Gianni Galassi (Click here) is a well known italian photographer and he started to use the [shoplink 14830]E-P2[/shoplink] instead of the [shoplink 14828]GF1[/shoplink]: “The main reason of this purchase is the poor definition of my Panasonic GF1 electronic viewfinder. I tend to use bigger focal lengths lately, so I can’t risk to get motion-blurred photographs by holding the camera with my arms stretched out -which is a good way to frame with wide angles, on the other hand-. I need a “real” eyepiece so that I can push the unit onto my face and fine-tune my framing with no shake. And, most of all, with the capability to reliably manual-focus, when required.”
He likes the Olympus cameras a lot but there are some complains:
“-Why in the hell the live view system of the E-P2 cannot visualize the EV alterations set by the photographer? No matter how I tweak aperture values in manual mode, or exposure compensation in any mode, the displayed image remains the same and, worst of all, even the histogram doesn’t show any change (which makes the histogram display totally senseless). This function is implemented in most (and cheaper) compact cameras. Why E-P2 users aren’t entitled to it, whereas [shoplink 18844]E-PL2[/shoplink] (fortunately) are?
-Why in the hell the endless E-P2 and E-PL2 menus don’t allow users to configure live-view screen according to their needs? For example, I can not have the histogram and the grid shown in the same view, nor I can move the histogram wherever I’d like it to be. No, I’m obliged to toggle between different modes by countlessly pushing the “display” button: it’s crazy.
-Why in the hell the E-P2 histogram is so big it hides most of the framed image, whereas the E-PL2 one is so poorly outlined that I have to guess what it says?
-Why in the hell the button layout of the E-PL2 is so totally (and crazily) different from the E-P2? Do those cameras belong to different lineups? Perhaps Olympus designers have fun every time I mistake the “menu” button for the “info” button, or the “playback” button for the “trash can” button. Or maybe Olympus R&D department is outsourced (an euphemism for “subcontracted”) to anonymous (and different) external camera makers, with no coordination or briefing coming out of the brand’s management?
-Why in the hell the “Fn” button configurability is restricted to such a few options?
-Why in the hell the [shoplink 21035]VF-2 electronic viewfinder[/shoplink], notwithstanding its price, has got to be so flimsy and poorly built?
-Why in the hell the two cameras don’t share the same battery (and charger) notwithstanding their identical battery size?”
Read the full article at Gianni Galassi’s website (Click here).
What do you think?
Links to the discussed Micro Four Thirds products:
VF-2 electronic viewfinder at [shopcountry 21035].
Olympus E-P2 at [shopcountry 14830].
Olympus E-PL2 at [shopcountry 18844].
Panasonic GF1 at [shopcountry 14828].
31 Responses
Agreed, consistency in design is big deal for photographers who want to upgrade.
Look at Canon/Nikon/Ricoh, their design is consistent from one model to newer one.
I disagree, look at the 400D, 450D, 500D. The same inconsistancies.
Some buttons stay where they are others change e.g. WB, picture style, trash to name a few.
Too much swearing!!!
Agreed.
Because people over at Olympus are stupid and have no idea about what photographers want, which is why their imaging division is going bankrupt and there isn’t a single thing in the world that will save them?
They’re just detached from reality.
Exactly my thoughts.
Wrong !
You can see the change in EV +- you can swich auto gain on or off – when on it works well for night images when you want some visibility for framing perpouses in dark areas – or turn off auto boost and it shows a very convincing preview of how the exposure will look! – so convincing I don’t bother with histogram I can see what my pic will be – and see where i might have problems with DR highlights or shadow!
Why the hell can’t he use the camera fully?
And why the hell would that need to be always turned on and off by hand?
Minolta’s prosumer “compacts” had already ten years ago little piece of code in firmware which automatically changed view to amplified BW image in dark and only setting in menus was for if you didn’t want to use automatic switching!
That’s the difference between actual usefully done feature and bullet-point engineered marketing feature.
And it doesn’t even need adding any hardware, just little more thinking and writing software!
> Why in the hell the button layout of the E-PL2 is so totally (and crazily) different from the E-P2? Do those cameras belong to different lineups?
of course, E-Px planned to be profesional (has electronic level gauge, more wheels and controls), E-PLx line is much simpler
Because in dark sometimes you want an as exposed image view and sometimes you want to get max vision… obvious realy – it’s not somthing you want or need automated – it is best as oly have implemented it – i.e. turn on and off as you require….
Why in the HELL is this rant important do be published?
Just cause he’s famous!? 🙂
LOL! But I agree. For the prices they are asking for their China build plastic products, they really should get back to making cameras and not toys.
Built wise and feature wise…
<>
Because a new safety act urged Olympus to do so. Funny enough, instead of using this to bring a whole new battery, they created the new one fully compatible to the older ones. I’m using the E-PL2 with old and new batteries, and the E-P2 with old and new ones. Perhaps he should do the same instead of swearing about a problem that is not real!
Oh dear, oh dear, some valid points, though the points on toggling for info and changing button layout apply to most camera makes but the dislikes are rather spoilt be the mis-information about the ability to see exposure changes in live view. Simply turn off live view boost and the change of exposure is replicated in the live view screen and histogram. Time to read that pesky little booklet (manual) that comes with the camera!
never read the manual, if you do it knows it’s got you!
Love the very italian way every niggle deserves a *WTH* as if each is some sort of unforgivable dealbreaker. The only one that worries me is the apparant build quality of the VF-2, which should be rock solid for the money they ask.
VF-2 is only for puch on camera, if you nead use finder.
Inge
indeed, and is the reason I want this camera. Frankly I’d far rather the VF was built in (which is what is drawing me towards the X100 … aside form the price and fixed lens….) but ofc you then end up with the G1/2 which is getting a little big. I want my cake *and* eat it! Reviews I have read on the VF-2 say it is about the best EVF finder available but for >200 GBP it should be built strong, especially with that hinge…
I don’t have an issue with the build quality of the VF-2. And I treat it pretty roughly. As for the rest, yeah, well, some of the operations are fiddly, I agree about the info display – for example, I’d like to have aperture / exposure / exp comp on screen with the leveling meters (although there is sort of a workaround) – but for some the rest, exactly, WTH no RTFM. Then again, he’d be the first Italian male who ever did.
The only reason the live view system in the EP-2 does not show changes in image brightness when exposure is changed in M (time or aperture) is when AUTO ISO is switched on. 😉
It’s not always the camera…
A good saying is: “A poor tradesman blames his tools”.
Another one is: “If all else fails, read the manual”.
Who in the hell is Gianni Galassi? 😉
some valid complaints, but can live with it.
Fuckin hell! that must be a nice lens he has there….
Exposure compensation is certainly shown in the live histogram. I use this all the time.
To me it’s a FEATURE that the screen image remains as bright as possible at all times. You can’t use an electronic finder to judge exposure anyway. That’s what the live histogram is for. And as I said, it works eventhough the finder brightness is full-on all the time.
Surprise, surprise: walkaround cameras have different requirements than a conventional dSLRs. And gets compared to other walkaround devices.
I do not have E-P* camera, but sort of can relate: flexibility isn’t the forte of digital cameras in general.
As convergence with mobile market continues, It is only natural to expect more people comparing cameras to smartphones. The smartphones one can configure completely to one’s liking – but not cameras. Considering price differential, one soon starts asking question why $1000+ gear can’t do what $200-300 mobile phone can.
‘All ways read the manual’. And in the case of the E-P2, pages 140-145 are a useful starting point, as it is not all ways the clearest of manuals to grasp on first reading.
Some of Gianni’s points all can be explained by one simple thing: the camera designers are designing for NEW users, not for existing users. This is even true in the Nikon lineup, which is probably the most consistent in terms of user ergonomics of any of the makers (e.g. with only one exception, the exposure compensation button has been in the same place since at least 1992).
But that begs the point. It’s really a simple concept that most of the Japanese companies (and Adobe ;~) don’t understand: if you have baby products and grown-up products and you want users to start with the baby and later buy into the grown-up one, you want what people learn on the baby product to apply 100% to the grown-up one. This makes it a no brainer for the customer. They simply get more performance and features, but don’t have to relearn anything. Unfortunately, many organizations fight this by making the following claim: if we do that, people won’t buy the grown-up product. That’s nonsense (unless, of course, the grown-up product doesn’t actually give the user more performance and features ;~). “Hook low, sell high” is the motto they should be following. Instead, we get “redesign often and hell with the existing customer.”
Finally, after thinking about the battery issue some more, I realize that I’ve been too easy on the Japanese companies. Basically, they all are switching to new batteries because of new export laws in Japan that don’t allow exposed terminals on the battery (that’s good, we should want that). But here’s the thing, they could have designed a CAMERA that takes either old or new batteries. The new laws say nothing about the device the batteries go into. So, you could design a battery chamber where old-style receiving terminals are on one side, new-style on the other side. Thus, the “all new battery” issue is just another of designing for the NEW customer instead of building on the existing customer base.
What all this tells me is that the camera companies no longer see the existing user base as all that important to their financial future. They are all dangerously close to entering into the disposable era. That, too, is silly, because if we ever truly get to that, there will only be two or maybe three winners overall. Companies like Olympus that are on the margin of success in interchangeable lens cameras need a different strategy, one that builds a base and keeps growing it, not keep churning it for new users.
When all is said and done, Olympus has now iterated the same basic camera four different times. If you have an EP-1 I can’t really see any strong reason to buy any of the newer models. That’s even more true of an EP-2. Olympus has turned into a one-trick pony.
I think the GF1 and EVF-1 electronic viewfinder work just fine. I wouldn’t even mind if it was B&W, I only use it for composing and focussing and for both it is fine. And it has diopter setting and tilt. For me it is the way I photograph instead of stretching my arms to look at the LCD. I have seen worse viewfinders, even on DSLR’s. The EVF-1 works for me and I don’t understand all the criticism these evf’s get.
The author describes the main quibble with Olympus’ PEN line up: the sub-par user interface. While Panasonic has maintained a fairly consistent, relatively ergonomic operation (with some penalties due to the small size) amongst their m4/3 bodies (mostly even derived from their former DSLRs and bridge cameras), Olympus opted for very flimsy, doubly functional controls, which were changed with almost every iteration of their products. The “highlight” is the control-wheel-4-way-control mess at the EPL-2.
I find the impact of exposure compensation on the ep2 evf as good Aa I have seen and better than any other implementation of this concept and thT includes the gh2 and minolta a2. Cut olmpus some slack. You are critisizing the current state of the art. For landscapes I actually prefer it to an slr viewfinder. It is that good. Still pay attention to the histogram and burned out highlights. Between the three and previsualization you are far better off than with an slr or other mirrorles camera.
I agree with Galassi on most points of his critique – the EP2 is a wonderful little camera, but it deserves a much better user interface. Switching auto bracketing on? Please press diverse menu buttons 18 times (if you can remember where they hid this …)!!!!! Manual white balance? You can easily choose it in the menu, but you can’t set it, unless you assign it to the function button (which is almost worthless, because you can’t properly customise it). Same problem with user modes.
Olympus has not been able to correct such obvious annoyances or even glitches in its user interface; no firmware update beyond ver 1.1. (back in spring of 2010) has been provided. For me, that implies that Olympus is not caring at all for their customers, and neither do they care for the EP2. It could be so easy to provide a much better user experience and add to the value of the PEN line. What Olympus has delivered is more than a hindrance to a proper workflow, it is something that they should be ashamed of.
You do not really need to read Users Guide, read instead http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/EP1/EP1A3.HTM it goes through operation and menu system in English and is concise and easy read.
Most commenters agree with my opinions. Some object that amateur camera users are not entitled to the same user interface that can be (sometimes) found in advanced DSLRs, which I totally disagree. Buyers shouldn’t be discriminated. There can be differences about features, of course, but not as far as basic design rules are concerned.
Some readers invited me to read the manual, so that I could realize that the histogram-ignoring-exposure-compensation issue is not an issue. One of them humorously pointed out that if i did RTFM I would have been the only Italian doing such a thing. Well, I am: in the Italian translation of the manual (page 101) the option is called with the same name as in the English version (still page 101): “Live View Boost”. Too bad in the Italian-translated camera menu the same menu-item is crappily translated in “Livello Carica”, which suggests to any average IQd individual that the battery level charge can be (or can be not) displayed. Anyway both the Italian and English manual do not mention that switching “Live View Boost” off allows the histogram show the effects of exposure compensation. As a matter of fact, neither manual mentions the histogram at all at page 101.
I insist: technology makes sense only if its equipped with a clear and flawless human interface. Apple’s iPad is evidence to it. I don’t think a menu structure like the one found in the Pen cameras lineup does a honest job. If we learn to be customers instead of worshippers, perhaps camera makers will learn how to give us real value for our hard-earned money.
i must agree with your observations
as an owner of a gf1 and an e-p1 and alot of adapted glass both rf and slr i too delight in these cameras as rangefinder-like manual focus machines , but olympus and panny both have menus that fall far short of pefect, many time i wonder why they chose button and function behaviors so against common sense and useability,
when the ricoh releases its m mount module for the gxr it will be worth
consideration, it menus and behavior were designed with photographers in mind… the ricoh is a true photographers machine