Micro Four Thirds cameras are still very much DSLRs. There are no inherent compromises with the new format - Olympus opted not to have a viewfinder or base flash because they felt that if you needed them, you'd buy an attachment.
I'll agree that the lack of viewfinder might seem like a compelling argument not to call this a professional or semi-professional camera, but the fact is that viewfinders are just a common preference among photographers. Who's to say that in a year or two professional photographers won't want to see any effects or changes that they make in real time on their LCD screen rather than their archaic viewfinder?
Agreed, it really isn't a DSLR in any way, shape, or form. The only part of DSLR it meets is "Digital", but it's not a Single Lens Reflex camera.
If you're going to compare it to any "classic" camera format, it's clearly much more comparable to a rangefinder in terms of form-factor, although it's not one of those, either.
It should be called exactly what it is - an interchangeable-lens Point & Shoot. Sensor size has no bearing on what we call the thing, Sigma's DP-series have APS-C sensors, same as Nikon DX, and manual controls, but they're solidly in the P&S category.
Point and Shoot adj. "Of, relating to, or being a camera that adjusts settings such as focus and exposure automatically."
Sure you could use this camera in that way. But then so could you with most modern dSLRs. And this camera does offer full manual controls as well. In fact it seems to outclass many entry level dSLRs in this area (eg. two command dials, quick access to ISO/WB/Shooting Mode/AF). Plus it has the bigger sensor AND interchangeable lenses.
No mirror means no dedicated autofocus sensor, which means painfully slow and often inaccurate autofocus. Panasonic had a good solution to this, Olympus does not. No mirror also means no dedicated matrix metering system, which leads to questionable auto-exposure. With a DSLR, I can press the shutter in very low light, and I'd be fairly sure to get accurate focus instantaneously, with good exposure at that. Try that with the Olympus.
The attachment is a separate entity, and is in no way TTL (through the lens). You're only getting framing help and nothing else, and you'd have to buy a different attachment for each lens you use (if they ever make any more). With a real DSLR, you get framing, pic info, DOF, focus confirmation/info, and battery life. To make comments like this means that you've never really used a DSLR. An LCD is nice, but for many, it's not enough by a long shot. Even for the common Joe, he'll find that it's lacking when he's taking pics on a sunny day.
This is not to mention the many other compromises attributed to this camera/format. It's the middle ground between DSLRs and P&S, but to say that it's essentially a DSLR is a BIG mistake. You could say a P&S is essentially a DSLR, too, then. Yes, you can change lenses on the Olympus, but if you go beyond the "pancake" and some smaller lens, you're throwing away the portability advantage, which leaves you with a very limited selection indeed.
It's a nice camera, but far from perfect, and very far from actually being a DSLR.
The phone has 256MB of RAM and a 1GHz processor, which do the job reasonably well, though the Anna interface will likely leave something to be desired for many smartphone users.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
"just how compact the device feels in your hands and when compared with an average DSLR"
Stop comparing it to a DSLR! It is a Point 'n' Shoot with a bigger sensor, nothing more and nothing less. There is more on a DSLR than a big sensor.
Micro Four Thirds cameras are still very much DSLRs. There are no inherent compromises with the new format - Olympus opted not to have a viewfinder or base flash because they felt that if you needed them, you'd buy an attachment.
I'll agree that the lack of viewfinder might seem like a compelling argument not to call this a professional or semi-professional camera, but the fact is that viewfinders are just a common preference among photographers. Who's to say that in a year or two professional photographers won't want to see any effects or changes that they make in real time on their LCD screen rather than their archaic viewfinder?
Exactly. It's not an SLR there is no mirror or pentaprism, thats partly how they are able to shrink the body size.
Agreed, it really isn't a DSLR in any way, shape, or form. The only part of DSLR it meets is "Digital", but it's not a Single Lens Reflex camera.
If you're going to compare it to any "classic" camera format, it's clearly much more comparable to a rangefinder in terms of form-factor, although it's not one of those, either.
It should be called exactly what it is - an interchangeable-lens Point & Shoot. Sensor size has no bearing on what we call the thing, Sigma's DP-series have APS-C sensors, same as Nikon DX, and manual controls, but they're solidly in the P&S category.
Point and Shoot
adj.
"Of, relating to, or being a camera that adjusts settings such as focus and exposure automatically."
Sure you could use this camera in that way. But then so could you with most modern dSLRs. And this camera does offer full manual controls as well. In fact it seems to outclass many entry level dSLRs in this area (eg. two command dials, quick access to ISO/WB/Shooting Mode/AF). Plus it has the bigger sensor AND interchangeable lenses.
"No inherent compromises"? Is that a joke?
No mirror means no dedicated autofocus sensor, which means painfully slow and often inaccurate autofocus. Panasonic had a good solution to this, Olympus does not. No mirror also means no dedicated matrix metering system, which leads to questionable auto-exposure. With a DSLR, I can press the shutter in very low light, and I'd be fairly sure to get accurate focus instantaneously, with good exposure at that. Try that with the Olympus.
The attachment is a separate entity, and is in no way TTL (through the lens). You're only getting framing help and nothing else, and you'd have to buy a different attachment for each lens you use (if they ever make any more). With a real DSLR, you get framing, pic info, DOF, focus confirmation/info, and battery life. To make comments like this means that you've never really used a DSLR. An LCD is nice, but for many, it's not enough by a long shot. Even for the common Joe, he'll find that it's lacking when he's taking pics on a sunny day.
This is not to mention the many other compromises attributed to this camera/format. It's the middle ground between DSLRs and P&S, but to say that it's essentially a DSLR is a BIG mistake. You could say a P&S is essentially a DSLR, too, then. Yes, you can change lenses on the Olympus, but if you go beyond the "pancake" and some smaller lens, you're throwing away the portability advantage, which leaves you with a very limited selection indeed.
It's a nice camera, but far from perfect, and very far from actually being a DSLR.