Olympus E-2?

[ivaylo_iordanov]

John,

 

 

This' a common misconception assuming two things. First, that the high end de jour

equipment is a must for good photography (false) and second, the so called

"successful professional" (photographer) and good photography are not synonymous.

"Pro" refers to the saleability of the images, not to the inherent qualities of the

photography nor to the supposedly top notch equipment. In fact many a pro regard

the dilettante mania for more'n'better and the inevitable endless upgrades with

disdain.

 

Ivo

[nathanael_galler]

Ivaylo, I guess with a Phase One digital back everybody could make a "professional"

fashion story (except of the real artists, they are something different) - it`s somehow like

Formula 1, the car is more important than the driver... Many fashion stories are like

snapshots but with a better camera and a lot image processing. John, unfortunately I have

not the money for such a high professional equipment since I`m only just at the start of a

professional career...

[robert_meyers]

I have an E-1. I can say that the camera itself is awesome. The pictures are good. I just ordered a second stoboframe pro-t, FL-50 flash, 50/2 Macro, and assorted accessories while I am looking for a second body (figured the flash and pro-t can be used on y contax g1 for now). Oh, and lenses are supposed to always be compatible with ANY four thirds camera. Note that Panasonic will be releasing one next year.

[nathanael_galler]

Robert, don`t you think it will be dated in two years? :-/

 

By the way, it seems that there will only be a new high class E-Olympus (many thousend $)

this year but no new E-1, E-3... Also a low budget SRL (lower than E300) is planned.

[robert_meyers]

:Nathanael Galler , mar 12, 2005; 03:27 p.m.

:Robert, don`t you think it will be dated in two years? :-/

:By the way, it seems that there will only be a new high class E-:Olympus (many thousend $) this year but no new E-1, E-3... Also a

:low budget SRL (lower than E300) is planned.

 

Maybe... but in truth, it has all the resolution I need (16x20 and 12x18 about as large as I go). It beats the E-300 in low light. Lasts for nearly 2000 shots with power pack... and will cost under a grand for a used body.

 

In all truth, I don't think I can go wrong. When the E-1n or E-3 comes out... I will need to buy 2 anyways, so, what the hell. I cannot keep barrowing backup cameras.

 

Also, in the way I use a camera it beats: D70/D100, 20D, S3. None of those cameras are cameras I can trust to keep working, if someone drops a body, or it gets sprayed with muck. I drop it or what not. I mainly do racing but am branching out into wedding lately. So I need a camera that will survive. If the EOS 1DII had come out on time, and not be delayed, I would have stuck with Canon. They didn't, so I sold my C gear. No need to jump again. No benefit. I looking into jumping to D2X... it would have cost me somewhere in the 15-17K range. Way to high.

[ivaylo_iordanov]

Hi Robert,

 

Just out of curiosity, what sort of racing do you shoot?

 

 

Ivo

[nathanael_galler]

Here are excellent photographs (for my taste), shooten with an Olympus C-5050 Zoom (!)

 

http://www.olympusamerica.com/e1/gal_amajoli.asp

 

He won two awards (among others `Magazine Photographer of the year`) with this camera

(which is way below a E-1)...

 

:-O

[robert_meyers]

Auto. Midgets and sprints mainly.

[bowlofcherries]

If money is a consideration, the Oly lenses are quite expensive -and lenses are .. everything (together with film/sensor). The C8080 does have an excellent lens, probably close to an L series Canon lens. And superb build. The Canon unfortunately are a bit noisy and too noticeable for street use - they do have a few very good lenses that arent super expensive ( the 50mm 1.8 notably, and Tamron makes an overlooked very good wide angle zoom, for the price). Note, the C8080 can be had at a bargain nowadays ( $650 new from buydig.com for example or Oly's own eBay refurb store )

[basscheffers]

Andre, where do you get from that the lenses are expensive? That is the most common misconception about the E system.

 

Most of them are actualy quite a bit cheaper than Canon or Nikon equivalents. And for some of them (especialy wide angle zooms) there is no equivalent, especialy from Canon.

 

I agree it's not very nice of Olympus to charge for a 150mm lens only a bit less than Canon's 300mm, but they perform the same function. So at the end of the day you still come out on top financialy.

[nathanael_galler]

Yes, I like the C8080 (from design), but do you think you get equal picture quality to the

E-1? I doubt...

[ivaylo_iordanov]

Well, "cheap" / "expensive" are relative terms and everybody I guess has his/her own

measure. Perhaps of bigger relevance is the fact that the Olympus lenses are available

at different price levels, plus SIGMA, known for it's "value" products, is entering the

game as well.

 

Probably I would be satisfied with the 8080 only if (1) it had manual lens controls

(zoom & focus) and (2) had an adequate RAW shooting capability. I consider these

inexcusable and the rest of the apparently excellent package only makes the design

shortsightedness even more glaring.

 

If I was price conscicious I would have gone for the E-300 and the new modestly

priced Olympus zooms. I am sure, at this stage my own capabilities are much more

limited than the camera and the lenses performance.

 

Ivo

[bowlofcherries]

Yep, you're right, Nat, the Oly 14-54 is $500 street nowadays, I should have checked the recent prices 03/2005; incorrectly assumed lenses maintain their prices, while body prices decline.

 

So an E-1 w/14-54 is about $1,600 street price nowadays. Hmm.. still not so great, price/performance wise - though I do like the solid feel, Oly body quality and silent operation (with the simulated optional click if they continued that feature from the E10)

 

Still, for $150 more than that lens alone, you get the C8080 *and* its top quality Oly lens plus a better 8 Megapix sensor(if you want to stay in the Oly family); which would give you some time till the E3 arrives (*).

 

Or, for a few hundred $ more, at about $1,100 the Panasonic Lumix DCM-LC1 (same as the Leica Digilux 2, actually better looking). Also 5 megapix, silent, and not so good above 100 ASA - but a top notch Leica lens, arguably the best -.

 

Or some Canon w/own or possible 3rd party lens combo.. hmm plenty of (too many) choices, arent we lucky!

 

@

 

(*) Considering that all sensors, for the same price, will keep getting better for the next few years it would be great if Oly would design an upgradeable sensor/cpu for their next E3. THAT would be a good selling point/ viable strategy vs the Canon and Nikon/Sony giants, esp. as Oly doesnt benefit from the same large production run benefits as the big 3.

[nathanael_galler]

Hi

 

I already asked me if Olympus can`t offer E1-owners (probabely me) a 8MP sensor/chip

update... Possible?

 

And: The Canon is out of race for me... ;-)

 

Nat

[bowlofcherries]

Nat,

 

I agree with Peter Phan (his answer March 9) regarding possible E-3: it does cost a lot to retool etc. so a E-3 isnt very likely soon, and an upgrade for any existing model (E-1) would be far too expensive as it has not been designed in - however much wishful thinking one might have (and I for one would like to keep Oly in the game, they are a top notch quality outfit).

 

I dont understand why you rule out the Canon solution, it is actually $100 less than an E-1: the new 8 Megapix Canon XT body is $900, which is $200 less than the E-1 body.

Combined with the EF-S 17-85 IS (Image Stabilised) @ $600 it comes to $1,500, which is still $100 less than the E-1 /14-55 combo. And the Canon sensor is much better, especialy at high ISO and in terms of resolution.

 

Regrettably, the current E-1 sensor probably doesnt take advantage of the resolution the 14-55 has (I say probably, because there is no way to find out): in answer also to your previous question re: why the C8080 (and the Canon) is actually better than the E-1, see below.

 

 

The Oly C8080 resolves 1750 vert/ 1600 horiz LPH, according to

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusc8080wz/page19.asp

 

while rhe older generation Oly E-1 resolves only 1400 vert / 1250 horiz LPH (add also some 'bad' moire artifacts), see

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse1/page21.asp

 

Note from the first comparison, the C8080 holds its own compared to the Canon 300D: 1600 /1450 (same sensor as Canon 10D)- and so as the 350/XT is presumably better than the 10D/3000D, that 350D is in all likelihood much better than the older gen E-1.

 

Also on the not so guaranteed future of the 4/3 format see

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/olympus-e1.shtml

 

All of which is why I suggest going for the C8080 if you want to stay with Olympus; Oly at tthe high end is currently in a trough, same as Nikon. The situation might change when Sony comes out with better, 'affordable' CMOS sensors, or if significant improvements in CCD/ alternative sensors surface (Fuji, Foveon, Kodak?)

 

Oh, also Gus, I dont understand where you say Canon doesnt have similar wide angle lenses as the Oly ( see the EF-S series, plus the many Sigma/Tamron/Tokina alteratives).

 

Well, didnt mean to get into soo much discussion, but since I have been spec'ing / (window) shopping recently and the C8080 is up there, I thought I'd let in these few words.

 

To give you an idea, personally I tend to be value and quality oriented, and like to buy at the 'sweet spot' of price/perfomrance. My first digital camera ca. Dec 2000 was a Nikon Coolpix 990 (a classic I should've kept), then the Coolpix 5000 in 2002 (not really a great upgrade, but I had sold the 990), an Oly E10, though more expensive at the time might have been much better; and then the Canon 10D in spring 2003. As I mentioned, I have looked closely at "lower" cost cams for a smaller second/backup camera, and the C8080 came out as the top candidate, as of now of course (Spring '05).

 

To finish, if I may suggest some pointers: (1) you cannot really trust written magazines, as they depend on the camera makers advertising for their revenues, (2) it helps if you can talk to pros or serious photographers who have been in the market for digital cams recently, next best is (3) reviewing photographer's websites, try also Googling generic terms and, for fun (4) see what kind of cameras the photojournalists use (hint: a sea of grey L lenses most of the time.

 

In the end, of course, it is the photos that count...so the good thing is, regardless of choice you ultimately make, you might get "pro level" photos even with an "obsolete" Oly E10 or 5060. Some of my best photos were taken with the "lowly" Coolpix 990.

 

Well, have fun spec'ing and shopping, and hopefully soon, shoot'ng

 

@

[robert_meyers]

:Andre Tchen , mar 13, 2005; 05:06 p.m.

:Yep, you're right, Nat, the Oly 14-54 is $500 street nowadays, I should have checked the :recent prices 03/2005; incorrectly assumed lenses maintain their prices, while body :prices decline.

 

Huh? Andrew, I believe the 14-54/2.8-3.5 released at $499. The 11-22/2.8-3.5 released at $799 and the 50-200/2.8-3.5 released at $999. I do not see any price changes there. The 300/2.8 has come down a grand, but it was over priced. Actually, I think this is pretty much a given? the lenses haven?t really dropped much at all.

 

:Or, for a few hundred $ more, at about $1,100 the Panasonic Lumix DCM-LC1 (same as :the Leica Digilux 2, actually better looking). Also 5 megapix, silent, and not so good :above 100 ASA - but a top notch Leica lens, arguably the best -.

 

Just as an aside, when I put my standard carry lens on my E-1 (a Contax 45/2.8), it is actually a smaller package than the LC1 (I thought of one for street? but currentl.y sticking to G1). Neat idea though? and nice camera.

 

:Andre Tchen , mar 13, 2005; 09:28 p.m.

:while rhe older generation Oly E-1 resolves only 1400 vert / 1250 horiz LPH (add also :some 'bad' moire artifacts), see :http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse1/page21.asp

 

You know, while Phil does a lot of nice reviews? this one is a sore spot for most oly users. Oly had fixed several of the issues almost instantly, and several of the issues that were noticed (like artifacts), were mainly from Adobe Camera RAW (which has also since been fixed by Adobe, and was a noticed problem). Remember, there have been four firmware revisions to the camera? and in all truth, two of them were like going out and buying a replacement camera. Very nice.

[basscheffers]

Andre, the 17-85/4-5.6 is most definitely a toy. A very overpriced one at that. It's nowhere near sharp wide open and having to stop a lens down to f/8 to get it sharp means you lose the shallow depth of field option. An E-1 with 14-54 will give you _way_ better images than any 8MP Canon model with this thing in front of it.

 

The least you could get away with is the 17-40/4L, but that is way to short, so you will have to add some more lenses to make up for it. If you want that to be a zoom, rather than 2 or 3 primes, the only competition is the 24-70/2.8L. And then you still have a crappy consumer body inferior to the E-1 in many ways.

 

How's that for value?

[nathanael_galler]

Andre, I just like the pictures of the E-1 that I saw much more than the ones of the 20D

(and other Oly-models)... Resolution and sharpness is not everything - the Canon tends to

look "supernatural"...

 

Joachim Baldauf is a new star photographer of germany (see Wallpaper, Vogue...) and he

shot his latest book project ("The subjective man") with a - old fashioned - E-20! This was

last year... And he blowed them up to huge pictures for an impressive exhibition...

 

See all http://www.shotview.com (> Joachim Baldauf > Projects)

[c4-contemporary-art]

I really, really wish people would stop obsessing over meaningless numbers.

People are buying up D70s in droves and they have IDENTICAL res to the E1s

for an 8x10 shot. Many people do NOT consider this. For an 4:5 aspect ratio,

the D70 is AT MOST a 5Mpix camera. And the holy 20D is at MOST a 6.5.