Olympus PEN EP-3

DekHog said:
I felt really guilty when I bought mine as well. Seems like so much money for something so small.... never regretted it though, and it actually gets better the more you use it. Initially you just don't appreciate how good it is....
Click to expand...

I feel better knowing I only paid £20 more than the VF3, in the long run I think it might save me anyway, was looking to buy the new 45mm next month but the VF2 has given my Canon 50mm a new lease of life!
 
When it comes to sensor performance, there's no substitute for acreage.

No M43 sensor is ever going to perform as well as the best available crop frame sensor with in its ability to provide shallow DoF or low light shooting.

M43 is pushing the limit at ISO 3200. The best crop frame sensors (D7000, X100) are 1.5-2 stops better with usable results up to ISO 12,800. Full frame sensors like the D3S are another 1.5-2 stops beyond that.

M43 is a jack-of-all-trades technology. OK at most things but exceptional at nothing. Even at being small.

I'm not seeing that a small DSLR like the D7000 with a relatively compact zoom is really that much more bulky than a M43 body with an equivalent zoom. It's certainly going to be easier to use.
 
SLRist said:
No M43 sensor is ever going to perform as well as the best available crop frame sensor with in its ability to provide shallow DoF...
Click to expand...

Oh dear oh dear. Here's that same old tired and incorrect myth repeated yet again :shake:

I could get into the old "format size does not affect DoF and you can easily prove it to yourself with just 5 minutes testing" thing but instead I'll let a couple of pictures do the talking.

MFT and shallow DoF...

_1010858c1.jpg


_1010272-c.jpg
 
Hmm. I'm not sure that flower picture proves much. I can throw the background out of focus in macro mode with my G9.

The point is - the smaller the sensor, the greater the aperture required to render the same shallow DoF.
 
Prove it :LOL:

I have an LX5 and it too can produce a nice OOF background but it can not match my G1 with 25mm f0.95 :LOL:

The reason I posted these shots is that there seems to be a common belief that you can't get shallow DoF from MFT and for the life of me I can't see what saying "I can do that with my G9" proves in that context :thinking: apart from going further to prove my point. Thanks.

Most people that have a problem getting shallow DoF from a MFT forget that they're (probably) using a 14-45mm f3.5-5.6 zoom and in reality if they can't get shallow DoF from that set up on MFT they wouldn't get it from a 5D with 14-45mm lens either.
 
Last edited:
SLRist said:
When it comes to sensor performance, there's no substitute for acreage.

No M43 sensor is ever going to perform as well as the best available crop frame sensor with in its ability to provide shallow DoF or low light shooting.

M43 is pushing the limit at ISO 3200. The best crop frame sensors (D7000, X100) are 1.5-2 stops better with usable results up to ISO 12,800. Full frame sensors like the D3S are another 1.5-2 stops beyond that.

M43 is a jack-of-all-trades technology. OK at most things but exceptional at nothing. Even at being small.

I'm not seeing that a small DSLR like the D7000 with a relatively compact zoom is really that much more bulky than a M43 body with an equivalent zoom. It's certainly going to be easier to use.
Click to expand...

Most people who know anything about cameras and buy into m43 know all the limitations anyway, so you're not telling us anything new here.

It's not about the ultimate in shallow DOF, image quality or speed. It's about having a camera that you take with you and use and don't leave in the house or the car because it's too heavy and too much hassle!

And a D7k with kit zoom is HUGE compared to a PEN and kit zoom, sorry...
 
DekHog said:
Most people who know anything about cameras and buy into m43 know all the limitations anyway, so you're not telling us anything new here.

It's not about the ultimate in shallow DOF, image quality or speed. It's about having a camera that you take with you and use and don't leave in the house or the car because it's too heavy and too much hassle!

And a D7k with kit zoom is HUGE compared to a PEN and kit zoom, sorry...
Click to expand...

+1
 
Well I've decided on an epl2 to be getting on with, if I like it, I'll upgrade in the future.
 
I do wonder if people who say the smallest DSLRs are 'not that much bigger' have actually had real-life experience of both. My E-PL2 and 20mm 1.7 literally fits in my pocket (just), it gets thrown in my glovebox everytime I get in my car...in short it's small enough to go absolutely everywhere I do, and as a result has completely rebooted my love of photography. A D7000 is in no way comparable in terms of size.

I actually bought the Pen about a month ago to compliment my D90, I've since sold my D90 and 70-200 VR, something I never thought I would do. Yes, the Nikon combo is superb, but it's not so good when it spends 300 days per year in my spare room and has to be planned into any trip/journey I'm taking.

We all know that in absolute picture quality terms that M43 doesn't match a crop or full frame sensor, but at the same time I would suggest that the vast majority of people hardly ever 'need' the full capability of their DSLR.

Micro 4/3s has pretty much reset my thoughts on what and when I can photograph comfortably with minimal intrusion into my family life (and it proved this time and time again on our summer holiday in Ibiza over the past few weeks), whilst still retaining full control and lovely depth of field creativity that I loved so much with my D90.
 
Last edited:
matty said:
Well I've decided on an epl2 to be getting on with, if I like it, I'll upgrade in the future.
Click to expand...

Great choice, mate. I think it's the best balance of features and price at the moment. I feel absolutely no urge to upgrade to any of the '3' series at all.... too much extra pennies, and I feel the PL3 may be too small anyway....
 
DekHog said:
Great choice, mate. I think it's the best balance of features and price at the moment. I feel absolutely no urge to upgrade to any of the '3' series at all.... too much extra pennies, and I feel the PL3 may be too small anyway....
Click to expand...

Yeah the EPL2 is a really nice camera and spec wise the best of the first two Pen series, personally I couldn't do without the thumbwheel thats on the EP1/EP2 so thats why I've gone down the road of upgrading to the EP2 while its cheap!
 
chrism_scotland said:
Yeah the EPL2 is a really nice camera and spec wise the best of the first two Pen series, personally I couldn't do without the thumbwheel thats on the EP1/EP2 so thats why I've gone down the road of upgrading to the EP2 while its cheap!
Click to expand...

I love my E-PL2 but battery life is woeful (and spare batteries require a mortgage!), a day out at a car show recently resulted in me killing a battery from full charge in 4hrs, (approx 200 photos and 5 mins of video).

I'm going to have to invest in another battery, ideally 2 spare are needed though.
 
ukaskew said:
I love my E-PL2 but battery life is woeful (and spare batteries require a mortgage!), a day out at a car show recently resulted in me killing a battery from full charge in 4hrs, (approx 200 photos and 5 mins of video).

I'm going to have to invest in another battery, ideally 2 spare are needed though.
Click to expand...

Non OEM batteries cost around £8 and work just as good as the original items - no need to be shelling out big bucks for originals. I've got two for my E-PL2 and can't tell the difference.
 
SLRist said:
When it comes to sensor performance, there's no substitute for acreage.

No M43 sensor is ever going to perform as well as the best available crop frame sensor with in its ability to provide shallow DoF or low light shooting.

M43 is pushing the limit at ISO 3200. The best crop frame sensors (D7000, X100) are 1.5-2 stops better with usable results up to ISO 12,800. Full frame sensors like the D3S are another 1.5-2 stops beyond that.

M43 is a jack-of-all-trades technology. OK at most things but exceptional at nothing. Even at being small.

I'm not seeing that a small DSLR like the D7000 with a relatively compact zoom is really that much more bulky than a M43 body with an equivalent zoom. It's certainly going to be easier to use.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're right! ISO12800 and f1.2 to get just the eyes in focus of a black cat in a coal cellar is a normal, everyday shoot for me. I almost never use ISO200 or shoot at f11 to get maximum DOF. All that DOF you get from a 4/3 sensor and it's no use to anyone, what a pity none of us take landscapes!

Keep using your Nikon, nobody's going to force you to buy 4/3. :p
 
woof woof said:
Oh dear oh dear. Here's that same old tired and incorrect myth repeated yet again :shake:

I could get into the old "format size does not affect DoF and you can easily prove it to yourself with just 5 minutes testing" thing but instead I'll let a couple of pictures do the talking.
Click to expand...

Having had to critically focus at f/3.5 on a medium format sized negative, I can guarantee you that it is not a myth - depth of field characteristics certainly change depending on the sensor size, and I'm genuinely surprised anyone disputes that. It's the first time I've ever heard it called as a myth!

Extoiling the virtues like compactness and having your camera handy everywhere is fine (and something I agree with, D7000 = small?!?! wow), but labelling something as a myth just because it is a valid criticism of the system seems a bit odd. You could argue that the problem with APS-C is that you have a harder time getting as much of the frame in focus as a result, instead...?

Each camera type has a different purpose, a different set of users who all appreciate each system for what it is - the people who like the compact for occasional snaps, and the pros who couldn't live without their ultra fast lenses and D3s cameras!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top