How would you change Olympus' E-PL1?
By Darren Murph 
posted April 9th 2010 11:21PM
posted April 9th 2010 11:21PM
posted April 9th 2010 11:21PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
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.
I'm still not sure of how these Micro Four Thirds function. Anyone want to elaborate on their functionality and how good it is compared to an actual DSLR?
@flameswater
ah... have you heard of "google"?
@flameswater I want one because they combine the portability of a point and shoot with a sensor that is almost as large as one in a dslr. Image quality is not as great as a dslr, but still multiple times better than a point and shoot.
@jayayess1190 ture.
@pretol asshole...
@pretol Yea, no reason to be mean. Of course there's always google, but i wanted a user's point of view from somewhere I can trust.
@flameswater Basic idea: take a DSLR, eliminate the optical viewfinder and therefore the mirror box, give it a slightly smaller sensor (but still bigger than a point and shoot), and create a custom line of small interchangeable lenses for it. Boom, high quality, portable, and versatile. Or at least in theory; the format is still young but IMHO it holds a lot of promise.
Micro four thirds refers to a specific standard developed by Olympus & Panasonic. A more general term for the above system might be EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens camera).
@gabedamien Hmm...doesn't sound like a bad idea. Now, if they could make the same lenses interchangeable between DSLRs and these "EVIL"s then it might be worth the money. But for now, I'm content with my DSLR regardless of size and portability :)
@flameswater You can use Four Thirds lenses on MFT cameras with an adapter.
@flameswater I have the PEN 1 and a adapter which I use DSLR lenses all the time and its great. The physical shutter on these really tops off the bar and makes the micro four thirds comparative to DSLRS.
@ch4s3r "The physical shutter on these really tops off the bar and makes the micro four thirds comparative to DSLRS."
What do you mean here? Physical shutter on what?
@ch4s3r Wow, there is so much I don't know about these cameras. Would you say that the MFTs are equal in quality to entry-level DSLRs?
@flameswater IMO, no. I have an entry level Nikon DSLR and it's much more user friendly than my friends' PEN 1. Maybe it's traditionalism (I used to own a nikon SLR before the whole digital shabang came around) but I think mirrored cameras still give the best images allround.
@flameswater I was planning to buy the Olympus E-PL1 next year, when I will be drafted to the army (I live in Israel). I want to buy it because my DSLR is to heavy and big to carry. I will make it as light as possible, really resistant and durable so it wont break.
@flameswater
That's the rub they don't do anything better than a dslr, and don't fit in pocket. For my money there are 2 choices:
1) cut the price in half
2) make it pocketable
If you can't do 1 of these, then S90(et al) or entry dslr.
@etwashoo2 It doesn't fit in a pocket but if you add up lenses they save you alot of space and weight. Of course it will cost you but photography isn't cheap bro.
@Atkins I was stunned too about it acctally having a shutter, it does not flip because of space constraints but jumps infront of the sensor at the start and end of a exposer.
@flameswater Absoluty, why anyone would choose a Rebel DSLR over m43ds is confusing to me at least.
@ch4s3r I think you have shutters confused with mirrors.
@ch4s3r Because the rebel is a very good camera, with a assortment of very high quality lens available to it, and more accessories then the amateur photographer would ever need.
@etwashoo2 S90 and entry level DSLR don't meet your 2 requirements. That don't make no sense.
The E-PL1 produces better JPG than the S90, and better than most entry level DSLR. For most new DSLR buyers, RAW is rarely touched and a PEN is a good choice.
@Atkins EVIL cameras do have a shutter, unlike point-and-shoots. They just don't have a MIRROR. The mirror assembly (the thing that flips down to provide optical view and flips up to redirect light to the sensor) is a completely separate component from a shutter (the thing that opens to reveal the sensor for a certain duration of time and closes to finish the exposure). P&S cameras, on the other hand, do not even have a shutter; they use an inferior "electronic shutter" method whereby the sensor is selectively powered. I won't go into why electronic shutters are currently still worse than physical shutters.
@etwashoo2 It is a glass half full / half empty zone. No, they are not really better than DSLRs. No, they are not pocketable. But in my own case, I would LOVE a smallER camera (that fits in my everyday shoulder bag, for instance) with a couple size-optimized lenses (fast pancake, and maybe a collapsing telephoto) which takes better pics in RAW and low light than a point-and-shoot. It makes for a great stealth / travel / everywhere role, which even the smallest DSLR doesn't occupy and the biggest point-and-shoot feels limited in.
@gabedamien EVIL huh? doesn't sound that good.
@gabedamien Another view it : The GXR. A system that uses interchangeable camera units that come sealed complete with sensor, lens and processing engine. Basically you're buying a finely tuned lens, sensor and processing engine calibrated to the highest optical performance - you could say a new camera every time you buy the camera unit. The overall performance of any interchangeable system is defined by the lens and the sensor alignment. If you attach generic or third party lenses to the body as with the Micro Four Thirds particularly if these are film lenses not designed for digital sensors the resulting image will suffer.
The GXR body will be the best at anything from a high speed compact super zoom (Panasonic TZ series) to an APS-C compact with a fast prime lens (Sigma DP2 or Leica X1) simply by swapping camera units. Specialist applications can be extended to a printer unit, a compact projector, or high capacity storage device to name a few, in otherwords it could stop being a camera completely. The benefits this brings over Micro Four Thirds or SLR designs are : portability, image quality (optimization of lens, sensor & processing engine) and expandability- totally sealed unit also means no dust!
@flameswater They are just like DSLRs (from Olympus atleast) except they have removed the mirror box and optical viewfinder and switched AF-system.
The smaller sensor of four-thirds found in these cameras and Olympus DSLRs make it possible to make smaller lenses, "get more zoom" on your tele-lenses and get more area in focus at a bigger aperture (more light/better performance in dark scenarios), the problem is that sometimes you WANT a smaller area in focus (for instance for portraits) and your lenses won't be as wide instead.
Beyond that you lose the instant view in the optical viewfinder but gain electric/computerized functionality in the viewfinder and in the case of the Olympus micro four-thirds as of now you get slower AF performance (The Panasonic ones are performing as entry level DSLRs even though they use contrast-detect focus.)
Focus speed and EVF resolution and such will of course become better over time.
So in the case of the Panasonic what you really lose is instant view in viewfinder and the wider DOF, you gain manual focus magnification in the viewfinder and the possibility to adapt almost any lens in the world to the system since the flange distance is shorter in these cameras than in the DSLRs, so it's possible to make adapters for most of them.
There's not much competition in this arena. Panasonic gh-1 is all I can think off, and it's pretty much the same camera. What wonnabe's are there?
@pretol While it is not MFT, Samsung's NX10 is a viable competitor.
@Atkins
The nx10 is a failcam. The image quality and controls are horrible...
@Avaron Never tried it, but from all the reviews I've read the IQ is on par with the Four Thirds and the ergonomics are very good.
@Avaron
What do you mean by Horrrrible?!!
Dpreview parses picture quality of NX-10 and says white balance and exposure metering and color are very good. The only lacking spec is the low light noise performance.
In acceptable light conditions it produces very decent photos on par with other entry levels like D3000, 1000D and Alpha 2XX.
@Atkins
@Atkins
It has a APS-C Sensor and is worse than m43 (epl1) at high iso.
And for the handling, well you cannot really adjust some things that are a given with standard dsrls nowadays. Not to mention that it really sucks with legacy glass. I still have some old but fantastic lenses that I couldn't use with it and when a 50mm 1.4f is like 30 bucks on ebay then thats a major drawback for me...
But let me list the cons from dpreview for you:
* Auto ISO will all too readily result in shaky photos
* Steep tone curve gives harsh transition to blown-out, white areas (as seen in Panasonic G series)
* Noise reduction in JPEGS can be destructive (especially in Smart Range mode)
* Several functions, including playback, unavailable for several seconds when shooting RAW
* EVF seems dull in comparison to excellent rear screen
* Lack of optional live view magnification makes manual focus of non-NX lenses impractical
* Continuous AF doesn't track and predict like most DSLRs will
* No real in-camera raw conversion option (it will only convert to some unusual presets)
* Little control over noise reduction (Only the additional NR at ISO 3200 is optional)
* Sensor cleaning isn't particularly effective
* Video mode suffers lag before recording starts, cuts off early and has pronounced rolling shutter
* Impossible to switch between images to check focus when magnified in playback mode
* Rear screen's perceptual resolution not quite as high as VGA branding would imply
@Atkins
It has a APS-C Sensor and is worse than m43 (epl1) at high iso.
And for the handling, well you cannot really adjust some things that are a given with standard dsrls nowadays. Not to mention that it really sucks with legacy glass. I still have some old but fantastic lenses that I couldn't use with it and when a 50mm 1.4f is like 30 bucks on ebay then thats a major drawback for me...
But let me list the cons from dpreview for you:
* Auto ISO will all too readily result in shaky photos
* Steep tone curve gives harsh transition to blown-out, white areas (as seen in Panasonic G series)
* Noise reduction in JPEGS can be destructive (especially in Smart Range mode)
* Several functions, including playback, unavailable for several seconds when shooting RAW
* EVF seems dull in comparison to excellent rear screen
* Lack of optional live view magnification makes manual focus of non-NX lenses impractical
* Continuous AF doesn't track and predict like most DSLRs will
* No real in-camera raw conversion option (it will only convert to some unusual presets)
* Little control over noise reduction (Only the additional NR at ISO 3200 is optional)
* Sensor cleaning isn't particularly effective
* Video mode suffers lag before recording starts, cuts off early and has pronounced rolling shutter
* Impossible to switch between images to check focus when magnified in playback mode
* Rear screen's perceptual resolution not quite as high as VGA branding would imply
@Atkins
It has a APS-C Sensor and is worse than m43 (epl1) at high iso.
And for the handling, well you cannot really adjust some things that are a given with standard dsrls nowadays. Not to mention that it really sucks with legacy glass. I still have some old but fantastic lenses that I couldn't use with it and when a 50mm 1.4f is like 30 bucks on ebay then thats a major drawback for me...
But let me list the cons from dpreview for you:
* Auto ISO will all too readily result in shaky photos
* Steep tone curve gives harsh transition to blown-out, white areas (as seen in Panasonic G series)
* Noise reduction in JPEGS can be destructive (especially in Smart Range mode)
* Several functions, including playback, unavailable for several seconds when shooting RAW
* EVF seems dull in comparison to excellent rear screen
* Lack of optional live view magnification makes manual focus of non-NX lenses impractical
* Continuous AF doesn't track and predict like most DSLRs will
* No real in-camera raw conversion option (it will only convert to some unusual presets)
* Little control over noise reduction (Only the additional NR at ISO 3200 is optional)
* Sensor cleaning isn't particularly effective
* Video mode suffers lag before recording starts, cuts off early and has pronounced rolling shutter
* Impossible to switch between images to check focus when magnified in playback mode
* Rear screen's perceptual resolution not quite as high as VGA branding would imply
@Atkins
@Atkins
It has a APS-C Sensor and is worse than m43 (epl1) at high iso.
And for the handling, well you cannot really adjust some things that are a given with standard dsrls nowadays. Not to mention that it really sucks with legacy glass. I still have some old but fantastic lenses that I couldn't use with it and when a 50mm 1.4f is like 30 bucks on ebay then thats a major drawback for me...
But let me list the cons from dpreview for you:
* Auto ISO will all too readily result in shaky photos
* Steep tone curve gives harsh transition to blown-out, white areas (as seen in Panasonic G series)
* Noise reduction in JPEGS can be destructive (especially in Smart Range mode)
* Several functions, including playback, unavailable for several seconds when shooting RAW
* EVF seems dull in comparison to excellent rear screen
* Lack of optional live view magnification makes manual focus of non-NX lenses impractical
* Continuous AF doesn't track and predict like most DSLRs will
* No real in-camera raw conversion option (it will only convert to some unusual presets)
* Little control over noise reduction (Only the additional NR at ISO 3200 is optional)
* Sensor cleaning isn't particularly effective
* Video mode suffers lag before recording starts, cuts off early and has pronounced rolling shutter
* Impossible to switch between images to check focus when magnified in playback mode
* Rear screen's perceptual resolution not quite as high as VGA branding would imply
@pretol Do you mean the GF1? GH1 is the larger m43 camera. Looks pretty good on paper though.
My choice would be to take the Panasonic GF1, as pretty much like for like, but looks a little more professional in my eyes.
One word: Kittens.
The magic formula - keep the specs and start lowering the price. They already seem to have gotten the gist of it anyway.
Larger lcd and faster auto focus. And add dials for changing things.
color options!
or include a wide angle lens!
@inertone There are two, and the wideangle lense is coming i think next month. Not fast, but wide enough
iPad.
@Broderbund
Win
Crysis too
Needs to be made smaller and lighter. I'm sure it is possible.
Add GPS for Geotagging.
I'd add live hdmi out, allowing an hdmi equipped screen to be used as a preview monitor. Also hdmi out would make it possible to capture the stream directly to disk with a device like Blackmagic-Design intensity.
Stereo microphone which, of course, is available on the E-P1 and E-P2. It will keep me from getting the PL1. Underrated feature, really.
@gong There IS the adaptor that you put on the hotshoe/accesory port. SEMA-1 i think is the model number
@gong I agree. What a stupid thing to leave off of the body & have to get an add-on for. Esp considering that camera's that cost half as much as this have onboard stereo with sound that blows the E-PL1 out of the water.
Want me to buy this? Dont leave off shit that should be included just to sell me a chunky add-on that I dont want.