Olympus new m4/3rds. Handsome and relatively cheap
 

In article ,
RichA wrote:
This is from lower-end of the m4/3rds line-up. $600, in-line with the
Samsung APS, the NEX. If the AF works a little better than the last
cameras, it could be good. The lens is supposed to be optically
better than the dog 14-42mm Panasonic replaced the well-regarded
14-45mm with.

http://dpreview.com/previews/olympusepl2/page3.asp

Still no AF assist lamp or orientation sensor.

Coming from someone who shot over 100 exposures on an E-PL1 during a
recent vacation, I can tell you that I seriously miss both of these
features.

Olympus new m4/3rds. Handsome and relatively cheap
 

In article ,
Mike S. wrote:

In article ,
RichA wrote:
This is from lower-end of the m4/3rds line-up. $600, in-line with the
Samsung APS, the NEX. If the AF works a little better than the last
cameras, it could be good. The lens is supposed to be optically
better than the dog 14-42mm Panasonic replaced the well-regarded
14-45mm with.

http://dpreview.com/previews/olympusepl2/page3.asp

Still no AF assist lamp or orientation sensor.

Coming from someone who shot over 100 exposures on an E-PL1 during a
recent vacation, I can tell you that I seriously miss both of these
features.

Sorry ... make that "1000 exposures".

Also to add insult to injury, you can use an Olympus E-series flash on the
shoe, and while the flash has its own AF-assist lamp right there, the
&&**&^ camera refuses to use it. By design....

Olympus new m4/3rds. Handsome and relatively cheap
 

(Mike S.) wrote in
:


In article
,
RichA wrote:
This is from lower-end of the m4/3rds line-up. $600, in-line with the
Samsung APS, the NEX. If the AF works a little better than the last
cameras, it could be good. The lens is supposed to be optically
better than the dog 14-42mm Panasonic replaced the well-regarded
14-45mm with.

http://dpreview.com/previews/olympusepl2/page3.asp

Still no AF assist lamp or orientation sensor.

Friend said he'd stick with the GF1 because of the AF assist.

Olympus new m4/3rds. Handsome and relatively cheap
 

Bruce wrote in
:

Rich wrote:
(Mike S.) wrote in
:
In article
,
RichA wrote:
This is from lower-end of the m4/3rds line-up. $600, in-line with
the
Samsung APS, the NEX. If the AF works a little better than the last
cameras, it could be good. The lens is supposed to be optically
better than the dog 14-42mm Panasonic replaced the well-regarded
14-45mm with.

http://dpreview.com/previews/olympusepl2/page3.asp

Still no AF assist lamp or orientation sensor.

Friend said he'd stick with the GF1 because of the AF assist.


The new GF2 got an excellent review in this week's "Amateur
Photographer". The reviewer (a DSLR user) wrote that he expected not
to like the touch screen controls. However, when he started using the
camera he found the controls intuitive and hardly used the buttons.

His only caveat was that the 12 MP sensor was somewhat restrictive
when the smaller* Sony NEX5 offers 16 MP. When the newest superzooms
are offering 16 MP on a much smaller sensor, 12 MP does seem a little
inadequate, however many pro shooters (and their clients) are very
happy with results from their 12 MP Nikon D3, D3s and D700 bodies. ;-)

*smaller body, but massively larger lenses.



90% of the people buying the cameras would never be printing anything or
cropping anything to the point where they could tell 12 from 16
megapixels anyway. The NEX's best attribute over micro 4/3rds is noise
control. The cameras are a pain to use, I won't buy one, they are simply
too small and too limited. I was under the impression the GF2 was an
attempt by Panasonic to cut the cost of production of the pricey GF1? I
have to get a look at a GF2. But I won't move from the G1 until something
else (apart from the GH series) comes out with a good built-in EVF.