Oly will license KM\'s Anti-Share in E-3

[bfung]

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=15087812

Not sure how real it is!

[admin_old]

That would be great, but we will see. I think it will have 12-15mp But that\'s at least a hope. IS would be good. We will see.
It is along the lines of what I heard. I just wonder who will make the sensor....
:)
T

Post edited by: tspore, at: 2005/09/19 02:25

[pixelmaniaman]

Do we really want some of these \"extras\" ? my KM A2 has the \"AS\" yes it\'s good, but I think the DSLR should stay with a more professional orientation.

[marcof]

Since no DZs have AS/IS/VR, it would be a good choice to have this in the body.
And I think professional shooters would love this feature.. it is not a gadget, it can be really useful :)
However, I never trust those \"the rep told me...\" threads..
we\'ll have to wait and see..

[DavidL]

This fits what I was told by a dealer several months ago, if people can remember my old threads. If not; two new cameras one around £1000 with live histogram and antishake now known as E500. The pro model for new year \"Faster than anything out there around 10mp probably with built in grip.\"

[OzRay]

As I mentioned in that post, it going to be a significant re-design if they are going to incorporate the dust buster as well.

I\'m still not a fan of shaking sensors. Whilst it works (I had an A2), KM hasn\'t implemented things all that well when you consider all the problems they\'ve had with sensor alignment.

And as others have pointed out, the imaging circle may not accomodate the shaky sensor concept. Now there\'s nothing to say they couldn\'t perhaps incorporate something from Panasonic.

Cheers

Ray

[Kansas Ron]

I am not sure if this would be as good as I originally thought. I too had an A2 and one of the problems was that you had to make sure not to leave the AS on all the time because the sensor heated up and there were reports of increased noise from it. The complexity of two different functions on the sensor (SSWF & AS) may be asking for increased number of problems. I certainly would want to see how this worked for a while before considering purchase.

[bfung]

Hi DavidL,

\"Faster than anything...\"

Do you mean FPS or cmaera response?

I am very excited to see Oly support camer build-in AS which mean all existing lens support AS.

Regards,

Billy

[First Light]

I welcome the in-camera AS feature as very good news. I hope that it\'s true. Don\'t forget, you will undoubtedly be able to turn if off when you don\'t want to use it. Plus, I trust Olympus to get it right with regard to its implementation.

What disappoints me is that the Olympus rep didn\'t appear to make any comment about noise at high ISO. I realize that this is an overblown spec for many photographers. But I shoot a lot in low light without a flash and it will make a very significant difference to me. It I had to prioritize lower noise and in-camera AS, I would place lower noise first.

[Kansas Ron]

You definitely have the right priority. Overall an improvement in the 400 and up ISO performance would be the most welcome improvement IMO.

[DavidL]

\"Faster than anything...\"

Was the quote. I took it to mean frames a second and buffer speed.
Whatever we are all going to upgrade our computors. david

[jebir]

Anti-Share...? That\'s not for me... I want to show my pics as fast as possible! :-)

Seriously, wouldn\'t it be more logical if the FourThirds consortium licenced technology from each other?

Sigma: Lens and camera technology
Kodak: Sensors and maging technology
Fuji: Sensors and imaging technology
Panasonic: Sensors and camera technology
Sanyo: What are they good at?

I don\'t really see why KM has to come into the picture. If they do, wouldn\'t it be loical to join the consortium then?

Jens

[iROK]

I don\'t really see why KM has to come into the picture. If they do, wouldn\'t it be loical to join the consortium then?

Well we now know that SONY has teamed up with KM to keep up with the PANASONIC / OLYMPUS 43rd\'s venture. KM would take a big unpleasent USER back-lash if it joined the 43rd\'s group... there is such a vast product base of MINOLTA AF gear that could be just like what they had to deal with in 1985 when the MD lens mount was replaced... (or CANON with FD > EOS in 1987?)

Unless they ran too different lens mount SLR systems... B)

[barondla]

Minolta and Olympus have worked together before. Remember the OM 2 with the first ttl flash system? It was invented by Minolta and set on the shelf to collect dust. Olympus took it and ironed out certain bugs before bringing it to market. Minolta saw no use for it at first. Makes you wonder what they were thinking? Japanese companies trade patents and parts all the time. I used to see this all the time in hifi equipment. Marantz turntable with Sony or Pioneer motor in them etc. Toyota used to have a car with an engine made by Yamaha!
I wonder if body IS is the way to go? I remember every camera company (except Canon) following the Minolta Maxxum / Dynax lead with af motor in body. Now years later most have moved to af motor in lens. Makes you wonder.
thanks
barondla

[Pavel]

You know guys there are limits to everything. There seems to be this idea here - based on fervent wishing - that Olympus engineers can overcome everything. They can\'t not even with the best of intentions. It\'s based on R&D spending and patent holding and simply just limits.

People want small viewfinders and bright viewfinders and 100 percent viewfinders. Well the only way you will ever get that is if you buy three different cameras! Some of these things work against each other and you always have to settle for trade-offs.

The advantage minolta has is their 35mm lenses. These are necessary! We don\'t have lenses that cast a larger image circle! That would mean that we would need new lenses or a smaller yet image sensor. The image sensor moves ... and I remember reading an interview with a minota designer where he talked about the challenges to designing the anti-shake and the problems with how far the sensor had to travel to support a wide angle lens with IS.

Now I want a Pro body. What does that mean to me? Well it includes the confidence that my gear will hold up to rough use and over a long period of time. I don\'t think the anti-shake ... inspires the likelihood of a body being able to hold up. It diminishes that robustness by putting in a sensor that humms in use like an electric razor at 2,000 rmp\'s. How is that going to sit with a guy that wants to count on a camera in the desert or in the arctic.

Pro\'s don\'t want whiz bang features. They want stuff that works day in a day out. You put these cute features in and you kill reliability percentages. Don\'t do it Olympus! Give us the best in ruggedness on what you call pro bodies. I want to trade \"whiz bang\" and \"do it for me\" for the comfort of my E-3 working without repair in five years. The way the old nikons and OM used to.

Put the kiddie stuff into the kiddie camera\'s :) ( ok, I\'m on a rant here ... but it\'s just exaggerating a bit to make a point :) )

I don\'t know for sure but I think that if Panasonic brings out an anti shake it will not have an anti dust shaker ...and likely a smaller sensor. I guess we can get used to a 3x multiplier?
How about just better noise performance along with f 1.4 and f 2.0 lenses. That will do it too.

Olympus blew it with the pro\'s when they left out their best lenses with no optical IS. That left them hemmed in with either having to offer no IS or having to go for the next best solution.
It must have been for cost reasons. Perhaps later they can update these after they\'ve paid off their R&D costs. That would be best - and still very possible. I mean after all - are Olympus designers not after the \"best\" solution. Give em time ... but lets hope they get it right. That means optical IS.

[TonyB]

I agree with Pavel. Although an AS system in body does sound attractive, I\'ve heard stories of KM sensor failure due to the AS mechanism breaking down.

Frankly give me a robust E-3, slightly larger than present E-1, to accomodate the weight of the new \"Silver Ringed\" lenses. Built-in grip would be nice. In short I\'d like to see the same body that was \"leaked/PS\" about 2 months ago, but with more grip on the bottom

http://fourthirdsphoto.com/index.php?option=com_gallery2&Itemid=51&g2_view=co re.ShowItem&g2_itemId=2133
http://fourthirdsphoto.com/index.php?option=com_gallery2&Itemid=51&g2_view=co re.ShowItem&g2_itemId=2133

http://fourthirdsphoto.com/index.php?option=com_gallery2&Itemid=51&g2_view=co re.ShowItem&g2_itemId=2138
http://fourthirdsphoto.com/index.php?option=com_gallery2&Itemid=51&g2_view=co re.ShowItem&g2_itemId=2138

Tony

[admin_old]

Pavel,
I must disagree with the comment, that in body IS would be a toy. If you are going to make that comment, unseen That would be like saying that the ultrasonic wave filter is going to be a toy. IF olympus does not come up with some type of in body IS I would be very angry. I have spent 9000 in high end lenses this year, 7-14, (I don\'t care about IS with that lens) 35-100, 90-250 (These 2 lenses I do care about IS). I have some apprehensions about in body IS. However, I think that we will have to see. I think that Olympus produces some great things, e.g. The optical lenses of Oly, and the ultrasonic wave filter.
But for the short term, we will see what happens.
T

[Pavel]

You know Tony, as cameras get more and more features to help the helpless ( a bit of an exageration but the general direction of all this stuff ) then I think of it as \"kiddie\" stuff more and more.
That is not to say that it is a toy or that there is no need for this but if we presume we can not have it all I\'d rather not have some of these \"features\" that hand hold us on our way to better shots. I\'d rather have ruggedness and longevity. Simple brings that. Complicated does not.

I\'d like to ask you what you want IS for in your 35-100 for? At the long end I can see a need for it in some circumstances. At 200 you need a 1/200th shutter speed as long as your technique is average and I can hold it to about 1/125th or so with concentration.
My problem at that speed is not my holding the camera steady - it\'s subject matter moving on me and creating a blur. IS does nothing towards it. Appertures and high iso availability do as they enable you to have faster speed.

At the 35 end with 1/60th shutter speeds a pice of cake and 1/30th doable ... what on earth is IS going to contribute? Heck a monopod helps the same. A pro will bring one. A general use kind of guy wont\' likely bring one - but I\'m talking about only the \"pro\" oriented model sitting on top of the hierarchy.

Now for the long stuff 100 to 300, sure it would be great. However it would be best done in the lens. I\'m sorry you bought in without IS. I believe there is a good chance that Olympus will do it right in the future and put out modified 150\'s and 300\'s with in lens IS. At the begining it was necessary to get lenses out ... and to make them affordable as could be withing the constraints that Oly has working against them with respect to low volume and new startup costs.
That wont be a factor soon. The Lens IS is \"doing it right\" bacause that is still more effective and much more pleasant to use as it stabilizes the image in the viewfinder - body is does not!
It also prevents us paying for something in the body when I really has no need except for the long glass -except for marketing and newbies. That part is fine - I don\'t mean to disparage beginers - but Olympu\'s reputation for \"professional\" is getting to be a joke!

Why not next put picture mode on their pro stuff. I\'m sure it will help someone, help sell it too - but it does not help the pro\'s.

You see what I mean. I am not saying that it isn\'t desirable. I just don\'t want that nonsense of the \"Pro\", the \"top\" body. Put it in a few of the best lenses later and in the lower bodies - sure. But for a rugged body expecting to be used in the most rugged ways the built in body IS is a liability. KM has a bit of a problem with it already and they aren\'t being used in a demanding way. I don\'t think a single war has been covered with these where the bodies are being run with and banged around - with IS humming the sensor around at 5000 hz.
And then the dust shaker too? Please - only on the consumer stuff.
Ever watch how sports guys throw their equipment around?

The more features, the more problems. Pro connotes \"rugged\" - keeping it simple helps with that.

Also if you look at how body is works you will find the only way to put it in is when the image circle is bigger than the sensor. The sensor moves side to side and the image has to be over it at the far reaches. Olympus then would have to make the sensor even smaller.
I\'d rather not have that. I want performance - not a helping hand instead of my skill.

Just on the top model though. That is all I\'m talking about. On the rest put whatever fancy stuff you want :) And then hold it gently :P

[parallaxkid]

Pavel wrote:

And then the dust shaker too? Please - only on the consumer stuff.
Ever watch how sports guys throw their equipment around?

Just on the top model though. That is all I\'m talking about. On the rest put whatever fancy stuff you want :) And then hold it gently :P

I agree with some of what you say Pavel. I believe the camera should be as reliable as possible, and ruggedness is a must. However, the sswf isn\'t a tool only for consumers. You seem to think that photojournalists shooting in wars are the only photographers considered \"pro\" and that pro caliber cameras need to be bullet proof tanks (no pun intended). In reality, all professional means is that you make your income as a photographer (or athlete, musician, chef etc). Technically, you don’t even have to be good at what you do to be considered “professional.” For obvious reasons, skill and talent are inherent in all professions.

For example, I know a “professional” photojournalist who works for the local paper. His photos aren’t anything novel, but he’s a professional (because his income comes from photojournalism). Another example, Shaquille O’Neal (woops, I fear I’ve stepped on some toes here).

I\'m a professional wedding photographer and I\'ve enjoyed the E-1\'s sswf thoroughly. I require my photos to be 100% free of dust, every shot. Just imagine if I had to wade through ~300-600 photos (per wedding) with the same dust specs on all of them. Not having to worry about this is truly beneficial to professionals. Also, I have over 22,000 exposures on each of my E-1s, and the sswf has never given me issues. A feature only for consumers indeed…

Alright that may seem a bit terse, but I do agree that there are obvious frilly things that pros can do without. My biggest annoyance is popup flashes. If the new E pro had a popup flash I’d be extremely disappointed. I have 2 speedlights that outperform any built in flash ever made. Its just another useless, flimsy thing for me to break. I personally think popup flashes are consumer/prosumer “extras.”

As for the in camera IS, I also agree that IS in lens would be better. IS isn’t needed with wide lenses, and it does seem to be shaking a very fragile piece of equipment at 5000hz. I don’t see Olympus putting IS into their new lenses anytime soon, and to satisfy the IS demand the in body version may be inevitable. Lets hope its as robust as the sswf. Personally I wouldn’t be upset if they didn’t implement it. I use a monopod/tripod for long/telephoto shots :D

[admin_old]

Pavel, I think that we are going to have to disagree here. I will admit I\'m not a pro if we are going to go by income, I only shot 10 weddings all last year, of course I don\'t plan on shooting more than 5 this year, so I must be getting worst. But I want the SSWF and I want IS.
But that\'s just me, you don\'t have to agree. I think that it would not neccessarly make it cheap, or consumer, etc.
For me IS is a safety net, I like those.
also I bought into the Olympus system partially because of the SSWF. It may be a toy. But it sold me!

T

[Pavel]

Tony sure we can disagree here... but keep in mind at the same time that I like to \"go overboard\" in my examples to make them impactfull. You know what I mean right. I don\'t consider it a toy and would love to have IS - you\'ve heard me say that before remember? AT the same time I wonder if the view experssed above by me although radical may not have some truth to it. The key word is \"wonder\". I don\'t know.

I really have to get a signature that has a disclaimer: Folks! I\'m just trying out concepts here. I don\'t belive all of what I\'m saying - I just want feedback on my ideas .... so overlook the over the top language please or you will forever missunderstand what I\'m about. I\'m just trying to bait some ideas.

You think that would put the debates more in the proper light from me?

You know I\'ve noticed that the first thing a canon shooter will tell me if I criticise canon in some detail is \"well why don\'t you switch\"? Why instead don\'t people look at it - that criticism is vital and not an indicator of dislike?
A camera is not a sacred relic.
To give one more example - I think if there is a \"Toy\" out there it is the Rebel. Why ... well it feels like one in the hands. Is it really a toy in the put down sense. NO. I\'d like to have one ( it\'s just not a priority ) because it is the perfect walkaround camera if you put a 35 f 2.0 on it.
Is it toy like compared to the 1D. If anything is ... then this contrast is ...valid .... though over the top a bit.

Look I marvel that you would think that a 1Dmk2 is too big for you ... when you have a lens that weighs three times as much and sticks out longer than your arm :)

So you think I\'m going to politely miss my chance to rib you for it. Not on your life! :)

I\'m not trying to mock your choices or values ( and that goes for anyone else here) I do want to get into it though ... who knows what we can discover. I do have to confess though I hate places where it\'s like a fan club.

Places where the brand of the posters is nothing but \"great\" aren\'t a place for me. First off every brand has a long way to go to have perfect bodies. No such thing as perfect anyway. Keep in mind that I bought the same E-1 you also use - and if I tell you it\'s toy like compared to the 1D ... don\'t get your hackles up. If you held them side by side .... and owned both where there was no defensiveness ... you would likely have the same thought. What isn\'t coming through here is I am not necessarily attaching value to it. Toy isn\'t necessarily bad. Pro isn\'t necessarily good. It just \"is\" in both cases.

And again ..... I\'m just trying to use vivid examples. Don\'t take me too seriously, man.

Cheers .... and peace!

Paralax ... you are completely right. I was picking extremes - and so left my argument wide open. :)
:P

[llpoolej]

I respect the fact you have used the cameras you compare, and give your opinion of its strengths and weaknesses. All cameras have them. If I was preparing a debate, I could make a solid argument why ANY camera was the best to buy. I would just change the perspective

At the time I bought my E-1, I also considered the D70 and the 20D. I got the E-1 with 14-54 for $900 and for the conditions I shoot in, it was the best camera. Either of the other two I could have made a good argument for. The 20D in many ways had the edge in performance. The loud CLACK of the shutter and the way it felt in my hands put me off.

The only thing I don\'t like is when someone who has never even held a camera, comments on it. I know this isn\'t YOU, as you have all these cameras. I am just pointing out how frustrating it can be in my life :P

[Pavel]

And guys, you know something else. Pro ... is no better in any way than amateur. these phrases are so \"loaded\" with baggage and emotion ... but heck a \"pro\" is just a guy that makes his living taking pictures not for himself ...but for the whims and with the dictates of others.

As far as creativity ... pro\'s dont\' need all that much. I\'ve constantly been blown away at the creativity,imaginations and quality of amateurs. It tend to think that on average I have seen the best work coming out of enthusiasts. I admire a pro for his bussiness sense, perseverence and consistency.

We all can learn from the best pros and the best amateurs. But to hold up a pro over an amateur isn\'t right.

THey often have differnet needs - for example moisture resistance and reliability. A pro has to stand in the rain to get his shot. We can all go home if we feel like it. He HAS to get useable shots. We are going for the more creative.

It\'s just different. It\'s like saying I need to buy a diesel and a truck because I make my living driving a truck. It would drive me nut to then have someone say ... oh darn .... I just have a corvette .... I\'m not a pro. Do you think when I get more money I would drive better with you equiptment sir like your truck?

I really am attaching little value to the concept of \"pro gear\" versus \" entusiasts\" gear. If you need to stand in the rain or use 400 mm lense for six hours at a time regualarly - you need to be tuned into what the Pro stuff gives you. People ofen say \" my 300 f 2.8 feels fine on my rebel. Ussually with a huff in their tone. Yeah sure it does ... for the first 30 minutes. Amateurs can put the darn thing down after a hour. A pro may be standing there for six! Does that make him a hero ... or sucker?
For a pro the weight of a big body is a benefit. But don\'t anyone think by pointing that out ... that I am holding up that side and suggesting that it is somehow more worthy. I am not! Many make that presumption and that is why we can\'t see eye to eye.

I just meant to convey the other side. I\'ve had to make my monthly studio rent via clicking the shutter. I know it isn\'t what many think it is. It ain\'t too glamorous. But it has diffent needs and they should be pointed out. A good brand to go with is one that gives comprehensive choices. Light, heavy ...whatever ... so a person is\'tn hemmend in by his fundamental choice of brand. I believe that Olympus is heading that way ...but it will take time.
Do they have a pro body. Not yet. The E--1 is like the 10D with weather resistence. If that were a pro in the canon lineup ... not too many would bite. OLy needs to get pro equiptment and primes out next. That is where they have a gap. They have the resto of the choices firming up nicely already. There is no insult in that. Just observation.
So that is what I think. It\'s a shame that people thing it\'s an insult. That is their value judgement attached to my statement.

[Pavel]

LL ... I just read your post. I like one thing you pointed out because I was so struck by it ...and I thought I must be the only one.
That clang of the 20D. I hated it so much that I dind\'t care what other things it brought to the table. It\'s not just that it\'s loud ... it just sounds so ....blech! I\'m glad someone else thinks so ! :)

I thought I was further gone towards neuroticsm .... than I cared to think. So either I\'m not .... or there are two of us.

The 20D is a fine camera ... that had the vibe of a wet noodle for me :)
The E-1 .... it\'s not as good in some ways ... but man oh man ... it just feels so good to use!
If more people go to shoot with one, I think olympus\'s numbers would swell, don\'t you folks think?
There are just some things imposible to describe with proper words. Olympus feel is one.

[llpoolej]

I have been scoffed at, and kindly persuaded to see the light. I have been told I need to change systems as there are no cheap used lenses for the Oly system(???) Not sure why I want cheap USED lenses. I have the lenses I want and need and they aren\'t used. Though a cheap LONG lens would be nice. Or a cheap LONG macro. I truly LOVE the quality of my lenses

I have offered to loan out my whole camera bag for a weekend to those scoffing at me so they can understand that intangible quality of my camera. They have never held an E-1 and never shot with one. You really have to to understand. It has its shortcomings, it truly does, but it makes up for it in something I can\'t explain

[Pavel]

Every last system has it\'s shortcomings.

The least of which may be the \"lemming\" syndrome ... that some are suffering from :)

Get\'em to hold it! That is a pretty generous offer ... because you know some of them may not want to return it!
:whistle: :dry: :ohmy:

[First Light]

Pavel wrote:
...The E--1 is like the 10D with weather resistence. ...
No way!!! Do you want to discuss all the reasons why this is not true? The E-1 is truly a pro camera. Now if you want to argue that it\'s not as good as another pro camera, then I\'ll agree with respect to some features. If you want to argue that some prosumer cameras out-perform it on some features, I\'ll also agree. But it has a number of features that are exclusive to pro cameras and it lacks a number of features that are exclusive to prosumer cameras. That all adds up to \"pro\" in my book. Maybe you meant to convey that it is an \"old\" pro camera. I\'ll agree to that, also.

[pixelmaniaman]

I don\'t think the sswf is a toy\" whilst like you it was a factor in deciding which dslr system I chose. As I have said many times before, the E300 satisfies my customers - they pay, I eat.
Some of the street hacks in europe use 10 year old 35mm cameras some not even slr\'s.. producing great & inspiring results. I\'m not sure they are even interested in \"Doing it Digital\"
Very soon maybe we will be able to order our dslr like a car -- basic then with add ons & add ins\"\" if you kno\' what I mean..:ohmy:

[Pavel]

FL. I had both. They perform exactly alike in every feature. The only differences are that the canon is insignificantly more in the resolution department and the E-1 has a smaller but more accurate viewfinder and weather sealing. The 10D is a bit more responsive but it\'s insignificant.

None of the pro end performace features are present. Not focus ability nor frame rate, write speed, viewfinder blackout, shutter response nor ruggedness. To use the E-1 and then pick up and shoot with the 1D is to feel a large gap. The step is as large as from a rebel 300 to the E-1. Larger in fact. So if those parameters don\'t define \"Pro\" and top of line - what does? As well to see the white ballance performance, custom function choices and shutter speed differnces is to know that the E-1 is no pro camera. Sorry.

Put another way, if Canon made the E-1 they would never consider labeling it a pro body. The weather sealing nothwistanding - it just does not cut it in any way.

I found the performance and feel identical between the two. Both high quality build with metal based bodies. Just not in the same league as nikons or canons top stuff. Hopefully soon.

I know that you would like to think that the E-1 is rugged, and it is but not to the same degree as a D2h or 1D - anymore than the rebel is next to the E-1. The shutter is rated to 150,000 actuations and the switches and buttons are of noticeable higher standard and it feels like it.

[Pavel]

pixelman, you are right. but to use your definition ... well any camera can be a pro camera. That makes the label useless.
I\'m sure that richard petty can go fast in a ford escort too - but I dont\' call it a pro race car :)

Pro is a shifting standard. It conotes the best most rugged build and top performance in every parameter.

It also presumes ergonomics weight towards consistency and safety rather than user friednliness.

Some fields require very little of a body. Others every ounce of performance. Those are the ones I am thinking of when it comes to selecting those bodies that are todays top performers - where no pro user would be let down, no matter what the shooting style.

I think that the field that demands uncompromising performance the most is professional sports shooting. That is where, no matter what your skill level you can only compete with the best equiptment of the day. The fact I tend to shoot sports a bit - and feel the difference there the most may be why I\'m so critical of the bodies that, well, plain and simple - let me down and don\'t cut it.

Looked at that way - there are only a few bodies of todays crop that are peerless. I won\'t rub it in - but the Minolta 5D isn\'t one of them - I\'m dearly sorry to offend it\'s owners :(

[pixelmaniaman]

hey I agree with you, in fact with digital photography it will always be a moving platform, manufacturers will forever strive to better the opposition and therefore produce more photographic platforms some with as we say \"wanted\" specs others with little more than \'advertising\" specs.
It happened in 35mm even to hybrid large format equipment, who would recognise the latest incarnation from \"H\" as against the original 500?
Photographers are adaptive & forward thinking people, otherwise we would still be get our heads under the black cape -
A pro camera I feel is one that can withstand the enviroment & hard use, look at the high end camera mounts, tough bodies, easy to replace viewfinders, mirrors, battery packs etc etc...
$20.000 will get you a great digital set up, but will it be updated & upgraded within a short period of time?
of course and thats why digital came along, the film cameras had I feel pretty much come to the end of
wanted and needed specs, lenses the best already designed and built.. Digital gave photography a well needed shot in the arm by bringing thousands of \'new\' shutterbugs to the table. The revenue and employment opportunities in the world of digital are unending...
The future may give us 50mp cameras activated with \"thought\" software... L
:silly:

[TonyB]

Pavel,

To use the E-1 and then pick up and shoot with the 1D is to feel a large gap. The step is as large as from a rebel 300 to the E-1. Larger in fact. So if those parameters don\'t define \"Pro\" and top of line - what does? As well to see the white ballance performance, custom function choices and shutter speed differnces is to know that the E-1 is no pro camera. Sorry.

Put another way, if Canon made the E-1 they would never consider labeling it a pro body. The weather sealing nothwistanding - it just does not cut it in any way.

I found the performance and feel identical between the two. Both high quality build with metal based bodies. Just not in the same league as nikons or canons top stuff. Hopefully soon.

Don\'t forget the large gap in pricing between the Flagship Nikon & Canon\'s Vs. the E-1. I sure hope I\'d get something extra from a 1D for the extra $4000.00, not to mention the 1Ds. I\'ve always found that ,for my needs, my money is better spent on glass then on a body that has a technology life span of 2 years.

Regards,
Tony

[Pavel]

Sure tony and thats a huge factor - the money I mean.
I\'m also not saying that the pro stuff is better under less than pro demands like sports. Only in the areas that it makes a difference is it worth the trade-offs like price, weight and visibility. In much shooting it makes no difference except to stand out like a sore thumb and get tired from carying.

They are capable - but for most shooting it makes precious little difference, don\'t you agree.

I would also say that the canon and nikon pro bodies aren\'t as much fun to shoot under many instances. That is why the prosumer like the D200 is going to sweep sales records for a nikon. It\'s good, good enought - and none of that weight.

I hope Oly eventualy has all classes, something for everyone. But the pro stuff is overrated for most shooting and like you pointed out - the price hurts!

Nuff said :)

[First Light]

Pavel, I also used a 10D quite a bit and my experience is not the same. It was not more responsive and had a paltry burst buffer. With the exception of AF, the E-1 out-performed it.

You seem to think that a camera has to be similar to an EOS 1D before it can be labelled a pro. Then let\'s label every camera that doesn\'t equal or exceed today\'s best specs as a consumer camera! While we\'re at it, let\'s say that only the fastest car can be labelled a \"race car\".

I could list all the reasons why the E-1 is clearly designed for professional photographers but I\'m tired and don\'t have the time. Go ahead and imagine what you want and be happy. Just stay away from the kool aid.

[Pavel]

So where do you draw the line between pro and prosumer FL?
At 10 shots in the buffer I guess as the 10D has nine vs the twelve of the e-1? :silly:

...versus the 50 of the D2hs. :whistle:

I thought we should include the ability to folow action too.

What does make a pro camera in you opinion? weather proofing? Small size? 3 fps? decent focus in bringht light?

Don\'t worry about me overdosing on Koolaid. I stoped drinking the Olympus stuff to excess after I found it wasn\'t good for ballance. :sick: Same for the other brands.

As for race cars. I confess, I did always think that only the fastest do when it counts. They use some pretty exotic stuff at the formula one and nascar both - somewhat akin to the cutting edge stuff you see at an NFL fotball game or the Olymics camera wise. Perhaps that approach is over the top. But I guess to each his own.

We can agree on one thing. THe E-1 is the pro version for Olympus.
So no more comparisons. Not till we have something better. THen I expect comparisons a pleanty, eh?

[parallaxkid]

First Light wrote:
Pavel, I also used a 10D quite a bit and my experience is not the same. It was not more responsive and had a paltry burst buffer. With the exception of AF, the E-1 out-performed it.

You seem to think that a camera has to be similar to an EOS 1D before it can be labelled a pro. Then let\'s label every camera that doesn\'t equal or exceed today\'s best specs as a consumer camera! While we\'re at it, let\'s say that only the fastest car can be labelled a \"race car\".

I could list all the reasons why the E-1 is clearly designed for professional photographers but I\'m tired and don\'t have the time. Go ahead and imagine what you want and be happy. Just stay away from the kool aid.

First Light I couldn\'t have said it better myself. I think a lot of what Pavel says is valuable and worth considering. But he does make a lot of assumptions about what is considered \"pro\" and what is not. I think we can simplify this a bit. The E-1 is a professional camera. Why? Because professionals use it.

Pavel- A word about the E-1\'s ruggedness. I worked for an environmental agency for about 7 months. The agency required a lot of field work and my first E-1 body is quite beat up. Does it still work? You\'re damn right it does, and without a hitch. Did I shoot in full rain? Yes, many times. So does this make it less rugged than a Canon/Nikon? Considering I\'m not a photojournalist using it as a bullet proof shield in a war, I don\'t really care. Period.

Actually, if I was shooting a war I\'d use my E1\'s. I\'d be afraid the opposing force would mistake the loud \"CLACK CLACK\" of the EOS series shutters as gunshots, and spray me down in a hail of bullets :D

[First Light]

Pavel wrote:
So where do you draw the line between pro and prosumer FL?
As usual, you ask another good question. I\'ve been thinking about it for a year. I think we have to begin by acknowledging that there are different types of photography. The needs of a sports photographer are very different from an architectural photographer. Does the definition of a \"pro\" camera need to take these differences into account? Or can we devise some sort of \"general\" definition? I\'m not sure how to answer.

I\'ve thought about making two lists, a \"Consumer\" list and a \"Professional\" list. You would check off the features that a camera has on each list and then total the results. Then subtract the \"consumer\" total from the \"professional\" total. A positive result would indicate a bonifide \"pro\" camera. A negative result would indicate a \"consumer\" camera. It may also be necessary to weigh some features more heavily than others in each list. So we might need to assign a numerical value to each feature in each list.

That\'s as far as I\'ve gone with my thinking on the subject. I haven\'t tried to make any lists yet but I\'ve got some features bouncing around in my mind for the lists. Perhaps I\'ll start a new thread on this subject later when I have more time.

[barondla]

Some companies don\'t even consider the Big Canon and Nikon as \"pro\" cameras. That is why we have medium format digital \"pro\" camera entries from Hasselblad, Mamiya, and soon Pentax. These people are more interested in quality than speed and ruggedness. The most pro Indy race car isn\'t worth a darn as a Baja off road race car! No one camera, even pro, can be sota (state of the art) for everything!

[TonyB]

Guys,

I really don\'t care if a camera is labelled Pro or not, as long as it meets my needs it\'s the camera that I\'ll buy.

Back in the late 80\'s I bought a Canon F1N w/standard finder over the F1N w/AE finder because I could use the 20 degree partial metering screen with precision and in doing so I gave up the Aperture Priority option on the camera, did it make for lesser options on the camera ? Yes, but it was still a \"Pro\" camera with the same construction and weather seal. I also had a T90 (Grandfather to the current EOS 1 series design) which gave me a plethora of options my F1N could not, was it a better camera? Yes. Was it labelled by Canon as a \"Pro\" model? No.

I don\'t want to get dragged into a discussion on whether or not the E-1 is a Pro model or not, frankly I don\'t care. When I switched from 35mm to Digital in late \'03 I had a choice of Nikon D100, Fuji S2, Canon 10D & the E-1. The Fuji was out of the running due to the inability of attaching a drive/grip and it\'s use of AA\'s. The Nikon & Canon looked good, but I could not bring myself to buying a camera with built in flash, as I felt it compromised the integrity of the prism and more importantly the weather seal. That left the Oly E-1 as the only option at the same ballpark cost as the aforementioned three models.

Is the E-1 truly a \"Pro\" camera? I don\'t know. I do know it has a fantastic build quality, best weather seal of any camera I\'ve ever used (mainly due to the lenses being sealed properly), offers 12 RAW+SHQ JPEG files before the buffer is full (more than enough, unless you are covering an NFL game), \"anti-shock\" mirror lock-up for long exposures, optional grip, diopter & interchangeable focusing screen. The rest is a bonus, including the SSWF - which at the time of my purchase thought little of, until I stated going out with a buddy who uses a 1D MkII and has had a few sessions spoiled by dust.......

In short the E-1 may be a little behind Canon and Nikon in terms of focusing speed, but is by far the best bang for the buck !!!!!

Tony

[marcof]

If the camera makes money for you, it\'s a Pro camera. If not, it\'s just a moneypit...

[Pavel]

Some pro\'s use a point and shoot on occasion. I\'m glad i\'ve got a pro body for so cheap. I only paid $400 for my canon G1.

[parallaxkid]

Pavel wrote:
Some pro\'s use a point and shoot on occasion. I\'m glad i\'ve got a pro body for so cheap. I only paid $400 for my canon G1.

Maybe pros will use p/s when they\'re on vacation with their family :D Personally I\'d still bring along one of my E-1s (the older beat up one).

I\'d hope they wouldn\'t use it for actual work...I can\'t stand using anything but the best I have because the work I do professionally needs to be at its highest quality 100% of the time.

I\'d buy a canon G1 for my girlfriend...but wouldn\'t use it for any work that I do.

Sorry Pavel that last comment was specifically targeted to get a rise out of you. I\'m sure the G1 is quite a little gem.

And I totally agree with TonyB, well said.

[First Light]

Pavel is absolutely correct! It\'s a gutsy thing for a professional photographer to admit but it\'s true. When are we going to learn that it\'s the person—not the camera—that makes a great photographer. There have been many times that a skilled pro has chosen to use a point and shoot (P&S) camera instead of a dSLR. And it\'s not just \"on occasion\".

It infuriates me when anyone (client or fellow pro) looks down on a photographer because their gear is not as good as they expect. Tony has written about this with his wedding photography—it\'s why he purchased an E-300 (so he could tell his clients that he has an 8 megapixel camera even though he prefers to shoot with his 5 megapixel E-1).

Go read about Magnum photographer Alex Majoli who shot in China and during wartime in the Congo and Iraq with a bunch of Olympus C-5050 and C-5060 cameras hanging around his neck. Last I heard he was using several C-8080\'s. You can read about him at Rob Galbraith\'s site here (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6468-7844). It\'s a great story.

Sometimes I wonder if that\'s what I should do. Forget the expensive tech and spend the money on travel so I can shoot more fun stuff.

It is totally, completely, insanely foolish to judge a photographer\'s ability by his/her gear.

[Pavel]

FL ... your making me nervous. Me being right ... what have I said that\'s being misconstrued! :)

I think an Alex Majoli with an Oly c-5050 is a pro photographer with a consumer camera.

Pavel with a 1D is a enthusiast with a pro camera.

Alex Majoli with a D2h is a pro with a pro camera.

The pictures produced with the middle scenario are likely to be the least acclaimed ... but that isn\'t the point here.

What I can\'t see to get through is that I really am not making a value judgement with the label. To me it is simply a way to describe equiptment that meets several requirements like ruggedness and then further describes the very best that a generation of body can be. A pro camera is one that gives no excusses. It has the very best in performance within each generation. If it is missing a performance feature ... and another make has it ... and the missing of that feature makes it unsuitable for a task - it is not a pro camera to me.

I think my definition is likely different that some of yours and that begins our difficulty in finding agreement. some pro tasks are possible with any adequate body. A group picture with strobes at a wedding is one example. A candid shot at the same wedding in dim light and only a moment to grab it ... with a off center composition .... may be at the same wedding but if you bring a bronica .. you may not get that shot - irrespective of gear.
Ever wonder why this is the renaissance of the wedding genre. It\'s the equipment!
If you have a great body .. but not the best ... you will sooner or later miss some shots. That is what I call compromise and I make the mistake of drawing the line there. All but the very best are on the other side to me ...and I don\'t call them pro.
Kinda dumb of me ... but you know sometimes it\'s debates like these that make us aware of our ways, right?

I have for a long time resented how \"pro\" gear ... which many clients define as a \"big\" camera - how it carries so much weight.

I\'ve been let into places because I\'ve had \"big\" gear ... and I\'ve gotten jobs for the same reason. It is interesting how that stuff works on people. That would be an interesting thread in it\'s own right.
So I appologise for my way of thinking about these inanimate objects ruffling feathers. That is not my value judgement doing that. It is peoples attachment of good baggage to the word \"pro\" - that causes that.

I feel that I can make a great landscape shot ( that\'s if I could in fact make a landscape shot to start with ) with any kind of equipment equally. I shoot a lot of action. I can not get equal results in that pursuit. That leads to my narrow bias. I didn\'t really think of that ... and I apologize.

I often get asked what equipment to buy by people. I always ask \"what do you shoot\". For some answers I tell them to get any brand or model within the brand because the performance does not make much difference. The feel of the body and the lenses do. ( btw I most often recommend Oly there) For some like sports or low light candids I recommend more based on performance. It may be invaluable. I didn\'t even realize I call these cameras \"pro\" cameras.

Dumb semantics

:blush:

[admin_old]

The great what to buy question. i must get asked about it 10 times a week. I tell them P&S. Then they say what Brand, I usually say \"Kodak!\" For that is the only camera my mother in law liked when I bought her one.
Not many people ask about SLR but I did try to convince 1 guy from going D-Rebel, and instead get a Oly. I think he blew me off.
T

[TonyB]

tspore wrote:

Not many people ask about SLR but I did try to convince 1 guy from going D-Rebel, and instead get a Oly. I think he blew me off.
T

I\'ve stopped trying to sway people towards Oly. Each time I\'m asked for advice they usually reply that Canon or Nikon are the \"only\" 2 options.....

Tony

[First Light]

Pavel wrote:
... I think an Alex Majoli with an Oly c-5050 is a pro photographer with a consumer camera.

Pavel with a 1D is a enthusiast with a pro camera.

Alex Majoli with a D2h is a pro with a pro camera. ...
Great example. Although I don\'t know about \"Pavel being an enthusiast\". It seems that you\'re way better than that.

There will always be some grey area where it\'s hard to decide whether some cameras are \"pro\" or not. The lines begin to blur for some models. But I agree 100% that the use a camera is put to does not by itself make a camera \"pro\" and that\'s what your example above illustrates very well.

[parallaxkid]

TonyB wrote:
tspore wrote:

Not many people ask about SLR but I did try to convince 1 guy from going D-Rebel, and instead get a Oly. I think he blew me off.
T

I\'ve stopped trying to sway people towards Oly. Each time I\'m asked for advice they usually reply that Canon or Nikon are the \"only\" 2 options.....

Tony

This is a shameful fact. Its like trying to recommend Linux to someone who barely knows how to operate a windows platform. Its next to impossible to make them see the light...so to speak (or at least a viable option).