Should you get an E-P2 over the E-P1?

Leonard Goh | Nov 06, 2009

The Olympus E-P2. (Credit: Leonard Goh/CNET Asia)

When Olympus announced the E-P2 Micro Four Thirds camera yesterday, I could almost hear E-P1 owners scream injustice in unison. It's not surprising if you consider that only five months have passed since the company's first shooter to employ such an imaging standard was launched.

Given the short duration between the announcements for these two snappers, I am guessing that when the E-P1 was launched, Olympus already had the specifications for the E-P2 confirmed. So why release an "incomplete" camera first? In some ways, we believe the E-P2 is what the E-P1 should have been in the first place.

However, the Japanese firm has clear market segregation for the two Micro Four Thirds cameras. According to Olympus, the E-P1 is targeted at the average user, while the E-P2, with an option for an external electronic viewfinder and microphone, is more suited for advanced lensmen. Not to mention that the new snapper has also continuous autofocus tracking and two more Art Filters. But still, no onboard flash for the just-announced Micro Four Thirds shooter.

But is this a good enough reason for having two very similar products announced within half a year of each other? A quick look at some online photo forums reveal that a lot of users (especially current E-P1 owners) are pretty upset Olympus pulled such a stunt on them. Most are hoping the firm will release new firmware updates for the E-P1 soon to enable the features that are present in the E-P2. We've checked with Olympus on this and are waiting for an official reply.

With regard to the new optics announced yesterday, camera blog 1001noisycameras says the company has made a bad strategic marketing decision by unveiling lenses which covers the range that Panasonic already has. To some extent, we agree with the blog. What the market will probably want to see more is perhaps more prime (fixed focal length) lenses, such as the 17mm F2.8 or the 20mm F2.0 lens produced for Micro Four Thirds cameras. Still, we have to admit the new 14-150mm F4-5.6 glass will probably go down well with travelers as it covers a good range from wide-angle to telephoto, and it will be a boon if it is priced correctly.

What do you think? Did Olympus do the right thing by unveiling two similar cameras so close to each other? And would you pay premium for the E-P2 (US$1,100 with EVF and 14-42mm kit lens vs. E-P1 at US$799 with 14-42mm optics)? Let us know below.

Filed under: Digital Cameras
1 Comment | Bookmark | Share

Slashdot

Digg

Facebook

Twitter

Delicious

Google

StumbleUpon

close this

Add tag

To add tags, you need to become a member. It's FREE.

Cancel

Log in or sign in

systemx

View profile

Send mail

systemx says...
I personally would never get another Olympus camera again. I bought 1 when they started using more standard micro-SD cards via an adapter to their ancient xd-card standards. However, I soon discovered, to my and the general population's knowledge at large that certain functions such as VGA video recording past 30 secs and Panoramic photography were only enabled when one of their original xd-cards were used in the camera. Nowhere was this published in brochures or on the box.

A recommendation to everyone, boycott Olympus cameras. If you need to get an MFTs camera, go for the Panasonic GF1.

Nov 10, 2009 10:28