Between the chase for stratospheric megapixel numbers, lust over new gear releases and pushing the limits of imaging envelopes, I sometimes take a step or two back and relive the experience of shooting with cameras from yesteryear. In this case, the first ever Olympus Four Thirds DSLR, the E-1 which was introduced in 2003. While accessorizing my outfit with a vintage-looking camera matches the overall retro-fashion look that seems hip these days, my purpose of shooting with the dinosaur E-1 was more simplistic. I wanted to slow down, and just enjoy shooting without having the camera get in the way. After all, have I not repeatedly talked about going back to the basics and getting the fundamentals right? Even MT has a great, must-read article about shot discipline, which emphasizes critical timing and technique relevant to all gear choices.
Why the E-1? This was where it all started for Olympus, and to explore the roots of the current Micro Four Thirds system I am heavily invested in. Having only 5 Megapixels, three focusing points (the horror!), poor dynamic range and usable ISO up to 400 only, there are many practical limitations with using the E-1. Being well aware of all these restrictions allowed me to work within what could be achieved with the camera. For my usual shutter therapy session out on the streets of sunny Kuala Lumpur, I rarely needed anything beyond ISO 200, and the bright and a tad harsh sunlight helped improve the focusing efficiency of the camera. I still keep the respectable Zuiko 50mm F2 Macro lens around, and brought this and the 25mm F2.8 pancake lens for my session.
Using the E-1 for about 3 hours shooting in a local wet market, I realized how much I missed the feeling of a much beefier grip on the camera body. While I have always championed the smaller and lighter camera alternative, nothing beats a sturdy, comfortable and ergonomically optimized grip. The camera felt so good in the hand, and reminded me of my time with the E-5, which served me well for many years.
The stark difference in shooting experience was from the optical viewfinder. Having switched completely over to the OM-D system, I’ve been using an electronic viewfinder for at least 5 years now, so it was strange to revert back to an optical viewfinder. I had expected and was prepared for dealing with not having the advantage of “what you see is what you get” exposure simulation, but it was genuinely pleasant to frame shots looking at the actual subject, instead of through a simulated LCD screen. This was especially true when shooting close up portraits!
Focusing turned out to be my biggest challenge. I have become so used to the near instantaneous AF speed of modern Micro Four Thirds system that it was almost bizarre to experience lens hunting or a slight hesitation while acquiring focus after you half-press the shutter button. To compound matters, it was almost impossible to review my images for critical focus accuracy, because the screen is a tiny 1.8 inch LCD with 134k pixels! I had to put my faith in the camera, and trust in my own shooting technique to get the shot.
Oh the shutter sound (or lack thereof)! So quiet and damped, unlike most DSLRs that “clank” loudly.
When the focus was spot on and the timing and subject content all came together perfectly, the E-1 delivered fantastic images. Despite having only 5 Megapixels, the image quality still holds it own, even viewing them on the Quad HD 32 inch LCD screen I am currently working on. Knowing that I had only 5 Megapixels to work with, I framed my images as close as I could to the final output I had in mind, leaving little or no room for cropping. The images from the 50mm F2 macro lens came out crisp and with good contrast. The Kodak CCD image sensor renders colors differently from the modern CMOS sensors in cameras these days, and worked very well for skin tones. I have to admit, Kodak knew what they were doing when dealing with color science.
Did I wish I had something more capable when I was shooting the images shown in this article? Barring a few extremely, fast paced action shots, not really. The E-1 was able to capture images just as I wanted. Despite being the first DSLR from Olympus, I believe they got many things right with the few flaws addressed in their later iterations (E-3, and E-5). It was a fun camera to shoot with, and I still enjoy using it.
Can we really improve our photography by endlessly upgrading to better cameras and lenses?
Has imaging technology improved that much over the years that cameras from only a few years ago have become truly obsolete?
My answer is both yes, and no. Yes, imaging innovation has indeed come a long way and pushed imaging boundaries. On the other hand, I don’t believe any camera can be completely obsolete. If it can shoot a good portrait photograph 10 years ago, it can surely do the same today, and for several years to come. The Megapixels may not be sufficient for larger resolution displays, and the images may be lacking in terms of overall sharpness, dynamic range and color tonality but we all know that photography is a lot more than just technical perfection. I have to remind myself, to make use of what I currently have, before considering an upgrade which may not add value to my photography.
Do you or have you owned or used an Olympus E-1 before? Do you still keep one or shoot with one now? Do share your experience and thoughts!
Also, check out MT’s own take on the Olympus E-1 in his 2014 article here.
__________________
We are also on Facebook and there is a curated reader Flickr pool.
Images and content copyright Robin Wong 2017 onwards. All rights reserved
Ming Thein | Photographer 
I was one of the first users of the E1 in The netherlands, After that I used the E3/E5 and OM-D E-M1, these are all fantastic cameras and of course are more modern. So…my E1 was resting in in a box for may years, last year I found back my E1. This cam is so good in terms of comfort and handling. The colours ar so nice, of course when you compare with new cameras it’s no comparison at all….But if you frame correctly (no crop), low ISO settings, the photos are great. Of course when you try to capture a flying insect…not possible. So, in my backpack the E1 is back, with zuiko 7-14mm and Sigma 30 mm 1.4 lenses, besides a new M1…and use it for sure for landscape and more static photos. I have a dream……new modern Olympus camera with an E1 body….would be great.
I have an E1, E5 and E500. The E1 has fantastic ergonomics and an almost silent shutter. I bought the E1 with the intention of converting it to infrared but having read the article i’m now not so sure. Maybe i’ll wait till next year. All my friends (some models) praise the colours and skin tones of the Olympus cameras and don’t believe the small megapixel size of the pics. The 4/3 E system was killed off by the camera club snobbery and brutal mega bucks advertising of Cannon and Nikon (plus crap advertising by Olympus themselves unfortunately). Thanks for inspiring me to try my E1 again.
i’ve read this story here over and over again, all couple months, and sadly regret selling my E-1 many years ago. It’s a legendary camera nowadays, like the Sony R1, or Canon EOS 5D…back into their heyday, these days, it’s still a blast from the past.
From the earlier digital camera history, the X-E1 Fujifilm is being such a marvel, into it’s own way. The Tonality from the E-1 and it’s Kodak Sensor really is special.
I am guessing this is not the venue for this, but I have an extra E-1 body and kit lens with a charger if you are interested. I was about to list online but was struggling with it and got caught in a loop of reading articles. I would rather it go to someone who appreciates it. Let me know!
Hi Ming (and Robin). Thank you for this wonderful article on the E-1. When I went out for a second-hand lens some years ago, the Zuiko 14-54 I, the seller also had the E-1 and I bought it for a very cheap price. I already owned E-510, E-500 (very nice) and E-3 (a bit too complicaties but good) and now I have the Panasonic G-85 which Is use at the moment. But….last week I took out my lovely, rounded and chunky E-1 again and enjoyed it’s colours, handling (so easy and simple) and had a wonderful time. It sits next to me on my couch right now and go for an autumnstroll in a minute. Thank you for being so ‘kind’ for this lovely camera with ‘only’ babylike 5mp. But what joy, quality and FUN. The camera I love most of all. Good luck from the Netherlands🍀Gerie
It feels nice to use, which does not change with time…they don’t build them like this anymore!
Sad, but (so) true, Ming. I’m glad to have a decent copy soon again.
Good Light.
My first digital camera was the E-1, which I still have, occasionally use and whilst I now also have an E-M1 Mk 1, that E-1 still has a lot going for it, especially the location of it’s On/Off switch on the r/hand side next to your thumb. Ok, so the m4/3rds cameras remind people of Olly’s OM cameras, but the position of it’s less ergonomically located on/off switch, I find irritating when the E-1 got this soo right one and a half decades ago! The E-3 and 5 models placed this switch in a less than satisfactory position – I’m tempted to buy the E-M1X, because of where the on/off switch is on that, but wish they did this without the built-in r/handgrip, which makes it too heavy and bulky in comparison to the E-M1.
Hi Robin, I’ve only just found your great E1 article. I still have and use my E1 regularly. When I look at it’s output i struggle to convince myself I need anything more modern. I find the ooc jpegs fantastic for contrast and colour but I would like to get more from the raw files, especially with regard to high contrast landscape shots. If possible could you please share some of your E1 raw pipeline? I’ve seen some mention if DxO?
I’ve tried Raw Therapy and find it frustratingly slow and clunky.
Any tips and advice would be awesome. Cheers, Tim
Dear ROBIN.
Thanks once again for this reminder that there are work arounds for old tech that still make them great choices today – how many of us truly need more than 6MP or 1 frame per second!
I have been discovering the joys of old CCD sensor ultra-compacts – in this day when “smartphones” have killed the pocket camera market you sometimes need a reminder that unless you are prepared to pay for triple- or quad lens phones, there are creative images that just cannot be taken, For sure, at 28mm equivalent my inexpensive MotoG phone takes great images – but as soon as you want the 85-135mm image compression effect for beautiful portraits or isolating subjects from backgrounds you realise that someting is missing. My rules are:
[1] CCD sensors – these are “obsolete” because they cannot produce hi-speed or hi-res video or download RAW images at any worthwhie speed. This makes these cameras “cheap bargains”. However CCDs sensors are inherently sharper than CMOS sensors. A 10MP CCD out-performs a 16-20MP CMOS,
[2] the ability to “dial down” the in-camera noise suppression and sharpening. Today’s software in your computer way out performs the in-camera algorithms and low power computer chips of 10 years ago. the DXO noise suppression programme is great for this
[3] the ability to lock ISO settings to 200ASA or less (to suppress noise)
[4] a propoer tripod socket to fit a pocket tripod
[5] SD cards, not obsoluete XD or memory stick formats – so pictures go straight to my laptop and get run through my DXO custom setting as a “batch process” over lunch breaks
[6] a minimum of 28 to 105mm equivalent focal length lenses
[7] Never pay more than £10 GBP / $15 USD on an auction site
[8] ….and this is vanity…they have to look cool and fit my shirt breast pocket so they go with me everywhere.
So for Robin’s readers – search out that old ultra-compact that you or your parents paid $200-300 USD for in 2008 that has lain in the back of a drawer for 5 years – and give it a try1
Can I suggest a new review: With the Olympus 4/3 cameras now a decade old, there is a rush of them onto auction sites. Many were treasured lovingly by careful amateurs and still look great. Olympus abandonded this DSLR system approach in the rush to mirrorless Micro 4/3 format. So with a beautiful DSLR and a 2 lens kit e410 model now selling for <£100 GBP / $125 USD is this a good way to get into creative photography today? Or are the compromises of penta-mirror viewfinders and DSLRs without image stabilisation (e410 & e420) just too much to give up for creative photography even at these "bargain prices".
So how about: pitting an Olympus e410/e420 vs the successor "mirrorless" format, a Lumix G1 or G2 – both of which are dropping in price now that they have reached the magic 10y old "obsolesence" threshold after which they are seen as near "valueless". Olympus m4/3 of that era are typically viewfinder-free pen models, so the Olympus-E vs Lumix-G format is the affordable creative choice.
best wishes – Paul in the UK
Thank you, Robin, for this endearing article and beautiful images! Currently shooting professionally, often in extremely low light, I switched to Canon full frame but was remembering the gorgeous colours from Olympus, while searching for a lightweight, in-the-car-always, camera. Can you help me with a question, please? I remember upgrading from the E-3 to E-5. The colours from the E-3 really popped in comparison with the E-5. Why would that be if the E-3 did not have the Kodak sensor? Thank you for your help!
I use several camera: Sigma dp quattro, Leica X, OM2, E3 and… E1. The E1 is always a great camera when it is used for what it is able to do. With ZD 14-54 or 50mm, it stays au great combo. I leaved the micro four third cameras and returned to the four third ones because I prefer the rendering of the E1 and E3. The Olympus E1 is a very endearing camera. Thanks for your review about the E1.
Nice to hear about. I did the same. I came back from EM1 to E5. It’s an absolute pleasure to shot with, far more satisfying than EM1. I have just bought a second E5 and have no complaint.
It’s slow, it’s old but the shutter sound, the mirror flip on air mattres. I use it with thet 14-50 Leica zoom
The shutter does sound incredibly silent, and addictive to click!
I completely agree. Also the battery/card door was made of metal. How many cameras today can make that claim.
Thanks for a valuable E-1 retrospect. They’ll never get too old!
If we go back in time, remembering all the E-1 praise and photos so many of us were eager to show, it was a jewel. I still have and periodically use mine, measuring O-MD progress but I must add one note to that scale, the E-1 can challenge anything new when it simply comes down to an excellent photo… taken with some E-1 skill and consideration. I’m so glad I still have it along with the 50mm and 14-54mm. I use the 50mm as an art copy lens on O-MD anyway. The E-1 is plain fun, knowing the chances for a portfolio addition when I get home. It just keeps going.
However, an inquisitive thought regarding to 50mm f2 macro, Why didn’t Olympus upgrade it to an MFT mount? Did they expect the 60mm f2.8 macro to replace it? If so, I think we’re missing a great lens in the MFT mount line up. In primes, there’s a large difference between 45 and 60mm, not to leave out the f2 and “macro.” Just curious… with some wishful thinking.
The 50mm F2 itself, as great as it was, had some flaws. The focusing speed was terribly slow and shooting at wide open F2 does produce noticeable chromatic aberration, though I must admit the sharpness is amazing.
I think most of the original 4/3rds lenses handle some sort of edge to edge sharpness and distortion better than m43rds in such a way that they have a certain “crisp/real” look to them. Add to that telecentricity and the image was already partially polarized.
That 50mm F2 had some chromatic aberrations wide open but usually these showed up when having high contrast lit situations. A portrait in many weddings scenarios wouldn’t show it. And of course once you close down a bit they just vanish leaving the hyper sharp.
Totally unscientific observations: Took many pics for years with 6 MP camera. Then bought a FF 20 MP camera and couldn’t really tell the difference on a 8″ x 12″ print. Hard to define and perhaps not real, but the bigger pixels of those 5 or 6 MP cameras result in better, richer looking photos. More DR may be good in many situations, but creates duller, more washed out images in many, too. More contrast is almost always better than more DR. (I remember an old review of an upgraded Olympus camera where the reviewer praised the new camera’s greater DR, but lamented the lack of the usual Olympus “punch.” Yep, less DR = more punch). Since most folks center point focus, all those focus points just slow down the process if you decide to use more.
In other words, yes, those old cameras are still usable and can still take great (perhaps even better in some situations) pics than today’s high MP, high tech offerings.
I think the “punch” had a lot to do with the way Olympus handles the JPEG files. With every updated JPEG engine in newer generation of cameras, Olympus tweaked the colors, optimization of sharpness/noise and contrast. Cameras at the lower end of the spectrum (say the PEN lite and mini series) will have punchier consumer friendly look (higher contrast, boosted saturation), but higher end OM-D cameras have more neutral and flatter presentation.
Lovely colours with this camera. Reminds me a lot of my old Minolta Dynax 7D. Time to hunt around in the loft!
I have never encountered the Minolta, now you got me curious!
I remember before deciding for the E-1 I have tried some Canon APS-C cameras with various lenses. For me the best then was E-1 with 14-54 + 50-200. Still have them, use them together with an E3, and and EM1-1 with 12-40 + 70 1.8. For daylight use E1 is still there, on par with the rest.
Oh yes, those two lenses, 14-54mm and 50-200mm, I simply love them!
I used many cameras as a pro photographer coming from a 19th century photographers family in any situation and finally get back to the E5. Best camera hands down. I don’t care pixels, I don’t care high Iso, I don’t care continuous focusing, I don’t care time lapse, I don’t care focus stacking. I’m a photographer nothing else. The E5 is the best camera. Far better than any new OMD and any Canikon.
The Olympus E-1 is one of the very test cameras Olympus has ever done. It had a UI simple and to the point. Had great color. And some truly great lenses. I can only hope Olympus looks back and releases some PenF that is more focused, to the point with less hard to configure features.
One of the very best I meant 🙂
I have an old Olympus E-20. Small sensor, 5 megapixels, can’t change the lens. Slow to write images to the card. But the lens is fantastic. Images have a nice quality due to the grain and are very sharp. No match for a modern camera, but I like the images and have a 16 x 20 canvas print on my wall. Somehow the images seem more “film-like” and under the right conditions look great on the web or at smaller sizes.
I have five E-10s and one E-20 that I use when teaching photography to the Bot Scouts. Maybe it is time to upgrade them to the E-1! I have done the whole Olympus gamut from E-10 to E-M1 Mark II! My children and friends have loved the upgrades because they received the “hand-me-downs’! I enjoy reading your articles.
Nice take on the photographic process. I always view photography as an abstract, capturing a 3d world in 2d, limited dynamic range and the like. So using an older, supposedly less capable camera is just fine with me. I recently bought an E-1 (Aug.2017) and have been having a blast with it. I use it with the 50mm f2 macro, 12-60 SWD, and just recently picked up the 25mm F2.8. The E-1 is like using a film camera (the rear screen is really only good for adjusting the few settings available) As you mention you have to rely on your instincts and try to get the framing right at first go. The whole process slows me down a bit, which is a good thing.
\
Nice to see old camera’s get some love Robin! I’ve gone back to shooting my Oly E-10 which if I’m not mistaken is an older camera with an even smaller sensor. I do know it’s only 4MP and I don’t like shooting over ISO 80! It’s certainly not as sharp as new lenses and high MP CMOS but I’ve started using it again just because it’s the only CCD camera I have. Unlike a lot people I know, I like CCD’s look. I don’t miss the MP’s at all on the E-10 but I do miss the higher ISO.
I’ve been thinking about picking up an E-Volt camera but not sure I want another lens system around. Too easy to get GAS! The E-10 is nice because the lens doesn’t come off!
First of all, Robin, I always enjoy your postings and experiences. Additionally, however, you just strike me as a very nice person – period!
I still maintain 2 copies of the venerable E-1 – all in mint condition, and I will not part with them. I must say however, that if you really want to boost the performance levels of the E-1, add any of the wonderful Panasonic-Leica Vario zoom lenses with IS. I constantly shift back and forth on my E-1 between the unbelievably sharp (for the genre) Leica Vario 14-150 F3.5-5.6 OIS and the Leica Vario 14-50 F3.8.5.6 IS. Adding IS capabilities to the E-1 opens up the camera to new horizons, allowing you to shoot in lower lighting scenarios and doing so at a much lower ISO level. But it is the clarity of the Leica optics which really makes the E-1 shine. I have images taken with the E-1/Leica combinations that have often caused folks to assume that they came from much higher MP cameras – now go figure.
As far as DR is concerned, yes – for a 15 year old camera, it still has a surprising amount of DR if you shoot in RAW. The current day RAW converters really have enabled us to go back in time and get the most out of older RAW files. Heck, just the other day – despite having a few dozen other digital cameras in my collection – I reached for the E-1/Leica combo and went out for some shutter therapy and the results were sublime. Those Kodak sensors were really something else, that’s for sure. The rich color tonality and that seemingly “special sauce” that make these E-1 images unique, will remain in the memory of many previous (and current) E-1 users.
Bottom line however is that even today, the E-1 is just a joy to use and “having fun” while photographing is often an elusive experience with the many hi-tech cameras out there today.
My suggest is for anyone who still remembers the E-1 (or who have never owned one), go on eBay and find a good used one. You won’t be sorry and the ergonomics alone of the E-1 will have you wondering why other camera makers didn’t adopt this style.
I had it for a while and used it for macro photography with the Sigma 150mm, which I feet was not the best application for the camera. I liked it for its nice colours and very ergonomic grip and buttons. On the other hand I found the viewfinder difficult to work with. AF was not very reliable and MF difficult to achieve with the relatively small viewfinder. The 5 Mp were also kind of restricting sometimes. Perhaps with an 8 or 10 Mp Kodak CCD sensor and with the pro Zuiko lenses this would still be a legitimate camera for someone satisfied working at base ISO (as I am)
What a joy to read this blog, I keep coming beek Robin.
What a camera it was and is!!
Greetings from Amsterdam
Indeed, sometimes we just have to appreciate what we have and even older cameras can do wonders!
Hi Robin! I love the E-1 since i have bought a used Body in 2010. I wish Olympus put the modern OMD functionality in the legendary E-1 Camera body. That a all a Pro like me want. SHG Glass und the fun ist ON! Nowaday i use it from timt to time for private photo projects. keep it up Robin ! Great job that you do there!
Greetings from Vienna
Christian
Olympus gave up on the Four Thirds DSLR system, I guess partly to the underwhelming sales figures. I do wish they keep at least one line of their Four Thirds DSLR alive, after all I am sure there is a market obviously for DSLR users.
Nice article and pics.
“The Kodak CCD image sensor renders colors differently from the modern CMOS sensors in cameras these days, and worked very well for skin tones”
True, same holds for cameras like Fuji S5. But the official answer of the internet forum gurus is that neither CMOS or CCD can see color (it is the Bayer filter that separates colors); so there cannot be any color response difference 🙂
Then how about the way CCD or CMOS captures light is different. Hence the difference in the filtered colors?
Great article and pics! I haven’t bought a new camera since picking up a used Sigma Merrill with wide-angle fixed lens. Boxy little thing with comical battery life but it does pack a nice little punch at low ISOs.
Sigma Merrill, something I have not had the chance to try. Will probably have some opportunities to shoot with Sigma soon.
Thank you for going back and reviewing an older camera. In comparison I would like to know your thoughts on the current cameras with large megapixels vrs lower megapixels.
I’m feeling that the shadow areas are getting a bit too dark due to the pixel sites being so small.
Thanks
I do not mind working with less Megapixels (anything 8-10MP is enough for me) but I also understand that digital displays are getting more and more dense in resolution, hence the megapixels do need to keep up. Personally the 16MP on most Olympus models are sufficient for what I do. Unfortunately I cannot speak for photographers who shoot commercially that requires incredibly high resolution images.
Nice article, and great photos as always Robin.I finally gave in, and and gave up my OM2 film bodies for the E-3 in 2007 when it was introduced. Over the years I added a few SWD’s ,many 4/3rds flashes and accessories, and all the SHG’s except the 300F2.8, I purchased a hardly used E-5, just as they were being discontinued, and later a EM-1, where I have called it quits on bodies. Since 2010, I actually still use the E-3 solely with the 14-35 SWD in my business, to do art reproduction and copy work, for wide format printing I do. My very complete kit allows me tremendous flexibility. I have No problems with DR, or a lack of extreme M Pixels 😉
I love the E-5! Mine could not work now, and I was thinking of getting it fixed. Not sure if Olympus can do it anymore. I do miss using larger cameras, and yes, the E-3 and E-5 were simply superb and can still deliver today, if you do not need to shoot insanely high ISO numbers or too many megapixels.
I miss my e-5, as it was a tank. I sold it and regret it. Also, I sold my 12-60 and miss the tactile focusing and build quality (and photo quality). I love my 12-40, but it is not the same experience as shooting with the older 12-60… I AM keeping my 50 2.0, however. But, with the 50 and the 45 1.8, is there room for a 45 1.2?? Who knows, haha! PS. I bought a refurb e-1 for $30 on ebay! (Mine was stolen 10 years ago, forcing me into the m43 realm… Haven’t booted up the newly perchased one, but this gives me inspiration! Thanks for reminding us it is about more than GAS…
Enjoyed your article very much Robin. I also like to bring out one of my old cameras now and again just to relive the experience and you are quite right about being pleasently surprised with the results. My latest outing was with my old Zeiss Ikon 6×6 film camera.
Hah, I guess great minds think alike. I too like to explore old cameras once in a while.
I recently went for a walk with my old Panasonic L1, for similar reasons. With my Olympus and Sony cameras, I take too many photos. As for the E-1, I think it and pretty much all the CCD cameras produced quite special colours when used within their limitations.
Oh yes, those CCD sensors produce something quite interesting, and it does magic with skin tones!
I loved my E-1, but my E-500 was my first love and the smaller size was a lot more manageable. I still take it out sometimes because it has the gorgeous color rendition. For outdoor, well-lit, stationary photography, it still manages fine! 🙂 Lovely pictures Robin, thank you for sharing.
Ah, lovely photographs, what was this latest full frame camera you took them with, say again?
I prouldy own E1 and keep it permanently mated to 35/3.5 – excellent, well-balanced combo. Enjoy shooting it every now and then when the light is right. Love the way it feels in hand and that shutter sound, although I find controls scattered in a rather inconvenient way. The LCD as you said is impossible to inspect critical focus, but I find it useful for viewing histogram and blown highlights to judge exposure. Kodak really mixed the colors right for this one and when all important things (focus, light, exposure, etc.) are nailed, the results are very pleasing indeed. I think 5mp might be lackluster for wide angle shots but is a non-issue for portraits, and that’s where E1 really shines for me.
You are being too kind, Vytautas !
I fully agree with you that the E-1 performs very well shooting portraits. The beautiful skin tone and also the “not too sharp” look create a nice portrait rendering.
Great article, great pictures, thanks! I still have two pieces of E-1 with few “legacy” lenses, (including ZD 150/2), and occasionally enjoy shooting with them. I truly love the camera. I used E-3/5, too, but never liked them as much as the E-1. The second “love for the first touch” was OM-D E-M5 then …
Owhhh the 150mm F2 lens! The baby tuna, which I never had a chance to try, unfortunately. Would love to have my hands on one and do a throwback review.
Come to Prague, we can go out shooting together. 🙂 The lens work very good with my first generation of the E-M1.
I had the 35-100/2, too, but I sold it to buy the 40-150/2.8, and now I regret it. The same for the 7-14/4 7-14/2.8 switch … I do not miss that much the 14-35/2 and 12-60/2.8-4 lenses … Besides the “baby tuna” I still keep the lenses 14-54/2.8-3.5, old version of 50-200/2.8-3.5, 50/2 and FE 8/3.5.
Prague is in my to visit list, definitely!
So let me know then, we can enjoy the “baby tuna” together. Did you know, that the Czech beer is the best in the world?-)
And now a used body can be purchased for around 30 or 40 USD. At those prices I’d be tempted to buy a body just for one or two afternoons of fun with old tech and challenge of seeing how I could do creatively within the constraints ~ especially if I could borrow a lens from a friend.
Go and get one, you won’t regret it!
Really nice images. Despite agreeing with everything you said, I still expected the images to be a little disappointing. Glad to be wrong.
Thanks Lance, you are too kind.
Every image shown is…when seen on an iPad…precisely as good as those you’re making with today’s cameras. (of course, we don’t see the fails.) Whether today’s processing software plays a significant role in the color and overall image quality only you can say. But it looks to me as if progress has brought us primarily convenience. Thinking in terms of web-based, on-screen presentation these photos appear equal to anything produced under the same circumstances by an EM1 Mk. II. I guess it reinforces once again that it’s the photographer, not the camera.
Convenience is the driving factor of most innovations today! Look at what one mighty smartphone can do, not just for taking photos. Everything progressed so far in technology was possible because of our craving for doing less, and getting things done easier and faster. Similarly to imaging products!
I don’t think the software today can extract any more than what can be squeezed out from the E-1’s RAW files. However, post-processing with today’s software is surely quicker and easier. I cannot imagine editing RAW images in a dinosaur computer!
I agree with you and MT: handling, utility, and durability often get overlooked in the rush for the latest new features.
About three years ago I spent some time using a 2004 Nikon Coolpix 8400: 2/3″ sensor, 8MP, 24-85mm ED zoom lens, ISO 400 max, and built like a tank. It was fun, I learned a lot, and it changed my priorities on buying my next camera and buying new cameras in general.
Handling, specific features needed for your photography needs, and reliability! These are things that I do not ignore when I do reviews. The fact that the E-1 still can shoot so well today, is a testament on camera know-how of a traditional Japanese company.
What can I say, except “hear, hear!” Robin, I find all the rot about pixels rather tiresome, when I take account of the fact that 99% of the photos being taken these days never make it out of digital imaging – and that as far as I know, the digital screen with the greatest pixel count only has 33Mp, and anyway, it’s a TV with a 77 inch screen!
I have several cameras – I guess I always have, since I was in my teens, anyway – a couple of Nikons (one FF, one HF) that I use for different things (mostly my more serious shots) and a Canon PowerShot G1XMkII – which I certainly didn’t buy for its pixel count (12.8MP on a 1.5″ sensor), but for the shots I generally take with it, it does a fine job.
I read an interesting article the other day, about the chap who pioneered these sensors – he’s now developed a sensor which eliminates this pixel stuff altogether, because it can capture individual photons! He seems to think it’ll never make it to the cameras we use – I rather suspect it might, because the idea is so attractive!
Thanks Jean! Sometimes we get too deep into analyzing the camera’s technical capabilities that we forget what truly matters, enjoy shooting. This is like a reminder to myself as well, that cameras are mostly good enough.