Review: Olympus E-1 at DC Views

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by Thad, May 16, 2004.

  1. Thad

    Thad Guest

    Thad, May 16, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Thad

    Bugsy Guest

    Bugsy, May 16, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Over at www.dpreview.com you will find dozens of satisfied owners of the
    E-1.

    Cheers,
    Hans
     
    Hans H. Siegrist, May 16, 2004
    #3
  4. Thad

    Bugsy Guest

    Thanks - I had read the reviews on that site (as well as the ones on
    stevesdigicams).

    Now the price has dropped looked very tempting.

    Thing is, can any DSLR be worth doing the ironing for a year?!

    Dave
     
    Bugsy, May 16, 2004
    #4
  5. Why would you buy the E-1 over the 300D? The lower noise and better lens
    selection (to say nothing of the upgrade path to 1.3x and full-frame sensor
    cameras) make it look like a slam dunk for the 300D...

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, May 17, 2004
    #5
  6. Thad

    Bugsy Guest

    Good question - I don't have a problem with Canon products and I think the
    300D is Extremely good value for money.

    However, there are two things about the 300d I don't like..

    1) Build quality. IMHO although the image quality of the 300d may be very
    good in order to keep the price down the build quality is definitely aimed
    at the consumer.

    2) Lack of PC flash connector. Now although isn't really a big problem as
    you can get hotshoe adapters etc to me this is an indication of the market
    this device is intended for.

    I accept that these are only my opinions and I know at least two people at
    work who have 300D's and love them to bits.

    Regards,

    Dave
     
    Bugsy, May 17, 2004
    #6
  7. Thad

    Clyde Guest

    The number one reason that a pro buys a pro level camera is reliability.
    It absolutely HAS to work ALL the time. So, you are looking for a very
    tough camera that will work in all situations and all weather. You also
    have to do this for 10s of thousands of shots. The E-1 is built for that
    and the 300D isn't.

    That's why I am looking at the E-1 for my wedding photography business.
    That and the smaller size. It has all the lens I need for my business
    already. I am successfully shooting at 5 MP now. If the E-1 were 8 MP,
    it would be a no-brainer.

    Yes, the EOS 1D and 1Ds are pro level cameras that would qualify too,
    but they are WAY more expensive. Five years from now my business my
    absorb those just fine, but not now.

    The 300D is a fine amateur camera. As an amateur camera you can shoot
    when you want and as often as you want. You aren't shooting as nearly as
    many shots either. The 300D works fine for that.

    Clyde
     
    Clyde, May 18, 2004
    #7
  8. Thad

    Skip M Guest

    What about the Canon 10D? More heavily built than the 300D/RebelD, with a
    shutter designed to last longer, too. I'm not sure what the number of
    cycles the E-1 is supposed to withstand, but the pricing of the 10D and E-1
    are in the same ball park. The 300D is decidedly low ball compared to both
    those cameras.
     
    Skip M, May 18, 2004
    #8
  9. Yes. I should have written 10D/300D. I personally think that that the 300D
    will retain utility as a second camera/go anywhere camera when the next
    generation beyond the 10D appears, so I think the 300D is a better idea for
    me than the 10D.
    Still, doesn't the E-1 claim to be better weatherproofed than the 10D?

    The smaller sensor on the E-1 strikes me as a screamingly bad idea. It's not
    enough smaller than the 1.6x sensors to be significantly different, but if
    you want 8MP or higher, you'd much rather have it in a 1.3x (or 1.0x) sensor
    than in a 4/3 sensor.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, May 18, 2004
    #9
  10. Thad

    Clyde Guest

    I see the Canon comparison to the E-1 as the 1D II. Yes, it's more
    expensive, bigger, faster, and has more pixels. However, it's the lowest
    Canon built for pro level toughness and reliability. Hey, I'd love one,
    but can't afford it.

    Clyde
     
    Clyde, May 19, 2004
    #10
  11. Thad

    Clyde Guest

    David J. Littleboy wrote:

    Yes, the E-1 claims to be more weatherproofed. That's important to a pro
    who goes outside. I haven't read any reviews that tested this feature
    though, so I don't know how weatherproof.

    Sensor size and number of pixels is the hallmark of Internet digital
    camera discussions. My view is that it's probably mostly irrelevant.
    Right now, 5 MP is doing everything I need it to do on a smaller sensor
    than the E-1. My customers don't care what it was taken with, just that
    the final output is what they want. So far, it is.

    I'm also not saying that my photography has the same requirements as
    everyone else's either. Figure out what you really need to do your job
    and buy the equipment to do it. For me the E-1 looks like it would do
    just fine. Maybe not for you.

    After all the lights and lighting is WAY more important that the sensor
    size or the number of pixels - as always.

    Clyde
     
    Clyde, May 19, 2004
    #11
  12. Yes. Thanks for the quite sensible defense of a camera that loses on two
    major counts for what I'm interested in.

    My view of things is not exactly mainstream: I moved from 5MP to scanned MF
    as a temporary expedient while waiting for digital to catch up. That was two
    years ago; I'm still waiting.
    But the lighting doesn't change, the camera does.

    The current A4 inkjet printers can render a lot more detail than 6MP can
    capture, so even if I don't print at 13x19, I still see the difference (at
    A4 the 1Ds samples I've downloaded look a lot better than the 6MP samples
    I've downloaded). And for landscapes, cityscapes, Japanese gardens and
    temples, I want all the detail I can get.

    And there's also low-light/available light work, so the slightly lower noise
    and f/1.4 and f/1.8 lenses available for Canon/Nikon make the E1 less than
    attractive.

    So I see the 300D as a low light/proofing/go anywhere camera with the
    expectation that money spent on lenses wouldn't be wasted. The E1 only hits
    one of those uses.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, May 19, 2004
    #12
  13. Thad

    Skip M Guest

    In my opinion, that's the biggest mistake made by most people in a
    discussion of the Canon 10D, including our buddy Preddy. The Canon 10D is
    not intended as a pro level camera, it is the digital equivalent of the Elan
    7. Even I tend to equate it by price, like I did to the Oly E-1. I
    couldn't find any reference to the sealing of the Oly, and I'm still not
    sure of the level to which it is sealed. Is it as good as the 1v/1D/1Ds, or
    more on the level of the 1n/EOS3? I notice it has dials rather than the
    buttons that Canon seems to favor for their pro cameras because of easier
    sealing.
     
    Skip M, May 19, 2004
    #13
  14. Thad

    Clyde Guest

    That is a good question. I don't know how well either Canon or Olympus
    pro cameras are sealed. Neither give us any objective testing data. The
    both talk about it in the same manner and marketing language. What does
    it really mean in real life? I'm never sure.

    Well, I do know a little bit. A couple of years ago I was near Aspen, CO
    at Maroon Bells National Park. I was walking around the lake and
    shooting panoramic sequences with my Canon EOS 3. It was partly cloudy
    to mostly cloudy that made some interesting sky. I had just shot at the
    farthest point away from the car and was walking back. A very sudden and
    heavy downpour hit.

    I had the EOS 3 on my tripod with the large, heavy pano head. I was wear
    a t-shirt and shorts and no rain gear at all. Yup, I got completely
    soaked. The EOS 3 did too. I tried to keep the EF 20mm lens pointed
    down. When got back to the car, wiped it all off but did nothing else.
    After a half hour drive and overnight just letting it dry at room temp,
    I fired it up. It worked absolutely perfectly. It acted as if it had
    never had a drop of water.

    I expect all pro level cameras are built to the same level of
    watertightness. I would expect the E-1 to perform the same. That's what
    I need and that's what any outdoor pro needs. I'm sure the manufacturers
    have to deliver that or the bad PR would ruin them in pro circles.

    Clyde
     
    Clyde, May 20, 2004
    #14
  15. Thad

    Ton Maas Guest

    At the risk of getting slightly off-topic, here's a summary of a "crash"
    test performed years ago on an Olympus OM 4 Ti by the Dutch magazine
    "Camerabeurs".

    First a description of the test procedure:
    1. The camera is placed in a freezer (-20 C) for 8 hours
    2. It's placed inside an oven (+ 75 C) for 1 hour
    3. It's placed in the vent of a sand-blasting company for 2 hours.
    4. One hour in a steamy shower cabin.
    5. One hour on a shaking machine.
    6. The shutter was released 15.000 times in a row, with the aperture of
    the lens at f 8.0

    After each test all shutter speeds were measured.

    These were the results (x out of 10):

    1. cold 7
    2. heat 10
    3. dust 9
    4. dampness 10
    5. shock 10
    6. internal 8
    7. price/value 9
    8. ease of operation 8
    9. design 8
    10. features 8

    total: 87

    This score was only topped by the Leica R6, which had been tested just
    prior to the Oly. The R6's final score was 88.

    Apparently the engineers at Olympus can do it :)

    Ton
     
    Ton Maas, May 21, 2004
    #15
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.