The End of an Era
Wednesday, September 16, 2009

This content has been moved to the new SeriousCompacts.com.

Click here to go to the new location

Posted by Unknown

Comments (16)

Loading... Logging you in...
Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout
  • Logged in as
0 Vote up Vote down
Andrew's avatar

Andrew · 811 weeks ago

Great story. I too do not use my Olympus DSLR much anymore, but when I do I appreciate its performance and the very high quality 12-60mm zoom lens. But most of the time I use the Olympus E-P1 or DP2 or GRD3. And not often enough I use film.

If the m4/3 cameras had the focus and processing performance of a DSLR, and there were fast native m4/3 primes available, those cameras would be ideal. But we're not there yet. I would accept a slightly larger m4/3 camera if it would increase performance. I've been curious about that Panasonic 7-14mm lens. By all accounts it is excellent.

But you're right that I believe the age of the DSLR is coming to and end for many people. For most people's needs the more compact m4/3-like cameras are all you need. In fact, I believe even many pros will appreciate them more than a DSLR once their performance and lens selection improve. .
0 Vote up Vote down
Michael Penn's avatar - Go to profile

Michael Penn · 811 weeks ago

Fantastic article. As someone that still uses a Nikon D300 and the large 17-55mm 2.8 for street photography I can't wait for a smaller camera that has a good iso 1600 and above, quiet and good lens selection without spending $10,000 on a Leica M9 with two used lenses.

Thank you,
Michael Penn
Loading...
+1 Vote up Vote down
Linh's avatar - Go to profile

Linh 36p · 811 weeks ago

I'm in a similar boat. I have my Canon system, and I rarely take it unless I'm going out to explicitly take pictures or for paid work. But even when I go out to take pictures for my own pleasure, the system weighs me down and I am finding it's not as enjoying.

So I started looking at the K7 and pancakes. Great glass, decent system. However, I wasn't convinced of the high ISO quality from the K7 for dark events (aka weddings). On top of that, to replicate my 20D/40D combo would cost many times more than I could sell my canon setup. But it's still pretty bulky. I can't just carry it anywhere.

And this is how I ended up pre-ordering a GF1+20/1.7 kit. I think I can manage w/o a viewfinder, but we'll see. Hopefully the add-on is not utter crap. But looking at more lenses, the G1 kit came to mind (maybe used). Save on buying it vs the lenses alone. That'd give me an extra body.. and the gears started rolling on if I could use the G series professionally. The build is what keeps me from saying it can work, the 40D is just built so nicely.

But we will see. This is a good start and hopefully the micro4/3's movement can get more push than the 4/3's movement did.
0 Vote up Vote down
praktinafan's avatar - Go to profile

praktinafan · 811 weeks ago

Might be interesting to try an old manual fast prime. For example a 1.4/50 or 2.4/35 which come out as 100 and 70 mm.
0 Vote up Vote down
Richard's avatar

Richard · 811 weeks ago

I'm not understanding why built-in viewfinders are so hard to come by. My old $100 Oly Stylus epic had an excellent one.
3 replies · active 811 weeks ago
Loading...
+1 Vote up Vote down
Linh's avatar - Go to profile

Linh 36p · 811 weeks ago

just no room for it. Or they'd have to make it taller. they weren't willing to sacrifice that for the market they hope to sell the most too. It's unfortunate, but at least oly looks like they might maintain an optical VF for the E-P1 and continuing series. It might not get built in though for a while.
0 Vote up Vote down
guest's avatar

guest · 811 weeks ago

well, there must be room... the Stylus Epic has a very clever viewfinder that doesn't take up much space at all. It is quite unlike any other I have seen. On the front side there is only a tiny hole (perhaps 1mm in size) just above the lens, which transmits the light via some strange system (glas fiber or sth) to the viewfinder . This system doesn't use a lot of space, and it also ensures that there is basically no parallax error.

I really would like to have sth. like that on the DP2 or similar, but it must be patented.
Loading...
+1 Vote up Vote down
Linh's avatar - Go to profile

Linh 36p · 811 weeks ago

it's still probably going to increase the height a bit. I'm sure they crammed a bunch of stuff in there. Either that or it wouldn't have covered a proper range or too small like a point and shoot (which I find to be useless personally).

Most wanting a viewfinder I think want something RF styled. At least, I would. I'm really hoping the EVF is decent.
0 Vote up Vote down
wolfie's avatar

wolfie · 811 weeks ago

Yes - I think you have pinpointed that we have arrived at an important point in digital photography where the mirrorless compact can now replace the DSLR for a large portion of most people's photgraphy. After handling the E-P1 today I could see my future could include small sensor and larger sensor mirror-less cameras rather than the current idiom of flagship DSLR and a "deputy" compact. The times are a changing!
Loading...
+1 Vote up Vote down
amin's avatar - Go to profile

amin 67p · 811 weeks ago

Enjoyed reading your post Björn!

I am probably headed the same direction. Was using a Nikon D700, and that kit wasn't seeing much use due to size and weight. I then downsized to a D5000, which I think is fantastic. I'm using that with a 35/1.8, 10-24, and thinking of picking up the Tamron 60/2 macro for my portrait/macro needs.

However, the recent purchase of a GH1 kit and M. Zuiko 17/2.8 has me rethinking. I don't want a GF1 or E-P1 because I like the viewfinder of the G1/GH1. Not super enthused about buying a G1 because I like the multi-aspect GH1 sensor. All it would take for me to consider dropping the Nikon would be availability of the GH1 body only (as a second GH1), Lumix 20/1.7, Lumix 7-14, and a faster portrait/macro option than the Leica 45/2.8.

Most likely I'll be shooting both systems for a while longer.
0 Vote up Vote down
JDH's avatar - Go to profile

JDH · 811 weeks ago

Thanks for the thought provoking post Björn!

The current m4/3 cameras do lag behind DSLRs when it comes to autofocus and general responsiveness. However, that's as of today, and I'm sure future models (including the GF1) will close the gap. For my purposes the perfect combination is a m4/3 body and a 4/3 body. The m4/3 is always with me, while the 4/3 is in a dedicated photo backback.

I am very, very, satisfied with an E-P1 for everyday use. For photo assignments my wife and I share an E-620 with an E-510 as a backup. The ability to use a variety of lenses (12-60mm, 35-100mm F2, 50mm F2, and old legacy lenses [Konica Hexannon]) really gives me the versatility that I desire :-). I have used the 4/3 system since 2004 (starting with an E1) and before that the E10 and E20 (fixed lens). More recently the G1 was a terrific camera but I missed being able to autofocus with the entire 4/3 range of lenses. Now

The GF1 should be a great camera, please keep us posted on how things turn out!
0 Vote up Vote down
Dave's avatar - Go to profile

Dave · 811 weeks ago

I'm just about to upgrade from a small point & shoot and I've been driving myself crazy trying to make the right decision. This article and the comments have really helped. I'd been thinking a Nikon D90, but I fear I won't take it out as much as I do my point & shoot, due to its size and weight. The new GF1 sounds great, but I'm concerned about the fact it doesn't have in-camera image stabilization. I hear that new 20mm F/1.7 Panny lens also does not have I.S. If that's the case, well, isn't that going to be problematic? I'm new at this, so forgive me if I'm not entirely getting it. I also hear that Panny lenses are very pricey, no? I shoot mostly street photography and wide angle landscape. I like the Oly E-620 and the Panny G1, as well. The GH1 is out of my price range, unfortunately.
1 reply · active 811 weeks ago
Loading...
+1 Vote up Vote down
Linh's avatar - Go to profile

Linh 36p · 811 weeks ago

GH1 itself isn't bad given the cost of the lens.. it's that panasonic won't unbundle it (probably because it'd cripple G1 sales).

IS is indeed useful, but by not means is the lack of it on the 20 problematic. It all depends on your style of shooting. I personally don't care too much on the wider end, I can manage hand holding. It's the long end I struggle with.

On the same name, being able to shoot static available lighting is great. And I'll miss it, but it's not important to *me.* I favored the AF/screen from the GF1 vs the E-P1, and the hope the EVF is good. That and it was a better deal financially since I ultimately wanted the 20/1.7.

Keep in mind the GF1/E-P1 aren't all that compact really, especially coming from a small point and shoot. there's no pocket slipping these things IMO (MAYBE your jacket w/ the prime mounted). So you'll run into the same issues of not really wanting to carry it... possibly.

For me, the Rebel was still to big to sit in my bag (I'm a canon guy). That and a sigma 30/1.4 isn't small. So that doesn't help reduce weight/space from my 40D. The G1 is close, but I want every little bit of space I can get. to *me* the savings was enough combined w/ the lens value to pre order the GF1. That is tiny in my bag, not to mention the 14-45 is tiny compared to anything in the dslr world.

Your best bet is to find a G1 locally.. then chop off the viewfinder and grip, and it's basically the GF1. It's still not the same, but you can at least get some hands on feel for it.
0 Vote up Vote down
John's avatar

John · 811 weeks ago

I too love the micro-4/3rds system. Prior to purchasing my Oly E-P1 I had to lug around my 50D/24-70L combo. It got old after about 3-4 hours, not to mention there were places that you just couldn't take it. However, with the E-P1 that isn't an issue. I take this little baby with me EVERYWHERE! I even get into events with it that normally do not allow you in with a DSLR. The security guards are just clueless to the fact that it is a DSLR in a point and shoot body... The image quality is pretty damn close to the 50D. There are some situations where the 50D outperforms the Oly, but they are few and far between. For the most part if I were to show you an image taken with each camera you wouldn't be able to determine the difference (after cropping the Oly's shots to 12x18"). If there are still people out there that are on the fence wondering whether or not they should take a look at the micro-4/3rds system I can say: Go for it! You won't regret it!
0 Vote up Vote down
Marco's avatar - Go to profile

Marco · 811 weeks ago

What about the battery duration? I read that it can take only 300 shot? it's true?
0 Vote up Vote down
David's avatar

David · 809 weeks ago

I still have my Hexar and just recently put some film through it... and had it scanned. Very... very nice. That f2 lens is so sweet. The other thing that I love about the Hexar is the dual IR beam autofocus (or what ever it is...) The main thing is that it is able to AF instantly in total darkness. For example, it can focus on a black tuxedo on a very dark dance floor, and in combination with it's "dumb" distance/GN flash and dual stage flash exposure... can produce a perfectly exposed shot. I used an off camera flash to make the flash look a little better. (Actually, I used an old 420ez flash in manual mode with set to the same GN of the Hexar flash. It worked (still works) great. If someone actually made a real digital Hexar, it would include its phenomenal, instant, pitch black AF capabilities.

Post a new comment

Comments by

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

 
Copyright 2007 | Andreas08v2 by GeckoandFly and TemplatesForYou | Design by Andreas Viklund
TFY Burajiru