Skip to main content

BOTBs - Olympus E-PL1

The Panasonic Lumix GH1 was a very powerful camera at the time; in fact, it was top of the range across both Panasonic and Olympus. So why then did I pick up the bottom-of-the-line, hamstrung Olympus E-PL1?

Because, despite the GH1 being smaller than any DSLR out there and lightweight in comparison, I didn't want to take it out to social events.
Olympus E-PL1
May 2012 to July 2014
~3000 shots

And that's where the E-PL1 came in. It was a backup to the GH1, definitely not a replacement in any way, shape or form.
  • 12 megapixel sensor, instead of the ~16 megapixel multi-aspect sensor in the Lumix.
  • RAW files with little headroom.
  • Poor low-light performance.
  • Rangefinder form-factor, rather than faux-DSLR.
  • No viewfinder.
  • No control dials.
  • Cheap construction.
I'd never even considered an Olympus Micro Four Thirds camera up that point. I had tried a friend's Olympus PEN E-P1, and didn't get on with the interface. Sure, it had produced some nice out-of-camera JPEGs, but I wanted an EVF on my cameras, and it wasn't until the OM-D E-M5 was released that Olympus offered a camera with competing features to the GH series of cameras.

The price did it for me though. I managed to buy a very cheap American body-only kit - after exchange rates, it only cost me ~£100. I never fell in love with the camera like I did with my Lumix bodies, as it was too limiting for someone used to having so many controls to hand. For instance, the lack of a dial meant that every change (including shutter-speed, aperture and exposure compensation) had to be done by first pressing a button for the item you wanted to change, then altering it with plus/minus buttons. This made for a very slow operation.
In addition, the autofocus wasn't as fast as the GH1 and got worse as light levels dropped. Despite having an f/1.7 wide-aperture lens attached, it would hunt and regularly miss the critical moment.

But it was the cheapest-of-the-cheap Micro Four Thirds camera of the time, and it did mount all of my Micro Four Thirds lenses. And it did serve the function of being a cheap camera I could take to weddings, the pub, or on hikes, and I didn't mind if it got a bit bashed.
I still own it, having tried and failed to sell it in 2015 - I'll probably end up giving it to my son when's he's a bit older as a first camera.

BovingtonSouth Downs
LondonDevil's Dyke
LondonSouth Downs
HoveGlynde
The ThamesSouth Downs


Back to Best of the Bodies.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BOTBs - Panasonic Lumix GH3

Panasonic had realised with the GH1 and GH2 just how much demand there was for high-quality, low-cost mirrorless cameras capable of brilliant video capture. And it was with the 2013-released GH3 that they responded to many of the demands that users had asked for. Panasonic Lumix GH3 January 2014 to December 2016 22500 shots Gone was the multi aspect Panasonic sensor, replaced with a 16 megapixel unit from Sony - the same, it transpires, as used in Olympus's at-the-time recently released OM-D E-M5 . This was a more capable sensor than the one used in the previous model, which helped with better noise handling at higher ISOs and higher-bit-rate video. Gone too was the compact body. Now, the GH3 was a chunkier magnesium alloy affair, and now weather-sealed. It was a huge improvement ergonomically over the GH2 - after shooting airshows for many hours with the GH2, my hand ached, mainly because there wasn't enough room around the handgrip for all fingers. This was no longer th...
Post a Comment
Read more

A dark night, and a brace of Voigtlanders

I fell in love with the Voigtlander f/0.95 17.5mm prime as soon as I mounted it on my GH4 a few years back. It properly sprang to life once I moved over to the Lumix G9 - the higher-resolution viewfinder made it much, much easier to check focus, and I feel that the sensor was able to benefit from the lens more than the GH4's was. Due to coronavirus in the UK, I've left the area where I live on very few occasions. I am lucky in that I have the South Downs to the north, and the English Channel to the south - and both are only a five minute walk away for me. Despite coronavirus, I've ensured that I've kept my Photo 52 challenge up to date. This forces me to get out with my camera so that I at least have one image, no matter how rubbish it is, to show for my week. As the nights have grown longer, the Voigtlander 17.5mm and its 42.5mm brother have both joined me on my evening walks, so I thought I'd show you a few shots I grabbed the other evening whilst traipsing ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Shooting the Clematis

In a prior post, I mentioned trying to find the perfect lens for flower photography . And how I was going to do some tests with the lenses mentioned within said post. Well, this isn't that test. It's another test. A test with very similar focal-length lenses, and with similar apertures. This is the Battle of the 50mm or Thereabouts Lenses for Photographing Clematis ! What are the contenders in today's test? Well, we have a trio of legacy 50mm lenses from a variety of mounts. And also an auto-focus lens specifically designed for Micro Four Thirds. Jupiter-8 f/2 50mm - m39-mount Helios-44 f/1.8 50mm - m42-mount Voigtlander Color-Ultron f/1.8 50mm - Q-mount Lumix f/1.7 42.5mm - Micro Four Thirds mount All lenses were shot wide-open, and all from the "same" distance from the flower. This distance was calculated based on the closest focusing distance of the lenses with the longest closest focusing distance, the Jupiter-8. Jupiter-8 f/2 50mm Helios-44...
Post a Comment
Read more