Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

Olympus E-1 interactive preview turned review

Regulars to dpnow may recall this article started off as an interactive preview of the Olympus E-1 based on hands-on time with late pre-production cameras provided by Olympus Europe. Since then I have been provided with a production sample and I have now updated this article to full review status.

This is a slightly unusual article in that the subject of the review is not just a new camera but a new system and system philosphy, so there are several pages that cover more general aspects of the E-system.

This is an interactive feature, an idea we have borrowed from our friend, Vincent Oliver, over at Photo-i.

What is an interactive feature?
Instead of presenting you with a finished article, fait-accomplis, an interactive feature is updated over time. An interactive feature has its own dedicated forum for feedback and discussion. This means you can comment on the article and help influence its direction as it unfolds. The author of an interactive feature will also use the forum to announce the latest additions to the article.

The interactive nature of the article is not complete - I still welcome your feedback and this can sent directly using the feedback email links or publicly on the dedicated E-1 discussion forum. Where relevant, I will make additions and amendments to the article based on your feedback too.

I hope that you will enjoy the interactivity of this feature and find its information useful. You can reach all the pages published so far by using the drop down menu at the top of the page or the direct page number links below.

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum



What is the Four Thirds standard?

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

Below is quite a detailed description of the Four Thirds standard. Where necessary, I have tried to relate this new standard to existing standards in order to illustrate the logic behind certain aspects of the standard, but I don't offer any personal opinions or judgments on the standard on this page. My own views on the advantages and disadvantages of the Four Thirds standard can be found on a other pages in this feature.

If you are particularly interested in the Olympus E-1 and the E-System, it's well worth reading the following to fully comprehend what Olympus is trying to achieve.

The Olympus E-1 is the first camera to be developed to the Four Thirds standard. This standard is owned and was developed by Olympus but it is an open standard. The whole point of the standard is to promote a comprehensive camera system featuring cameras, lenses and accessories designed and manufactured by a number of different, competing, companies.



To date, the only two names that have been publicly associated with the Four Thirds standard, apart from Olympus themselves, are Kodak and Fujifilm. Kodak's semiconductor division developed and manufactured the 5 megapixel CCD sensor chip that the E-1 exclusively uses. Fujifilm has acknowledged its interest in the Four Thirds standard but has remained silent regarding any plans, or otherwise, to turn that interest into commercial reality.

Why the Four Thirds standard is significant
Since before World War II, 35mm film cameras have been the mainstay of the mid-high end consumer and professional photographer requiring easily portable equipment. The vast majority of 35mm film cameras shoot pictures in the 3:2 aspect ratio, 24x36mm, full frame format.

The problem of the 35mm legacy
With 35mm film SLR cameras firmly established, it's only natural to want and expect to be able to use lenses developed for these cameras. But when Olympus formulated the new standard, they identified fundamental problems with the 35mm legacy:

Sensor size and cost: Although imagers of the same size as a 35mm film frame exist, they are extremely expensive. This is because semiconductor manufacturing is much more cost-effective at producing tiny chips than large ones and a chip the size of a 35mm full frame is elephantine in the chip world. The cost of chips rises exponentially as the chip size increases.

Sensor size and lens compromise: Although some digital SLRs based on 35mm systems are available with full-frame imagers, to make digital SLRs more affordable, all current manufacturers have produced cameras fitted with image sensors that are smaller than a 35mm full frame. This lets you retain the use of existing 35mm system lenses but as only the central portion of the lens view is captured, the angle of view is significantly reduced.

At the cheaper end of the DSLR market the cropping factor can mean the useable angle of view is equivalent to that of a full frame camera fitted with a lens of 50% or even 60% greater focal length. This isn't too bad if you want to extend the effective reach of a telephoto lens; a 200mm lens would become equivalent to a 300 or 320mm lens, but at the wide angle end, a seriously useful lens like a 24mm wide angle lens becomes a very ordinary 36-38mm equivalent.

The solution to these problems was to create a new family of lenses specifically for a smaller imager size. This keeps the imager chip cost relatively low and avoids the issue of cropped wide angle view. A bonus is that lenses designed specifically for a smaller imager are more compact than their 35mm system equivalents. Both Nikon and Pentax have decided to produce lenses to match smaller imagers.

Sensor characteristics compared to film
Film has a relatively smooth surface and is able to receive light at a relatively acute angle without negative, pardon the pun, consequences. However, there is a school of thought that says the angle at which image-forming light rays fall onto the surface of an imager chip is critical and needs to be as close to 90 degrees to the focal plane as possible. This is because the light sensitive photodiodes live at the bottom of pits in the surface of the chip. As the angle of incidence of a light ray increases, less of the light is captured by the photodiode. Lenses designed for film cameras are allowed the luxury of acute angles.

Olympus says research by optical expert Professor Anders Uschold confirms that the use of typical lenses designed for 35mm film SLRs in digital SLR bodies demonstrates measurable loss of brightness and detail capture into the corners of the frame, also called corner shading, just as the angle of incidence theory predicts. He also demonstrates through his research that lenses designed specifically for electronic imagers in digital SLRS, using near parallel ray projection onto the focal plane by using near-telecentric lens design, are less prone to corner shading.

Defining the Four Thirds standard
The Four Thirds standard is founded on fundamental optical, mechanical and digital communication specifications.

Optical
Optically, the Four Thirds standard is based on the Vidicon picture tube size standard for a 4/3rd inch imaging device, hence the name. In the E-1's case the image sensor is a Kodak CCD. Roughly speaking, the imager frame diagonal is two thirds the diagonal of the mount it sits on. Using the Vidicon convention, the mount is 4/3rd inches or 1 1/3rd inches, or 33.8mm in diameter and this makes the diagonal of the imager itself 22.3 mm. This means the diagonal, corner to corner, distance of the imager in a Four Thirds system camera is fixed precisely at 22.3mm.

Myth number one exploded:
The name Four Thirds has nothing to do with the aspect ratio of the image frame, which just happens to be 4:3 with the E-1 and a lot of other digital cameras. Four Thirds system cameras are permitted to have any aspect ratio as long as the diagonal measurement of the frame is 22.3mm. The useable image circle projected from the rear of a Four Thirds system lens will cover any imager as long as its diagonal is 22.3mm. Future Four Thirds cameras could have square imagers or low and wide imagers, including the same aspect ratio as 35mm full frame cameras at 3:2. The imager type, CCD, CMOS, Bayer filtered or Foveon X3 type, is immaterial. That choice is down to the camera manufacturer.

The 22.3mm diagonal of a Four Thirds standard image is approximately half that of a full frame 35mm diagonal (43.27mm). This means a Four Thirds system lens of focal length, say, 14mm, will have approximately the same angle of view as a 28mm lens on a 35mm camera.

It ought to be noted that as the aspect ratio of a 3:2 frame on a 35mm camera (and most other digital SLRs) is lower and wider than a 4:3 frame on the E-1 (and many other digital cameras), while the diagonal angle of view is comparable, the lateral and vertical coverage will be different, with lateral coverage slightly greater for the same angle of view with a 3:2 aspect ratio camera and slightly higher vertical coverage for a 4:3 aspect ratio camera.

Mechanical

The Four thirds standard defines the lens mount size, three claw bayonet design, fit and distance from the focal plane. Nine electrical contacts lie inside the bayonet perimeter. The diameter of the lens mount aperture is roughly double the diagonal of the imager, or 50mm. This provides adequate room for large rear elements that are often required in the design of near-telecentric lenses. The distance from the mount to the focal plane is also relatively large, making more space for components like the reflex mirror, filters and the focal plane shutter in front of the imager at the focal plane.

Digital communication
A communications protocol is defined by the Four Thirds standard to enable information to be exchanged between the camera body, lenses and flash units. Each of these system components has its own user-upgradeable firmware and a microprocessor. Besides aperture and focus settings in use, lenses present a predetermined profile of optical characteristics specifc to that lens to the camera. The camera can use this information to compensate for these characteristics, like corner shading or optical distortions. The same lens profile information can also be saved with image files for optimal off-camera post processing on a PC.

An open standard
The Four Thirds standard is available to any company that wishes to produce lenses, camera bodies or flash units compatible with the standard.

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





Identified advantages
Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

If you have skipped the rather long and detailed Four Thirds standard description page, I really do recommend you read through it to get the best out of this page where I explore the advanatages and disadvantages of both the standard and the first interpretation of that standard, the Olympus E-1.

Size and weight
Four Thirds lenses are half the focal length of equivalent angle of view 35mm system lenses. That, in theory, should mean they will be half the size and weight of 35mm lenses. The E-System Zuiko Digital lenses produced by Olympus so far are, indeed, smaller and lighter, to varying degrees, than 35mm equivalent lenses, especially the Zuiko Digital 300mm f/2.8 telephoto, which is equivalent to a 600mm f/2.8 lens.

As far as I'm aware, there is no 600mm f/2.8 35mm system lens on the market. The nearest lens to the specification of the Zuiko Digital 300mm f/2.8 we could find is Nikon's AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8. This weighs 4.8kg, has a maximum diameter of 160mm and is 352mm long. By comparison, the Zuiko Digital 300mm f/2.8 weighs 3.3kg, is 129mm wide and 281mm long.

The Nikon lens will offer the same 600mm equivalent focal length angle of view as the Zuiko Digital when used on a Nikon Digital SLR calculated using a 50% equivalence factor relating to the Nikon's imager size. Canon's EF 400 mm f/2.8L IS USM is even wider and heavier than the Nikon lens, though it does include optical image stabilisation. The 60% equivalence factor of the slightly smaller Canon imager means a 400mm lens becomes equivalent to a 640mm optic.

Nikon's AF-S Nikkor 600mm telephoto isn't as bright as the Digital Zuiko. Its maximum aperture is f/4, but at 455mm long, it's 62% longer and at 5.9kg, it's 79% heavier. Canon's equivalent lens, also f/4 max, complete with image stabiliser, is slightly lighter and shorter than the Nikkor, but still massively larger and heavier than the Zuiko Digital.

Another point worth noting is that the Canon and Nikon telephotos described above are significantly more (30-60%) expensive than the £5,300 (inc.VAT) Zuiko Digital.

With shorter focal length lenses weight and size is less critical, but the Zuiko Digital lenses still have a useful advantage. The Zuiko Digital 50-200mm f/2.8-f/3.5 zoom (100-400mm equivalent) , is 87x157mm and weighs 1070g with its tripod adapter. The nearest specification lens we could find is the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 HSM zoom. It weighs 2600g and is 268mm long. It's also nearly £1,000 more expensive than the Zuiko Digital, which is priced £779, (inc.VAT).

It should be noted, however, that the Sigma has a fixed maximum aperture throughout its zoom range, though its zooming range is considerably narrower.

The standard zoom in the current Zuiko Digital range is the 14-54mm f/2.8-f/3.5 (28-108mm equivalent). It is priced £496 (inc.VAT) on its own but is discounted when bundled with an E-1 body. It weighs 435g and is 87.5mm long and 73.5mm wide. Sigma sells a remarkably cheap (£160) 28-105mm f/2.8-f/4 Aspherical zoom and it's only 79.5mm long, 77mm wide and weighs 405g.

Canon doesn't have a lens in this range with a f/2.8 max aperture, but its slower f/3.5-f/4 28-105mm USM lens is about the same size as the Zuiko Digital and about a third lighter. Nikon, too, doesn't have a lens in the 28-108mm range at f/2.8, but its £1300 28-70mm f/2.8 AF-S optic weighs nearly a kilo and is 88.5mm wide and 121.5mm long. This lens has the advantage of a fixed maximum aperture throughout the zoom range.

But what about an equivalent 28-108mm zoom range for small imager Canon and Nikon DSLR? For Canons, you'd be looking for a 17.5-67.5mm zoom range and with Nikon, an 18.7-72mm zoom range. At the time of writing, as far as I can see, there is no comparable lens of the angle of view range anywhere near the Zuiko Digital 15-54.There are some slightly wider but shorter zooms of the same brightness, but all are significantly larger and heavier and most are more expensive and there are some slower examples of the same shorter range, but these are also large and expensive.

No lens compromise
As already identified in the section above concerning the issue of using smaller imaging sensors with 35mm system lenses, the usefulness of wide angle lenses is badly compromised and the availability of 'standard' wide angle zoom lenses with a generous zoom range is virtually non-existent.

But it doesn't stop there. Olympus applies near-telecentric design to its optics to maintain the projected angle of image forming rays into the imager as close to 90 degrees to the focal plane as possible. This minimises corner shading and loss in detail recorded by the pitted photo-diodes in the surface of the imager when the angle of incidence becomes more acute. Olympus points out acute angles are typical of lenses designed for film use.

To enable telecentric lens design the lens mount diameter needs to be relatively large compared to the sensor size in order to accommodate over-size rear lens elements. Olympus says the mount diameter should be double the diagonal of the imager. Ideally, for a full frame 35mm SLR, Olympus says the lens mount should be 100mm wide (2x50mm). Canon's lens mount is 54mm in diameter and Nikon's, which dates back to the 1960s, is only 48mm. The Four Thirds lens mount is about 50mm in diameter, about double the diagonal measurement of the film frame, just as they say is required..

With Nikon and Canon DSLR imagers in the region of 28mm in diameter, if you subscribe to the Olympus theory, you need a lens mount in the region of 56mm wide. Canon is probably OK for its smaller sensor DSLRs but way off the 100mm required for its full frame DSLR and any future full frame DSLR, it should be noted.

The problem for Nikon looks more serious. Even with its small sensor, the lens mount is, according to the Olympus theory, too small. Indeed, the Four Thirds mount is larger than the Nikon one. This pointedly reveals why Nikon appears to have no ambitions to produce its own full frame DSLR based on the current 35mm system. But then again, it ought to be remembered hat Kodak went ahead and did exactly that with its Nikon-based full-frame DCS 14n Pro.

For the time being I'll be keeping an open mind about the telecentric design requirement for electronic image sensors. It sounds convincing on paper, but I'm yet to be convinced of its importance in real life. While the Kodak DCS-14n Pro has been criticised for a lot of things, I haven't seen much criticism to do with corner shading and lost detail towards the corners of the frame. The full frame Canon EOS-1Ds is hardly criticised for anything, apart from its price and certainly not for image quality. However, nobody has yet done back to back exhaustive comparisons with a Four Thirds camera and lens to prove, or otherwise, the telecentric theory, apart from Professor Anders Uschold, who is contracted to Olympus.

Smart lenses
Four Thirds compatible lenses are smart. They have their own microprocessor, upgradeable firmware and the Olympus E-System lenses, at least, all use fly by wire focussing in manual mode, letting you choose which direction you prefer to turn the focus ring towards infinity. You can also manually fine-adjust critical focus using the focus ring even when the camera is set to AF mode, which is really neat.

Not to be confused by digital sensor corner shading, there is the issue of lens vignetting or light fall-off towards the extreme of the image circle. Olympus says lens profiles will tell the camera body about the degree of vignetting, as well as other lens imperfections, like barrel or pincushion distortion, that might require digital correction. Lens distortions are not yet corrected inside the E-1, but Olympus says future cameras will be able to do this. The profile data can be saved with images and be used to dictate post processing of images on a PC, though as far as I can see this will be limited to RAW files only. Even teleconverters and, I'm told, extension tubes, have their own profiles.

User-upgradeable firmware
The potential limits of the new Four Thirds standard and the E-System won't be neared for some time. Continued development will, says Olympus, mean that there will be regular firmware updates for camera bodies and also lenses. New E-System flash units, like the FL-50, are also firmware upgradeable and all upgrades can be undertaken by the users.

Cost
It has already been demonstrated that when compared to premium brand lenses of the same build and, presumably, optical quality, E-System lenses are competitively priced. This is partly because E-System lenses are physically smaller than their equivalent 35mm system counterparts. Olympus may also be banking on the fact that as it's starting out as the exclusive supplier of lenses for the E-System, it can sell a fair number of them, helping it leverage economies of scale. A more cynical view would be that the lenses simply have to be competitive in price for the E-System to succeed.

From the camera body point of view, the most important single component is the electronic imager. The Four Thirds standard has been fixed around an imager of 22.3mm in diagonal measurement. This makes it, in E-1 4:3 aspect ratio form, around 238 sq. mm in area. Its APS sized rivals have an area of around 386 sq.mm, or 60% greater area. In theory, the E-1's CCD imager should be usefully cheaper to make, per unit than APS-sized CCDs, though scale of manufacturing quantity does have an impact on the calculation.

Canon's CMOS imager is clever because it is manufactured using the same process as CPU and memory chips and is significantly cheaper than CCD manufacturing. But Canon's sensor is still around 55% larger than the E-1's CCD, so some of Canon's cost advantage is probably negated.

Olympus has chosen to position its first E-System camera in the mid-low range professional and high-end prosumer sector, so it's not designed or built to be sold as a high volume consumer market camera, like Canon's EOS-300D, for example. But if Olympus chose to enter that market and they say that they will, sooner or later, they should be able to be competitive in terms of cost because of the compact size of the Four Thirds imager.

A lot of people are banking on Canon scaling its affordable CMOS imager to the full frame. Having spoken to various experts in the semiconductor industry, my feeling is that even with CMOS, a full frame sensor will never be affordable in the mass-market sense.

People marvel at the Canon EOS-300D selling today for around £750, discounted, with a lens. Maybe that will fall to £500 in real terms within a couple of years, but even with fantastic improvements in CMOS manufacturing efficiency, I estimate an EOS-300D specification camera with a full frame imager would still cost in the region of £2,000 in the same time period.

In summary
The Four Thirds standard is well thought out and has avoided many of the compromises imposed on other cameras that are based on legacy 35mm systems. Lenses and cameras can be light, compact and relatively good value. In theory, image quality should be optimal for digital shooting. The headache of compromised wide angle lens performance is avoided. The smart communications protocol between lenses, bodies and flash units has tremendous potential.

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





Identified disadvantages

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

After the rather promising analysis of the advantages inherent in the Four Thirds system and the Olympus E-1/E-System, we now turn our attention to facets that are of concern to me and others.

It ought to be emphasises that the issues raised below are legitimate questions and statements but they are not necessarily my opinion. I'm playing 'devil's advocate' here. My responses to each point are, however, my own opinion based on my industry knowledge, experience and discussions with Olympus engineers.

As new issues and, indeed, responses, come to light, this page will be expanded.

New and untried
Both the Olympus E-1 and the Four Thirds system are new and un-tried. Initial buyers will be the guinea-pigs that will have to endure the bugs and other teething problems inevitable in a brand new system.

Ian's response: I have to admit that I have a personal distrust of first-generation products, like new car models, for example. But with the E-1, I think the hardware is well-sorted, though I'd expect a steady series of firmware updates from Olympus to start with.

Lack of third party backing
Olympus is on its own. How can you trust in the future of a new system if nobody else is participating in it? OK, so Fujifilm has issued a press release expressing interest in the Four Thirds standard, but it has remained silent since. Kodak made the E-1's sensor chip, but it has invested in the full frame DCS-14n Pro DSLR – it won't be dumping that in favour of Four Thirds. And where are the independent lens makers?

Ian's response: This is certainly a very serious point. Without another major brand adopting the Four Thirds standard, the whole point of that standard in being an open one will have failed. And without that commitment from other manufacturers, it's difficult to see an independent lens maker taking the plunge too. At the time of writing there was no news at all of any firm commitment from a third party, even Fujifilm, which has expressed a corporate interest in Four Thirds, to produce compatible products.

Olympus simply refer press questions on this subject to the PR representatives of the third party companies concerned. So, yes, if you prefer the cup is always half full philosophy, the standard is good enough to attract independents in the future, but if you are naturally cautious, there is certainly no guarantee. On a more optimistic note, even if the standard failed, that doesn't mean your E-1 would conk-out in sympathy, so the risk in buying into the E-1 isn't total.

Is Olympus committed?
History says that when the going gets tough, it abandons it customers. Witness the OM SLR system. Once AF was an obvious requirement, instead of adapting its system like Nikon, Pentax and Canon did, it quietly all but abandoned the SLR market and its loyal customers.

Ian's response: The abandoning of the OM user-base is something Olympus must live with for a long time. I, personally, was a victim too and had to write-off my OM system in the early 90s in favour of a Canon EOS system. Olympus will say that the OM system was in its prime for a good couple of decades, but its decision not to embrace the AF era was frustrating to say the least. But all the signs are that the E-System is designed to avoid such situations in the future. Future-proofing is what the E-System is all about. Canon FD system users had a similar headache when the Canon EOS system was introduced. And it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that today's existing legacy 35mm SLR systems may have to adapt more radically to the digital era.

The Four Thirds standard is based on a sensor that's too small The physical size of the Four Thirds sensor is too small. It should have been based on the same size 'APS' sensor as its rivals. Such a small sensor will be limited in terms of future resolution and noise characteristics. It also further limits the creative freedom to shoot with limited depth of field.

Ian's answer: I don’t buy this. Kodak says the Full Frame Transfer sensor CCD technology it has developed will scale to 11 megapixels in the Four Thirds format. Compared to APS sensor DSLRs, the pixel pitch is in the same ball park and vertical resolution is very close to existing APS sensor DSLRs at 6 megapixels. Olympus is promising fast lenses and these should allow shallow depth of field shooting. Noise is a hot topic, but even with a first-generation, pre-production, sample, noise up to ISO 400 is very well controlled.

Concerns about noise
Independent reviewers are already finding that E-1 sample images have too much noise at moderate to high ISOs compared to rival DSLRs.

Ian's answer: As already mentioned above, noise is a very hot topic. Sure, if you need to shoot noise-free at 1600 ISO, the E-1 won't be for you. But in the real world, ISO 400 is the true test and at that speed the E-1 passes the test. Considering the other aspects the E-1 has to offer, I do think the noise issue is a bit of an over-blown distraction. Nevertheless, the reality is also that that noise characteristics will continue to be a hot talking point and Olympus certainly needs to address the issue.

5 megapixels isn't enough
The Olympus E-1 should have been equipped with at least 6 megapixels to match its rivals and maybe more to establish some superiority.

Ian's answer: Like the noise issue, I think sheer numbers of pixels is a distraction from more important image quality considerations, like dynamic range and the resolving power of the lenses and the imager. What’s the point of a super-high resolution imager if the lenses can't exploit it? For general purpose use, I feel 5 megapixels on the E-1 is adequate, not generous, but adequate. Time will eventually tell, as real photographers get their hands on productions cameras, whether or not that hunch is on the mark.

The E-1 isn't quite a pro camera and it's not quite a consumer camera The Olympus E-1 seems like a nice enough item of hardware, with its moisture seals, cast alloy construction, no built-in flash compromise and built in dust cleaner solution for the sensor – all important issues for professional users, but at 3 frames per second continuous shooting for only 12 frames, only 5 megapixels, it's neither a press photographer's camera nor a studio photographer's camera – it falls between two stools.

Ian's answer: I think this is a fair criticism. Olympus is adamant the E-1 is a pro camera. I can't see Olympus persuading a dedicated Canon or Nikon press or sports photographer switching to an E-1 based system. It's certainly not in the same league as a Canon EOS-1Ds in the studio, either. But I think we do forget that many pro photographers don't fall into these glamorous categories and for them an E-1 could be a great camera for their needs. Indeed, I know pros who have switched to Canon EOS-10Ds successfully and the 10D is certainly not as 'pro-spec' as the E-1.

Where is the consumer model?
If Olympus wants the E-System to flourish, it needs to play the numbers game. That's what kept the Olympus OM system alive in the 1980s, when the OM-10 was introduced. The E-1 is too expensive for the mass market. Olympus should have introduced an OM-10 consumer-spec equivalent at the same time as the E-1.

Ian's answer: I certainly agree with this point of view, up to a point. Olympus had to make a start somewhere. They have clearly chosen to establish the E-System as a high-quality base from which to grow. Higher specification and more expensive members of the E-System are in the pipeline, say Olympus, but just as importantly, so are consumer-specification and so cheaper models too. The all-important seasonal Christmas market has been missed for a consume E-model this year, but I'd say it would be pretty important to deliver such an offering before the end of next year.

It's too little, too late
Olympus is about three years too late. Canon, Nikon and Fujifilm have got the market sewn up.

Ian's answer: I don't agree with this point. Digital cameras have a shorter typical working life than film cameras so the market is renewing itself all the time. Also, digital SLR sales have been tiny compared to traditional film SLR sales to date. However, digital SLR sales are ramping up. Canon says it is now producing 70,000 EOS-300Ds a month, for example. But there is a big challenge for DSLRS: they need to prove their worth over high-end fixed-lens digital cameras like the Nikon CoolPix 5700, Fujifilm S7000, Minolta Dimage A1 and of course the amazing 8 megapixel Sony DSC-F828. Personally, I think DSLRs have a secure future, but it won't be easy for any of the players out there, least of all, Olympus.

Check this page in future for new issues raised. Go to the Olympus E-1 interactive forum (see link below) now to add your own point of view - you might see it answered here too!

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

A look at the E-1 body

On this page you can examine the E-1 body from a number of different angles and you can see the E-1 compared side by side with a Pentax *ist D and a Canon EOS-10D. On a separate page you can see the E-1 in a number of views next an E-10/20.

(above)
1. Dioptre correction adjuster
2. Status LCD back-light switch
3. Rear settings thumbwheel
4. ISO setting mode button
5. EV compensation mode button
6. Auto exposure lock control
7. Autofocus point selection control
8. Storage card data transfer activity lamp
9. Image playback control
10. Menu button
11. Compact flash compartment door release
12. Four-way menu navigation cluster
13. Menu selection 'OK' button
14. Image delete button
15. Image protect button
16. Image information mode control
17. Removable transparent protective plastic cover for LCD view-screen
18. Eyepiece shutter switch


(above)
1. Flash mode control
2. Image size/format control
3. LCD status display
4. Shutter release button
5. Top plate mode selection dial
6. Exposure mode dial lock release button
7. Exposure mode dial
8. Exposure bracket mode control
9. Remote control, self timer and single/continuous shooting mode selector
10. Metering pattern mode selector
11. Focal plane indicator


(above)
1. Ambient white balance light sensor
2. White balance mode selector button
3. White balance calibration button
4. Self-timer indicator lamp
5. Depth of field preview button
6. Low light autofocus assist lamp (red)


The E-1 battery looks like it might fit in a variety of Canon cameras. But despite its similar dimensions and shape, the electrical contacts are incompatible. Like all the flaps and doors, moisture sealing is evident.


This view shows the E-1's over-size (in relation to the sensor dimensions) lens mount. Notice how small the mirror is in relation to the lens mount . There are no mechanical linkages. All communication between the camera and lens is via nine electronic contacts.

A single Type I or II compact flash card is accommodated, including microdrives. The moisture-sealed card bay door is not plastic but a separate metal alloy casting.

Olympus has preserved much of the radical design thinking incorporated in to the original Olympus E-10, including the large right-hand sculpted grip and practically shoulder-less left side (as viewed from behind the camera). Many of the E-10 and E-20 external controls can be found in much the same positions on the E-1's casing.

On the opposite side to the grip you will find the lens release button (just in front of the small bar code-like Four Thirds System logo). Underneath that there is the three-position (continuous, single shot, manual focus) focus mode selector switch. Behind that is a hefty sealed flap for an external power connector and above is the door that hides the data and video-out ports. The two circular knobs are dust covers for the cabled remote system and external flash PC socket, respectively.

Olympus knew it had to produce an above average standard zoom lens for the E-1 and the 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 performs impeccably, providing the very useful equivalent zoom range of 28-108mm with a respectable maximum aperture, though unlike top-flight alternatives, aperture settings are not constant throughout the zoom range. The lens has a decent close focus performance as well, even without the optional extension tube set that is available.

Three bayonet lugs and nine electronic contacts - that's about all there is to speak of at the back of the 15-54 zoom. Note the relatively small rear element considering this is an optic with an f/2.8 maximum aperture.

More weather-sealed access. Above is the data and video port collection, including both USB 2.0 Hi-Speed as well as IEE1394 Firewire. Below is the proprietary DC external power connector.

The E-1's base plate holds no surprises.

A sturdy plastic four-petal lens hood is supplied with the 14-54mm zoom.


E-1, 10D and *ist D side by side
Here, as requested by John, I've compared some views of the the E-1, Canon EOS-10D and the Pentax *ist D - from left to right in that order:

Above are the three cameras fitted with various lenses supplied. The Olympus E-1 has a 14-54 (28-108 equiv) f/2.8-3.5 zoom, the Canon EOS-10D has a 50mm (80mm equiv) f/1.4 standard lens and the Pentax *ist D is fitted with a 24-90 (36-135 equiv) f/3.5-4.5 zoom.

Here are the three cameras sans lenses. The E-1 has a marginally taller body than the EOS-10D, but the 10D is easily the widest. The *ist D is just, well, small! Despite having a substantially smaller sensor than either the 10D or *ist D the E-1 has a lens mount almost as large as the *ist D's.

Viewed from the grip side, the E-1 has the most sculpted hand grip of all, helped by the height of the body. Both the 10D and *ist-D fit less naturally into the grip of my right hand.

From the opposite side, you can see that the E-1 has the deepest body and it looks like the 10D is slightly slimmer than the otherwise diminutive *ist D.

This top view shows the relatively massive pentaprism/pop-up flash bulge on top of the 10D. The E-1's highly sculpted grip is also shown well here. Notice the relatively small status LCD of the *ist D.

Moving slightly back to reveal more of the rear of the camera. You can see the *ist D has an anti-reflection coating on its LCD viewscreen, while the EOS-10D doesn't. The E-1 has a removable plastic viewscreen protector, though the view through it when attached is acceptable.

And here is a full-on rear view, again accentuating the tall but narrow nature of the E-1 and its highly sculpted grip.

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum
A look at E-1 system menus
In general, the Olympus E-1 has a comprehensive and fast reacting menu system - unlike those of its E-10/20 predecessors.

Most key settings can be accessed and altered directly using dedicated exterior case buttons and dials, without the need for ploughing through menus. You can use the menu system to set custom functions and to re-program exterior buttons with other functions.

Here is a selection of menu screens and a look at image reviewing modes:






















Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





Noise and the E-1
Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum
Here are some image crops to illustrate noise characteristics of the E-1, exploring the ISO characteristcis of the E-1 from minmum ISO setting (100) to maximum (3200).

We also examine ISO 800 crops, one with in-camera noise filtering and one without (I'll leave you to decide whcih is which, for now!).

Above is the original scene, un-cropped. The conditions were overcast. All shots taken using pre-production E-1 firmware. Lens used, 14-54 zoom at widest zoom setting.

Here are approximately 225 pixel-wide crops, un-processed and saved in optimised JPEG format with Photoshop compression setting on 10 (minimum JPEG compressin is 12).

The samples start at ISO 100 at the top, going downwards in sequence: 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 (ISO boost mode), 3200 (ISO boost mode).

Below are two larger 1:1 crops, at 800 ISO, saved again at Photoshop level 10 compression optimised JPEG format.


So which has the noise filter on and which doesn't (top/bottom)?. Tell us which you think on the E-1 p/review forum! (see discussion forum link below)

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





General image quality
Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

Viewfinder accuracy

The red area above indicates what is seen through the viewfinder of the E-1. The E-1 claims to have a 100% coverage viewfinder and in our hands it gets very close. The black strip at the top is wasted space, as is the white strips on the side. A few millimetres at the base of the frame have escaped. Viewed through the eyepiece we calculate you actually see 96.2% of what is actually captured, or about 4.7 megapixels instead of a perfect 4.9 megapixels.


To get things into perspective, above is the Pentax *ist-D viewfinder performance. It only shows 85.2% of what is captured by the sensor, giving a practical resolution of 5.1 megapixels instead of the sensor's full capacity of 6.0 megapixels.

Close focus

Using the 14-54 at its closest focus point and at full tele, coverage is as small as 5.8cm across the frame. The lens has no specific 'macro' mode, so this is a good performance.


You can get physically closer in wide angle mode, but there is nothing to gain as lateral coverage is no smaller than 13cm.

Colour

Above is the Gretag Macbeth DC colour chart for the E-1. Colours are fairly neutral, as are greys and whites. In practice the E-1 delivers a fairly faithful colour performance in normal daylight conditions.


For comparision purposes, here is the same colour test chart shot using a Pentax *ist D. The Pentax chart has come out slightly lighter, but apart from a slightly deeper blue in the Olympus result the two charts are fairly comparable.

Fluorescent colour
I have decided to shoot a simple day-glo fluorescent colour test swatch as fluorescent tones are very difficult to reproduced. From left to right the original colours are fluorescent red, green, orange and yellow.

The E-1 has produced a rather flat result.


By comparison, the Pentax result is quite vibrant and true to the original.

Barrell/pincushion distortion

When shooting straight-sided buildings I was very impressed with barrel distortion control of the 14-54mm zoom at full wide angle view before I got the test chart out (above). Vertical bowing is a more sensitive issue and, indeed, the lens does well in this respect but the visible horizontal bowing was a surprise in the test chart.

With the E-1' s lens. everything straightens out nicely at the mid-zoom setting.

There is hardly any evidence of pincushion distortion you might expect at the telephoto end of the zoom range.

Below, again, for comparison, are the test results for the 24-90mm zoom that came with our review sample Pentax *ist D:

The Pentax 24-90 shows moderate barrel distortion at its fullest wide angle setting (24mm, or equivalent to 36mm when taking the 50% digital sensor multiplier into consideration).


A touch of inward bowing, the tell-tale characteristic of pincushion distortion, can just be seen at the mid-zoom setting of the Pentax 24-90 zoom.


The pincushion effect of the Pentax lens does worsen at the full tele zoom setting, but only marginally.

Resolution
Widest aperture setting
At their respective widest apertures for the zoom setting at which the test target was photographed, there is little to choose between the Pentax and the Olympus results, but the key point here is that the E-1 is just over two thirds of a stop brighter.


(above)Olympus E-1, 14-54mm zoom, f/3.1, 27mm focal length (54mm equivalent)


(above)Pentax *ist D, 24-909mm zoom, f/4, 35mm focal length (53mm equivalent)

Mid aperture setting
At f/8, both lenses show resolution gains, but there is still not much in it overall.

Olympus E-1, f/8


Pentax *ist D, f/8

Small aperture setting
At f/22 the Olympus maintains its performance while the Pentax is shows a notable deterioration in sharpness.


Olympus E-1, f/22


Pentax *ist D, f/22

High contrast colour fringeing
A consistent test for determining resistance to fringeing is under development. However, in conditions where other cameras have shown copious degrees of purple ghosting around high contrast boundaries, the E-1 and it 14-54 zoom has been impressively free of it in all but the most extreme situations. To put this in perspective, the old E-10/20 models from Olympus were quite prone to fringeing, but not the E-1.

Image noise
Image noise issues are tackled on a separate page - click here.

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





Questions for Olympus
Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

These are questions that have been posed by you the reader. They have been forwarded for clarification by Olympus.

Answered questions are then transferred to the 'Questions answered' (next) page.

Q. Does the Olympus Studio Software enable 16-bit TIFF files to be exported from RAW originals for convenient processing in the favoured image application of one's choice?

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





Questions successfully answered
Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

This page contains the answers to questions that have been put to Olympus and successfully answered:
Q. Will the Olympus E-1 operate with lenses that are not equipped with the Four Thirds lens to body communications system?
A. Yes, for compatibility with microscopes, bellows units and other similar devices.

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





Sample images for download
Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

Original E-1 images available for download
A Zip archive of seven original Olympus E-1 images I took at the beginning of September at an Olympus press seminar in Mallorca is now available for download.

This archive is 23MB. To download this file using a typical 56Kb dial-up connection would take at least one hour. Using a 512Kb connection, this file will take approximately 6-7 minutes.

Please don't download this file unless you absolutely have to.

Copyright
Please don't download this file without noting that it remains the property of Ian Burley and Digital Photography Now, as does its copyright. There is no automatic permission given to allow the publication or reproduction of the images contained in the file. If you wish to seek this permission, please email [email protected].

The images contained in the file were produced by a pre-production Olympus E-1 and lenses and initially I warned that theyt may not be fully representative of the final shipping product. However, after several weeks use of a production E-1 I feel they are adequately representative.

Notes on each image file:
Image parameters reproduced here are also available via examination of the standard EXIF format data recorded in each file.

Image file: P9010061.JPG
ISO: 100
Lens: 50mm f/2.0 Digital Zuiko Macro
Focal length (35mm equiv): 50mm (100mm)
Aperture: f/5.6
Shutter speed: 1/1000th
Meter setting: Program ESP (evaluative)
Lighting conditions: Bright, direct, midday sunlight
Notes: This was as close as I could get to the watch using the 50mm f/2.0
Digital Zuiko Macro. The watch case is 36mm wide, not including winding knob. The watch face is a cream beige off-white.

Image file: P9010114.JPG
ISO: 100
Lens: 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 Digital Zuiko Zoom
Focal length (35mm equiv): 54mm (108mm)
Aperture: f/5.0
Shutter speed: 1/250th
Meter setting: Program ESP (evaluative)
Lighting conditions: Bright early afternoon sunlight
Notes: This was a slightly 'grabbed' shot from a distance with the 14-54 zoom on full tele. This usefully shows extreme highlights and shadows in the same image. I understand the girl in the white dress was probably celebrating her Catholic confirmation. The scene was just outside the cathedral in the Old Town of Palma, Mallorca.

Image file: P9010128.JPG
ISO: 100
Lens: 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 Digital Zuiko Zoom
Focal length (35mm equiv): 14mm (28mm)
Aperture: f/5.0
Shutter speed: 1/125th
Meter setting: Program ESP (evaluative)
Lighting conditions: Bright early afternoon sunlight
Notes: Again, the periphery of the scene and some of the background are in shadow, while there are highlights to test the dynamic range and the meter.

Image file: P9010171.JPG
ISO: 400
Lens: 300mm f/2.8 Digital Zuiko Telephoto
Focal length (35mm equiv): 300mm (600mm)
Aperture: f/3.5
Shutter speed: 1/320th
Meter setting: Program ESP (evaluative)
Lighting conditions: Mid afternoon, overcast, semi-shade.
Notes: This was taken using the 300mm f/2.8 Digital Zuiko Telephoto on a monopod. The sun had gone out but the ambient light was still quite good.

Image file: P9010178.JPG
ISO: 400
Lens: 300mm f/2.8 Digital Zuiko Telephoto
Focal length (35mm equiv): 300mm (600mm)
Aperture: f/4
Shutter speed: 1/400th
Meter setting: Program ESP (evaluative)
Lighting conditions: Mid afternoon, overcast.
Notes: Again using the 300mm f/2.8 Digital Zuiko Telephoto on a monopod.

Image file: P9010254.JPG
ISO: 100
Lens: 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 Digital Zuiko Zoom
Focal length (35mm equiv): 54mm (108mm)
Aperture: f/7.1
Shutter speed: 1/320th
Meter setting: Program ESP (evaluative)
Lighting conditions: Mid afternoon, sun slightly obscured by broken cloud.
Notes: I deliberately took this to see if any chromatic aberration could be coaxed out along the sharp eddges of the leaves against the sky. The sky has been bleached slightly as the meter has concentrated on the foliage. A wider shot shows the sky to be more blue.

Image file: P9010264.JPG
ISO: 800
Lens: 300mm f/2.8 Digital Zuiko Telephoto, with EC14 tele-converter
Focal length (35mm equiv): 425mm (850mm)
Aperture: f/5.6
Shutter speed: 1/400th
Meter setting: Program ESP (evaluative)
Lighting conditions: Mid afternoon, overcast.
Notes: Back to the monopod-equipped 300mm f/2.8 Digital Zuiko Telephoto, but this time with the EC14 teleconverter (approx 1.42x conversion).

Image sharpness was set to normal (which is equivalent to low on some cameras) and white balance was set to automatic. None of these images were subject to the E-1's noise filter mode. All images were photographed using SHQ JPEG mode (least compression JPEG mode, highest resolution).

By downloading the archive you agree to the copyright and ownership restrictions detailed at the top of this page. To download the Zip file, Windows users right-click and 'save target' or just click here.

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum





Comparing the E-1 with its predecessors
Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum
Here is a set of pictures showing, in this case an Olympus E-10, side by side with an E-1 fitted with the 'standard' Zuiko Digital 14-54 lens. An E-20 is externally identical apart from gold lettering instead of white.

You don't get any prizes for noticing that the older E-10/20 body design has been used as the base for the E-1. Here you can see exactly how close:


The E-1, fitted with the 14-54 (3.8x) lens is bigger than the E-10/20. Although this f/2.8 lens is less bright than the f/2.0 4x fixed lens on the E-10/20, it has to serve a sensor with four times as much area to illuminate.


The left side flank (viewed from behind) of the E-1 is the most altered. However, many of the controls and port covers are where an E-10/20 user would expect to find them.


This view shows the family heritage even more starkly. The E-1 adds more controls but most of the E-10/20 controls remain where they were.


The E-1 is taller than the E-10/20, even without the latter's built-in pop-up flash.


Most noticeable in this view are the E-1's removable viewscreen protector and the extra sculpting of the right hand side of the grip to the right.


Again the prominence of the top side of the grip shows and it does make a positive difference to the feel of the camera in the hand.


The radical side view of the E-10/20 versus the more conventional look of the E-1. Note how far the E-10/20's viewfinder eyepiece protrudes compared to the E-1.


This is perhaps the most conventional aspect of the E-1 and it does have that Olympus OM-2SP look about it.


Just visible in this picture is the relatively smooth surface finish of the E-1 compared to the knobbly relief of the E-10/20 finish.


Is the omission of the built in flash a mistake? The E-10/20 have a very useful and relatively powerful flash unint and it only appears to take up space when it's deployed.


Although the 14-54 lens of the E-1 is chunkier, it is also shorter than the E-10/20 fixed lens.


From underneath differences in the two grips are even more apparent. The battery cover hides a lithium ion battery in the E-1 and a conventional disposable battery compartment in the E-10/20.


Finally, back to the back and let's not forget that very handy, if annoyingly poor display quality, tilting LCD viewscreen of the E-10/20. Like all conventional mirror reflex digital SLRs, the E-1 can't show a live view through its screen.

Are you a E10 or E-20 user? Got any comments on the E-1 compared to your camera. Join in the discussion at the E-1 interactive review forum - click here.





Conclusions and ratings
Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum

For detailed Olympus E-1 specifications, click here.

The Olympus E-1 is marketed as a professional camera. Its specification and price place it at the entry level for the pro market. Olympus probably aims to sell just as many E-1's to advanced amateurs as well as to professionals and the conclusions below will reflect this assumption.

dpnow review ratings explained
We know that you, the reader, will value certain aspects of a product more than some other individuals. This is why we instead of numbers or percentages, which can be interpreted very differently by different reviewers and readers, our rating system presents values on or above a median. It's a bit like ABC exam scores, where A or A+ is the best, C is the minimum pass and F is, well, failure.

Design and construction

The Olympus E-1 is a landmark camera. It's the first 'proper' digital SLR to be designed from the ground up without any compromise imposed on it from a donor film SLR system. Its design incorporates a number of features that are a first for digital SLRs and in the main it works well. Construction is excellent, with a high quality of finish and obvious use of very sturdy materials that befit a pro-spec camera.

Innovation

The E-1 has innovations by the truck load. It's the first interchangeable lens DSLR with fly by wire focussing and you can choose which direction you prefer the focus motion to operate. The E-1's lenses communicate digitally with the camera body - a feature that is yet to be fully exploited, but there is serious potential there. E-system lenses are designed specifically for the digital domain, itself not a new innovation, but combined with the lens mount size and sensor size, it's the first completely digital package for this kind of camera. And then there are neat features like the ultrasonic sensor cleaner - I'd actually forgotten about that until now and as I write this I realise I have not yet experienced any evidence of dust specks on my images. Despite removing and re-fitting the lens on many occasions.

Specification

There is no doubting that the E-1 is a high specification camera. It has a 12 frame, 3 frames per second continuous shooting capability, even with simultaneous JPEG and RAW recording. Auto white balance bracketing is included too. FAT 32 support for memory cards larger than 2GB is provided, as are USB 2.0 Hi-Speed and Firewire data ports. On the negative side, the 5MP sensor resolution is basic for a camera of this class.

Handling and ease of use

The Olympus E-1 fits the right hand like a glove and like no other digital SLR I have yet tried. The camera may look like its E-10 and E-20 predecessors but practically every handling and user interface feature has been improved - some radically. The E-1 powers up quickly, has very good shot to shot speed and a partially full image buffer doesn't lock you out. E-1 system menus and navigation are quick and relatively easy. That said, I think Canon still has the edge when it comes to sheer excellence in camera menu systems and while the E-1's system is certainly very good, there is still some room for improvement. The E-1's viewfinder is bright and clear and lends itself well to critical focus and framing demands. Responsiveness is good, too. There is no detectable shutter lag in general shooting and the camera's shutter and mirror return action delivers a very reassuring, but vibration damped sound. The optional portrait mode grip makes already excellent handling better still and the added power of the grip battery speeds up the AF performance according to Olympus. The E-1's standard lithium ion battery performs very well and you can expect several days typical light use without running out of juice, or at least a day of fairly intensive shooting.

Autofocus

Olympus' decision not to implement illuminated AF points in the viewfinder is divisive - some aren't at all bothered, while others miss this feature sorely. It would probably have been better to include illuminated points with an option to switch the feature off. The inclusion of only three AF points, instead of the more common 5, 7 or more found in some of the E-1's rivals is also curious. Olympus simply says it leaves the viewfinder less cluttered. In terms of AF performance, the E-1 and 14-54mm lens works very well in normal conditions. It’s quiet and reasonably fast, though there was a tendency to reach focus in two stages - a fast snap to near focus lock and then a second find adjustment to actual lock. The continuous AF option is not comparable to the super high speed systems in much more expensive cameras aimed at professional sports photographers. I don't have much to complain about in low light shooting. There can be instances of hunting in low light but no cameras are immune to this. Strictly in terms of benchmarking, the E-1 failed our horizontal AF target test. I find that a lot of AF cameras do fail this test, but it was disappointing that the E-1 did - after all the Pentax *ist D passed with flying colours. In practice, however, this issue didn't show up in general.

Exposure system

There were no surprises concerning the E-1's exposure system. It is devoid of any gimmicky 'scene' modes, which some will welcome. The dial simply offers fully programmed mode, aperture priority auto, shutter priority auto and manual mode. Spot and 'ESP' evaluative matrix meter options are provided and I found no glaring deficiencies.

Image quality

All the tests show that the E-1 and its 14-54 zoom make a strong combination and despite a deficit in terms of sheer pixels compared to some of its rivals image quality is definitely comparable to best in the class. The 14-54 zoom exhibits low distortion and excellent sharpness, though the E-1's default in-camera sharpening setting is so conservative that post-processing may be required to show this. There is also very little evidence of high contrast chromatic aberration or purple fringeing. Colour, contrast and dynamic range are all very good. The E-1 produces the best 5MP images I've seen and in some situations can out-gun results from rival 6MP DSLRs. If there is a weakness in the E-1's image quality, it is high ISO noise. Up to and including ISO 400, image noise is not a concern. But at ISO 800 and up, noise starts to make its presence felt. Use of the E-1's in-camera noise filter setting can help, but the processing of each image does slow the camera down a little. Alternatively, more powerful post-processing noise filtering of RAW images is offered by the optional Olympus Studio software.

Software

Olympus supplies its Viewer digital light box utility as standard and this is able to display E-1 RAW file images on your PC. You also get a time-limited sample copy of the enhanced version of Viewer, called Studio. This adds RAW image processing and conversion functions. In my view, Studio should replace Viewer as the standard, no extra cost, software bundle for the E-1.

Value for money

In the UK official Olympus recommended price for the E-1 plus 14-54mm lens 'kit' is £1549 excluding VAT. The body only is priced £1199 +VAT. If you look at the E-1's sum of its parts, the price Olympus has set for the E-1 is reasonable. The problem is that, unlike its rivals, buyers must make a serious leap of faith to commit to an E-1 as it has no track record and the E-system is still in its early stage of development. There is, as yet, not third party system support for the E-1, which must be a concern for the future. Olympus has heavily discounted the excellent 14-54 zoom when bought with the E-1 as a kit, but that lens is not a budget model in the first place. Add to that recent price pressure caused by older rival models being heavily discounted and the E-1 starts to look expensive.

The full system pricing, as of August 2003 can be perused here.

The bottom line
Viewed as a photographic tool, the Olympus E-1 is a camera that is great to use and produces very pleasing images. Its legacy-free design is both fascinating and refreshing. Lenses are, once again, designed for the exact purpose they are meant for. The Olympus E-1 is certainly a historic camera: it marks Olympus' return to the SLR system market and ushers in a new era of SLR system designed exclusively for the digital age.

Is the Olympus E-1 perfect? Of course not. Issues that Olympus can certainly improve on include certain aspects of AF performance and image noise above ISO 400. Olympus needs to grow the E-system to make more potential buyers confident, but that's no secret. More importantly, I feel, is the involvement of third party players. It's all very well that Fujifilm and Kodak are listed as E-system partners, but if the system is to survive and flourish it needs independent lens manufacturers as well as camera marques to ship compatible product. Words alone are not enough.

I would have no hesitation in recommending an Olympus E-1 with the 14-54mm zoom on merit alone, unless a lot of high ISO shooting was on the agenda. The E-1 is a very remarkable camera and the E-system deserves a fair crack at success.

Check the dedicated Olympus E-1 interactive forum


This camera was tested according to the DIWA Awards product evaluation standard