And the E-PL2 goes back

I really, really wanted to like this camera, but after two days of
tolerating it, it's going back to B&H. For starters, the IQ is not much
better than a Canon G12. Secondly, the controls are a nightmare. The
movie start button is far to easily pushed so I needed to reprogram it
to something else. The control wheel is VERY poorly implemented and when
using it you will, 99% of the time, invoke a command you dont' want. It
takes a very light a deft touch to use it as a wheel only (it doubles as
a "clicker" at four positions, so when you depress the wheel to turn it,
you usually click another function instead. It's absolutely maddening.

The software they give you sucks, too.

Onward and upward. The search for a decent compact camera continues.

Bowser wrote:
I really, really wanted to like this camera, but after two days of
tolerating it, it's going back to B&H. For starters, the IQ is not much
better than a Canon G12. Secondly, the controls are a nightmare. The
movie start button is far to easily pushed so I needed to reprogram it
to something else. The control wheel is VERY poorly implemented and when
using it you will, 99% of the time, invoke a command you dont' want. It
takes a very light a deft touch to use it as a wheel only (it doubles as
a "clicker" at four positions, so when you depress the wheel to turn it,
you usually click another function instead. It's absolutely maddening.

The software they give you sucks, too.

Onward and upward. The search for a decent compact camera continues.

Hi,

It depends on what you mean by "compact". I just finished testing my new
Canon S95, and am quite pleased with it. Its chip is a size larger than
most pocket cameras, its lens is F:2 at the wide end, and it has
semi-manual controls as needed. I just made some 8x10" prints from
casual portraits at a party, and the quality was outstanding. It is a
bit heavier than most pocket cameras,but small enough to easiliy fit
into a man's jacket pocket, and it will always go with me. The flash is
a bit weak, but I use my little Metz 28-CS digital slave flash only for
distant indoor flash use. With the F:2 I can take pix indoors without
flash if needed, as the iSO 800 pix are rather good. I matched prints
against a friend's Nikon P-7000 of the same subjects, and the S95 pix
were either equal to or sharper than the Nikon's.

Mort

On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 18:23:29 -0500, Bowser wrote:
: I really, really wanted to like this camera, but after two days of
: tolerating it, it's going back to B&H. For starters, the IQ is not much
: better than a Canon G12. Secondly, the controls are a nightmare. The
: movie start button is far to easily pushed so I needed to reprogram it
: to something else. The control wheel is VERY poorly implemented and when
: using it you will, 99% of the time, invoke a command you dont' want. It
: takes a very light a deft touch to use it as a wheel only (it doubles as
: a "clicker" at four positions, so when you depress the wheel to turn it,
: you usually click another function instead. It's absolutely maddening.
:
: The software they give you sucks, too.
:
: Onward and upward. The search for a decent compact camera continues.

If I were a betting man, I'd say you're doomed to failure. It's very hard for
me to see how someone who owns, and knows how to use, a 5D2 is going to find a
compact camera that will satisfy him.

Bob

On 1/29/2011 10:18 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 18:23:29 -0500, wrote:
: I really, really wanted to like this camera, but after two days of
: tolerating it, it's going back to B&H. For starters, the IQ is not much
: better than a Canon G12. Secondly, the controls are a nightmare. The
: movie start button is far to easily pushed so I needed to reprogram it
: to something else. The control wheel is VERY poorly implemented and when
: using it you will, 99% of the time, invoke a command you dont' want. It
: takes a very light a deft touch to use it as a wheel only (it doubles as
: a "clicker" at four positions, so when you depress the wheel to turn it,
: you usually click another function instead. It's absolutely maddening.
:
: The software they give you sucks, too.
:
: Onward and upward. The search for a decent compact camera continues.

If I were a betting man, I'd say you're doomed to failure. It's very hard for
me to see how someone who owns, and knows how to use, a 5D2 is going to find a
compact camera that will satisfy him.

Maybe, but I'll keep trying. Can't tell you what a disappointment the
Oly was, though. I'm downloading a few raw files from a G12 today, and
I'll take a long look at them before writing it off.

In the meantime, I'll lug the 5D II.

On 1/29/2011 11:52 PM, Rich wrote:
On Jan 29, 6:23 pm, wrote:
I really, really wanted to like this camera, but after two days of
tolerating it, it's going back to B&H. For starters, the IQ is not much
better than a Canon G12. Secondly, the controls are a nightmare. The
movie start button is far to easily pushed so I needed to reprogram it
to something else. The control wheel is VERY poorly implemented and when
using it you will, 99% of the time, invoke a command you dont' want. It
takes a very light a deft touch to use it as a wheel only (it doubles as
a "clicker" at four positions, so when you depress the wheel to turn it,
you usually click another function instead. It's absolutely maddening.

The software they give you sucks, too.

Onward and upward. The search for a decent compact camera continues.

If someone is used to a nice large camera body with plenty of room for
fumbling around, then a tight-packed compact is going to take an
effort getting used to and using. For one thing, hitting buttons by
accident is par for the course, unless you have hands like a female
Chinese factory worker. For another, the control is there in the
camera to do most things you might want, but much of it is in menus,
so the camera will never operate as quickly as your big DSLR. If you
can't adapt to it and learn how to use it to obtain decent results,
it's just the way it is.

Agreed. If you have the chance, take a look at that damned wheel/button
combo on the E-PL2 and see if it's just me. IMHO it's a disaster.

On 1/30/2011 5:40 AM, Alfred Molon wrote:
In articlep9idnXmuhbLvPNnQnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@giganews. com, Bowser
says...
For starters, the IQ is not much
better than a Canon G12.

A bit strange, since the G12 has 2.2 micrometer pixels while the E-PL2
has 4.4 micrometer pixels - four times the area.

The E-PL2 does produce a less noisy image, but up to ISO 800, the
differences are minimal. And the Canon files appear sharper. The
downside, of course, is that you can't change lenses on the G12. But the
controls of the G12 are light-years ahead of the E-PL2.

I may take a look at a T2i, as well. Not as small as the E-PL2 or the
G12, but much smaller than the 5D II.

On 1/30/2011 11:05 AM, Alfred Molon wrote:
In , Bowser
says...
The E-PL2 does produce a less noisy image, but up to ISO 800, the
differences are minimal. And the Canon files appear sharper.

Go here and choose the E-PL2 for comparison:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonG12/page5.asp

At ISO 800 the image of the G12 is very blurry, due to all that noise
reduction, while the image of the E-PL2 is tack sharp and free of noise.

Even at ISO 400 there is a difference like day and night between the E-
PL2 and the G12.

At ISO 1600 the differences are even more pronounced.

Ah, OK, that's why we see something different. I'm comparing RAW files,
not JPGs. I rarely, if every, shoot JPGs.

But I agree that the Olympus images are less noisy in either JPG or RAW.
But when I take a G12 RAW file, open in ACR (v6.2) and apply a little
noise reduction, the files are more than usable at ISO 1600. Honestly,
it's not bad for a P&S. Still no match for any DSLR, but not bad.

On 1/30/2011 12:06 PM, Alfred Molon wrote:
In articleWOydndRp2MStCdjQnZ2dnUVZ_qadnZ2d@giganews. com, Bowser
says...

Ah, OK, that's why we see something different. I'm comparing RAW files,
not JPGs. I rarely, if every, shoot JPGs.

But I agree that the Olympus images are less noisy in either JPG or RAW.
But when I take a G12 RAW file, open in ACR (v6.2) and apply a little
noise reduction, the files are more than usable at ISO 1600. Honestly,
it's not bad for a P&S. Still no match for any DSLR, but not bad.

There is no E-PL2 review yet on dpreview, which is why the RAW samples
are missing. It's likely however that also with RAW files the E-PL2 will
blow away the G12. Canon is not known for poor in-camera JPEG
processing.

But wait... let's see if it is possible to compare the RAWs and JPEGs of
the G12 on dpreview ... indeed it's possible.

Go to http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonG12/page6.asp

and select ISO 800, as second camera the G12 with JPEG output and as
third camera the E-PL2 with JPEG output.

There is very little gain in the G12 RAW image compared to JPEG and
again the E-PL2 (JPEG) blows away also the G12 RAW image.

Which should not come as a surprise, since the pixels of the E-PL2 have
4 times the area.

I wasn't comparing samples from DP Review, but the ones I shot myself
with the E-PL2. My comments were based on that.

On 2011-01-30 19:37:07 -0800, otter said:

On Jan 30, 8:25*am, Bowser wrote:
On 1/29/2011 10:18 PM, Robert Coe wrote:




Maybe, but I'll keep trying. Can't tell you what a disappointment the
Oly was, though. I'm downloading a few raw files from a G12 today, and
I'll take a long look at them before writing it off.

In the meantime, I'll lug the 5D II.

I gave my G12 to my son for Christmas. It's much better than what he
had before, so he's happy.

I just wasn't using it, despite it being so much more "portable". I
remember thinking "that's a cool shot, I wish I had my 5D2" several
times. Still looking for something more portable with "knock your
socks off" quality. Unfortunately, Leica is not an option for me.

Yup!
Exactly my feelings. I have my G11, which does a fair enough job, but
it is not a replacement for my D300s.
I have it available in my car for those few times I don't have the
D300s with me. It also gave me a life boat on my 2009 South Africa trip
when my D300 was stolen.
I have yet to see a compact which will do much better than I have
experienced with the G11.
I might have been tempted by the X100, as it is so evocative of my old
Electo35, but it is too much of a niche camera without interchangeable
lenses. Who knows? In a weak moment it is still something I might
consider.

For now it is wait and see, but I don't think the manufacturers are
going to step up to the plate with a compact DSLR shooters are going to
be completely happy with, any time soon.



--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-01-30 23:01:36 -0800, Alfred Molon said:

In article 2011013020133099097-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck
says...
I have yet to see a compact which will do much better than I have
experienced with the G11.

How about the Olympus XZ-1 with the F1.8 lens?

I think I will stick with my G11 for my "small" camera. I get
reasonable IQ, fair noise control, acceptable low light performance for
this type of camera, and an OVF.
Here is what the G11 can do;
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Merav-0015fw.jpg


--
Regards,

Savageduck