J
John Mason
Guest
I saw some odd comments in another thread about focus points on the E1 being better than on the Canon. Here are some of my thoughts on the E1 vs the Canon line since I'm in both camps.
I'm interested in the E1 as a backup camera to my 1Ds. I also have a E10 and a D60. The E10 got me into digital photography and out of my older film stuff. I'm an Olympus user from way back from Pen F SLR 1/2 frame days and had a Om1 and Om2. I really would like Olympus to succeed with this camera.
I only say the above so that when I explain why the focus points on the E1 are not as good as on the canon people will understand that I'm not slamming the E1 but hoping they correct this issue.
On the 1Ds you have 45 different focus areas. You can deslect some or all of them and have lots of control. The thing that is VERY nice that the E1 does not have is that whatever focus spot the camera has decided to use for its focus point it lights that focus point on. Now, if the photographer disagrees with this you can on the higher end canon lenses shift the focus slightly forward or back. So lets say the focus point is on the person's noise, not only do you know the camera used the nose, but you can easily shift the focus to the person's eyes.
Contrast this to the E1 which has large focus points and does not indicate in the viewfinder in any fashion whatsoever what focus point the E1 has decided to use. Is it the closest point? Is it the point in the back with more contrast? This is a major oversite. The Olympus response is the indicator light would have been distracting. Of course, that's just an excuse.
I still may get an E1 but if I do I will certainly turn off all but the center focus point and go back to the older way of focusing of reframming before the shot.
Bottom line is what is the point of multiple focus points where the camera picks the focus point automatically when you can't confirm which one it picked.
The 10D has 7 focus points instead of 45 as does the 300d/Digital Rebel. They are selectable and indicate where the focus is. Many people have talked about a focus error in the 10D. If they alignment is off, as a small percentage are, canon - at least canon USA will recalibrate either the lens or the camera so it is correct. It stinks that the quality control isn't better, but any forum will exagerate any problem as the ones with problems will ask their questions or complain. Informal survey's on the canon forum show the actual percentage of off focusing cameras is quite small.
So, in regard to focus points, canon does have the upper hand.
The cost issue though, overall I would buy an E1 over a 10d. The image sharpness and the dynamic range seem better in what I'm seeing in the samples than the 10d. The accuracy of the base lens of its wide angle is really impressive. People need to compare apples to apples. The Olympus lenses are like Canon's L glass and in some cases better. They don't have IS, but the 28-135is lens from canon (which I have) doesn't take a candle to my 3 canon L lenses in contrast and color accuracy or wide open sharpness (it's not bad stopped down a bit but that still leaves the color/contrast issues)
The E1 is also a pro camera with it's speed, and weather sealing. A 300d is not the competitor here. Olympus doesn't have a competitor there yet. Maybe when they make a plastic E1 and lower the speed a bit, then they will have a competitor. They will also need a low end lens like the base lens for the 300d.
Then there is the dust. Ah - the dust. If it turns out that the E1 shaker actually works, that's way up there as a time eater in a pro camera situation.
To those comparing lens costs don't forget to compare maximum light gathering as I've seen some posts comparing not-comparable lenses to the Olympus. Once you get the apeture and the angle of view coverange the same all of the olympus lenses are quite a bit smaller than their canon counterparts.
I've seen others state (like the MR review) that this is a flash in the pan camera like 1/2 frames were. I think the more accurate issue here is if you can have a pro camera with pro lenses that costs less and is sharper and gives you enough of a negative for the jobs intended purpose why would you not pick the E1. Yes, imagers will become larger at lower cost, but why lug around the big lenses needlessly.
I think I've just about convinced myself to get an E1!
--
John Mason - Lafayette, IN
I'm interested in the E1 as a backup camera to my 1Ds. I also have a E10 and a D60. The E10 got me into digital photography and out of my older film stuff. I'm an Olympus user from way back from Pen F SLR 1/2 frame days and had a Om1 and Om2. I really would like Olympus to succeed with this camera.
I only say the above so that when I explain why the focus points on the E1 are not as good as on the canon people will understand that I'm not slamming the E1 but hoping they correct this issue.
On the 1Ds you have 45 different focus areas. You can deslect some or all of them and have lots of control. The thing that is VERY nice that the E1 does not have is that whatever focus spot the camera has decided to use for its focus point it lights that focus point on. Now, if the photographer disagrees with this you can on the higher end canon lenses shift the focus slightly forward or back. So lets say the focus point is on the person's noise, not only do you know the camera used the nose, but you can easily shift the focus to the person's eyes.
Contrast this to the E1 which has large focus points and does not indicate in the viewfinder in any fashion whatsoever what focus point the E1 has decided to use. Is it the closest point? Is it the point in the back with more contrast? This is a major oversite. The Olympus response is the indicator light would have been distracting. Of course, that's just an excuse.
I still may get an E1 but if I do I will certainly turn off all but the center focus point and go back to the older way of focusing of reframming before the shot.
Bottom line is what is the point of multiple focus points where the camera picks the focus point automatically when you can't confirm which one it picked.
The 10D has 7 focus points instead of 45 as does the 300d/Digital Rebel. They are selectable and indicate where the focus is. Many people have talked about a focus error in the 10D. If they alignment is off, as a small percentage are, canon - at least canon USA will recalibrate either the lens or the camera so it is correct. It stinks that the quality control isn't better, but any forum will exagerate any problem as the ones with problems will ask their questions or complain. Informal survey's on the canon forum show the actual percentage of off focusing cameras is quite small.
So, in regard to focus points, canon does have the upper hand.
The cost issue though, overall I would buy an E1 over a 10d. The image sharpness and the dynamic range seem better in what I'm seeing in the samples than the 10d. The accuracy of the base lens of its wide angle is really impressive. People need to compare apples to apples. The Olympus lenses are like Canon's L glass and in some cases better. They don't have IS, but the 28-135is lens from canon (which I have) doesn't take a candle to my 3 canon L lenses in contrast and color accuracy or wide open sharpness (it's not bad stopped down a bit but that still leaves the color/contrast issues)
The E1 is also a pro camera with it's speed, and weather sealing. A 300d is not the competitor here. Olympus doesn't have a competitor there yet. Maybe when they make a plastic E1 and lower the speed a bit, then they will have a competitor. They will also need a low end lens like the base lens for the 300d.
Then there is the dust. Ah - the dust. If it turns out that the E1 shaker actually works, that's way up there as a time eater in a pro camera situation.
To those comparing lens costs don't forget to compare maximum light gathering as I've seen some posts comparing not-comparable lenses to the Olympus. Once you get the apeture and the angle of view coverange the same all of the olympus lenses are quite a bit smaller than their canon counterparts.
I've seen others state (like the MR review) that this is a flash in the pan camera like 1/2 frames were. I think the more accurate issue here is if you can have a pro camera with pro lenses that costs less and is sharper and gives you enough of a negative for the jobs intended purpose why would you not pick the E1. Yes, imagers will become larger at lower cost, but why lug around the big lenses needlessly.
I think I've just about convinced myself to get an E1!
--
John Mason - Lafayette, IN
