The Online Photographer

Well now, this is interesting.

I sound like a broken record (pop, tick, hiss), but...

Almost four years ago now—three years and ten months, more precisely—on The Luminous Landscape, I wrote an article called "'DMD': The Digital Camera I’d Like to Own." "DMD" stood for "decisive moment digital," my rather ham-handed attempt to coin a name for what I thought was needed. (I'm not great with names.)

The motivation for it was a lot older than that. Basically, for years I had practiced as a documentary/art photographer* shooting 35mm black-and-white film with SLRs. Intermittently, I had looked for a pocket camera that would give me results similar to what I got from an SLR. The idea was simply that I wanted to be able to show prints of pictures taken with the two cameras side-by-side, without viewers being able to tell the difference.

I never did quite find my pocket camera. The Olympus XA was a companion for a while, but the pictures had too much vignetting; the prints didn't stand up to my SLR prints. Ditto the Contax T2, which I reviewed in Camera & Darkroom magazine, although it came closer.

Well, four years ago now, I got to thinking the same way about digital. What we needed, I thought, was a "digicam" style camera—those handy, eminently portable point-and-shoots—but that yielded picture quality indistinguishable from that of a DSLR.

So, just two days ago, I got to see an Olympus E-P1 for the first time, and then, this morning, the eagerly awaited Panasonic counterpart, the Lumix GF1, was announced. ("Fauxtokina" continues. Heh.)

The DMD, it seems, is a reality.

Before I go any further, the GF1 has a viewfinder, for those of you for whom this was the biggest issue about the E-P1: a clip-on EVF, sold separately. The head swivels upwards, too, which should be useful for macro work. (There is a new Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm (90mm-e) ƒ/2.8 ASPH. MEGA O.I.S. lens for the Micro 4/3 system, too. "MEGA O.I.S." means image stabilized.)

With the 20mm lens, you can also use a clip-on optical finder for 40mm lenses like the one from Voigtländer. The aspect ratio is a bit different, but you'd get used to that.

Panasonic's published sample picture from the new Leica 45mm Macro-Elmarit lens

I must say I very much liked the E-P1, slowish autofocus and all—it seems to be one of those designs that overcomes its own shortcomings and manages to make a pleasing whole. The odd collapsing zoom lens (the only lens for it Mike Crivello's had) is light and nicely balanced in the hand, and although the AF is on the slow side, the camera pre-focuses nicely and is responsive when shot that way, with a lovely shutter feel and sound. I just looked at the camera in the store, so I can't speak to usage issues or things like the visibility of the viewing screen in broad daylight. But overall I felt the camera was attractive and appealing. It certainly is beautiful, in a way that most digital camera designers have simply given up on.

To that fine start, the similarly-sized GF1 adds some useful distinctions. It does not have body-integral IS, but the AF is expected to be as fast as that of the GH1, which is quite good. It adds video. Although not deliberately precious like the E-P1, it's quite handsome in its own right. There's that EVF available. It has a tiny pop-up flash, which will come in handy if you take insurance snapshots, and there are doubtless some other features I have no interest in. It's a little lighter and a little slimmer than the E-P1 (Panasonic somewhat goofily calls it an "Artistic Flat Design" at the Lumix website.) The GF1 will come in colors—black, metallic red,  silver and white. (Colors are popular in the Japanese home market.)

For more on what the camera looks like, Panasonic has posted a 360° view.

For more on its relative size, dpreview has posted a size comparison.

Prices
Of course, these cameras are going to be best suited to complement full-sized 4/3rds systems of one sort or another.

But both the E-P1 and the new GF1 are pretty expensive cameras—both $900 with their respective normal prime lenses. (The Olympus adds an optical viewfinder, no small expense when sold separately from most makers. Panasonic's EVF will cost extra.) Obviously, $900 is more than the cost of many good entry-level DSLRs, so these are certainly not cheap-out options for anyone wishing to avoid the expense of a "real" camera.

I have little doubt that either Micro 4/3 camera will be satisfying from a "cool gadget" standpoint, offering object appeal and pride of ownership. What I'm not so certain about is how either the E-P1 or GF1 would serve as somebody's only camera, for those who don't have multiples of $900 in their camera budgets. It seems to me that for $900, a camera should be good enough to serve as an only camera, for the buyer who wants to use it that way, rather than a convertible sports car to keep in the garage on weekdays and drive on the weekends, if you will. Only broader and longer-breathed data samples are going to tell us whether they'll serve in that sense.

Lenses
Probably the most appealing thing to me about the Panasonic are its lenses. For years, I did everything with a 35mm and am 85mm on a 35mm SLR, in a ratio of maybe 80/20, respectively, and one of the necessities for me in a camera system is a small, light, portable fast wide-normal lens in the 35mm–42mm focal-length equivalent range. I'm hidebound that way. Most photographers are similarly picky, only with different requirements—their own, whatever those might be. 

The Oly's 17mm ƒ/2.8 "pancake" for the E-P1 does indeed appeal, but a ~1.3 stop faster 20mm ƒ/1.7 (pictured on the camera in the top two illustrations) appeals even more. Add to that the Leica 90mm-e—it looks hulking here, but it's only two and a half inches long and weighs only 8 oz. (225 g)—that you can use for head-and-shoulders portraits and closeup purposes, and you've got a fine, versatile pair.

Red GF1 with the Leica 90mm-e Macro mounted. Photo from dc.watch.impress.co.jp.

On the Panasonic lens roadmap for 2010 are a 100–300mm ƒ/4–5.6 O.I.S., 8mm ƒ/3.5 fisheye, and 14mm ƒ/2.8 prime WA. That sets out a roadmap in my mind, too—if it were me, I'd get the camera with the 20mm first, then add the Macro-Elmarit, and then add the 14mm WA when it arrives next year. Perfect.

Of course there are zooms available too, for those who insist. And don't forget the adapters that allow you to use standard 4/3 lenses, as well as Leica M-mount lenses.

All in all a particularly tasty introduction today, from Panasonic. I have a GF1 on the way as soon as they ship, a temporary loan from a kind reader, and I'm looking forward to learning more about it.

*What this means is that I'd spend most of my days wandering around town shooting whatever I felt like. It's the life.

Send this post to a friend

Featured Comment by Juze: "WANT! WAAAAAANT!

"What I want even more is an EP-2 with AF that's as fast as Panny's and that in-body IS. And then that delicious pancake becomes a stabilized ƒ/1.7. Oooh, delicious.

"But a GF1 with the pancake is fine as well. (Hear that, Santa?)"

Featured Comment by Catherine: "Uh oh, guys, don't get your boxers in too much of a twist just yet...it looks like Panasonic is marketing the GF1 to us CHICKS!

"Excuse me...I mean, us "spirited women."

"Yay for us! Go, female team!

"Oh no! Along comes the DMD at last, and it's meant to be a CHICK-CAM?! Better keep looking at those manly-beast cameras that Canon and Nikon keep pumping out, for now, just to be on the safe side.

"You have to love marketing. I wanted one before I even knew I was supposed to!"

Mike replies: I must be in good touch with my anima—I usually like cameras the Japanese target at females. I loved the Contax Aria, a decade ago, and that was intended to be Contax's "lady camera." (I even included a paragraph about that in my review of the Aria in Photo Techniques.)

To considerable fanfare among Canonophiles, the world's leading cameramaker today announced its bid to regain the APS-C throne it ceded when it didn't try hard enough with the 50D. It has tried hard enough this time and then some. The new 7D is Canon's top-of-the-line reduced-sensor-size body. It features a nearly 18-MP CMOS sensor with cutting-edge technology, 8 fps, the now mandatory video capabilities expanded and improved versus its competitors, and an improved 100% viewfinder that matches the one in the Nikon D300 for magnification. The new body also features improved weather sealing and a nifty feature using technologies that have been close to Canon's heart for years: you can configure the viewfinder image overlays electronically.

It will ship at the end of this month with an announced list price of $1,699 in the U.S. and £42,365.29 in the U.K.*, and is already available for preorder at B&H Photo, both as body-only and as a kit with a bargain-priced 28–135mm ƒ/3.5–5.6 IS USM lens. Amazon had the 7D listed this morning but has taken it down again, possibly because it got inundated with more pre-orders that it felt it could fulfill from its first shipment. Thus the formidable popularity of Canon.

The 7D follows Canon's usual policy and does not have body-integral image stabilization. (If you care about that, Tamron has introduced a new image-stabilized version of its popular 17–50mm ƒ/2.8 lens, called—deep breath, get ready—the "Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II VC LD Aspherical [IF]." (Whew.) The crucial bit to watch for if you'll be buying is the "VC," which means vibration control.)

For more info...well, Google "Canon 7D" and prepare to get lost; it's all over the web. No, actually I'll recommend Rob Galbraith's excellent analytical preview page, and Gizmodo's hands-on preview complete with sample videos and 22 sample images in multiple sizes.

As an aside, I was amused to note that 1001 Noisy Cameras has dubbed the current run-up to the IFA trade show in Germany "Fauxtokina." Made me laugh.

Nearly killing the monkey
The 7D continues Canon's historic ineptitude with camera names. It is logically a 60D, but presumably Canon doesn't want it to be confused with the 50D, which was considered a rote upgrade by the faithful and which sank beneath the waves without leaving much of an oil slick behind to mark the spot. So they've a) conflated the new name with the name of their moderately-sized pro-am full-frame body, even though the 7D isn't full-frame, and b) pillaged the alphanumeric appellation of yet another defunct Konica-Minolta.

Want to buy a 7D for $200? I have one I'll sell you. Hint: it's not the 7D you want. I hope to live long enough for people to know new Canon SLRs are digital without them being labeled with a "D." How long has it been now since a new film SLR came out?

Newly-created features and components
Fortunately for photographers, however, Canon knows how to make superlative cameras. The 7D looks to be 100% business, from its well-refined, no-nonsense shape and control set to its completely overhauled AF to its take-no-prisoners new sensor. Apart from the few physical changes noted in the first paragraph above, most of the significant changes from the 50D appear to be under the skin. To quote Rob: "The Canon EOS 7D contains more newly-created features and components than any Canon model since the EOS-1D Mark III in 2007. It sports a new image sensor, new AF system, new metering system, new electronic level, new viewfinder display technology, new wireless TTL controller functionality and new configuration and customization options not found in any Canon camera previously." Just reading about the formidable new sensor will take you a while (even if, like me, you only understand half of it).

Now here's a question for you, though: if you didn't have a camera or lenses already nor a spot of brand loyalty either way, and you had the money in your pocket, which would you choose: a $1700 7D or a $2000 A850?

*Ooh, I think I made a typo.

Send this post to a friend

It's official: confirming rampant and hotly discussed rumors that have been swirling for weeks, Leica Camera AG today announced that on 9/09/09 it will introduce "a collection of groundbreaking new products, designed and manufactured for all photographers, novice and professional alike." The announcement, via live webcast, will take place at the following time:

Here's today's announcement by Leica CEO Rudi Spiller.

I'm never going to understand why camera companies introduce multiple products on the same day—it definitely reduces the coverage they get from scurvy li'l bloggers like me. I'd be happy to feature all of Sony's cool new products one at a time if they'd un-embargo them with a few days' space between each. Oh well.

In any event, Sony has unveiled four new products today. Two similar new cameras situated just under the A700 and aimed at "photography enthusiasts" (again, who are all these non-photographers buying other DSLRs?), the 12.3-MP A500 ($750) and the 14.2-MP A550 ($950); and a new lens, a 28–75mm ƒ/2.8 constant-aperture zoom to serve as a half-as-expensive and not-quite-but-almost half-as-heavy alternative to the godlike, but dear, Zeiss 24–70mm.

But the real news is the A850. It's so close to the A900 that Imaging-Resource has already posted a full review, by pillaging parts of its own A900 review. (That doesn't make it worse review if you haven't read the original, of course.) In fact, the only differences, according to I-R—I'm quoting, here—are:

• 3 frame/second continuous mode, vs. 5 fps for A900
• 98% viewfinder coverage, vs. 100%
• IR remote is optional, not included in the box
• Slightly higher default color saturation
• Slightly (microscopically) softer images?
• List price of $2,000 vs $2,700

...Unquote. Photo Club Alpha (which has posted the full press release) had speculated that the new camera would have a single Bionz processor rather than the A900's two, but, according to both sites now, that's not the case.

And the kicker? It's quite a kicker. Two grand. That's right—you can now buy a full-frame, 24.6-MP big dog for $1,999. It's both the highest-resolution SLR-style camera you can buy and the cheapest full-frame digital camera you can buy. Not a bad trick.

Incidentally, the reason for the slight reduction in viewfinder coverage is most likely so that the fabricators can have just a little slop to work with. Even with a very well-made camera, it's still difficult and painstaking to exactly calibrate a mirror assembly and prism to read perfectly accurately on all four edges. This is a trivial change—the viewfinder will most likely be just as good as the one in the A900 for all the we users can tell. (And the viewfinder in the A900 is the best I've seen in a digital SLR so far. It's a beaut.)

Two grand still isn't parrot seed (I'm tired of writing "chicken feed"), but it's less than the 3-MP Canon D30 [sic] cost when it kicked off the era of affordable DSLRs in the Fall of 2000. We've come a long, long way in nine years, my people.

The camera, body only at first, is due in a month or so and the new lens will be along a month after that, when the camera and lens will be offered as a kit.

Pre-order the Sony A850 at:
Amazon.com
Amazon.co.uk*
B&H Photo-Video

*Note that the camera is considerably more expensive in the U.K.—£1,947.75, which is equivalent to about $3,150 today.

Send this post to a friend

In geekout mode now, take a look at what Fazal got....

Send this post to a friend

Featured Comment by Ed Taylor: "Beautiful camera to my eye.

"After reviewing some of the photos taken with this camera, I realized something had changed. I knew it would happen eventually and it has. Photos taken with film are starting to look like antiques to me. I feel like I am looking at a photo from the past even when it is of a 2009 subject. I am not saying this is good or bad. In fact, I can't help that I see things this way. It is just the way it is for me, and probably for most of the younger generation. I very much like the look of film, but at this point, I feel film should be used when one wants to get that look, or for effect. For me, it is now an artist's tool. Of course, you can pretty much duplicate the film 'look' by degrading a digital image, but if you have a darkroom, you might as well go for the real thing. In music and film, artists are still imitating old time technologies by adding scratches to videos or tics and pops to music—all good for artistic interpretation, but I now seem to accept the cleanness and detail of digital as being more realistic. I remember a time when to me, digital images looked more 'fake.' It's amazing how far technology has progressed in just a decade or so and also how our impressions have adapted to it."

Old Champions Brought Out of Retirement...

Brett Favre in better days. But it ain't 1997 any more.

...It ain't 2005, either. (For more cool shots of the S90 like this one, see Pocket-lint.)

It's on, baby. The battle is joined. Shots have been fired. Professing innocently that he isn't after revenge, Brett Favre signed with the team that true (yes, true) Packer fans hate above all others, saying "true Packers fans will understand." In case you might be wondering, they emphatically don't—Packerland is fuming from Lake Mich to the Mississippi. Bring it on, old man.

In related news, four years after the S80 was introduced, Canon introduces the S90—a mouth-watering little compact which Canon actually designed for photographers, of all the outlandish things. (Talk about a strange world, where a camera designed for photographers has to be decidedly different from all the rest.) With Micro 4/3 having gained a firm toehold and Panasonic seemingly permanently unable to keep the LX3 pipeline flowing, Canon is resuscitating an old champ to do battle on two fronts.

Can better marketing and adequate production capacity banish the darling LX3 from photographers' hearts? Can Canon do enough with 10 MP on a 7.6 x 5.7mm sensor to quell the rising desire for the much bigger 18 x 13.5mm 4/3 sensors in compact cameras? S90, left jab. G11, right cross. Bring it on, world.

The S90 brings the goods on paper, sah. How about a 28–105mm-e lens that's ƒ/2 at the wide end? In-lens Image Stabilization? Raw capable? How about actual manual control of most functions without jumping through hoops by mail? Add to that a new control ring around the lens (I admit, it appeals) and a no-nonsense, svelte and tiny shirt-pocketable body in basic black, with no funky bumps and rumples in the sheet metal (no hot shoe, either. Viewfinder? We don't need no steenking viewfinder), and you've sussed the stats. Tiny sensors aren't giving up the fight just yet.

Extra! Packers consider signing Fran Tarkenton
October 5th: Showdown. Favre might have a few touchdowns left in the old arm. Question is, how many for them, how many for us? I call three interceptions, one for a Packer touchdown. You heard it here.

As for the latest curtain call of Canon's small sensor photographer's compact—shipping in October, we're told, although that showdown will take longer to play out—well, that one's harder to call. It's always easy to claim Canon's coasting, much harder to count it out.

Hey, at least true Canon fans don't have to suffer the ignominy of seeing their old champion in a jersey that says "Nikon" on it.

Now that would just be sad.

Order the Canon S90 from:
B&H Photo
Amazon

Send this post to a friend

Featured Comment by Yanchik: "Awesome. I'm a mountaineer / winter climber. I've been waiting for a practical replacement for the S70 (bought my first one in 2004, my second in Spring this year).

"This is the camera you need when it's one hand for safety and one for photography. On a lanyard around your neck, stuffed down your front to keep it warm, no great big protrusions to catch and stick in you if you fall onto it, big sliding front cover to cover the optics. 28mm for the climbing en-route shots. Raw to give you a fighting chance of post-processing to a printable image...

"When I get my hands on one, I'll do my best not to trap it under the rope when starting awkward abseils. But still, the S70 handled it...."

By Ken Tanaka

Maybe chickens really can grow lips, after all.

I’ve been a fan of Canon’s G series of PowerShot cameras since the fall of 2006 when Canon introduced the G7. In my opinion the 10 megapixel G7 produced some of the finest images I’ve seen from a compact camera. But on the battlefields of the pixel count marketing wars the G7’s 10 MP sensor resolution specification began looking anemic against competitors. Canon, under pressure to compete, put the PowerShot G’s tiny 1/1.7 sensor on an aggressive electronic steroid regimen until, by the fall of 2008, the PowerShot G10 boasted a brawny 14.7 MP resolution. Nobody was going to kick sand in the G10’s lens on the beach!

As I wrote here last fall, the G10 is unquestionably a fine compact camera, perhaps the best of its genre. But on the path from the G7 to the G10, there's no question that image quality declined. The smooth, nicely saturated tones of the G7 were noticeably a bit noisier and flatter in the G10. This was clearly the result of Canon’s megapixel increase. Yet it seemed that Canon would sacrifice sensor brawn for image quality when chickens grew lips.

Well, folks, it looks like there’ll be some barnyard puckerin’ going on this fall. It seems that Canon has listened to its customers* and responded by introducing the new PowerShot G11 with a 10 MP sensor! I know I’m not alone in my elation. If the G11 produces images as smooth as the G7’s, we’re probably looking at the finest enthusiast compact ever made.

The G11 also (finally) introduces an articulating 461K LCD screen, although 0.2" smaller than the 3" screen now on the G10. That’s fine with me. The rest of the camera’s design and features seem very similar to the current G10. That’s fine with me, too, as I very much like the G10’s handling.

It's already available for pre-order from B&H Photo and from Amazon.

Ken

*While Canon certainly listens to customers, I suspect that this sensor down-res was also encouraged by the wild success of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 / Leica D-Lux 4 cameras which held their sensors to 10 MP while Canon was pumping up the G’s resolution. Those cameras produce, in my opinion, the finest compact camera images available today. The marketplace seems to have recognized this, too. Since the Panasonic LX3 was introduced (at about the same time as Canon’s G10) it’s been hard to find it in stock anywhere. The success of these cameras, despite their lower sensor resolution, must certainly have encouraged Canon to return the PowerShot G’s sensor to a more reasonable pixel density in favor of image quality.

Send this post to a friend

dpreview.com is reporting this morning that Leica has revealed detailed specs and a release date (October) for the much-anticipated S System.

As, in dpreview's words, "a basic 'kit' (S2 and one lens) will set you back around $30,000," this is not a camera or system we will be covering on this site. However, I want to make it clear that I think this is a very well-thought-out move for Leica, an intelligently and thoughtfully conceived idea. It is a prime example of the sort of "newthink" [note the date on the linked article] of which I heartily approve. The only problem that I can see is that the timing relative to the worldwide recession is not propitious—and that is not Leica's fault.

The camera and its system will have two native or natural markets, which is important for a new product this ambitious. First, there's any sort of high-dollar pro who photographs handheld—mainly, but not exclusively, fashion and runway photographers. These are also the type of photographers who work in very style- and status-conscious, people-oriented worlds where using the best and most prestigious equipment is an important statement; a perfect match. Second, there are photography enthusiasts who are simply not price conscious—some of whom might already be Leica enthusiasts. There are people out there who prefer, and can pay for, $240,000 automobiles and $80,000 stereo speakers, and the S System will be in a perfect position to appeal to them too.

I really have no idea if the gamble will work for Leica, but it is a noble, clear-headed gamble, one that, if successful, is likely to be good for the camera market as a whole.

Send this post to a friend

Featured Comment by James McDermott: "Just been pumping up the biceps and having my conspicuous embarrassment gland removed, ready for my one year-one camera-one lens experience with the Leica S2 and 75mm lens. Now, which bank vault to blow...?"

Mike replies: Re those biceps, you might not have to pump them up as much as you think—actually, the S2 is rather smallish, according to people who have seen it—smaller than a full sized Nikon or Canon.

Featured Comment by Marc Rochkind: "I've been acquiring old cameras lately, and recently bought a 1958 Zeiss Ikon Contarex (a.k.a. Bullseys or Cyclops). In many ways, and in the opinion of some, it was the best camera ever made. It was also the beginning of the end for Zeiss Ikon. (Its current rangefinder is Japanese.)

Zeiss Ikon Contarex 

"All the other major German makers, except for Leica, are gone now. They've been gone for over 25 years. I predict that the S2 and the M9 will be the Leica's Contarexes, and Leica, too, will be gone in a few years.

"Back in the 1960s what the world wanted was an M3-sized SLR. They eventually got it, but it was from Olympus (OM-1). Leica produced the big, fat, overpriced Leicaflex, obsolete from the day it was introduced. Same with a full-frame M9. That's what the M8 should have been. (Yes, the S2 isn't a me-too camera, but at its price it can't possibly save Leica.)

"The plan to follow the market by two years at twice the price just won't work."

Car enthusiasts have long enjoyed what are called "spy shots." Automotive manufacturers go out of their way to keep new models secret until their official introductions, but they also need to test the cars on real roads, out in the real world, and they need to take them places. Fanatical "spy photographers"—sheetmetal paparazzi—specialize in bringing in shots of sometimes heavily disguised or camouflaged cars spied "en route" or in the wild; the pictures are then dissected by automotive journalists to try to identify just what the cars might be. The shot above, for instance (which, obviously, comes from worldcarfans.com) was labeled all over the 'net as being BMW's new Z Vision Concept, on its way to the Frankfurt Auto show.

Likewise, photo enthusiasts now enjoy tracking "leaks" of upcoming cameras prior to introduction. The latest leak, for instance, involves Panasonic's GF1, which would be its second (or third, if you count the G1 and GH1 as separtate cameras) Micro 4/3 offering and an answer to Olympus's still hot-off-the-production-line E-P1.

Contrary to popular belief, camera companies don't leak information about upcoming products deliberately. But the information gets out for the same reason news about upcoming cars does—the companies have to get the cameras into the hands of beta-testers for real-world use, to gather crucial early feedback and identify teething problems. And, of course, the more people who know a secret, the less secure the secret is.

I've personally never had much interest in "pre-launch" buzz, except perhaps in a few select cases, but I do understand the appeal. I'm sure for some it's a lot of fun to track it all. Generally, I'd rather wait until something is real to talk about it. That's why TOP isn't the greatest source for the latest news about leaks.

(But just for the record—in Nostradamus mode, and we all know how painful that can be—I'll venture the guess that the biggest news this coming Fall will be from Sony, and will concern DSLRs. Dum-de-dum. I'm just sayin'.)

Oh, and about that picture at the top of this post—according to worldcarfans, BMW says it's actually a 5-year-old design study being transported from BMW design studios in Germany to a storage facility. Is that true, or is it further indirection, a sort of nefarious verbal/conceptual camo? I guess that's all part of what makes spy shots, like camera news leaks, so intriguing.

Send this post to a friend

By Laurence Matson

Modern photography is rife with Holy Grails, and certainly one of them is the reinvention of the street shooter’s ideal camera as originally embodied in the Leica M series—and in the hands of Henri Cartier-Bresson.

H.C.-B. is to street photography as Ansel Adams is to landscape photography. These three and other icons used a specific tool and molded their defining concept around the tool. The tool essentially becomes a defining factor in how you take pictures.

When Sigma set out to develop the DP series of cameras, they had a specific concept in mind: to house the technology of their DSLR cameras in a pocketable device. One of the models used during the concept phase was the Leica M. Although not pocketable and certainly not digital at the time, it was considered the first true street shooter’s camera.

At photokina 2006, Sigma showed the first concept of the DP1. It was small enough to fit in a large pocket and promised best-of-class image quality with the first APC-size imager in a compact camera. For many, this was the Holy Grail.

But no sooner was the DP1 announced than the discussions about performance began. And there was plenty of time for them; the time delay between the concept camera shown at photokina and the final version shown at PMA 2007 was considered horrendously long, to say nothing of the period from PMA 2007 and the final launch of the finished product. The longer this discussion went on, the greater the expectations—and skepticism—became.

What prospective users underestimated—and in some cases, what Sigma employees before an open mike admitted to underestimating—was the challenge of packing so much technology inside such a tiny package, and doing it for the first time. An honest appraisal of the DP1 was that they succeeded at the time of launch, but just barely. Firmware updates followed quickly to handle major issues, and adept users managed to produce some amazing images. But it was clear to many that a future DP camera would require more horsepower for processing and some changes to the interface.

Standing Guard, Hartland, Vermont

Enter the DP2. Once again, anticipation and expectations were high, and some felt that the "little camera with outstanding image quality" came up short. However, Devices are rarely perfect, and never are in the eyes of all. Devices have an intended function and propose through their designs how to go about it. Ultimately, the buyer has to decide whether the device suits his or her needs or not.

In my opinion and from my experience, the DP2 makes a very good street camera. It is not perfect, but it is certainly a step in the right direction. Here is how I use it for that purpose:

• Set the camera to M mode on the dial, and adjust the ISO, shutter speed and f-stop for the prevailing conditions. I tend to set it for ƒ/8 and adjust the shutter speed on the fly as light conditions change. If my final result will be B&W, I only adjust the ISO using the QS menu.

• Set focus to MF and use the wheel to set it for a hyperfocal point around 1.5–2 meters. Again, this can be adjusted on the fly.

• Use the fastest card you can. I use 32 GB Delkin class 4 cards. There might be faster cards around now.

• Use the OVF and keep both eyes open to see the action evolve. Capturing the moment is about anticipation.

• Turn off the LCD. It is a distraction.

Set up like this, I can capture an image every two to three seconds for as long as I want. There is no shutter lag.

If there is a company out there that listens to what its users want, it is Sigma. This has been shown time and again in their response with new firmware or products. As we move towards the DP3 and beyond, it is good for people to discuss problems openly in forums or blog comments. But as with any criticism, the constructive form is best, and this acknowledges what is right as well as what could use improvement.

-

Laurence Matson, one of the initiators and stalwarts of the Sigma Users Group, describes himself as a "strong Sigma and Foveon proponent." I invited him to write this "counterpoint" when he criticized my take on the recently introduced Sigma DP2.  —MJ

Laurence Matson's Sigma DP2 Gallery

Send this post to a friend

This is a pretty amazing photograph, although it needs its caption to yield its meaning. It's a recent photograph taken from by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC). If you look at the larger version, you can see the descent stages of the Apollo 11 Lunar Module, Eagle, still sitting on the surface of the moon. It's the tiny whitish speck in the middle of the picture casting the long, skinny, non-crater-like shadow. It's been there since 1969.

The LROC—note hammer and Swiss Army Knife for scale

Shazzam
For those of you who prefer more earthbound adventure, check out the nifty GoPro Hero, an inexpensive, waterproof, miniature still and video camera with a wide-angle lens intended to attach to helmets, surfboards, cars and offroad vehicles, your wrist, your chest, radio-controlled vehicles, or pretty much anywhere else you can think of to stick one. The company's website is a lot of fun to browse around in, and here's where you can buy one (as you can see, it's not exactly going to break your bank—although note that the price at the link is just for the camera and the housing; you buy the attachment accessories separately, based on what you need).

What do you say, should I attach one to my forehead on my next trip to the doggie park? I think the suction cup attachment might work for that.

Send this post to a friend

Featured Comment by David A. Goldfarb: "This is not a camera you attach to your forehead on your next trip to the doggie park. This is a camera to attach to your doggie's forehead on your next trip to the doggie park."

Featured Comment by Ctein: "I suspect most people don't realize how far removed the Apollo photos they remember are from the originals. The original chromes never left the NASA vaults. A very few institutions, including the Smithsonian, got first-generation 'master' dupes. A few very elite publications got second-gen dupes. Most publications got third- or even fourth-gen dupes.

"Add in another generation for the printed reproduction and you're typically 4 or 5 generations away from the originals.

"How big a difference did that make? I've been lucky enough to see some of the Apollo chromes in the Smithsonian archives. The difference between those and what typically appeared in a good publication is like the difference between printing a negative on Grade 2 paper and Grade 4. Not to mention the color and saturation distortions commensurate with that.

"Two books are noteworthy: Orbit: NASA Astronauts Photograph the Earth by Jay Apt, Michael Helfert, and Justin Wilkinson, and Full Moon by Michael Light. The photos for Orbit were scanned from original flight film ('zero generation' original, first generation reproduction) and color/tone corrected by Roger Ressmeyer. (Ressmeyer had a scanner station built onsite, so film never had to leave the storage facility.)

"Michael Light was not quite so blessed; he had to work off of first-generation 'master' dupes. Perceptive viewers will see artifacts, e.g., some small amount of dark haloing around the blackest shadows, which are evidence of slight degradation in the duping process. His results are still remarkable and gorgeous.

"Those who want some sense of what the photos really looked like owe it to themselves to own these books.

"Digital imaging has been a true blessing to space photography; no longer do we public have to suffer with distorted and degraded n-generation offspring."

Featured Comment by David A. Goldfarb: "This is not a camera to attach to your forehead on your next tript to the doggie park. This is a camera to attach to your doggie's forehead on your next trip to the doggie park."

Featured Comment by Rod S.: "I really enjoyed the heads-up on the new LRO photography, Mike. Hey, the Apollo 14 picture is particularly fun: the astronaut's walking trail leading over to the ALSEP jumped out at me even before I'd scrolled to the enlargement.

"I'll second Ctein's recommendation of Full Moon. Michael Light sifted through NASA's collection to find those that struck him as a photographer, steering away from the most commonly seen photographs. Most of the B&W photographs were shot for geological control but most of those he selected are stunning. The first time I turned the pages of the book, I cried, because it took me to those valleys and mountains in a way I had not previously experienced.

"In a discussion with Michael Light at the opening of his exhibition in Sydney, I had remarked about the several copies of the book that I'd seen which included flattened lumps of white clay within the pages. Michael explained that the clay was used during production (by Amilcare Pizzi, in Milan) to address the problem of pages sticking together due to the unusually large amount of black ink used in the printing (for the lunar skies). On the issue of duplicates, Michael told me that he was able to use a fresh new set of 'master' duplicates which NASA had fortuitously prepared shortly before he made his request, so he did have good fortune there."

In days of yore, when men were men and cameras took real pictures, one occasionally heard of hockey pucks like the Canon New F1 (for some reason, the New F1 was always described as a "hockey puck") being dunked in seawater, rescued, resuscitated (usually with a soak in fresh water followed by air-drying, after being opened as much as possible to said air) and revived, to go on soldiering for years afterwards. Nothing could stop 'em.

But a modern DSLR? All those delicate electronics? Forget it, right?

Wrong, pixel-breath. Planet5D tells the rather remarkable story of two Canon 5D Mark II's that went swimming and lived to shoot again, in what must have been very alarming inadvertent tests of their weatherproofing. Who'd a thunk they'd survive a dunk? Yet they did.

And if you need to shoot video underwater without taking your 5DII down on purpose, there's always the Liquid Image VideoMask:

Just be sure to be careful where you're looking, because that's being recorded too!

Send this post to a friend

The scribes at dpreview.com oft make proud reference to the length of the site's reviews..."our 32-page review," etc. But I have to confess my slothfulness...for me, their reviews are 2-page reviews, all of 'em, because all I ever read is the "Introduction" and the "Conclusion." Hey, I'm an executive, towering like a colossus astride the TOP empire, and I'm busy. With the blog, not so much. But I've got the garden to water, the dog to take to the park, and housework to ignore.

And naps, don't forget how much time naps can suck out of each day. It's brutal.

Anyway, what I'm saying is that I'm not attuned to all the subtleties of dpreview's reviews. But is it just me, or did Richard Butler and Lars Rehm just give a rave review to the Olympus E-620? "The Four Thirds range has tended to lag a fraction behind the best contemporary APS-C sensor-size DSLRs," they write, on, er, the Conclusion page. "This isn't the case with the E-620...it's up there with the best of them." "...you'll be impressed by the level of control you get for so little money." "Its ability to deliver great images, straight out of the camera[,] hits the spot precisely." "...competes more convincingly with its peers than any Four Thirds camera we've yet seen."

 

That sounds like a rave to me. I could be wrong.

Send this post to a friend

And it begins: the E-P1 with a Voigtländer Nokton, and with the old 40mm ƒ/1.4 lens from the original Pen and with any Four-Thirds lens you choose....

Send this post to a friend

In the continuing absence of hands-on primary experience, maybe this will help with the E-P1 size debate. A regular reader who's become a friend of the site sent me this illustration he made. He took the images from various places on the web but they're presented scrupulously to scale. (Personally, I think each of us should just wait to judge until we see and hold the camera for ourselves. But we're here to please.)

Left to right, Canon G10 (1/1.7" small sensor), Olympus E-P1 (Micro 4/3), Canon 450D (APS-C), and Canon 5D Mark II (24x36mm or "full-frame"). Click on the image to see it a bit larger.

Send this post to a friend

Featured Comment by JK @ Studio Hatyai: "For close to a year, c. 1992, I carried a Fuji 6x9 rangefinder around Tokyo pretty much every day. It was a fairly big, clunky, noisy camera, but within a few months I stopped noticing those things, as you do with something you’re using all the time. The curious thing was, most of my subjects seemed to stop noticing it about then too. Somehow they were picking up on my casualness with the thing.

"Ever since then I’ve quit worrying about the exact size, color, shape etc. of a camera, at least in terms of its potential discretion. Much more than anything else, subjects respond to your ease with your gear, and your ease with them."

Mike replies: I had a weird experience once with that very camera that confirms part of what you're saying. I had one for a few days to try, and I felt very awkward and nervous pointing it at people. One time, believe it or not, I pointed it from my 4th-floor balcony at some nearby construction, at one guy working on a roof, and as I was looking through the camera the construction worker looked right up at me and glared. It seemed to me at the time like he had sensed himself being watched or spied on. It was uncanny, but I don't think it was a coincidence. Although it might have been, of course.

A couple of readers sent me this link, to a young woman in England with a German (or Dutch?) accent handling the Olympus E-P1. Sometimes seeing someone handle a camera can give you a better idea of what it really looks like.

(P.S. Somewhat annoyingly, I can no longer post YouTube videos directly here, because the minimum size of the videos now exceeds the width of my column. You know what they say: oh well. I wonder what would happen if I reset the size constraints manually....)

Send this post to a friend

Featured Comment by Maarten B.: "German accent, definitely. The name is German too. For a Dutchman like me it is very easy to hear."

Featured Comment by Clayton Lofgren: "Another one with funny accent."

I don't usually like to proclaim opinions about things before I know quite what I'm talking about. Not because my opinion is so valuable, but because it isn't.

However, I feel a somewhat closer connection to the new E-P1 than I do to most cameras because of the fact that I've been periodically calling for just such a camera (a large-sensor compact) for the past four years or so. Lots of people have been asking me, "Is the E-P1 the DMD?" I hope this justifies sharing my initial reactions even if it might not add much of substance to the discussion...on account of I don't actually know anything firsthand about the E-P1.

Seldom have new cameras been so anticipated as the E-P1. (The last time expectations rose to such a fever pitch was for the Canon 5D Mark II.) Ever since Micro 4/3 was announced and Olympus let it be known that it would venture an entry into the category, and later when the early mock-up above was shown under glass, many photographers have been waiting for the details.

Personally, I'm well pleased by what we've learned so far of the E-P1. It's basically just what I expected—and more, too.

Not interested
I should mention that there's a lot about the camera that doesn't interest me. I don't think I'm interested in video, and I don't think I'm interested in having a dictaphone in my camera. So I'm not initially moved by the "electronic Swiss Army knife" aspect of the E-P1. I know this is part of the point of it, part of the design brief, part of the marketing schema. But the reason I like cameras is because I like pictures. I don't go moping around wishing that a camera would just do something else in order to make it more interesting. I like pictures. I like cameras. I'd be likely to use the E-P1 just as a camera.

I'm also not interested in any of the whole happy muck-pile of JPEG processing features—art filters and scene modes and suchlike gabble. That's all fine for those who want all that. Not for me. I'd shoot raw and out.

I'm also not interested in the zoom lens. Wouldn't buy it, and if it didn't exist my opinion of the camera wouldn't be changed. Your mileage etc.

Pig in mud
Here are some of the things I'm happy about, on the face of things:

• The lens focal length. Three huge cheers for Olympus. I've opined (cavilled?) at length elsewhere about the growing scarcity of plain old 35mm-equivalent primes on many digital cameras. Thirty-five millimeter is the de facto normal lens focal length on a Leica rangefinder (the 50mm Summicron holds the position honorarily, but for many years, more people bought Leica 35mms than 50mms), and for better or worse it's just my "home" angle of view. I see like it does. To me something in the 35mm–40mm range is the first most-needed lens, no matter what else is available. I'm thus very happy that the first prime for the E-P1 is a ~35mm-e.
• Body-integral stabilization. As longtime readers know, I love this feature...when it's well implemented. It sure worked great on my old K-M 7D. I don't know, maybe I just drink too much coffee. I loved it for low-light shooting; it really helps. Olympus reportedly implements this feature well. I have high hopes.
• The lens speed. ƒ/2.8 is not super fast, but it's fine for a camera with a sensor that's good up to ISO 800 and that has IS (see the post about this below, second one down). Plus, on cameras where you don't have to look through the lens to see the subject, widest-aperture speed isn't as important. On a camera like this, I'd rather have an ƒ/2.8 the size of this one than an ƒ/2 that's twice as big.
• Two viewfinders! Kewl. Very considerate of Olympus to provide a matching OVF for the 17mm. I'll admit that right now I can't quite see how I'd focus and shoot with this camera, but I'm provisionally willing to wait and see until I can try it for myself. I'm a clever guy (well, with cameras, at least), so I'm betting I can figure out a method that I'd get comfortable with that would allow me to actually take pictures with the E-P1. This baseless conviction subject to cruel real-world smackdown at a later date of course.
• Right-sizing. Everybody will have different opinions about the size of the E-P1. Too big? Too small? Just right? Hello, Goldilocks? Personally, I'm happy that Olympus made an obvious attempt to choose a "just-right" size. You or I might not agree with the designers' choice. (Or, we might.) But I give them credit for making an attempt at finding just the right size.*
• Premium quality. Nice that they decided not to go the el-cheapo price-leading cost-accounting shopper-checklist cut-the-corners route. The EP-1 appears to have some fine-object quality. I approve; I like cameras that are beautiful. If I want cheap I'll buy cheap; in this case I'd rather have pretty.
• Design. Okay, maybe the whole Pen thing is a tad breathless, a shade precious; whatever. I don't think I've ever seen a Maitani Pen and I don't feel the whole nostalgic vibe in this case. But I like the fact that Olympus took so much care in crafting an object of beauty and desire, making a camera that has style and grace.**
• Strap lugs. Yeah, they cost more. But I like plain old strap lugs. Had to smile when I saw 'em.

Withholding judgment
Lots of things about the E-P1 remain to be seen. That's always the case with a new introduction. Are we going to like or hate the viewing screen, or not care? Is the camera responsive enough? How's the lens, really? What do we really think about the image files, after we've shot with the li'l bugger for a few months and learned how to eke the quality we want out of it? Lots still left to suss, after the sun sets on this day.

But for now, I'm psyched. Do the kids still say that? We used to say that when I was a kid.

*P.S. I could not care less if it fits into a pocket. Absolutely not a criterion. Never carried a camera in my pocket, don't wish to start.

** Also, I do like it when companies respect their history and take continuity into account. It's part of identity, and making products with strong, coherent identities makes for strong companies, if you ask me. Olympus is thinking of its own history, of what sets it apart and makes it unique and thus, what it can offer to us that differentiates it from everybody else. That quality is not the strongest quality among the many strengths of Japanese corporations in general. I admire the people at Olympus for thinking that way.

Send this post to a friend

Featured Comment by Dwig: "Excellent points. Particularly that about the 'normal' prime lens.

"Personally, I prefer to keep the term 'normal' sacred, holding to the classic definition of a lens with a focal length equal to the diagonal measure of the image. That equates to 42mm for 35mm full frame if you file the negative carrier out to show the edges. It's only 40mm otherwise. If you shoot slides, it's more like 37mm or 38mm and if you judge from a machine printed borderless 4x6 or 8x10 it's more like 38mm for color negs and 35mm for slides. Bingo, your preference for 35–40mm-e lenses makes perfect 'normal' sense. Even Nikon's new 35mm ƒ/1.8 DX lens is overly long to be a 'normal' in my view; they need a 24-28mm offering. [Oren and I agree —Ed.]

"'Standard' should, in my opinion be reserved for historical discussions involving the old film convention of selling a 50mm lens as the basic starter lens. Today, 'kit' or 'kit lens' has really replaced the term."

Olympus E-P1 and 17mm (34mm-e) ƒ/2.8 lens

By Vlatko Juric-Kokic

Let me immediately join Eamon's camp: I'm also someone who wants a small and serious camera. I've been rooting for a more advanced E-4xx ever since the E-400 appeared. I talked to various Olympus people about it, but...no. Having seen the development of the series and now the E-P1, I can understand Olympus's reasoning and why there isn't a real digital OM. Nevertheless, a man can dream.

Olympus apparently gives a lot of importance to the E-P1. They brought journalists from all over Europe (and one from South Africa) to the launch in Berlin. Masaharu Okubo, the president of Olympus Imaging, came to deliver the introductory speech at the launch. The atmosphere was one of eager expectation. Unlike some launches I've seen, everybody rushed to see the camera when it was officially unveiled and you couldn't approach the display case for some time because of the people photographing the camera...

Our traffic spiked by just under 50% yesterday, which seems to indicate a very healthy interest in the new Olympus digital "Pen"—especially since TOP was far from the only place on the internet where people could go to find information about the new camera.

Personally I was very happy to see it...both the product itself and the interest it's generating. Not only because it's another vindication of the "DMD" article that I wrote so long ago at The Luminous-Landscape (DMD stood for "decisive moment digital" and the article was a call for a large-sensor compact for use as a complement to a DSLR), but because I feel starved for an injection of creativity into the current state of camera design. The current camera market is almost a mirror of the one that existed in 1993 except that digital capture has replaced film. Back then, most cameras were either black-blob Wunderplastik AF SLRs, or point-and-shoots. After the all-too-brief Renaissance of creativity in camera design that accompanied the incunabulist years of digital, I've been dismayed that camera design has largely settled back into that very same rut.

One thing that strikes me about Micro 4/3 and its close relatives is that it need not have an adverse effect on the SLR market. I should think that most photographers would use a Micro 4/3 camera like a sports car in the garage—not as their everyday driver, but as a second camera used to complement a DSLR. Its success need not come at the expense of the DSLR category.

I've spent a lot of time in the past 24 hours surfing the web to see peoples' reactions to the E-P1 announcement. Actually, I was halfway through writing a satirical "Guide to New Camera Announcements" before I broke it off, thinking that it might hit a bit too close to home for all of us! But I did come across some genuine howlers in my peregrinations, that's for sure. One fellow said, "You cannot truly create by holding a camera out in front of you." Really? He should spend a bit of time in a camera museum somewhere, and see some of the many hair-shirt Rube Goldberg devices with which the photographers of the past managed to be very creative indeed.

In any event, the next camera I'll be getting here is supposed to be the DP2, courtesy of a kind reader, but our preliminaries regarding the Olympus E-P1 are not yet done: one of our friends was able to spend an entire morning shooting with the new camera on the streets of Berlin yesterday, and he is writing up his impressions for us right now. I don't have an ETA for that, but it's something to look forward to if you're one of the many who are curious about the camera.

By Eamon Hickey

First, a tiny bit of background: Like many, many others (notably, the publisher of this very website), I've been pining away for a small but serious digital camera for a decade or so now. (Yeah, a decade. Shame, shame on you, camera companies.) By "small but serious," I meant coat-pocketable or smaller, with DSLR-like image quality and, equally important, real responsiveness and controllability.

I've expressed this strong desire—I prefer not to describe my behavior as begging—to nearly all the big camera makers in one meeting or another over the years, and the nice folks at Olympus America, apparently remembering my ravings, gave me a short briefing on the new E-P1 a couple of weeks back. I only had it in my hands for about 15 minutes—nowhere near long enough to come to any conclusions about it—but I do have a few impressions, for whatever they're worth.

With the 17mm ƒ/2.8 pancake mounted, the E-P1 should be conveniently coat- or cargo-pocketable for most people (not pants pocketable). I wish it were 15% smaller yet (and told Olympus so), but with the 17mm, it's definitely in a different class of portability than even the smallest current DSLR. With the 14–42mm zoom, I think most people would say it's not conveniently coat-pocketable anymore, but it's still a fair bit more compact than a DSLR.

Made of stainless steel and aluminum, it feels polished and solid—what marketing folks like to call "premium"—but not Leica-premium. That's not a criticism—it's very well finished for a camera that sells for under $1,000. Though it uses a somewhat unusual dual thumb wheel control layout, rather than a thumb and forefinger wheel system, I think the E-P1's layout won't be meaningfully slower for manual operation (at least for me). I'll have to use it more, but my initial impression of the camera's magnified manual focus assist was also largely favorable—I think I could focus manually quite quickly in most conditions. I didn't check all the things I'd need to check to be able to tell whether some form of zone focusing is possible, so can't comment on that important issue.

I'm actually quite happy that the E-P1 includes reasonably sophisticated video capabilities. (Though I am no more young and was weaned on an old Minolta SRT-101, I'm a big fan of still/video convergence and have it in mind to write an essay explaining why, if I ever find the motivation.) Olympus showed me a fair bit of E-P1 video footage, which was very sharp, but I won't be able to know much else of significance until I can shoot my own footage under carefully controlled conditions.

Responsiveness is something that takes some reasonable amount of use to really suss out, but I'm initially optimistic. Olympus made a special effort to get shutter lag down into the range of a typical DSLR (i.e. under 100 milliseconds). Praise be to the camera gods, you can shoot raw images at three frames per second for ten shots before buffer stall. All very encouraging. My time with the camera was too limited to say anything concrete about the autofocus system, except that it was not obviously slow in any way. More testing definitely needed there.

On a matter of much smaller note, I thought the silver and black version was handsome. The beige version does not look better in person, in your humble reporter's completely subjective opinion.

My biggest concern with this camera is how well I will get along with using mainly the LCD for framing. (The optional OVF is perfectly okay, but I doubt I'd use it much—hinders pocketability.) I've been framing with LCDs for years, of course, with many point-and-shoots, but my expectations of those cameras were very much lower. Time will tell.

I could do a lot of the things I like to do with a camera with this little guy and just the 17mm. I'd be equally happy with a 14mm pancake. If Olympus (or Panasonic) also makes a thin normal or short tele—anything in the 25-to-35mm range—that opens to ƒ/2, they've made me happy. Maybe I'm just too easy. They revealed nothing of future plans, so I'm just singing in the wind here. I see this camera as an adjunct to my DSLR(s), not a replacement. For some things, the DSLR(s) will always be better.

So is the E-P1 my "small but serious" ideal, or Mike's DMD? Well, I don't know yet (and wouldn't begin to dare to speak for Mike), but I'm much more optimistic about it than about anything else I've seen before. Olympus has told me they'll try to get me a review sample as soon as circumstances allow. Can't wait.

Eamon

Send this post to a friend

Featured [partial] Comment by David Dyer-Bennet: "...We do not all agree. In particular, some think the lack of viewfinder is a killer, and the rest of us think the lack of viewfinder is fine. So which of us should Olympus listen to? (Yeah, I know, 'my' faction, for each value of 'my'....)"