Dear readers: you must be my strength. Please tell me why I should not buy an EP-1 camera as soon as Olympus finally releases it. Like these guys I have pined for a compact, sturdy, full-featured camera with interchangeable lenses and a full-sized light sensor for years, all the time feeling safe knowing that no such camera exists. Now that someone went ahead and made one I feel my resistance ebbing away.
Then again, it’s not like I wouldn’t blow that $800 on beer or some other unnecessary expense. That’s it – I will pass on beer for a couple of months. Or lunch. Probably lunch.
***Update***
For what it’s worth the camera that I will replace is a heavily brassed Nikon FE2 with the mirror locked up. I take blog pics with my wife’s point-n-shoot digicam.
***Update 2***
Several commenters have suggested jumping to medium format. If anyone can recommend some quality, pocketable, reasonably-priced medium format cameras I would seriously consider buying one of those.
The Moar You Know
Food is for losers. Buy the camera.
dmsilev
No Help WhatSoEver: If you don’t feel like waiting, you could buy a Panasonic GH1. Same basic premise as the EP1 (and uses the same micro-4/3 lens system), but should be on sale any day now, a bit sooner than the Olympus.
-dms, happily sticking with his Nikon D80 for the time being. For the time being…
Punchy
What’s wrong with the cell phone cam?
Wile E. Quixote
@Tim F.
Because you’ll be getting first generation technology, essentially a x.0 release of the micro 4/3rds format. The EP-1 looks really awesome. DSLR features without DSLR bulk and designed to take advantage of digital technology, plus it’s an incredibly cool looking camera, but the EP-2 will probably be even better, and cheaper.
I hope micro 4/3rds takes off because it’s the perfect camera for people who want and need more features, such as interchangeable lenses and external flashes, than the higher end prosumer compacts offer but who don’t want the bulk of a DSLR and who aren’t wedded to taking their pictures through an optical viewfinder. SLR was designed for film cameras and limits what you can do with digital imaging, like take movies, unless you do a lot of work, which then makes the camera very expensive.
Legalize
Buy the camera. I say this as someone who still shoots with a goddamn 35mm Vivitar. Buy the camera.
Andrew
It’s probably a great camera, as long as you like the micro 4/3 sensor. That sensor is quite a bit smaller than the APS-C sensors in most entry level DSLR’s. Also the olympus doesn’t have a view finer, which is something I can’t stand.
Doctor Gonzo
It is Micro Four Thirds, which means it is NOT a full-frame sensor. It’s got a crop factor of 2, so 12.3 megapixels on a sensor that small is going to lead to poor high ISO performance.
I use a Canon 40D. It’s 10.1 megapixels on an APS-C sensor are pretty good in terms of high ISO performance. No, it doesn’t fit in my pocket, but no camera with SLR-like quality will. You can get the body for $800 these days I bet now that the 50D is out.
The E-P1 looks like it could be interesting, but I’d pass on it myself.
dmsilev
A Nikon FE2? If you have any substantial investment in F-mount lenses, it might be worth considering a Nikon body. Bigger than the Olympus, but you could save a fair amount of money by reusing the old lenses.
-dms
blogenfreude
1. It’s not a Nikon product.
2. You secretly want to buy a Mamiya 6 or 7 (or other medium format) and make art.
3. What Wile E. said.
John Harrold
I have a question. I’ve got a Canon EOS 20D, it’s a digital SLR. One of the things I really like about it (and other digital SLRs) is that when I push the button down it takes the picture immediately, and if I hold the button down it just keeps taking them until the buffer fills. Does the camera mentioned above still have this noticeable delay?
r€nato
any particular reason you are hung up on the full-frame sensor???
Wayne
I was just looking into the 4/3’s concept today. And the onlinephotographer is where I saw it first. I have the first Canon digital rebel and it’s been a great camera and don’t know if I would give up all the lenses I have to go to a different format. I also like a real viewfinder, I’ve never liked to have to hold the camera out to look at the live view. But the Olympus is quite nice and the video is a plus and I think a great balance between too small and too big. I say buy the camera and eat lunch, you’ve already saved up by brewing your own beer.
Wile E. Quixote
Dumb Micro 4/3rds question: Is the lens mount for micro 4/3rds cameras standard across brands? If it is then that’s just another killer feature that will make it a totally kick-ass standard. Nikon and all of the other DSLR manufacturers use the crack pipe theory of marketing. They give you the pipe (the body) for cheap and then lock you into buying the crack (your lenses) for lots of money, which means that once you have a bunch of Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, et al lenses you’re very reluctant to purchase anything other than a camera body that can use the lenses you own.
Comrade Stuck
Go Canon EOS. DSLR. Rebel XT or XTI. That is all.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
This is just like during the Manhattan Project, when they had to choose the best enrichment method for producing bomb-grade fuel: cyclotrons, gas diffusion, or breeding plutonium in the reactor at Hanford.
/hoekstra
Dork
No offense, but from your link it looks ugly and way too old-school/retro.
blahblahblah
No 1080p, no buy.
Wile E. Quixote
@Tim F.
Well you could donate a liver to someone and use the money you get from that to buy the camera. I mean you have two of them so you’ll still have a spare. Or is that kidneys? I’d better look that up.
Doctor Gonzo
Wile E.: Yes, the Micro Four Thirds lens mount is consistent across brands.
Xenos
Medium format bodies and lenses are pretty cheap on Ebay. I would love it if a proper medium format digital back I could stick on a used Mamiya 6 body were available.
The closest I can find is this – soon to be released for less than$10,000!
Redshirt
Great camera review site, covers hundreds of cameras:
Wile E. Quixote
@Dork
For me the old/school retro look is a feature and not a bug. Especially if you get the external viewfinder that mounts on the hot shoe. I wonder what that 17mm Zuiko lens costs? That and the 14/42 would be a completely awesome combo to have.
John@MM
What Doctor Gonzo said. Packing that many pixels on a sensor that small means noise. I love Olympus cameras and this looks like a great one, but I doubt you could take a really good picture above ISO 200 with it.
Buying a camera is very much like buying a computer. It’s all in what you want to use it for. If you are looking for a walking around camera then any good ultra-zoom will do, like the Olympus SP x UZ series. If you want something with interchangeable lenses and you already have some Nikon lenses then a D40 or D80 make more sense economically.
Having said all of that, I immediately wanted one of these when I read about it on the Olympus site. The only thing holding me back is the thought of the cost of the better quality 4/3rds lenses.
Wile E. Quixote
@Doctor Gonzo
Even with all of the different autofocus and image stabilization systems that different vendors use? Wow! If that’s the case then this is really awesome.
Jennifer
I dunno about this particular camera, but I love my Olympus Evolt 300.
Uncommonsense
You’re talking to the guy who bought a Nikon D70 on impulse and has never experienced a moment of regret or even a second thought.
I can be of no help to you.
gbear
I’m using a Canon MEH.
It’s ok.
I kind of agree with dmsilev. Skip the first generation.
Betsy
@Wile E. Quixote:
Oh yeah, I love how it looks!! I wonder if it would feel in the hand at all similar to my old Canon A-1. I love that thing.
Redshirt
Try again:
Hmm. So how does one enter a link? Pressing the link button and inserting the URL does not seem to do the job.
dpreview.com for the site. Great camera review site.
Jennifer
@gbear:
Well, with a name like “meh”, did you expect more than “ok”?
malraux
If you have an investment in nikkors, then you’d be giving that up. That and the whole 1st generation issue.
Personally, I greatly prefer the old school viewfinder over a LCD screen. I also think the focus on making digital cameras also camcorders is silly; ok I really just think that camcorders are silly and adding those features to a camera makes the camera less rather than more.
All that said, super compact is nice. An interchangeable lens mount with multiple different companies is pretty close to a holy grail. If that style of camera works for you, then go for it.
Doctor Gonzo
@Wile E. Quixote:
I think Micro Four Thirds cameras that have image stabilization do the IS at the sensor, not in the lens, to save on lens costs and to give all lenses IS. So compatibility with IS systems isn’t an issue.
LarryB
John,
Seems like a sweet camera. A few points, however:
I couldn’t figure out from reading the specs whether this camera has a mechanical shutter like an SLR. One of the things that I HATE about digital pocket cameras is the delay between when you hit the shutter button and when the picture is finally taken. Don’t get this camera unless it let’s you go full-paparazzo.
I assume you like the LCD viewfinder. I hate ’em.
I have had several Olympus cameras over the decades. They all had really nice features but proved mechanically fragile. YMMV
gbear
Given that what I use my camera for most often is documenting the condition of buildings that are out in the middle of nowhere, battery life has become my most important issue. What good is a camera that runs out of juice after you’ve used ‘zoom’ a couple of times. Also has to run on AAs (real ahmericun batteries. no elitist discs) so that I can buy them at any store or gas station anywhere.
John@MM
I may have spoken too soon about the noise problem. This uses the same sensor that is used in the E620. In fact, it looks like it might be an E620 shrunk down to look like an old Leica.
Here’s a review of the image quality of the E620 that you might find useful –
Andrew
@Wile E. Quixote:
Micro 4/3’s is consistent across brands, however very few brands are signing on. Pentax, Nikon, Sony, and Canon are all still going to use their own mounts.
malraux
@LarryB: There’s no mechanical shutter, but the spec is less than 100 millisecond for “shutter release”
It’ll also do 3 shots/second up to 10 when shooting RAW. That said, at 12MP, I’d think twice about shooting RAW.
terry chay
Tim,
The main reason you shouldn’t buy it is because you might get yours before me. :-) But I’ll give it a go.
Reasons not to buy Olympus E-P1:
1) Commercial is too cute
2) It doesn’t blend
Okay seriously:
1) 4:3 format is a 2x multiplier, it won’t perform as well as APS-C or full frame for overall image quality and dynamic range. (Ignore the fact that this format is 4 – 16 times the size of your wife’s pocket digicam.) Note that this compromise is seen either as a loss of sharpness (Olympus) or more noise and moiré (Panasonic) when you pixel peep
2) Micro 4:3 format adapters needed to support legacy lenses run $150+ in addition to the camera.
3) Most cameras will lose autofocus feature. Nikon G lenses can’t be stopped down on them.
4) 4:3 and Micro 4:3 lenses are terribly expensive now because the lack of ability to go to old used film lenses
5) video recording has no audio jack, sound from AF leaks into video recording
6) video recording is limited in time
7) video recording is only 720p
8) startup time is very slow on this model
9) contrast based autofocus is slow
10) no viewfinder or electronic viewfinder, which will be corrected in a future model but not this one.
11) 3″ LCD actually has low resolution compared to my Nikon D3, since focusing is done on this, that is an issue. That’ll change in the future but not this one.
12) Olympus has poor AR coatings on their LCDs making outdoor use a pain
13) LCD doesn’t articulate like the Panasonic G1 or GH1 or Nikon D5000 or Olympus E-640. So no shots from the ground or above the head.
14) shot to shot time could be improved
15) both kit lens have plastic construction
16) 2x multiplier means no usable wide fast primes from Leica or Cosina.
17) 2x multiplier means the Cosina Nokton F1.1 and Leica Noctilux F0.95 is operating at 100mm effective focal length. Who shoots at that?
18) No built in flash (don’t pay more than $100 for the $200 retail flash they’re selling with it).
19) $750 only covers the body only price. The kits are $150 more for a $300 retail lens. So you’re real price is $900 unless you want to be ripped off
I can think of more, but is that a start?
Like all cameras there are compromises, Like all cameras if you wait long enough there will be a better one. You just have to ask if this one will hits the right spot. My guess is if it means you’ll take more photos, it’ll be worth it.
After all, when a house is burning down, the one thing people want to save over their money and jewelry is their photo albums. I think that says a lot.
Hope this helps.
KC
I’m in the same boat as you, John, and I’ve read that web site you link to for years. I have a big Nikon D300 which takes great photos but is quite bulky. My “everyday” camera is a Canon G9, which takes good photos and is convenient but is very slow in operation.
The EP-1 looks just about perfect, except for no viewfinder. Olympus has already said they will be coming out with a slightly larger micro-4/3 version with viewfinder. I think I’ll wait for that.
I had an Olympus C7070 compact camera about 3 years ago. While it was fairly quirky, it took really nice photos, and I was quite fond of it at the time. So Olympus has a good place in my heart.
In the mean time, I may hunt down a nice old Zuiko 50mm f/2 for a portrait lens, before they all get bought out.
** Atanarjuat **
Tim, have you given thought to the Panasonic DMC-LX3?
It obviously doesn’t have a full-frame sensor (not even a 4/3 crop sensor, micro or otherwise), nor can you change lenses, but it’s the best in its class of compact cameras for low-light, high ISO shooting.
In fact, ISO 1600 in Dynamic B&W looks stunning, and slightly grainy in a nostalgic way. The 24mm wideangle lens and very short zoom is not for everyone, but if the photography of Henri Cartier-Bresson appeals to you, this camera will tide you over until the Olympus EP-2 (or EP-3, for that matter) is released with all the refinements and improvements that will surely come later.
-A
terry chay
@John Harrold: Yes and no. There is a delay for the autofocus, but if you have manual focusing or focus locked, there is no noticeable delay. The shot to shot delay. The AF system on this is contrast based (on your Canon it’s “phase based”) so it won’t focus as fast or as accurately… think point and shoot focusing with an SLR lens motor.
There hasn’t been much a delay in even the pocket cameras since the Canon DIGIC processor went the way of the Canon S series.
JoeTX
You will regret paying that much for a camera that doesn’t have a viewfinder. Without a viewfinder outdoor shots in bright sunlight are impossible, action shots also impossible.. My Panasonic TZ3 at $300 is an awesome super zoom, except it doesn’t have a real viewfinder, and it is a serious handicap to an otherwise great camera.
terry chay
@Wile E. Quixote: Yes, even with the different I.S. and AF systems. There usually needs to be a firmware update in order to support the new lenses. So certain things like AF on a 4:3 lens (which was designed to be contrast focused) will suddenly start to work after an update on a M4:3 after an update.
With I.S. it’s an either-or thing. (Either I.S. on the lens or the body, but if you have both only one will operate). Of course, Panasonic won’t release a camera with sensor shift stabilization and you won’t see a Zuiko with O.I.S. It’s some crazy Japanese patent sharing thing I never understood. Actually nobody understands it, not even their partners like Leica (Panasonic), Zeiss (Cosina, Sony). I suspect not even the Japanese really understand who gets to do what. :-)
One cool example is that the Olympus E-P1 doesn’t have the capability to do sensor-shift IS when shooting video. But you stick a Panasonic HD Mega-O.I.S. M4:3 lens on it, and it will not only focus while shooting, it will be image stabilized.
Another thing is because of the spec, 4:3 lenses should mostly work with all the features on a M4:3 camera. Also because it has the widest bore for the shortest register distance, there are adapters available for this to mount your Olympus OM, Nikon F, Pentax K, Canon EOS (and their previous one circa 1986), Nikon rangefinder, Canon rangefinder, Contax rangefinder, Leica M, Leica R lenses on the thing.
BTW, the 17mm costs $300, same as the 14-42mm lens. The reason the kit costs more is because the 17mm kit comes with the $100 external viewfinder, thus explaining the price discrepancy. It’s only available in silver painted plastic (not black) if that matters.
terry chay
@gbear: AA support is not going to happen anymore for pro digital cameras because they need much more juice than AAs can provide without adding bulk. For instance the E-P1 uses the 1150 mAh battery at 7.2V (You’d need 5 AAs to do that much volts).
Brachiator
@gbear:
The Canon Powershots typically use AA batteries.
Here’s a camera review site that prefers AAs for the reasons you note and makes sure to note the battery method support for models reviewed.
Jeff Berardi
The reason not to get this thing is so you can get the NEXT m4/3s camera from Olympus, which is rumored to have a proper EVF, like the Panasonic G1 has.
Tom Levenson
I almost placed my order for this camera the day it was announced. I think the comments that it’s not a Nikon D-80 (or 2k$+ D700, for that matter) miss the point — this is a street shooting camera more like the old Leica M-2 (or perhaps better, the original Olympus PENs).
I want one — with the Pancake, a Pana-Leica 4/3s 50 mm 1.4 (a great portrait lens with the 2x crop) and maybe some fun zoom.
But, but, but …. my absolute favorite camera right now is my Leica Digilux 2 — an “obsolete” camera with a 28-90 fixed lens, a 5mp (!) sensor that is larger than a compact, smaller than 4/3s, and an electronic view finder. The EVF is the deal maker/breaker here. The Digilux 2 behaves like I hope the EP-1 will – all the controls you want in all the places you want them, great feel, fast and responsive action. It has fabulous optics and image quality. It’s not quite as flexible or responsive as my Nikon D-80, but it is still the camera I use first, and happiest. (And if you want to see some recent Digilux results, jpgs right out of the camera, unprocessed, check out the Bees of Brookline post on the blog link through my name).
But it is a little large, a little cumbersome — and I really want a pocketable (or almost) camera to which I can attach a range of fun and funky lenses (old Leica M and Rs, for example). Yet I still need that EVF. (There was a flame thread on DP Review about us luddites who insist on reliving our photographic youth with viewfinders, when LCDs are so clearly the coming thing. To which I reply — so what? It’s my camera, and I’ll use it the way I damn please.)
So I am, very reluctantly, waiting for the EP -2. My guess — six months to a year …and if I’m wrong I’ll refund what you paid for this comment.
A couple of other thoughts: I do have a serious photog friend, longtime Leica film guy, who has a Panny G-1, which he thinks is the greatest thing since sliced bread. I wouldn’t worry too much about pixel density, unless Oly goes crazy about megapixel wars in the next go-round. There is nothing magical about sensor size…except that fewer pixels per unit area do reduce noise. But if the noise is already below an acceptable threshold at the ISOs you want, then what do you care?
Last — Nikon legacy issues: if your lenses are manual, then they have limited use on Nikon digicams. I’ve got a couple of great old lenses — a 28mm f 2.8 and an 85 f2, which is just a glorious portrait piece of glass. But they are a struggle to use on the D- 80, and I recently bought a used autofocus 28mm as a consequence.
In the end, the only good camera is the one you have with you; I’ll carry an EP sized camera more than I do anything else — and since the Leica and Nikon have both spoiled even very good compacts for me, this is my next move.
Helped any?
Trollhattan
You SHOULD buy the E-P1, as long as you can manage life without a viewfinder (the optical finder for the pancake lense will be quite helpful). Early image quality is amazingly good, even with the inexpensive kit lenses, and the lens selection should flesh out nicely in the next couple of years.
I like the LX3 suggestion, but it’s not going to deliver the quality of the E-P1. Another possibility are the Sigma DP1&2 twins, quirky little cameras capable of amazing performance, so long as the light’s good.
Mid format digicams cost as much as a car. A Hasselblad xPan would be a great film-based option.
Quicksand
Snort.
I like the idea of the EP-1. I can’t really get behind the 4/3 sensor in a full-sized DSLR — too many compromises for me — but for a little rangefinderish cam like this, it’s a great idea.
I won’t buy one, though, because I’m already invested in Pentax gear and lenses (including some splendid old ones). I am pining for a new K-7, however.
terry chay
@Quicksand: At the rate New Pentax photogs are jacking up the price of your lenses, you can probably sell your kit for a profit in a year or two. :-)
(I’m a Nikon F/Leica M shooter myself. A friend of mine sold his Leica Noctilux at 3x what he paid five years ago (that’s $4000 in profit!). It boggles the mind.)
DZ
There are certainly newer and more sophisticated cameras, but I will stick with my Nikon D60. Uses all my old Nikon lenses, produces great pictures, and I already own it.
Quicksand
@terry chay
The Noctilux is a fine lens, I’m sure, but $4K? And I think the new-ish Noctilux f/0.95 runs around $10K. For a STANDARD LENS. One that when stopped down just a little, is probably comparable to many other lenses.
I’ll stick to my 55mm f/1.2, thankyouverymuch. I’m a crappy photographer anyway.
Litlebritdifrnt
I have not read all the comments yet so I apologize in advance, however I bought an Olympus digital camera and it sucked. It had serious movement issues, I mean really, unless it was on a tripod on solid concrete where the earth was not moving, it utterly sucked. I cannot begin to tell you how many spectacular critter pictures I lost due to the utter suckiness of the Olympus. Fact is they are late to the game, they are a “camera” company trying to get into the “digital camera” market. Forget it, go with a company that has the “digital” thing down pat. Sony. Or for a point and shoot type dealy HP is hard to beat.
Trollhattan
@53 Litlebritdifrnt
Critter shots like these?
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1154/1097256510_4049c2c8b7_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3361/3475530968_6cd10391c7_o.jpg
IMHO they’ve gotten their act together and the bodies now are a match for their lenses, which comprise the most consistently good lineup in the industry. That said, µ4/3 is still quite new but it’ll be a miracle if Canikon don’t each rush similar systems to the market in the next two years.
Trollhattan
I should have added that the E-P1 only has contrast-detection autofocus, which is one area in which it can’t compete with the phase-detection systems in dslrs. PDAF is considerably faster, especially when coupled with fast-focusing lenses.
gbear
@Brachiator:
Yep. Both my cameras are Canon Powershots. The newest is a couple years old so I’m sure it’s now way behind in the technology department.
The Other Steve
Bah, I’m more than happy with our Kodak Z812…
Back in my day we took pictures with a Kodak Instamatic and we liked it!
terry chay
@Quicksand: Actually the Noctilux 1.0 is noticeably soft even when stopped down. It’s an unfortunate feature of the design. I have a couple friends with them.
I heard the 0.95 Noctilux does indeed get better when stopped down (as good as a Summilux 1.4 perhaps), but I don’t know because I don’t have $10k to blow.
The crazy thing is the price of used Nocti’s jumped from $4k to $6k overnight when Leica introduced teh 0.95 Nocti at $10k (They used to retail new for $1k twenty years ago, you could get them used for $2k before the digital age hit about eight years ago. Now you can sell it for $6k.)
Ella in NM
Because buying bigger, better and more shiney “things” does not make you happier, only broker?
Seeley
Tim F. I think you should get your $800 dream camera. This week I got my $800 dream kitten, and I couldn’t be happier.
How did I justify it? Well, for one thing I just finished my MBA and shamelessly hinted to friends and family that if they wanted to give me a graduation present, parts of a Bengal would be greatly appreciated. Someone bought the tail, someone else paid for the the ears, someone else “paid [for] an arm and a leg”, etc
Secondly, there was a health endeavor that I really needed to undertake. I’ve been needing to do it for a long time, but just could not get myself motivated. So, I planned getting the kitten as a reward. It worked great! I actually DID the health thing and got my cat. And hey, what’s $800 compared to one’s health?
Anything important you could use motivation to do?
Gray Lensman
I’m really happy with my Canon G10 for the money ($500). It feels like a real camera and with 12.7 MPs, the quality is great. I wouldn’t hesitate to leave my beloved Canon 5D home for travel and rely on the G10 with its 28-120 lens. It also uses my big Canon flashes (580EX, 430EX) even on the remote trigger thingy for portrait setups.The pics I took at my niece’s wedding were as good as the pro’s Canon 5D full frame shots on the web. The movies are reasonable too.
Remember that most photography today is for the computer. It shoots RAW too, if that tickles yore eyeballs.
Calming Influence
I’m using a Canon MEH, but thinking of upgrading to a Canon BLEH.
Bill D.
Pocketable? Not really. The Fuji GA645Zi, a fixed-lens rangefinder camera available only in used form for $500-800, is the closest I can think of. It’s a nice camera but has only a limited zoom range equivalent to 33 to 54 mm in 35mm format equivalent. The GA645 Pro 45 and Pro 60 (also only available used and with lenses equivalent to 27mm and 36mm respectively) cost less but have fixed focal lengths. These cameras will all fit into large coat pockets, but not in any pocket you’re likely to have on you in summer.
There are no pocketable medium format cameras with interchangeable lenses. Medum format SLRs are *big*. I know- I own several. If you want portability you’d be happier with a digital camera or a compact 35mm film camera.
At this point there’s no point in sticking with film unless you have good technical or artistic reasons for doing so. I’m a film enthusiast but I still use digital for my everyday shots due the convenience factor.
Bill D.
Mr Furious
No, Tim. A thousand times, no.
If you have any significant collection of Nikon glass at all, it just doesn’t make sense to buy anything other than a Nikon SDLR.
Bodies, sensors and all that shit changes and becomes obsolete by the year now. Spend your money on lenses (which was always the rule, really) and buy a body at deep discount: buy a just replaced model new, or find a bargain on Ebay.
The Nikon D40 will probably blow that thing away in terms of image quality, and is still fairly compact for an SLR—the only downside is tom reduce size the took out the AF motor and the body depends on AF-S lenses (internal motors) to auto-focus, something you probably don’t have. But you can buy one brand new with an 18-55mm lens for half the price of that camera.
You can find used D80s (which is what I have) for $400 on Ebay or new ones from Cameta on Ebay for about $450-500.
D70 and D50 bodies are less—between $200-300 used on Ebay. D80, D70 and D50 bodies will mount any Nikkor lens from the last forty years. (note, the older the lens the more functions fall away…metering auto-focusing, etc.) but you can use whatever lenses you already have.
IF you feel the need to have the newest technology, get a D90. It’s not much more than that Olympus and will kick its ass. Just put whatever lens you had on your 35mm on it.
Your homework:
Digital Photography Review Awesome review site. The E-P1 (P)review is on the front page right now…
Ken Rockwell a Nikon partisan, but has good reviews and breakdowns between the different bodies, and explains the pixel/sensor stuff pretty well…and an extremely thorough lens section.
Thom Hogan Another Nikon guy.
I have bought 5-6 lenses over the last year on Ebay, and have had fantastic luck in every case. I got pro glass at less than half price in each case. The best lens I now own is a 15 year old 35-70mm 2.8D that I paid $300 for. It’s better than anything manufactured today for 3 times the money.
I work with lots of professional magazine photographers and they all have Canon G9s for their “pocket cameras.” They all prefer that to the newer G10 which overpacked the sensor to go from 12 to 15 MP.
My suggestion? By a used D70 or D80 on Ebay. Use your lens(es) you aready own and wait for the D90 to come down in price. You can sell whatever you buy on Ebay for what you paid for it in a year.
Mr Furious
Where’s my fucking comment?
Mr Furious
No, Tim. A thousand times, no.
If you have any significant collection of Nikon glass at all, it just doesn’t make sense to buy anything other than a Nikon SDLR.
Bodies, sensors and all that shit changes and becomes obsolete by the year now. Spend your money on lenses (which was always the rule, really) and buy a body at deep discount: buy a just replaced model new, or find a bargain on Ebay.
The Nikon D40 will probably blow that thing away in terms of image quality, and is still fairly compact for an SLR—the only downside is tom reduce size the took out the AF motor and the body depends on AF-S lenses (internal motors) to auto-focus, something you probably don’t have. But you can buy one brand new with an 18-55mm lens for half the price of that camera.
You can find used D80s (which is what I have) for $400 on Ebay or new ones from Cameta on Ebay for about $450-500.
D70 and D50 bodies are less—between $200-300 used on Ebay. D80, D70 and D50 bodies will mount any Nikkor lens from the last forty years. (note, the older the lens the more functions fall away…metering auto-focusing, etc.) but you can use whatever lenses you already have.
If you feel the need to have the newest technology, get a D90. It’s not much more than that Olympus and will kick its ass. Just put whatever lens you had on your 35mm on it.
Your homework:
Digital Photography Review Awesome review site. The E-P1 (P)review is on the front page right now…
Ken Rockwell a Nikon partisan, but has good reviews and breakdowns between the different bodies, and explains the pixel/sensor stuff pretty well…and an extremely thorough lens section.
Thom Hogan Another Nikon guy.
I have bought 5-6 lenses over the last year on Ebay, and have had fantastic luck in every case. I got pro glass at less than half price in each case. The best lens I now own is a 15 year old 35-70mm 2.8D that I paid $300 for. It’s better than anything manufactured today for 3 times the money.
I work with lots of professional magazine photographers—most shoot Canon EOS digital only because Canon got out of the gate on digital faster than Nikon. And they all have Canon G9s for their “pocket cameras.” They all prefer that to the newer G10 which overpacked the sensor to go from 12 to 15 MP.
I’ve used Canon 30D and 40D SLRs and they are also VERY nice. I’m just partial to Nikon.
My suggestion? By a used D70 or D80 on Ebay. Use your lens(es) you already own and wait for the D90 to come down in price. You can sell whatever you buy on Ebay for what you paid for it in a year.
Mr Furious
No, Tim. A thousand times, no.
If you have any significant collection of Nikon glass at all, it just doesn’t make sense to buy anything other than a Nikon SDLR.
Bodies, sensors and all that shit changes and becomes obsolete by the year now. Spend your money on lenses (which was always the rule, really) and buy a body at deep discount: buy a just replaced model new, or find a bargain on Ebay.
The Nikon D40 will probably blow that thing away in terms of image quality, and is still fairly compact for an SLR—the only downside is tom reduce size the took out the AF motor and the body depends on AF-S lenses (internal motors) to auto-focus, something you probably don’t have. But you can buy one brand new with an 18-55mm lens for half the price of that camera.
You can find used D80s (which is what I have) for $400 on Ebay or new ones from Cameta on Ebay for about $450-500.
D70 and D50 bodies are less—between $200-300 used on Ebay. D80, D70 and D50 bodies will mount any Nikkor lens from the last forty years. (note, the older the lens the more functions fall away…metering auto-focusing, etc.) but you can use whatever lenses you already have.
If you feel the need to have the newest technology, get a D90. It’s not much more than that Olympus and will kick its ass. Just put whatever lens you had on your 35mm on it.
Your homework:
Digital Photography Review Awesome review site. The E-P1 (P)review is on the front page right now…
I have bought 5-6 lenses over the last year on Ebay, and have had fantastic luck in every case. I got pro glass at less than half price in each case. The best lens I now own is a 15 year old 35-70mm 2.8D that I paid $300 for. It’s better than anything manufactured today for 3 times the money.
I work with lots of professional magazine photographers—most shoot Canon EOS digital only because Canon got out of the gate on digital faster than Nikon. And they all have Canon G9s for their “pocket cameras.” They all prefer that to the newer G10 which overpacked the sensor to go from 12 to 15 MP.
I’ve used Canon 30D and 40D SLRs and they are also VERY nice. I’m just partial to Nikon.
My suggestion? By a used D70 or D80 on Ebay. Use your lens(es) you already own and wait for the D90 to come down in price. You can sell whatever you buy on Ebay for what you paid for it in a year.
Mr Furious
No, Tim. A thousand times, no.
If you have any significant collection of Nikon glass at all, it just doesn’t make sense to buy anything other than a Nikon SDLR.
Bodies, sensors and all that shit changes and becomes obsolete by the year now. Spend your money on lenses (which was always the rule, really) and buy a body at deep discount: buy a just replaced model new, or find a bargain on Ebay.
The Nikon D40 will probably blow that thing away in terms of image quality, and is still fairly compact for an SLR—the only downside is tom reduce size the took out the AF motor and the body depends on AF-S lenses (internal motors) to auto-focus, something you probably don’t have. But you can buy one brand new with an 18-55mm lens for half the price of that camera.
You can find used D80s (which is what I have) for $400 on Ebay or new ones from Cameta on Ebay for about $450-500.
D70 and D50 bodies are less—between $200-300 used on Ebay. D80, D70 and D50 bodies will mount any Nikkor lens from the last forty years. (note, the older the lens the more functions fall away…metering auto-focusing, etc.) but you can use whatever lenses you already have.
If you feel the need to have the newest technology, get a D90. It’s not much more than that Olympus and will kick its ass. Just put whatever lens you had on your 35mm on it.
I have bought 5-6 lenses over the last year on Ebay, and have had fantastic luck in every case. I got pro glass at less than half price in each case. The best lens I now own is a 15 year old 35-70mm 2.8D that I paid $300 for. It’s better than anything manufactured today for 3 times the money.
I work with lots of professional magazine photographers—most shoot Canon EOS digital only because Canon got out of the gate on digital faster than Nikon. And they all have Canon G9s for their “pocket cameras.” They all prefer that to the newer G10 which overpacked the sensor to go from 12 to 15 MP.
I’ve used Canon 30D and 40D SLRs and they are also VERY nice. I’m just partial to Nikon.
My suggestion? By a used D70 or D80 on Ebay. Use your lens(es) you already own and wait for the D90 to come down in price. You can sell whatever you buy on Ebay for what you paid for it in a year.
Mr Furious
Your homework:
Digital Photography Review Awesome review site. The E-P1 (P)review is on the front page right now…
Mr Furious
The best place to research this stuff I’ve found, is Digital Photography Review
The E-P1 is on the front page there now, and it does look cool as hell, but the dinky sensor, and no viewfinder would be a problem for me if it was my only, or my “best” camera.
I can make those sacrifices for a backup/pocket camera, but that’s because I have my SLR when I want it.
Mr Furious
Comments are totally fucked up tonite…
The best place to research this stuff I’ve found, is Digital Photography Review
The E-P1 is on the front page there now, and it does look cool as hell, but the dinky sensor, and no viewfinder would be a problem for me if it was my only, or my “best” camera.
I can make those sacrifices for a backup/pocket camera, but that’s because I have my SLR when I want it.
Mr Furious
Jesus. That string of comments looks embarrassing right now, but none of that shit was working right last night.
John T
Quality, pocketable, reasonably-priced? In the medium format realm, two out of three is the best you can hope for (even if you have really large pockets).
I lust after the Plaubel Makina 67 but I really can’t justify spending more than $1,000 on a camera that hasn’t been manufactured in almost 30 years.
If you already own Nikon lenses, you should skip the EP-1 and just get a D40. I’m pretty happy with mine, it’s got a good quality sensor and it’s light enough to carry around.
terry chay
@Mr Furious: Actually, if he has a significant investment in Nikon lenses and his camera is an FE2 (manual focusing camera), then he should get nothing less than a D300. Why? Because even though you can mount the lenses on a D40 (now it’s a D5000), you can’t meter or autofocus. Even on the D90, you can’t meter. (You mentioned the autofocus, but not the metering part).
(If he does get a Nikon, I highly recommend he get a focusing screen with it. Other things to point out is the the D90 has a much brighter/larger viewfinder, and the D40 is a very light camera—I know a number of people who traded their D200 back in for a D40 because of the weight issues of carrying an all metal body.)
With the E-P1 and a Nikon-M4:3 adapter (about $200 from Japan Exposures, about $80 in plastic from eBay/China), he can shoot, meter, but not autofocus his old lenses. With a dandelion chip, he could even get the AF lock beep (probably a worthless feature). The lenses would all be normal or telephoto though, so it’d be a wash to have to buy a 17mm (35mm) kit or a 18-55 zoom that comes bundled with the D40/D60.
BTW, I shoot a D70, D200, D3, M8 and I’m pretty certain that the D80 will not “kick [the E-P1]’s ass.” of these four cameras the only one that will beat it all-around would be the D3. The D70 is significantly worse, the IQ on the D80 (or D200) will be comparable or slightly worse, and the M8 isn’t really a camera to be compared to this one.
Another correction is that it is not true that most pro magazine photographers shoot Canon because Canon was out of the gate faster than Nikon. It is correct to say that most shoot Canon now, but Nikon was the first one out of the gate having two models out (one from Nikon and one from Kodak) before Canon introduced theirs. Not only that, but the top selling consumer digital for many years until about 2002 was a Nikon. It is a fact that Canon beat Nikon to almost the low end dSLR price/quality points (until the D70 and D40) as well as making the first affordable full frame (5D), but there are a lot of reasons why news photographers prefer Canon that aren’t entirely because of the digital history of the two companies: Canon was the first with piezoelectric AF (AF-S Nikon or USM Canon), first with image stabilization (VR in Nikon), largest selling all electronic mount of all time (Nikon’s F mount is electromechanical), much more advanced AF with more tracking points until recently (Nikon has leapfrogged this with COLOR tracking), and has a design that simply favors the way a photojournalist uses a camera (two handed operation is required in the Canon world prevents missets).
I find the Canon G9/G10 pocket camera a nice design, but rather bland. I don’t see that many images that come out of it that you can’t get with a Canon SD970. Most pros I know use the Panasonic LX3 (or Leica DLUX 4) as their backup camera, NOT the G10.
The sensor on the E-P1 is only “dinky” when compared to a D3, D3X, 5D Mk 2, or 1Ds Mk III. Those cameras run $5k+ for the body only and require pretty expensive lenses for most shooting (okay the $100 50mm f/1.8D looks shoots great on it). Just carrying a camera around gets a reaction.
It all depends on how much investment he has in the Nikon system. I, for one, will never leave it. But all manufacturers right now make excellent cameras and the E-P1 is a unique design with good performance.
Jonathan Lundell
dpreview just posted their review of the Panasonic GH1.
I haven’t read it yet, but Panasonic has been doing some very good work lately.
Jonathan Lundell
The lack of a viewfinder makes the E-P1 a non-starter for me. Micro Four Thirds means no optical viewfinder, of course, but a good EVF isn’t bad, and the GH1 EVF sounds very, very good.