Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: E-1 craving

Subject: [OM] Re: E-1 craving
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 17:27:28 -0700
AG Schnozz wrote:
> Moose razzed me with:
>   
>> Oh, I missed that combo above, me and the semi-incompetent
>> friend who can get the job done if I take most of the load.
>> Bless you and your buddy.
>>     
>
> I enjoy these philosophical discussions with you, Moose.  I
> think it stretches both of us and makes us realize that there is
> room for personal skill growth and flexibility in our lives.
>   
Moi? Razz? I enjoy them too. Even though I'm always right, sometimes 
working through ideas with another intelligent and thoughtful being can 
make me ever more righter. :-)   We can learn from our differences, with 
a little luck.
> There has been a continuing trend in photography for the cameras
> to have more and more intelligence built in to allow you to use
> it as a "point and shoot".  The fuzzy logic in the metering
> systems, for instance, can now see "color" and know what type of
> scene it's pointed at and adjust the metering accordingly. 
>   
This is certainly a drawback with the 300D. Although really quite good 
overall, the matrix, or whatever it is called, metering can't be relied 
on to not occasionally do something silly. The 5D is almost always in 
spot metering mode.
> Autofocus systems keep getting better, 
I'm not so convinced about that. Both my DSLRs live in single, central 
spot focus mode. How can a focus system know where to focus otherwise? I 
suppose one day I may remember to use the special DOF mode where it sets 
aperture based on the differerence in focal distance of the various 
focus points. Then again, I'll probably forget about it just when it 
would be useful. There are just too many clever functions on these 
things for me to keep them all straight in my head.
> but as a result, the focus rings keep getting worse.  
I don't know about other brands and models, but the few AF lenses I have 
don't fit this description with the exception of the 50/1.8. The 24-85 
is the better version of USM, so there's no need to switch for MF fine 
tuning. Just press the release half way and turn the ring. The ring 
itself isn't quite MF quality, but handily placed, just over 1/4" wide, 
nicely ribbed and smooth and easy to use. The Tamron 90/2.8 Macro has 
very slick push-pull AF-MF switching and a big, beautiful, focus ring 
with a 1" rubberized section. It's certainly the closest to an MF lens feel.

The Tamron 28-300  has a 3/8" rubber grip and works rather smoothly. The 
inexpensive ProMaster (Viv, Phoenix,Prakica, etc.) 19-35 also has a fine 
grip on the ring, although the action is looser/cheesier than the 
Tamron.. That leaves the 50/1.8, which has no distance scale and a tiny, 
sloppy feeling focus ring, and yet, an excellent lens really cheap.

All but the 50/1.8 have a distance scale. I have no idea how accurate 
they are, but then I don't know that about my OM lenses either. None has 
a DOF scale except the 90/2.8, and it is so small as to be pretty 
useless. All but the macro have much shorter rotation distances from 
infinity to close focus than typical MF lenses.

All in all, I think they do about as well with MF function as is 
compatible with their requirements for good AF performance, which is 
after all, their primary purpose and market. For good, accurate, quick, 
efficient AF use, they need relatively short throw and light action in 
the focus mechanism. A relatively heavy, well damped 180 degree+ 
focusing action just won't work for AF. With short rotation, an accurate 
distance scale with more that a very few markings simply won't fit. 
Likewise, the DOF scale becomes so compressed as to be useless without a 
magnifying glass, so why even try.

So in the entry level lenses, I agree with you. In the better lenses, I 
think it's not a matter of dumbing down, but of the mechanical 
requirements of AF dictating designs that don't easily accommodate what 
you want. Form following function, if you will. You want MF, use MF 
lenses. It would be nice if both qualities could co-exist in one lens, 
but it appears that's not technically feasible. You want short stroke 
and control, use a hatchet, you want power, use an axe. You want low 
speed torque for rock hopping, you want a long stroke engine, a simple 
matter of lever arm length. You want high speed horsepower, short 
stroke, cause long stroke can't rev and has bad valve room to volume 
ratios. That's why Toyota bought the tooling for the long stroke Chevy 6 
when GM went to shorter stroke v8s. The original Land Cruiser was 
powered by that engine, Toyota-ized for reliability. Although according 
to my rock hopping friend, they never got the valve metallurgy right, so 
they wore out faster than the originals.
> Manual focus point selection? 
> Huh?  Isn't it just quicker to manually focus the lens yourself?
>  Oh, you can't. The focus screen is nearly worthless.  
Here, the 5D gives something away to the OMs and their own big FF 
bodies. I don't know just what they have done, but clearly compromises 
have been made, presumably to keep size/weight/cost down. The apparent 
magnification is low.  It's better than the 300D and pretty much fully 
functional for me and my vision, but not the same as a 'real' FF camera.
> The more the "technology" improves, the worse some things get.  Lenses
> don't come with DoF markings any more!  And we call this "progress"?
>   
See above.
> Now, I will totally acknowlege that your 5D is as fully
> functional in manual modes as my E-1, so there is no spitting
> contest there. When used "old style" where manual focusing and
> exposure are desired is there really any difference between the
> cameras?  
Not much, and I have no idea in whose favor. One good thing I will say 
for the Canons, and I simply don't know about others, is the ability to 
change the 'program' in Program Mode. Turning the front wheel moves 
through all the combos of aperture and shutter speed that match the 
metered EV. It's a real, and perhaps better in many cases, alternative 
to aperture or shutter preferred modes, as you can pick based on either 
one without any switching.
> Sure, there are some differences, but in reality these
> are nuances and tradeoffs, not major swings either way. The 5D
> represents a major improvement in sensor technology, but the
> rest of the camera is just an incremental change over previous
> models.
>   
Absolutely. There are a few nice touches and a few goofy things, but 
basically, the body is just another reasonably competent SLR. The 
imaging system, though, is amazing.
> There are things about the E-system which infuriate me--like the
> worthless metering system in the viewfinder chamber!  Why oh why
> they abandoned mirror-box metering is beyond me. Now we've got
> to shade our viewfinders like every other camera system! 
> Progress?  Yeah right.  "OTF" flash control?  Nope, now we've
> got preflash which doesn't improve anything and just adds
> additional delay.
>   
Flash is just not much of an issue for me. 300D has a little built in 
flash that's sort of useful for low light focus and informal people pix. 
5D has no flash, but astonishing low light focus and imaging capability. 
I've never used any other flash with them. I understand the needs of you 
folks in the event, portrait, etc. businesses, but it a non issue for me.
> Old dog, new tricks?  Is that the problem here?  It is, after
> all, just a tool.  The problem strictly lies with the user, not
> the tool is what you are suggesting. 
I wouldn't go that far. We have different photographic goals and 
desires, so different tools are appropriate. I was just riffing on your 
description of a slightly dysfunctional work relationship with your 
camera. That doesn't mean it isn't the best choice available for your 
work at the time. I could never do wedding and event work, I don't have 
the temperment for it.
> As a professional, I should be willing and able to use the "best tool" 
> regardless of any other factor.  Everybody has their own criteria as to what 
> is "best" for them.
>   
It was funny to me to listen to all the talk about the E-1 as a pro 
camera when it was new, like "pro" was one set of criteria. I think Oly 
knew exactly what part of the pro market they were targeting and hit the 
nail on the head. You are by no means the only pro to discover that the 
quality of results for wedding/event and portrait photography and the 
time saving of ready to print images right out of the camera make the 
E-1 the most effective tool for that use. It's a money maker, and that's 
the name of that game.

I'm sure I could learn to use the 5D better for out of the camera ready 
images, but it isn't in the same league with the E-1 for the kind of 
work you do without extra effort, pre and/or post.  Fortunately, post 
work is a part of the process I usually enjoy and I have no deadlines. 
If I were to go pro for art photography, that would still be fine. For 
almost any other sort, it would be a pain and cost me money.
> For me, one of the biggest advantages to the E-1 is the
> reliability and robustness. I've got total confidence that it
> will turn on when I flip the switch and that it will take the
> picture when I tell it to, no matter the environment (rain or
> shine), no matter the situation. Yes, there are tradeoffs for
> this, but it's nice to know that the camera will "git r done"
> when needed.  And I am reasonably confident that I'm not going
> to get an ugly dust-blob appear in the middle of an assignment.
> Cleaning sensors is not a skillset that I've developed yet.
>
> A camera does have to inspire a little confidence. 
Again, Oly hit the nail on the head for the pro market they targeted.
> A modern
> camera must do a decent job of "suggesting" an exposure and
> focus point, but it must also do a decent job of NOT getting in
> the way of the photographer when he/she wants to override those
> suggestions!  I'd rate the E-1 better than average when it comes
> to this, but horrid in comparison to my old OM-2S or OM-4.
>   
LOL, now you are getting a little out there. I've never had a 2S, so I 
don't have direct experience there, but I've never had any of my 4 
bodies suggest a focus point. On exposure adjustment, the 5D shines. It 
has two 'on' modes. In one, rolling the back wheel adjusts the EV up and 
down at any time it isn't being used for something else, not just when 
the release is half pressed. I can't imagine anything faster and easier 
for exposure adjustment.
> If the E-3 doesn't materialize, I'll give the L1 serious
> consideration. 
Now there's a camera I don't "get". Take away most of the features of 
the E-330 that make it special and desirable, change the styling to look 
like there might be a red spot there somewhere, raise the price, and 
you've got what?
> But when I finally must give up on 4/3, 
Maybe you won't have to. Oly is having problems making at least lenses 
fast enough to meet demand, and it seemed like there were spot shortages 
of the newer bodies. That may give them the money and incentive to 
follow up the E-1 with something more up to date and competitive, if not 
cutting edge, and equally well targeted to your work. It wouldn't really 
take much, would it? A few more pixels, better operating and AF speed 
and a little less noise wouldn't make it "better" than a 5D in specs. 
But might make it better for your work.

I know you cost evaluate and justify pretty much everything. Maybe you 
need another, different camera just for fun and fine art, without 
working out a spreadsheet. Life isn't all about economics. Then if an 
E-something comes along that fits the business model, get that later. 
Put a wild colored strap on it and don't even think of doing a wedding 
with it! Maybe if you don't cart it around for hours taking hundreds of 
shots as work, you won't even find the grip a problem.
> I'll have to go Canon, I'm sure.  But the longer I wait, the less expensive 
> the 1Ds Mark IIn, Series 7a 90 megapixel cameras will be.
>   
Just so they aren't bigger and heavier than the 5D. I just won't cart 
around a 1DsII, what a monster!
> Just maybe, by then, they'll have a dustless sensor and decent
> wide-angles.
>   
Don't hold your breath. :-)  Remember the big volume, and thus money, is 
in the APS sensor models. They already have their own and there are 
plenty of after market wide and super wide lenses for the EF-S mount. 
For high quality wide primes, there are great old MF lenses and maybe 
somebody like Cosina/Voightlander will step up with small volume 
specialty lenses.

A. Wordy Moose

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz