Hear, hear! Look at my old E-1... Seven users (pool camera) before I got
it, thousands of lens changes, and never been physically cleaned.
Reskinned... Yes.
Love this Beastie.
On Nov 12, 2015 5:16 PM, "Ken Norton" <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Do y'all realize that was November of 2003? Man, 12 years runs by fast.
>
> Some of us are still using the E-1.
>
> The one thing that DPR has done a poor job of through the years is
> comparing the intangibles. Which is just about impossible. Sure, the
> camera had a few issues, as compared to others at the time, but the
> strengths still created a compelling camera system that has stood up
> better over time than the contemporary cameras of its time.
>
> Another factor from that era, which I believe set back digital
> photography for almost 10 years, is the mistaken assumption that CMOS
> was superior to CCD because Canon happened to figure out how to make a
> CMOS sensor with less apparent imaging noise than the CCD sensors of
> the time. The narrative became all about sensor noise, and imaging
> color as well as image malleability was ignored. DPR directly
> contributed to this narrative, for which, they are entirely guilty of
> destroying photography companies as a result. It has only been in the
> last two years that CMOS sensors have finally attained the IQ
> comparative to what CCD had in 2013. A couple of years ago, Phil even
> admitted to it in some oblique way.
>
> For the E-1, the things that DPR got right in the review was the
> horrid AF performance, spotty AWB, poor high-ISO noise control and
> lackluster read-write speeds. The LCD monitor is horrid and the menu
> system was a sign of insanity to come.
>
> Where DPR got things REALLY wrong, was in the camera size and weight.
> A smaller sensor did not mean smaller cameras. A smaller sensor
> allowed the camera to be right-sized. The lenses, while slow in AF,
> are still among the best made. Three lenses took you from 8mm to 200mm
> and were show-stopper in quality. The CCD sensor with mixture of Kodak
> and Olympus dithering magic creates an imaging quality that far
> exceeds the pixel count. My wife will still pick out the E-1 pictures
> in a wedding shoot where all three cameras are being used. The camera
> just does something special for human skin.
>
> DPR also got wrong the criticism on the image review. It is a little
> complex to figure out, but it is actually a brilliant design. DPR also
> got wrong the level of importance of the self-cleaning sensor. They
> eventually came around, but not soon enough. DPR didn't have a clue
> how nearly indestructible the camera is either. I know, first hand,
> just how solid the E-1 is.
>
> DPR really went off the rails when criticizing the new "limited" lens
> selection. That was short-sighted and is something they keep doing.
>
> AG Schnozz
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|