Joel,
Thanks very much for your insight. I normally focus MF lenses wide open,
then stop down without taking the camera away from my eye. I understand
that the E-1 finder is larger and brighter than the 510, but was curious
about the transparency of the screen. The 510 finder is virtually
transparent, so there is little similarity to the screens that I used with
Exacta and other SLR cameras. This makes it difficult to get an exact
focus, and does nothing to provide a hint of the DOF available in the final
image. Does the E-1 finder provide any improvement in this area?
In your reply, as well as in a post from Ken, both of you make reference to
the lower pixel count of the E-1 and its impact on the images. Most of my
images go to the web or to family members, and large prints don't enter my
consideration. I suspect that 5MP would suffice for any work that I would
attempt.
Again, I guess my basic question is this: Is size the main advantage of the
E-1 finder over the E-510, or are there other quality differences?
TIA
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Wilcox" <jfwilcox@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 7:21 AM
Subject: Re: [OM] Question for E-1 Users
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Jim Nichols <jhnichols@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> I have an E-510 which I use with my ZD 14-54 AF lens and several Leica-R
>> and Pentax manual focus lenses. From what I have read, the finder and
>> screen of the E-1 would give me better focusing ability and a more
>> realistic DOF rendition when using the MF lenses than I am currently
>> getting with the E-510. Is this correct? Does the E-1 screen more closely
>> resemble a frosted screen than the transparent screen of the E-510?
>>
>> I have been considering the acquisition of an E-1, but have never had the
>> opportunity to examine one. Hence the questions above.
>
> Jim,
> I'm slow getting to list activity this weekend but wanted to add my
> vote. I have E-1, 330, 410, and E-3. The E-1 and E-3 work pretty
> well with MF lenses, the faster the lens the better. MF lenses are
> fine with Live View, but I find it much more difficult to do manual
> focusing through the VF with the non-single digit E's. My experience
> more or less corroborates Piers's, I think. I purchased an ME-1 when
> I got the 330, thinking it would improve the experience (since it
> provides 1.2x magnification). I won't bother getting one for the 410
> because the 410 is fine for my purposes as it is.
>
> Comparison of an E viewfinder to any full-frame film camera,
> especially one as big and bright as an OM, is going to produce
> disappointment. I think they're really hard to compare because they
> are made to do different things. In their milieu, I like all of the
> E-system viewfinders. So take my comments under advisement. The
> digital viewfinders don't interfere with what I want to do with the
> cameras, so I tend to be less concerned that they aren't equal to film
> or possibly FF digital cameras. I can't say that I have noticed any
> actual difference between the screens in any of these cameras. Their
> size is different and provides the one advantage that the E-1 has over
> all others but the E-3.
>
> The shortcomings you are apt to find with the E-1 are the size of the
> LCD (small and only allows 4x enlargement during replay) and possibly
> a want of pixels. I don't think you shoot a lot of sports? It is
> hard to shoot continuously at a quality mode higher than HQ because
> the buffer is slow to write to the card. But the E-1 is a great
> camera with a great feel, excellent color, and wonderfully smooth and
> quiet shutter. The E system cameras jumped quite a bit ahead with
> noise "improvement" with the 330, 410, 510. I don't mind the noise of
> the E-1 at ISO 400 or even 800, but tastes differ. Also, if critical
> focus with a MF lens is important, I would find it better to stay with
> a camera that has LV. With a reasonably fast lens, wide-open or
> closed maybe a stop, the E-1 VF works pretty well, and of course with
> hyperfocal distance focusing it's fine too, but you can already do
> that with the 510.
>
> Joel W.
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|