The Olympus E-1 is HUGE!!! (and saw other cameras)

Went to a camera store today, certainly puts things in perspective.
Whereas previously i had relied on online reviews, seeing and handling
the cameras for real helps a lot. Two things that I realized...

1. there's a huge difference between the digicams and the DSLRs (the
digicams, even the oly 5060 or the 8 megapixel cameras, were
absolutely tiny, impressively so - i had soemhow imagined the oly 5060
to be somewhat bulky, but handling it today, i couldn't believe how
tiny it was)
2. the DSLR are quite a handful; in fact, double that! (even the 300d
- rebel - ... compare that though, with the digicam that is fujifilm
5500/5100, which was soooo tiny i almost giggled!) What even amazed me
most was that the Olympus E-1, the 4/3s camera, supposedly designed to
be smaller and lighter, while indeed seems awesome in terms of build
quiality, is not actually smaller than the others (dslrs), and seemed
to me a little bigger than the Canon 300D or the 20D.

In conclusion; 1)DSLRs are really big. 2)quite a few digicams - p&s -
are unbelievably tiny! (and the review don't communicate that
adequately) 3)Olympus has the most outstanding build quality, it
handles like a true, awesome, uncompromising ideal. 4) it really makes
sense to go to a store to have a look at the cameras because online
reviews are not the whole story

And there you go, my rant for the day! (did i mention that i flirted
with the female bartender? yeah!)

 

They have a bar in the camera shop??

 

5. Just like camcorders, the picture quality is proportional to the camera
size - sensor size primarily.

 

Digital cameras are not huge because they have huge sensors.
Very few digital cameras have sensors that are even 24x36 mm,
some are as small as 3x4 mm or so.

Still - many digital cameras are larger than most 35 mm cameras.




/Roland

 

Makes me suspicious about the guy's conclusions :^).

But, hey - what a great new marketing tool. Get 'em drunk before the sales
pitch.

 

A Hooters style camera store?

 

Picture quality is strongly impacted by lens quality and even more by the
nut behind the viewfinder

 

.....or get 'em laid before the sales pitch.

 

What camera store might this be?

Gary Eickmeier

 

[also answering Gary Eickmeier]

The camera store was one of the cornershops nearest to a central
rotunda in a local mall. The rotunda had the escalators, and tens of
tables that were served by the usual cafe/bar/snacks outlets. I was
passing on my way to an appointment and didn't think much of it seeing
it from the outside, but once i stepped into it I was surprised to
find that they actually had a serious inventory on display. You name
it, they had the Canon and Nikon DSLRs, the Olympus E-1 (the guy said
they were waiting for the E300 too), many of the enthausiast digicams
(the 8mps from oly and nikon, the G6) and they even had a
comprehensive Leica section where they showcased the M6, the leica
slr, and quite a few other things. Needless to say, they also sold
disposables and developed them, and I would think that a lot of their
business came from that.

 

You're not going to tell us, are you?

Gary Eickmeier

 

The way I understand it, the DSLRs are larger in order to accommodate
standard lens mounts. The cameras are still smaller than film cameras, but
they are barely large enough to fit a lens onto them. They also have to have
room for the mirror mechanism and pentaprism. Also, it is easier to hold a
larger camera steady. The tiny little guys suffer from camera shake. A
larger camera also means it can hold a larger battery, so it can run
longer -- very important for professional and advanced amateur work.

Still, the DSLR is due for a complete re-design -- the creation of a camera
designed from the ground up to be digital. The current DSLR design forces
some compromises, especially in the availability of wide-angle lenses. The
new design would have a completely different lens mount, offering greater
protection of the sensor. It might not have a mirror, but if not then the
viewfinder LCD will have to be much better than those available today. It
might not look like an SLR at all.

The place for the tiny little guys is in your pocket. Never leave home
without it.

 

The Olympus E series (E1 and E300 aka E-Volt) were designed as digital
cameras 4/3 system from day one. So that pretty much kills that theory

 

Why, you wanna flirt with the bartender-at-the-rotunda?

I don't know what to say. I'm sure it had a sign and a name, i just didn't pay
attention. It's just a camera shop in a slightly-upscale modern mall; the kind
of mall that mixes shopping with entertainment, and has plenty of chairs and
sitting spaces in which some older folks peoplewatch and some younger ones
flirt.

It's in England if that helps.

 

Well, that gives us the country, at least.

Thanks,

Gary Eickmeier

 

You mean there's a real place somewhere that offers chairs for a
passerby to actually sit in and they don't charge money for sitting?
Get a rope!! They ought to put meters on those chairs and make them pay
for all that slouching around - discounts for seniors, of course. I
mean, what if someone fell out of a chair? Do they keep EMS on site
with a legal defence team at hand?








(just kidding)

 

On 15 Nov 2004 14:53:24 -0800, (Mike Henley)
wrote:

No, dSLRs are normal size while the others are tiny.
Everything is relative. I'm used to a Nikon F4S. Now there is some
heft! <)

Most give the camera specs. Size and weight, or a link where they can
be checked.

With that I agree.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com