The Best Film Look -Olympus XZ-1 Beats Fuji And The Rest
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- ☕️ Support my channel: www.buymeacoff...
Get a copy of my zine: www.blurb.com/...
Subscribe also to my monthly newsletter and get a free preset and camera profile that you can use with LR or PS (ACR). Of course you'll also get my best picks of the latest in the camera and photography world. sulanto.fi/new...
My camera gear, these are affiliate links to Amazon:
Ricoh GR3: amzn.to/3k8UATp
Ricoh GR3x: amzn.to/3DB4Puc
Sony A7IV: amzn.to/3BshuwT
Sony 24mm F2.8 G: amzn.to/3nVqy6y
Sony 40mm F2.5 G: amzn.to/3xGm49E
Sony 50mm F2.5 G: amzn.to/3BQxNBw
Sony ZV-1: amzn.to/3qVgo7H
Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 G2: amzn.to/3DKPsPN
Sirui ST124 tripod: amzn.to/3BuXc5P
NiSi Vario ND: amzn.to/3bGLFUy
Topaz apps: www.topazlabs....
👕Get something to wear and support my channel at the same time👕
teespring.com/...
My name is Matti Sulanto, I'm a photographer based in Helsinki Finland.
My Instagram: / sulantoblog
My website: sulanto.fi
"Photography is not about sharpness or megapixels. Photography is all about light, shadow, composition, timing. Photography is all about being able to see what is happening around you." I can't say anything about the XZ-1 having not owned or used one. But this quotation ought to be added to the great quotes about photography. Loved this video.
@@Andre-rl2fjSpeak by yourself 😉🤡🤣🤗
Actually it has nothing to do with CCD. The reason it delivers amazing colors is that all these old cameras use different sensor filtering. Their high ISO sucks but color wise they are amazing ! Plus Olympus has always had great color science. Cheers
You have made the same conclusion as I in the video😀
I can't speak for Olympus but Canon specifically designed their older CCD sensors to replicate film in the early days of digital cameras because they were trying to entice film shooters to go digital. This is the reason the early Powershots and even the 5D Classic (CMOS) have a very filmic look.
CCD is only good near base ISO, once you go above ISO400, it produces a lot of noise that cannot be easily filtered out like on CMOS. But back in those years many cameras were not able to even reach ISO800+. Early DSLRs like Pentax K10D or Nikon D80 also used CCD sensors. Those APS-C 10Mpix sensors had ISO1600 ceiling because they had significantly larger photosites than compact cameras. But thats about it. If you try to take some long exposure with such sensitivity, sensor overheats quickly and produces large amount of noise. Not to mention video. Larger CCD overheats very quickly while capturing video and some HD 720p resolution was limit for most of such cameras. XZ-1 HD video has low resolution, it looks more like enlarged 640x480. There are no details and it looks like oil painting movie :D It also has very small dynamic range, no contrast and other issues. And once people wanted more live-view, video and higher ISO, switching to CMOS was the only way how to achieve that without complex cooling mechanisms and extensive digital noise processing.
Olympus XZ-2 has 12Mpix 1/1.7" BSI-CMOS sensor and it has much better signal to noise ratio. It produces quite good photos even with ISO800 and is still usable for some web purposes or reduced size with ISO1600. RAW of course.
XZ-1 has the ISO400 ceiling +/-. ISO 800 only if you can live with a lot of noise, no fine detail and narrow dynamic range. And only in RAW(ORF). Because JPGs are horrible even at ISO100 with strong denoising artifacts that are killing details.
I used to own an XZ-1 before it was fashionable. I was glad to get rid of it. My X100V beats it hands down.
Ccd plays a lot into these old cameras does it surprise you photographers want back the old cameras … says something
After film, I initially landed on a Leica D-lux 3 as my travel camera.. it had a CCD sensor, took great pictures at low ISO values up to ISO 400. Being an electrical engineer and an enthusiast photographer I always had a keen interest in sensors, filter arrays and how various lens designs interact with them. In my humble opinion, early sensor design attempted to imitate the classic ‘film’ look as most people at that transformative period still printed their images. Now as computer technology improved, people began viewing their photos on computer monitors and social media. Hence it became a balance of light and resolution between the camera sensor and the computer monitor, with CMOS sensor technology becoming the technology of choice. Hey, I actually had high hopes for Foveon sensor technology… but.
Thanks. Film look probably was more important 10-15 years ago than today.
This is why some contemporary photographers present their work with backlights.
That being said, those old cameras are still around and fun to shoot with!
@@mattisulanto You're absolutely right. Most photographers today weren't even born when digital became good enough to replace films.
I am surprised that there is a video about this camera after more than 10 years! I took my XZ-1 out of the drawer and recharge it, will take it with me tomorrow when I am out and about!
How was it? :) i was about to sell mine, but i changed my mind
I own an old Panasonic Lumix LX3, I believe from the same era of this Olympus, and I like its image quality until today. The b&w images are so smooth and the Leica lens is so sharp. I just can`t let it go.
I had the XZ2. CMOS. Still filmlike color. But my suggestion is find a Olympus Stylus 1 or 1s. Fantastic little compact with 28-300 constant f2.8 lens, evf abd super fast OMD e-m5 operating system. WAY overlooked.
I really enjoyed watching this video. I found an XZ-1 in an old cupboard three months ago. I had completely forgotten I had it. I charged the battery and brought it out of retirement. It is small, lightweight and has strong image quality. I love to use it now. As long as you understand its limitations, its definitely worth trying to find in the used camera market.
Lenses baby! My old Olympus trip film camera delivered images that punched far far above it’s price tag. And survived years of abuse rock climbing, and mountaineering. One handed photos, in impossible places, and still delivered.
Great vid and thanks. For some of us, there's "film look" and there's "film experience". I'm in the latter camp and enjoy the whole process of loading film, being extremely selective on shots, going through the challenge of shooting real film, having the anticipation that an undeveloped film holds and then the great reveal, after the effort (and cost) of having it developed. Then there's the whole digitisation experience, where we re-live our shoot. For most I suppose that is all "inconvenience", but for us remaining masochists, it's wonderful in so many ways! Cheers - Dave
Thanks. You might enjoy this video: ruclips.net/video/YfJClTBLdkM/видео.html
Thank you for this Matti.
When you wrote "beats Fuji" I was ready to fight, but after seeing your beautiful photographs I see your point.
I love soft painterly film-like photos, like Ernst Haas or Saul Leiter.
I shoot with Asahi Takumar lenses mounted on a Fujifilm x-t2 and i find the results very pleasing.
Thanks again for this video, I will seriously consider this camera for travel and certain projects.
Thanks for your compliments😀
Sulantoさん、はじめまして。
わたしのOlympus XZ-1は古くなって使う機会が減りましたが、いつでも使える状態です。
明るいレンズで画像の階調が良く、美しい色彩が目を惹きます。
鞄から取り出して、すぐシャッターが切れるところが気に入っています。
モードダイヤルが気づかないうちに動いていることがあり、注意が必要ですね。
良い動画ありがとうございました。
I have not tried this one yet but Ive tried a ton of these digicams and own many of them. The one that comes closest to the film look IMO is the Canon Powershot G3. Canon specifically designed the sensor in the 5D Classic (and early Powershots) to replicate film because they were trying to entice film shooters to go digital. This one looks pretty good though.
Thanks for sharing.
I bought this camera when it came out and absolutely loved it. Beautiful camera that produced great quality images. My only issue was the aggressive noise reduction applied to the photos above iso 100, it looked pretty terrible. I later upgraded to the XZ-2 which was a huge improvement on image and video quality. I really should dig it out again.
I agree with you regarding the CCD thing - i suspect that it's not possible to separate out the sensor from the other variables you mention. I'll just add one more as a bit of a wildcard.... Film was the measure of photography when the digital revolution hit. The early need in the market was to compete with analogue - to have digital that looked 'as good', which meant looking similar in order not to offend the accepted aesthetics. Once the initial technical problems were overcome, and the true potential of digital became apparent, and there was market acceptance of digital, digital was freed of the burden of 'the film look' and licensed to develop according to it's own peculiar potential. I don't see anything particularly deliberate in this evolution... but it seems to me to be a plausible pathway for the development to have taken.
I used it for a few years, while it's more "filmic" than modern compacts, its nothing compared to the Camedia c-5050. Slow, very, very quirky, but the output is top notch
Brands should focus on improved pocket cameras after the great success of x100v and Ricoh GR. because those are not perfect, they have much to improve, and it seems there is a huge market for this.
I tend to agree, but there can never be a camera that would be perfect for everyone. That's why we have so many different models, something for everyone.
@@mattisulanto any new one won’t be perfect, but I mean that there is room for improvement, and therefore room for market appetite. Traditional photography lost a battle against smartphones, but has not lost the war.
I understand and have the same sentiment as you have.
@@TungstenOvergaardMarcuspix just did a video saying he thinks the small camera market is on its way out. I hope he’s wrong. I love a camera I can stick in my pocket.
@@Wonderish403 the small cameras Marcus Pix uses are not APSC. That’s why the image quality is so bad and so reliant on big flashes or very sunny days in the desert. That market, small sensors, is dead, APSC is not.
I bought the XZ-1 after watching Robin's video because I felt so nostalgic about my first Olympus (and camera in my life). I was so blown away by the quality and speed of such an old compact camera. Now it's almost all the time in my pocket haha.
Thanks for sharing!
Where I can buy it? Thank you!
I had one from new and actually sold it a few years ago for most of its original value. I was never really inspired by it, or its images that it created, and found the low light performance below par... Mine had a custom grip attached - by Richard Franiec, who has since retired I believe. Its odd how these older cameras are becoming more popular, when they weren't that great upon release. Its almost like someone has found a pallet of them in a warehouse somewhere, and needs to create a buzz....
Perhaps you've been looking for the perfect camera.
Share with us here when you find it. Meantime, good luck!
Maybe thats not really the point I was making. @@kindface
I agree with you. I use the XZ-2 for years and like to put it in my pocket for carefree hiking or cycling. I avoid ISO above 400 whenever possible, ISO 100 of course is best. Although I own a few mft cameras (for example the OM-1), I took the opportunity a few weeks ago to buy a second-hand Olympus Stylus 1s in mint condition. The image quality is similar, but the focal length goes up to 300mm (35mm equivalent) at constant speed. It is of course slightly larger than the XZ-2, but also a featherweight compared to the OM-1 or G9.
The colour look saturated but in such a pleasing way... That'll be difficult to replicate today.
The images so pop so beautiful that they make my eyes pop out with a wow😍
Thanks!
I had one XZ1, a wonderfully little camera, coupled with an awesome Olympus EVF connected in the hotshoe.
Later I bought the Olympic XZ2, a more advanced camera which was a joy to use.
Then i bought a Sony RX100M3 with a 1" type sensor. This camera had a leaf shutter and a ND filter, 24-70 mm zoom, so less reach zoom but superior image quality.
Then Fuji presented the XF10 with a fixed lens and an APS sensor, with Fuji film simulations.
In my opinion all these cameras are pocketable instruments of great photography capabilities.
I currently keep the Sony RX100M3 and the Fuji XF10.
I have one of these little beauties Matti. It lives in my day bag. The presets are awesome including a super grainy b&w. Only thing I’ve done is added a ThumbsUp lever that allows steady one handed shooting✌️
Thanks for sharing! Good to hear so many of my audience have this wonderful little camera.
過去十年XZ1一直是我最可靠的朋友，協助我記錄每一個日常，讓它們成為美麗的時刻。👍
XZ1 has been my most reliable friend for the past ten years, helping me record every day and turn them into beautiful moments.
Looking back, some of my best shots came out of my Nikon D40, which also had a CCD sensor. I think I have been disappointed in every camera that has followed. The photos from the D40 always popped and looked so vibrant. The 1/500th flash sync was handy too.
reject modernity
return to d40
I get that there is a resurgence of older compact cameras, and I understand why. But I'm also sceptical about this so-called ccd magic. I also think the film simulation obsession is a fad that's going to be around for a while then disappear. I find a lot of the film-sim images on line that are so popular are too orange, and remind me more of the expired film look. I didn't really like the look of most color print film back when film was all we shot, and I'm still not crazy about it. But then people are paying big bucks to get blurry wedding photos, so I guess it's all a matter of taste. I do understand that there is a reaction to the overly clinical look of modern images. It reminds me of the resurgence of vinyl over digital in music recordings. Vinyl adds just the right amount of distortion (some call it warmth) to smooth out the accuracy of digital music. Also, it feels good to be different. When everybody else is shooting modern cameras and listening to streaming digital music, it's nice to go against the current. That's part of it too.
OG 5d is legit. Loved that camera. Still today.
I have a G15 that I use occasionally just for fun to get that "filmic nostalgic look". I pretty much set it to JPEG only and use it for just casual fun photography. Thanks for the video!
Thanks for sharing!
I had both XZ-1 and XZ-2. The XZ-2 was better in low light, but I've always found more pleasing the images from XZ-1 in good light. The ZX-2 had a green cast in bright light scenarios in JPEG. The XZ-2 was also sharper, had a better screen but the body was bulkier. I miss those cameras.
Agreed! The XZ-2 is one of my best cameras today😊
Would love a comparison video between this and my Canon Powershot S95 from 2010. I love that camera.
The photos look really organic - nice video - will try to get one because there is something about the ccd sensor -
Leica M8 with the ccd sensor is quite different from the later cmos sensor
Over 10 years ago, I was close to buying the glossy white version of the XZ-1 on discount... I sooo regret not doing so now. Obviously, that involves keeping the camera over the years too, haha.
It certainly has a nostalgic feel in it. I had a Leica D-Lux4 years ago, it renders all colors nicely except Red, its vibrancy is way over addressed, luckily I was able to correct it in Phase One software with Leica film presets.
I agree...this little cam is great
I still have mine, original battery was bloated and almost dead. easily replaceable with third-party batteries so i bought two plus an external charger. sadly the internal battery which keeps the time and date is dead too. not sure if that is replaceable. yes it does help you make beautiful images and will be keeping mine.
Still have mine; just can't part with it although I don't use it much. The images SOOC are great for such a small sensor camera (1/1.63). Excellent, fast lens. It's best in good light. I'll push the ISO in low light to 400, 800 if I'm forced but that's it. Otherwise, you have to use a larger aperture and/or slower shutter speed as you did. Adding the accessory VF-2 EVF and a stick-on grip improves handling and the shooting experience for me. These old cameras are still great photography tools as long as you recognize and respect their limitations.
Thank you for sharing.
I bought one of these brand new and still use it as my travel camera. It is my favorite camera in my bag. These pix in the video look just like mine.
I too prefer the old compact CCDs.
I had an excellent Samsung ST200F smart camera
I really like your presentation. It is calm,totally devoid of histrionics and deliverrs the point. There is a very high level of integrity there. I am about to embark on a new discovery much like what you did withthis subject matter it is a whole new world of finding an excellent, lovable camera for daily purposes that is user friendly, special in the way iof image quality and affordable.🎉
Wow this just popped on my feed and happy to see a newer video of this old niche compact camera. I had one of these and it was pretty nice all around camera for that time. Olympus had good colors for sure except for the sometimes overly reddish skin tones. I really didn't like the low light performance nor the video but all photo cameras at the time had bad video. Eventually I got rid of Oly for a Sony Rx100 and that finally gave me what I wanted for video. Even by today's standards it's good enough. Eventually I'll stop with it and go full cell phone because I just got an Oppo find x6 pro that has three large 1" sensors with one being 35mm equiv. 😊 Time moves on with all things but thanks for bringing me back some good memories with this Olympus! I had lots of good shots with it. 😢😊
Awesome images. I wish it could take video clips too.
I really enjoyed this video, by coincidence i'm doing exactely the same with my Sony HX60 point and shoot camera, bought it last November. It has nice build in photo effects. With these effects and the vintage filters in Lightroom i can make the photos look like they were taken with an old 35mm analogue film camera.
Tiny cameras of this vintage connect you with the simple joys of photography! My LUMIX LX7 is a pocket wonder much like your Olympus. I added a viewfinder to complete the package. There’s only one more thing to add to either the Oly/Panny to feel the complete photographer experience, the beret!😀👍
You are absolutely correct😀
I have an LX 10 always mated with a zhiyun Crane M since 2017. It is a powerful portable cinematic beast.
Looks like a fun little camera. I'm a big fan of Olympus colors. Are you hanging with Robin Wong out there?
They should definitely meet up!
I agree with your view on the CCD vs CMOS censors. I know that Kodak CCD had a lot to do with how they set up that sensor. However, the color look was always determined by the processor and the OEM color "magic".
I still using my Panasonic DMC LX3, I love the color and contrast of the ccd sensor
The Original Ricoh GR digital camera is awesome for black and white, 8.1 megapixels of delight.
It's not easy to express this properly but I feel like I can actually TOUCH the things in these photos. It's not about how real or crisp the textures are (sharpness, resolution...) it's... object seperation. Something in how these older digital cameras render images is conducive to how our perception works. I'm not getting an "unreal" feeling from modern ones but looking at these images here I do get a sense of realness I'm not getting elsewhere. I'm not sure I'm making sense.
I am amazed at the beautiful colour. I once had an Olympus OM2 :in 1975 and I wish I never sold it
It's certainly not about the megapixels but, for me, if the lens cannot resolve detail well enough (Sony APSC kit lens can be guilty of this) I find myself walking around with the feeling that my efforts may potentially be spoiled by the limitations of such a lens. I therefore found myself looking for brighter lighting conditions and higher contrasting subjects to counter these limitations, and I ignored so many potential images that I countered that problem with my iPhone. Well, thankfully one can change out the lens on the Sony kit, but if you have a fixed lens compact, that lens had better be good! Looks like that is the case with this Olympus.
Thanks. Sure, a poor lens makes any camera less nice to shoot with.
Great video! Brings back memories. I used this camera for quite a while till it developed a mechanical problem. Still have it with me though. I used it a lot at full zoom max aperture for head-n-torso portraits. I would switch on the TCON in Settings, so the camera is always at 113mm f2.5 even if I switch it on/off. It's like using a prime lens.
One point that really deserves mention is the lens' aperture-FL curve. The aperture drops slowly, unlike many modern cameras that have almost similar numbers, like 28-100mm f1.8-2.8 but the aperture plummets to 2.8 if you zoom it even a few mm. With the XZ-1 even at 85mm you'll be at f2, if I remember correctly.
It was a real gem.
Low light sensitivity in CCD is always best but here dynamic range seems very nice in all photos
28-112 mm zoom is in my opinion an ideal. Beutiful camera.. Nice vid, cheers.
I have the pentax MX1, very similar camera with the same lens, the sensor is Cmos though. I did not use it for a long time, then I tried the reversal film simulation and it looks very nice. I may have to wait after the Swedish winter before I can try the color rendering a little more 😊
Thanks for sharing. Not much color in the Swedish (or Finnish) winter😀
Pentax MX-1 is gutted Olympus XZ-2. Same lens, sensor, IBIS, processor etc, but does not have hotshoe and EVF port. Another OEM copycat is Casio EX-10 again without flash hotshoe.
Similar with Olympus Stylus 1 and Casio EX-100 that shares same internals except EVF.
I have a 5d classic and still absolutely love the images that come out of the camera. I once shot 500 images in an afternoon with my 5d and 6d cameras and I preferred nearly all the 5d ones in a blind test. I have a Lumix S5 now and while it does amazing video it can't compete with the colour science from the original 5d.
I love the pictures you posted from this camera! They remind me of the 5d, only they have a warmer, more punchy look. What a terrific little camera... looks like they're holding their price quite well too.
There's a good chance that you can replicate the 5D look on newer Canon cameras if you're willing to tinker with their Picture Style Editor desktop application (IMO, the most underrated photographic tool among Canon shooters).
@@IndigoEyePhotography I've got a 550d and a 6d and even using that software that 5d images have a certain quality to them. The 6d has terrific high iso performance but the images, despite being higher resolution, look softer and more artificial somehow.
I think it's because the 5d has 12mp spread over such a large sensor
6:30 everyone going crazy over CCD's but you're the first online that ask this question...
from what i heard online years ago is that at the time of making 5d classic, canon is working with kodak to develop their color science to match the kodachrome.
i think the reason they change it now is because;
1. the colors are too styleized, so they tone it down to make it more flexible
2. the colors are just too good that they can't improve from that point, so they change it for the sake of change and make the illusion of differences/improvement/upgrade.
And im not mad even if thats the case. if all the camera looks like that, it wont feel special anymore, and lose the feel of nostalgia that they had.
Loved the video Matti, new subscriber ❤
I own two of these from new. Fabulous little things. I normally shoot JPGs on the vivid preset along with a raw file and work on the raw file to make it look like the jpeg. I like HDR. 🙂
Thanks.
Thanks a lot for this review. I used to own this camera and I agree 100% with you. I think that the best part of this camera is the lens and I wish I could have bough the same lens on more advanced cameras.
I picked many Olympus point & Shoots & even their first DSLR from under $10, sometimes including the shipping. The CCD DSLR power zoom was under $30. Some 2 for $1 plus shipping. AS IS, some worked some did not. These give great film looks. I believe Kodak made early Olympus sensors. Early, Sony Cameras great color also. I picked 3 of these at .99. Plus shipping. I’d like specialize in the sale of my photography Vintage Style? I did see a wedding photographer that does Holga film photography as a extra to her regular digital wedding work?
Thanks for sharing.
Nice video but I am surprised that you didn't touch on the large aperture f1.8 on the lens which is not very common on point and shoot cameras
I have the lumix lx7 and honestly... I feel the same way you did with the xz1, I guess theyre pretty comparable since theyre both ccd sensors from the same time and the last batches of ccd cameras released. No need to edit for film simulations but with the option to do so with raw captures.
There is also a bit more sun, a bit more colors and a bit more live compared to Helsinki on a January, so most cameras look better and make more fun. Is there a Camera for Sauna shooting, maybe that could. be the next great thing. The pics look nice. I love CCD cameras. They were great in 3 chip video cams. No rolling shutter!
I've been using my XZ-1 the past couple of weeks because my Panasonic G100 got stolen
I've been loving it after not using it for years
And the macro capabilities are really good
So sorry to hear your Panasonic was stolen but good that you still had the XZ-1.
Thanks @@mattisulanto
I have the Olympus Camedia C-2040Z. It is older tech (2000) but it is CCD. I dare not use it above ISO 100. It is kinda regulated to shooing infra-red now.
My new favorit camera is the Panasonic gm5.i love this little camera.
Yeah, I totally understand your remark about the wide-angle smartphone lenses... actually, in the smartphone world of today, a 35mm equivalent lens is already considered a moderate telephoto (or, as they stupidly put it: a "zoom" lens), with 50mm equivalant fokal length almost considered a "super zoom"...
I found one of those in a recycling bin about a year ago--perfect working order. I guess someone decided it was obsolete. It goes everywhere with me now. I love the way it renders colors and it's great for low-light situations. A monopod is usually enough to keep it steady for indoor or night shots.
That was a nice find. Someone did know what they threw away😀
We need point and shoot compact cameras back, in the shape and form of the Xiaomi 14 Ultra (with the photo kit) but at the $500 range
i have one, and have the hot shoe viewfinder mounted. i loved it then. i still love it.
I just found your video ! And totally agree it’s a special camera to use and that’s why I still use it occasionally. Thanks!
Just activated my Olympus e-pl3. Let's see how it performs. No ccd 😮
Actually I prefer XZ-2, but XZ-1 served me well for about 3 years of daily carry and I still use it for some documentation purposes time to time. JPGs are totally horrible, but RAW can surprise once in Lightroom. But it needs good light and stay below ISO400. My mode dial is perfectly OK although that camera did more than 40k photos. But I had to clean sensor, because there was some dust on it from previous owner. Fortunately it can be disassembled without any complication.
On the other hand XZ-2 is perfectly capable of hand held night cityscape photos with ISO800 thanks to BSI-CMOS, open aperture and shutters like 1/10s. It also has much better FHD video and is perfectly usable as low light movie camera too.. I took videos of couple vents with this. It also has articulating display that helps a lot for ground level shooting or with camera above head. XZ-2 is now my daily carry camera for about 3 yeas always in my bag unless I carry some M4/3 or APS-C DSLR.
Anothre Olympus marvel is Stylus1s.. great travell camera with unbeatable 28-300/2.8..
Thanks for sharing. I have never tried the XZ-2, but I guess it has to better that the XZ-1.
Great video, so glad I found it! I'm on a mission to find current reviews of the Olympux XZ-1 from people using it these days as I've been using this camera solidly since buying it in 2012. I love this little camera and take it everywhere. It totally has it's limitations, but if you know how to get the best out of it and shoot RAW, you can get some great photos.
Thanks.
I had both the xz1 and the xz2 both has identical lenses but Ive noticed a difference in the output. Even though the xz2 is technically better in terms of true to life colors, I still prefer the XZ1.
Beautiful work! I love the non-new cameras best.
Thank you very much!
I like the pop they somewhat similar with what I get with my 35 2.8 zeiss lens on 5.6-8.
Yeah Mat, I got one of these and passed it to my son years ago ..nice and compact with vibrant colors.
The curious thing is that this old camera has a sensor that is larger than the sensor in the “brand new” TG-7. I even understand that the “engineering” inside the TG-7 is special, as the lens movements occur internally and the camera is sealed, but even so I get the feeling that they should have made some progress in this area of sensors. The impression I have is that Olympus was years ahead of the competition and was not understood, and now, despite the patents, it has fallen behind because of the Hardware it uses.
That was fun. I still have my LX5, I bought that as soon as it was launched in 2010. The LX5 is similar. I don't understand the CCD thing. The LX5 is an exceptional camera though. But when I moved up to m43, I stopped using my LX5. Your video has made me think about taking my LX5 out for a spin again🙂
Thanks. Sometimes it's nice to take out an old camera and be positively surprised.
Nice review, this old digital camera holds well. Thanks for sharing.
Well done. I enjoy seeing the older classic cameras being featured. That said, is there a 'modern' equivalent to the XZ-1?
Thanks. I suppose the Sony RX100 series could be close the a modern equivalent.
lol i sold this camera last year to a gen Z girl from KL.... bought it previously because of Robing Wong too.. I love it for street photography actually.... it definitely have that "CCD Magic" but i hate it for my unit event camera... i know the aperture and sensor is DECENT for a compact camera but its too slow/not suitable for low light event photography
Great camera but in bright light, you need the EVF which is about the same price as the camera, used too !
Man I forgot how good these were. 🥰
Thanks for the video, it sure brings back some old memory. I find it odd... I used to have xz-1 and sold it years ago, its color (sooc jpeg) was quite different from yours. Mine was way more vivid, similar vibe as output from first few iterations of Samsung Galaxy S phones - eye-candy with unreal look, maybe it's just my copy's character 😅 That being said, I was happy with its output under low light. As a non photography enthusiast, XZ-1 is my first camera that is capable to focus fairly easy in low light.
Thanks for sharing.
10:25. All you have to know about photography is in there.
Yup don't listen anyone use whatever we had , I only had fuji xt100 and Nikon j5 and I just nice for taking street photography even with the kit and manual lens ,
Great shots. Very rich colors. Thanks for the review. I have to see if I can find one of these.
Thanks for the compliments.
I have one, it used to be my fishing camera until age brought that to an end.
The XZ-1 is a favorite of mine. I definitely think the Olympus color science has a lot to do with the look. I have an Olympus Pen Mini E-PM1, and it delivers similar pleasing colors - a little different to the XZ-1, but they do have a lot in common.
Regarding CCD sensors, the early ones did have a very filmic look - because Kodak in particular based the color science on their film color science.
I have an old Kodak DC290 digital camera (as seen in Mission Impossible II), and the colors of the jpegs are amazing. The camera itself is on its very last leg, but the sensor is so good, I wish, I could move it and the processor to a newer camera with no issues, but it's not practical in any way - I may have to bite the bullet some day and get myself a Leica M8 instead.
Thanks for sharing.
Kuala Limpur mentioned URAAAAAAA MALAYSIA 🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾
Are those colours straight for from camera? 😮 So rich!! So much better than the camera you recorded the video with.
I don't have a lot of spare time for editing raw files, would jpeg be truly a significantly worse image? I find my iPhone images to have a certain ugliness to the contrast and sharpening - flat and crunchy. This looks really nice with the CCD. I imagine it is great for rainy days and blue hour, when colour is most vibrant. ✨
Im both love and hate compact camera at the same time, i like how tiny and beautiful of it, but every compact camera sooner or later will all face the dust problem with it design
The XZ-1 used to sell for about $80 on eBay, now they are $200 - $350(!), because you and others like Robin keep making videos about this camera! LOL! ;-) I'm glad I bought two of them when they were dirt cheap, and one even has a clean dust-free sensor.
I have used the XZ-1 in one video three years ago, but that video was not specifically about the XZ-1. Now I made this, so two videos in three years. Anyway, I think it's crazy to pay $200-300 for this camera😀
I'm with you with the smart phone lenses, They are all bonkers wide (I'm an android/pixel user). I also find the colours on the pixel phones to be just ridiculously over saturated.
Thanks. Yeah, some phone camera colors really are way too saturated.
First of all: Really nice pictures and good video!
I don't know how CMOS vs. CCDs causes a change in colours in images taken with digital camers.
The following is admittedly somewhat OT, as it is about CCD vs. CMOS, just not about colours or even photography, but I guess it might be interesting to one or two of you to know.
Because there's another area (or use case) for (flatbed) scanners where there is a huge difference: With a CCD scanner it was possible to scan a page or a double page from a book, while with a CMOS based scanner the result is unusable.
I guess the keyword is depth of field, here: The scanned images from the CCD sensor will have varying brightness, but chances are that text is readable across the whole scanned image. While some parts of the douple page of the book will touch the surface of the scanner glas others, there is usually a little gap between other parts of the paper and the glas. The challenge for the scanner is to provide proper results for varying subject distances.
Opposed to that a CMOS scanner, however, can only provide good results for single pages lying flat on the scanner glas, for one exact distance. Unfortunately, virtually all flatbed scanners are CMOS based. They are fast and quiet, and for single pages lying flat on the scan glas they can provide convincing results, but scanning (double-)pages from books is beyond their capabilities.
Amazing review!!! Would you recommend this one or the Pentax MZ-1? Currently I use Ricoh GR III and absolutely LOVE the colours… it’s so different than Fuji so I trust Pentax very much as a company with their science but maybe I give Olympus a try? Normally
I don’t like zoom lenses and prefer prime due to sharpness and quality but composition zoom helps me so much more and for vintage aesthetic with this camera it might be fine? I don’t always need max sharpness and sometimes take it out in Lightroom removing clarity.
I have not used the MZ-1 so can’t say much about that.
I really liked the images from my old E-300 Olympus for straight jpegs, but it had a terrible OVF.
I didnt like the native colours of 5D, it was more about general image acuity, the thing was a dog to operate.
OMD M1 impressed me the most with its lovely out of the box jpeg colours and having IS
Hey Matti, so good that someone explains it right for all those Fuji lovers out there that pay more than necessary. I shoot with a LX7 and TL500 and it's simply stunning. So would you recommend to keep the jpgs or to shoot in RAW with the Oly?