Plain review of Olympus Pen 2

NeilLNeilL Registered Users Posts: 4,201 Major grins
edited January 29, 2010 in Cameras

Comments

  • craig_dcraig_d Registered Users Posts: 911 Major grins
    edited January 28, 2010
    Not bad, but this review doesn't answer the most interesting questions. For example, when the E-P1 came out, the reaction among many reviewers and photographers was, "Nice idea, pity the AF is so slow." Then Panasonic brought out the GF1, which was much better in that regard. Now this review says the E-P2 "improves on the Pen E-P1 by including a focus tracking mode," but doesn't say whether AF is generally faster than the E-P1, and doesn't compare it to the GF1 at all. In fact, Panasonic isn't mentioned even once in this review, despite being Olympus' principal competitor in m4/3.

    If I want to buy into m4/3, this review really doesn't help me very much to decide which model to get. It tells me something about the E-P2, compares it a little to the E-P1 but without considering how well the E-P2 addresses criticisms of the E-P1, and doesn't consider the broader m4/3 context at all. The only parts of this review that are really helpful are the discussion of the EVF and the ISO samples.
    http://craigd.smugmug.com

    Got bored with digital and went back to film.
  • Wicked_DarkWicked_Dark Registered Users Posts: 1,138 Major grins
    edited January 28, 2010
    Kirk Tuck has written extensively on the subject. Maybe his review will be helpful.

    http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2010/01/my-long-final-rambling-review-of.html
  • craig_dcraig_d Registered Users Posts: 911 Major grins
    edited January 28, 2010
    Kirk Tuck has written extensively on the subject. Maybe his review will be helpful.

    http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2010/01/my-long-final-rambling-review-of.html

    That's actually a really good review even though it also doesn't do any of the comparisons I mentioned above. What's great about Kirk Tuck's review is that he writes from his own, admittedly very personal perspective, bringing decades of experience in photography and a month (not a day or two) of working with the E-P2 to tell us exactly what he finds good and bad about it in considerable detail. He writes with a level of knowledge and authority that the Good Gear Guide guy just doesn't have.

    For me, the money shot in Tuck's review is this: "You have to use the hot shoe to trigger flashes; either with an adapter or a radio trigger. That means you don't get to use the wonderful EVF and if I can't use the EVF I really don't want to use the camera." And his discussion of using old Olympus PEN lenses on the E-P2 with an adapter was insightful in a way that one doesn't usually get from younger reviewers.
    http://craigd.smugmug.com

    Got bored with digital and went back to film.
  • Mr EddyMr Eddy Registered Users Posts: 58 Big grins
    edited January 29, 2010
    craig_d wrote:
    Not bad, but this review doesn't answer the most interesting questions. For example, when the E-P1 came out, the reaction among many reviewers and photographers was, "Nice idea, pity the AF is so slow." Then Panasonic brought out the GF1, which was much better in that regard. Now this review says the E-P2 "improves on the Pen E-P1 by including a focus tracking mode," but doesn't say whether AF is generally faster than the E-P1, and doesn't compare it to the GF1 at all. In fact, Panasonic isn't mentioned even once in this review, despite being Olympus' principal competitor in m4/3.

    If I want to buy into m4/3, this review really doesn't help me very much to decide which model to get. It tells me something about the E-P2, compares it a little to the E-P1 but without considering how well the E-P2 addresses criticisms of the E-P1, and doesn't consider the broader m4/3 context at all. The only parts of this review that are really helpful are the discussion of the EVF and the ISO samples.
    The E-P2 has essentially identical AF speed to the E-P1. If that's a critical factor, the GF1 is noticably faster.

    I think the differences between the two are pretty clear. For most people it seems to boil down to IBIS/Lens IS and 4/3 AF support.

    In favour of Olympus:
    * Out of camera jpeg quality and colours
    * AF (if slowly) with all 4/3 lenses (adapter needed of course). GF1 only AFs with a (small) subset.
    * In body IS. So you get IS with all the adapted legacy lenses.
    * The E-P2 EVF is better than the GF1 EVF (but not the G1/GH1)

    In favour of Panasonic
    * Faster AF
    * Better rear LCD
    * Kit lenses are better, although the 14-54 is physically larger
    * AVCHD video. Oly only has motion jpeg

    Appearance is subjective, although more people seem to like the retro Oly thing.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,132 moderator
    edited January 29, 2010
    Mr Eddy wrote:
    The E-P2 has essentially identical AF speed to the E-P1. If that's a critical factor, the GF1 is noticably faster.

    I think the differences between the two are pretty clear. For most people it seems to boil down to IBIS/Lens IS and 4/3 AF support.

    In favour of Olympus:
    * Out of camera jpeg quality and colours
    * AF (if slowly) with all 4/3 lenses (adapter needed of course). GF1 only AFs with a (small) subset.
    * In body IS. So you get IS with all the adapted legacy lenses.
    * The E-P2 EVF is better than the GF1 EVF (but not the G1/GH1)

    In favour of Panasonic
    * Faster AF
    * Better rear LCD
    * Kit lenses are better, although the 14-54 is physically larger
    * AVCHD video. Oly only has motion jpeg

    Appearance is subjective, although more people seem to like the retro Oly thing.

    Nice synopsis. thumb.gif

    Thanks,
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • craig_dcraig_d Registered Users Posts: 911 Major grins
    edited January 29, 2010
    Mr Eddy wrote:
    The E-P2 has essentially identical AF speed to the E-P1. If that's a critical factor, the GF1 is noticably faster.

    I think the differences between the two are pretty clear. For most people it seems to boil down to IBIS/Lens IS and 4/3 AF support.

    In favour of Olympus:
    * Out of camera jpeg quality and colours
    * AF (if slowly) with all 4/3 lenses (adapter needed of course). GF1 only AFs with a (small) subset.
    * In body IS. So you get IS with all the adapted legacy lenses.
    * The E-P2 EVF is better than the GF1 EVF (but not the G1/GH1)

    In favour of Panasonic
    * Faster AF
    * Better rear LCD
    * Kit lenses are better, although the 14-54 is physically larger
    * AVCHD video. Oly only has motion jpeg

    Appearance is subjective, although more people seem to like the retro Oly thing.

    Thanks, that's very helpful.

    After reading the Kirk Tuck review, I have this mad temptation to buy an E-P2 just to put old manual-focus Pen F lenses on it, which of course would render the AF issue moot. But I doubt I'll do it.
    http://craigd.smugmug.com

    Got bored with digital and went back to film.
  • Mr EddyMr Eddy Registered Users Posts: 58 Big grins
    edited January 29, 2010
    craig_d wrote:
    Thanks, that's very helpful.

    After reading the Kirk Tuck review, I have this mad temptation to buy an E-P2 just to put old manual-focus Pen F lenses on it, which of course would render the AF issue moot. But I doubt I'll do it.

    I've had fun with manual focus lenses, and the G1 with the EVF makes it pretty easy. So far I haven't accumulate quite as many lenses as I originally planned. My KEH shopping cart has been full a few times but restraint is a wonderful thing.

    I've got the Leica M, Canon FD and Pentax M42 adapters. I particularly like the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4, which fits pretty perfectly in terms of both size and appearance.
Sign In or Register to comment.