skip_williams

1. No "full frame" sensor'd camera will be launched from Olympus or any 4/3 company. (A key assumption is that 4/3 lenses do not produce an image circle large enough to cover a 24x36mm frame.)

 

2. It's obvious that Olympus now has a huge hole in their line-up with the E-3 at $1700 and the E-510, now reduced in the UK to 400 pounds body-only. Given the timing of the announcement, we should expect one or two cameras at PMA or soon thereafter. It's typical for companies to launch price reductions in advance of new models.

 

Skip

Given the expense of grinding an aspherical surface in the early 80's (most are molded today), I'm 100% certain that Olympus would have trumpeted it in their promotional literature if it was true. The 35-105 was a nice lens, but hardly one of the stellar performers like the 35-80/2.8.

 

Skip

As others have said, not much marketable gear there, unfortunately. Counter to George, I'd be surprised if you got $250 for the lot, sold individually. Most third party lenses are worth more as users than the time it takes to sell them, unfortunately. The Vivitar might do OK, though. From a shop or KEH.com, probably $100 for everything.

 

You might consider selling everything as one lot, priced at $100 or 100 pounds. And keep the 100/2.8, the best 50/1.8, and the 50/1.4 for your E410

 

You might also consider peddling it through one of those Ebay drop-off-consignment shops?

 

Skip

<i>The data I presented corrects both Skip's mistaken estimate and your mistaken statement.</i><p>

 

After looking at Godfrey's data and doing some research on my own, I agree that there's a mathematical 2-stop difference in DOF. For me, it seems closer to 1 stop, but that's a very subjective judgment. (I prefer a nicer term than what was used before)<p>

 

Sharpness? I use +2 or +3 right now. I haven't settled on a specific setting for my E-3. I tend not to oversharpen though, preferring to use the JPG's right out of the camera if possible.<p>

 

As far as Z's comments, I think that they're way off color and totally inappropriate. If you think someone's wrong or mistaken, then present a lucid argument, as Godfrey did. And the comments about his system switching is crazy....who cares? Does anyone care if someone switches car brands every 2-3 years? Or juice brands? or anything else? I think not.<p>

 

Skip

I too have seen some pretty neat hacks, but hacking a phone is a lot less intimidating than a camera. I've seen people that can swap out the IR filters on cameras. I've also seen a guy who tried and almost succeeded in putting a CCD in a Leica M2. But swapping in another sensor in a DSLR? That'd be a herculean effort, IMO.

 

I hope I didn't sound pushy, it wasn't meant that way.

 

Skip

Thomas,<p>

 

Congrats on the E-1, it's a great camera, especially for 2004 when it was introduced. I just sold mine for the E-3, and it was hard to let it go. There isn't a "better manual" than the one that comes with the camera. It's actually pretty good, as camera manuals go. It won't tell you how to take pictures, only how to work the camera.<p>

<i> Is there any talk about an aftermarket sensor to up the number of pixels? </i><p>

There are no after-market sensors available for any camera from any maker. The reverse-engineering of the integration of the sensor with DSLR cameras' processing engines and supporting systems is far to complex to be economically viable. You shouldn't waste brain cells waiting for such a product.<p>

 

If you "need" more pixels, you "need" another camera. You might try PhotoAcute, which says that they can increase effective pixel counts by integration of multiple exposures. I've heard of some people raving about it.<p>

 

Skip

I've had one for about 6 weeks and it's been a great camera. It's a bit noisier than the E-1 re shutter noise, but much faster, esp the frame rate. Image quality is very high and I'd easily print up to 20x24, personally. PhotoAcute usage would probably help.

 

DOF? There's about a one-stop difference practically, IME, vs. 35mm. So an F/2 lens in a 4/3 camera acts like an f/2.8 lens on a full-frame, 35mm camera. The finder is nicer, as is the amount of in-camera information you get.

 

The in-body IS is superb. The AWB is better than my E-1. Noise is 1-2 stops better, ISO 1600 is very usable out-of-the-box; 3200 usable with PP. The handling is better than the E-1, but that's marginal, as it was so good. It's a different camera and it will take me a few months to get used to all the controls and usage. I found myself making mistakes last night shooting indoor track for the first time, which probably cost me 20-30 keepers out of 500 shots.

 

AF speed is better than the E-1, but I'm a bit underwhelmed in low-light, action situations with non-SWD lenses (14-54 & 50-200). I'm getting ready to trade my 11-22 + 14-54 for a 12-60 SWD and my old 50-200 for a newer, SWD version soon to gain a higher AF speed.

Bryan,

 

There _IS_ a reset mode in the menus....consult the manual again or look it up online at Olympus' site at http://olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_support_manuals.asp?id=1192 and search the PDF or look on p118:

 

1 Menu 􀀗 [ ] 􀀗

[CUSTOM RESET SETTING]

2 Use to set.

[RESET] Resets to the factory default

settings.

[RESET 1]/[RESET 2]

Resets to the registered

settings.

3 Press the i button.

4 Use ac to select [YES].

5 Press the i button.

 

Also, taking the battery out for a while will probably have some effect, but the camera will probably remember most settings.

 

Does it work in manual mode? Try it outside. In sunny situations, set it to 1/125sec at f/16, assuming ISO 100. That should get you good pictures to start from. After a reset, if that doesn't generate good photos, then it needs to go in for a service to Olympus.

 

Skip

The box is too small to hold standard System Group, Lens Group, etc marketing material that came with OM-System hardware....those booklets were about 4x6". It may contain some custom material for the target market? But it's so small....Hmmmmmm.

 

It definitely isn't a body box. However, a lens box for a standard or wide angle would fit inside a 4" cube?

 

Is there anything else written on the box?

 

My guess is that it's marketing paraphernalia like trinkets, etc.

 

Skip

You could also use it in stop-down mode on a 4/3 camera like the E-1 or E-3.

 

Skip

Great camera.....I got mine before Thanksgiving and it's replaced my now-sold E-1....Highly recommended.

 

Skip

No, there is no external grip for the E5x0, and no way to mount one.

John is a great repair guy. He tuned up my 1929 Leica I and it's a great camera now. He couldn't get the 1/500 up to snuff, but everything else, including the finder (it's been up-converted to a II) is top notch.

 

Skip

What you've described is a nice thought, but not practical for any company these days, IMO. The market for such a camera is just too tiny to be viable.

 

No company is going to develop yet another lens line that is completely incompatible with anything else. The development costs are just too high for a lens line, plus a new body, plus a new shutter assembly, etc.... IMO, Olympus has reached the bottom of the practical sensor size for an interchangeable lens camera that has commercial viability.

 

The only lens line that is in existence today that's smaller than the Z-D's is the Leica M/LTM lenses, which are served only by the M8 today, since Epson's RD-1(s) is gone. We'll likely see a digital camera from Cosina/Zeiss-Ikon eventually, but it will be a rangefinder, not an SLR.

 

For people who want something small, they choose a nice, pro-sumer camera. Me? I bought a Panasonic Lumix LX-1 2 years ago and couldn't be happier. It offers nice control via M/A/P/S modes, RAW, pocketability, and great image quality at lower ISO's.

 

Skip

For a budget 35mm finder, find a Russian KMZ 35mm finder. Two glass lenses, tough as nails, super bright. No brightlines. I love mine....$30. If you can find one. Lots cheaper than a CV or Leica finder.

 

Skip

I have a 1929 I that was later converted to a II and looks very similar to your new black beauty. I'd also advocate leader trimming, as previously mentioned.

 

I had mine CLA'd a few years ago by John Maddox at L&J Leica Repair in Greenville, SC and the one thing that wasn't possible was to get the 1/500 speed working well. He told me that the old mechanics just weren't up to maintaining the speed. He said that I'd probably get 1/350-400 tops. If he tried to tweak the speed up to get the 1/500 to work, then other speeds would be off.

 

So I try to use mine with ASA 100 film to keep the speed down in the middle ranges for accuracy.

 

Otherwise, it's a real beauty. The black paint can be fragile. I found an old "Tower" ever-ready case (a Sears-sold Leica copy) that was falling apart and cut off the top part. I'm now left with a nice 1/2 case that screws into the I/II's tripod socket and provides nice protection to the black finish. It's also very cool looking.

 

I typically shoot with a clean Summar, 50/2.5 CV, 35/2.8 Jupiter, or 21/15 CV lenses, but the Elmar will also be nice you've got. Given the squinty finder, I also usually fit a metal 50mm SBOOI CV copy brightline finder that's superb.

 

Enjoy,

 

Skip

I sold mine for $223.00 about 12 months ago and it didn't need a CLA at all. $3-400 seems a bit high to me. Based on recent sales at the time, I had estimated $2-250.

 

Skip

Olympus' Zuiko-Digital lenses communicate to the camera through electronic contacts. There is no mechanical linkage between the camera and the lens. Thus an E-System body has no way to "talk" to a manual diaphragm lens...so you use it in stop-down mode.

 

Skip

In the March 2007 Olympus Lens Roadmap there is an ultra-wide-angle zoom slotted in the consumer grade lenses to be introduced in 2008. That might be the "9-18" you mention.

 

It will be a consumer grade lens, and constructed as such. Don't expect it to have the f/4.0 speed, edge-to-edge sharpness, or weather-sealing of the 7-14. I'd expect f/4-6.3. It also won't cost $1,600.

 

Skip

Other than the Peleng, I had a OM-mount Sigma 8mm f/4.0 fisheye mounted on my E-1 for a while before I got the 8mm Digital Zuiko. Results are here: http://www.skipwilliams.com/olympus/fisheye-test.htm. It's pretty good, and the resulting image stopped down was fine. The downside is that those lenses aren't easy to find.

 

There's also the 8mm f/2.8 Olympus Zuiko, but that's a $1200-1400 lens, hardly an economical option.

 

Skip

The HLD-2 is only for the E-1, and it uses a unique, high capacity battery that is NOT compatible with the BLM-1 or it's charger. This mistake has been corrected with the HLD-4 used for the E-3, which takes two BLM-1's.

I think you've got the E-3 on too high of a pedestal. Those cameras are pro-spec, super-fast, top-end professional cameras. The E-3's competition is the 40D, D300, and Sony a700. And it's not appreciably smaller or lighter than it's competition, IMO.<p>

 

<i>I agree with the comments on bodies. E-3 should be compared with D2x and 1D, and clearly wins on size and weight.</i><p>

 

I don't think I've ever heard Olympus state that their 4/3 lenses' advantages would include cheaper prices. But smaller and lighter is probably true if you choose your comparisons carefully and selectively. I don't think I've ever seen anything close to a 35-70/2.0 or 180-500/2.8 or a 70-200/2.0 lens offered on the other brands, not-to-mention that they'd be positively huge and several thousand dollars.<p

 

<i>I do not agree on the comment on lenses: "not only smaller and lighter, but also faster and cheaper." This is simply not true. Not even close.<i>

As Patrick said, what are you looking for? How much do you want to spend?

 

Skip

If you are in love with fast primes, razor-thin DOF, high-ISO shooting, and big prints (>16x20), then the 4/3 system will probably not meet your requirements in the short term. The lack of fast lenses aside from the Sigma 30/1.4 and Leica 25/1.4 is a real PITA. I'd love for them to introduce a 16/1.4, but no plans exist now. OTOH, the E-3 or E510's IS will certainly help with low light shooting.

 

The two fast lenses mentioned above will mimic your 50/1.2. The DOF will be greater on the 4/3 camera, which may or may not be what you want. I disagree with Ronald, as I think that the 25/1.4 and Canon 50/1.4 will be quite similar, with the DOF and perspective differences that are inherent in the focal lengths. Equivalent focal length lenses will give you ~double the DOF on 4/3 vs. full-frame cameras.

 

On an E-3: 25/1.4 DOF at 10': 2.07 feet

On a 5D: 50/1.4 DOF at 10': 1.02 feet

 

The 12-60 is a nice, fast focusing lens, but it's not a speed demon at f/2.8-4.0. The 14-35/2.0 might be THE lens, but not cheap or lightweight, nor available yet.

 

For travel, it's hard to beat the E510, but it's not a pro or pro-spec camera. The E-3, which I spent a fair amount of time with this weekend, is a superior camera, IMO, esp with it's IS.

For a budget, there's nothing like a used Bessa R body which will take the M-mount, ZM lenses. If you really, really like it, then you could upgrade to a Zeiss Ikon or a Leica M body.

 

The Bessa isn't as well made as the two other cameras, but it also doesn't cost as much. You will get what you pay for. The quality of the photos will be mostly determined by the lens, not the body.

 

Skip