inconsequence

Olympus has announced a newer (and more expensive) successor to its first micro four-thirds camera, the E-P1. From my point of view, the key features of the new camera are electronic viewfinder support (hotshoe-mounted — very similar to the GF-1), continuous-tracking autofocus (will this make it suitable for photographing toddlers? according to dcresource the E-P1 and E-P2′s focusing have both improved since initial release — thanks to firmware upgrades — but both remain lackluster compared to the GF-1), and the option to shoot video with full manual control. Aside from these two new features, the new camera is black — sad, because I think the new model is markedly less attractive — and has a few irrelevant gimmicks.

Along with the new camera, Olympus will be offering a 9-18mm (18-36mm) wideangle zoom, and a 14-150mm (28-300mm equivalent) superzoom, making Micro Four-Thirds a pretty complete ecology (and quite likely offering superior optics at a given price-point than Canon or Nikon). This will leave Nikon and Canon sandwiched between Panasonic and Olympus (offering superior compact cameras) and Leica (offering superior high-end cameras). If Panasonic and Olympus can only get some camera bodies out at a reasonable price, they could do some serious damage.

While these may seem pretty minor changes, assuming the continuous-tracking autofocus doesn’t suck, it significantly changes things relative to the GF-1, since the E-P2 has almost everything (except a built-in flash, which I don’t care about) that the GF-1 offers along with image stabilization and better controls. In the end, however, this is really still a first generation product. I imagine the true second generation micro four-thirds cameras will be truly compelling.

The E-P2′s SRP of $1100 (which includes the new EVF) is steep, which remains a deterrent.

Meanwhile…

It’s interesting to see Canon backing off its relentless pursuit of the megapixel, with the 1D Mkiv and G-10 both signaling that maybe it’s time to concentrate on pixel quality. (What’s with the zany crop factor of the Mkiv though? I’d have thought we’re past that kind of odd compromise.) It’s also interesting to see Nikon persisting with 720p-only cameras — how hard would it be to offer 1080p @24fps?

It seems to me that Canon right now has two very compelling cameras (the 7D and 5D mkii) while Nikon’s range is starting to look dated. (The 7D’s hefty introductory price tag does manage to make the 300s seem reasonably priced though.) Nikon’s cameras are all great still cameras, but their half-assed video support seems more like an attempt to tick a checkbox than offer serious functionality.

Right now, I want Panasonic, Olympus, and Leica to give Nikon and Canon more serious competition, because it seems that they’re all just milking their customers — especially early adopters. (It’s amazing that Leica’s cameras seem reasonably priced compared to Nikon’s. Indeed, the Leica X1 looks pretty competitive with the E-P1/E-P2/GF-1 coupled with the (~$500) 20mm f1.7. If you don’t need autofocus, full frame Nikon prices look ridiculous.)

There’s a very thorough review of the new (and as yet unobtainable) Panasonic GH-1 just posted on dpreview.com. Edit: and Cameralabs has just posted their review as well (link is to the verdict — it’s worth noting that after carefully managing to give all the current generation of contenders — D5000, XTi, E620 — identical scores of 88%, the GH-1 scores 89%).

Here's an unretouched 100% crop from an ISO 3200 sample shot. (If you're not into the minutiae of digital photography and for some reason you're still reading this blog entry, a digital photo taken at this sensitivity until the current generation of cameras looked like absolute garbage.)

You can find more (still) samples here.

Here’s the bad news:

• It’s still listed at $1499 (which is not unreasonable given it comes bundled with a very good 14-140mm lens, but still)
• Its electronic viewfinder is apparently a bit unpleasant to use in low light conditions (not sure how low — need to play with one)
• Its continuous shooting rate is 3.3 fps (roughly the same as a Canon 500D/XTi, but not as good at the Nikon 5000D). Edit: Camerlabs notes that the EVF stops updating between shots during continuous shooting, which is actually a pretty crippling deficiency.
• The built-in Flash is kind of lame (oh right, I don’t use flash)

Aside from that, the news is all good. Shockingly good. Notably:

• Better detail (JPEG or RAW) than the Canon XTi/500D. (Brief pause while you adjust your lower jaw.)
• Equal or even slightly better low light performance (JPEG or RAW) than the Nikon D5000. (Damn, it’s just not going to heal, is it?) Edit: Cameralabs low light tests (which are both more consistent and realistic than dpreviews) favor the Nikon D90 (which performs identically to the D5000) slightly over the GH-1.
• Much better at avoiding “jello” effect than any other DSLR (apparently its circuitry is optimized for rapidly grabbing frames from the sensor)
• 1080p at 24fps, 720p at 60fps (AVCHD) or 30fps (MJPEG). 720p footage described in the review as “broadcast quality” and favorably compared to footage from semipro camcorders.
• Viewfinder size is roughly similar to Canon 1DS Mk III (i.e. full-frame pro DSLR)
• Generally excellent UI, handling, menus, customization, physical dials
• No “video mode” — dedicated video button is always available

So, we’re here. Panasonic appears to simply be better at doing image processing than Nikon or Canon (how else to explain equal or better image quality from a smaller sensor?), and they’ve produced a camera that is simply a better still camera than Nikon or Canon can (currently) make (bear in mind that the image quality on the D5000 and 500D/XTi is, in essence, as good as anything Canon or Nikon can offer, modulo sensor size) and is actually a credible video camera (versus a half-assed video camera with sub-par frame rate, jello effect, and manual focus while shooting). All in a camera that’s smaller than any DSLR on the market and has the most flexible lens mount there is*.

So, now all we need to do is wait for the GH-1 to actually appear in stores and the price to drop. (Then there’s the Pentax K-7 just around the corner, which is quite small and weather sealed.)

Note: * micro four-thirds cameras can currently use any Panasonic, Olympus, or Leica four-thirds or micro four-thirds lens, and Olympus OM lenses; there’s no reason not to expect adapters for Nikon, Canon, and Pentax mounts in the near future thanks to the micro four-thirds design. Of course you will probably need to focus manually with everything except the micro four-thirds lenses.

At last, a small camera that takes DSLR quality images.

Olympus has finally announced its first micro 4/3 camera. Unlike the Panasonic GH-1 it “only” does 720p video (but the samples I’ve seen are gorgeous), has no viewfinder or built-in flash, has a low resolution (but large) fixed LCD, is actually quite small, and is priced competitively (MSRP $699 body only, $799 with a 14-42mm Zuiko lens).

One really intriguing feature of the camera is that in addition to being able to share lenses with all other micro 4/3 cameras (e.g. Panasonic’s 14-140mm and 7-14mm lenses, and various Leica lenses), it can use normal 4/3 lenses via an adapter, and it could potentially use pretty much any 35mm or APS-C (or even Leica M-series) lens via adapters (Olympus is providing an OM-system adapter for starters). This makes it almost the perfect “backup” camera for serious photographers since it could easily share lenses with any other camera one happens to use.

This camera is almost pocketable, offers similar low-light performance to the Canon T1i (i.e. slightly inferior to the D5000/D90, slightly better than the GH-1), has built-in image stabilization, dual control dials, full manual control, all-metal construction — indeed the same feature set as Olympus’s E-620 and E-30 DSLRs. And it looks lovely.

If it had a viewfinder, or even a higher resolution LCD, I think it would be ridiculously compelling. If, as many expect, its street price quickly drops below $400 it will be ridiculously compelling anyway. I, for one, don’t much care about the lack of flash, since I avoid flash (especially built-in flash) as much as possible.

Oh, and it’s perhaps the most physically beautiful digital camera I’ve seen.

With Canon’s new consumer DSLR offering 1080p video (albeit at 20fps), 15MP, and 14-bit RAW, the obvious shortcomings of the D90 are more obvious than ever. I also note that my favorite discount camera store is out of stock on the D80, while Amazon is selling D80s for the same price as D90s. Obvious conclusion — the D90 is replacing the D80 at the ~$700 price point and a successor to the D90 with the obvious deficiencies addressed is on its way.

Canon has announced the latest in its consumer DSLR line with 15 MP and 1080p (@20fps) / 720p (@30fps) video. Assuming Canon inserts this camera at the logical price point (presumably slightly cheaper than Nikon’s D90), that pretty much sets a new bar for DV cameras which will either need to match the 500D’s image quality or come in under its price. It also means that Nikon will need to respond with a D90x (say) that offers 1080p (and, I hope, 14-bit RAW).

And remember that the Panasonic GH-1 is already out there, waiting to eat their lunch. And while the Panasonic’s image quality may be marginally inferior to that of the Canon and Nikon DSLRs (the D90 in particular has ridiculously good low light performance), the GH-1 is smaller, cheaper, has it all over them on the video side of things.

And one — well two — more things. The GH-1′s rear video screen swings out and twists, like a video camera’s, and its electronic viewfinder works for video, like a video camera’s. Shooting video on a conventional DSLR is going to get old, fast.

Addendum

Oh and one more significant advantage of the GH-1 for shooting video — its autofocus works continuously while shooting.