What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Lens Olympus NEEDS to release

> [Think back 5 years ago... How many of us would have been able to afford = a > 400mm f/3.5 IF-ED style lens? I sure couldn=B9t. But now I have one with my > 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 Digital-Zuiko zoom on my E-1 for less than $1000 and l= ove > it. I think sometimes we loose perspective on how far we=B9ve come in such = a > short time. We also get caught up in comparing this with that and losing = sight > of how good we have it!]
 
Yes, relatively speaking, digital is still in an early stage of development and it is amazing what has happened in such a short time.
I see that Canon has now joined in with dust control in its new 400D.
John
 
Hi Terry,
Sorry, I forgot to ask in the previous post, I just wondered how you find the viewfinder in the E1 and if it is big and bright enough.
Unfortunately, no shops near where I live stock the E1 and its some time since I handled one.
Cheers
 
> [Sorry to butt in, but I have an E1 and the viewfinder is just the > same as a trad SLR. Since getting Genuine Fractals, I can now produce > good sized prints with the 5.1 Megapixels. The quality is pretty good > all round. I cannot say that at above 200ISO I am happy with the > noise. iStockPhoto are the most exacting of libraries and will not > accept photos for library use that have noise or other abberation.]
 
Terry: But I don't want zooms. I want primes. And yes, I own a Zuiko 300mm f4.5, a great telephoto that was/is affordable. And I want a body that feels like an OM-1n. B.D. says the E-1 a great box that handles well, and I'm sure it's quite good. (I've only briefly handled an E-1, not reall used it.) I want real manual focusing; 90-95% of the time I couldn't give a rip about autofocus.

Richard: The viewfinder is NOT like my OMs. End of story for me. The second time I picked up an E-1 I got a rather better impression than the first, but it's still not an OM. And I shoot mainly with rangefinders now, and that's a whole different viewfinder experience.

B.D. If the M8 produces good quality, "state of the art" files (I don't know anyone who doesn't anticipate that it will), then how will it be "outmoded" in five years or less? I've never understood this argument, but that's coming from someone who uses OMs, Oly 35SP, etc. And I wouldn't put it Leica in the ground so fast.
 
> Hi John > I feel the E-1 is just big enough and bright enough. If you are used to a= n > OM-1 (the biggest, brightest viewfinder =AD ever) or an OM-4 (still better = than > anything from Nikon or Canon) then you will be disappointed as I first wa= s. > However, it has in no way prevented me from getting great shots and it is > better than what I=B9ve seen from the competition.
 
As far as the E-1 viewfinder goes - yes, I wish that the image size appeared slightly larger but for all that it is still a perfectly usable finder and I find it almost as easy to manually focus as with a 2-4 screen equipped OM body. I was never a big fan of split image and microprism focussing aids anyway, so the plain screen (or the grid version) suits me fine.

Plus, I feel that the higher eyepoint compared to, say, an OM-1 makes it much easier to "scan" the edges of the frame - this is important if you want to tighten up your composition and avoid cropping as much as possible, especially with "only" five million pixels to start with.
Admittedly the body is larger and heavier than an OM body but the much more ergonomic shape more than makes up for this , in my opinion. Plus, I have never been able to successfully hand-hold any other camera at such slow shutter speeds as I can with an E-1.

At todays prices you can't go wrong - just buy one and enjoy using it.
Don't get too hung up on comparing specs. When I consider that I paid over 1800GBP for my first E-1 and 14-54mm lens the prices now are a giveaway.

Andy.
 
It's quite simple: what is 'state of the art today is rarely state of the art tomorrow. And paying a premium for a 'red dot' for a body that simply will not have anywhere near the useful life expectancy of a film M strikes me as foolish.

By the way - if you keep waiting for a digital SLR with the same viewfinder you have in your OM, you'll be very frustrated. Times change; gear changes; deal with it. :) I, too, miss the larger, brighter finders. And I sorely miss my Leica M boxes and flare-free aspheric primes wides. But such is life. I wouldn't go back to film unless, for some bizarre reason, digital disappeared as film is now disappearing. Insisting that everything must remain as it was, and refusing to adapt to new technology when that technology has effectively replaced what came before it, is a bit like continuing to drive your produce to market in a horse-drawn wagon - you will get where you're going, but the market may be closed by the time you arrive.:)

B. D.
 
AMEN!! Note that the vast majority of the yearnings for days of yore come from those who have yet to experience the pleasures of the present. ;-)
 
"The viewfinder is NOT like my OMs." Earl, I have not looked through an E-1, but I have a Canon 5D and the viewfinder in that is still a poor comparison to my old OM-1/2/4! Not sure if the viewfinder of the 1Ds mkII is any better being a 'pro' camera and all, but as things stand now I'd love to get a digital OM (I know that they'll never make one, more's the pity...)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top