Leaked Olympus E-P1 Micro Four Thirds compact has us hot, bothered (updated)

It's not scheduled to be announced until tomorrow, but it looks like Olympus' Micro Four Thirds tribute to the classic rangefinder has leaked out onto these here Internets looking every bit as handsome as the top-side leak seen earlier. Remember, we're talking about a DSLR-sized sensor stuffed inside that retro compact body. Judging by the pics of E-P1, we're looking at a stock, 17mm lens with an interchangeable 14-42mm (3x) zoom lens available at launch. One more day and we'll have prices, ship dates, and full spec-sheet to share -- can you wait? 3x lens and few more color variations in the gallery below.

Update: Possible specs accompanying authentic looking images have now entered the rumor mill. Said specs have the camera measuring in at 120 x 70 x 35mm (about the size of a Sigma DP2 or slightly larger than mainstream point-and-shoots) snapping 13 megapixel RAW images and 1280 x 720 pixel video to SD card, ISO 6400 sensitivity, 11-point AF, electronic anti-shake, and 3-inch LCD if we're reading the machine translated text correctly. It's expected to ship in July with prices starting at about $900 -- though it's unclear what you get at that price point.

Gallery: Olympus E-P1 Micro Four Thirds leak has us hot, bothered

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

[Via 43rumors]

[Information Central @ Jun 15th 2009 4:26AM]

Doesn't look quite as cool as the prototype from a long time ago, but if the picture quality is good, it'll do.

It won't take much to beat the noise-riddled garbage that dominates the small-cam market these days.

If only it would have an intervalometer... but year after year, it seems that only Nikon understands how to put a simple timer in their cameras.

[Plothole @ Jun 15th 2009 5:06AM]

I would disagree.... in that I think this looks much better than the soap-bar shaped prototype.

[bandigolo @ Jun 15th 2009 2:00PM]

I agree - the original Olympus retro prototype was way sexier than this.

[Plothole @ Jun 15th 2009 4:26AM]

It's pretty obvious that the black one was just recolored in photoshop (or similar).

Anyways, less than a day to go...

[Phrank @ Jun 15th 2009 9:06AM]

Can you tell from the pixels? You've clearly seen some shops in your time.

[good grief @ Jun 15th 2009 9:39AM]

@phrank, just look at the lighting -- the lens is casting a negative shadow onto the black body.

[spyker @ Jun 15th 2009 11:16AM]

Just look at it. It's easily fake. The quality looks bad, especially around the edges of the camera. I like the white/tan one :D.

[Phrank @ Jun 15th 2009 12:33PM]

@good grief: Sheesh, I was just playin'. :-p

Anyway I misread his post; thought he was saying they took an older black model and 'shopped it silver. Didn't look at the rest of the pics. Oops!

Now that I actually looked, I can say, my name is Phrank, and that guy sucks at Photoshop.

[Rob @ Jun 16th 2009 1:09AM]

13 Megapixels in something less than aps-c? Mega yawn. Why can't they make it like 5 or 6 megapixels?

[nintendo fanboy hater @ Jun 15th 2009 4:41AM]

Up periscope!

[xconan @ Jun 15th 2009 6:31AM]

a strange place to put the rangefinder viewer though that should have been the hotshoe for z external flash

[Temple @ Jun 15th 2009 9:58AM]

It not that odd, It's called an "Auxiliary Rangefinder" and they've existed for over fifty years.

[swon @ Jun 15th 2009 4:50AM]

oh nice, a lot better than i was expecting but true not as hot as the prototype.

i'll take an all black one but i doubt this is less than US $1000.

[Shinigami @ Jun 15th 2009 7:14AM]

$1000?
Hmm... nice digicam versus digicam+bigscreenTV... tough choice...
I expect it to land somewhere around $600 and I haven't seen the back of it yet (its a live-view camera, so the screen better be huge and great!!!).
I was really expecting for it but if it lands in a price land of "not-cheap DSLRs", it doesn't have a choice. Or so I think.

[Cunthor @ Jun 15th 2009 5:03AM]

Oh yeah, and great idea with the add-on viewfinder. Beats shitty tourist look with "arms holding camera away from face", and EVF which just blow.

[Paul in Maryland @ Jun 15th 2009 5:48AM]

specs here:
http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=635107

[Kelmon @ Jun 15th 2009 5:54AM]

私は日本人がよいことを望む

[Kelmon @ Jun 15th 2009 5:54AM]

私は日本人がよいことを望む

[Kelmon @ Jun 15th 2009 5:54AM]

私は日本人がよいことを望む

[Kelmon @ Jun 15th 2009 5:55AM]

Damn you, Engadget Comment System! Sorry about the duplicate posts and suffice to say that what I had to say wasn't worth 3 posts - probably not even worth the 1.

[humps @ Jun 15th 2009 7:12AM]

Paul's link CLAIMED, body only is about 90,000 JPY, with two kit lense about 125,000 - 130,000 JPY. But 17 F2.8 is 45,000 - 50,000 JPY and 14-42 F3.6 ~35,000 JPY.

13Mpixel, 720p movie, live view, 11 area AF

[Cunthor @ Jun 15th 2009 7:18AM]

From the link:

120x70x35mm 300g
13M RAW JPEG RAW+JPEG SD, (yay no xD cards)
1280x720 7min (720p video?)
640x480 14minSD
11 AF (points?)
ISO 6400—200
Shutter speed: 60-1/4000

Sorry, the link is in Japanese so someone might be able to double check the data. Specs looking good, I hope the screen is high resolution like the latest Nikon/Canons and AF speed and startup is dSLR like.

[Bad Beaver @ Jun 15th 2009 5:49AM]

Oh, the price will be interesting... add $150+/- for the viewfinder...

[Kelmon @ Jun 15th 2009 5:49AM]

It is certainly quite attractive to look at and the retro-styling is certainly nice. We just wait now to find out how well it handles and performs.

[Newone @ Jun 15th 2009 5:49AM]

That hotshoe viewfinder might be smarter that it looks, maybe even have syncronized focusing with the objective

[geothermalcat @ Jun 15th 2009 5:54AM]

is it me, or are all of these types of camera look like they were made by vtech (make shitty kids computers for years 2 and up)
im yet to see one with the same build quality of atleast a bottom end slr.

[KarlW @ Jun 15th 2009 7:02AM]

My thoughts exactly. This looks like a pocket-full of win, but I'm not going to be able to afford it.

Pretty much like all the devices on this site, actually, but moreso.

[james @ Jun 15th 2009 7:10AM]

EVF is great.. its the one thing i miss using my G9..

EVF is more accurate than optical (as its showing what the sensor sees) And it also allows you to avoid the dorky "tourist camera away from face"

A good EVF is a killer feature to me..

[xregy @ Jun 15th 2009 7:14AM]

What's the deal with the black one if it doesn't come with black lenses...
But still, this is THE ONE I've been waiting for. 300g(?) weight looks awsome.

[Beastage @ Jun 15th 2009 7:20AM]

Nice camera for early adopters

Obviously there will be some later better models with the more point and shoot design.

[Bluecold @ Jun 15th 2009 8:16AM]

It's confirmed to have In-Body IS.
http://43rumors.com/ft5-fullsize-of-the-whitebeige-e-p1/#comments

[Mr.Clicky @ Jun 15th 2009 8:25AM]

Yes, but why?

[Temple @ Jun 15th 2009 10:01AM]

why? same reason people love the Leica M bodies. They want to have compact camera that they can carry around to take pictures of spur of the moment events and want to have the quality of an SLR and interchangeable lenses.

[Patriks7 @ Jun 15th 2009 12:27PM]

Problem is, this tiny sensor will get nowhere close to DSLR quality...

[Plothole @ Jun 15th 2009 1:29PM]

@Patriks7

The sensor is exactly the same size as in Olympus dSLRs!

[jdang @ Jun 15th 2009 1:35PM]

Patriks7,

it uses the micro four thirds system, which is a smaller sensor than the APS-C for sure, but in the Panny GH1 does quite well in the ISO tests.

Compare vs. the D90

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_GH1/noise.shtml

[ron.melton @ Jun 15th 2009 8:53AM]

Looks a lot like the old Olympus Pen 1/2 frame 35mm cameras. A classic design.

[tanvach @ Jun 15th 2009 9:11AM]

The only quibble I have is the bokeh, since the crop sensor will have more depth of field than non-crop equivalent lens.

But looks very portable, I love to use it for traveling!

[Yan @ Jun 15th 2009 9:19AM]

wow... if this thing can be priced under $500 and take near DSLR quality pics (not expecting low light miracles), then I think it would be a must buy as a complement to a nice DSLR. That ISO 200 worries me though, as does a 7 minute limit on HD clips.

[FLiPMaRC @ Jun 15th 2009 9:29AM]

Finally out! This is definitely a must for those time I don't want to lug around my DSLR!

It's surely going to be expensive when it comes out.

[riccardo @ Jun 15th 2009 9:48AM]

total /agree with tanvach

Another point is that it all looks quite plastic-y. especially te lens barrel, which would be a real bad feeling
Hope it dont cost over 600: Olympus lenses are quite good so this could be a VERY interesting camera

[gadgety @ Jun 15th 2009 9:57AM]

Looks fantastic! I want one. Looking forward to sample pictures.

[Richy @ Jun 15th 2009 11:12AM]

Not all EVFs are born equal.

The EVF on the Panasonic Lumix G1 and GH1 (the 'other' Micro 4/3 cameras) is supposed to be fantastic.

I really fancy a GH1 for the continuous AF in movie mode, but can't justify the huge price difference between it and the very similar (though no movie mode and a slightly different sensor) G1.

[bigcow05 @ Jun 15th 2009 11:13AM]

Hmm, not very nice looking but very compact and rangefinder-like. I wish it had an EVF though, that is the only thing pushing me towards the Samsung NX.

External vf seems like a gimmic if you can't see how the image is focused. On real rangefinders, you only use stuff like that with super wide lenses that had a ton of dof and didn't require precise focusing. 17mm on a 4/3 cam is 34 which is more of a wide normal.

This cam seems like a Leica wannabe and not a practical alternative to a real rangefinder. Perfect for poseurs but not a someone who needs a fast street cam. Quite a shame really, I was looking forward to this cam.

[dave @ Jun 15th 2009 11:36AM]

This camera was ever intended to be like a rangefinder. This is clearly a modern remake of their original Pen series camera which was a compact, SLR camera. It was mostly manual control with some auto features built in. They all had viewfinders..as most cameras did back in the day, be it an SLR, P&S or rangefinder.

This, in all regards to the original Pen F, is a compact SLR. I'm a rangefinder user, as well as a street shooter with an arsenal of film/digital P&S cameras and of course a big bulky Canon 40D SLR that I use for 'expected' shots, ie social events.

This camera will fit nicely into the P&S niche community of users who require excellent manual controls and IQ like an SLR, but stuffed into a tiny body. I'm one of those persons. I have a Sigma DP2 with a prime fixed lens...I love it. But I'd also like a wider variety of glass. The E-P1 will hopefully be the solution for that.

I don't bother bringing my smaller camera's up to eye level when shooting, so the external VF isn't something I'll need, but it's there.

I think this camera will do well, despite it's high price.

[bigcow05 @ Jun 15th 2009 11:47AM]

@dave:

It is certainly a nice camera and much more useful than normal compacts, making it a great complement to a DSLR system. I just don't think it will fare well as a main camera. Framing with the LCD takes away one of the biggest advantages of rangefinder-type cams: no mirror vibrations. In place of that, there will be vibrations from the arms and hands. Framing with the vf is possible but there will be parallax errors at close range, and in this day and age I don't think an EVF is too much to hope for... I still think the Samsung will be more practical but we will see.

[Lukino @ Jun 15th 2009 4:01PM]

17mm is 17mm on the small sensor too. Size of the frame is halved, but DOF remains the same... and you don't really need to precisely focus a 17mm.

[bigcow05 @ Jun 15th 2009 5:16PM]

@ Lukino:

That's true. Thanks for the correction.

[Richy @ Jun 15th 2009 11:14AM]

Sorry, meant to add that I'll give this a look. But, though I like the styling of the Olympus with the smaller lens, I'm not sure how weird looking & unbalanced (in terms of handling) it'll be with a bigger lens.

At least with Micro 4/3, the lenses are smaller than the equivalent on a regular 4/3 or APS-C DSLR.

[eric42 @ Jun 15th 2009 11:22AM]

Shame about the $900 price (assuming the "rumored mill" is correct_. Hopefully that's retail and the street price will be much less. I just can't see spending more than $600-$650 given the price of some of the entry-level DSLRs these days.