> Does the E-3 not have a look similar to the E-1's. And aren't E-3 becoming
> cheaper all the while?
As much as I've badmouthed the E-3, you'd think they would be a lot
less expensive.
That camera has some major improvements over the E-1, with more
pixels, slightly cleaner high-ISO performance (usable 800), a gorgous
viewfinder, image-stabilization and a faster shutter. In all of the
usual measurable ways the camera slam dunks the E-1. Olympus has even
done an excellent job keeping the colors decent!
But, I think the E-1 is still a better camera in the following regards:
1. Image Color at all light-levels. You can boost a 2-stop
underexposed picture and still have color-integrity. Boosting an E-3
image will result in color-shifts (and nasty digital noise patterns).
2. Grip/body shape. The E-1 is by far one of the most, if not the most
comfortable camera of its class. That deeply scalloped thumb area and
silky smooth shutter release are as close to perfect as ever was. The
E-3 is good, but still is an ergonomic disaster in comparison.
3. Body weight and center of gravity. The E-1 balances well in the
hand as the CG is farther to the right. The E-3's CG is much farther
to the left and combined with the 12-60 feels like it wants to twist
out of your hand.
4. Shutter noise. That E-1's shutter is so blasted quiet. It's great
fun shooting a wedding as nobody knows but you that you're leaning
into the buffer so far.
5. Dynamic Range. Long story short--the E-1 is world-class in this
regard. I do have numbers to prove it--once David and I get the
article finally put together....
6. Reliability. It's like a Toyota or a BP oil well--it just won't stop.
7. Button/Mode/Wheel/Dial method/design. The E-1 has a mode dial. The
E-1 has the body switch for focus-modes (heavenly). The E-1 has that
big dial on the front which can be moved from any angle.
8. Focus-assist light... Not that I use them very often, but the E-1
uses the projected red grid, vs the stupid flashy nonsense.
9. Mixed lighting. The E-1 doesn't color-shift under artificial lights
or during the "golden hours" quite as much as the E-3.
Don't think, based on these criticisms, that the E-3 is dogmeat,
though. Far from it! The E-3 is also an EXCELLENT camera, but the E-1
is better in these areas, even if they are more nuances than
measurable concerns.
I will freely admit the E-1 is extremely challenging when it comes to
squeaking out that extra bit of resolution we really need for
non-portrait work. You have to be pretty adept with the RAW converter
or image editor to make the images better than the camera normally
allows them to be. It is a most frustrating camera when you want to
shove past that mush-pit AA filter. Noise is addressable, but does
take some serious skills to make it so.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|