Anyone still using/enjoying an E-1?

[John King]

@Erich_H Short answer is that I don't know ...

However, I think that the E-450 is a stripped version of the E-420.

 

[Erich_H]

@Erich_H Short answer is that I don't know ...

However, I think that the E-450 is a stripped version of the E-420.

Naah. According to DPR test, it's a souped up version. Added some art filters, and some other small improvements. Same sensor. Probably same AA implementation as the 420, then.

EDIT:
Quote from DPR:

"So, to sum up, the differences between the two models extend to:

Three Art Filters (Pop Art, Soft Focus and Pin Hole)
TruePic III+ processor
Increased continuous shooting buffer (8 RAW files, rather than E-420's 6)
Improved screen (The luminance has been improved on the existing HyperCrystal II panel)"

 

[John King]

Thanks, Erik.

 

[Erich_H]

Thanks, Erik.

This is a good one, but you've probably seen it:

https://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/e420-e520.html

I'm using his settings.

This guy is also an Exakta wiz!

 

[macabee]

Perhaps like some, an E-1 was my first DSLR. For all its simplicity compared to today, I still managed to get some nice images. Technically speaking, there's no reason to get another. But the thought occurred to me to hunt one up. The color rendition of the (Kodak?) CCD sensor is highly regarded, and I have the Oly adapter to use my OM lenses. So...anyone doing something similar?

The E-1 was my first DSLR, back in the day. I reluctantly disposed of it because of the size of the rear screen, but I did miss it. I eventually ended up with a Pentax K-1 [FF] but the weight and size was a bit too much, so I invested in the OMD-E M1 ii, I have been impressed by the performance and compactness.

I digress, I saw an E-1 in v.good condition so I bought it, whilst it is heavier than the OMD it is still a joy in particular the colour rendition. So I use them both.

 

[SilverShutter]

I don't use an E-1 but an E-420. Although different cameras for sure I think there is a lot to enjoy on the E-system. I use mainly the 25mm pancake lens, its almost the size of an old film SLR!
In a lot of ways I can see the philosophy of M43 in that camera/lens combination. If only I didnt have to deal with the silly xD card format.

 

[The Grumpy Snapper]

I sold mine after getting an E-410. I later regretted selling it and did look for another for a while.

However, having used my E-3 a couple of times recently I can't see me ever going back to a DSLR for serious work. I'm now so used to electronic viewfinders I find going back to an optical viewfinder difficult. I find that amazing given that I used optical viewfinders for decades.

 

[Erich_H]

I don't use an E-1 but an E-420. Although different cameras for sure I think there is a lot to enjoy on the E-system. I use mainly the 25mm pancake lens, its almost the size of an old film SLR!
In a lot of ways I can see the philosophy of M43 in that camera/lens combination. If only I didnt have to deal with the silly xD card format.

I just recently (a couple of days ago) got me a Zuiko pancake. I'm looking forward to using it. But since I got it, the weather has been of the "stay inside" type. Haven't seen the sun for a while. Rainy and windy and cold...

Fortunately we have the Compact Flash slot!

Safer, faster, and not a problem getting a new one. In fact, when I bought my Zuiko pancake, it was attached to an E-420 with a 32GB SanDisk Extreme inside!

But normally I use an 8GB Compact Flash.

In the other slot I have a 1GB xD card I got with one of the Olympuses. Just to play with the copy function sometimes.

My stationary PC have a card reader that accepts both CF and xD.

 

[PakkyT]

If only I didnt have to deal with the silly xD card format.

I am not aware of any of the Olympus dSLRs not having a CompactFlash slot. The E-420 most certainly has one. So you don't have use the xD card unless you want to.

 

[SilverShutter]

I am not aware of any of the Olympus dSLRs not having a CompactFlash slot. The E-420 most certainly has one. So you don't have use the xD card unless you want to.

It's been more a matter of laziness on my part to be fair, the 2GB xD card I got with the camera is okay enough, but it would have been nice to be able to use regular SD instead. CF cards are more expensive per GB than SD and I don't use the camera enough to spend the money on it yet.

A good point I forgot to mention is that the Godox M43 compatible flashes are also backwards compatible with the E-system. I would assume this applies to other flashes for the system too. I've used the X1T and TT350O with the E-420 to do product photography for my eBay page with very good results.

 

[PakkyT]

A good point I forgot to mention is that the Godox M43 compatible flashes are also backwards compatible with the E-system. I would assume this applies to other flashes for the system too.

One interesting note that also pulls the conversation back the E-1, it that the old FL-40 flash worked on everything up to and including the E-1. But for some weird reason was not forwards compatible with any later E-x, E-xx, or E-xxx models. I never understood how it worked fine on the E-1 but not on others but then the FL-36 and FL-50 would work fine on the E-1 as well. Seems like the FL-40 just needed a FW update or something. And that flash wasn't cheap by any means back in the day (hundreds of dollars), so finding out after upgrading from the E-1 that your FL-40 flash was a no-go with your next camera didn't made anyone happy.

 

[John King]

@PakkyT The FL-40 has a high trigger voltage. These can be 250V or higher.

High trigger voltage flashes can be used with cameras that have a flash port, but NEVER use them in the hot shoe.

Modern flashes have trigger voltages of around 6-12V.

 

[PakkyT]

@PakkyT The FL-40 has a high trigger voltage. These can be 250V or higher.

No. The FL-40 was a modern flash (hit the market in late 1999) made for Olympus's digital cameras. It has a trigger voltage of about 3V. Perhaps you are thinking of one of the old OM line of "T" series flashes like the T45.

Oh and I mispoke when I used the terms "not compatible" with the later models. I should of clarified that is was not TTL compatible with later Oly dSLRs but could still be used as a simple manual or auto flash.

 

[John King]

No. The FL-40 was a modern flash (hit the market in late 1999) made for Olympus's digital cameras. It has a trigger voltage of about 3V. Perhaps you are thinking of one of the old OM line of "T" series flashes like the T45.

Oh and I mispoke when I used the terms "not compatible" with the later models. I should of clarified that is was not TTL compatible with later Oly dSLRs but could still be used as a simple manual or auto flash.

You could well be right, Patrick. I am probably 'remembering the facts of another case' ... .

It could be that the TTL on the FL-40 is only compatible with the E-1 and earlier, but the trigger voltage is fine. I think Michael Meissner has a page about this, or maybe Guy Parsons.

 

[PakkyT]

It could be that the TTL on the FL-40 is only compatible with the E-1 and earlier, but the trigger voltage is fine.

I can confirm it was, as I owned the FL-40 for a while. I used it on my Olympus C-770UZ (boy was that an unbalanced combo). It was when I got my E-520 and found the the flash wouldn't work in TTL that I decided to sell it and got a used FL-50. It was a year or so later when I got my E-1 and realized I could have used the FL-40 on it. But the FL-50 worked very well on the E-1 with TTL as well and the E-1 used those great Kodak sensors that so many loved. Only 5MP but for certain types of shots, I opted for the E-1 with the FL-50 over my 8MP E-520 (Panasonic sensor I believe).

My two daughters with a little FL-50 "catchlight" in their eyes with the old E-1...

051912-16.34.59 by Patrick, on Flickr

 

[John King]

@PakkyT , the E-520 was a 10 MPx Panasonic CMOS. Same sensor as my E-510, with a different (stronger) AA filter.

The last Kodak CCD 8 MPx was in the E-3xx and E-500 series IIRC.

 

[PakkyT]

Oh ya it was 10 wasn't it. Then it must of been my IR converted E-300 that was 8MP? Looking it up now... Ya the E-300 was the 8MP one. They, except the E-1, are all gone now so I forget what was what. So ya as I said, even at twice the resolution, I sometimes preferred the E-1 over the E-520 for portrait type shots.

By the way, anyone who had some of those old Sears kids or family portraits done in their studios after 2003, likely those were shot with an Olympus E-1.

 

[The Grumpy Snapper]

The limited release, Europe only for some reason, E-400 had a 10 MP Kodak CCD. I don't recall ever hearing why it was sold in Europe only.

 

[curtisls87]

While I haven't used it in quite a while, I hold onto my E-1 and the 50mm F2.0 macro. Never know when they might come in handy.