CSBC
News Editor
Reged: 24/11/2006
Posts: 1595
|
|
AP News update
|
Barney
Baht 'at
Reged: 16/12/2005
Posts: 11483
Loc: Harrogate, North Yorks
|
|
Careful Chris, I'll be after your job. Kit prices linked to here. 
--------------------
"Wrong on so many different levels."
Blog - Contre Dour - Capturing the ordinary for posterity.
Flickr
|
Zou
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 05/02/2007
Posts: 3040
Loc: Edinburgh
|
|
It's quite a dilemma - the 17mm/viewfinder kit is probably what my heart would prefer, but the zoom kit (and an extra £50 in my pocket) is surprisingly tempting. I can't see the point in the twin lens kit though.
--------------------
Zou's Flickr Page
|
alanS
The Flameproof Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 4737
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
The 17mm kit would cut down on the bulk and probably be better to handle than the zoom but it's twice the price (or there abouts) of an LX3.
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
Bone_Idle
Mr Maybe
Reged: 28/07/2006
Posts: 1836
Loc: Bradford
|
|
Looks like early adopters will be paying the price. Hopefully the price will drop as units start to shift!
--------------------
Thanks
Nick
|
Barney
Baht 'at
Reged: 16/12/2005
Posts: 11483
Loc: Harrogate, North Yorks
|
|
The price will drop quicker than a Geordie lass's knickers in a rugby club. (I hope!)
--------------------
"Wrong on so many different levels."
Blog - Contre Dour - Capturing the ordinary for posterity.
Flickr
|
Barney
Baht 'at
Reged: 16/12/2005
Posts: 11483
Loc: Harrogate, North Yorks
|
|
Quote:
It's quite a dilemma - the 17mm/viewfinder kit is probably what my heart would prefer, but the zoom kit (and an extra £50 in my pocket) is surprisingly tempting. I can't see the point in the twin lens kit though.
It's good to see that the adaptor is being included as part fo the kit too.
--------------------
"Wrong on so many different levels."
Blog - Contre Dour - Capturing the ordinary for posterity.
Flickr
|
Steve
Enough of a twit?
Reged: 08/06/2005
Posts: 2237
Loc: York
|
|
I'm actually starting to warm a little to the concept...just not enough to dip into my pocket for it.
Oh well!
--------------------
Steve
My Flickr
|
Fire_Monkey
No Fire, Just just a Monkeh!
Reged: 11/11/2008
Posts: 800
Loc: Darkest Sussex
|
|
Quote:
I'm actually starting to warm a little to the concept...just not enough to dip into my pocket for it.
Oh well!
Yet!
--------------------
Andy
My Flickr
|
Lazza
journeyman
Reged: 27/01/2008
Posts: 84
Loc: Zider Country ... Ooh Arrr
|
|
Looks great, sounds great .... but the price?!? Whoooaaaaahh
I'll reserve judgement until we see some proper tests of it and see how the lenses are looking, can't see how the old OM lenses will work with the adapter/LCD view screen but I'm certainly interested in this camera. It's surely got design icon written all over it granted - but is it any good? We shall see. 
|
Bone_Idle
Mr Maybe
Reged: 28/07/2006
Posts: 1836
Loc: Bradford
|
|
The US prices put the UK's into perspective:-
14-42 Kit $799 (under £500)
17mm VF Kit $899 (about £550)
I'd say the pricing in the US is about right for the UK market and the UK pricing is much too high!
--------------------
Thanks
Nick
|
Learning
Ethelred the Ill-Named
Reged: 26/09/2006
Posts: 3714
Loc: Nottingham
|
|
Please will the mods divert all EP-1 threads onto one thread for us lesser mortals. This EP-1 is about as useless as a Leica 0. Look what followed 
|
Guitarist
old hand
Reged: 15/02/2009
Posts: 728
Loc: Salisbury, Wiltshire
|
|
£750? They're having a laugh, aren't they? Bit like that Voigtlander folder at nearly £2000. Still, I guess if people are daft enough to pay these prices.........it's a bit like these pretentious restaurants with rude staff that the likes of Michael Winner frequent. If customers boycotted such establishments because of the crap service and outrageous prices, they'd soon change their tune.
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 6283
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
£750? They're having a laugh, aren't they? Bit like that Voigtlander folder at nearly £2000. Still, I guess if people are daft enough to pay these prices........
If it does what you want and you can afford it, and there aren't cheaper alternatives, it's good value, whatever the numbers on the price ticket say. The fact that a "more capable" DSLR may be significantly cheaper is irrelevant if it's too heavy or bulky to carry.
If you don't want one, again the price is irrelevant, as you don't have to pay for it.
|
Bone_Idle
Mr Maybe
Reged: 28/07/2006
Posts: 1836
Loc: Bradford
|
|
Also, how do you define a 'more capable' dslr?
In a recent test the Panasonic G1 out resolved the Nikon D300 at lower ISO's, and the new G1H (and the samples from the Oly E-P1) show a significant improvement in noise at high ISO. So the m4/3rds sensor is certainly more than capable.
The E-P1 has an all metal body, it's only 3fps but has built in Image Stabilization. In fact, apart from the lack of viewfinder, it's spec'd above most entry level dSLR's.
I think people are expecting dSLR quality for compact camera pricing. A few month ago the prices would probably have been a lot less, but camera manufacturers across the board have put their prices up.
--------------------
Thanks
Nick
|
Barney
Baht 'at
Reged: 16/12/2005
Posts: 11483
Loc: Harrogate, North Yorks
|
|
Capability depends on requirements. Certainly the EP-1 scores for performance against size but obviously will fall down in other areas. I see the main strengths of the EP-1 make it ideal as an addtional body for an existing DSLR user, or as a first upgrade for a compact user and much less suited to those wanting to take a first step into DSLR photography.
Either way, I'm getting one, the only question is when.
--------------------
"Wrong on so many different levels."
Blog - Contre Dour - Capturing the ordinary for posterity.
Flickr
|
IvorETower
Little Buttercup
Reged: 15/11/2006
Posts: 2315
Loc: Camberley, Surrey
|
|
I thought that Panasonic were having a real laugh with the price of the G-1, but this takes the biscuit (for now). It is way too expensive. If it were to me marketed in the same manner as the Pen, it should be priced close to the £200 mark (or £100 street price, TBH, when you see the competence of some of the offerings at this level of the marketplace)
--------------------
Too many cameras, too many lenses.......
|
Barney
Baht 'at
Reged: 16/12/2005
Posts: 11483
Loc: Harrogate, North Yorks
|
|
Quote:
I thought that Panasonic were having a real laugh with the price of the G-1, but this takes the biscuit (for now). It is way too expensive. If it were to me marketed in the same manner as the Pen, it should be priced close to the £200 mark (or £100 street price, TBH, when you see the competence of some of the offerings at this level of the marketplace)
I've no idea how you can think that to be honest. The Canon G10's RRP is £569.00. Anyone thinking that a camera will come to market offering the features of the EP-1 for less than a top end compact is having a laugh, never mind £100 on the street.
--------------------
"Wrong on so many different levels."
Blog - Contre Dour - Capturing the ordinary for posterity.
Flickr
|
DaveS
old hand
Reged: 22/06/2007
Posts: 817
Loc: Acton, West London.
|
|
As I recall the Pen was never a cheep camera, although £700 is a little steep.
I would say £500 would be nearer the mark, though why the prime lens kit should be so much more than the zoom eludes me.
Dave
--------------------
DaveS's Flickr Photos
|
Zou
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 05/02/2007
Posts: 3040
Loc: Edinburgh
|
|
£700 RRP = £550 street soon enough. I'd go as far as to say they'd have been crazy to ask for less - the G1 proved popular at a fairly high starting price. Start low and then any future 'starter model' (as suggested by the interview with Oly guy linked to elsewhere on AP) would have to be very very cheap indeed - probably so low specced as to be not worth buying.
--------------------
Zou's Flickr Page
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
