E-1 as a "digital EOS-3 or F100"

BJL · Sep 17, 2003

It has often been said that the E-1 mixes some elements of cameras at the 10D, D100, S2 level while in other ways aiming higher, but falling short of the D1x, 1D etc.

In film camera terms, this sound a lot like the EOS-3 or F100; more than an Elan (EOS-30) or N80 (F80), but less than an EOS-1 series model or an F5.

Canon and Nikon have film cameras in that gap, the EOS-3 and F100, which would be my ideal film camera choices now, because the extra step up to the top models is mostly high speed automation for action photography. There also seems to be lots of interest in a possible Canon DSLR in this niche, the often requested "EOS-3D", and a call for a Nikon DSLR based on the F100 body.

So, is there a similar niche in DSLR, and how well does the E-1 fit it? Putting aside image quality debates until the production model reviews are in, Olympus seems to have offered features like ruggedness and extensive fine controls that fit the role of a camera for deliberate, controlled, relatively low-automation photography.

ricardo franca · Sep 17, 2003

I would say thay when Canon introduced the 10d it was aiming at that niche, with the D60, of a lighter,plasticky construction, now being replaced by the 300d.

If Nikon has by now been able to reduce the production cost of their cameras (namely the CCD's) the d100 replacement will probably sport a more convincing body as well.

As for an SLR based on eos3/f100 bodies, I guess that probably won't happen as it would bring them too close to the flagship models, resulting in unwanted competition for those models... In the end they'd be downgrading by either reducing pixel count or strangling it on the sw (this has happened with the 300d).

I might only suggest that Olympus' niche is something a bit different: a smaller, lighter, cheaper, high quality flagship that competes directly with the 10d/d100/s2 both in price and pixel count but built to much higher standards.

Brenton LeMesurier wrote:
So, is there a similar niche in DSLR, and how well does the E-1 fit

BJL said:
it? Putting aside image quality debates until the production model
reviews are in, Olympus seems to have offered features like
ruggedness and extensive fine controls that fit the role of a
camera for deliberate, controlled, relatively low-automation
photography.

ricardo franca · Sep 17, 2003

Brenton LeMesurier said:
It has often been said that the E-1 mixes some elements of cameras
at the 10D, D100, S2 level while in other ways aiming higher, but
falling short of the D1x, 1D etc.
In film camera terms, this sound a lot like the EOS-3 or F100; more
than an Elan (EOS-30) or N80 (F80), but less than an EOS-1 series
model or an F5.

Canon and Nikon have film cameras in that gap, the EOS-3 and F100,
which would be my ideal film camera choices now, because the extra
step up to the top models is mostly high speed automation for
action photography. There also seems to be lots of interest in a
possible Canon DSLR in this niche, the often requested "EOS-3D",
and a call for a Nikon DSLR based on the F100 body.

So, is there a similar niche in DSLR, and how well does the E-1 fit
it? Putting aside image quality debates until the production model
reviews are in, Olympus seems to have offered features like
ruggedness and extensive fine controls that fit the role of a
camera for deliberate, controlled, relatively low-automation
photography.

toughluck · Sep 17, 2003

Think of it as an EOS 10D in terms of the new E system, I guess.

I feel there will be distinction in series next year, two to four of them - at least for a beginning, and I feel those will be:

the top-notch E system camera - with, say, twice, or thrice the resolution, taking the absolute maximum out of the lenses - unless they aren't that top-notch and will have problems with that resolution, maybe a Foveon sensor?
just below top-notch, better than E-1, but worse than that top notch - most improvements will have to do with camera part, not imager.
the succesor to E-1 - a very good all around camera.
an amateur class E system camera - a plastic body, slower shutter, slower AF.

The question is - is the series started by E-1 high-end enough to fulfill the second category requirements?

If there would be two series, it would be just the top-notch and E-1 successor. If three series, then it would be the first three - but the successor of E-1 would fall into the second category.

Question holds - does Olympus expect the E system to fall into the hands of amateurs and will they make that possible (and in how many years), or is the E system destined to be elite and pro class (and price) only, and the possibility to make an amateur class 4/3 camera will fall into 3rd party manufacturers? If so - which ones? Sigma? With foveon sensor - that would be cool, but pro class only. Contax? Yashica? They make cameras for their own system, so that would be pointless. One of the remaining four manufacturers in the great five? Only Minolta didn't release their dSLR, and it seems there is much truth in rumours about the Zeus. Who else? Russian Zenit??? I wouldn't believe that (well, not until I'd see it anyway) - they will go out of business in two or three years if they don't introduce a single digital camera, but it seems they will more likely go along with Pentax (as they did with their 212m and Km), than with anyone else.

Kodak? While it seems logical, I feel they have no intention of manufacturing anything in the 4/3 system except for the sensor, of course (yet).
There is really no one to go along the E route enticing amateurs.

My thoughts on the subject - nowadays market is moved largely by amateurs, as pros get expensive products (with prices covering only the product + R&D costs + small turnover) that are largely funded by amateurs. If they don't get amateurs into the system, it is going to cost pros more. One minus point for Olympus - they will have to entice pros to buy E system cameras with parameters only - but without the advantage of lower prices. Other manufacturers could easily crush them - even now, I guess they are waiting for E-1 to be actually released. A camera with all the specifications of the E-1, but following a known system (Minolta Zeus fits into that category) and cheaper - funded by amateurs (!) would be the end of E-1 as we know it...

As for the subject - with one camera in the system it is hardly the time for classification... In the next year, when new E-system cameras, maybe even some in the 4/3 system (3rd party), are announced, it will be time to discuss the classification - maybe the E-1 is meant to be THE camera of the 4/3 system, maybe its successor will carry the best marks of the system (E-2, E-3, up until E-9 - what then?), but will be largely refreshed each year? Maybe E-1 is just the middle class of the series, much on par with the 10D? Or maybe it's meant to be an amateur camera, and really pro cameras are yet to come ;-)... Time will tell, but I guess it isn't very safe to compare E-1 to other brands - it isn't in the same league, I guess - and like someone said - it would be like comparing apples and oranges, different systems, different highlights, different attitudes, differently stressed various points...

ricardo franca · Sep 17, 2003

let's imagine that the e-1 is a full frame (35mm), like the 1ds (but it's not 'cause it's got a tiny sensor, ok), first class built quality and materials, dust/spalsh proof, fast lenses, high spec wb system (but only acceptable af and a lot less features)

if the 1ds costs 7500usd and the e-1 2100usd and when you have a plasticky 300d at 1000usd, and cheaper and slow (3.5-5.6) ef-s lens series, how much could an "e-30" cost... the current d-zuiko lenses available are fast and cheaper than 35mm equivalents!

and to balance things a bit let's remember the fate of aps and pen-f's alike...

BJL · Sep 17, 2003

ricardo franca said:
As for an SLR based on eos3/f100 bodies, I guess that probably
won't happen as it would bring them too close to the flagship
models, resulting in unwanted competition for those models

There is room for distinction of the top tier models on the legitimate basis of extras that really cost money, rather than just things left out for marketing reasons as with the 300D: operating speed (1D, D2h) and extreme pixel count. This leaves a second teir for people who do not need (or cannot justify the substantial extra cost of) the extra speed or the roughly medium format resolution of the 10MP plus models, but still want a bit more than the D100 and 10D offer:

100% viewfinder coverage (E-1 has it, D100, 10D do not; nor do F100 or EOS-3)
spot metering (E1 and D100 have it, 10D does not; F100 and EOS-3 have it?)

and as much manual control as possible (E-1 seems good, but I cannot say how much it differs from those others)

So the E1 offers something in this direction, but maybe only a little.

P. S. Kodak documents indicate an intention to go about 11MP, at which point lens resolution limits would apparently come in to play; Olympus has already mentioned plans for a cheaper "consumer" model.

BJL · Sep 17, 2003

ricardo franca said:
and to balance things a bit let's remember the fate of aps and pen-f's alike...

APS violated a basic rule: it was a smaller format but neither cameras nor film were ever cheaper; the opposite in fact. Smaller format DSLR sensors and cameras are for now a lot cheaper than 35mm format. So I do not think that the history of APS tells us much about 4/3 or "APS" sized DSLR formats.

Wile E. Coyote · Sep 17, 2003

Brenton LeMesurier said:
ricardo franca said:

and to balance things a bit let's remember the fate of aps and pen-f's alike...

Click to expand...

APS violated a basic rule: it was a smaller format but neither
cameras nor film were ever cheaper; the opposite in fact. Smaller
format DSLR sensors and cameras are for now a lot cheaper than 35mm
format. So I do not think that the history of APS tells us much
about 4/3 or "APS" sized DSLR formats.

"Smaller format DSLR sensors and cameras are for now a lot cheaper than 35mm format. "

Am I missing something here?
Bill...

Acme E-10, Acme LiPo, Acme WCON08B, Acme FL-40, Canon off camera cord, Acme Brand Stroboframe, Acme Promax Softbox, Acme GraphireII...other stuff, too...

BJL · Sep 17, 2003

Wile E. Coyote said:
Brenton LeMesurier wrote:
"Smaller format DSLR sensors and cameras are for now a lot cheaper
than 35mm format."

Am I missing something here?

Sorry for the ambiguity: I meant cheaper than DSLR's with full 35mm size sensors, not 35mm film cameras!

toughluck · Sep 17, 2003

Brenton LeMesurier said:
ricardo franca said:

and to balance things a bit let's remember the fate of aps and pen-f's alike...

Click to expand...

APS violated a basic rule: it was a smaller format but neither
cameras nor film were ever cheaper; the opposite in fact. Smaller
format DSLR sensors and cameras are for now a lot cheaper than 35mm
format. So I do not think that the history of APS tells us much
about 4/3 or "APS" sized DSLR formats.

Exactly. It's entirely different with digital than with film.

I'd say that we can expect a plastic body, feature lowered, let's say, 'D-1' (D letter goes between 'E', as in E-system, and 'C', as for Camedia), with two zoom lenses (say: 14-45/3.5-5.6 and 40-150/4.5-5.6) offered next year for, say, $800 for the body and $100-$150 for the lenses. That would shake the dslr market somewhat, but two things must be taken care of:

current 4/3 sensor must (should I stress "must" more?) be delivered in bulk quantities, with same parameters for the amateur class camera
lenses must also be produced at a good pace.

Second point has been taken care of, as Olympus stopped the entire OM range lens production in March this year, leaving space, I guess, for manufacturing 4/3 digital lenses. So they have plenty of manufacturing capacity to work with... I guess such lenses are possible - they would be produced somewhat faster, so that's one more point for it.

As for the first point - it is possible that Olympus will announce 'E-2' next year with a better sensor, but current production lines would not stop, and Kodak would keep producing the current 4/3 2560x1920 sensor at the same pace, maybe faster, and a new, say 3840x2880 - 1,5x linearly - it is possible, pixel count will be 11 Megapixels, as Brenton pointed out, pixel pitch would be 33% larger than on E-20, so it is possible technology-wise, and would provide excellent image quality.

It all goes for the body of a new "D-1". With 1/4000 shutter (I got used to the one in my Minolta Dynax 5), good AF system, maybe slower than on E-1, good AE system, maybe without spot metering, crippling the viewfinder - 90-95%, removing diopter correction in the VF, lowering write speed, frames per second, maybe the buffer by a small bit, if it would lower the price significantly...

I'd say $800 would be a good price for such a camera. But maybe this price estimate is too low. EOS300D would drop to the $500 line next year - we can be certain of that, new consumer dSLRs are on the way... The future's looking bright.

toughluck · Sep 17, 2003

I would compare it differently. Imagine the E-1 is somewhat more than 10D. Numbers say it all: the supposed shipping of E-1 is to be equal to 90,000 units per year. Canon ship(ped)s 10D at a rate of 30,000 a month. That's 4 times more.

Now, the E-1 costs $2100, and the 10D - $1400. If you crippled E-1 down to be similar (feature-wise) to EOS-300D, with the following equation:
(E-1 price/production rate of 10D to E-1) (price ratio of 300D to 10D)

And it equals $375. I don't believe that value, but it is awfully enticing. Let's say that such a price would come at a very large sacrifice cost. Let's say 2,5x more - that is $937,5 - it seems very much posiible, an the price WILL drop after some time to 60-80% of the initial price, and that will be $562,5 to $750. Yes, those prices are realistic, as well as for many amateurs. I guess the prices will drop even more once the new model will be announced, and/or when production reaches bulk amounts.

One thing is for sure - without amateur appeal there won't be 3rd party manufacturers making 4/3 lenses. Without 3rd party manufacturers there won't be budget-challenged amateurs looking into the 4/3 system. Without those amateurs (someone HAS to buy camera bodies) Oly won't have money to develop pro E-system cameras. The circle closes. They have to entice amateurs in some way. Those that will buy into the E system will get 3rd party lenses like wide angle (Zuikos will be expensive, like the 11-22 they are supposed to release later this year), standard and portait primes, teleprimes (longer ones), or other equipment, like flash units - I don't think Olympus is going to include systems similiar to Nikon's 3D light measuring, or Minolta's Advanced Distance Integration into their bodies , at least in the lower range, so the 'D' function does not need to be in the flash unit.

Of course some people will buy kits with two 3rd party lenses, like my friend, who bought an EOS 300 with two Tamrons: 28-90 and 75-300, kill me, but I can't remember relative light...

There are possibilities for everyone to gain with the 4/3 system, so let's hope manufacturers are, in fact, reading these forums, and will do something about it...

norman day · Sep 17, 2003

Yes Ricardo ... it's a rugged camera .. but with a comparatively poor resolution to price ratio....and ... if you can believe the preliminary reviews of this camera ... it has a totally-disappointing image quality ... so much for the "revolutionary" 4/3 system!

........ and to cap it all Sony are about to launch an 8 megapixel camera that is armed with a Carl Zeiss zoom that can focus down to approx. 2cm......bye bye E-1...... you are about to join your OM707 ancestor in the Olympus "Hall of Flops".

Cheers,

Norman

ricardo franca said:
Brenton LeMesurier said:

It has often been said that the E-1 mixes some elements of cameras
at the 10D, D100, S2 level while in other ways aiming higher, but
falling short of the D1x, 1D etc.
In film camera terms, this sound a lot like the EOS-3 or F100; more
than an Elan (EOS-30) or N80 (F80), but less than an EOS-1 series
model or an F5.

Canon and Nikon have film cameras in that gap, the EOS-3 and F100,
which would be my ideal film camera choices now, because the extra
step up to the top models is mostly high speed automation for
action photography. There also seems to be lots of interest in a
possible Canon DSLR in this niche, the often requested "EOS-3D",
and a call for a Nikon DSLR based on the F100 body.

So, is there a similar niche in DSLR, and how well does the E-1 fit
it? Putting aside image quality debates until the production model
reviews are in, Olympus seems to have offered features like
ruggedness and extensive fine controls that fit the role of a
camera for deliberate, controlled, relatively low-automation
photography.

Click to expand...

Frank from AZ · Sep 17, 2003

Well, once Olympus introduces oh say another....45 lens and other accessories, then maybe your comparison will be somewhat valid. Remember the body of the camera is part of a system and as of this writing, the Oly E1 system is pretty slim.

Brenton LeMesurier said:
So, is there a similar niche in DSLR, and how well does the E-1 fit
it? Putting aside image quality debates until the production model
reviews are in, Olympus seems to have offered features like
ruggedness and extensive fine controls that fit the role of a
camera for deliberate, controlled, relatively low-automation
photography.

--
Frank from Phoenix
Olympus E20N; C5050; FL40; LiPo; Tripper 15 Gb, Pentax MZ-S

toughluck · Sep 17, 2003

norman day said:
Yes Ricardo ... it's a rugged camera .. but with a comparatively
poor resolution to price ratio....and ... if you can believe the
preliminary reviews of this camera ... it has a
totally-disappointing image quality ... so much for the
"revolutionary" 4/3 system!
........ and to cap it all Sony are about to launch an 8 megapixel
camera that is armed with a Carl Zeiss zoom that can focus down to
approx. 2cm......bye bye E-1...... you are about to join your OM707
ancestor in the Olympus "Hall of Flops".

Cheers,

Norman

A Zeiss lens? As usual with Sony cameras. What about aperture? Have you ever thought, or heard, that f/2 on an SLR is quite different than on compact cameras? I guess not. Bye, bye depth of field control.

E-1 image quality? I guess you may find it lacking, but I don't, there seems to be other people who don't, and it seems you're just nitpicking, and your points are not valid. E-1's sensor does have a good midtone and dynamics range, which will give good skintone reproduction. Also - technology goes forward, and undoubtedly we'll see new 4/3 system sensors soon, which will be better in all aspects, possibly cheaper, why not made by other manufacturers? Imagine if Foveon went to make a 4/3 X3 sensor - SD9 already has a bit larger sensor than 4/3 standard, so imagine incorporating that.

In the end we'll all see us using purely digital systems, designed for that particular purpose instead of currently available compromises. In the end there will just be full frame (36x24 mm) dSLRs available with current mount systems, and all world will move on forward. Canon already seems like it made its choice - the EF-S mount. I'm not commenting, it's too early for that. Nikon doesn't seem to be interested, so it's just pushing the DX series of their standard mount lenses. Minolta has Vectis, but they would have to update the system a lot to get into pro class, and they have yet to anounce a modern dSLR.

Olympus went the best way. They have seen the limitations of incorporating digital into their OM system (excellent in most aspects), so they've decided to go along the route of purely digital.

And it is, in fact, too early to hand out decisive judgments like "so much for the "revolutionary" 4/3 system!" - we haven't seen it perform yet, those are just pre-production cameras, I doubt they will not address the problems they have with it. Besides, let's see how it performs market-wise. If they sell 10,000 cameras in the first two weeks after its release, it will have hit.

toughluck · Sep 18, 2003

norman day said:
Yes Ricardo ... it's a rugged camera .. but with a comparatively
poor resolution to price ratio....and ... if you can believe the
preliminary reviews of this camera ... it has a
totally-disappointing image quality ... so much for the
"revolutionary" 4/3 system!

As for the resolution to price ratio:
D2H has 4.0 millions effective pixels, and
E-1 has 4.92 millions of these suckers.
D2H costs $3,500
E-1 costs $2,200
Price to resolution ratio (lower is better):
D2H: 3,500/4 = 875
E-1: 2,200/4.92 = 447
Around half the price per megapixel.

Is the Nikon system (quite expensive, if I may add) worth the extra $1,300? After all - D2H image quality, as seen from previews, seems to be even more lacking than of E-1. I can't see E-1's lacks, but I can plainly and clearly see D2H's.

Now - do you also bash Nikon, or is it reserved purely for Olympus?

ricardo franca · Sep 18, 2003

let's see...sigma has been putting out some excelent lenses lately, great glass, digitaly optimised and fast.

in order to cater for nikon/canon/minolta/pentax users all they have to do is(almost) change the mount.

a 4/3 lens system means designing from scratch!!!

even if there's an amatur market, it'll have to be a big one...

toughluck said:
There are possibilities for everyone to gain with the 4/3 system,
so let's hope manufacturers are, in fact, reading these forums, and
will do something about it...

ricardo franca · Sep 18, 2003

it's not a question of bashing one or the other... i don't even think that the d2h vs e-1 comparison makes any sense.

the 1d and the d2h are directed to a particular niche of the market and the e-1 is not part of it: the speed market, be it news, sports, paparazzi...

and you can't see things in a mpix/$$$ ratio either - there's no way you can compare the e-1 and the d2h.

i'm not saying the e-1 isn't good enough, it's better in some ways and worse in others.

but now you're at it the comparison might make some sense if both cameras were the first model of a new system, not when a nikonmount owners have (big or small, it doesn't matter) lens set that includes his favorite lenses and he can buy specific ones from either nikon or other manufacturers as well.

it only seems reasonable to those of us who are starting a dslr system from scratch... it sounds really weird when you read some post where people say they'll move from nikon to canon because the lates nikon wxyz doesn't quite match the slightly-noisierless/barely-higher-resolution of canon's latest camera...

ok some guys love cameras, others love camera manufactures...and buying new stuff, thats their problem... for me it only makes sense to move from my film system to a dg one that suits my purposes, fits my wallet and my bone stucture and my photostyle, provides reasonable quality and will not be dead in 2 years - in the dg world that would be like going back to the brownie...

toughluck said:
Now - do you also bash Nikon, or is it reserved purely for Olympus?

ricardo franca · Sep 18, 2003

oh, yes, i love zeiss glass...i have been using it on my contaxes for over 10 years now - but man, they're heavy!

what i don't like is:
1. the fixed lens - and i should stop here

2. the 2/3 sensor
3. the viewfinder

4. the 7x zoom (what a compromise in quality) - it took zeiss 20 years to finally go for an af system...even now they're only accepting 3 out of 10 lenses that come out of prod. because they like high standards.
5. the max shutter speed of 1/3200, 1/2000 in shutter prio.
6. the ergonomics
7. the fact that sony isn't (wasnt't) a camera manufacturer

(8. it's the ugliest thing i've seen since the)

norman day said:
Yes Ricardo ... it's a rugged camera .. but with a comparatively
poor resolution to price ratio....and ... if you can believe the
preliminary reviews of this camera ... it has a
totally-disappointing image quality ... so much for the
"revolutionary" 4/3 system!
........ and to cap it all Sony are about to launch an 8 megapixel
camera that is armed with a Carl Zeiss zoom that can focus down to
approx. 2cm......bye bye E-1...... you are about to join your OM707
ancestor in the Olympus "Hall of Flops".

Cheers,

Norman

ricardo franca · Sep 18, 2003

with "dead" i meant the 4/3 systems and the prospect of new lenses...

BJL · Sep 18, 2003

Frank B from AZ said:
Well, once Olympus introduces oh say another....45 lens and other
accessories, then maybe your comparison will be somewhat valid.

Canon, Nikon, Pentax et al may have fifty lenses or so, but on examination, far fewer are needed to have a well rounded modern "tier two" system.

a) many of those lenses duplicate functionality at different price/weight/performance trade-offs, whereas I doubt that Olympus feels much need to offer multiple cheaper entry level lenses. For example, Canon has about 16 zoom lenses, but only four or five are of importance to serious photography, and the current three announced E system lenses over most of the same options: one or two more should do it.

b) many prime lenses are anchronisms in an era when even many demanding professional use zoom lenses for many purposes, along with a few special primes. There is a small high end niche of prime-only users, but they are out of the scope of my discussion, and a small enough market niche that Olympus can probably live without them.

I can come up with a bit over half a dozen main primes needed: a couple of fisheye and ultra-wide, a standard lens (20mm or 25mm?), a macro/short portrait (already there), a longer portait lens, a couple of long fast telephotos.

Can you give me your list of fourty-five lenses that the E-series lacks but would need but lacks in order to be viable for the typical F100 or EOS-3 user?

E-1 as a "digital EOS-3 or F100"

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Active member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts