The Lost Compact DSLR System: Part 1 1/2

At the beginning of 2001, it was reported that Olympus and Kodak was joining forces to create a consortium, based on a new standard for digital photography. Since then, Kodak has sadly folded, but the group has gone on to add more members. Of course the "old" standard is now pretty much dead, or some would say that it's morphed into the current "mirrorless" version of micro-4/3rds. 

No, that's not me, or my dad for that matter. That..... is the famed Yoshihisa Maitani. He joined Olympus in 1956 at the age of 23, and would go on to create the Pen, Pen F, and the M-1 (which we know as the OM-1) system while working for that company for the entirety of his illustrious career. Yeah, I have a little bit of a "man-crush" on him. 

Just looking at this cut-away of the Pen F; makes my jaw drop a little bit. It's a single lens reflex, but the mirror box has been turned sideways and so there's no tell-tale penta-prism. The guy is just unique.... and so were his designs. 

In the last few posts, I've been talking about the concept of the compact SLR which he pioneered when the OM-1 was introduced in 1972. The comparison with the then contemporary Practica is stark. One could still pass for modern today, and the other would look at home on the front seat of a Edsel. 

But to me, an even more astounding comparison is this image of if and the Nikon F fully configured for "combat" in their "professional" get-up, complete with motor drives..... WOW! No surprise that some pros were woo'd away to at least give it a try. 

This image is of the E-420. In September of 2006, it's almost identical predecessor, the E-400 was launched for Europe only. However, the Spring of 2007 saw the introduction of E-410, along with the E-510, and E-610 siblings. While the 510/610s had more features, the 410 pretty much had the same capabilities. This would be true of the follow-up model, E-420 as well. In these machines, Olympus finally fulfilled the promise of really compact dimensions that the smaller 4/3rds sensor should have given all along. 

When compared side by side, the differences between it and the Canon EOS Rebel XTi don't jump out at you, but it's really the disparity in mass that's the big thing here. Much of that is due to the size of the Canon lens. It takes a lot more glass to move the difference in light necessary to cover the larger sensor! So, with the bigger sensor, doesn't that make the Canon the clear winner here? Technically true, but in real life in the hands of photographers that these cameras are aimed at? Not even..... the difference isn't going to be anywhere near apparent. So, what do you gain? Well: there's size, there's weight and..... there's innovation. This isn't disparaging of Canon, or any other company for that matter. It's just that Olympus has carved their niche in the photographic world through innovation. They were the David of the Japanese camera manufacturing world and they still are! 

From the very beginning, Olympus has been committed to having a complete professional system. Like Nikon, Canon, and now Sony (previously Konica/Minolta), they have everything under the sun. But more importantly, there's a level of commitment to their product that some manufacturers simply don't have. 

If it's all that awesome, why don't I shoot with it, instead of Nikon? It was a close thing. My cameras could very well have been the above pictured E-3, and E-410 vs. the D-300, and D40 that I have sitting on my desk right now. When I made to switch to DSLR, it was one of the systems under consideration. The main difference came down to my desire to have at my disposal the literally millions of lenses that have been made for the Nikon "F" mount. That, and the availability of the 18-200mm VR super-zoom that not even Canon had at the time. However, I often wonder what it would have been like if I would have gone with Olympus instead of Nikon. 

I will tell you one thing: I'd have been darned irritated when the consortium dropped the old 4/3rds standard when they brought out m4/3rds in August of 2008! But if you don't mind using a "dead" standard and are happy with the lenses that were available for it, then this is a really nice system to be using. They are a little bit harder to find, but they send to sell for less than similarly equipped Canon, Nikons, and even Sonys. So, if yo have a penchant for the quirky, this might be the system for you.


 


 

Great Deal: The 6 Megapixel DSLR

In the later half of 2003, a huge shift occurred in the photography world. Although Single Lens Reflex cameras equipped with digital sensors had been around for some time, going all the way back to midway through 1990s. They were unwieldy, expensive and didn't have enough resolution to pose a threat to film. And although the Nikon D1 of 1999 with it's 2.7 Mp sensor was the killer hardware for professional photojournalists, the $5500 price tag barely made a ripple in the consumer market. Then came the Canon Digital Rebel (300D)!
Most of you know that I'm not a Canon shooter, but I'm happy to give credit where credit is due. List priced at $899, this was the camera that kicked down the door that led to the world-wide consumers stampeded....along with the rest of the camera manufacturers that had the where-with-all to build a similar product. Nikon followed with the D70 in January of 2004 and the DSLR rush was on!
So, why then, with those cameras? Let's start from the beginning. Ever since the 1960s, the single lens reflex (more specifically Japanese SLRs) had dominated the photography scene. Virtually all serious photographers bought them, and those that didn't (serious or not) wanted one. When digital came along in the mid-to late 90's, it was obvious that, that was going to be the next big thing in photography, however, the sensors didn't give enough resolution for pictures to not look grainy and "pixelated" when blown up beyond snapshot (4x6) size and there was so much electronic "noise" in the image beyond ISO 400 that they were all but unusable.
However, between 2000 and 2003 a series of technologies converged to form the perfect storm of consumer market-dom! First, noise was conquered in larger APS-C format sensors which was the size first used in market-viable DSLRs. At the same time, manufacturers were able to get enough photo-sites onto them to get resolution up to 6 Mp, thus enabling prints blown up to 11x14 (and beyond) to be virtually indistinguishable from film! The third and main event was the breaking of the $1000 barrier which brought in the flood of consumers which has further driven the costs of production (and price of cameras) down through the magic of economies of scale! You take these advances, cram them into a cheaper to produce plastic body, get rid of a few expensive features; a seminal product is created!
At this stage of the game, everyone from serious amateurs to soccer-moms were snapping them up as fast as Canon and Nikon could build them. This led to pretty much every other manufacturer jumping into the pool. I'm not going to do a timeline here, but suffice to say that between 2003 and 2005, everyone from Pentax, Olympus to Konica/Minolta got something out into the sub-$1000 market-space. What does that mean to us......the frugal propellerheads of the world?
The fact is that to the "Average Joe" who just wants to shoot pictures of their kids growing up, family events and maybe even dabble in some artsy things like shooting the moon or wildflowers, 6 Mp is plenty. And these barrier-breaking cameras are now hitting the used market by the thousands! With entry-level replacements MSRPs at something south of $599, that puts fully functional used DSLRs in the sub-$300 range and I've seen them sell for close to $200 or less!
Think about this. Here's cameras which are all legitimately competent at virtually anything a normal person might ask of it. Give's the user the capability to access a virtually limitless treasury of lenses of every description, quite often for a "song", shoot pictures to your heart's content AND simply delete the non-keepers.....without the costs of film.....ALL AT THE PRICE OF A HALF-DECENT POINT-AND-SHOOT!!! That's just crazy! Is this a great country or what!?!

Which one should you consider? That's contingent on a few factors, the most important being what feels good in your hands and you like the interface the best. It's like the Mac vs. PC question. So here are my recommendations to look at and see what fits you the best:

• Canon Digital Rebel XT (300D) and XTi (350D)
• Nikon D70, D70s, D50, D40
• Olympus E500, E510, E520, E610, E620
• Pentax *ist D, *ist DS
• Konica/Minolta 5D
• Sony A100, A200 (first two models after Sony took over the Konica/Minolta line)

I chose these, because they are all at least 6 Mp, and can routinely be found in the $200-300 price range. All of them are systems that have been around for some time and therefore have sold quite a lot of cameras (with Nikon and Canon being far and away ahead of the others), lenses and other accessories. Some of them, such as Nikon and Pentax still use the same lens mount (with some modifications) going back to their film camera days thus allowing a user access to a huge inventory of glass, both OEM and after-market.
Which brings up the reasons for choosing one manufacturer over another:

• Feature set. Research, research and research. All of these cameras have ridiculously long lists of features, some useful, some not as much. Most have similar ones, others (like the Konica/Minolta sensor-shift), not as much.
• What do you like. Be a pest. If you have friends with any of these cameras, by all means ask them about it and see if you can take a few pictures with them. For instance; you may find that while most reviewers don't care for Canon's grip size/shape, that maybe with small hands, you are fine with it.
• Personal history. Does your dad have a bunch of old gear in a closet that you can have? Maybe there are several old Nikon or Pentax lenses that will work with your "new" camera and put you ahead of the game?
• Cast a wide net. After looking at the other factors, if it doesn't look like one is an overwhelming favorite, then create a list of all the ones that might work and find the best deal among them.
• Other factors. What else might you want to do with it in the future. It could be anything from underwater photography to astro-photography. Understand that the most popular (read common) models such as Canons and Nikons generally have had the most accessories made for them. This could range from something as common as dedicated flash units, to something as esoteric as telescope adapter mounts or macro-photography bellows units.

If you used to use SLRs back in the film days, the decision is a "no brainer". If you haven't and have been shooting pictures with a digital point and shoot, the difference in using a DSLR is astounding, almost indescribable. You'll wonder why it took you so long to do it. No, although $200 isn't inconsequential, the fact of the matter is that for a rather modest investment you can open yourself up to a whole new world.
Next time: how to collect important DSLR accessories, the Frugal Propellerhead way.