Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 20, 2009, 10:48 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 18
Default Olympus Pen

I had a pen F a few years ago. I was fond of the size and the quality of the lenses, even though it was a half frame. And it was an SLR.

I was excited by the announcement of the new digital Olympus Pen. And sadly disappointed when I discovered that it had no viewfinder. I'm sorry after thirty plus years of photography I cannot understand the lack of a viewfinder in so many of today's cameras.

Yes the users are not serious photographers, and yes they probably don't make big prints. But low light photography is out! I have digital cameras with anti-shake, and it often allows low light pics, but super quality lenses and high resolution is totally a waste of time if the camera is not steady. I don't know anyone, even youngsters, who can get a steady picture at the end of two feet of arm with a slow shutter speed. So you limit your pics to bright light and flash? For that money and sophistication?

Can any serious photographer explain this to me?
dichro1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 21, 2009, 6:08 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Hi,

Since I don't consider myself a serious photographer , I can only answer your question from the perspective of someone who enjoys taking digital images:

I've read just about all the reviews and press releases on the E-P1 and every review lists all the shortcomings of this little camera. From the ones you mentioned (and they ARE significant), to the less than average LCD screen (especially since it doesn't have an EV), the racking of the 14-42mm lens as it refocuses everytime you take a photo-even if the shot is identical to the one prior, the lack of lenses, etc.etc.

After all that, I still would love to have one. I'd love to be able to take it on vacation or on local trips into the city, where I don't want to lug an E-30 around. Sightseeing, for me, is done in broad daylight, taking pictures of landscapes, street scenes, architecture, and so on.

As for low light situations, inside a building, I would rest the camera on something to steady it.

There are situations when nothing but a full featured dslr will do. There are also times when I could have a whole lot of fun with the E-P1.

Zig
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2009, 8:00 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 477
Default

Well, I suppose you could look at it another way.

A "serious" photographer might take a camera when he/she has nothing but a pocket to put a camera in. After all, it's better to have a camera, than no camera, if you're serious!!!
And a "serious" photographer will FIND SOME WAY to take a photo in low light, by using skill and ingenuity.

A camera, after all, is just a tool. It's the photographer that creates a photographic image, not the camera.
dnas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2009, 5:54 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
dwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 133
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dichro1 View Post
...Can any serious photographer explain this to me?
Easy, cost and size. These are by far the strongest and most important factors in success in today's rather crowded market. The manufacturers have, more the most part, come to realize the fact that making the best camera to use very often results in a market failure. They design the cameras to be the most appealing at the time of purchase (and in the "first look" class of pseudo-reviews) and not to be the most loved after a year of use.

There have been some rebounds. Canon's new G11 is an obvious attempt to respond to the negative response to its predecessor's failings. They've used a lower resolution sensor to get larger photosites (read: potentially less noise). It also retains an eyelevel VF (optical) in addition to the rear panel LCD finder.

Personally, I much prefer to having an eyelevel VF and find the Panasonic G-1 more appealing than the Oly E-P1. I still use my old Nikon CP8400 and find its electronic eyelevel VF (EEVF?) quite usable though I find the rear LCD quite useful at times, particularily when swiveled to be the equivalent of the old optical waist level VFs.
__________________
----
Dwig
dwig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2009, 11:49 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 18
Default

Personally, I much prefer to having an eyelevel VF and find the Panasonic G-1 more appealing than the Oly E-P1. I still use my old Nikon CP8400 and find its electronic eyelevel VF (EEVF?) quite usable though I find the rear LCD quite useful at times, particularily when swiveled to be the equivalent of the old optical waist level VFs.[/QUOTE]


Yup, that makes more sense to me. And I see a few people who have a better grip. A camera that you cannot hold the steadiest possible in situations that require it, especially if you pay a lot of money for it is pretty much worthless. Interchangeable lens doesn't mean much unless you have a tripod or brace, & if you're not going to carry them why buy it in the first place?
dichro1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2009, 6:12 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dichro1 View Post
Interchangeable lens doesn't mean much unless you have a tripod or brace, & if you're not going to carry them why buy it in the first place?


You're kidding, aren't you??

Are you saying you NEVER take a shot with a DSLR without a tripod or brace??
dnas is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:02 AM.