CONTAX CLUB Carl Zeiss 討論區

EP1 用kit lens 時都係會自動用software correction 減少變型 　，跟GH1 差不多

_________________
http://www.brianmok.com/

EP-2 for X'mas gift!

http://photorumors.com/2009/08/03/olymp ... iewfinder/

_________________

Wah
理事 - Board of Members
www.flickr.com/dicksonlau

If for anything I had more faith and confidence in Panasonic than Olympus ... First off, Olympus never had such technology on EVF, and then the sensor, and then some ...

E-P1 or E-P2 still , does not matter ... but where's the proper lens ( and that do not require the software to even perform OK )

_________________

Faith and confidence is one thing ... actual sales result is another. No matter like it or not, the EP-1 should be considered as a very successful one. G1/GH1 is described as cheaper, better practicability with EVF and faster autofocus and even better optics, yet I do not see it creating such a success as EP-1.

I forgot which was the last one before EP-1 that can generate such wide discussions among all plus a real buying wave. Most Nikon or Canon users have strong brand loyalty on cameras with interchangeable lens capability, and if u take this into account and see how many of them have got a EP-1, you have to really give credit to the OM designer/marketing team here.

Finally one should note that plays EP-1 are likely to play manual lens ... so the M4/3 lens performance are really not so important here.

_________________
Contax : RTS, RTSII(50Y), RTSIII, Aria D, Aria(70Y), N1, ND, T3D(70Y), G2D
Nikon : FM3A, FM3AB
Leica : M9, X1
Fuji : X100
OM : EP2

IN the short term .. yes, but with business, the long term is the key .. the E-P1 , just as the D3, D700, the 5D MK.II all genberate that first few batch with hype and sale ... but if we go take a lok at real long term business as testified by data in volume of body sold .. such items do not bear challenge from much more ho hum products.

The notion of that manual lens is good already is only for those hobbyist who engaged ... the real market with E-P1 / Micro 4/3 still lies in the much vast upgrade market from DC users and those who are not into legacy lens ( aka new generation of digital users ).

The reality is that the E-P1 did succeed in creating a form factor, but again its only in this that it had succeed. And people buying it not because its good or great, but because its the layman's choice. With GH1's sensor, better overall, the coming Panasonic ( compact model ) is simply likely to dethrone it especially now that Panasonic match or exceed Olympus image quality in camera and better it in the RAW development.

Just like the 4/3, as we all know. the system ultimately cannot just sell on one feature or idea, it must exist as a solution based and system based. Which the 4/3 fail to deliver ( hence why even it start up early , still not able even to catch enough market share as Olympus even vision to had ). Panasonic simply see the issue and try to solve it by launching the Micro 4/3 since it yields a new platform form factor and thus free them from direct heading towards others. The G1/GH1 is not selling in HK only becasue people's prejudice. In fact world wide it open up a lot of sale. And long term especially with GH1's Video is likely to be more business vise a product for a brand than the E-P1.

In short, the E-P1 is a very good industrial design in concept, but a bad implementation. Simply put, it gather short term success, but ist not likely being the one to stand for long. And if Nikon decide that the next Coolpix P series to had an APS-C sensor and its mount .. And with G series AF-Nikkor can do full auto .. care to thing would people use it ...

I use 4/3 also, and that's even why it so evident to me where the E-P1 had been and had not been ...

_________________

你估C N P沒有咩？
Software Engineer are more important than Optical Expert etc..........now.
That is why I still play film......
Try L lens on film body and compare with JPEG from FF DSLR......maybe they look so different.

The issue is not whether C or N or Olympus / Panasonic use it or not ... the issue is allowing the user to use or not to use this feature. In N or C, this feature is added and manually controllable, and can be set on or off, and RAW do not had the data cooked / corrected although the software had the data to correct it.

In Micro 4/3 Olympus and Panasonic had design the lens in a fashion that it must use this feature before it can even be termed OK performance. In fact Panasonic used this also in the LX3. Its their decision to not to made lens that can stand on its own, and that forcing the user to use software correction ( no way to set the correction to off, and also made software to do that without informing the enduser )

In fact this feature is nothing new. Its in the way Olympus and Panasonic implement it in the hardware/software combo and how all those Micro 4/3 lens proven beyond acceptable once not using the software correction ( meaning the lens itself is highly uncorrected ). People who are advanced enough to employ and exploit the potential of such system will likely also be able to tell if they want such or not and the way how Olympus and Panasonic did it .. Just as Hamlet say it - " To be or Not to be, that is the question " Oly / Pana take them upon themselves and force the user no choice, that is the issue and the no no

_________________

compact DC 有冇我就唔知，亦冇興趣估／知....
不過如果dpreview唔講，我真係唔知這些可換鏡的dc竟然會by default咁用software correction 減少變型，而且好似仲冇得disable，更唔會話你知.....其實用家亦很難發現。

實際上，當GH1的review 出了後，友人還說好彩買了EP1，點知都一樣。

我從來對鏡頭重視多於機身，如果某鏡變型的話，請尤他變型好了。否則支支鏡都一樣。菲林機，數碼機亦然。

_________________
http://www.brianmok.com/

從前常有道鏡頭新不如舊, 因為 "新鏡"可以利用 multi-coating 技術將一些 imperfection 如色散等 counter-balance, 所以對於玻璃選材, 鏡片研磨準繩度就不用那麼著重......

如果 software correction 真的那麼利害........又或者無論幾百蚊到幾萬蚊既鏡頭都要 software correction 的話......最實際既做法就係買支幾百蚊既 kit 鏡用下算數!

又或者不久將來大家要支鏡靚D的話就要不斷買 software 升級.......

_________________

Wah
理事 - Board of Members
www.flickr.com/dicksonlau

最緊要唔好用幾义／皮野買支新鏡，到換機身software correction唔work後，才如夢初醒

_________________
http://www.brianmok.com/

Some facts, I use cheap canon kit lens...after correction by software and when post to web for around screen size, you can't find much different to 17-55....

_________________
事務局長

Damn, my Calon Segur heart fall in love with Haut Brion

I fully agree with Vincent, as I stated before this software correction is nothing new, it was there way back even before DSLR .. sadly this is not the real issue with Micro 4/3, what on hand is Micro 4/3 used that as an excuse or they reason it that way , to made under par performance lens that simply is not and should not be accepted. They probably cheat on performance too much , take a look at this DPR lens test page ..

- http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusEP1/page22.asp -

A fix focal lens that covers somewhat like a 35mm on film and having only 2.8 speed, and it still had massive CA, and distortion that goes to 4.2%, well for such fix focals, and at that speed, anything like that in any other coverage simply is not acceptable. So I wager these lens are more for DC user upgrading ( most having zero idea about this and won;t know the difference )

Still, this software correction is a tool that must be used with caution. While correcting for display on screen is something. Too heavy a correction such that of the E-P1 leave the total image blurred and this can easily be seen on print ( say 8X10 ) or even in some case just by typical screen display ... That had been beared by numerous image sample now already online on E-P1 and Panasonics

I suppose that, for me, is one more reason not to buy the E-P1, or at the least not to buy those Micro 4/3 lens even if I am going to get a Micro 4/3 body

_________________

Panasonic GF1都係冇EVF......

_________________
Best Regards,

Terry Shum
香港互聯網康泰時攝影會幹事

GF1: rumour or announced?

_________________
Lo Fan

http://www2.lofan.net
http://www.lofan.net

至少有內閃!

留意 hot shoe 對落..........有玄機!

_________________

Wah
理事 - Board of Members
www.flickr.com/dicksonlau