Albert
Leading Member
I was hoping for "WOW!!!" pictures, but instead, I got "me too" pictures..
And I hear the disappointments, as an OM owner, I am disappointed too...
BUT.. I think there is something major that most of the nay-sayers are missing.
I remember when Steve Jobs had that commercial, with the woman throwing a hammer at the monitors.. The Mac was IT!! It was small, it smiled at you, it was the uber-computer.. I won't insult the Mac by calling it a Canon, but there were zealots just like Canon zealots of today.
I (in the end) still chose a PC. The reason was simple. Open standards, I had CHOICES. It's the same reason I use unix instead of Windows. I want choices. If I buy a Canon, I can only wait for Canon to do this, Canon to do that..
With the E-1, I can wait for Olympus...Fuji...Kodak... etc.. I have choices. Linux and Apache have proven that the most open standard eventually wins, even against Tyrants like Canon.. err.. I meant Microsoft.
Somebody has to be brave, and come out and be the first one to eat the first few iterations before the bandwagoners jump on. Olympus is always revolutionary, not just generic upgrades..
Is the E-1 what the marketing dept have hyped it to be?
Well, let's take a look.
You get almost the same quality image with a smaller, open standards based sensor that is 1MP less than the competition while not having CA problems..
Hmm... I guess when you some it up that way, it's not so bad huh?
Second, I understand that whenever you pick up a Canon, it automatically takes a picture of a resolution chart, and cannot be used to take real world pictures; but short of walking around taking pictures of gray cards all day, the real world images look pretty darn good to me.
Bokeh is excellent as you'd expect from any and all Zuiko lenses, and the entire system is smaller..
So let me get this straight, I can buy a camera who's total package is smaller, get roughly the same image quality, and still have plenty of room for improvements from not just one manufacturer? Sounds like we have a potential winner here.
The same way Apache quietly overtook IIS, (I hope) will be the same way the 4/3rds overtakes the other systems.
From Phil's results, I think the dark horse is the Fuji S2! If image is the only factor, then everybody should buy a Large Format with a Scheneider lens. So those who just complain about imagine being the only variable without look, feel, ergonomics, ease of portability etc.. are just lying or trolls or lying trolls or ignorant.
Also, just because a camera takes good pictures doesn't mean you + that camera take better pictures!
I have seen pictures that are lousy from a Leica, from a Hasselblad, from a Contax, from a Canon, from a Nikon etc.. In fact, humans never cease to impress me as far as how they can take good equipment and mis-use it.
Some of the smaller digital cameras are suppose to take nice pics, but I don't with them because my hards are too big, and cannot grip the camera well to take a steady shot.
Some of the other things, like shutter button feel, shutter lag, etc.. All that adds to the experience and adds to the overall package.
What I would love to see, is Kodak or Fuji announcing that they will have a 4/3rds body with 8-10MP come April next year. Then the ball game changes drastically...
Olympus needs to roll out a prosumer body..
Perspective people.. you all sound like a bunch of back-seat photographers.
My friend loves to shoot high grain film, which he does an awesome job with as far as portrait shots. He told me once, wanna-be photographers do nothing but take pics of resolution charts, real photographers are too busy taking PICTURES to mess with that.
Those who buy Canon and run like 1 roll of film through it a year (and mind you, all resolution charts) are an insult to photography and probably an insult the cameras.
From the pics I've seen, E-10's and E-20's produce amazing pics, and the E-1 produces better pics then they do with lower noise. So put away the magnifying glass, and the resolution charts, and take some pictures.. like I'm going to do this afternoon.. With my Olympus Om1n and my Zuikos.
Yes, you, you cannonites, PUT AWAY THE RESOLUTION CHARTS..
I seem to recall photo albums from before the 70's that were amazing to me. Taken with a Leica M3 and 1 lens, and while the film grain was much rougher than anything I can buy in the store today, they produced better pictures that I can right now.. Why? The photographer imposes his will and his view, and the result is a picture. Those who don't know an f-stop from a door stop, yet complain about resolution etc.. SHAME ON YOU. Spend some money buying a book on photography or something useful..
YES, put away the resolution charts...
And I hear the disappointments, as an OM owner, I am disappointed too...
BUT.. I think there is something major that most of the nay-sayers are missing.
I remember when Steve Jobs had that commercial, with the woman throwing a hammer at the monitors.. The Mac was IT!! It was small, it smiled at you, it was the uber-computer.. I won't insult the Mac by calling it a Canon, but there were zealots just like Canon zealots of today.
I (in the end) still chose a PC. The reason was simple. Open standards, I had CHOICES. It's the same reason I use unix instead of Windows. I want choices. If I buy a Canon, I can only wait for Canon to do this, Canon to do that..
With the E-1, I can wait for Olympus...Fuji...Kodak... etc.. I have choices. Linux and Apache have proven that the most open standard eventually wins, even against Tyrants like Canon.. err.. I meant Microsoft.
Somebody has to be brave, and come out and be the first one to eat the first few iterations before the bandwagoners jump on. Olympus is always revolutionary, not just generic upgrades..
Is the E-1 what the marketing dept have hyped it to be?
Well, let's take a look.
You get almost the same quality image with a smaller, open standards based sensor that is 1MP less than the competition while not having CA problems..
Hmm... I guess when you some it up that way, it's not so bad huh?
Second, I understand that whenever you pick up a Canon, it automatically takes a picture of a resolution chart, and cannot be used to take real world pictures; but short of walking around taking pictures of gray cards all day, the real world images look pretty darn good to me.
Bokeh is excellent as you'd expect from any and all Zuiko lenses, and the entire system is smaller..
So let me get this straight, I can buy a camera who's total package is smaller, get roughly the same image quality, and still have plenty of room for improvements from not just one manufacturer? Sounds like we have a potential winner here.
The same way Apache quietly overtook IIS, (I hope) will be the same way the 4/3rds overtakes the other systems.
From Phil's results, I think the dark horse is the Fuji S2! If image is the only factor, then everybody should buy a Large Format with a Scheneider lens. So those who just complain about imagine being the only variable without look, feel, ergonomics, ease of portability etc.. are just lying or trolls or lying trolls or ignorant.
Also, just because a camera takes good pictures doesn't mean you + that camera take better pictures!
I have seen pictures that are lousy from a Leica, from a Hasselblad, from a Contax, from a Canon, from a Nikon etc.. In fact, humans never cease to impress me as far as how they can take good equipment and mis-use it.
Some of the smaller digital cameras are suppose to take nice pics, but I don't with them because my hards are too big, and cannot grip the camera well to take a steady shot.
Some of the other things, like shutter button feel, shutter lag, etc.. All that adds to the experience and adds to the overall package.
What I would love to see, is Kodak or Fuji announcing that they will have a 4/3rds body with 8-10MP come April next year. Then the ball game changes drastically...
Olympus needs to roll out a prosumer body..
Perspective people.. you all sound like a bunch of back-seat photographers.
My friend loves to shoot high grain film, which he does an awesome job with as far as portrait shots. He told me once, wanna-be photographers do nothing but take pics of resolution charts, real photographers are too busy taking PICTURES to mess with that.
Those who buy Canon and run like 1 roll of film through it a year (and mind you, all resolution charts) are an insult to photography and probably an insult the cameras.
From the pics I've seen, E-10's and E-20's produce amazing pics, and the E-1 produces better pics then they do with lower noise. So put away the magnifying glass, and the resolution charts, and take some pictures.. like I'm going to do this afternoon.. With my Olympus Om1n and my Zuikos.
Yes, you, you cannonites, PUT AWAY THE RESOLUTION CHARTS..
I seem to recall photo albums from before the 70's that were amazing to me. Taken with a Leica M3 and 1 lens, and while the film grain was much rougher than anything I can buy in the store today, they produced better pictures that I can right now.. Why? The photographer imposes his will and his view, and the result is a picture. Those who don't know an f-stop from a door stop, yet complain about resolution etc.. SHAME ON YOU. Spend some money buying a book on photography or something useful..
YES, put away the resolution charts...
