« Workingman's Leica | Main | Dreams, Reveries, Mysteries, Memories: 'Emmet Gowin: Photographs' »

Sunday, 28 June 2009

Comments

Mike, no problem. I had the same on another blog and tried that, changing the video sizes in the embedding code. Just the two numbers, height and size, it just works. The sizes number pair apears two times in the code, dunno why, change both of them to be sure. Try to find the ones that work for you and once you have them , use the same numbers on every video. That's it.

Is not compact at all !!!

Good idea to post this video. The camera is much larger than I anticipated--looks almost Leica size--definitely much larger than the old Olympus 35mm rangefinders.

Looks bigger than I might have envisioned, but still fine.

That also looks like the perfect new mate for that Rockwell guy whose wife wants to dump him.

Thanks for the tip Max! I'll do that next time.

Mike

I too am struck by how much bigger the camera is than I expected. Were people seriously talking about sticking that thing in a pocket (even a cargo-pants pocket)? That said, it is a fine looking camera.

[She sounds exactly like my Austrian friend....]

I hope she's a small person. The camera looks rather large in her hands. Like my FE2 looks in My hands.

Wish we could see it operating: AF speed, lag, LCD refresh speed....

Mike,
Take a look at this webhosting service:
http://www.squarespace.com/
It might make publishing your blog more effortless. Love that Pen, but must wait to see what Olympus does next.

Looks much bigger than I imagined in my mind. (Or maybe this women is really, really small ;-)

I still can't see myself buying this and holding out in front of my face. Even more so now that I see it someone's hand.

Oh look, a woman with hands closer to my size and the camera without its bulky case.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J0eSJEY_yM

And what is the oddest cross genre promo video I can recall seeing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FWv21EgRZU

Mike,

Re: youtube

I have a typepad blog, too. If you have a premium account you can easily change the size of your columns with Themebuilder. If you have a regular account, you can still try out some other themes that have slightly wider columns. Your current one, is not one of the wider ones. This would also allow you to offer your advertisers slightly larger spaces, if you were so inclined.

I have one on order with Amazon, but if it is as big as it looks it won't be in my hands long. This thing looks HUGE! What are they thinking (if so)!!??

Hmmmmm.....somehow I thought it was going to be about Leica M8 in size. This is much larger than I imagined.

Being German myself I can tell you this accent belongs to someone from my country ;-)

The Dutch typically speak English much better.

Carsten

The handling by this lady is quite rough. If anything else, this video is surely a testament to the strong built of the camera lens plate and the the lens mount!

Tom its smaller than a M8

Leica M8
Dimensions 139 x 80 x 37 mm (5.5 x 3.2 x 1.5 in)

Olympus E-P1
Dimensions 121 x 70 x 36 mm (4.8 x 2.8 x 1.4 in)

You must take into view that the women has her own size to contrast with the Olympus. ;)

João M.

Thanks for all the reports on this new camera Mike. Its a good read. Here's a video with a DSLR (E420) next to the new E-P1, to make the size even more obvious. Regards!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn0PpTXMSK0

It's smaller than my Bessa R3A, a little wider but a little less tall than my Minolta Hi-Matic F, maybe half an inch wider than my old Pen EE2, but not quite as wide as my Pen FT.
It's a little smaller than an OM-1. If you chopped the prism off an OM-1 and made it half an inch narrower they'd be the same size.

As soon as I held one I thought it was just right - small but not too small, solid but not too heavy.

Somebody else, maybe on TOP, posited the idea that cameras come in size groups. I can't remember what they were exactly, but generally, it was something like shirt-pocketable, cargo-pocketable, jacket-pocketable, light over the shoulder, medium, large, etc. Within these groups, precise dimensions don't matter much.

The Oly body is 4.74 x 2.75 x 1.38 inches (WxHxD.)

I have a Leica D-Lux 3 that is 4x2x1 in the body, with a flat retractable lens that makes the whole thing 1 1/2 inches deep, and I would consider that cargo-pocketable and easily jacket-pocketable -- but it's much smaller than the Oly: 3/4 of an inch shorter in length, 3/4 of an inch shorter in height, and about the same depth, but that's with a lens attached.

I also have an M8 body that is 5.5x3.2x1.5, or 3/4 of an inch longer, a half-inch deeper and just a bit thicker than the Oly, both without lenses, and the Leica is definitely an over-the-shoulder camera. There may be pockets that will take it, but they'd have to be *big* pockets.

Looking at both of the videos posted here, I'd suggest that the Oly falls into the light over-the-shoulder category, at least, when the lens is attached. It might be much easier to pack than most cameras, however, and that's important. You might also be able to carry the camera in jacket pockets, broken down, with the body in one pocket and lens in another, when not shooting, and that would also be handy. The Oly's small for a larger-sensor camera, but it's not tiny.

JC

Here are the sizes from DP Review:
Pen EP-1; 121 x 70 x 36 mm (4.8 x 2.8 x 1.4 in)
Leica M8; 139 x 80 x 37 mm (5.5 x 3.2 x 1.5 in)
Perhaps the EP-1 appears large because the lenses are relatively small.
bd

Thank you very much. That video was very useful. I had gotten the idea from the marketing and from discussion groups that it is a compact camera. Frankly, since it is obvious now that it is too large to put in almost any kind of pocket. There is not much advantage over a small DSLR or a Leica M8 which would also hang around your neck. It is not the "always with you" camera I had hoped for.

Obviously German accent unless you are making the traditional US confusion between deutsch and dutch. The Pennsylvania Dutch were deutsch not niederlandish.

Seriously, is that photo taken with a wide angle lens - the Pen is huge. It smaller, but not much smaller than a Rebel or D40 with a small wide angle or normal prime.

I looked at the link on YouTube listed above by Hugh. Still looks huge, and boxy. Was the original Pen F this BIG? I remember it as a small camera. I think Olympus probably blew it as it is touted as small, but obviously not so...we'll see.

E-P1 = 4.7x2.8x1.4in
M8 = 5.5 x3.25 x 1.5 (roughly--measured mine with a tape measure)

So it is smaller, but not small...

Yup, I think the video looks about right: I handled one and it felt about as big as it looks here. I was surprised, and bought the LX3 that day!

It felt nicely made, solid and all, just not petite. It doesn't seem enough smaller than the G1 to justify giving up the flip screen / viewfinder (according to taste) and the faster operation. The Olympus seemed to have to drive the lens through its whole range to focus, while the G1 just knew where to go, much quicker. I don't know how well (if at all) the G1 works with the olympus 17mm lens, but if they'd kindly hurry up with that promised 20mm, that would seem like a more attractive choice for me at least.

Being half Dutch, half German (and well... living in Holland) I can certainly say she has a German accent.

Re. the camera, as some wrote before, I thought it would be more compact. Looks to be a bit too large to be an always-carry-with-you-camera. Well, depends. If your DSLR is a D3(x) or EOS1, it may seem pocketable to your. If your DSLR is a D40, it's ... ehhhmmmm ... hardly smaller?

About Olympus EP-1 measures and weights:
My Nikon FM3A body measures are 5.6 x 3.5 x 2.3 inches, and weights 570 grams. The EP1 body measures 4.7 x 2.8 x 1.3, an weights 335 grams.
IMHO, there's the perfect difference. Anything smaller than this would make it difficult to handle.
In terms of volume, at 30.3 cubic inches, 17mm pancake included, it's smaller than the G10 with lens extended: 40.0 cubic inches. (Digital Camera Resource site data).
It's OK, at least for me. I put my order for the kit version with the 17mm pancake less two hours after it was offered in Adorama's site, on June 16.
And the clock goes on ticking...

Eudoro
Rio, Brasil

Remember that Eamon in his review said that his first reaction was that he wished it was 20% smaller still, or words to that effect.

(I never remember exact quotes for some reason.)

Mike

"Leica size--definitely much larger than the old Olympus 35mm rangefinders."

Which Olympus models would those be? The 35SP/UC are almost the exact same size as an M2/3/4. The LC and LE are larger. The XA, RC, RD, etc., are smaller.

I never believed this would be a pants pocket camera, and Olympus never said it would be. They have, in fact, stated that they can make smaller m4/3 bodies in the future, and will.

It's amazing (well, maybe not ...) how people can get their knickers in a twist at over something that they, not the manufacturer, had in mind.

I suspect the size may be "just right" for me ... if it is just a tad smaller than an M or OM, it will be fine. Now for that optical VF/RF on a slightly smaller chassis ...

I think it's clear that Olympus needs to hire Shaquille O'Neil as a pitch-man. Or Yao Ming. Somebody who can palm a basketball will show the new Pen off to best advantage, I'm sure. But you've got to like this woman's manner and accent!
My film Pen measures 108 wide x 63 tall x 48 deep at the lens. Or, as I prefer to think of it, about 4 1/4 x 2 1/2 x 2. Makes me feel like Shaq!

Well, all these compact cameras that aren't, or are, depending on your pockets. We've had reviews by adjunct TOP writers of the Oly, and the Canon G9-10; methinks it's time for JC,( bestseller breath, as Mike J. refers to him) to write us a review of the G1 Panasonic. Just to balance things out.

Thanks in advance.

Today I had a launch in Holland of the E-P1 for dealers (I am press, but was allowed to come ;) ). Nice camera and size and weight are perfect to me.
I also talked to the lady in the video. And yes, she is German.

Preconceptions... yes all those pictures we saw early on with just the camera on its own and no hands to give scale certainly gave the impression of a smaller item. One possible explanation is that we're still not used to seeing rear screens quite that big.

Now that I've watched the videos and got over the size surprise it got me to thinking of the only camera I used with a separate viewfinder attached, the Bessa L. At 135.5×78.5×33.5 mm it was bigger than the Olympus in all but front to rear depth but I was very happy to carry it everywhere in its "never ready" case with viewfinder and 35mm pancake.
So, my conclusion is that I'd be happy with the size of the Olympus but not so happy remembering that the Bessa L & 35mm cost about 1/3 as much.

Cheers, Robin

Oh, and less of the "funny accent" remarks - you yanks have funny accents to our ears!

You just never know who you'll run across on TOP. Hi Grant. How's the bike biz? Former sub to RR; kids got in the way, again.

I had a play with the E-P1 at PMA Australia and thought it was pretty ordinary. Cheap overall feel. Overly complex. Too many tiny controls/buttons crammed into too small a space. Poor picture taking experience, with both the non-articulated screen and clip on viewfinder. The obligatory zoom (in initial packages) kinda defeats the purpose of a compact. Even the rep admitted if you don't need video you're probably better off with the E-420 and pancake. The E-P1 probably takes good pictures but it's not for me, especially at the inflated price they're asking.

I remember the first E-1 ads, their model had small hands, making the E-1 look much larger. Presumably to make it look as impressive as a D1.

Here, I think the girl has rather small hands, making the camera also look a lot bigger, though probably not by design!

Forget the M8 - they're huge. Here's the real comparison:
EP1 121 x 70 x 36
Leica CL 121 x 76 x 32

This is a good size for a small, USABLE camera. Smaller than that, and they get fiddly to work with fast. I loved the idea of the little Rolleis, but every thing was too crammed together to use. And all the buttons on a modern digicam drive me nuts. You need a little space to use them well.

"bestseller breath, as Mike J. refers to him"

I do not!

Mike

Mike,

Don't be a Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh, don't make me track down the post; I know it's there.

JC, write the review, I am very interested.

Bron, the oft times wrong.

The Pen looks bigger because of the brown leather casing (mainly on the bottom), I think you can remove that?

Also, I really love how the lens expands as you turn the zoom. Didn't see that coming!

Why does her accent need mention at all? Does yours?

Perhaps the comparison we are all missing is the Olympus to the Sigma. Here's those numbers:

EP1 4.7 x 2.8 x 1.3 ; 11.8 ounces

Sigma 4.5 x 2.3 x 1.1 inches ; 9.3 ounces

(note: Sigma is listed at 2.2 inches deep, but that is with the lens. Looking at the photos, the body is less than half of that, so I put in 1.1 here)

Sp the Sigma is smaller in all dimensions. That seems to be the game in this case, as these to cameras, to me, are head to head for comparison...

"Methinks it's time for JC ( bestseller breath, as Mike J. refers to him,) to write us a review of the G1 Panasonic. Just to balance things out."

I was devastated by the slight, and cried myself to sleep that night.

Anyhoo, about the G1...One of the problems seldom mentioned about larger-sensor cameras is that they are expensive and readily sold on America's Fence. I shoot Nikons, and have a D3 and a D300 as my main, gotta-get-the-shot machines. I also have an M8 as my main, don't-have-to-get-the-shot device. All of them are expensive enough that I am reluctant to bang around town with them; and the Nikons are heavy enough to make that uncomfortable. But the G1, I carry in my car, full-time. I have it sitting on seat under a jacket, and if somebody breaks into the car and steals it someday, it won't ruin me financially. In the meantime, it takes photos good enough for what I usually need. Actually, it takes photos better than that, but the other cameras have advantages, especially for very-low-light shooting.

The G1 is excellent for travel, as well. Combined with a smaller laptop, some folding earphones and other miscellaneous necessities (prescription medicine, extra glasses, etc.) it still makes a package small enough to carry-on even the small regional airplanes. I also like the twistable LCD, and the camera, even with one of the zooms, is light enough that when you carry it over your shoulder, you don't notice it.

All-in-all, I think a better package (for me) than the Oly. But I'm seriously looking forward to the rumored Oly viewfinder version.

(You know what would be neat with the twistable LCD? A credit-card sized remote control like they sell with Sony video cameras. Those are a necessity for video cams - how else to get the requisite close-ups on your home-made porn? -- but they'd be a neat way to take unobtrusive in-bar street shots with the G1, with the camera sitting casually on a table-top.)

I too had a really good play with the EP1 at PMA in Australia. The rep let me play with a untethered camera with both lenses. It's similar to the Canon G10 without a lens on but of course the lenses don't retract into the body like the G10.

I liked the handling but my G10 felt better made and sure looked better. This is a camera that I really wanted a viewfinder on. After spending 15 minutes with the camera I'm ot as enthusiastic as I was efore I played with one.

I may just have another look at the Panasonic GH1.

"I think it's clear that Olympus needs to hire Shaquille O'Neil as a pitch-man. Or Yao Ming. Somebody who can palm a basketball will show the new Pen off to best advantage, I'm sure. But you've got to like this woman's manner and accent!
My film Pen measures 108 wide x 63 tall x 48 deep at the lens. Or, as I prefer to think of it, about 4 1/4 x 2 1/2 x 2. Makes me feel like Shaq!"

Grant Petersen shoots digital? What is this world coming to? You riding plastic bikes these days too? ;-)

Nice to see the Bike Curmudgeon reading The Photo Curmudgeon!

My biggest issue with the G1 is that it doesn't have in-body stabilization and neither the Oly 17mm lens nor the eagerly awaited Panasonic 20/1.7 have IS (at least, Panasonic's roadmap doesn't list OIS next to the 20). The LX3 has a nice fast lens and better-than-average high ISO results (for a small sensor digicam). In a larger sensor camera, I expect fast lenses and image stabilization both or I'm not taking advantage of the larger sensor.

I'll have to check out an E-P1 in person. I think I'd be happy with the size of it; I've seen other photos that make it look smaller (larger hands presumably). I'd really like a twistable LCD but could live without it if I really love the camera. I'd like to find out how easy it is to switch from AF to MF - if it's just an override where turning the focus ring on the lens puts you in MF or if you have to click through the menu (yuck).

Right now, I have 28mm and 85mm primes for my APS-C DSLR along with a couple of zooms covering 16-300 and a 400 tele. I typically shoot primes or zooms and when I shoot primes, it's almost always people; sometimes it's the 28 for a semi-compact outfit. I can see myself replacing the primes with an E-P1 kit (17mm pancake and maybe the Oly 50/2 with an adapter) and just keeping the zooms and the tele for the DSLR. I suspect I'd end up using the E-P1 at least 75% of the time if I did that.

Here is my really big irritant with the vast majority of E-P1 coverage and previews: Almost all insist on comparing it to either a P&S or, at best, a low-end DSLR. I can't be alone in not giving a damn how it compares to these. I am looking for a camera for street shooting and other "close in" tasks (and not sports or wildlife and some such more esoteric application) where one might traditionally use a rangefinder, and I really want a *fantastic* camera and lens, not just one that compares favorably to a P&S. I want to sell my Canon gear and give my Bessa a break.

So, c'mon reviewers, start giving the lens and camera a *hard* look, not just being amazed at how much better it is then some top-end P&S.

I bought the Pana G-1 and was set to have regret if the PEN was small and nice. But I'm still happy with my G-1 :-) Especially as it has a viewfinder and not a ridiculous add-on thing.

"Nice to see the Bike Curmudgeon reading The Photo Curmudgeon!"

Actually, Grant P., aren't you the guy who used to publish a very good newsletter about vinyl records? I have an archive around here somewhere, and I'm ashamed I can't put my hands on it to check...forgive me. Anyway, if I've got that right, the Photo Curmudgeon used to read the Vinyl Curmudgeon before the Bike Curmudgeon read the Photo Curmudgeon. [g]

Mike

"Almost all insist on comparing it to either a P&S or, at best, a low-end DSLR."

Paul - I believe that's because the target market is people coming from P&S cameras, or in the market for a low-end SLR. It's really not geared at being "fantastic" in the way you're talking about, but just might be for some people - given its build, flexibility, and features. It will be interesting to see if anyone does a comparison to some higher end equipment. (My guess? It's very close to being "pro" level; Everything but autofocus speed, and high-ISO noise. It will still be good, but unless it's got the speed and low-noise of a D3, people will complain.)

"Here is my really big irritant with the vast majority of E-P1 coverage and previews:..."

Here's a novel idea. Why not spend some time with the camera to see if it meets YOUR needs? It's clear that many here have expectations that the E-P1 may or may not meet. If the camera instead came with a fixed 45mm-e lens, an attractive pouch and was priced at AUD $800 (instead of $1600-1700 with the 17mm) I could have been interested. You may value its intrinsic qualities more highly ... but cruising the web won't tell you this.

The comments to this entry are closed.