Photocracy
The Great Pretender
Reged: 18/11/2006
Posts: 644
Loc: Sunny South Coast
|
|
It will be five years since the E-1 was launched in September which in DSLR terms is an aeon. So much has happened since then and the E-system has become both celebrated and slated in just about equal measures. E-1s are still highly sought after and sell easily on the secondhand market. If you were lucky enough to own an E-1 and with the benefit of 5 years worth of hindsight, what was it that the E-1 had so right and why is it still so highly prized despite being relatively dated?
Is it a future collectible?
Does it still cut the mustard for pro use?
Take the time machine back to 2003. Just for interest, here is the Olympus press release from June 2003 when the E-1 was announced.
--------------------
Rob
|
Iloca
Unregistered at user's request
Reged: 06/12/2005
Posts: 3800
Loc: Northern Ireland
|
|
What I like about the E-1 is it's simplicity, all the features you need if, like me you had been using an M/F 35mm SLR. I found it very user friendly, more so than the E-3 (I still need to double check when using the Dual Function buttons, something I really hope they change on the next single digit body)
A future classic? IMO it's already a classic, that people decided to stick with it and wait for the E-3 rather than switch brands (believe me I was tempted by the K10D) says it all really.
The E-1 is a camera that was much more than the sum of it's parts IMO 
--------------------
Mi Vid Iloca
My Flickr Gallery
|
Repton
Mr Test Shot
Reged: 05/07/2005
Posts: 1776
|
|
Quote:
It will be five years since the E-1 was launched in September which in DSLR terms is an aeon. So much has happened since then and the E-system has become both celebrated and slated in just about equal measures. E-1s are still highly sought after and sell easily on the secondhand market. If you were lucky enough to own an E-1 and with the benefit of 5 years worth of hindsight, what was it that the E-1 had so right and why is it still so highly prized despite being relatively dated?
Is it a future collectible?
Does it still cut the mustard for pro use?
Take the time machine back to 2003. Just for interest, here is the Olympus press release from June 2003 when the E-1 was announced.
Try these for size - http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2430
|
Iloca
Unregistered at user's request
Reged: 06/12/2005
Posts: 3800
Loc: Northern Ireland
|
|
What can you say, E-1 + old version 40-150 with the EC-1.4 teleconvertor.
Talent goes a long way.
--------------------
Mi Vid Iloca
My Flickr Gallery
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4987
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
It will be five years since the E-1 was launched in September which in DSLR terms is an aeon.
Yes, it does seem a long time ... Give it another five years then work out what proportion are still in active service. If it's a true classic, then the figure will be fairly high.
|
Photocracy
The Great Pretender
Reged: 18/11/2006
Posts: 644
Loc: Sunny South Coast
|
|
Quote:
The E-1 is a camera that was much more than the sum of it's parts IMO
That's certainly a vote for classic status and this view does seem to be shared.
Quote:
Try these for size - http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2430
Wow! Brilliant pictures and they would certainly pass muster against today's cameras.
Quote:
Yes, it does seem a long time ... Give it another five years then work out what proportion are still in active service. If it's a true classic, then the figure will be fairly high.
Yes, good point. I suspect there will be quite a few still going in five years as a lot of people are hanging on to them. Here's some data on shutter life performance to date. As it's based on only 23 submissions, I'm not sure how accurate it is, but interesting.
--------------------
Rob
|
Benchmark
Is it safe?
Reged: 12/07/2005
Posts: 3034
Loc: Sedgefield, Co Durham
|
|
My original E1 is still in daily use after four years, and I shall continue to use it for the foreseeable future. It does everything I want, is robust, reliable and very weatherproof.
I also have a brand new E1 with a kit lens tucked away as a spare, but I have never used it in anger.
--------------------
Nigel CRIPN and Bar
Beware of the Dark Slide
|
Photocracy
The Great Pretender
Reged: 18/11/2006
Posts: 644
Loc: Sunny South Coast
|
|
Quote:
My original E1 is still in daily use after four years, and I shall continue to use it for the foreseeable future. It does everything I want, is robust, reliable and very weatherproof.
I also have a brand new E1 with a kit lens tucked away as a spare, but I have never used it in anger.
Yes, it does make you wonder how necessary all of today's typical specification is when the E-1 apparently still does it all so well. It seems it's still a totally viable camera. Do you find the 5 megapixels a limitation at all and what do they look like at A3?
That's very nice to have an unused one tucked away for the future! 
--------------------
Rob
|
Benchmark
Is it safe?
Reged: 12/07/2005
Posts: 3034
Loc: Sedgefield, Co Durham
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
My original E1 is still in daily use after four years, and I shall continue to use it for the foreseeable future. It does everything I want, is robust, reliable and very weatherproof.
I also have a brand new E1 with a kit lens tucked away as a spare, but I have never used it in anger.
Yes, it does make you wonder how necessary all of today's typical specification is when the E-1 apparently still does it all so well. It seems it's still a totally viable camera. Do you find the 5 megapixels a limitation at all and what do they look like at A3?
That's very nice to have an unused one tucked away for the future!
I have several A3 prints hanging around the house that I took on the E1, and to be honest, there is little to choose between those and others that I have taken on 35 mm or 645 film cameras.
So, to answer your question, I don't find the E1's pixel count a limiting factor. Indeed, my biggest gripe with newer cameras is that they have millions of pixels that I just don't need or want, resulting in bigger files, slower processing times and unnecessary sensor noise.
Many of the images that I take for my day job are used to illustrate reports, and are either printed on a colour laser printer or in Adobe Acrobat files. Excess file size is therefore an issue for me (especially when some of my reports contain fifty or more photographs), so I reduce all of my files to 1.4 MP when processing in Adobe Camera Raw. This produces perfectly acceptable images, and I always have the option of going back to the original Raw file if I need a full resolution image.
I also have a Canon G9 that I use alongside my E1. The G9 is a brilliant little camera, but in my opinion is spoilt by having far too many pixels. In my view it would have been much, much better with just 5 or 6 megapixels. After all, how many people who take photographs on compact cameras will ever want or need to print them to A2 size and above?
--------------------
Nigel CRIPN and Bar
Beware of the Dark Slide
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 37916
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
Quote:
I have never used it in anger.
Nigel, it's probably a good idea to take it out fairly frequently and fire off a few shots to keep the shutter in shape. Maybe less necessary than in the days of mechanical shutters, but still a good idea, I think.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
Edited by Fen (22/07/2008 14:40)
|
Benchmark
Is it safe?
Reged: 12/07/2005
Posts: 3034
Loc: Sedgefield, Co Durham
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I have never used it in anger.
Nigel, it's probably a good idea to take it out fairly frequently and fire off a few shots to keep the shutter in shape. Maybe less necessary than in the days of mechanical shutters, but still a good idea, I think.
Hi Nick,
Yes, you’re probably right. I have fired off a few test shots around the house to make sure that everything is working, but I should do it more often I think.
--------------------
Nigel CRIPN and Bar
Beware of the Dark Slide
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9477
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Quote:
Yes, it does make you wonder how necessary all of today's typical specification is when the E-1 apparently still does it all so well. It seems it's still a totally viable camera. Do you find the 5 megapixels a limitation...
Five whole Mp!!! Sheer luxury........  My dear old EOS D30 (circa 2000) has only got 3.2 and that gets plenty of use. If there is a limitation then it does mean I have to be a bit more careful about framing as cropping can cut down the available pixels very quickly.
On the other hand I have experimented with doubling the pixel count using PS and trial prints suggest that A3 remains well within the bounds of possibility. I can't see the E-1 performing any less acceptably.
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN 
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is more fun than one in the cupboard........
|
RogerMac
Hotshoe Shuffler
Reged: 25/03/2007
Posts: 499
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, it does make you wonder how necessary all of today's typical specification is when the E-1 apparently still does it all so well. It seems it's still a totally viable camera. Do you find the 5 megapixels a limitation...
Five whole Mp!!! Sheer luxury........ My dear old EOS D30 (circa 2000) has only got 3.2 and that gets plenty of use. If there is a limitation then it does mean I have to be a bit more careful about framing as cropping can cut down the available pixels very quickly.
On the other hand I have experimented with doubling the pixel count using PS and trial prints suggest that A3 remains well within the bounds of possibility. I can't see the E-1 performing any less acceptably.
If I do not get run out of town for praising Canon on this forum I must state that I have taken a lot of good shots on my Powershot G2 (4MB). Many of its shots are still being passed round the family with appreciation, I still use it occasionally and it has no problem printing to my A3 printer, it is limited ISO wise and I MUCH prefer the Oly handling but credit where its due 4MB is really plenty.
|
Benchmark
Is it safe?
Reged: 12/07/2005
Posts: 3034
Loc: Sedgefield, Co Durham
|
|
Notwithstanding the limitations of sensor size, which I for one will not try to deny (even Olympus cannot change the laws of physics), Olympus does seem to have succeeded in producing a range of cameras (the E1 being the first) which reproduce colours and tonal gradations better than most of their competitors, regardless of price or specification.
The E1 has always been renowned for the sheer quality of it’s output, and even with the passage of time and increases in pixel count, that overall ‘photographic quality’ has rarely been surpassed IMVHO.
For those reasons I am more than happy to use my E1 for as long as it keeps going - which I expect will be a very long time. On the odd ocasions that I really need 'better' quality, or just feel like a change, I use medium format film.
IMHO digital still has quite a long way to go before it can better medium format Velvia.
--------------------
Nigel CRIPN and Bar
Beware of the Dark Slide
|
Benchmark
Is it safe?
Reged: 12/07/2005
Posts: 3034
Loc: Sedgefield, Co Durham
|
|
Quote:
If I do not get run out of town for praising Canon on this forum
You as well Roger?  
--------------------
Nigel CRIPN and Bar
Beware of the Dark Slide
|
RogerMac
Hotshoe Shuffler
Reged: 25/03/2007
Posts: 499
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
If I do not get run out of town for praising Canon on this forum
You as well Roger?
Actually I have got 6 Canons (only one Nikon) on my top shelf  and I only regret buying one of them. It was not till they got to DSLRs that they lost the plot.
Hope that reestablishes my credentials for the Oly forum
Roger
Edited by RogerMac (22/07/2008 22:07)
|
Benchmark
Is it safe?
Reged: 12/07/2005
Posts: 3034
Loc: Sedgefield, Co Durham
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If I do not get run out of town for praising Canon on this forum
You as well Roger?
Actually I have got 6 Canons (only one Nikon) on my top shelf and I only regret buying one of them. It was not till they got to DSLRs that they lost the plot.
Hope that reestablishes my credentials for the Oly forum
Roger
Six! 
For my part I would like four previous offences to be taken into consideration m'lud.
There was a Canon G3 (or was it a G4?) which I have since sold, a G5, a G6 and now a G9. All have been excellent workhorses, and our children often pick up the G5 or G6 to take snaps. (They are banned from using my G9 .) Oh, and there's a Canon Fax Machine to be taken into consideraton too. 
I also have a Nikon Microscope and film scanner, so perhaps I had better get my bike.
--------------------
Nigel CRIPN and Bar
Beware of the Dark Slide
|
Repton
Mr Test Shot
Reged: 05/07/2005
Posts: 1776
|
|
the only canon I ever had was a cooker
|
RogerMac
Hotshoe Shuffler
Reged: 25/03/2007
Posts: 499
|
|
Quote:
Oh, and there's a Canon Fax Machine to be taken into consideraton too.
Well if you include office equipment its seven as my company owns a Canon photocopier.
Can I say in mitigation that the Datematic was inherited  
Roger
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9477
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Only six?.......... 
Somehow I've managed to accumulate 11..........not bad for a someone who's really a Nikon man at heart.... 
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is more fun than one in the cupboard........
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
