Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

ep1 in depth review just posted

Rawfa

Rawfa

Active member
I went over some parts of the review (it's very extensive) and found out that they advise to keep the noise reduction off while shooting under iso 800.
 
Lili

Lili

New member
They gave it a '9' in image quality, I don't recall them ever giving any camera that high a score!
 
S

smokysun

New member
hi lili,
it is very rare. they did give the dp1 a nine and flunked it in every other department. this is a very good sign for the ep1.
wayne
www.pbase.com/wwp

ps. reading a bit more of their conclusion, it doesn't seem like a camera for a neophyte. more like for don, people who've had a lot of experience with cameras.

ps. here's the comparison with the dp2: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusEP1/page27.asp i think it will be a surprise for some!
 
Last edited:
nostatic

nostatic

New member
smokysun said:
hi lili,
it is very rare. they did give the dp1 a nine and flunked it in every other department. this is a very good sign for the ep1.
wayne
www.pbase.com/wwp

ps. reading a bit more of their conclusion, it doesn't seem like a camera for a neophyte. more like for don, people who've had a lot of experience with cameras.
Click to expand...
I have NR off no matter what. I like the noise it makes at high iso.

It works fine as a p&s. The only issue with "experience" is that I think it requires a few setting changes out of the box. But with the 17mm pancake it focuses plenty fast and exposes correctly. The menus aren't totally intuitive but you don't need to go there unless you want to.

It is what it is. The iq is much better than a small sensor camera, but not as good as a good APS-C dSLR. The handling is somewhat unique (p&s with a different interface and interchangeable lenses) and the vibe is strong. Certainly not for everyone, but very enticing to some.
 
pollobarca

pollobarca

New member
That NY times review is clear. But if you are spending this sort of money and choosing this sort of camera then the flash and VF compromises should have been taken account for. Especially the flash. End of the day all cameras are compromises. Depending on how well focused the manufacturer is to fulfilling the objectives makes or breaks the camera.

all the best

paul
 
Terry

Terry

New member
Robert Campbell said:
They also gave the Nikon 990 a '9' years ago. Their scoring system seems a bit odd -- I can't work out any obvious relationship. [A bit like nowadays when no cameras seem to be 'below average']
Click to expand...
The ratings are based on what is currently on the market today. So a camera that got a 9 back then would not get the same rating today. Also, the reason generally stated for not a lot of bad reviews is also selectivity in what they review. Generally they don't touch the dud cameras and I think most of the dslrs launched do a great job the nuances come out in the writing.
 
Streetshooter

Streetshooter

Subscriber Member
It's funny to me that reviewers compare the camera to
Dslr's. That's absurd. It wins against every camera in it's class even
if for 1 reason....interchangable lens mount.
This single feature blows the competition away.

Then if you compare feature against feature, it fares well
against it's competetors.

Remember the Oly software sucks and most users will switch to
jpegs untill Adobe gets on board. Because of this, we are not
really seeing what the camera can really do.....

I always wondered how independant the reviewers really are.
I would take it all with a grain of salt........
The camera is having a very pronounced effect at this time and I
expect that to grow as the dust settles and when ACR is updated.....
Don
 
Robert Campbell

Robert Campbell

Well-known member
TEBnewyork said:
The ratings are based on what is currently on the market today. So a camera that got a 9 back then would not get the same rating today. Also, the reason generally stated for not a lot of bad reviews is also selectivity in what they review. Generally they don't touch the dud cameras and I think most of the dslrs launched do a great job the nuances come out in the writing.
Click to expand...
Fair point, but I'm never quite sure if they rate all cameras together at any time, or whether '9' for the E-P1 is a comparison with others in its class -- if it has any competitors that is. Is it relative or absolute?

BTW, the german photo mags are much worse -- they give ratings to two places of decimals -- not just on objective things, but on some that are quite subjective -- very detailed etc, more light entertainment than anything to base a judgment on.
 
nostatic

nostatic

New member
David Pogue again shows the incredible shallow depth on his knowledge pool. I hope no one gets killed diving in head first...
 
Streetshooter

Streetshooter

Subscriber Member
nostatic said:
Yeah, go figure. Maybe it is comments like this:

"Far too many pictures come out blurry, because the sensor inside is so tiny."
Click to expand...
Oh geeze...all this time I thought the light beams were slow and that created the blurrrrrr...hmm never realized it was "The Sensor Problem".....
 
M

Michael S

New member
Pogue is a tech reporter and commentator -- more of a "gadgeteer" than a photographer. And his NY Times audience is not what you'd find on dpreview or another photo site, though there's some overlap I suppose.

I want a camera like this -- bigger sensor than a compact, interchangeable lenses, size comparable (in some ways) to a compact, extensive manual control, etc.

But I'm not sure at this point that I want this camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top