I want one... now.

[fletch]

The new Olympus micro 4/3s camera has just appeared on DPReview. It looks amazing

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympusep1/

Full sized sensor, interchangeable lenses, compact and portable. It all looks very promising and could genuinely fill a gap in the market. I could see myself with one of these with a wide-normal zoom and the 17mm pancake lens for use in touristy/party type snapshots or when I don't want to carry the full kit and a big mumma fully blown DSLR for 'proper' photography.

It looks very cool as well. I want one! Anyone else and if so where/when would you use it?

[FrankLamont]

...and I thought the prototype they pulled out looked dodgy.

Caught me out for a mo... read 'full sized sensor' and thought 'full frame sensor' - but no, that can't be right. Read the sentence again and understood.

[fletch]

Originally Posted by FriedChicken

Caught me out for a mo... read 'full sized sensor' and thought 'full frame sensor' - but no, that can't be right. Read the sentence again and understood.

Yeah - The sensor is 50% of a 35mm full frame camera. Big enough to have useable high ISO and decent control of DoF which is the point in having a larger sensor.

Sure it won't do D3 high ISO quality shots but it looks like it will do D90/500D quality high ISO.

[Doug Pardee]

Originally Posted by FriedChicken

read 'full sized sensor' and thought 'full frame sensor'

To be pedantic about terminology, full frame doesn't mean "35mm sized" but rather "captures the full image projected by the lens". In other words, the sensor and lens designs are matched. All of the 4/3 cameras are properly called full frame because the 4/3 system lenses are designed specifically for 4/3 sensors and vice versa.

I've never used one or even held one, but just by reputation the Oly Zuiko 4/3 lenses are some of the very best out there, and their 4/3 sensor is pretty darned good. The big weakness in Oly's DSLR designs has been, well, the SLR part of the design—its side-swinging mirror and the assocated contorted porro viewfinder path that makes the necessarily small viewfinder image even tinier.

Image quality has not been a significant issue on the 4/3 system, and time will tell if this new non-SLR camera architecture is a hit or a flop.

(I'll add a note here that the EP-1 is not the first micro-4/3 camera, just the first from Olympus and notable for its retro styling. Panasonic has already been producing two more conventionally-styled micro-4/3 cameras: the G1 and the GH1.)

[fletch]

Originally Posted by Doug Pardee

To be pedantic about terminology, full frame doesn't mean "35mm sized" but rather "captures the full image projected by the lens". In other words, the sensor and lens designs are matched. All of the 4/3 cameras are properly called full frame because the 4/3 system lenses are designed specifically for 4/3 sensors and vice versa.

Brilliant, I've got a full frame camera then.

Unfortunately most people aren't as pedantic and will just think I'm being an arse if I go around telling people my e510 is full frame!

As for the EP-1 it is a totally different proposition to the Pannasonic offerings, they are mini SLRs with an (electronic) viewfinder and interchangable lenses, not much more portable than a proper SLR but suffering the drawbacks of no optical viewfinder, no phase detect auto focus etc. I would never consider buying one as I wouldn't be able to use it in a different way to a conventional DSLR.

The Oly is different, its small and portable, coupled with a pancake lens its very pocketable (if you have baggy trousers) and it would take up much less room in luggage and be much more inconspicuos (sp?) than a big black SLR.

[Doug Pardee]

Originally Posted by fletch

the Pannasonic offerings, they are mini SLRs with an (electronic) viewfinder and interchangable lenses

To continue being pedantic, the Panasonic micro-4/3 cameras are not SLRs. By definition, an SLR has a viewfinder that shows a reflected image (that's what "reflex" means: reflected). An electronic viewfinder (EVF) is a totally different animal.

The Panasonic offerings are "SLR-like" in styling, but they're not SLRs any more than the many SLR-like digicam models are.

[fletch]

Originally Posted by Doug Pardee

To continue being pedantic, the Panasonic micro-4/3 cameras are not SLRs. By definition, an SLR has a viewfinder that shows a reflected image (that's what "reflex" means: reflected). An electronic viewfinder (EVF) is a totally different animal.

The Panasonic offerings are "SLR-like" in styling, but they're not SLRs any more than the many SLR-like digicam models are.

Well done - you win the pedant of the day award.

I'm sure you know what I meant though. The G1 looks like an SLR, its shaped like an SLR, it has a mirror hump but no mirror and the EVF is in the same place. So why would I want a camera that has all of the drawbacks of an SLR but not the benefits.

[cphoniball]

*wonders when he will ever have enough money to justify $800+ on a separate camera for when it's too "inconvenient" to carry a DSLR*

I get that photography is expensive... I just don't see the point of wasting money for a convenience. Buy a quality point and shoot for $300-400 if you don't carry your DSLR around.

[fletch]

Originally Posted by cphoniball

I just don't see the point of wasting money for a convenience. Buy a quality point and shoot for $300-400 if you don't carry your DSLR around.

I supose the point is that the quality of a P&S in anything but good light doesn't even come close to that of a large m4/3s sensor. Even the best P&Ss just aren't in the same ball park.