> Based on your prior posts, it appears that the A1 and E-1
> handle your event photography with aplomb.
Can't we ALWAYS use cleaner high-ISO performance? Minolta makes
a mean flash system. Minoltas have better metering systems than
the Olympus, Minoltas have "shoulder" characteristics in their
sensors and processing--not the same "linear till 254.254.254"
response that is typical. With RSE, I'm recovering about two
"Zones" worth of details in the highlights--that's some serious
shoulder. The A1 stinks at event photography due to the
shutter-lag and high-ISO performance.
> If you just need something new, why not get an E-330? More
> pixels, live view for those awkward angle shots and what
> looks to be the best macro setup ever designed for an SLR.
No kidding. If it had a metal case, better viewfinder and the
E-1's control layout I'd have pinched, borrowed and stolen to
get one by now.
> If you need something for art photography, landscapes, etc.,
> no matter how the KM handles, it isn't even in the ballpark
> with a 5D for the images it can capture. Which is more
> important?
Ah, and this is the rub. I can't dispute the IQ of the 5D. It's
obviously "arrived" when it comes to that. My problem is that I
like a camera that handles like it's an extension of my
eye/brain/hand and not just a chunk-o-camera. I really like the
A1 because there are features that have absolutely nothing to do
with image quality which inspire me to take new and fresh images
and encourage out-of-box image capture. The most creative stuff
I've shot (with rare exception) in the past five years has been
with the A1. Going back in time, I've had several different
medium-format systems. Without exception, my OM pictures beat
the snot out of the medium-format shots. Not necessarily in IQ,
but in the overall sellability and merit of the shots.
I want to say Thanks for the Memories. The Minoltas have the
ability to program in user-defined settings into the mode-dial.
Being able to go from Program-Mode ISO 400, AWB, JPEG to
Aperture-Priority, ISO 100, WB 5400, RAW, -.5, grid screen,
saturation changes, and color mode with a twist of the mode dial
is very refreshing. With the E-1, you have to do a
three-fingered operation and it still doesn't change the
exposure mode. Canon? Just how do those memories work in a
Canon? Oh.
As I've mentioned before, when shooting landscapy type shots,
the A1 gives me an image look that is not unlike that from 4x5.
Before you snort coffee out your nose, I'm not talking about
ultimate IQ, but the DOF and image flatness that is achieved
through swings and tilts to give the image front-to-back
sharpness. I've tried this with other 2/3" cameras and for some
reason the look is still different. Minolta achieved something
special with the A1 (and A2) that allows this camera to
transcend specifications.
I'm a Zone System darkroom geek. Todays cameras are all
"mid-tone" orientated or we are all doing the "expose to the
right" shuffle with the histogram. This results in the same
"sameness" in photographic results that is getting rather tiring
to look at. (give me some emotion, please). Images don't have
the old organic look to them. Why? Well, we can blame the
technology, but I think we can blame the technique. Cameras like
the Minoltas encourage techniques that allow you to achieve the
organic film look to the images.
The OM-4T is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. The
componants are the same as any other camera of the era, but the
metering system allowed you the flexibility to approach the
composition in another dimension. If Olympus would have evolved
the OM-4Ti another generation I'm sure it would have looked
remarkably similar to the Maxxum-7. The 7D is the digital
conglomeration of the 7D with the A1. See where I'm going with
this?
I love using my E-1, but I've got to be honest with you all and
say that it is a very frustrating camera to use as compared to
the A1 when I'm doing tripod work. I can get the exposure right
BEFORE the shot with the A1--that live histogram (and live view
monitor/EVF) sure is sweet. The fact that the A1's GT lens is so
incredibly sharp at almost ALL apertures and focal lengths ain't
so bad either.
For people pictures, the E-1 beats all. The skintones are just
off-the-chart good. Very Kodak like. I got my wife a pocket
Kodak digital a couple Christmas' ago and am continualy amazed
by the image quality. That camera is absolutely perfect when it
comes to image color--even beating the E-1 sometimes!
Compared to the E-1, the A1 doesn't give me nearly as good of a
color--there's a slight greenish haze to the pictures. The noise
is higher--definitely. I can't really use the camera at anything
higher than ISO 200 (320 actual), but when seriously
post-processed the sharpness and dynamic response altered to fit
my vision the images are more than decent enough to sell.
However, the 2/3" sensor does choke when it comes to sublety--a
definite characteristic of the E-1. The E-1 captures subtle
changes in tonalities that are not unlike PanF or Kodachrome.
AG
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|