Dawid,
You are very right about your observations that the (LCD instead of
viewfinder of the) E-P2 comes nowhere close to the quality and feel of the
OM's and it's lenses. My experience is the same. This even goes for the E-1
and E-3 and also for some other brands DSLR's from friends I handled. If you
only want to continue to experience the feel of the OM's just stick with
them and know for sure you are a film-guy
But then I think there are also some advantages in shooting digital, but it
also requires a different approach to taking photo's. In my experience,
shooting digital is more casual and I make a lot more clicks than I used to.
The keepers ratio is a lot lower, but in the end I end up with at least as
many keepers as before, I actually think more. It took quite some time
however to get used to this new kind of photography and even now after 5
years I sometimes miss the way I worked with my OM's. With my OM-2n I knew
when I had pushed the trigger that I had a special shot and was right about
90% of the time. With the E-1 and E-3 I am not sure immediately after
pushing the trigger, but I get certainty after checking the preview. As sais
just another way to photograph which I had to get used to. Of course, as
always, YMMV.
Wiliam
-----Original Message-----
From: Dawid Loubser [mailto:dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: dinsdag 31 augustus 2010 9:16
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: [OM] So I finally tried an E-P2...
I have been holding out for a while. I have been secretly hoping that
Olympus has been
refining this camera (the concept of which is very appealing). I was
wondering whether this
might be the digital system for me.
What a disappointment! The shocking light-as-a-feather plastic build
quality was actually
not the worst. Nor was that ridiculous all-plastic extending kit lens
with the flimsy switches.
No - the worst of it all was that electronic viewfinder. I had high
hopes - after reading some
reviews - that this viewfinder (which could - after all - be made as
large as they could have wished,
unconstrained by the need for glass prisms, etc) could be something
special. Perhaps in low light even.
Instead, one is presented by a low-resolution, "chunky", dimensionless
image ridden with electronic
noise. In no light whatsoever (I tried it in bright or in dark light)
does this viewfinder even closely
compare to an OM-1 or OM-3Ti viewfinder, in fact, I was simply
disgusted. I politely handed back the
camera to the shop that let me try it out, safe in the knowledge that
I would never, ever even consider
buying that little plastic contrivance as a tool for photography. Yes,
the resulting image can be quite
good.
But oh my, what a nasty experience it must be making those images (I
only made a couple of silly test shots).
Perhaps I have simply been spoiled by the responsiveness, clarity,
"extension-of-one's-hand" that an OM body
offers. Or the small size, and the build quality of the lenses. But
I'm glad this is settled now _ I always
wondered whether I'd like M4/3 for day-to-day usage.
Hell no.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
Geen virus gevonden in het binnenkomende-bericht.
Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com
Versie: 9.0.851 / Virusdatabase: 271.1.1/3092 - datum van uitgifte: 08/30/10
20:34:00
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|