Reading mode: Light Dark

E-1, the revolution you are all missing..

Go to last post
I think Olympus has done a horrible job as far as expectations.. as an Om'er Zuikoholic, I had higher hopes than most..

So I'm probably going to buy a C5050..
Canoeman said:
Albert:

All-in-all I tend to agree with your position vis-a-vis those who
are so fixated on resolution chart shots, etc. I have shot
professionally with 4X5, Rollei SL66, Leica M3, OMs, XAs and a
couple of other's I've probably forgotten. That's not to say I was
a good photographer because of my equipment, choice of films and
processing, etc. The quality of my work (which I stand by but
isn't digitized) is due to my eye, brain, technique, hard work AND
having good tools.

Now I am a network guy (CNE, so you know I'm not a MickeySoft fan),
and photography is a pleasure, a hobby. I can see digital in my
future, and as a dedicated Olympus guy (I sold my Rollei and Leica
gear because the OMs, along with my Toyo 4x5 setup, satisfied most
of my needs 99% of the time), I really want to continue with a tool
that I'm pretty darned sure will be a joy in my hands. But I don't
have unlimited discretionary funds, even if the treasurer in the
family is very tolerant,which she is.

So, if I am going to spend the kind of money an E-1 system will
require, I need an overriding reason to go that way. So far I
don't see anything that is THAT compelling, though I have not
handled one, nor am I absolutely certain that Phil's tests (with
all due respect to Phil) are the final story.

Like you, I believe 1000% that the magic in a photograph is NOT
necessarily directly connected to the gear nor its cachet. (E.G.,
I invested in Fujinon lenses for my 4x5, probably one of the
best-kept secrets in the large format world. Also have them for my
enlarger.) One of my favourite photographers used OM gear when all
the pros (and their sycophants) were laughing at Olympus.

So I am reserving final judgment (I am not that close to a purchase
anyway) until more "evidence" is in, and until I can give an
extended real-world test. Yes, the images are not bad, and I am
dead certain that the E-1, in the hands of real photographers, can
be a tool for makng wonderful, great pictures. But right now the
limited images we have are just that... "not bad", in comparison to
other, less expensive alternatives. Quite frankly, I'd almost say
that I should buy an E-XX and wait to see what happens.

Canoeman
Click to expand...
 
Albert: On your site, you say, "One last comment, move your feet people! "

Omigawd, thank you, thank you, thank you. I am SO tired of all the "I need this zoom because" and "that zoom doesn't have the right range", yadda, yadda, yadda.

And before you zoom folks beat on me with a stick, two things..

1. Yes, I have a zoom lens, and its convenience is nice. Zooms have their place. (Usually it is at home on a shelf.)

2. I have a disability (handicap, whatever you wanna call it)... I had polio (yeah, I'm that old), and walk with a crutch. But I LOVE my primes, move around to get the shot and, as Albert says on his web page, see the world in a different way because I choose to use superior lenses.

One of the BEST assignments I ever had from my photo instructor was, on a weekend I was going away to to a conference, to use ONLY a compact rangefinder I then owned (a Konica C35), and to only shoot from 5ft or closer. I.e., "if your pictures are good enough,you're not close enough." That assignment changed my life. It finally clicked... INVOLVEMENT with the subject was critical.

Get the lead out, folks.

Canoeman
 
Albert: D a m n, you're good.
Albert said:
I used linux a LONG TIME ago.. and people (the Windoze) people use
to laugh at me. I used Linux when I use to email Linus for
drivers!! 1994-1995! But look how far Linux as come. Was it all
that open before? Not like it is now.

Of course, I'm a BSD user now (digital evolution happens)

I see the gripping as FUD on both sides.

Microsoft downplays linux, and Linux Zealots spread Linux marketing
like fertilizer as well. Linux cures AIDS. Linux will makes your
company smooth and efficient. Linux is more secure. Linux is more
secure if you have the right person behind the helm, just like a
camera takes better pictures in the hands of PROFESSIONALS.

People make it sound like:

1: Everybody is Ansel Adams.
2: What is preventing you from the winning shot is the camera, and
not the fact that you can't tell an f-stop from a door stop.
3: The #1 reason a picture is good or bad, is determined by the
camera instead of the photographer..
Sam Berry said:
I am a Linux/Apache etc... user for similar reasons, but I don't
believe that Olympus has created such an open system. They are
famous for disabling camera features if a 3rd party memory card is
used, instead of a Olympus branded one. Very open.

None of us has yet seen this Open Standard. Can you see the kernel
source code? Freely? What about man pages?

Canon has more options for lenses by orders of magnitude vs oly at
the moment, and not just from canon. 3rd party flash? Yep. Only
Canon cards? No. 3rd party lens? Yep. 3rd party RAW software? Yep.
Free SDK to develop RAW software? Yep.

You get my point?

They have spread FUD like fertiliser. To 10D had ever suffered from
purple fringing with a lens costing more than £150 and certainly
not by the apertures that these samples were taken at. I use a 50mm
1970's takumar macro lens, whose exit pupil sits right in the lens
mount. There are NO corner effects whatsoever. Honesty, the Oly
marketing machine could have been microsofts.

I wish you good pictures with your Om1n, the old OM series are nice
cameras.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Phil:

I used to work for an unnamed, major technology company (can you say "Document Company"? Thought you could), and belive me, drivers that were released with the first generation (1.0) of a new product bore no resemeblance to the good drivers, or what we should have released inthe first place.

Canoeman
Phil Askey said:
NarrBL said:
Seems this is a key point: these present E1 tests for noise,
moire, and resolution occur on a PRE-production camera. Although
the preview states 'initial production' - wondered about that at
the time, and what the window was that suddenly had the freeze
lifted to show images.
Click to expand...
Sorry but these are from an initial production camera with a serial
number.

Intial production simply means the first cameras off the production
line. In theory they are no different than the cameras you will
buy in the store other than the people who made them may have less
experience now at doing so than later. It may be the case that
later cameras have newer firmware, although my experience of intial
production cameras is that they are virtually identical to the
final camera.

The firmware in this camera is 'Version 1.0'.
Member said:
I'm beginning to wonder if this isn't just dpreview being drawn
into part of the marketing wars as with some of those
pre-production photos on Japanese sites. These get buzz out there
amidst anticipated competition, with nits so evident that they
cannot be unaware - and so the actual artifacts will be discounted.
Click to expand...
Not at all, but I can't come out and say "this camera isn't
perfect" if Olympus are telling me that it is initial production
and that I will be getting a 'further down the line' full
production camera later.

You should know better than question our independence from
manufacturers.
Member said:
Then when the job is really finished, of course the resulting
product will look much better, and be complimented on that being
the case - 'look what they really did...'.
Click to expand...
We will see.
Member said:
Software is likely the last thing to get finalized, and it is from
inference the major contributor to all the problems mentioned here
on the E1.
Click to expand...
Well, we hope so anyway.
Member said:
Joe is still right that it could have been smaller....but those
sample pictures in fact tantilize that there is a nice look to the
E1 image - use of curves seems to show a lot yet hiding in dynamic
range.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised actually because I really didn't see any more dynamic
range than other digital SLR's. I've heard plenty of people on
this forum saying they like the dynamic range but perhaps they
haven't used / experienced other d-SLR's.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
 
Yup.
Albert said:
So I'm probably going to buy a C5050..
Canoeman said:
Albert:

All-in-all I tend to agree with your position vis-a-vis those who
are so fixated on resolution chart shots, etc. I have shot
professionally with 4X5, Rollei SL66, Leica M3, OMs, XAs and a
couple of other's I've probably forgotten. That's not to say I was
a good photographer because of my equipment, choice of films and
processing, etc. The quality of my work (which I stand by but
isn't digitized) is due to my eye, brain, technique, hard work AND
having good tools.

Now I am a network guy (CNE, so you know I'm not a MickeySoft fan),
and photography is a pleasure, a hobby. I can see digital in my
future, and as a dedicated Olympus guy (I sold my Rollei and Leica
gear because the OMs, along with my Toyo 4x5 setup, satisfied most
of my needs 99% of the time), I really want to continue with a tool
that I'm pretty darned sure will be a joy in my hands. But I don't
have unlimited discretionary funds, even if the treasurer in the
family is very tolerant,which she is.

So, if I am going to spend the kind of money an E-1 system will
require, I need an overriding reason to go that way. So far I
don't see anything that is THAT compelling, though I have not
handled one, nor am I absolutely certain that Phil's tests (with
all due respect to Phil) are the final story.

Like you, I believe 1000% that the magic in a photograph is NOT
necessarily directly connected to the gear nor its cachet. (E.G.,
I invested in Fujinon lenses for my 4x5, probably one of the
best-kept secrets in the large format world. Also have them for my
enlarger.) One of my favourite photographers used OM gear when all
the pros (and their sycophants) were laughing at Olympus.

So I am reserving final judgment (I am not that close to a purchase
anyway) until more "evidence" is in, and until I can give an
extended real-world test. Yes, the images are not bad, and I am
dead certain that the E-1, in the hands of real photographers, can
be a tool for makng wonderful, great pictures. But right now the
limited images we have are just that... "not bad", in comparison to
other, less expensive alternatives. Quite frankly, I'd almost say
that I should buy an E-XX and wait to see what happens.

Canoeman
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Phil, considering the R&D cost involved, I'm not that surprised that there would be somewhat limited openness to start. I would think the initial investors would want to recoup some cost. I don't necessarily equate open to mean free and I have seen no reports that other 3rd party and Brands cannot reasonably buy into the format at this early stage.

Since Fuji came to the game later it seems to be an indication that Oly/Kodak will let others into the party. I would think that the buy in would be at a premium at this early stage but would become a lot less later on if the system has staying power and proves itself worthy.

I don't think we will ever again see the openness that was around before Bill Gates. The Good Old Days!! LOL

Regards: Will
 
Albert said:
I was not overwhelmed by the pictures nor the resolution tests, but
your sample pics looked great; so I was not underwhelmed either..
Click to expand...
In what way did the sample pics look great?
Can you please explain what was so great about them?

Roland
 
That's a pretty realisitic evaluation there. I honestly expected everyone in this forum to banish anyone who didn't rave about the camera to the canon forum. The fact that Jono and friends are being realistic now and been humble whilst doing it is really quite impressive. It's nice to see some accurate evaluations by Oly people, who I expected to keep their rose coloured glasses on well after the reviews.

I would choose this camera over a normal digicam any day if the price premium was less silly. The noise and DOF reductions make it worth it alone.

I wish you luck with whatever camera you choose. But I can seriously reccomend a 10D :-)
Albert said:
The E-1, had build up hype, and it didn't deliver... (Most never
do). So a disappointment? Yes. A "Total Disappointment"? No..

It produces images better than the E-10, E-20's. Interchangable
lenses. Weatherproofing.

That is enough to get me interested; because I like the E series a
lot.

Now it's a play on price..
DMillier said:
The camera looks exactly the same to me now as it did when it was
announced. Apart from minor variations and the Foveon chip, all
sensors of similar sizes and pixel count seem to produce more or
less the same resolution (so pixel count does matter!). Most also
seem to produce similar levels of noise, again with minor
variations.

So, the E1 has 5MP and a slightly smaller sensor and produces
slightly less resolution and slightly more noise than the 6 MP APS
competition. Quel surprise!

The body still looks good and strong (like the E10) and some of the
supporting specs look good; the 4/3 standard is still interesting.

But the camera obviously doesn't have any ground breaking
technology as far as image quality is concerned so oly are left
with exactly the same problem as Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Fuji: they
are competing on price, pixel count etc. plus the extra build
quality and sensor dust scrubber.

Unless they do something spectacular on price it still isn't a
compelling buy if you are a current nikon/canon user but if you are
not invested in a system depending on the street price it might be
worth a look.

Superficially, the new Pentax seems more attractive though
(smaller, lighter, good existing lens range).
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Yes, and memory recalls that the 'open systems' idea has mostly been a debacle over its decades of history. Think of how Unix was tied up in knots by 30 or so vendors, 10 of them significant - and that was the initial computer 'open system'. It was still better producing for it, minding the variants, so the principle was there. But pointy heads always think they can corner a market, and that this would be best, and that non-standard features are a way to do it. At the very least, an arranged oligarchy - and that has very prominent track record in American-style economics.

4/3 specification seems treated as potentially another of those oligarchies - only with the question open whether they have a market.

On Joseph's point, small vendors very often get short schrift in such things - it's easy to feel they are more trouble than they are worth, if you do communicate with them. Especially in a climate of frenzy about IP (intellectual property) concerns. Simply supporting them by conversation is the other thing, though sounds Joe can support himself given the spec.

Rent-seeking seems so often the basis under financial thoughts, hiding there among any later ideas...it will be a long pull to demonstrate other modes sufficiently, and the recent internet-vc bubble experience won't help. Probably a new view on what products are, which forces need for diversity in their construction.
WARPSTUDIO said:
Phil, considering the R&D cost involved, I'm not that surprised
that there would be somewhat limited openness to start. I would
think the initial investors would want to recoup some cost. I don't
necessarily equate open to mean free and I have seen no reports
that other 3rd party and Brands cannot reasonably buy into the
format at this early stage.

Since Fuji came to the game later it seems to be an indication that
Oly/Kodak will let others into the party. I would think that the
buy in would be at a premium at this early stage but would become a
lot less later on if the system has staying power and proves itself
worthy.

I don't think we will ever again see the openness that was around
before Bill Gates. The Good Old Days!! LOL

Regards: Will
Click to expand...
 
carsten böttcher wrote:
[ quoting some article ]
carsten böttcher said:
"It is interesting to note that one of the co-signors of this 4/3
System, Kodak, has already started using full-sized 24x36 mm CMOS
sensors rated at 14 Megapixels resolution in its professional SLR
cameras."
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. Kodak also makes $200 point-and-shoot digicams. Who's to say there's not room for them to offer something in between (a 4/3-based camera)?

Cheers,
Jeremy

--
Jeremy L. Rosenberger
http://www.frii.com/~jeremy/
 
Albert said:
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...
Click to expand...
--After being a pro for over 25 years, I have used Nikon, Cannon, Konica, Mamiya, Hassy etc. Our studio does all types of photography. One of my primary competitors is also one of my best friends. We have decided to join forces and share lab equipement and labor. So we get to compare our images and learn from each other.

One way that we have learned to judge the quality of a camera and lens set up is looking at group shots of many people. Say for instance a high school band of 100 kids. We blow it up to 11x14 or 16x20 and watch for those little faces to be sharp or soft. We have looked and tested all of our cameras using this method.

I kid you not, the Olympus E-20 rocks! This was a surprising discovery because both myself and my colleague are Nikon buffs! There is something to their lens system! Now after looking over the observations regarding the noise and seeing where the Olympus came in 4th behind the Fuji, Cannon and Nikon. I was quick to be able to make that comparison irrelevant for our studio work because the real break down was in the higher ASA range. That was like shooting a Nikon f-2 lens with 400 speed film. Sure you could see a little grain but that image was really sharp! And if you don't want noise just don't use it in that higher ASA range. Just like with film, don't use 1600 film or digital settings unless you are willing to sacrifice quality.

Since we don't use more than 400 ASA for most of our digital shots, I think the Olympus with what I think may be a sharper lens set up may more than compensate for the noise shortcommings.

I admit, I would rather spend the money on a Nikon D-100 than spend a lot of money on a more expensive Olympus system where I would have to invest in yet another system.

If the price gets right, I would buy the E-1 and I bet hundreds of others would too!

I can still remember the days when I was blown away by the sharpness from my little Olympus pocket camera that I would take it on vacation!

There is a noticible difference, and I have every lens that Nikon made up until just recently when they decided to upgrade their lens systems! I think that was a smart move by Nikon!

D. Massey
http://www.masseyphoto.com
 
Albert said:
Sam, I agree with you there; and that will play on the part of
Olympus; how "open" they will make the system will determine how
well it survives..
Click to expand...
Even if they make it "truly" open, will anyone else come to play ? They built a standard on a small sensor - in the end, everyone has to pick their ideal sensor size, just as everyone in the past picked between sheet film, 120, 35mm (and other various sizes throughout history). The market settled primarily on 35mm and 120 as providing a good compromise between image quality and convenience for various photographers needs. The same think will shake out with sensor sizes. 4/3 can be as open as it wants, but if the majority of interchangeable-lens-toting photographers are already willing to lug around 35mm (or larger) gear, and have the option of lugging less gear with a Canon 10d-sized sensor, the smaller 4/3 sensor is going to be an awfully hard sell if at any point in time, it offers lower image quality, and especially if it offers little in the way of gear selection and high prices. And if you're adverse to lugging gear, the E1 is a compromise, but you'll also get increasingly good image quality from even smaller digicams. The E1 may be destined to be a niche product.
Albert said:
People make it sound like:

1: Everybody is Ansel Adams.
2: What is preventing you from the winning shot is the camera, and
not the fact that you can't tell an f-stop from a door stop.
3: The #1 reason a picture is good or bad, is determined by the
camera instead of the photographer..
Click to expand...
And your post makes it sound like anyone looking to spend a couple grand on a camera and another couple grand on lenses and accessories must not be a "real" photographer if they actually bother to compare the results they can get from different products. The thing is ... good photographers and bad photographers alike can benefit from spending less money on a 10d.

There's no revolution here ... there's a neat idea with absolutely no evidence that it (the "open" idea) will ever provide practical advantages, and faith in that idea comes at a really steep cost right now. Meanwhile, without the revolutionary war drums, you can buy into the Nikon system without buying a single piece of Nikon gear (Fuji or Kodak camera, lenses from Sigma, Tamron or Tokina, flash units from Metz or Sunpak ...)
  • Dennis
 
Jeremy Rosenberger said:
I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. Kodak also makes
$200 point-and-shoot digicams. Who's to say there's not room for
them to offer something in between (a 4/3-based camera)?
Click to expand...
But they don't do that.

I think that Kodak is rather uninterested in 4/3 IMHO.

Roland
 
Roland Karlsson said:
But they don't do that.
Click to expand...
Well, they don't do it currently. I don't happen to know that they ever will, but I would bet that you don't happen to know that they ever won't.
Roland Karlsson said:
I think that Kodak is rather uninterested in 4/3 IMHO.
Click to expand...
You might be right.

Actually I have a relative who works for Kodak (unfortunately not in digital imaging, though). Maybe it's time I pressed her for some information. :-)

Cheers,
Jeremy

--
Jeremy L. Rosenberger
http://www.frii.com/~jeremy/
 
Albert,

Check out the Sigma SR-9 if you're looking for a revolution.

I was getting ready to pop for the E-1 until I saw the "me too" reviews. If I'm going to plop down some serious bucks, I want some kind of bang for it. I was disillusioned to say the least.

I went to Phil's Reviews and started reading up on the dSLRs - came across the Sigma SR-9 (which I hadn't even considered previously) - was pleasantly surprised. The resolution beat everything in its price class (under $3,000). Then I checked out the Sigma SLR forum - kinda "light" on postings, but the quality is very high. Then I checked out the prices - nice big SURPRISE! They have lowered the price to be more competitive and even gain a price advantage. I checked out some internet sites today and there are several selling the body for less than $1,000!!! This raises a big question: Should I pop for $2,500+ for an E-1 system that will reward me with the promise of things to come and just so-so images compared to the competition, or do I spring for the SD-9 where $1,500 will get me a comparable system that can produce routinely better quality images?

Seems like a "no-brainer" to me - Sigma SD-9 wins the revolution hands down.

Cliff.
Albert said:
I was hoping for "WOW!!!" pictures, but instead, I got "me too"
pictures..
Click to expand...
Same as me - I feel the letdown.
Albert said:
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..
Click to expand...
Me too.
Albert said:
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.
Click to expand...
Good point.
Albert said:
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?
Click to expand...
Nope.
Albert said:
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.
Click to expand...
The better out-of-the-camera S2 pics are due to some in-camera processing.
Albert said:
Also, just because a camera takes good pictures doesn't mean you +
that camera take better pictures!

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.
Click to expand...
Yup, my hands are off the charts too - I know what you mean. The SR-9 is "man sized" making for a nice hand hold - not for the wee house mouse.
Albert said:
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...
Click to expand...
Someone will, but another "me too" isn't worth the advertising print IMO.
Albert said:
Olympus needs to roll out a prosumer body..
Click to expand...
 
Albert is clearly a "new" Olympus fan. We "old" Olympus fans are now (usually) macro-photographers ..... the Olympus OM system has the best range of macro lenses/accessories in the world. Thank God that some enterprising japnese guy has produced an adapter that allows we "dinosaurs" to use our superb lenses on a Canon EOS digital/film slr!! The E1 system will die..... it was released too early .... with too few (and highly-expensive) lenses ... it's performance to cost ratio is nothing short of c.r.a.p.... (as I predicted in this forum a few weeks ago) ....it is also incompatible with the superb range of OM lenses which thousands of OM users are now scrambling to buy up on Ebay!

Leica has produced a high-resolution digital back for their slrs ... it costs an arm and a leg ..... we OM fans are willing to lose an arm and a leg for a similar digital back for our OM2/OM2n/OM40/OM3/OM4/OM3Ti/OM4Ti camera bodies... (even if it takes us 2-3 years to save up for one).

R.I.P. E1

Norman
 
After reading through several of your recent posts, I get the impression you are very bitter about something. And I don't think it's about cameras.
Hope things change for you.

Good day!
It truly is one.
--
markE
pbase supporter

'In wildness lies the preservation of the world.'
-Henry David Thoreau
-Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/marke/natural_world
 
norman day said:
Leica has produced a high-resolution digital back for their slrs
... it costs an arm and a leg ..... we OM fans are willing to lose
an arm and a leg for a similar digital back for our
OM2/OM2n/OM40/OM3/OM4/OM3Ti/OM4Ti camera bodies... (even if it
takes us 2-3 years to save up for one).
Click to expand...
The Leica back only works with newer Leicas that support
communication with the body. For camera bodies without
that feature, backs are not a good idea.

Moreover, there is a very high demand on Leica backs
by a very, very, very dedicated photographer community.
People with loads of money that have their (fantastic!)
Leicas as their first god.

Roland
 
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