Surprising rise of Olympus E-P1

<p>Having been dragged kicking & screaming into the digital camera world, I am still uncomfortable with the size of most DSLRs. I had a Canon 50D for a week, then traded it. Big as a brick. Handles like a schoolbus. I carefully avoided the mega cameras of the 1990s and early 2000s for the same reason. Plus I could give a shit about autofocus anyway.<br>

I think there's a large segment of the serious-camera-buying-public that loves and <em>must have</em> anything that's the latest, and if it's also the biggest, so much the better.A Caddilac or a Hummer, if you will. A smaller but significant portion wants an excellent camera that's not so goddamned attention and space-grabbing. A BMW. They have until now been ignored. Personally, I will look at the EP-2 when it comes out (I hope)with an optical viewfinder.I use the LCD about 1/10 of the time on my DSLRs. I'm selling my Panasonic LX-2 essentially because it doesn't have an OVF.<br>

I totally agree with Lex re: the 4/3 format. If <em>Luminous-Landscape</em> can compare up the G10 , with its 1/1.7 sensor, favourably to full frame dslrs, well then mabe a 4/3, sensor, 5x as big, can make a passable print.</p>

 

<p>Jack Lo,there is much wisdom in what you say. I delayed moving to autofocus fo years. Used a Canon T90. Every feature but AF... little big but well balanced Big... Even now I just barely trust those little confrimation green lights. And I want the decision to manually override the little computer bugger inside. And I always pre focus and still wonder who shoots like Matt Dillon... One wise owl said that precision in focus is much overrated...there is latitude. (That could be a whole new topic) I have learned to trust my E-1 and my ED lenses and know what few patterns drive it buggy.. theory and charts are horsehocky for me. I would never have bought my mini Coolpix P 5000 if I followed the recommendations on review sites. A sweet little item. Size wise. And has optical finder. And mini flash for the shoe. Now Olympus is making me want MORE in micro electronics. Got to have rational array of button and wheels. That is key as I get fussier as I get grayer.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>(I suppose it would it be too much to ask for the shutter speed and aperture rings like the OM4/ti??)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>William, have you ever seen the Panasonic DMC-L1 ?</p>

<p>Interesting camera, but all of my minature format lenses are Nikon, so I won't buy one. Besides, Canon and Nikon will launch similar offerings if the E-P1 succeeds. But I'd bet they will come in closer to $500 - $600 in price.</p>

<p>There's a rumor going around dpreview that Canon is working on a G10 replacement with an APS-C sensor but a non removable lens. Photokina 2010 at the earliest. I'd bet price to be about $600.</p>

<p>Non-removable (a-la Canon G-X APS makes much more photographic sense than removable. Less dust. Dust is an issue in much of the real world and no, dust removal systems don't deal with it 100%. Less than 100% can mean real grief if you're shooting a lot in situations that aren't likely to repeat. I'm not a toy-buyer, I'm into tools.</p>

<p>For me the hang-up on full frame is this. I have quite a few Zuiko and other lenses that I like quite a bit that I would prefer not having to need to replace, and on the wide end I would need to fill that in. So far there aren't any particularly good super wide angle primes in 4/3rds. Until that happens I'll continue clamouring for a full frame olympus SLR (or E-P1 equivelent).<br>

I don't need a full frame, but if it isn't full frame I need a 14-18mm equivelent prime in the f/2.8-f/4 range, a 20-24mm equivelent prime in the f/2-f/2.8 range and a 28mm (or 24mm) equivelent prime in the f/2.8 and f/1.4-f/1.8 ranges. So until I see a Zuiko 8mm f/2.8, 10mm f/2.8, 12mm f/2 and 14mm f/1.4 or at least most of that I am not going to be real enthusiastic about it.</p>