How can they call the lens ultrawide when the micro 4/3 is 2x crop factor. That makes the 17mm lens a 34mm lens. That's not even near wide angle in 35mm terms. Or have Olympus labelled the lenses specifically for the camera meaning the 17mm label is already after the 2x crop factor.

this is the wide lens they are talking about..

m4/3 7-14mm

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct...uct/1252/cat/69

14-42 is just the kit lens..

anyway just to share:--

Detail: Olympus E-P1 vs E-30, Panasonic GH1, Canon T1i, and Nikon D5000

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/EP1/EP1A.HTM

wish olympus had chosen to put in an evf. dat will make it an true contender.
the omission of a build in flash is still acceptable but without a viewfinder... it might be a little harder to do manual focussing.

you guys can be really serious about the camera sometimes... it's all about the photographs, not the camera dude

300 pics only.

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2009/archives/5202
d5000 so keng meh ? 
This I hadn’t planned on
If there was one thing I hadn’t planned on it was this; I fell in love with the D-5000. In fact, I’m keeping it. I was absolutely shocked at its high ISO performance. I took shots, hand held at 1250 ISO in a square in the town of Siena, and when my brother and I looked at them that night—full screen on my computer, you could barely see any noise at all. It was like ISO 400 on my D300. I was just amazed!!!! So, I pushed that thing up to 1600 ISO any ol’ time, and I was shooting at night handheld without a second thought.

Also, it has so many of the features of my D300 that I felt surprisingly at home. In fact, I could only find one thing that I really wished it did that I couldn’t figure out how to get it to do; I wanted to assign the center OK button to zoom in to a 100% view (like I do on my D-300), but I don’t think it offers that feature.

I was also surprised to learn that the image quality was fantastic (very D-300-like, but if you shoot in JPEG mode I would set the Picture Control setting to Vivid to make the color more punchy. While there, I would increase the amount of sharpening as well, but outside of that, I love that camera for travel work because it’s so light, compact, and takes such great images (even in low light). By the way; I never used the video! (I only had one 4GB SD memory card. It’s a long story, but that’s all I had. I should have bought more, but that’s another story).

The Fate of My D-300
So, what’s going to happen to my beloved D300? I’m selling it. It was my back-up camera, and the one I used for travel photography, but now I have a new low-noise, lightweight, replacement that even shoots video, so it’s time to wave bye to my D300 (and its sale will help offset the cost of my original problem).

What Was Your Wife’s “Big Surprise” shoot?
Are you ready for this? On Thursday morning, up pulls a red convertible Ferrari F-430, which my wife had rented for the day for me to drive through the hills of Tuscany and find a place for a sunset shoot of the car. Does it get any better than that?!!!

I’ve always been a Ferrari freak (which is why my wife chose to rent a Ferrari in the first place), but however great I thought driving a Ferrari would be—honestly, it was 10 times better than I imagined. Totally a surreal experience. I drove it from Montaione to Pisa, and everywhere in between. It really felt like you’d imagine a Ferrari would feel. It was more than just great looking and really fast. It was a race car on the street. Oh yeah, I got some cool shots, too! (You’ll see some tomorrow. I had my brother take it through some curves as I shot—-he really hated that—wink, wink) and then we took turns driving and shooting, and just having a ball. It’s a day I’ll never forget. Do I have a rockin’ wife or what!!!!!

OK, Let’s See Some Photos
Tomorrow I’m running a series of photos from the trip, so I hope you’ll stop by and check them out. I’m back home now, (and probably back in the office by the time you read this, taking lots of ribbing for leaving my camera gear behind). But hey, I lived a dream—-I went to Italy and fell in love (does it still count if the thing you fell in love with was a camera?).

Shooting Time vs. Family Time
Although I limited my shooting time (after all, this was a family vacation first), I did get to shoot for five hours by myself on Friday, which was great fun (although four hours of it was driving time to and from my shooting location in “The Crete” area of Tuscany). Tuscany is just a magical place, and it’s a very target rich environment for photography (and for food, and architecture, and landscapes, and history, and…..)

I really tried my best to make sure my photography didn’t get in the way of our family time, so I just took my camera along wherever we went, and I shot along the way (kind of like a photo walk). Of course, my wife went out of her way to make sure I’d get interesting things to shoot during the week, and anytime I needed a few extra minutes to “get the shot” she was totally cool with it. I took far fewer shots than any previous trip (less than 950 photos for the entire week-long trip), but I had such a relaxing time; got some great time with the wife and kids, got my internal batteries totally recharged, and still got at least a few decent shots, which I’ll share here tomorrow.

Scott says:
June 22, 2009 at 6:25 am
Hi Rogier Bos:
I get asked this question a lot. The main reason I bring the D300 instead of the D3 is that I can usually get away with using just one lens the entire trip—my 18-200mm f/3.5 - f/5.6 VR. That’s all I used in Italy all of last year, and it worked wonderfully. If I put that lens on my full-frame D3, it gets cropped. So basically, I was trading low-noise for something more lightweight and not having to change lenses ever—which relieves me from saying, “Rats, I don’t have the right lens for this shot!” which I’ve said over and over before I started using that 18-200mm lens.

Of course remember; I’m on vacation with my family, so I want to travel light and not make myself a burden. If I was shooting for an article on travel, then I’d bring all kinds of gear, and an assistant to help me lug it all around, but for shooting while on vacation I want a lighter weight body and ideally, one lens. Now, with the D-5000, I have an even better solution, because it’s:

(a) Lighter weight (by far)
(b) Much better in low light
© I have video built-in just in case

Hope that helps show you were I’m coming from. Every time I leave to go shooting I have to sit there and try to figure out, “Well, what should I take for this,” but now at least I know what to take when I travel.

Take care,

-Scott

" pro say d5000 high iso much better than d300 wor. so E-P1 = d3 lolz "

i dont see any logic in this statement.. if d5000 is better than d300 how come suddenly E-P1 = D3?

D3 is FF la..

On par with D3 only 2999?! D3 is ff leh... unless u have concrete comparison XD

launched in KL ka? went to all shops in one utama and curve also say dun have the funniest thing is that they dont even know that it exist heheheh