Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: Er1kksen on March 05, 2008, 07:05:20 am
-
Detailed Preview (http://fourthirdsphoto.com/preview/e-420_01.php)
So here it is, the first DLSR you really can just toss in your pocket. And the biggest surprise? A tiny, inexpensive 50mm equivalent f2.8 pancake lens. It's what I've been fantasizing about for months. Focuses to 15cm, too.
And the wonderful IQ of the E-3 (which may or may not be equal to the general IQ of the canon and nikon offerings in its price point, we already have some threads about that) is bound to be found here, with either the same sensor or possibly an even slightly improved one. I think this raises it to the level of competitive (IQ-wise) with the rest of its entry-level competition. If it handles jpegs the same way the E-3 does, it may actually give better results for consumer snapshooters who only shoot jpeg.
Once prices come down, I'll get one. I said I wouldn't upgrade until I could get 12mp, but I was thinking along the lines of consumer-sensor 12mp. If it's got the E-3's sensor, the extra 2mp doesn't really matter to me.
Sound interesting to anyone else?
-
Without being perjorative, I think it's main market will be women (or men with small hands). I know my wife measures the value of a camera by how well it fits in her purse. She constantly ridicules me for shlepping my A700 with vertical grip and a couple of lenses where ever we go. The 25 mm lens reminds me of my Oly Pen F pancake lens. Although I'm not a fan of the 4/3 system, I really believe Olympus may have found a niche market.
-
Or, as noted over at the online photographer, its market might just be the market the sigma dp1 was going after. I know people who want to get the image quality of a dslr but find even the canon 400D to be huge.
-
The E420 is exactly the same size and 5g heavier than other Oly dSLRs before it (and not significantly smaller than dSLRs from other manufacturers, e.g. Nikon D40/60, Canon 400D). Granted the combo with the pancake lens make it a small package but the camera itself is not revolutionary size wise. Marketing talk.
-
The E420 is exactly the same size and 5g heavier than other Oly dSLRs before it (and not significantly smaller than dSLRs from other manufacturers, e.g. Nikon D40/60, Canon 400D). Granted the combo with the pancake lens make it a small package but the camera itself is not revolutionary size wise. Marketing talk.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179288\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I disagree about the size. When you start shrinking things down to that size small differences are big. But it is the combo with that pancake that makes it a really small package.
Now if they bundled it with a 20mm (40 equiv) prime I'd be all over it.
-
The E420 is exactly the same size and 5g heavier than other Oly dSLRs before it (and not significantly smaller than dSLRs from other manufacturers, e.g. Nikon D40/60, Canon 400D).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179288\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The E-410 is 5g heaver than the lightest of all DSLR's, the E-400 and E-410, but significantly lighter than any other DSLR including most other Olympus DSLR's: about 440g with battery, compared to 490g for the Olympus E-510, 522g for the Nikon D60, 556g for the 400D, and 690g for the Pentax K200D, the lightest non-FourThirds DSLR for which pancake lenses are available.
What other DSLR body and lens combination comes closest to the roughly 535g of the E-420 with 25/2.8 lens and battery?
Also, the body is distinctly less deep than almost any other, in particular being shallower at the lens mount due to the shorter "flange to focal plane" distance of the FourThirds mount specification. The shallow "lens mount to body back" distance combined with the pancake lens (none such available for EF-S or DX) reduces the total depth of the body with lens, the dimension that is probably most important to the "pocketability" of a camera.
I agree with other comments that women are likely a major E-420 target market, as is already the case with the E-410: check out the color options for the new leather cases and straps for the E-410 and E-420. But some men like me are also interested in a light, pocketable camera with interchangeable lenses.
-
I don't understand the comments that the camera has limited appeal, e.g., to women and a selection of males. It will probably appeal to all the same people who liked small 35 mm cameras from Oly, Pentax, and others. Judging from their presence on auction sites, cameras of that size were pretty popular then, so why wouldn't they be now?
-
Well, back when I used to use only my OM-1 and my friend was always toting around his 20d w/ a long tele and battery grip, it was kind of summed up when one of my somewhat duller colleagues started talking about my camera.. he started on the fact that it looked cool (sophisticated opinion, no?) but quickly stated that I was essentially a loser and that my canon-using friend had a much better camera. Granted, the 20d is in many ways a much more versatile camera than an old OM-1 loaded with tri-x; I'm not going to argue about that. But when asked why he thought my friends camera was better, he replied, "I dunno, it's... bigger... and stuff..."
So there are always the people who think that way.
Then there's the nice solid feel of a good molded grip attached to the just-right heft of a mid-size DSLR. Some people prefer that.
-
But when asked why he thought my friends camera was better, he replied, "I dunno, it's... bigger... and stuff..."
If it isn't large and solid enough to use for self defense, it's not a Real SLR.
-
I suspect that a nice solid metal OM-1 with its pointy edges would actually be more useful in a fight than a modern plastic wonder with fragile-looking long lens attached...
-
A 70-200/2.8L IS may look fragile, but it would probably crack a skull without suffering too much damage...
But this looks like it might fit the niche of "digicam size/weight, DSLR quality" reasonably well.
-
A 70-200/2.8L IS may look fragile, but it would probably crack a skull without suffering too much damage...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179572\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It doesn't look fragile. It looks like it should have V2 painted on its side. (Or maybe I'm thinking of the 300f2.8 IS.)
-
I don't understand the comments that the camera has limited appeal, e.g., to women and a selection of males. It will probably appeal to all the same people who liked small 35 mm cameras from Oly, Pentax, and others. Judging from their presence on auction sites, cameras of that size were pretty popular then, so why wouldn't they be now?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179383\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Without being perjorative, I think it's main market will be women (or men with small hands). I know my wife measures the value of a camera by how well it fits in her purse. She constantly ridicules me for shlepping my A700 with vertical grip and a couple of lenses where ever we go. The 25 mm lens reminds me of my Oly Pen F pancake lens. Although I'm not a fan of the 4/3 system, I really believe Olympus may have found a niche market.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179269\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
From the verbage of their press release (Olympus) it seems this camera is meant for the point and shoot market. But sadly, without IS, it will have limit appeal in this market.
-
From the verbage of their press release (Olympus) it seems this camera is meant for the point and shoot market. But sadly, without IS, it will have limit appeal in this market.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179670\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
IS is the bane of photography. It has allowed companies to think that producing a lens that goes from f-google to f-googleplex is a great idea because IS will save you. (I'm looking at you canon with your 17-85.)
-
I'm pretty sure it was one of the cheaper white canon teles, as he later seemed astonished that my friend's old yashica had a zoom lens that had a constant aperture of 3.5...
-
Any guesses as to when we'll see an announcement for the E-520? What features will it have??
-
IS is the bane of photography. It has allowed companies to think that producing a lens that goes from f-google to f-googleplex is a great idea because IS will save you. (I'm looking at you canon with your 17-85.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179676\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
IS is just a safety net to camera shake, nothing else.
But when a company such as Olympus, who believes in sensor-based stabilization, and has NO LENS BASED STABILIZATION on any of its glass, produces a camera without IS, marketing better re-think the product line and positioning.
-
... when a company such as Olympus ... produces a camera without IS, marketing better re-think the product line and positioning.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=180231\")
The Olympus product line includes the E-510 for those to whom IS is worth some increase in size, weight and cost, leaving the E-410 and E-420 mostly for those who put a higher priority on size and weight.
Is there enough market for the smaller, lighter, unstabilized E-420 in competition with models like the E-510 and the other even bulkier stabilized options in other brands? I do not know, but Olympus surely knew how well the E-410 was selling alongside competition like the E-510 when it decided to produce the E-420. So I am inclined to think that Olympus marketing understands the market situation at least as well as us self-styled experts in internet forums do.
P. S. An apparent leak at the Olympus UK web-site suggests that an E-520, with IS, will be announce soon. The page was changed later, but here is a cached version:
[a href=\"http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.olympus.co.uk%2Fconsumer%2Fdslr_6839.htm&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3a%6ffficial&client=firefox-a]http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache%3Ahttp...lient=firefox-a[/url]
-
The E-420 is cheap enough and has the tiny size niche that will probably keep it in my glove box. If I had to spend much more to try an Oly I wouldn't. I'd just buy another canon lens.
So from a marketing standpoint they get me in the door.
-
The shallow "lens mount to body back" distance combined with the pancake lens (none such available for EF-S or DX) reduces the total depth of the body with lens, the dimension that is probably most important to the "pocketability" of a camera.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179372\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There is Voigtlander 40mm f/2 pancake for Nikon mount. Metering works with the small nikons too, and A and S modes. Nikon also has Nikkor 45mm F/2.8 pancake lens.
Also you can get the really small nikkor 20/4 AI-S or slightly larger nikkor 20/2.8 AI-S for compact wide angle needs.
-
There is Voigtlander 40mm f/2 pancake for Nikon mount. Metering works with the small nikons too, and A and S modes. Nikon also has Nikkor 45mm F/2.8 pancake lens.
Also you can get the really small nikkor 20/4 AI-S or slightly larger nikkor 20/2.8 AI-S for compact wide angle needs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=180693\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I said "DX or EF-S" lenses for a reason: for DX bodies those 40mm amd 45mm pancake lenses give far narrower than normal FOV, so only the (non-pancake) 20mm options are relevant in comparison to the normal FOV of the Olympus 25/2.8 pancake. The Nikon 20/2.8 is 42.5mm long and weighs 270g (I cannot find the spec's for the 20/4) compared to about 25mm and 95g for the Olympus 25/2.8. Other Nikon options include the 24/2.8 and 28/2.8, closer to normal FOV in DX. The 28/2.8 is lighter than the 20/2.8 at 205g, but the 20/2.8 is the shortest "near normal" option.
Also, the Nikon F mount has a distance of about 46mm from flange to focal plane, compared to about 38mm for FourThirds mount. So the distance from focal plane to front of lens is about 63mm for a FourThirds body with 25/2.8 compared to about 88mm for a Nikon mount body with the 20/2.8. So the Nikon options do not come close to the low camera depth and weight of the E420+25/2.8.
P. S. I found the specs for the Nikon 20/4. Apart from being a long discontinued manual focus lens, it is longer still at 47mm, but lighter than the 20/2.8 at 205g (still over twice the weight of the Olympus 25/2.8).
-
I want that e-420. Is May still the launch date? I've seen signs they are getting out and about but that could just be a flood of cameras to review sites.
-
Olympus 25mm x crop factor 2 = 50mm
Voigtlander 40mm x crop factor 1.5 = 60mm
Also Pentax has a nice range of new pancake lenses, 21mm, 40mm and 70mm.
And some of us prefer manual focus lenses with good distance and Dof scales. Especially on wide angle lenses.
This is the Nikkor 20mm f/4
(http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/ai204a.jpg)
-
Olympus 25mm x crop factor 2 = 50m
Voigtlander 40mm x crop factor 1.5 = 60mm
Also Pentax has a nice range of new pancake lenses, 21mm, 40mm and 70mm.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=180972\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No major 35mm format SLR system ever had a 60mm "normal" lens, or any 60mm prime except one macro lens, and for a good reason: if anything 50mm is already a bit narrow compared to normal lenses for other formats, with focal length about image diagonal length being a rule of thumb. That would be 43mm for 3:2 shape, about 40mm for crops to traditional print shapes like 8"x10" and 11"x14". In fact, that 40mm pancake might well have been intended as a a roughly normal FOV with 35mm format.
About Pentax: do I need to say for the third time that was referring to Nikon's DX and Canon's EF-S systems lacking a compact normal FOV prime lens, with no claim about Pentax's system? I agree about the nice array of Pentax small prime options, particularly the wide-normal 21mm. It is a pity that recent Pentax DSLR bodies have got bulkier, in particular compared to the E-410, E-420 and E-520, but also compared to earlier Pentax models like the *-ist DL. Maybe the Pentax in-body I system adds significant bulk. Also, the longish 46mm or so flange to focal plane distance of Pentax K mount cramps the options for a shallow lens+body combination.
-
Now I only mentioned the Pentax because I think it's an interesting lens range. I would love to see a 21mm mf pancake for Nikon or Canon or a 15mm for Oly...