I remember moving from Olympus E-10 to E-1 - upgrade was huge. Used it for almost 3 years. AWB was always spot on. Interesting quirk was that only software creating proper color was Olympus Studio (with "high function" option), later versions of the OStudio created washed out wrong "cmos" like colors.
Great video. SO much more to say about this camera and lenses. Hope you continue your comments on this body and glass. (Btw - my similar bodies are: E1, E5, OMD-E-M1 MK II.)
Thanks! I do hope to do more with the system so hopefully I'll have more videos on it in future! Sound like you have a pretty well arounded 4/3rds and M4/3rds set up!
Hi…I own my E-1 for about 10 years now and also have a E-500 and the E-1 is my favourite. Great handling, simple and weathersealed. I also have E-3, but that camera is more complicated to use and heavy. I also have the 14-54 and (my favourite) 50-200. Question: Are the photos in your gallery all done with the 35 mm? Thanks for your nice ‘talk’ about my old buddy. I don’t use the E-1 very often, because I prefer the practical use on my Ipad with my Olympus Em-1 (1), but when I’m in the mood I always enjoy my E-1 for the day. Stills are wonderful.
That's awesome, do you use a split prism focusing screen with it or just the stock one? I recently got a split prism for the e-1 and for manual focus glass I love it!
@@agxiso ah yeah it would be neat of the camera focus LED would work for Manual focus stuff. But yeah I assume it's similar to change as the e-1 there is just tab in the mirrorbox and when you pull it the screen drops and you can swap it. It makes focusing very nice. www.ebay.ca/itm/315346228341?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=hcCIqZNERO6&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=NMcFURBUQGC&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY I just found that random one on eBay but there seem to be a few sellers!
The E-1 is in a league of its own. It feels like no other camera in the hand, it produces some amazing files and sounds smooth. Mine had a loose rubber grip, I removed it, cleaned both the grip and the body from all adhesive residue and now I can't get an adhesive to get the grip to stick to the body.
It's a very awesome camera. Yeah the grips swell and the rubber deteriorates so adhesives don't stick to it well. You can maybe try to clean it with IPA to scrub off any gunky layers then try a different adhesive. If it's also swollen you can potentially cut some away to make it fit better. Otherwise the only other thing I can suggest is buying a parts one that has a good grip and transplanting it!
@@Mr50mmish the rubber is in good condition and fits well on the body. All cleaned up perfectly with alcohol, but no adhesive I have seems to do anything. Might just try black colored polyurethane that I normally use for construction joints ans crack repairs.
The E1 is better than the E300/E500, more subtle, easier to manage highlights and shadows, better jpgs out of the box and better raw file manipulation (no TIFF). Slightly more natural colors, but amazing CCD, raw red green blue and yellow hues are amazing. The E300/E500 has a more digital look, stronger contrast, stronger sharpening, difficult to manage highlights under strong sunlight, but also makes beautiful pictures. I prefer the look of E300 pictures over E500 but its very subtle, the E500 camera is more manageable but less geeky, much lighter too. The early CMOS variations are also very well color rendered, E510/E410 had image stabilization and a very early live view possibility (slooow). If I am not mistaken. The later CMOS variations are more neutral calibrated and lose some raw Kodak color science magic. But are much better camera's as a tool. Alot of early CMOS and super CCD's also have very beautiful color rendition, but it's more hit and miss. Check galleries to know not specs. The difficulty is to get good glass at cheap prices for the E1/E300/E500 that lets in alot of light (you need that with these vintage digitals without stabilization). The kit lenses are ok, but require post processing (sharpening), use center autofocus and recompose ... The E1 shure is the camera to keep. And if you can't find a cheap E300 just get the E500 and you will have 95% the same image results.
Negli anni 2000 avevo uno studio fotografico ed usavo la pellicola 35mm nelle cerimonie (matrimoni, ad esempio) mentre la medio formato (6x9cm) per l'arredamento. Nel 2004 sono passato al digitale proprio con la Olympus E-1 per i miei reportage. Nei matrimoni, le stampe 30x40cm (proporzione 4/3) erano bellissime e non avevo problemi persino a scattare direttamente in jpg, sapendo come esporre di destra (misurazione spot sulle alte luci e sovraesporle appena prima di perdere il dettaglio) e grazie alla maggiore profondità di campo rispetto al 35mm (oggi full-frame) potevo usare il diaframma f:2,8 spesso e raramente chiudevo oltre f:5,6. Questo mi permetteva di usare al meglio la luce ambiente e, grazie allo scatto praticamente privo di vibrazioni e l'ottima ergonomia, di fatto era come se avessi una fotocamera con il sensore stabilizzato. 😯 Bella esperienza. Purtroppo dopo 4 anni si è guastata e ho al volo acquistato una E-3 usata da un fotoamatore in una città vicina per sostituirla. Ovviamente avevo anche un secondo corpo, una E-300. Con la E-3 ho avuto dei benifici tangibili come velocità operativa, monitor ampio ed orientabile, autofocus e nitidezza migliore, sensore stabilizzato, poter scattare anche oltre 800 iso, bla bla bla... eppure l'ergonomia diversa e soprattutto lo scatto meno silenzioso, mi davano un pochino fastidio. 🤔 Sembrava una reflex Canon, questa Olympus E-3. Comunque me la sono fatta piacere. 🙂 Non ho riscontrato tangibili differenze nella resa dei colori perché Olympus è... Olympus. Un anno fa, essendo rimasto senza reflex 4/3 ed avendo ancora bellissimi vetri Zuiko 4/3 che usavo con le mirrorless, ho acquistato di nuovo la E-3 e, mi è così piaciuto vedere le foto attraverso un mirino ottico (mi ricorda il passato con la pellicola), tanto da acquistare l'ultima della serie professionale, ovvero la E-5. Con questa reflex, Olympus ha regalato il miglior equilibrio nel sistema; sensore da 12mp che trovo ottimale per quasi ogni esigenza, filtro aa inesistente per dare giustizia alla resa delle ottiche Zuiko e bellissima resa fotografica nel complesso. 😉 Magari per alcuni rumorosa anche oltre 400 iso, ma grazie ai nuovi software A.I. scatto anche a 3.200 iso senza patemi esistenziali. Una settimana fa, un amico fotomatore mi ha regalato la sua E-1 che non usava da tempo. A volte gli amori, ritornano. 🥰
That's an awesome linage of Olympus you had going on! I'm glad you got reunited with the E-1 how are you liking second time around after all these years?
Sicuramente l'ergonomia (mi piace che il mirino sia leggermente decentrato sulla sinistra) e lo scatto più ovattato. L'ho subito dotata dell'impugnatura portabatteria che mi era rimasta, e con lo Zuiko 150mm f:2 si aveva un bellissimo equilibrio. Nei prossimi giorni verifico sul campo quanto possa regalarmi anche nel 2024.
I've owned most of the best early CCD cameras including the E300, E500, S5pro, S3pro, S2pro, k10, IstD, Dynax and more and the E1 is the king of them all if you have good light - if you're after the slide film look. It's best to shoot in TIFF because then you get the Olympus color science. The Fuji S2pro is second best but it's not fun to shoot with. Both Kodak and Fuji were trying to appeal to film photographers back then and their early cameras were built to mimic film. The Nikon D200 is amazing but wasn't designed to look like film. So it doesn't.
@@Mr50mmish It's really slow. Much slower than the S3. The S3 is a better camera than the S2 in just about every way except the S2 just has a little more Fujichrome magic.
@@flixfan1 ah I didn't realize it was that much slower. I am looking to pick one up. There is a local seller in my area (kind of... It's a 2 hr drive away) in box!
@@Mr50mmish I love the S2. If you shoot in TIFF, the slowness makes the experience like shooting film. S3 doesn't do TIFF. But if you're using these old CCD cameras, and shooting RAW, you should look into processors that use the original color science. Adobe is great, but it kind of makes everything look the same. I use Silkypix for both the E1 and Fuji's when I shoot RAW. It's not as good as Lightroom but uses the original color.
I remember moving from Olympus E-10 to E-1 - upgrade was huge. Used it for almost 3 years. AWB was always spot on. Interesting quirk was that only software creating proper color was Olympus Studio (with "high function" option), later versions of the OStudio created washed out wrong "cmos" like colors.
Ah. Hmm I wonder if there is an archived version of the original somewhere it's be pretty neat to try.
This camera is awesome. Ben shooting on one for several decades. Some amazing memories and even better photos.
That's great, they really are pretty durable Cameras!
Great video. SO much more to say about this camera and lenses. Hope you continue your comments on this body and glass. (Btw - my similar bodies are: E1, E5, OMD-E-M1 MK II.)
Thanks! I do hope to do more with the system so hopefully I'll have more videos on it in future! Sound like you have a pretty well arounded 4/3rds and M4/3rds set up!
This camera is the most comfortable camera to hold from my collection. And it takes great photos!
It is an ergonomic machine! For sure!
Hi…I own my E-1 for about 10 years now and also have a E-500 and the E-1 is my favourite. Great handling, simple and weathersealed. I also have E-3, but that camera is more complicated to use and heavy. I also have the 14-54 and (my favourite) 50-200. Question: Are the photos in your gallery all done with the 35 mm? Thanks for your nice ‘talk’ about my old buddy. I don’t use the E-1 very often, because I prefer the practical use on my Ipad with my Olympus Em-1 (1), but when I’m in the mood I always enjoy my E-1 for the day. Stills are wonderful.
Good day,
Yup in that gallery the photos were the 35mm f3.5 macro! Oh the 50-200 sounds awesome! I have been eyeing one up for a while!
I have an e-500 and adapted a macro Nikon lens. Loving it
That's awesome, do you use a split prism focusing screen with it or just the stock one? I recently got a split prism for the e-1 and for manual focus glass I love it!
@@Mr50mmish I have the stock screen. I didn’t know there was other screens for the e500. I would love a focus point led like my d40.
@@agxiso ah yeah it would be neat of the camera focus LED would work for Manual focus stuff. But yeah I assume it's similar to change as the e-1 there is just tab in the mirrorbox and when you pull it the screen drops and you can swap it. It makes focusing very nice. www.ebay.ca/itm/315346228341?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=hcCIqZNERO6&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=NMcFURBUQGC&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY I just found that random one on eBay but there seem to be a few sellers!
The E-1 is in a league of its own. It feels like no other camera in the hand, it produces some amazing files and sounds smooth. Mine had a loose rubber grip, I removed it, cleaned both the grip and the body from all adhesive residue and now I can't get an adhesive to get the grip to stick to the body.
It's a very awesome camera. Yeah the grips swell and the rubber deteriorates so adhesives don't stick to it well. You can maybe try to clean it with IPA to scrub off any gunky layers then try a different adhesive. If it's also swollen you can potentially cut some away to make it fit better. Otherwise the only other thing I can suggest is buying a parts one that has a good grip and transplanting it!
@@Mr50mmish the rubber is in good condition and fits well on the body. All cleaned up perfectly with alcohol, but no adhesive I have seems to do anything. Might just try black colored polyurethane that I normally use for construction joints ans crack repairs.
@@NiGhtPiSH superglue - trust
The E1 is better than the E300/E500, more subtle, easier to manage highlights and shadows, better jpgs out of the box and better raw file manipulation (no TIFF). Slightly more natural colors, but amazing CCD, raw red green blue and yellow hues are amazing. The E300/E500 has a more digital look, stronger contrast, stronger sharpening, difficult to manage highlights under strong sunlight, but also makes beautiful pictures. I prefer the look of E300 pictures over E500 but its very subtle, the E500 camera is more manageable but less geeky, much lighter too. The early CMOS variations are also very well color rendered, E510/E410 had image stabilization and a very early live view possibility (slooow). If I am not mistaken. The later CMOS variations are more neutral calibrated and lose some raw Kodak color science magic. But are much better camera's as a tool. Alot of early CMOS and super CCD's also have very beautiful color rendition, but it's more hit and miss. Check galleries to know not specs. The difficulty is to get good glass at cheap prices for the E1/E300/E500 that lets in alot of light (you need that with these vintage digitals without stabilization). The kit lenses are ok, but require post processing (sharpening), use center autofocus and recompose ... The E1 shure is the camera to keep. And if you can't find a cheap E300 just get the E500 and you will have 95% the same image results.
Nice, I own a E1 and a E500, never gonna sell them, which good glass are you thinking about? I have the 50 f2 and it's a lot of fun
Negli anni 2000 avevo uno studio fotografico ed usavo la pellicola 35mm nelle cerimonie (matrimoni, ad esempio) mentre la medio formato (6x9cm) per l'arredamento.
Nel 2004 sono passato al digitale proprio con la Olympus E-1 per i miei reportage.
Nei matrimoni, le stampe 30x40cm (proporzione 4/3) erano bellissime e non avevo problemi persino a scattare direttamente in jpg, sapendo come esporre di destra (misurazione spot sulle alte luci e sovraesporle appena prima di perdere il dettaglio) e grazie alla maggiore profondità di campo rispetto al 35mm (oggi full-frame) potevo usare il diaframma f:2,8 spesso e raramente chiudevo oltre f:5,6.
Questo mi permetteva di usare al meglio la luce ambiente e, grazie allo scatto praticamente privo di vibrazioni e l'ottima ergonomia, di fatto era come se avessi una fotocamera con il sensore stabilizzato. 😯
Bella esperienza.
Purtroppo dopo 4 anni si è guastata e ho al volo acquistato una E-3 usata da un fotoamatore in una città vicina per sostituirla.
Ovviamente avevo anche un secondo corpo, una E-300.
Con la E-3 ho avuto dei benifici tangibili come velocità operativa, monitor ampio ed orientabile, autofocus e nitidezza migliore, sensore stabilizzato, poter scattare anche oltre 800 iso, bla bla bla... eppure l'ergonomia diversa e soprattutto lo scatto meno silenzioso, mi davano un pochino fastidio. 🤔
Sembrava una reflex Canon, questa Olympus E-3.
Comunque me la sono fatta piacere. 🙂
Non ho riscontrato tangibili differenze nella resa dei colori perché Olympus è... Olympus.
Un anno fa, essendo rimasto senza reflex 4/3 ed avendo ancora bellissimi vetri Zuiko 4/3 che usavo con le mirrorless, ho acquistato di nuovo la E-3 e, mi è così piaciuto vedere le foto attraverso un mirino ottico (mi ricorda il passato con la pellicola), tanto da acquistare l'ultima della serie professionale, ovvero la E-5.
Con questa reflex, Olympus ha regalato il miglior equilibrio nel sistema; sensore da 12mp che trovo ottimale per quasi ogni esigenza, filtro aa inesistente per dare giustizia alla resa delle ottiche Zuiko e bellissima resa fotografica nel complesso. 😉
Magari per alcuni rumorosa anche oltre 400 iso, ma grazie ai nuovi software A.I. scatto anche a 3.200 iso senza patemi esistenziali.
Una settimana fa, un amico fotomatore mi ha regalato la sua E-1 che non usava da tempo.
A volte gli amori, ritornano. 🥰
That's an awesome linage of Olympus you had going on! I'm glad you got reunited with the E-1 how are you liking second time around after all these years?
Sicuramente l'ergonomia (mi piace che il mirino sia leggermente decentrato sulla sinistra) e lo scatto più ovattato.
L'ho subito dotata dell'impugnatura portabatteria che mi era rimasta, e con lo Zuiko 150mm f:2 si aveva un bellissimo equilibrio.
Nei prossimi giorni verifico sul campo quanto possa regalarmi anche nel 2024.
Goodluck! Hopefully it gives you some awesome photos!
That is a nice song you put in the photo gallery section, may I know where did you get it from? Thank you
Good day, it's "Everything Has a Beginning" - Joel Cummins, on the UA-cam Audio library. Cheers!
@@Mr50mmish thanks Mr50mm, wonderful day for you 🙏
I've owned most of the best early CCD cameras including the E300, E500, S5pro, S3pro, S2pro, k10, IstD, Dynax and more and the E1 is the king of them all if you have good light - if you're after the slide film look. It's best to shoot in TIFF because then you get the Olympus color science. The Fuji S2pro is second best but it's not fun to shoot with. Both Kodak and Fuji were trying to appeal to film photographers back then and their early cameras were built to mimic film. The Nikon D200 is amazing but wasn't designed to look like film. So it doesn't.
Oh, what about the S2 makes it not fun to shoot? ON paper it seems fairly close to the S3 interface wise.
@@Mr50mmish It's really slow. Much slower than the S3. The S3 is a better camera than the S2 in just about every way except the S2 just has a little more Fujichrome magic.
@@flixfan1 ah I didn't realize it was that much slower. I am looking to pick one up. There is a local seller in my area (kind of... It's a 2 hr drive away) in box!
@@Mr50mmish I love the S2. If you shoot in TIFF, the slowness makes the experience like shooting film. S3 doesn't do TIFF. But if you're using these old CCD cameras, and shooting RAW, you should look into processors that use the original color science. Adobe is great, but it kind of makes everything look the same. I use Silkypix for both the E1 and Fuji's when I shoot RAW. It's not as good as Lightroom but uses the original color.
There was one on ebay today for $85 i was trying to snag but someone got it before me
Ah damn, next time! $85 is a good price for one!
It's good, unfortunately too slow for todays.
I would never give myself nickname Mr. 50mm...
Why not. It's a perfectly excellent focal length! And nothing else. Probably.
@@Mr50mmish I don’t think he was referring to focal LENGTH ! 🤣😂
@@SpudUna Whaaaaaaa, what else could it possibly mean?