Olympus E-1 or Canon 10D ?

Jono Slack · Jul 21, 2004

HI Terry

I've recently got the E1, as a backup/carryabout addition to my Kodak/Nikon gear.

I've been deeply impressed, one of the big surprises being how easy it is to do without the IS (VR in nikon's case) which I'd become used to, and which I thought was vital.

As for telephotos, the 50-200 is a lovely neat lens, and at f2.8/f3.5 it's fast as well, and it's very sharp - to get the same as your 100-400, the 1.4 teleconverter will just about get you there.

I do agree that some slower telephotos would be a good idea, I suspect that Olympus will leave Sigma to fill in the gap here (not sure which lenses are coming first).

I haven't used the 10D, but I can wholeheartedly recommend the E1, it's a lovely camera, and much more than the sum of it's specifications.

kind regards
jono slack

Terry Sessford said:
Mick, I am in the opposite situation - I have a Canon 10D but for
the last couple of months I have been toying with the idea of
switching to the E-1 system because, in the short term, I like the
specification of the E-1 body and, in the long-term, I am not happy
with the direction in which Canon appear to be moving (ie. towards
full-frame 35mm sized sensors which I consider to be totally
unnecessary in the digital world - they are slaves to an old film
standard that is no longer relevant).

I played with an E-1 for the first time last Friday (in a shop) and
was very impressed with its handling, build quality, AF speed, etc.
The one big thing that is stopping me upgrading to the E-1 from the
10D is the lack of a decent telephoto lens at a sensible price. At
present my favourite lens is the Canon 100-400 mm f4.5/5.6 IS L.
Olympus should prioritize producing a sensibly priced 300mm f4
prime or a 100-300mm f4 telephoto zoom or similar (preferably with
IS).

Terry.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Terry Sessford · Jul 21, 2004

tomh1000 said:
Terry Sessford said:

I played with an E-1 for the first time last Friday (in a shop) and
was very impressed with its handling, build quality, AF speed, etc.
The one big thing that is stopping me upgrading to the E-1 from the
10D is the lack of a decent telephoto lens at a sensible price. At
present my favourite lens is the Canon 100-400 mm f4.5/5.6 IS L.
Olympus should prioritize producing a sensibly priced 300mm f4
prime or a 100-300mm f4 telephoto zoom or similar (preferably with
IS).

Terry.

Click to expand...

Hum, the 50-200 (100-400 35mm equiv) is a very nice lens and is
only around $850 plus it is a faster lens. It is f2.8/3.5. How much
is the 100-400 Canon lens?

The Canon lens is f4.5/5.6 and retails for about £1,150 (compared to about £750 for the Oly 50-200).

Allowing for the 1.6x multiplier of the 10D even if I used the Oly 1.4x TC with the 50-200 (and allowing for the 2x multiplier of the E-1) I would still have less reach and the TC would reduce the 50-200 to an f4/5.6 lens, which is no better than the Canon at the long end (which also has the advantage of IS). So please Oly launch a 300mm f4 or similar NOW (or substantially reduce the price of the Zuiko 300mm f2.8 to something sensible).

Terry.

tomh1000 said:
--
Tom
http://www.deltonalakes.com/galleries
Feel free to post your photos

Terry Sessford · Jul 21, 2004

Hi Jono,

Jono Slack said:
I've been deeply impressed, one of the big surprises being how easy
it is to do without the IS (VR in nikon's case) which I'd become
used to, and which I thought was vital.

I know that I would miss it!

Jono Slack said:
As for telephotos, the 50-200 is a lovely neat lens, and at
f2.8/f3.5 it's fast as well, and it's very sharp - to get the same
as your 100-400, the 1.4 teleconverter will just about get you
there.

Please see my comments in my last posting in this thread.

Jono Slack said:
I do agree that some slower telephotos would be a good idea, I
suspect that Olympus will leave Sigma to fill in the gap here (not
sure which lenses are coming first).

Funnily enough two days ago (Monday) I emailed Sigma UK inquiring about this and I am still awaiting their reply.

Jono Slack said:
I haven't used the 10D, but I can wholeheartedly recommend the E1,
it's a lovely camera, and much more than the sum of it's
specifications.

The 10D is a good camera but I was very impressed with the E-1 when I handled one for the first time and took a few sample shots last Friday afternoon (at Walters Photo Video in Bath).

At present I really don't know what to do - I guess the rational thing would be to wait until Photokina and see what emerges.

Terry.

Jono Slack said:
kind regards
jono slack

Terry Sessford said:

Mick, I am in the opposite situation - I have a Canon 10D but for
the last couple of months I have been toying with the idea of
switching to the E-1 system because, in the short term, I like the
specification of the E-1 body and, in the long-term, I am not happy
with the direction in which Canon appear to be moving (ie. towards
full-frame 35mm sized sensors which I consider to be totally
unnecessary in the digital world - they are slaves to an old film
standard that is no longer relevant).

I played with an E-1 for the first time last Friday (in a shop) and
was very impressed with its handling, build quality, AF speed, etc.
The one big thing that is stopping me upgrading to the E-1 from the
10D is the lack of a decent telephoto lens at a sensible price. At
present my favourite lens is the Canon 100-400 mm f4.5/5.6 IS L.
Olympus should prioritize producing a sensibly priced 300mm f4
prime or a 100-300mm f4 telephoto zoom or similar (preferably with
IS).

Terry.

Click to expand...

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Jono Slack · Jul 21, 2004

Terry Sessford said:
Jono Slack said:

I've been deeply impressed, one of the big surprises being how easy
it is to do without the IS (VR in nikon's case) which I'd become
used to, and which I thought was vital.

Click to expand...

I know that I would miss it!

Member said:

As for telephotos, the 50-200 is a lovely neat lens, and at
f2.8/f3.5 it's fast as well, and it's very sharp - to get the same
as your 100-400, the 1.4 teleconverter will just about get you
there.

Click to expand...

Please see my comments in my last posting in this thread.

Member said:

I do agree that some slower telephotos would be a good idea, I
suspect that Olympus will leave Sigma to fill in the gap here (not
sure which lenses are coming first).

Click to expand...

Funnily enough two days ago (Monday) I emailed Sigma UK inquiring
about this and I am still awaiting their reply.

Member said:

I haven't used the 10D, but I can wholeheartedly recommend the E1,
it's a lovely camera, and much more than the sum of it's
specifications.

Click to expand...

The 10D is a good camera but I was very impressed with the E-1 when
I handled one for the first time and took a few sample shots last
Friday afternoon (at Walters Photo Video in Bath).

At present I really don't know what to do - I guess the rational
thing would be to wait until Photokina and see what emerges.

LOL - boring though. But I'm sure you're right, if they suddenly announced a 10mp body with IS built in then you might feel a little cheesy!

kind regards
jono

Member said:
Terry.

Member said:

kind regards
jono slack

Terry Sessford said:

Mick, I am in the opposite situation - I have a Canon 10D but for
the last couple of months I have been toying with the idea of
switching to the E-1 system because, in the short term, I like the
specification of the E-1 body and, in the long-term, I am not happy
with the direction in which Canon appear to be moving (ie. towards
full-frame 35mm sized sensors which I consider to be totally
unnecessary in the digital world - they are slaves to an old film
standard that is no longer relevant).

I played with an E-1 for the first time last Friday (in a shop) and
was very impressed with its handling, build quality, AF speed, etc.
The one big thing that is stopping me upgrading to the E-1 from the
10D is the lack of a decent telephoto lens at a sensible price. At
present my favourite lens is the Canon 100-400 mm f4.5/5.6 IS L.
Olympus should prioritize producing a sensibly priced 300mm f4
prime or a 100-300mm f4 telephoto zoom or similar (preferably with
IS).

Terry.

Click to expand...

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Click to expand...

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

bigmack · Jul 21, 2004

I understand! Bigger sensors[More and bigger pixels] aren't better.Lower noise isn't better.Faster lenses aren't better[f1.4 and below at many focal lengths]. IS isn't "very" useful.Nikon and Canon are alwys heavier;Etc,Etc,Etc,Etc...Canon and Nikon,the majority of reviewers and the people[including Pro's] who use their products are either stupid or uninformed.I rose to the bait because of frequent,unsupportable,factually incorrect maligning of Nikon and Canon products and their users[we're brand driven sheep as has been asserted on your forum] .Tone down your rhetoric.You don't have to continue to defend your choice of the E-1.It's an excellent camera.As has been frequently been said with the quality of equipment we're discussing the user has more impact on image quality than the equipment..I'll try to not to "rise to the bait" again.
Regards to All of You.

Jono Slack · Jul 21, 2004

bigmack said:
I understand! Bigger sensors[More and bigger pixels] aren't
better.Lower noise isn't better.Faster lenses aren't better[f1.4
and below at many focal lengths]. IS isn't "very" useful.Nikon and
Canon are alwys heavier;Etc,Etc,Etc,Etc...Canon and Nikon,the
majority of reviewers and the people[including Pro's] who use their
products are either stupid or uninformed.I rose to the bait because
of frequent,unsupportable,factually incorrect maligning of Nikon
and Canon products and their users[we're brand driven sheep as has
been asserted on your forum] .

Phew - you got there

;-)

kind regards

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Dan · Jul 21, 2004

Jono,

I'm an old E-10 user, and I remember seeing your photography from back then. My one big concern about the E1 is the lack of IS or VS lenses.

I haven't yet bought or used the 50-200, and I still trying to decide if I should do so, and sell my whole Canon setup, or just sell the E-1 equipment. Why do you say that the IS or VR is less of a big deal than you thought. I had the Canon 70-200F4, and I got a ton of blurry photos indoors, because I could never hold it steady enough. With the Canon 70-200IS, I get consistently better photos, and the lens is still useful outdoors.

I think the E1 at ISO 800 is fine for my uses, but even at 800, I don't think the F3.5 at 400 (and I think its close to that even at 300) is fast enough to let me handhold. Am I missing something?

I remember both you and Jaja showing incredible photos taken with the E-10 that mere mortals like me could neve replicate. I don't want to buy the 50-200 thinking I have the talent that you have, but if I'm missing something that might allow someone with lesser skills to still use the 50-200, I'd love to hear it.

Thanks,
Dan

Jono Slack said:
HI Terry
I've recently got the E1, as a backup/carryabout addition to my
Kodak/Nikon gear.

I've been deeply impressed, one of the big surprises being how easy
it is to do without the IS (VR in nikon's case) which I'd become
used to, and which I thought was vital.

Nick-E20 · Jul 21, 2004

the 10d can be had for £829 now

but ill stick with my e20

Terry Sessford said:
dgrogers said:

So, the E-1 will be available for the same price as the 10D in 11
days.....

Click to expand...

Hmmm ... here in the UK the E-1 is already cheaper than the 10D -
it has been since Oly reduced the price by £300 (to about £999 for
the body) a couple of months ago.

wayne58604 · Jul 21, 2004

Jim,

The film is held as flat as possible, but according to the experts, it is curved (slightly). This differs from the flat sensor surface.

I am just passing on what I read.

Wayne

wayne58604 · Jul 21, 2004

Perhaps I should have explained each item in greater detail -

a t o m i c said:
wayne said:

The E-1 uses lenses designed specifically for digital photography,
meaning that they are optimized for a flat sensor rather than the
curved film plane. The 10D uses film camera lenses which do not
focus properly on a flat sensor (the DR or 300D can use the EF-S
lenses, which in addition to their intrusion into the mirror box -
they cannot be used on a 10D - they are designed for the CMOS
sensor, thus back/front focus issues do not occur with this lens).

Click to expand...

I don't know where you got all this, but it's COMPLETELY untrue.

The texts will point out this issue with film lenses and the direction of the light onto the surface of the digital sensor. To further clarify what I meant, it is the direction of the light rays onto the sensor that determine the overall sharpness of the image. It is the ability of film to accept light at any angle that gives it an advantage over digital sensors, who respond best to perpendicular rays. This can be done through lens design, but not all film lenses do this. So, digital specific lenses are superior to film lenses of equal quality. Oh by the way, my information source was from several 'white' paper writen some time ago when digital SLRs were first being introduced.

a t o m i c said:
a t o m i c said:

With that said, there are the Sigma lenses which are specifically
designed for digital cameras, and might solve some focus issues
with the 10D.

Click to expand...

I doubt it.

The Sigma lenses may or may not help, this was just brought out as a possible solution to the infamous Canon back/front focus issue, which incidently, affects some lenses more than others. There are both L and non-L lenses which exhibit this problem. Thus far, I believe this issue to be limited only to the older lenses designed for film use. As the sales of DSLRs continue to grow, I expect the future lens designs to accomodate digital camera characteristics.

a t o m i c said:
a t o m i c said:

Oh, Canon does have plenty of lenses, but how many do you actually
need? The biggest reason to get a Canon DSLR is their CMOS sensor,
which in theory, is superior to the CCD sensors used in most other
digital cameras.

Click to expand...

In theory, CMOS are NOT superior to CCDs - the primary motivation
for going CMOS was so that they could take advantage of normal
semiconductor fabrication techniques and thereby drive down cost
whilst driving up quality.

Ahh - well, the CMOS sensor is superior to CCD. Hard for those of us with CCD sensors, but it is true. The lower operating temperature of the CMOS sensor provides better noise performance at higher ISO. However, CMOS sensor used at normal ISO ranges do not exhibit better performance. Ask any other semiconductor engineer with experience with bipolar vs CMOS processes, and they should be able to verify this (yes, I have graduate degree in Semiconductor Physics, and have worked in the semiconductor field for over 20 years). BTW, the cost of any semiconductor is based on the number of good die on each wafer (larger wafers means more die per wafer, larger wafers all cost more, as their is more area). It does not cost more to make bipolar over CMOS, in fact, CMOS processes can result in higher wafer costs. Since most CMOS processes result in smaller device geometries, you can get more die per wafer. In the case of image sensors, this is not the true, as the sensor area is more or less fixed (although the 4/3 sensor used on the E1 is smaller than the typical APS sized sensor used on other DSLRs).

Wayne

OM Fan · Jul 21, 2004

Jim,

Could it be that you can count on one hand the people who had an unhappy experience with the E-1 is because (compared to the 10D and probably all other dslrs) you can count on one hand the number of people who have bought the E-1. It's obvious that the more cameras of a particular model are bought, the more complaints there will be! This is true for any product ..... tv ... car.... hairpiece..... etc.!

I cannot understand why Olympus did not launch this camera with at least a dozen lenses together with the whole variety of accessories that are normally associated with a professional system. (It would then have been well worth its high cost). They did it with the OM (film) system many years ago and took the photographic world by storm. I feel that Olympus is not really committed to this system (probably because they are already making a lot of money out of their all-in-one digital cameras)...and neither are the other manufacturers who said that they would produce products for it ... just where are these products?

Cheers,

Norman

JM Porter said:
Jim writes: Hypothetically if the two cameras are priced exactly
the same for the bodies, which camera would you prefer? On one
hand, with the Canon you have hundreds of lenses to choose from
while the Olympus you have only 6 to choose. From the hundreds who
visit this forum regularly, I can count on one hand the people who
have had an unhappy experience with their E-1s while a quick surf
thru the 10D forum turns up many more complaints.(front and back
focus,WB,PP,firmware issues). I am sure there are other compelling
reasons to choose the E-1 over the 10D (weather sealing,sensor
cleaning). Have fun out there, stay tuned. 11 days to blast off.
Jim

Terry Sessford · Jul 21, 2004

Nick-E20 said:
the 10d can be had for £829 now

I've never seen it that cheap in the UK - where have you seen it at this price (including VAT etc)?

For example at both Walters Photo Video and Digital Depot the 10D body is £1149
http://www.waltersphotovideo.co.uk/
http://www.digitaldepot.co.uk/

This price seems fairly typical in the UK.

Nick-E20 said:
but ill stick with my e20

Terry Sessford said:

dgrogers said:

So, the E-1 will be available for the same price as the 10D in 11
days.....

Click to expand...

Hmmm ... here in the UK the E-1 is already cheaper than the 10D -
it has been since Oly reduced the price by £300 (to about £999 for
the body) a couple of months ago.

Click to expand...

JM Porter · Jul 21, 2004

Norman,as long as this is all in friendly discussion, I do sell a lot more Canon 10Ds and Drebels than I do Oly E-1s. I also sell every Nikon D70 that lands on my shipping dock. My comments about satisfied customers maybe slanted. I haven't participated as much on the Canon and Nikon forum(although I do read them). I found a niche of customers who really enjoy photography and are willing to share unselfishly with others.

I was in the camera bidness when Oly introduced their Om line of cameras and lenses. They were small and light and extremely sharp. The line grew as well as the reputation of the fine cameras and optics. Unfortunately 1985 came along and caught Olympus flat-footed. The Minolta Maxxum leaped onto the scene closely followed by Canon's EOS line of Auto-focus cameras. Oly tried AF with the dreaded OM88( a real disaster). Each year they lost more market share to the Big AF Boys. Oly was still building the finest Microscopes and other medical devices which had OM4 cameras attached to them. At the end of the OM story, A new OM4T was selling at wholesale for $1200. The end was near for the interchangeable lens Oly cameras. Oly burst onto the compact P&S scene with a huge line of best selling 35mm film cameras and then has smoothly transferred that business into their exhaustive line of P&S digital cameras. The E-10 was not embraced until it had been discontinued and is still a hot used commodity. The E-20 came onto the scene and was so expensive, the cameras sat on dealer's shelves. Along comes the announcement of the 4/3 system and all the Oly doubters came out of the woodwork. They have mad a huge gamble to make this E series camera go. Yes, they are about 6 months behind schedule on a new camera announcements, but look at the dealer shelves, the E-1 is selling, the lenses are selling. Most customers I have encountered buy more than just one lens, they are buying into the system.Oly customers are fiercely loyal to their brand. If I could polish my crystal ball and tell you what is coming, I think a huge grin would crawl across our faces. As far as the other MFR's climbing on board, let's go back about 7 years to the introduction of APS(another pile of shi_). 5 big companies signed up to produce APS cameras and inside of 5 years all but 2 had dried up and blown away. Sigma has announced 2 lenses for the 4/3 system. I spoike with Sigma recently, they claim Japanese dleiveries in late August and US dleiveries by the end of September. I can't see many E-1 body owners buying Sigma lenses but I do see the next generation consumer E series Oly customer to buy some Sigma. Oly has taken big risks , but the satisfied customers are a nice reward to them.
Norman, Thanks for the exchange, I love to see how others feel. Jim

OM Fan said:
Could it be that you can count on one hand the people who had an
unhappy experience with the E-1 is because (compared to the 10D and
probably all other dslrs) you can count on one hand the number of
people who have bought the E-1. It's obvious that the more cameras
of a particular model are bought, the more complaints there will
be! This is true for any product ..... tv ... car....
hairpiece..... etc.!

I cannot understand why Olympus did not launch this camera with at
least a dozen lenses together with the whole variety of accessories
that are normally associated with a professional system. (It would
then have been well worth its high cost). They did it with the OM
(film) system many years ago and took the photographic world by
storm. I feel that Olympus is not really committed to this system
(probably because they are already making a lot of money out of
their all-in-one digital cameras)...and neither are the other
manufacturers who said that they would produce products for it ...
just where are these products?

Cheers,

Norman

OM Fan said:

Jim writes: Hypothetically if the two cameras are priced exactly
the same for the bodies, which camera would you prefer? On one
hand, with the Canon you have hundreds of lenses to choose from
while the Olympus you have only 6 to choose. From the hundreds who
visit this forum regularly, I can count on one hand the people who
have had an unhappy experience with their E-1s while a quick surf
thru the 10D forum turns up many more complaints.(front and back
focus,WB,PP,firmware issues). I am sure there are other compelling
reasons to choose the E-1 over the 10D (weather sealing,sensor
cleaning). Have fun out there, stay tuned. 11 days to blast off.
Jim

Click to expand...

a t o m i c · Jul 21, 2004

wayne said:
The texts will point out this issue with film lenses and the
direction of the light onto the surface of the digital sensor. To
further clarify what I meant, it is the direction of the light rays
onto the sensor that determine the overall sharpness of the image.
It is the ability of film to accept light at any angle that gives
it an advantage over digital sensors, who respond best to
perpendicular rays. This can be done through lens design, but not
all film lenses do this. So, digital specific lenses are superior
to film lenses of equal quality. Oh by the way, my information
source was from several 'white' paper writen some time ago when
digital SLRs were first being introduced.

And where does your 'curved film plane' fit in? Focal plane flatness has absolutely NOTHING to do with the differences between imaging onto CCDs or film. In fact, it's generally desirable to use a telecentric design with film as integral tripack emulsions will show less misregistration and single layer emulsions will show less halation. Obviously, telecentric designs have an inherent cost which adds to the existing difficulties of retrofocal designs, these becoming particularly acute with lenses of short focal length and wide angle of view. What you apparently don't know is that telecentricity has been an aim of advanced lens designers for many years, and many Nikkor designs are excellent in this regard.

wayne58604 said:
The Sigma lenses may or may not help, this was just brought out as
a possible solution to the infamous Canon back/front focus issue,
which incidently, affects some lenses more than others. There are
both L and non-L lenses which exhibit this problem. Thus far, I
believe this issue to be limited only to the older lenses designed
for film use. As the sales of DSLRs continue to grow, I expect the
future lens designs to accomodate digital camera characteristics.

There is no reason why Canon's SLR AF system should produce different results on their film or digital SLRs. It seems to be a simple matter of manufacturing QC at the moment.

wayne58604 said:
Ahh - well, the CMOS sensor is superior to CCD. Hard for those of
us with CCD sensors, but it is true. The lower operating
temperature of the CMOS sensor provides better noise performance at
higher ISO. However, CMOS sensor used at normal ISO ranges do not
exhibit better performance. Ask any other semiconductor engineer
with experience with bipolar vs CMOS processes, and they should be
able to verify this (yes, I have graduate degree in Semiconductor
Physics, and have worked in the semiconductor field for over 20
years). BTW, the cost of any semiconductor is based on the number
of good die on each wafer (larger wafers means more die per wafer,
larger wafers all cost more, as their is more area). It does not
cost more to make bipolar over CMOS, in fact, CMOS processes can
result in higher wafer costs. Since most CMOS processes result in
smaller device geometries, you can get more die per wafer. In the
case of image sensors, this is not the true, as the sensor area is
more or less fixed (although the 4/3 sensor used on the E1 is
smaller than the typical APS sized sensor used on other DSLRs).

What point were you making there? That CMOS designs are better and worse and cheaper and more expensive? What? My point was quite clear, Canon went CMOS for manufacturing flexibility, as that was perceived as their main hurdle. They seem to have been proved right, but their CCD competitors are offering better dynamic range by some margin at the moment.

Adrian

Terry Sessford · Jul 21, 2004

Interesting post Jim. As a current Canon 10D owner who is considering getting an E-1 I wish that I could borrow your crystal ball after you have given it a good polish since I would not want to invest in an E-1 now if it is soon to be replaced by a higher spec model (I am not interested in the rumoured lower spec budget model) nor if Oly decided that the 4/3rd system is not commercially viable and abandoned the format. With regard to the latter point, from what you say it sounds like the E-1 system is proving to be a commercial success - from talking to Oly representatives etc do you believe that this is truly the case and that the system is here to stay for a good long time?

Thanks for any info.

Regards,
Terry.

JM Porter said:
OM Fan said:

Could it be that you can count on one hand the people who had an
unhappy experience with the E-1 is because (compared to the 10D and
probably all other dslrs) you can count on one hand the number of
people who have bought the E-1. It's obvious that the more cameras
of a particular model are bought, the more complaints there will
be! This is true for any product ..... tv ... car....
hairpiece..... etc.!

I cannot understand why Olympus did not launch this camera with at
least a dozen lenses together with the whole variety of accessories
that are normally associated with a professional system. (It would
then have been well worth its high cost). They did it with the OM
(film) system many years ago and took the photographic world by
storm. I feel that Olympus is not really committed to this system
(probably because they are already making a lot of money out of
their all-in-one digital cameras)...and neither are the other
manufacturers who said that they would produce products for it ...
just where are these products?

Cheers,

Norman

JM Porter said:

Jim writes: Hypothetically if the two cameras are priced exactly
the same for the bodies, which camera would you prefer? On one
hand, with the Canon you have hundreds of lenses to choose from
while the Olympus you have only 6 to choose. From the hundreds who
visit this forum regularly, I can count on one hand the people who
have had an unhappy experience with their E-1s while a quick surf
thru the 10D forum turns up many more complaints.(front and back
focus,WB,PP,firmware issues). I am sure there are other compelling
reasons to choose the E-1 over the 10D (weather sealing,sensor
cleaning). Have fun out there, stay tuned. 11 days to blast off.
Jim

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

a t o m i c · Jul 21, 2004

wayne said:
Jim,

The film is held as flat as possible, but according to the experts,
it is curved (slightly). This differs from the flat sensor surface.

I am just passing on what I read.

Could you quote any of it? You might try looking up Kyocera's 'Real Time Vacuum" system and their ceramic pressure plate for starters.

Adrian

English Bob · Jul 21, 2004

wayne said:
Jim,

The film is held as flat as possible, but according to the experts,
it is curved (slightly). This differs from the flat sensor surface.

I am just passing on what I read.

Wayne

The old Minox IIIs used a curved film plane to compensate for some aberrations they couldn't correct at the time in their tiny lenses. That camera was discontinued about 40 years ago and the more recent Minox cameras all use a flat film plane.
--
Good Shooting,
English Bob

English Bob · Jul 21, 2004

Dan said:
Jono,

I'm an old E-10 user, and I remember seeing your photography from
back then. My one big concern about the E1 is the lack of IS or VS
lenses.

I haven't yet bought or used the 50-200, and I still trying to
decide if I should do so, and sell my whole Canon setup, or just
sell the E-1 equipment. Why do you say that the IS or VR is less
of a big deal than you thought. I had the Canon 70-200F4, and I
got a ton of blurry photos indoors, because I could never hold it
steady enough. With the Canon 70-200IS, I get consistently better
photos, and the lens is still useful outdoors.

I think the E1 at ISO 800 is fine for my uses, but even at 800, I
don't think the F3.5 at 400 (and I think its close to that even at
300) is fast enough to let me handhold. Am I missing something?

I remember both you and Jaja showing incredible photos taken with
the E-10 that mere mortals like me could neve replicate. I don't
want to buy the 50-200 thinking I have the talent that you have,
but if I'm missing something that might allow someone with lesser
skills to still use the 50-200, I'd love to hear it.

Thanks,
Dan

Pardon me for jumping into your thread, but this may be pertinent. I'm past the 60 year mark and my hands aren't as steady as they used to be. Still, I used the 50-200 yesterday at 200mm, hand held, ISO 400 to capture this:

No noise cleanup, no post processing except to resize for the web. If I can hand hold the 50-200mm, anybody can.
--
Good Shooting,
English Bob

wayne58604 · Jul 21, 2004

a t o m i c said:
And where does your 'curved film plane' fit in? Focal plane
flatness has absolutely NOTHING to do with the differences between
imaging onto CCDs or film. In fact, it's generally desirable to use
a telecentric design with film as integral tripack emulsions will
show less misregistration and single layer emulsions will show less
halation. Obviously, telecentric designs have an inherent cost
which adds to the existing difficulties of retrofocal designs,
these becoming particularly acute with lenses of short focal length
and wide angle of view. What you apparently don't know is that
telecentricity has been an aim of advanced lens designers for many
years, and many Nikkor designs are excellent in this regard.

If you look at the E10 white paper, you will see this effect (of a film camera lens being used on a flat sensor). The Exx and E1 lenses are optimized to keep the light rays in parallel, thus minimizing image distortion. With film, as described in several articles (by Sony and Canon in particular), the slight (and this is very slight) curvature of the film helps minimize image distortion when used with the normal film lenses. Yes, you are correct about the short focal length lenses. And yes, I am familiar with the efforts made by Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Sony, and Leica (I worked for a Japanese company who supplied components to Canon and Sony - my contacts at Nikon and Minolta were from industry contacts prior to this time, and have consulted with Leica on industrial optics and camera/lens designs in the 70's - mostly for the M series lenses).

I am just restating what has appeared in print so sorry if I offended you.

a t o m i c said:
There is no reason why Canon's SLR AF system should produce
different results on their film or digital SLRs. It seems to be a
simple matter of manufacturing QC at the moment.

This, unfortunately, is a sad affair for owners of Canon EOS digital cameras. It seems that there are some QC issues (just as there are with Olympus - early focus issues with the E10 and some DOA samples of the E1 lenses). Canon has modified their lenses should one have front or rear focus (at no charge), but it will only work on that particular model camera (I know of several photographers who found this out the hard way, when their modified for the 10D lenses fail to focus properly with the film EOS line). It is isolated to a few of their lenses, so it might not be an issue to most.

However, it does show that the E1 line is better suited for anyone who does not have a large investment in either Nikon or Canon lenses.

a t o m i c said:
What point were you making there? That CMOS designs are better and
worse and cheaper and more expensive? What? My point was quite
clear, Canon went CMOS for manufacturing flexibility, as that was
perceived as their main hurdle. They seem to have been proved
right, but their CCD competitors are offering better dynamic range
by some margin at the moment.

Sorry Adrian, I guess this got lost . The point is that the lower operating temperature of CMOS aids in high ISO noise, while like you pointed out, the wider dynamic range of the CCD is an advantage too. It was not cost that drove Canon to the CMOS sensor (at least not according to the Japanese engineers), it was the advantage at higher ISO, which fits into what they believe their core market is (sports photography and long focal length lenses).

Since this was a discussion on E1 vs 10D:

Bottom line - the Olympus 4/3 system has a lot going for it and is IMHO the better system for anyone starting fresh. I also believe that the E10 and E20 are the best of the breed (fixed lens DSLR) and offer the best user experience (optical thru-the lens finder, fast flash 1/640 sync, useable manual focus, and nice manual controls). Any of these cameras can produce 11x14 prints of exceptional quality, and since most photographers seldom print beyond this, the Olympus line meets their needs with ease.

Wayne

Day Hiker · Jul 21, 2004

bigmack said:
I rose to the bait because
of frequent,unsupportable,factually incorrect maligning of Nikon
and Canon products and their users...

No baiting intended. My questions regarding the DO zoom image quality and the 10D vs. E-1 sensor noise levels were honest. So...

Are the early image quality reservations that I saw regarding the Canon DO zoom subsiding? Or are they still surfacing? I could do my own research, yes, but I decided to raise the question here since the lens was mentioned.

Does the 10D indeed have 1 to 1-1/2 stops less noise across the ISO 100-800 range than has the Olympus E-1? I probably should read Phil's E-1 review again. I haven't looked it over for a couple of months.

I ask the questions as a followup to the assertion that using the 10D at higher ISO with a slower lens is comparable to using the E-1 system. It may well be a fair comparison if the DO zoom is very good and the 10D has lower noise across the board. That's all I'm after here.

--
Kind regards,

Jim

'The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange

Olympus E-1 or Canon 10D ?

Forum Pro

Terry Sessford

Guest

Terry Sessford

Guest

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Dan

Guest

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Terry Sessford

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Terry Sessford

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts