anyone else excited by the EP1?

[randomlinh]

*edit*: http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=3945

holy crap, I think i found my next purchase.




http://www.1001noisycameras.co...and-lenses-leaked.html

I'm not too thrilled with the ~$900 cost possibly, but if it comes w/ the 14-42, then I'd be less annoyed. but the form factor is awesome. I'm glad I never could get my hands on an LX3, and at $500 these days if you can find it... blah. might as well save for this thing.

20/1.7 in the fall supposedly too. that paired w/ the 14-42... it would give my dslr setup a run for it's money for everyday use =)

 

[arrfep]

I am. Well, depending on release price, at least. I carry my 5D/35L combo most places I go, and quite often I'd like something easier to carry/pack. I'd considered going the LX3/G9/g10, but the E420/25mm pancake combo made me think twice. Then I nearly bought that but the G1 came around. And I may have pulled the trigger on the G1 but now this is coming. Since this will be a camera I don't "need," I'm waiting till my idea version of whatever it is comes out. And from the looks of EP-1, it could be it, but I'm not willing to shell out over a grand just because Olympus is catering to the Leica crowd.

IMO, if they were to sell it for ~$800 with the 14-42, or ~$1000 with the 20/1.7, it could be a big hit. That's probably just cheap enough to sway the serious shooters who pick up the LX3/G10 as a pocket companion to their SLRs, only a couple hundred more than those buying the G1's for the same reason, and on par with the Sigma DP2 which is the only real competition in terms of a large(ish) sensor compact body. I think the success of this cam will fall largely on release price.

 

[996GT2]

Looks like a sweet camera. Hopefully the implementation is better than in the DP2.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: arrfep
I am. Well, depending on release price, at least. I carry my 5D/35L combo most places I go, and quite often I'd like something easier to carry/pack. I'd considered going the LX3/G9/g10, but the E420/25mm pancake combo made me think twice. Then I nearly bought that but the G1 came around. And I may have pulled the trigger on the G1 but now this is coming. Since this will be a camera I don't "need," I'm waiting till my idea version of whatever it is comes out. And from the looks of EP-1, it could be it, but I'm not willing to shell out over a grand just because Olympus is catering to the Leica crowd.

IMO, if they were to sell it for ~$800 with the 14-42, or ~$1000 with the 20/1.7, it could be a big hit. That's probably just cheap enough to sway the serious shooters who pick up the LX3/G10 as a pocket companion to their SLRs, only a couple hundred more than those buying the G1's for the same reason, and on par with the Sigma DP2 which is the only real competition in terms of a large(ish) sensor compact body. I think the success of this cam will fall largely on release price.

well, they won't bundle it w/ the 20/1.7 because a) it's not slated till fall supposedly, and b) panasonic is letting it run first =)

I too started looking at Panasonic's line, the GH1 in my case (wanted video). But it's not really all that much smaller. I mean, it is for an SLR-like camera is, but the DP2 was what I'm personally going for size wise (well, in a perfect world, an SD960 with a crop sensor in it somehow =).

 

[randomlinh]

$750 for the body, $800 w/ the 14-42 kit, $900 for the 17 kit+viewfinder. Not too shabby... the 17 kit is a bit much for me though. overall, would have liked to see it $100 cheaper.. but I always want it cheaper.

 

[arrfep]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
$750 for the body, $800 w/ the 14-42 kit, $900 for the 17 kit+viewfinder. Not too shabby... the 17 kit is a bit much for me though. overall, would have liked to see it $100 cheaper.. but I always want it cheaper.

Niiiice. I'm pleased with my price estimates. In reality, a few months after release, the prices will be down 10%. Maybe even more if this follows typical Olympus price fluctuations.

 

[Heidfirst]

good old expensive UK again - it's $950 before tax ($1100 after) with the 14-42 here ...

 

[jpeyton]

The first Olympus I'd ever consider owning.

This camera will be a huge success for Olympus.

 

[Munky]

Seriously? $900 for a micro 4/3 camera that doesn't even have a flash built in? I'd never even consider it unless it was closer to $400. But if you must travel small, I suppose you don't have a better alternative.

 

[ivan2]

i like the idea of the e-peen 1, able to be bearably small with pancake or good enough with walkaround zoom or even telephoto. I suspect they throw the view finder in specifically for those who's trying to channel their inner Bresson, i will never admit that's why i buy it, if i ever will, but i will say that's a good selling point. the other accessories seems pretty weak, especially the flash. If we don't use that, the next acceptable light with tilt will be as big as the camera.

not quite excited but definitely interested, if i see this on sale in the airport duty free shop again i might jump on it.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: munky
Seriously? $900 for a micro 4/3 camera that doesn't even have a flash built in? I'd never even consider it unless it was closer to $400. But if you must travel small, I suppose you don't have a better alternative.

err.. look at the $400 cameras out there now. the 4/3's sensor pretty much kicks their asses. but yeah, this camera is a very specific market.

and yes, the lack of a built in flash is a bit annoying. that and the lack of onboard AF-assist lamp.. c'mon people (pointing right at you canon), just stick it on there.

 

[Deadtrees]

I like the concept and its size. But, I just can't stand its sensor size. I'll wait for Samsung's one because it's at least APC-C sized.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: munky
Seriously? $900 for a micro 4/3 camera that doesn't even have a flash built in? I'd never even consider it unless it was closer to $400. But if you must travel small, I suppose you don't have a better alternative.

That fits the pricing model for most "small" things.

Look at the MacBook Air. $1500 and it doesn't even have an optical drive built-in?

Same principle. People pay *extra* for smaller, thinner things in the world of consumer electronics. I might not fully agree with it, but that's how it is.

 

[akugami]

Olympus E-P1 Movie Sampless

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Deadtrees
I like the concept and its size. But, I just can't stand its sensor size. I'll wait for Samsung's one because it's at least APC-C sized.

it'll be interesting how small they can get the camera. I'm guessing not as small as the E-P1 (while maintaining interchangeable lenses). The pics of the E-P1 next to an OM1 pretty much sealed the deal for me.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: munky
Seriously? $900 for a micro 4/3 camera that doesn't even have a flash built in? I'd never even consider it unless it was closer to $400. But if you must travel small, I suppose you don't have a better alternative.

That fits the pricing model for most "small" things.

Look at the MacBook Air. $1500 and it doesn't even have an optical drive built-in?

Same principle. People pay *extra* for smaller, thinner things in the world of consumer electronics. I might not fully agree with it, but that's how it is.

it's not only that, but what else is out there to compete? Virtually nothing. Same goes for the Air (tho, a lot of netbooks from asus are looking great, because i really only need the power of an atom on the road).

 

[randomlinh]

comparisons against the G10 sizewise

http://chinese.engadget.com/ph...ympus-e-p1-hk/2088576/

 

[Deadtrees]

One thing I don't understand is 3.0" 230,000 pixels LCD screen.
Really...Why the hell did they decided to use such a low resolution screen?

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: munky
Seriously? $900 for a micro 4/3 camera that doesn't even have a flash built in? I'd never even consider it unless it was closer to $400. But if you must travel small, I suppose you don't have a better alternative.

This camera has me puzzled. I would never even consider looking at this thing for $900.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: munky
Seriously? $900 for a micro 4/3 camera that doesn't even have a flash built in? I'd never even consider it unless it was closer to $400. But if you must travel small, I suppose you don't have a better alternative.

This camera has me puzzled. I would never even consider looking at this thing for $900.

you're obviously not the target then =)

Originally posted by: Deadtrees
One thing I don't understand is 3.0" 230,000 pixels LCD screen.
Really...Why the hell did they decided to use such a low resolution screen?

Cause Oly is trying to milk it for what they can. It is a negative, but not enough for me not to want to buy it. For some it may since it's the only way to really shoot w/ the camera. The viewing angles are suppose to be pretty good though.

 

[Deadtrees]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: munky
Seriously? $900 for a micro 4/3 camera that doesn't even have a flash built in? I'd never even consider it unless it was closer to $400. But if you must travel small, I suppose you don't have a better alternative.

This camera has me puzzled. I would never even consider looking at this thing for $900.

you're obviously not the target then =)

Originally posted by: Deadtrees
One thing I don't understand is 3.0" 230,000 pixels LCD screen.
Really...Why the hell did they decided to use such a low resolution screen?

Cause Oly is trying to milk it for what they can. It is a negative, but not enough for me not to want to buy it. For some it may since it's the only way to really shoot w/ the camera. The viewing angles are suppose to be pretty good though.

Damn...That's really cheesy way of milking the cow. At least, they could've put 430,000 pixels one. They should've put 960,000 considering how this LCD screen works as viewfinder. 230,000 pixels LCD on this camera seems like the most stupid thing I've seen in a while.

Anyway, I think it's too early to jump on this camera. I've seen some sample images and they looked disappointing. Its AF speed is quite behind when compared to the Panasonic one. As honestly implied by Ogawa Haruo of Olympus, Olympus is behind Panasonic when it comes to this format of camera. I'd wait until Samsung and Panasonic releases their hybrid cameras.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Deadtrees

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: munky
Seriously? $900 for a micro 4/3 camera that doesn't even have a flash built in? I'd never even consider it unless it was closer to $400. But if you must travel small, I suppose you don't have a better alternative.

This camera has me puzzled. I would never even consider looking at this thing for $900.

you're obviously not the target then =)

Originally posted by: Deadtrees
One thing I don't understand is 3.0" 230,000 pixels LCD screen.
Really...Why the hell did they decided to use such a low resolution screen?

Cause Oly is trying to milk it for what they can. It is a negative, but not enough for me not to want to buy it. For some it may since it's the only way to really shoot w/ the camera. The viewing angles are suppose to be pretty good though.

Damn...That's really cheesy way of milking the cow. At least, they could've put 430,000 pixels one. They should've put 960,000 considering how this LCD screen works as viewfinder. 230,000 pixels LCD on this camera seems like the most stupid thing I've seen in a while.

Anyway, I think it's too early to jump on this camera. I've seen some sample images and they looked disappointing. Its AF speed is quite behind when compared to the Panasonic one. As honestly implied by Ogawa Haruo of Olympus, Olympus is behind Panasonic when it comes to this format of camera. I'd wait until Samsung and Panasonic releases their hybrid cameras.

eh, I'm only guessing on the milking. but it doesn't seem all that bad, given it has excellent viewing angles.

This definitely doesn't work out well if you want to go wide though, the 4/3's 2x crop factor is killer. I personally don't care, as I like the ~50mm equiv. Hopefully that 20/1.7 from panasonic works better than the 17/2.8 (which seems mediocre). The 14-42 samples looked pretty good to me.

I'm curious to what samsung will do as well, but it's going to be bigger w/ it's larger sensor. And that ultimately is why I want this. But I may ultimately wait to see what panasonic has to offer. As much as I want to click pre-order, beginning to think I should wait to see how the 20/1.7 performs. Because that combo would be 85% of why I buy this thing. If it's not up to par... it'd be a waste.

 

[jpeyton]

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab...rt-retro-olympus-e-p1/

http://www.biofos.com/mft/ep-1_pre.html