to design the sensor in a bowl shape for the light to hit every pixel at the same angle.
Next, the E1 with comparable lenses, is about 25% lighter to carry. As i am getting older, my neck is in a hurting way after carrying the camera for 5 hours at a wedding job. The light weight is definitely appealing as stupid as it sounds. High end hobbyist will appreciate this too, even if they don't have the chance to realize this point.
The E1 allows me to get into a weather resistant camera at a much lower price than the 1D, 1Ds and D1X. I can't cancel an event job because it is raining outside. And forget that point, I just hate it when my stuff gets wet just because I try to take excellent care of my equipment. With the E1, hopefully selling at $1600 area, I can have a weather proof camera. All I can say about weather, is welcome to Miami!
All these benefits require the E1 to deliver pictures at all ISO levels comparable to what I can buy today. if it can't, I can't afford to "like" the E1. But, on the other hand, what kind of a deal would it be if the E1 was BETTER than the 10D? Wow, it would have a very strong appeal to all market sectors and pro's and high end hobbyists alike.
So, I hope I expanded somewhat on what you were looking for. My fingers are getting tired - lol.
Pete
