Slickdeals.net

Slickdeals.net (http://slickdeals.net/forums/index.php)
-   Hot Deals (http://slickdeals.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Olympus PEN E-P1 12.3 MP Camera $190 @ Best Buy (http://slickdeals.net/f/4155278-olympus-pen-e-p1-12-3-mp-camera-190-best-buy)

geeezer 04-01-2012 08:22 PM

Olympus PEN E-P1 12.3 MP Camera $190 @ Best Buy
 
Olympus PEN E-P1 12.3 MP Camera [bestbuy.com]

Product Features
•From our expanded online assortment; not available in all Best Buy stores
•12.3-megapixel Live MOS image sensor
Captures high-resolution images. Supersonic Wave Filter eliminates dust and debris for clear image results.
•Micro four thirds lens mount
For use with M.Zuiko interchangeable lenses (not included).
•3" HyperCrystal LCD monitor
With 230K pixels, 176° viewing angle and brightness and color balance controls for clear images.
•HD movie mode
Records high-definition (1280 x 720) or standard-definition (640 x 480) movie clips at 30 fps with audio.
•TruePic V image processor
Delivers excellent dynamic range, accurate color fidelity and reduced noise in low-light conditions.
•Imager shift image stabilizer
Reduces image blur caused by camera shake and vibration. ISO up to 6400 for improved image capture in low-light conditions.
•19 automatic scene modes
Including night scenes, portraits and landscapes for capturing optimal shots in a variety of situations.
•3 fps (frames per second)
For continuous shooting of up to approximately 10 RAW frames.
•Face detection technology
Isolates subjects in-frame and optimizes conditions to take high-quality pictures of friends and family.
•Auto, custom and preset white balance controls
Help achieve natural tones under different lighting conditions. White balance bracketing allows up to 3 frames in 2, 4 and 6 steps.
•Art filters
Include pop art, soft focus, pale and light color, light tone, grainy film and pin hole for creative photographs.
•Imager contrast detection AF system
Features single and continuous autofocus and manual focus, as well as S-AF + MF options. Eleven-area multiple AF ensures crisp images.
•Direct-print support
With a compatible PictBridge-enabled printer to print photos without a PC. Also supports DPOF print reservation.

iconian 04-01-2012 08:33 PM

looks to be body only.

tennisplayer888 04-01-2012 08:35 PM

Body only? If it comes with a lens, I will take it...

travfar 04-01-2012 08:48 PM

Not worthy. I have this camera. It's good for nostalgia sake and not much for anything else. It's effectively usuable for MF lenses. The interface is sorely lacking. For $200, you can do better today.

derek533 04-01-2012 08:53 PM

From Product Description:
Quote:

Micro four thirds lens mount
For use with M.Zuiko interchangeable lenses (not included).
Body only.

johnnash 04-01-2012 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tennisplayer123 (Post 48940304)
Body only? If it comes with a lens, I will take it...

It says in the specs that lenses are not included.

yjhuoh 04-01-2012 08:54 PM

i had one of these a while ago (right around the time the e-p2 came out). my biggest complaints were the slow AF and the low resolution display.

cgigate 04-01-2012 08:57 PM

don't know if the Olympus E serial DSLR lenses are compatible with this camera.
I have couple lenes for E420 DSLR

kyotuosa 04-01-2012 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 48940462)
Not worthy. I have this camera. It's good for nostalgia sake and not much for anything else. It's effectively usuable for MF lenses. The interface is sorely lacking. For $200, you can do better today.

For $200 u can do better?

Quote:

Originally Posted by cgigate (Post 48940594)
don't know if the Olympus E serial DSLR lenses are compatible with this camera.
I have couple all kinds lenes for E420 DSLR

need to buy MF-2

drmaxxmd 04-01-2012 09:33 PM

No flash

travfar 04-01-2012 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48941298)
For $200 u can do better?

Ah. yeah. That's how much I paid for my GF2 new. I also picked up another NEX 3 for $250 new 3 weeks ago.

You can get a new GF3 body for that on ebay for around that. A much better camera. A E-P1 would be tempting at $100, not at $200.

dj-3lusion 04-01-2012 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 48940462)
Not worthy. I have this camera. It's good for nostalgia sake and not much for anything else. It's effectively usuable for MF lenses. The interface is sorely lacking. For $200, you can do better today.

glad i never wasted any money on any deal or any olympus pen deal :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by drmaxxmd (Post 48941418)
No flash

no HDMI

SD_William 04-01-2012 10:29 PM

:omg:too bad, No flash, No HDMI.

shnitz 04-02-2012 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48941298)
For $200 u can do better?

Well, there's no lens in this kit, or can it magically take photos without one. What's the cheapest lens you can buy for this camera? The 17mm is a joke for optical performance and costs $300. The 14-42mm is a kit lens and ALSO costs $300. So, for $500 minimum, yes, I can do a ton better. The Olympus E-PM1 costs that little and is better. Anything from Panasonic, Samsung, Sony would work as well, if you're asking us to stay mirrorless.

As mentioned, this has no flash, no AF assist lamp, tiny screen, slow operation, no viewfinder port, etc. If you're doing purely landscape or macro, then this camera would MAYBE make sense, but only if you're willing to focus with that smaller screen, AND you already have lenses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48941298)
need to buy MF-2

Except that most of the lenses don't autofocus very well, or at all, with the adapter. Unless you're taking artistic pictures of chairs and trees, waiting a few seconds for autofocus to lock is not worth it.

semifast 04-03-2012 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 48942444)
Ah. yeah. That's how much I paid for my GF2 new. I also picked up another NEX 3 for $250 new 3 weeks ago.

You can get a new GF3 body for that on ebay for around that. A much better camera. A E-P1 would be tempting at $100, not at $200.

I have never seen a new GF3 body for $200 anywhere. And I've been looking for weeks, including on Ebay every day.

kyotuosa 04-03-2012 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48948414)
Well, there's no lens in this kit, or can it magically take photos without one. What's the cheapest lens you can buy for this camera? The 17mm is a joke for optical performance and costs $300. The 14-42mm is a kit lens and ALSO costs $300. So, for $500 minimum, yes, I can do a ton better. The Olympus E-PM1 costs that little and is better. Anything from Panasonic, Samsung, Sony would work as well, if you're asking us to stay mirrorless.

You gotta be kidding at putting 17mm & 14-42mm @ $300, the older version 14-42mm on ebay for $100 all day long and 17mm is about $200. How about the 20mm for $300?
It's really sad to see that you try to manipulate the price for the sake of an argument.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48948414)
Except that most of the lenses don't autofocus very well, or at all, with the adapter. Unless you're taking artistic pictures of chairs and trees, waiting a few seconds for autofocus to lock is not worth it.

You don't even know which lenses he have and I bet you haven't done any updates on the camera either.
All the newer 4/3 (14-54II, 9-18, 14-42) lens work quite nice and all the lenses work with the adapter for that fact.

Your information is outdated just like this E-P1 camera. But for $200 it's hard to beat.
btw, you continue to mention the types of pics you try to take is important, duh......Who buys Olympus to take Sports photography? Get a Canon
Olympus has the worst auto focus technology in the industry, they are famous for their beautiful JPEG color tone.

kyotuosa 04-03-2012 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 48942444)
Ah. yeah. That's how much I paid for my GF2 new. I also picked up another NEX 3 for $250 new 3 weeks ago.

You can get a new GF3 body for that on ebay for around that. A much better camera. A E-P1 would be tempting at $100, not at $200.

GF2 is a worse camera...it's worse than the GF1, pretty much a total failure out of the GF line.
I would give you that, GF3 for $250 new does sound like a good deal. Even though the GF series is really only comparable to the E-PL series. So crappier case newer technology to each their own.

travfar 04-03-2012 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48978674)
GF2 is a worse camera...it's worse than the GF1, pretty much a total failure out of the GF line.
I would give you that, GF3 for $250 new does sound like a good deal. Even though the GF series is really only comparable to the E-PL series. So crappier case newer technology to each their own.

The GF2 worse than a E-P1? Not even close. Saying that the GF2 is worse than the GF1 is like saying a BMW 328 is worse than a M3. The E-P1 is like a Ford Fiesta. Panasonic doesn't make a series comparable to the E-PL series. The GF series is the competition for the E-P series. The G series has no match for Olympus.

If you think a GF3 is a good deal at $250, then how can you think the GF2 is a bad deal at $200 since the GF3 to the GF2 is the GF2 to the GF1. The GF2 is a better camera than the GF3.

kyotuosa 04-03-2012 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 48979786)
The GF2 worse than a E-P1? Not even close. Saying that the GF2 is worse than the GF1 is like saying a BMW 328 is worse than a M3. The E-P1 is like a Ford Fiesta. Panasonic doesn't make a series comparable to the E-PL series. The GF series is the competition for the E-P series. The G series has no match for Olympus.

If you think a GF3 is a good deal at $250, then how can you think the GF2 is a bad deal at $200 since the GF3 to the GF2 is the GF2 to the GF1. The GF2 is a better camera than the GF3.

I guess your M3 is a knockoff one and the Ford Fiest is a monster hand made machine. :lol:
upgrade in touchscreen but worse IQ and probably worse usability. http://www.camcorderinfo.com/cont...Review.htm

EPL series is comparable to the GF....

Dreef1999 04-03-2012 09:38 AM

nerd fight!

Who cares, the ep1 is a good camera/value for the right person with the right circumstances. It feels good in the hand, it looks good, it uses the same sensor as all other 12mp 4/3 meaning you aren't giving up much in pure image quality.

It has piss poor auto-focus and hunts for focus in low light. It has no lens which considernig the kit lens alternative that isn't much of a loss.

shnitz 04-03-2012 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48977914)
You gotta be kidding at putting 17mm & 14-42mm @ $300, the older version 14-42mm on ebay for $100 all day long and 17mm is about $200. How about the 20mm for $300?
It's really sad to see that you try to manipulate the price for the sake of an argument.

I'm not manipulating price, those are the new prices of my local camera shop, and of all the authorized stores such as Adorama, B&H, Cameta, etc. If we're allowed to bring used into the equation, a used NEX-3 with associated lens will again beat all over this camera, which is better in every way. If you're comfortable buying used, the ballgame changes. Heck, even get a GF1, which is also $200 or less used, has the same sensor as the E-P1, but with a faster functioning camera, AF assist lamp, larger screen, built-in flash, AVCHD Lite movies, etc. Again, all without being poky slow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48977914)
You don't even know which lenses he have and I bet you haven't done any updates on the camera either.
All the newer 4/3 (14-54II, 9-18, 14-42) lens work quite nice and all the lenses work with the adapter for that fact.

Your information is outdated just like this E-P1 camera. But for $200 it's hard to beat.
btw, you continue to mention the types of pics you try to take is important, duh......Who buys Olympus to take Sports photography? Get a Canon
Olympus has the worst auto focus technology in the industry, they are famous for their beautiful JPEG color tone.

It doesn't matter which lenses he has. They're all pretty crippled on the camera. The ones you mention are about the only ones that work half-decently. The rest are pretty much manual focus. My info isn't outdated, I currently shoot a G2 and keep up to date with all 4/3 and m4/3 news. I'm not talking about sports photos. I'm talking about photos of your friends in your house, at a party, at a restaurant, etc.


Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48978674)
GF2 is a worse camera...it's worse than the GF1, pretty much a total failure out of the GF line.
I would give you that, GF3 for $250 new does sound like a good deal. Even though the GF series is really only comparable to the E-PL series. So crappier case newer technology to each their own.

No, the GF2 is not a worse camera. The GF2 is a different camera, and Panasonic made the mistake of giving it a model number that made it seem like it was a successor to the GF1, when in fact it's a lower line. The GF2 is basically a slimmed-down GF1, so that it is at least semi-pocketable. Besides on-body controls, it is identical in output to the GF1, with added video capability, touchscreen, and an iAuto mode for beginners.

kyotuosa 04-03-2012 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48980982)
I'm not manipulating price, those are the new prices of my local camera shop, and of all the authorized stores such as Adorama, B&H, Cameta, etc. If we're allowed to bring used into the equation, a used NEX-3 with associated lens will again beat all over this camera, which is better in every way. If you're comfortable buying used, the ballgame changes. Heck, even get a GF1, which is also $200 or less used, has the same sensor as the E-P1, but with a faster functioning camera, AF assist lamp, larger screen, built-in flash, AVCHD Lite movies, etc. Again, all without being poky slow.

http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-M-Z...566&sr=8-2

I am not talking about used.....ebay sell new 14-42mm for $100.
So you are manipulating price. 20mm for $340.

NEX-3 has better image quality due to the image sensor but the downside is also its image sensor. The lens will always be bigger than the m4/3

lets not argue about which camera is better, lets let the pro decide. food for thought...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicGF1/32



Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48980982)
It doesn't matter which lenses he has. They're all pretty crippled on the camera. The ones you mention are about the only ones that work half-decently. The rest are pretty much manual focus. My info isn't outdated, I currently shoot a G2 and keep up to date with all 4/3 and m4/3 news. I'm not talking about sports photos. I'm talking about photos of your friends in your house, at a party, at a restaurant, etc.

sorry i call bs on that. :omg:
just cause you can easily find photos under your condition in flickr.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/olym...711469577/

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48980982)
No, the GF2 is not a worse camera. The GF2 is a different camera, and Panasonic made the mistake of giving it a model number that made it seem like it was a successor to the GF1, when in fact it's a lower line.

"Not a worse camera" but a "lower model" Am I seeing a oxymoron here? :lmao:

in short - yah it's a worse camera.

travfar 04-03-2012 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48980388)
I guess your M3 is a knockoff one and the Ford Fiest is a monster hand made machine. :lol:
upgrade in touchscreen but worse IQ and probably worse usability. http://www.camcorderinfo.com/cont...Review.htm

EPL series is comparable to the GF....

Ah.. yeah to a GF1, not to a E-P1. You seem to be missing that point. I know that them both having a 1 in the name is probably confusing you. Just try to concentrate. How long have you had a E-P1 and a GF2?

The GF series is comparable to the EP series. Panasonic doesn't make anything as crappy as the EPL series.

kyotuosa 04-03-2012 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 48995880)
Ah.. yeah to a GF1, not to a E-P1. You seem to be missing that point. I know that them both having a 1 in the name is probably confusing you. Just try to concentrate. How long have you had a E-P1 and a GF2?

The GF series is comparable to the EP series. Panasonic doesn't make anything as crappy as the EPL series.

lol my bad, i was talking about E-P1 > GF-1 and of course >>>>>GF-2. So I have no idea why would you think GF-2 for $200 is a good deal.
in IQ anyway and build quality anyway, just let dpreview do the work so you can stop arguing.

Actually if GF-3 is worse than GF2...then it's not a good deal. So, it is actually comparable to the EPL line...lol u funny man.

shnitz 04-03-2012 09:57 PM

OK, last reply here, because you seem to be trolling:

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48995306)
http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-M-Z...566&sr=8-2

I am not talking about used.....ebay sell new 14-42mm for $100.
So you are manipulating price. 20mm for $340.

Your Amazon link lists Cameta as the seller. Now, if you go to the Cameta website:
http://www.cameta.com/index.cfm?f...pus%2017mm
$219 is either for a factory demo version or a no-box version, which means that they are selling you one that was pulled out of a camera kit. The NIB price is $299. So, your $420 kit, and that is for a lens with worse image quality than a kit zoom. 20mm is $340, which gives you a $540 kit. That's NEX-C3 price. And if you think the E-P1 compares favorably to a NEX-C3 . . . even against the 17mm, it's worth the $130 that you're paying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48995306)
NEX-3 has better image quality due to the image sensor but the downside is also its image sensor. The lens will always be bigger than the m4/3

lets not argue about which camera is better, lets let the pro decide. food for thought...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicGF1/32

The NEX-3 with lens is smaller than E-P1 with lens. Look, it compares favorably in size to the E-PL3:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3
Notice there where it says "smaller and thinner than either the Panasonic GF1 or Olympus E-PL1," despite somehow having some monstrous lens. And another comparison:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonynexc3

Your link to GF1 vs EP-1 only compares the JPEG quality favorably, due to choices that Olympus made in JPEG processing. Choose your own JPEG settings, or as DPReview admits, shoot RAW, and that difference disappears. Same sensor, exact same photos. Except for, oh wait, as DPReview tells you in the very first sentence, had you cared to read (the underlining and bolding is mine):
-"We've already looked at the feature and design differences between the GF1 and its only direct competitor, the Olympus E-P1, and it would seem to be fairly obvious that the Panasonic wins - by a narrow margin - on points, thanks to its better focusing, better screen and built-in flash."
-"Shooting raw removes any significant difference between the GF1 and the E-P1, and it's easy to get (almost) exactly the same color with little effort, and (with most raw converters) you'll get visibly more resolution out of the GF1 than the E-P1 too"
-"There are a couple of areas - arguably more important than color (which can at least be fixed) where the GF1 outperforms the E-P1. First is focus, which as well as being faster, is slightly more reliable on the GF1. The second is exposure, which the E-P1 - if left to its own devices - gets wrong more often than the Panasonic, especially when shooting 'difficult' subjects, with overexposure (and blown highlights) not unusual. Panasonic's metering is actually very reliable and tends to take a slightly more conservative approach, favoring underexposure where the E-P1 is more likely to overshoot (which is nigh on impossible to fix)."
-"The GF1's focus is faster and a touch more reliable than the E-P1 (which occasionally gets it completely wrong)."

Seriously, did you read your own link? They clearly state that the GF1 is better, except in colors, which are easily customizable, easily fixable, and anyway are a matter of opinion whether you prefer more saturated, contrasty images. Things like overexposure, missed focus, etc. cannot be fixed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48995306)
sorry i call bs on that. :omg:
just cause you can easily find photos under your condition in flickr.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/olym...711469577/

Again, your own link is your downfall. From there:
-"Focus using AF and manual tweaking works great. I use this a lot to work around the slow AF. Auto focus, then follow the subject with MF adjustments to get the shot. "
-"The AF is slower than my E-3, especially of the macro lens..... but you get use to the speed or lack of it."
-"The kit m4/3 14-42 AF much faster than the three 4/3 lens. It was also quieter."
-"The AF is a little slower and noisier than the kit m4/3 14-42."
-"The Autofocus is too slow and sometimes it just won't focus."
-"Occasionally, I whip out my 50-200mm. It's a terrible combination, size and performance, but sometimes I just don't want to bring my E-510 with as well. Focusing is kinda crappy, but I've still taken decent pics with it."
-"I use 4/3 lenses on the E-P2 and find them very usable, hwoever somewhat sluggish with their autofocus. Perhaps the lens most well suited to the E-P2 is the 50mm macro (due to size and weight), however the autofocus is pretty slow, although it does get there in the end."
-"They are slower, but other than that, they work just beautifully. "

Yeah, sounds just peachy. So, the only downfall of the lenses is "just" slow AF? "Hey man, what's the difference between my new laptop and your 8 year old laptop?" "Oh nothing, yours is just faster."

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48995306)
"Not a worse camera" but a "lower model" Am I seeing a oxymoron here? :lmao:

in short - yah it's a worse camera.

No, it's a lower model. For example, is a 13" laptop a worse laptop than a 15"? Is a 2-door version of a car lower than a 4-door model? No, it's absolutely personal choice, whether you prefer portability or size, especially when they have the same specs inside. The GF2 doesn't take worse photos than the GF1, they're exactly the same. In fact, the video mode is slightly improved in the GF2, and it has a stereo mic. The controls are moved to mainly a touchscreen instead of buttons, you know, like EVERY smartphone and tablet today? It's completely preferential whether you want a smaller touchscreen camera that will fit in a jacket pocket, or a larger button-driven camera that you have to wear over your shoulder. They use the same lenses, and the GF2 doesn't have worse anything than the GF1. So, it isn't "worse."


Overall, defend what you want, but any reviews of the E-P1 being slow, the screen being small, etc. are from when the camera came out 3 years ago. Considering digital cameras are advancing as fast as computers, all of the nitpicks with the E-P1 are doubly more true today. It was a good idea, but it really took until the E-P3 to fix the PEN flagship (which is priced at a hilarious $900). Funny enough, they really got it right with the low-end, as the E-PL2 and E-PM1 are exactly what the PEN cameras should be. Small, light, well set up, cheap enough for what you get. Basically, they're the Olympus versions of a GF2.

travfar 04-04-2012 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 48999146)
lol my bad, i was talking about E-P1 > GF-1 and of course >>>>>GF-2. So I have no idea why would you think GF-2 for $200 is a good deal.
in IQ anyway and build quality anyway, just let dpreview do the work so you can stop arguing.

Actually if GF-3 is worse than GF2...then it's not a good deal. So, it is actually comparable to the EPL line...lol u funny man.

Clearly you are still confused. There's no way the E-P1 is better than the GF-1. The used prices tell that story alone. New, the both sold for about the same. Now you can get 2 or 3 E-P1 for the price of a GF-1. The EPL line is no where near comparable to the GF line. It's a gift to say the EP is. Once you actually get a camera of your own instead of misinterpreting other people's reviews, you'll understand that.

kyotuosa 04-04-2012 06:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 49004828)
Clearly you are still confused. There's no way the E-P1 is better than the GF-1. The used prices tell that story alone. New, the both sold for about the same. Now you can get 2 or 3 E-P1 for the price of a GF-1. The EPL line is no where near comparable to the GF line. It's a gift to say the EP is. Once you actually get a camera of your own instead of misinterpreting other people's reviews, you'll understand that.

:lmao:

kyotuosa 04-04-2012 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48999866)
OK, last reply here, because you seem to be trolling:


Your Amazon link lists Cameta as the seller. Now, if you go to the Cameta website:
http://www.cameta.com/index.cfm?f...pus%2017mm
$219 is either for a factory demo version or a no-box version, which means that they are selling you one that was pulled out of a camera kit. The NIB price is $299. So, your $420 kit, and that is for a lens with worse image quality than a kit zoom. 20mm is $340, which gives you a $540 kit. That's NEX-C3 price. And if you think the E-P1 compares favorably to a NEX-C3 . . . even against the 17mm, it's worth the $130 that you're paying.

and your point? it's new......done

14-42 new + body for $300
17mm new + body for $400
20mm new + body for $540

Here u go, learn how to add.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48999866)
The NEX-3 with lens is smaller than E-P1 with lens. Look, it compares favorably in size to the E-PL3:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3
Notice there where it says "smaller and thinner than either the Panasonic GF1 or Olympus E-PL1," despite somehow having some monstrous lens. And another comparison:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonynexc3

I said it'll never have small lens like the m4/3 due to its image sensor size.
Where's Nex's pancake and X lens? wanna compare that? Wanna compare anything other than the kit?
This is just sad...

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48999866)
Your link to GF1 vs EP-1 only compares the JPEG quality favorably, due to choices that Olympus made in JPEG processing. Choose your own JPEG settings, or as DPReview admits, shoot RAW, and that difference disappears. Same sensor, exact same photos. Except for, oh wait, as DPReview tells you in the very first sentence, had you cared to read (the underlining and bolding is mine):
-"We've already looked at the feature and design differences between the GF1 and its only direct competitor, the Olympus E-P1, and it would seem to be fairly obvious that the Panasonic wins - by a narrow margin - on points, thanks to its better focusing, better screen and built-in flash."
-"Shooting raw removes any significant difference between the GF1 and the E-P1, and it's easy to get (almost) exactly the same color with little effort, and (with most raw converters) you'll get visibly more resolution out of the GF1 than the E-P1 too"
-"There are a couple of areas - arguably more important than color (which can at least be fixed) where the GF1 outperforms the E-P1. First is focus, which as well as being faster, is slightly more reliable on the GF1. The second is exposure, which the E-P1 - if left to its own devices - gets wrong more often than the Panasonic, especially when shooting 'difficult' subjects, with overexposure (and blown highlights) not unusual. Panasonic's metering is actually very reliable and tends to take a slightly more conservative approach, favoring underexposure where the E-P1 is more likely to overshoot (which is nigh on impossible to fix)."
-"The GF1's focus is faster and a touch more reliable than the E-P1 (which occasionally gets it completely wrong)."

Seriously, did you read your own link? They clearly state that the GF1 is better, except in colors, which are easily customizable, easily fixable, and anyway are a matter of opinion whether you prefer more saturated, contrasty images. Things like overexposure, missed focus, etc. cannot be fixed.

Oh wait...dynamic range, image quality lets ignore that and i believe i already said olympus has the worst auto-focus in the industry......lol
Again manipulating for the sake of argument, seen alot of that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48999866)
Again, your own link is your downfall. From there:
-"Focus using AF and manual tweaking works great. I use this a lot to work around the slow AF. Auto focus, then follow the subject with MF adjustments to get the shot. "
-"The AF is slower than my E-3, especially of the macro lens..... but you get use to the speed or lack of it."
-"The kit m4/3 14-42 AF much faster than the three 4/3 lens. It was also quieter."
-"The AF is a little slower and noisier than the kit m4/3 14-42."
-"The Autofocus is too slow and sometimes it just won't focus."
-"Occasionally, I whip out my 50-200mm. It's a terrible combination, size and performance, but sometimes I just don't want to bring my E-510 with as well. Focusing is kinda crappy, but I've still taken decent pics with it."
-"I use 4/3 lenses on the E-P2 and find them very usable, hwoever somewhat sluggish with their autofocus. Perhaps the lens most well suited to the E-P2 is the 50mm macro (due to size and weight), however the autofocus is pretty slow, although it does get there in the end."
-"They are slower, but other than that, they work just beautifully. "

Yeah, sounds just peachy. So, the only downfall of the lenses is "just" slow AF? "Hey man, what's the difference between my new laptop and your 8 year old laptop?" "Oh nothing, yours is just faster."

Lol never said it was not slower..but u were saying it can't even take restaurant, normal activity pics...lol
There's plenty of those types of pics in that thread...fail

exaggerating get u nowhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shnitz (Post 48999866)
No, it's a lower model. For example, is a 13" laptop a worse laptop than a 15"? Is a 2-door version of a car lower than a 4-door model? No, it's absolutely personal choice, whether you prefer portability or size, especially when they have the same specs inside. The GF2 doesn't take worse photos than the GF1, they're exactly the same. In fact, the video mode is slightly improved in the GF2, and it has a stereo mic. The controls are moved to mainly a touchscreen instead of buttons, you know, like EVERY smartphone and tablet today? It's completely preferential whether you want a smaller touchscreen camera that will fit in a jacket pocket, or a larger button-driven camera that you have to wear over your shoulder. They use the same lenses, and the GF2 doesn't have worse anything than the GF1. So, it isn't "worse."

So...BMW 328 is not worse than the M3....because it's a different class.
:wave:

bye have fun making up stuff supporting ur claim.

travfar 04-04-2012 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 49005364)
:lmao:

Better to live in ignorance and bliss. Dude, I respect your choice. The harsh light of reality is too much for some,

kyotuosa 04-04-2012 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 49010048)
Better to live in ignorance and bliss. Dude, I respect your choice. The harsh light of reality is too much for some,

yah man... price says it all.
So u r saying $400-$600 GF1 is a bargain.
ignorance is a bliss u got that right.....There are too many things that are wrong in ur post....:lmao: sums it up

NYISLES 04-04-2012 10:02 AM

Olympus cameras are CRAP! Get a Canon!

fyu 04-04-2012 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYISLES (Post 49011090)
Olympus cameras are CRAP! Get a Canon!

as soon as canon makes a mirrorless system

travfar 04-04-2012 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 49010132)
yah man... price says it all.
So u r saying $400-$600 GF1 is a bargain.
ignorance is a bliss u got that right.....There are too many things that are wrong in ur post....:lmao: sums it up

I'm saying that a GF1 is worth $400-$600 used while a E-P1 is worth less than $200 new for a reason. That reason is that the E-P1 pales in comparison to a GF1. You seem to be missing that point or misdirecting with misinformation. I guess that's all you can do at this point.

fyu 04-04-2012 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 49011198)
I'm saying that a GF1 is worth $400-$600 used while a E-P1 is worth less than $200 new for a reason. That reason is that the E-P1 pales in comparison to a GF1. You seem to be missing that point or misdirecting with misinformation. I guess that's all you can do at this point.

I think body only for GF1 used price is around $200-$250. any higher is optimistic at best.
feel free to prove me wrong and buy my used gf1 for $400 :)
I can even give a fellow sder a discount and do $300 shipped conus. lol

travfar 04-04-2012 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fyu (Post 49011250)
I think body only for GF1 used price is around $200-$250. any higher is optimistic at best.
feel free to prove me wrong and buy my used gf1 for $400 :)
I can even give a fellow sder a discount and do $300 shipped conus. lol

Not optimistic at all. Realistic.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/PANASONIC...27c56bd069
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Panasonic...4ab5bb0164
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Panasonic...3f15b8f211

kyotuosa 04-04-2012 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 49011198)
I'm saying that a GF1 is worth $400-$600 used while a E-P1 is worth less than $200 new for a reason. That reason is that the E-P1 pales in comparison to a GF1. You seem to be missing that point or misdirecting with misinformation. I guess that's all you can do at this point.

lol u seem to forget GF1 was bundle with 20mm that's why it sold extremely well so there aren't any new supplies.
Therefore, people who wanna buy the compact Panasonic would need to shell out more because all the successors are worse than the GF1.
While E-P2 & E-P3 beats E-P1 consistently and then there's the Olympus bankruptcy situation that has hurt the company's image. Since there are abundant of supplies for the E-P1 &2 the price will continue to drop.
Same goes to Panasonic L1 always has decent used value for awhile not because it's necessary a better camera. But it's a niche market and people are willing to pay more for it.

I guess you don't understand anything about marketing and had to explain that to you...
Again, u'r saying GF-1 is worth $400-600. You would pay that much for a camera that has worse camera body, ISO, dynamic, jpeg process, no image stabilizer but better AF, flash, and video.
Oh and E-P2 goes for like $240 used, GF1 beats that too? lol If you don't agree with it, don't bring it up. So again, another :lmao: post.

Just to be clear - Olympus has history of crappy AF ever since the Evolt series. People should know what they are getting...Really, u shouldn't even click into this thread if u care that much about Oly's AF.
It's always gonna be behind others....lol

As for flash - Really? You can't really do much with on board flash, half of lenses gonna block its range and it's not gonna be bright enough anyway. Get a separate flash thx.
I think people on this board said the same thing about Canon 5DII ...lol

Video - This should be the real deal breaker for most of the people if they truly care about HD video.

Photo - go for Olympus. So it turns out after all these crappy posts, I still haven't seen one can do better than $200 new.

fyu 04-04-2012 11:13 AM

i still can't believe it, but I can't complain. time to list this gf1 on ebay.

DarnelJenkins 04-04-2012 11:22 AM

The Ep-1 is a very nice camera. In terms of image quality on par most other m4/3. A firmware update made the auto focus more then acceptable. Maybe not slick but still a nice price for a very capable camera.

travfar 04-04-2012 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 49012422)
lol u seem to forget GF1 was bundle with 20mm that's why it sold extremely well so there aren't any new supplies.
Therefore, people who wanna buy the compact Panasonic would need to shell out more because all the successors are worse than the GF1.
While E-P2 & E-P3 beats E-P1 consistently and then there's the Olympus bankruptcy situation that has hurt the company's image. Since there are abundant of supplies for the E-P1 &2 the price will continue to drop.
Same goes to Panasonic L1 always has decent used value for awhile not because it's necessary a better camera. But it's a niche market and people are willing to pay more for it.

I guess you don't understand anything about marketing and had to explain that to you...
Again, u'r saying GF-1 is worth $400-600. You would pay that much for a camera that has worse camera body, ISO, dynamic, jpeg process, no image stabilizer but better AF, flash, and video.
Oh and E-P2 goes for like $240 used, GF1 beats that too? lol If you don't agree with it, don't bring it up. So again, another :lmao: post.

Just to be clear - Olympus has history of crappy AF ever since the Evolt series. People should know what they are getting...Really, u shouldn't even click into this thread if u care that much about Oly's AF.
It's always gonna be behind others....lol

As for flash - Really? You can't really do much with on board flash, half of lenses gonna block its range and it's not gonna be bright enough anyway. Get a separate flash thx.
I think people on this board said the same thing about Canon 5DII ...lol

Video - This should be the real deal breaker for most of the people if they truly care about HD video.

Photo - go for Olympus. So it turns out after all these crappy posts, I still haven't seen one can do better than $200 new.

I agree. Your posts are crappy. As for video, get the GF2 and be happy. Get the E-P1 and be sad. With the new hack, the GF2 is now the video god. Even better than the GH1.

I know why you laugh so much. Crazy people tend to giggle a lot. It also explains your rambling. I read your last post and there were a lot of words, zero content.

kyotuosa 04-04-2012 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 49025348)
I agree. Your posts are crappy. As for video, get the GF2 and be happy. Get the E-P1 and be sad. With the new hack, the GF2 is now the video god. Even better than the GH1.

I know why you laugh so much. Crazy people tend to giggle a lot. It also explains your rambling. I read your last post and there were a lot of words, zero content.

Can't argue with the mentally challenged owww~~ :hug:

travfar 04-04-2012 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyotuosa (Post 49025442)
Can't argue with the mentally challenged owww~~ :hug:

Yes, that's right. I can't argue with you. Finally, you realize that about yourself. That's the first step to getting better. You're on your way.

kyotuosa 04-04-2012 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by travfar (Post 49025676)
yes, that's right. I am retarded. Finally, you realize that.

fixed....


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:30 PM.


1999-2014