On 11/12/2015 2:16 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
Do y'all realize that was November of 2003? Man, 12 years runs by fast.
Some of us are still using the E-1.
The one thing that DPR has done a poor job of through the years is
comparing the intangibles. Which is just about impossible.
:-) I have, on occasion, had difficulty doing more than a poor job on the
impossible, so I sympathize. :-)
Sure, the
camera had a few issues, as compared to others at the time, but the
strengths still created a compelling camera system that has stood up
better over time than the contemporary cameras of its time.
Compelling to some. I suspect a lot depends on what one photographs, and under what circumstances. I believe that, if I
were forced to use either an E-1 or the Canon 300D that I bought instead at the time, I would still choose the Canon.
At least for me, standing up better over time is irrelevant. Newer cameras do it, at least the "its" important to me,
much better than these older ones. And that's my bottom line, how well does it do what I want.
Another factor from that era, which I believe set back digital
photography for almost 10 years, is the mistaken assumption that CMOS
was superior to CCD because Canon happened to figure out how to make a
CMOS sensor with less apparent imaging noise than the CCD sensors of
the time. The narrative became all about sensor noise, and imaging
color as well as image malleability was ignored.
Us buyers and users are all different. It was about noise for me because noise was getting in the way of getting the
results I wanted. It was about color for you because you were shooting thousands of images of people a year, and skin
tone MATTERED. I have always shot far more images of things in nature and man made things where absolute color accuracy
isn't a big deal. There's no internal sense of what exact color these things are, and the original is never available
for comparison because the light is always changing. (And yes, your African violets may be the exception that tests the
rule. Are they available for an E-M5 II HR test?)
DPR directly contributed to this narrative, for which, they are entirely guilty
of
destroying photography companies as a result.
I wonder how much that may be true. I have only one data point, me. I chose (and choose) knowing the strengths and
weaknesses of the options, not only on the basis of reviews opinions. I've always done a LOT of comparison of images in
PS, what I can and can't do with them and what I like and don't like about them, before making camera choices. Just
'cause my choices and yours don't always agree doesn't make the people who made such comparisons relatively easy guilty
of anything bad.
An example: I read lots of cant about how the Fuji X cameras, with their slightly larger sensors, have better IQ than
µ4/3 cameras. So I downloaded Raw samples from DPR and IR of their studio sample subjects. And I just couldn't find any
consistent advantage for either. There were specific parts of each subject where one or the other was, perhaps, subtly
better at 100%, but just no overall winner. So I quit worrying.
It has only been in the
last two years that CMOS sensors have finally attained the IQ
comparative to what CCD had in 2013. A couple of years ago, Phil even
admitted to it in some oblique way.
For the E-1, the things that DPR got right in the review was the
horrid AF performance,
That was the clincher for me, but based on side by side comparison of actual cameras, not only reviews. AF with the
first longer zoom of the time (40-150?) would have simply driven me round the bend in practical use.
spotty AWB,
Who cares? I leave WB on daylight for anything but indoor subjects lit by clearly incandescent or fluorescent light.
Nowadays, with all the sorts of illuminants, my WhiBal card gets more use.
poor high-ISO noise control and lackluster read-write speeds.
Yup, and Yup. One thing it came down to was that I could get usable shots out in the field with the 300D that I couldn't
with an E-1. Studio, flash, event, etc. are things I don't do.
The LCD monitor is horrid
Crappier than the 300D? I just don't remember, but the 300D sure looks tiny,
low rez and poor color now. :-)
and the menu system was a sign of insanity to come.
Wasn't a factor for me. And I get along pretty well with the current Oly menus.
Actually better than the Pannys I have.
Where DPR got things REALLY wrong, was in the camera size and weight.
A smaller sensor did not mean smaller cameras. A smaller sensor
allowed the camera to be right-sized.
And here, we come to figurative fisticuffs. ;-) Right-sized is clearly different for different people. It's an endless
debate that no one can win. The 5D was good enough to satisfy me for five years, and might have gone on, were it not for
the advent of new tech. But it was never right-sized for me. I just put up with the size and weight as evils necessary
to do what I wanted photographically.
Just now, Ming Chen went off on mirrorless camera makers for their sins. One of his things was that the cameras are
often too small and/or have grips that are too small. He much prefers the E-M1 to the E-M5s. I HATE, HATE, HATE, huge,
deep grips like that. As with the 5D, I might put up with such a grip for other virtues, but never as first choice. (I
wear large size gloves, so it ain't only hand size.)
The lenses, while slow in AF, are still among the best made.
Like the camera at home on the shelf, the camera that doesn't focus doesn't get the shot. This shot just doesn't happen
with an E-1.
<http://galleries.moosemystic.net/MooseFoto/index.php?gallery=California/Marin%2C_Sonoma%2C_Mendocino_Coast/Bodega_Bay&image=CRW_1183croofm.jpg>
And I don't care if its skins tone is slightly off. :-)
Three lenses took you from 8mm to 200mm and were show-stopper in quality.
Can't be 8 mm, 7-14 or 9-18, or were you averaging? :-) Same choices on the short end with µ4/3, but 300 mm on the long
end. And the IBIS on the E-M5 II ---, swoon ...
The CCD sensor with mixture of Kodak
and Olympus dithering magic creates an imaging quality that far
exceeds the pixel count. My wife will still pick out the E-1 pictures
in a wedding shoot where all three cameras are being used. The camera
just does something special for human skin.
I believe you, and just don't care. I'd guess images with human skin in them
are under 1% of my shots.
DPR also got wrong the criticism on the image review. It is a little
complex to figure out, but it is actually a brilliant design. DPR also
got wrong the level of importance of the self-cleaning sensor.
BIG yes! Back with Oly once they got competitive again with µ4/3, I sure don't
miss hand cleaning sensors.
They
eventually came around, but not soon enough. DPR didn't have a clue
how nearly indestructible the camera is either.
How would they?
I know, first hand, just how solid the E-1 is.
I have many things in my life, and more that I have discarded, that are/were still perfectly functional, but practically
useless, obsoleted by tech change.
DPR really went off the rails when criticizing the new "limited" lens
selection. That was short-sighted and is something they keep doing.
Doing to what/whom? Just curious. I think Sony deserves it, if only for their
history.
What I can't figure out is why no one has made a 7 mm prime for µ4/3? Is the sensor stack so thick that it would have to
be retrofocus, and thus big and expensive? There are relatively rare occasions where wider without panorama would be
useful, but not enough to justify carrying on of the big, heavy 7-14 zooms around, let alone the cost.
Just pointing out again that one person's meat may be another's poison. I am very happy that you are still (well, again,
really) enjoying the E-1, and getting results that you like and/or are salable. I just can't play that game. (But
another game awaits, however it plays out. The Lytron is due today. :-) Eeeek, there's a box on the porch. Gotta go!)
Alternate Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
