The Olympus E-PL1
P.S.: I like this sentence: “The higher resolution and better JPEG engine of the E-PL1 puts the baby Nikon to shame” (link to the text on dpreview)
The Olympus E-PL1
P.S.: I like this sentence: “The higher resolution and better JPEG engine of the E-PL1 puts the baby Nikon to shame” (link to the text on dpreview)
*Please also check your spam folder if you don't get the confirmation mail. And mark the mail as "non-spam" to see the future newsletter.
10 Responses
Good review, but i wonder why in the final scores they give a quite higher mark to RAW image quality than to JPEG. In the review it’s clear that the JPEG engine is one of the best things of the camera. Maybe it’s just a mistake?
good review also for me
but for me the vote is a political vote 69% to all evil cameras
also if the EPl-1 jpeg are superior to other jpeg the exact term used by richard Butler is “JPEG engine of the E-PL1 puts the baby Nikon to shame” 😉
if the EPL-1 is a camera introduced to substitute a point and shot compact camera for me is more important the Jpeg quality than the RAW quality
regs.
I’m most impressed by how much better id does in every aspect compared to the Nikon D3000! With the “much larger” APS-C sensor everyone crows about, you’d figure it’d at least be close. They compare it to the K-x which has a reputation for great low light capability.
Impressive.
Yet, D3000 gets a better score than E-PL1.
Definitely seems political that all the m43 are rated at 69. Too consistent to be chance given their individual scores vary significantly. Given they are praising its actual image quality as the final arbited, its odd that its ‘performance’ rating is lower than other m43 in order to keep it at 69%.
That said, one thing I didn’t notice when skimming over is discussing the limitation the 1/2000 limit represents for faster lenses on this larger sensor. Its a shame to have a larger sensor that gathers more light, and a fast lens that you can’t use without filters to reduce the light. Its a very strange handicap to put on the camera frankly.
well the Canon S90, a P&S cam that is a bit near the price of the E-PL1 with a not-so-good reputation for its resolution and handling has a higher score of 75%
go figure… i’m not saying E-PL1 deserves better but that score of 69 really bugs me, despite the improvements in IQ and cheaper price, they still wont give Oly a break.
anyway, i always look at the sample pictures more than the numbers, and i think E-PL1 shows its true potential when used properly. i have followed the reviews of Oly cams in DPR and i have to say these sample shots could be the best Ive seen from Oly so far…
now if only they’ll put the same sensor and processor on a 4/3 body… hoping for something by Photokina (even if not the E-5)
Yes, i’m tempted by the olympus, with the 20mm pana lenses, but there is some default, like no direct control dial, no compressed movies recording, and a dated qvga screen, which it the same than my current compact and other electronic stuff. Sure, i want better image quality, but i also want better ergonomics (using menu to change iso or aperture is not cool, and on my no touchscreen compact, i’m sometime touch the screen to try to change value, like i do to change something on my touchcreen phone… 😉 ) I’m also want an as big as possible high res screen, since it’s the only way to frame the scene, apart the costly and rather good evf.
I’m too really surprised about the image “quality” of the nikon, compared to the olympus or gf1.
D3000 gets a better score due to ergonomics and performance, but on all other aspect, E-PL1 is ahead. The lower global score is strange, due to the fact that image quality is the most important criteria, has explained here http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Guides/dpreview_scores_and_ratings_01.htm
Well, my which is a E-PL2 with a capacive high res touchscreen screen, It’s became common to smartphone and video players, so why not on camera ??? And an articuled screen maybe ?
Yeah, it is a little suspect, but if you read the scoring guidelines dpreview says that the cameras are compared to models in its class. In this instance, the Canon S90 is compared to other P&S cameras, while m43 cameras are being compared to entry-level DSLRs.
I believe that Nikon are overly exploiting their brand name, making cameras that are clearly below average – only professional or semi professional models are really worth considering (for those who need them of course). When was the last time you saw an amateur Nikon camera that you truly desired? The results of the D3000 vs E-PL1 are not the least surprising for those who take the time to read reviews closely.
This is the review I’ve been waiting for and the only disappointment is E-PL1 not being compared to Pentax K-x, Nikon D5000 and Canon EOS 500D, its competitors by features, price and position.
E-PL1 is clearly better in image quality than the other cameras it is compared with and its only serious flaws come from Olympus somewhat artificially trying to distinguish it from higher-priced E-P2: lower-spec IS, no control wheel, lower fastest shutter speed and ( relatively ) low resolution screen. Those are very easy to correct in a new model and I’m already looking forward to E-PL2 or E-P3, whichever corrects those first.
But, until they become available, I’ll have to put up with E-PL1 :).