Going digital with OM Zuiko primes - E1 or 20D?

[lutz]

Sorry if this has been discussed over and over again, but...<p>

In the light of availability of adapters for both, OM Zuikos as well

as Leica R lenses (both of which I own and love), to work on either

the Oly E1 or the Canon 20D - which of the two routes should I take

and why? Any of you having pondered the same question? Thanks.

[bruce_kapla]

Lutz,

I went from Zuiko to EOS DRebel. This was before OM had announced the E1 with the adapter. My adapter is wonderful with the Zuiko glass. Only thing is no AF. Oh well, have never used it with OM. Went with Drebel simply because it was the first DSLR at that price point, and I have always been fond of EOS system, my brother-in-law uses Canon and has let me fiddle with it from time to time. I would look seriously at the 20D for the reason that if you ever do want to dabble with EOS glass, it is much more readily available on the used market.

[skip_williams]

Lutz,

 

I thought about this issue for quite a while before deciding to go with an E-1, sitting on a pile of Zuikos. If I were you, I'd think about these things to make your decision:

 

1. Decide if you can deal with the complaints that the E-1's 5MP isn't enough. For me, the camera's usability, design, and overal philosophy outweighed the raw MP argument. The system will catch up in that regard. If you regularly need 16x20 enlargements to be pin-sharp, then both of these cameras might let you down, but the alternative in digital is the big-bucks of the 1Ds.

 

2. The use of MF lenses is overrated. In the end, I found that the usabiltity of manual focus lenses on either body is pretty limited to special purpose lenses or most shot near wide-open. The hassle of stop-down operation gets old very, very quickly. In the end, I only kept one of my top-end Zuikos, the 90/2, which is use very successfully for macro work. I also use the 50/1.8 and 135/2.8 as good companions to a zoome for the odd-needed focal length.

 

3. Don't make your decision on the general use of MF lenses on one of these bodies. Neither has good manual-focus screens like a split-image or microprism, so accurate low-light focusing is questionable. Also, the quality of the E-1's zoom lenses is really outstanding. I only own three E-System lenses (11-22, 14-54, 50-200) , but haven't wished for much else....so far. I've talked to a number of people who had either the E-1 or the 10/20D, using Leica R and/or Zuiko lenses. Most decided, as I did, that the usefulness of the MF lenses shouldn't be a big factor, as the newer lenses, with AF and newer designs, were far more useful in normal situations.

 

If you shoot static subjects, then your milage may vary and you could be happy using MF lenses. I often shoot moving subjects and the benefits of AF far outweigh the other issues.

 

4. Body ergonomics and use. I was drawn to the E-1's design philosophy of usability. I find that I can get almost everything done that I need to do without resorting to the menus and usually with one-button + control wheel operations. I didn't like the 20D in that respect. For me, this was a huge issue; raw MP may be more important to others.

 

5. The rebel. I had a very hard time deciding between Nikon, Canon, and Olympus. In the end, I decided to go out on the proverbial limb with cult-ish camera system, just as I had done with the OM system in the mid-70's and the Leica M-System in the 90's. I'm not one to follow the crowd. Canon is safe, the system is huge, and the quality is very good, but something cried out to me to avoid this dark side. If I had been a working sports pro, I'd have been forced into a 1D, but I could afford to decide at a more reasonable level.

 

I've had my E-1 for about a year, and I've been very, very happy with it. I've probably shot 5 rolls of film in that time, vs. 10,000 digital images. Certainly it's bigger than my OM's or Leicas, but it's not HUGE, and it's not too heavy.

 

What would I improve? Certainly more MP and less noise at high-ISOs. But those aren't show stopers, as I compensate at ISO 1600/3200 with a batch process in Neat-Image that makes the issue almost moot. I want faster Autofocus and more focusing points (draw with the 10/20D, esp after the new v1.4 firmware improved that issue). I want the focusing points to light-up when they lock on, like Canon. I want faster frame rates to 5-7 FPS, 3 FPS is not enough many times. I want ISO in the finder or deck LCD all the time.

 

Skip

[lutz]

Skip, <p>I don't want to discourage any further posters to throw in their $0.02, but I just have to thank you for your most thorough write-up! That's the spirit we have been missing for the most time lately on the Leica Forum, haven't we? ;-)<p>So, everybody else, please feel encouraged by Skip's example to report on your personal findings. Cheers.<p>Oh, and one additional thought - is the new E300 compatible with the E-1 mount and lenses (and adapters, for that reason)? And a very last one: Is the stop-down drill not a mere pushing of the OM Zuikos' barrel button prior to exposure?

[bill_sams]

FYI...The "Olympus SLR Talk" forum on "dpreview.com" has LOTS of recent threads regarding 4/3-OM adapter use and lens performance/etc that might help...

[daniel_kreithen1]

I've used manual focus Nikon and Leica-M for quite a few years (also medium format) until recently (3 months ago) buying an E-1 and kit zoom lens. I've only played with the 20D at the shop for a while. My advice: go handle both cameras. For me, it was immediately apparent that the E-1 was both better built and better ergonomically. The 20D focussed faster and with more points, but as this was my first auto-focus camera, I find that I usually set it to the center sensor anyway (that way, I have a good idea of what it actually focussed on). I also don't have much use for high frame rates. If you're used to professional film cameras (an M6 for example), then I predict you will feel more comfortable with the E-1.

 

I find that the image quality from the E-1 is very good - at 8x10 prints it is capable of critical sharpness. The kit lens is very good - nothing to complain about there except for the speed, and Olympus is addressing this with the new lenses that have just been announced. I think that the Four Thirds system is well-conceived to be a replacement for 35mm film cameras, with image quality that will meet or exceed the film counterparts (if not with the E-1, with subsequent iterations). Do not underestimate the dust shaker and pixel mapping - something that other manufacturers would do well to imitate in some form. I have not had to touch up a single picture for dust or hot-pixels, and don't expect to have to. This is a huge win in the long run in terms of time.

 

The best advice is to hold both of them - you'll probably be sold on the E-1 just based on this trial.

[GerrySiegel]

Skip and Daniel have offered some really sound and rational advice for picking a new system. There are compromises to be had in any system. But both are excellent. I might suggest a user review of the E-1 and the E system at this location by John Foster and Mr Wrotniak,(The 20D you can get lots on here) at this link:

<a href="http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/e1-user.html">E-1 user report</a>....I have had an E-1 since July and have two of the ED lenses. For me it is right, and it is a feel factor thing,with more feel than charting and special comparisons. I think though that I have more for my cash outlay than I would have got with a 10D/20D and an appropriate pair of high quality Canon lenses.Buyer's market for a pro body... I can't really find any downside. The startup is fast, but not " The Mask" fast. The camera is not huge,but not compact. It has a good solid grip feel. I imagine had I went for Canon I would have been pleased too. Frankly, Lutz, you got a toughie. And don't overthink it,please. Go with the feel factor. Can't get too far off course. Aloha, Gerry

[neild]

My personal findings are as follows...

<p>

I use a 10D with an adapter for Zuiko OM lenses. I use it in the stop-down mode, which means that the lens closes to the aperture indicated on the f-stop ring of the lens. I focus wide open, then close down to my desired f-stop in order to take the photo.

<p>

I have found that this technique suits me quite well. Sure, it is a bit slower than when using an automatic diaphram, but I can still focus wide open. It is only the small size of the viewfinder image in these cameras that make life a bit more difficult than normal.

<p>

Overall then, I recommend the combination (EOS + adapter)...

[lex_jenkins]

Handle them both. The 20D may have more mp and access to a larger selection of lenses, but the E1 has superior ergonomics. It feels great in my hands.

 

I haven't bought any dSLR yet, tho', because I'm more concerned about AF speed and accuracy than sheer megapixels. I also want a brighter viewfinder than any of the current sub-$2,000 dSLRs (other, possibly, than the recently discounted Nikon D2H). I'm too accustomed to the HP finder on my Nikon F3 to go backward.

 

I have four nice manual focus Zuikos but they wouldn't factor at all into my decision on a dSLR. If and when I do get a dSLR it will be strictly for that system's advantages - lenses, flash, etc.

[skip_williams]

<i>Oh, and one additional thought - is the new E300 compatible with the E-1 mount and lenses (and adapters, for that reason)? And a very last one: Is the stop-down drill not a mere pushing of the OM Zuikos' barrel button prior to exposure?</i><p>

 

The E-300 is just another E-System body and takes all the accessories, lenses, etc. as the E-1. It isn't built as well though, not being as weather sealed, but the price is cheaper. It also has other design limitations, like the use of mirrors instead of a prism or a smaller shot buffer, or no USB 2.0.<p>

 

IMO, the E-1's prices will continue to fall a little bit, as we get closer to it showing it's age and the release/announcement of new E-System bodies. Since O didn't announce new bodies at PMA, they will likely have to re-start rebates to move the E-1 inventory soon.<p>

 

When you mount a MF lens on an E-1 using the currently available adapters, the adapter actuates the diaphragm lever with a fixed pin. So just like a rangefinder camera lens, when you turn the aperture dial to a smaller aperture, the diaphragm closes. The DOF-preview button on Zuiko lenses is inoperative when mounted on an E-1.<p>

 

I assume that the 20D's adapter works the same way.<p>

 

Skip

[lutz]

First, I wish to thank everybody for most generously providing all the valuable information and feedback as above. The insight as well as the links provided have made for fantastic thought fodder! :-) <p>My impression right now is that I just have to lay my hands on the alternatives in order to establish an emotional approach to base whichever decision upon. The dry facts appear to be just too complex for me to come to any kind of obvious conclusion. While the many valid arguments given pro the E-1 sound more than reasonable, my original impulse for this post was driven by a) the lack of any "serious" digital body (apart from a trusty 3MP Canon Digital Elph), plus b) the considerable amount of really fine film SLR glass collecting dust in the drawers. And I'm talking the Zuiko 2/28, 2/50, 2/90 and such, not to mention the Leica R primes. So, adaptability as well as a considerable increase in MP real estate and a low FL factor (both of which in order to get the most out of the best - well, that is IF these lenses are really up to the task of satisfying the quality demands of a smallish Hi-Res chip...) *do* matter to me, although I wouldn't mind having a digital AF body on the side as an added bonus, with a dedicated system lens for just that purpose.

<p>

PS: As far as the OM-Zuiko-stepping-down-ease-of-use is concerned, the EOS adapters seem to have an edge over the E type adapters... :-( At least those provided by <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/frames/4saleReos.htm">cameraquest</a> seem to take advantage of the unique built of the Zuiko lenses:<p>

 

<i>Olympus OM Lenses: OEOS, mounts Olympus OM lenses very conveniently on the EOS via the adapter because OM lenses have an external stop down switch, allowing you to focus wide open and then quickly stop down to shooting aperture for metering and taking the shot.</i>

[lex_jenkins]

Yup, the stop down switch on OM Zuikos (and Zuiko mount third party lenses) is unique among auto-diaphragm lenses. The next closest thing is a preset lens, which is nowhere near as convenient, tho' T-mount presets work with a wide variety of bodies.

[akochanowski]

I had exactly the same questions as you a few months back, because (as you know) I have a great fondness for the OM system and, like you, have a number of wonderful Zuiko lenses.

 

I looked carefully at both ethe E-1 and the 20D. In the end I chose to get a 20D and the cameraquest adapter for the Zuikos and could not be happier. If you haven't used a 20D before, here are my tactile impressions. When you mount one of the smaller Canon primes, like a 28/2.8, it feels wonderfully balanced and is eminently useable for the street and wandering-around photography. The availability of prime Canon glass was a factor in my decision, and in retrospect I think I would have been terribly disappointed if I would have had to venture out on the street with a zoom lens, even the nice E-system lenses.

 

Low light response of a 20D is nothing short of astounding. While yes, NeatImage can clean up high-ISO noise, the first (and second and third..) time you see what a 20D does at 1600ISO you will be amazed.

 

I disagree with the notion that the E-1 has more ergonomic controls. They are good, no question the E-1 feels very nice in the hand. But I think Canon has organized the necessary controls nicely and logically as well. Let me put it this way: every major function you are likely to need is accomplished through a knob or one push of a physical button and the turning of one of two control wheels. It's intuitive and the only time you need to delve into menus is if you want to change a secondary setting.

 

It's hard to comment on the pixel issue, which seems to be personal to each user. I have been getting very good 13x19 Epson inkjet prints with no interpolation straight from the 8MP output. Just based on the number of pixels that the E-1 outputs, it seems you would have to upsize some to get there. As to 8x10's, of course, there probably is no real difference.

 

On a personal note, I completely understand why some of us like the unconventional camera system, like the OM. I had high hopes for the E-1 too, but much as it felt nice in the hand, frankly it seemed overpriced and a likely dead end. It somewhat galls me that I went the conventional Canon route, but in case it isn't clear, the 20D is a fantastic piece of kit that exceeded my expectations.

 

As to the adapter, I would echo what Skip said. It's nice to mount the Zuiko on the EOS but other that wide open it's not particularly effective. Here's what I do. I stick one of my lovely OM 4Ti's with the 40/2 and a roll or two of film in my bag. I shoot it when the light is good. It's still a pleasure. But I've shot 2000 exposures with the 20D since November.

[Aoresteen]

I'd go for the E1 when the E2 gets announced. The prices are going to drop soon. I'd expect an anouncement by Photokina time this fall.

 

If you can't wait take a hard look at the E300.

[GerrySiegel]

Is Fotokina annual event? Or biennial? I forget. Anyway, the prices on the E-1 and some lenses have begun to slide rather substantially. That is either good or bad,depending on the expectations for the next version of the E pro body.Ah,a multitude of riches... But then there is the fine fast lens price issue or fast zoom issue if you add that in to the equation. Ah,I still say forget the equation,get both Lutz. Or buy the Epson RD-1 and be really difficult to live with:-)...GS

[oben_c]

Excellent answers above. I am also a long time OM user and I considered both DSLRs about 6 months ago. I had bought the Kindai EOS adapter for Zuikos about 18 months ago to futureproof some of my specialty glass.

 

So when I reviewed the cameras and found that Olympus was not supplying the Om adapter outside of the US my decision was made easier. I had been considering a 10D but the 20D came out round about the time I was looking. The 20D ended up being purchased.

 

My experience with the adapter has been good overall. As noted the use of manual lenses with stop down metering becomes tedious if you do any serious amount of shooting. I therefore use only my specialty lenses with the adapter. This includes a 90mm f2 macro, a 24mm f3.5 shift lens, and a 35-80mm f2.8 zoom. All three of these work extremely well with the adapter.

 

As mentioned above the presence of existing Canon primes and an upgrade path to full frame digital with the 1DsII was also a factor for me. I've bought three Canon lenses so far and these are by far much more convenient to use with the 20D. The OM lenses I use with the adapter complement these.

 

I still shoot some film and amazingly I do as someone above does - I use my OM-3Ti with 40mm f2 loaded with Velvia 100 or Astia 100 and carry it with my digital gear.

 

I've shot over 5000 shots with the 20D and can say I am very impressed. Note that the 20D did have issues of banding etc noticed when it first came out. This is really a phenomenon of inherent underexposure favored by the 20D. I set 1/3 to 2/3 overexposure for most shots by default and get great results 'shooting to the right' (histogram).

 

You can't really go wrong whichever option you choose.

[GerrySiegel]

If one parses the fast zoom vs the fast prime preference, it gets interesting. I would value see a test of fast primes vs fast zooms of current design,which the latter seems to be the game plan of the new and shiny chrome strip E series lenses for late '05. Now having a variable aperture is not exciting,yet f 2.8 to 3.5 is barely noticable to me. And the brightness factor in the viewfinder is not really noticable. The three new lenses announced by Olympus are for fast one f stop zooms. Prediction: Modern lens design will go for fast zooms versus fast primes. Why? Because cinematographers seem to have valued the marvels of ultra good zoom lenses...a pure guess,but I put my money into the guesstimate of analytical prediction if you will.<p> I never saw myself a maverick,(except quirky Hexar), but think Olympus has caught one of the brass rings sharing a prize with Canon and Nikon for ideas ( C/N innovated with eye focus/ multiple matrix flash,giving credit deserved)Plus a gazillion you name it accesories!. It will never reach the Canon or Nikon markets,so what else is new. But will be an alternative with some innovation to recommend. Note FYI that K-Minolta has just announced smaller circle lens to compete with their own legacy full frame lenses. Ahah,the plot thickens. Great topic for speculation. I would indeed like to afford both systems. And some great lenses like the salami size ED 150 f 2.0. Mama mia,what a hunkie glass.

[GerrySiegel]

This was a shot in the foot for Oly by Oly. Once customers asked for this OM adapter, and they started giving it FREE on request via grapevine, it should have been a slam dunk to provide it everywhere as a bonus,with the kit. (Are these Soviet era strategists running that company?) After all, they are in essence proving the FL-20 flash as a giveaway. They didn't think, anyone who did not get a free adapter in a satin box with a box of Crackerjacks,:-)sort of, is gonna be peesed- off,just a little. That is how I see it Mr and Mrs North and South America, Liberian oilers at sea, and EU friendly shooters. Be well and all the best to you whichever brand you fancy. GS

[lutz]

Just in case you were interested in a follow-up: I've decided for the Canon 350D. I'm quite impressed by that little piece of camera. I've bought two adapters, one for my Zuikos and one for my Leica R glass. I'm still struggling with the tiny viewfinder when focussing, though. If anybody has some sound advice on how to cope with that (magnifiers, even self made ones...?) please contribute your experiences. Thanks again for all of your input.