# Olympus E-P1 classic rangefinder  Micro Four Thirds: it's a beaut!



## editor (Jun 15, 2009)

Now this I want. It looks fantastic. 







http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/15/leaked-olympus-ep-1-micro-four-thirds-compact-has-us-hot-bother/


----------



## Paul Russell (Jun 15, 2009)

editor said:


> Now this I want. It looks fantastic.



Looks excellent. And it comes in black. Edit: or maybe it doesn't!


----------



## Refused as fuck (Jun 15, 2009)

Want.


----------



## editor (Jun 15, 2009)

I'm guessing that there still won't be any exposure information in the viewfinder (it looks like a removable job stuck on the hotshoe) which is the one thing I really, really want.


----------



## Idaho (Jun 15, 2009)

So is this just a very good compact camera - or is it something else. You explained rangefinders to me once Mr Editor, but the knowledge has decayed in my feeble mind.

How much is it likely to be?

I wouldn't normally ask, but I am about to stump up for the Lumix LX3 - and with all such large purchases I am convinced that I will buy jus in time to see my purchase superceeded.


----------



## editor (Jun 15, 2009)

It has a much bigger sensor than the LX3 so will provide better quality images (particularly in low light), but that's not to say that the LX3 isn't a superb camera capable of taking very high quality images. The Olympus is almost certainly going to cost a whole load  more then the LX3. I'd still recommend the Lumix.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2009)

editor said:


> I'm guessing that there still won't be any exposure information in the viewfinder (it looks like a removable job stuck on the hotshoe) which is the one thing I really, really want.



Besides being fucked off that they're calling it either a "rangefinder" or a "_homage_ to rangefinders", there isn't a rangefinder on the camera, not even, as you remarked, a *viewfinder*, ffs!

Apart from that, it's a lovely-looking piece of kit with some very good features, especially the interchangeable lenses..


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jun 15, 2009)

Hmm if only that camera turns out to be affordable I will be most interested.  I pray to the tooth fairy that at some point they bring out a wide angle zoom lens to go with it.

If they play their pricing cards right they might put a few top of the range compacts out of the market especially if it is highly specified in the usual way that Olympus digital cameras are.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 15, 2009)

editor said:


> Now this I want. It looks fantastic.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


'direct linking prohibited' - need a new image


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jun 15, 2009)

Cor, it's very sexy. I actually quite like the silver version, and I never like silver versions of anything.

However, I barely use my GR-D, so I doubt I'd use this. Best just stick to my SX-70.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Jun 15, 2009)

Vintage Paw said:


> Cor, it's very sexy. I actually quite like the silver version, and I never like silver versions of anything.
> 
> However, I barely use my GR-D, so I doubt I'd use this. Best just stick to my SX-70.


 
Buy it for me?
 I'll let you look at it whenever you want.

*takes shirt off*


----------



## editor (Jun 15, 2009)

Vintage Paw said:


> Cor, it's very sexy. I actually quite like the silver version, and I never like silver versions of anything.
> 
> However, I barely use my GR-D, so I doubt I'd use this. Best just stick to my SX-70.


It's a bit different to the GRD as it has interchangeable lens though.

*image link fixed


----------



## ethel (Jun 15, 2009)

i want. i have no money. boo.


----------



## Paul Russell (Jun 15, 2009)

Assuming that the autofocus is fairly nippy (or manual focus is easy to set), this could well be the digital camera I've been waiting for since, erm, they started making digital cameras...

The only dodgy thing I can see is the apparent lack of any decent dials to change aperture, etc.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jun 15, 2009)

The other Engadget link shows the top of the camera.  There is a dial that can be set to Auto Program, Aperture priority and Shutter priority.  This must mean that elsewhere are other controls that provide these functions.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/07/olympus-e-p1-micro-four-thirds-shooter-leaked/


----------



## Paul Russell (Jun 15, 2009)

Hocus Eye. said:


> The other Engadget link shows the top of the camera.  There is a dial that can be set to Auto Program, Aperture priority and Shutter priority.  This must mean that elsewhere are other controls that provide these functions.



Yes, fair point -- I guess that black plastic wheel that you can see from the top view is how you change aperture, etc.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 15, 2009)

more pics

http://dcdv.zol.com.cn/137/1373538.html

They're really going for the retro look.






I'm trying to work out the controls. As observed earlier, the black wheel looks tied to the shooting mode dial on top. Roll wheel on the rear right looks a plausible candidate for aperture/shutter speed in combo with the function key?


----------



## editor (Jun 15, 2009)

cybertect said:


> more pics
> 
> http://dcdv.zol.com.cn/137/1373538.html
> 
> They're really going for the retro look.


Mmmm... that reminds me of my Dad's Voigtlander case.


----------



## editor (Jun 15, 2009)

Looking at the specs in Chinese(!), it's got HD video, ISO 200-3200, dimensions 120 x 70 x 35, 4023 x 3024 pixel images. http://dcdv.zol.com.cn/137/1373593.html


----------



## cybertect (Jun 15, 2009)

editor said:


> Mmmm... that reminds me of my Dad's Voigtlander case.



Nor a million miles from my Mamiya rangefinder






(and hundreds of other 1960s cameras )

e2a: the $900+ price tag being bandied about is worrying, though. Especially with the way that dollars usually get translated into pounds


----------



## lobster (Jun 16, 2009)

warehouse express have them on order .


----------



## Idaho (Jun 16, 2009)

£700 is fairly pricey. I wonder if this camera will open up a market that will see all non-four thirds as obsolete... Perhaps in 6 months time it will drop to £550ish.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 16, 2009)

DP Review have published a hands-on preview

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympusep1

e2a: want


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2009)

Wow. It's the same size as the legendary Olympus Pen! OMG - and it can use old OM mount manual focus lenses - oh yes! 








> There's no doubting this is a handsome little beast, and the choice of materials, sleek, simple lines and lack of unnecessary ornamentation give it the same 'real camera' appeal that makes otherwise rational photographers lust after the similarly timeless Leica M8. The E-P1 is one of the most attractive digital cameras we've ever seen, and we can imagine there will be a lot of people looking to justify buying one even if they have little or no real need for one. The 'pride of ownership' factor is going to be very strong with this one.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 16, 2009)

another extensive first-look review

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e_p1-review


----------



## Paul Russell (Jun 16, 2009)

cybertect said:


> Nor a million miles from my Mamiya rangefinder
> 
> 
> (and hundreds of other 1960s cameras )



My first thought was Contax G2!

Edit:

The main worrying thing has been a couple of mentions of the autofocus speed, e.g. dpreview

"the samples we've tried have very slow focus in anything but perfect light"

OK, these are not the final cameras, but it doesn't seem to tally with Olympus's claim of 3 fps...

Also, from www.dcresource.com

"Manual focus allows you to set the focus distance yourself, though that can be difficult, since there are no distance markings on the lens, nor are any displayed on the LCD."

Hmm...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 16, 2009)

So what focal length is a Leica-M fit 35 going to be on this little chap?


----------



## cybertect (Jun 16, 2009)

70mm equivalent field of view.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 17, 2009)

cybertect said:


> 70mm equivalent field of view.



Oh OK. That'd go well with the 17/2.8 lens on the cheaper kit then. Nice ...

Edited to add: 

Thinking about it some more, although it's going to be giving you the field of view of a 70mm, an M-fit 35mm is still going to be 35mm as far as depth of field goes, right? So you should be able to stick it at f8, focus it at about 6' and have a great deal of leeway regarding focussing?


----------



## mincepie (Jun 17, 2009)

"Want" also.
Suspect that given time other more-refined models will come out that use the micro 4/3rds system too.

Pity about the price. But then the whole camera-pricing thing is screwed up at the mo for Britains. £700 was £550 two years back. (give or take a bit)


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jun 18, 2009)

I was most interested in this camera until I saw the price.  I think that Olympus have seriously blundered here.  The maximum they should have priced it at was £400.  There are dSLRs at less than that.  Olympus itself is selling the E620 with 14- 42 lens kit at £596.  Anyone who already has a D420 upwards who is looking to have a pocket camera to go with it would be better advised to go with the 25mm pancake lens (expensive yes, but small) to put on their existing camera.  I bought my E420 with that lens and have had no problems getting it into my jacket pocket.  My Ricoh R5 has had a lot less use since I got the E420.

I might get an E620 once they are available secondhand.  I have a 50mm (100mm equivalent) f/2 portrait /macro Olympus lens which is the dog's dangly bits and two such small dSLR cameras carried out and about each with a different lens would be no great difficulty.  I have an adaptor for the OM lenses and a long OM zoom that I haven't used since last summer.

Sorry Olympus, I am staying with my Ricoh until you get your pricing sorted.


----------



## editor (Jun 18, 2009)

E-P1 video recording examples here: http://www.photographyblog.com/articles/olympus_e-p1_videos/


----------



## editor (Jun 19, 2009)

The camera goes on sale in Jessops next Thursday (25th).
http://www.photographyblog.com/news/olympus_pen_ep-1_to_hit_shelves_next_week/


----------



## Piers Gibbon (Jun 25, 2009)

i like the fact that it can take old olympus om lenses...simply because my dad has a few of those

hmm could be an amazing prezzie to give him..but sheesh..the price!

my lx3 is still rocking my world hugely...


----------



## Refused as fuck (Jun 25, 2009)

Leave your sexual deviances out of this thread, please.


----------



## editor (Jun 25, 2009)

Refused as fuck said:


> Leave your sexual deviances out of this thread, please.


Hi. This a forum for discussing cameras.


----------



## Paul Russell (Jun 25, 2009)

Oh, it's the launch thing tonight featuring David Bailey (I know: who's he?) isn't it?


----------



## Biddlybee (Jun 25, 2009)

cybertect said:


> Nor a million miles from my Mamiya rangefinder
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I love that case


----------



## editor (Jun 25, 2009)

I'm thinking that it's a little bit bigger than I imagine it to be, but_ damn_ those retro lines are seductive! Good to see that they've wheeled Bailey out for the launch - he's been linked with Olympus since the days of the mighty OM1.

I'd love a digital version of the Olympus XA, mind.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Jun 25, 2009)

editor said:


> Hi. This a forum for discussing cameras.


 Hello. I was making a joke about his camera getting his rocks off.


----------



## George & Bill (Jun 25, 2009)

> we're talking about a DSLR-sized sensor stuffed inside that retro compact body



Except, no - the camera has a 2x crop factor, meaning the sensor's a fair bit smaller than on most dslrs, which have a 1.5 or 1.6 crop factor. 

Meaning that the rangefinder has gone from being basically equal to the slr in the days of film (because they were both 35mm), to its very clear inferior at the present stage of digital development.

Don't get me wrong - it looks nice, and I would love to get my hands on one. But when you compare it to what you can get from a dslr for the same money, it does look like another piece of jewellery for people who can afford such things.

Most serious photographers will wait for rangefinders that genuinely do have dslr-sized sensors - that'll be the point at which to get excited.


----------



## winjer (Jun 25, 2009)

slowjoe said:


> But when you compare it to what you can get from a dslr for the same money, it does look like another piece of jewellery for people who can afford such things.


How about comparing the output instead of the specifications?



> Most serious photographers will wait for rangefinders that genuinely do have dslr-sized sensors - that'll be the point at which to get excited.


Keep up, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M8


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jun 25, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> ...
> 
> Also, from www.dcresource.com
> 
> ...



That's a huge omission. Out of my list on that point alone. Never use autofocus, so have no interest in speed of that, but blimey! How can you leave out something so important on a camera harking all retro?


----------



## stowpirate (Jun 25, 2009)

Or better still get a real rangefinder camera - or not


----------



## winjer (Jun 25, 2009)

Unlike that one?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 25, 2009)

stowpirate said:


> Or better still get a real rangefinder camera



That be a *view*finder camera.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jun 25, 2009)

Not only is that camera above not a rangefinder camera but nor is the E-P1 which is the topic of this thread.  People are using the term 'rangefinder' as shorthand for a small compact that is not an SLR.  This must be very confusing to anyone who doesn't understand what is going on.


----------



## stowpirate (Jun 25, 2009)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Not only is that camera above not a rangefinder camera but nor is the E-P1 which is the topic of this thread.  People are using the term 'rangefinder' as shorthand for a small compact that is not an SLR.  This must be very confusing to anyone who doesn't understand what is going on.



It might as well be referring to the camera above as it has nothing at all in common with a rangefinder camera. Digital compact equals rangefinder has got to be some form of joke?  The M8, RD-1 you can manually focus as you can with a DSLR.    A point and shoot guessamatic Leica 1 it maybe


----------



## George & Bill (Jun 25, 2009)

winjer said:


> How about comparing the output instead of the specifications?



You wanna punt that the output will be as good as what's available from comparably-priced (or ever much cheaper) 1.5 crop dslrs? Be my guest. Even if it is, you're still buying into a system that by dint of the size of the sensor (which can't be changed from one model to the next if you want to keep your lenses), will always keep the boffins pedalling twice as hard just in the hope of keeping up. 




> Keep up, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_M8



35mm rangefinders could/can be had for a comparable cost to 35mm slrs. Is the digital M8 comparable to dslrs of the same, or even half the price? Er, no.


----------



## winjer (Jun 25, 2009)

slowjoe said:


> You wanna punt that the output will be as good as what's available from comparably-priced (or ever much cheaper) 1.5 crop dslrs? Be my guest.


You're still just comparing specifications, the output will depend on the camera, the lenses and most importantly the photographer, so a smaller camera will sometimes be at an advantage, as with 35mm vs 120 etc.



> 35mm rangefinders could/can be had for a comparable cost to 35mm slrs. Is the digital M8 comparable to dslrs of the same, or even half the price? Er, no.


Apples/oranges.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 25, 2009)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Not only is that camera above not a rangefinder camera but nor is the E-P1 which is the topic of this thread.  People are using the term 'rangefinder' as shorthand for a small compact that is not an SLR.  This must be very confusing to anyone who doesn't understand what is going on.



I mentioned this way back in the thread.


----------



## George & Bill (Jun 25, 2009)

winjer said:


> You're still just comparing specifications, the output will depend on the camera, the lenses and most importantly the photographer, so a smaller camera will sometimes be at an advantage, as with 35mm vs 120 etc.



OK so you just don't know what you're talking about. The size of the sensor has an inherent effect on the camera's ability to gather light. There are no two ways about that. 

The ability of the photographer has got nothing to do with how good the camera is, which is what this thread is about.



> Apples/oranges.



Any more meaningless catchphrases you'd like to share?


----------



## stowpirate (Jun 25, 2009)

R-D1xG should be half the price of an M8 

http://theonlinephotographer.typepa...009/02/welcome-news-for-rangefinder-fans.html

http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=NewsDesk_Internal&article_num=022709-1

Now that is a real camera


----------



## winjer (Jun 25, 2009)

slowjoe said:


> The ability of the photographer has got nothing to do with how good the camera is, which is what this thread is about.


You're not talking about how 'good' the camera is, only how its sensor compares to another sensor, which is pointless. You're also ignoring the difference in lens design.

I have to assume the only reason you posted at all was to have a go anyone who buys an E-P1 for not being a 'serious' photographer. I can't imagine why.


----------



## George & Bill (Jun 26, 2009)

winjer said:


> You're not talking about how 'good' the camera is, only how its sensor compares to another sensor, which is pointless. You're also ignoring the difference in lens design.
> 
> I have to assume the only reason you posted at all was to have a go anyone who buys an E-P1 for not being a 'serious' photographer. I can't imagine why.



It should be clear that the reason I posted was that the article linked to in the OP claimed that the E-P1 has a "DSLR-sized sensor" - which is not the case. Like it or not, the size of the sensor has an innate and inescapable effect on the image quality that a camera is capable of achieving. 

There may be lots of things to recommend this camera, and there's nothing to suggest I want to have a go at anyone who may buy one. My point is not that it's a bad camera, but that the system will not be comparable to dslr systems as 35mm rangefinders have been comparable to 35mm slrs. It's a shame you can't grasp this.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jun 26, 2009)

Refused as fuck said:


> Buy it for me?
> I'll let you lick me whenever you want.
> 
> *takes shirt off*



I would consider this ...


----------



## Paul Russell (Jun 30, 2009)

Apparently, Bailey's first words at the launch were "Wow, it's got a viewfinder" and "Can't I have it in black?" !


----------



## cybertect (Jun 30, 2009)

slowjoe said:


> It should be clear that the reason I posted was that the article linked to in the OP claimed that the E-P1 has a "DSLR-sized sensor" - which is not the case.



Er, there's no rule that it has to be 35mm full frame, or even APS-C to qualify, is there?

The EP-1 has the same size sensor that Olympus, Panasonic and Leica use in their 4/3 DSLRs. They are single lens reflex bodies (mirror, prism, viewfinder, etc.) with a digital sensor. Sounds like a DSLR-sized sensor to me. 

It's only 20% smaller by area than the Foveon used in Sigma's SD15 DSLR (only 0.8 mm shorter, most of that is made up in the length difference between 3:2 and 4:3 aspect ratios) and only 30% smaller than Canon's APS-C sensors.

In comparison, the 4/3 sensor is four times bigger than the 1/1.7" sensor used in better quality compacts like the Canon G10 and ten times bigger than the 1/2.5" sensors used in lower end digicams.


----------



## George & Bill (Jul 9, 2009)

cybertect said:


> Er, there's no rule that it has to be 35mm full frame, or even APS-C to qualify, is there?
> 
> The EP-1 has the same size sensor that Olympus, Panasonic and Leica use in their 4/3 DSLRs. They are single lens reflex bodies (mirror, prism, viewfinder, etc.) with a digital sensor. Sounds like a DSLR-sized sensor to me.
> 
> ...



I wasn't aware that Olympus used such small sensors on their DSLRs - but fair point, in that case. Doesn't make the E-P1 any better, of course - rather, it shows why Canon and Nikon have the DSLR market sewn up. Nor does it alter the fact that the EP-1 is not a camera, like so many film rangefinders were, that offers the same amount of sensitive material as the best (or even the second-best) contemporary SLRs.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Jul 9, 2009)

Saw it in the shop window and stood there gawping with lust for about half an hour. The price-tag made me wet myself, though.


----------



## editor (Jul 13, 2009)

Here's another glowing review (albeit with some caveats):


> Despite these short-comings, the Olympus EP-1 is still a very appealing and refreshingly different camera that does indeed combine the best features of compact and DSLR cameras. It's not a pocketable camera by any means, contrary to how Olympus are marketing it, but it is small and unobtrusive enough to carry over a shoulder without attracting too much attention. The EP-1 represents a significant upgrade for compact owners who don't want the bulk of a DSLR, and a great second camera for DSLR users who want something smaller without sacrificing image quality, ultimately satisfying the needs of both groups. Olympus have taken the bold step of creating a camera that fills a clear gap in the market, rather than just following the crowd, and the EP-1 certainly deserves all the success that it will surely get.
> http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/olympus_ep1_review/



*still wants


----------



## Paul Russell (Jul 13, 2009)

editor said:


> Here's another glowing review (albeit with some caveats):
> 
> 
> *still wants



Just about every review I've seen has mentioned the autofocus being a bit off the pace.

I did have a quick try of one with the kit lens, and after all the doom and gloom about the focusing, it seemed OK to me.

What seems to be a big mistake, at least to me, is that in manual focus there's no distance scale (if that's the right word) either on the lenses or on the LCD display. You can zoom in a lot to check the focus apparently, but a lot of people who would be using it for street shooting would just prefer to set it to 6 foot or whatever and f/8, or whatever under certain circumstances.


----------



## editor (Jul 13, 2009)

I used to love the manual focus scale on my old XA. Set it to 3m, aperture to f5.6 and street shooting was go!


----------



## editor (Jul 17, 2009)

Listing of reviews here:
Read - PhotographyBLOG
Read - DigiCamReview
Read - photocrati
Read - PhotographyPress
Read - OutbackPhoto
Read - CNET
Read - Steves Digicams


----------



## editor (Jul 29, 2009)

Another rave review. I want this puppy!



> The E-P1 is one of those rare products in this mass-produced age that can provoke an emotional response in even the most jaded shooter, which is a tribute to the Olympus design team as much as a reflection of any pent-up desire for a new category to bridge the yawning gap between compact cameras and entry-level DSLRs.
> 
> It's easy to come up with a list of reasons not to buy one; the slow focus, the dime-store screen, the lack of built-in flash, the paucity of Micro Four Thirds lenses, the unimpressive 'iAuto' mode, not to mention the fact that Panasonic could - and probably will - produce something that fixes half these problems at some point by making a compact version of the GH1.
> 
> ...


----------



## lobster (Jul 29, 2009)

editor said:


> Another rave review. I want this puppy!




I guess my other thread "Is it time to upgrade your camera? Good analysis here." has not changed your mind


----------

