Epson P-4000 Launched in the UK

#1 Mike

Finally, a portable storage device with the quality and ease of use of a P2000 and capacity more fitting of today's DSLR's. The 40GB model is good, but, for those like me that shoot RAW+Fine JPG, the space is used up very quickly. An 80 GB capacity doubles my shooting before backup capability is compromised

Thanks Epson, good on you

Mike
http://www.scenicsensations.com

6:43 pm - Wednesday, November 2, 2005

#2 Adam PW Smith

The press release makes this device sound like the bee's knees. Here are a few observations from a P2000 owner. I bought the P2000 when a hard drive failure took out my laptop on the eve of a wedding I was scheduled to shoot. I've been using it regularly since then as a portable storage device for when I shoot live events.

The battery life is enough to last me through most events, as long as I never actually use the device to review the pictures. It lasts just long enough to download the pictures.

The reviewing screen is very sharp and clear, and that's what will strike most people when they look at it in the shops. This is a good thing.

But the UI is cumbersome and just too slow. Reviewing photos is time consuming, especially if you're in a situation where people are waiting or action is still going.

The real problem occured when I ran out of hard drive space without realising it. I had worked out a routine to get one card copied to the drive while I kept shooting with a second card. I stuck the card in, pressed the buttons necessary to start downloading, and then put the thing into its case and went back to shooting. What I didn't realise is that there was an error message that popped up telling me the drive was full -after- the two customary confirmation messages . By the time I pulled the P2000 out again to dump the next card, it had automatically powered off, erasing the error message. I didn't discover that it had trashed about four cards of photos until later. This is, in my opinion, a massive design flaw.

The P4000 appears to be just a larger hard drive version of the P2000. To consider this to be a tool for professionals is simply not on. I need my tools to be reliable and predictable. I'll keep using my P2000 because I paid so much money for it, but I'll no longer completely trust it. I'll have to spend more time and energy on confirming that it did what it was supposed to have done.

There is a real need for a device like this, but for the price they charge I would demand more reliability and a less cheesy and faster interface. And there are a lot of niggyly little annoyances too. It's just another device designed by engineers and product managers, with not enough input from photographers.

My recommendation? Don't buy. Wait. Someone will do this sort of thing right at some point.

adam

7:03 pm - Wednesday, November 2, 2005

#3 GARY POGODA

Thank you, Adam, for the excellent observations. Here is a question.

When socializing with friends, my wife loves to show them her photos
but the only ones she ever has with her are the ones currently in her
camera, which she always carries in her pocketbook. I was thinking
of getting the P-4000 for her to store her entire photo collection, and
then she could carry that in her pocketbook at all times, as well.

Do you foresee any problems using the P-4000 for this scenario?

7:48 pm - Wednesday, November 2, 2005

#4 Adam PW Smith

"I was thinking of getting the P-4000 for her to store her entire photo collection, and then she could carry that in her pocketbook at all times, as well. Do you foresee any problems using the P-4000 for this scenario?"

Nothing that would prevent you from doing it this way, it's just a matter of patience really.

You would probably want to create an album (or more than one) to store those photos that she wants to show. Getting photos into the album(s) has to be done one at a time and the device appears to make a copy of the image for the album (not just an alias/shortcut to the original), so it's a little slow and it uses up extra space.

So the short answer is "yes it will work". Not elegantly, but it will work.

If you're using a Mac, you may want to consider one of the new iPods as a portable photo album. The screen is a little smaller, but the management required is a helluvalot simpler.

There are other portable photo album/wallets out there that might also work better, but I don't have the money to be trying them all.

My strongest suggestion is to buy from a place that offers a good, no-questions-asked, satisfaction guarantee so that you can give it a good solid thumping for a couple of weeks before you commit the cash. It's a lot of work, but these things are not cheap and it's quite offensive to drop a load of money on something that doesn't truly make your life better. Be ruthless in your assessment.

adam

8:13 pm - Wednesday, November 2, 2005

#5 GARY POGODA

Thanks, Adam, for the response. Actually, I do use Macs, and I would
buy the iPod in a second if Apple comes out with one that has an LCD
comparable to that of the Epson. Otherwise, I am willing to put up with
an inelegant UI when it comes to photo loading/storage, since I will be
doing that myself; however, if the retrieval/viewing UI is also inelegant,
then my wife would not like it.

So my follow-up question would be, once it's all set up, is it easy to use?

9:05 pm - Wednesday, November 2, 2005

#6 Adam PW Smith

"So my follow-up question would be, once it's all set up, is it easy to use?"

Once you have the pictures on the device and everything in its place it's not too bad. The clarity of the screen is excellent and once the pictures are cached the speed starts to pick up. (I haven't tried hooking it up to a TV yet to see what they look like there.)

9:36 pm - Wednesday, November 2, 2005

#7 geek

"But the UI is cumbersome and just too slow. Reviewing photos is time consuming, especially if you’re in a situation where people are waiting or action is still going."

Adam, I beg to differ with regards to these comments.

First of all, the UI must be the simplest one can ever find for such a device - my friend and I didn't even need to read the manual before we started using. Yes, it's that simple.

Secondly, given that this is a portable device that is so small and runs on battery, you can't expect a Pentium IV nor PowerPC processor with 1 GHz memory installed in it, can you? You're probably using a DSLR whose files are 6, 8 or even 16.8 megapixels - surely it takes time to load such huge files, doesn't it? If you need to review the photos quickly immediately after taking, my suggestion is, go back to use a laptop instead.

Gary, to use it as a digital photo album, just remember to shrink your photos to not more than 1024X768 pixels (in theory, you don't even need them to be larger than 640X480 since this is the resolution of the screen but hey we all want our photos to look as good as we possibly can, don't we?).

I'm a very happy user of the P-2000 - I think it's the best gadget that I've ever owned. I can show the photos of my kids and my trips to my friends and watch videos while commuting to and from work. And I don't need to invest in more CF cards. I can't be any happier. If there's anything I would complain, it's that fact that the video player doesn't remember where you last stop watching (unlike the ipod music player) but hey, it's not to difficult to do a fast-forward is it?

GeeK

3:54 pm - Thursday, November 3, 2005

#8 GARY POGODA

Funny you should mention the shrinkage. I was debating whether to
do that, or just leave the photos at full size. The advantage of having
the photos at full size is that the device is now a backup, plus, should
my wife ever want to print a photo for a friend, it's all there. I guess it
would depend on how much faster photos are retrieved at 640 x 480,
versus how much extra work it would require on my part to shrink the
photos, rather than just load them from her SD card. I don't suppose
you can load from an SD card and store as 640 x 480 all at once? If
that were possible, I would do it, because I am guessing the increase
in speed would be significant.

5:25 pm - Thursday, November 3, 2005

#9 geek

Gary,

Frankly I wouldn't use this device as a backup tool. It's too easy to lose it or break it. I'm now toying with a 300GB Maxtor external HDD as a backup tool, and possibly lots of DVD-Rs as a secondary backup.

For printing, I suppose you're referring to printing to Pixbridge printers on 4R (4 by 6 inches). To get a lab quality print, you only need (4X300 by 6X300) pixels = 1200 by 1800 pixels, no more. As long as you save as 100% quality after you shrink, I don't see a problem printing good quality photos.

Yes, you can't download from an SD and shrink it straightaway (that'll be cool ). After all, the primary usage of this tool is for photographers to carry it around as a portable storage while they shoot hundreds of pictures (or even thousands) and not worried about running out of memory cards. My friend borrowed mine for her trip to Italy and she'll be back this weekend. She will be able to give a first-person account on how useful it is for her trip.

5:40 pm - Thursday, November 3, 2005

#10 GARY POGODA

Thanks for the info. You've given me much to think about.

5:49 pm - Thursday, November 3, 2005

#11 Adam PW Smith

A few followups...

"the UI must be the simplest one can ever find for such a device - my friend and I didn’t even need to read the manual before we started using. Yes, it’s that simple."

I don't disagree that it's easy to pick up. The UI is simple in the sense that there are few controls and the functions are pretty obvious. What I was referring to is the way the UI is not particularly streamlined. There are three, and only three, albums on the main screen. So if three doesn't suit you exactly it's not optimal. The process of getting a card dumped into memory requires a number of button presses and waiting. I would prefer it to be possible that you could throw it into a "catch" mode and have it automatically download any card dropped into it. As a pro photographer specialising in live events, the time it takes to wait for the buttons to become active can be critical to me.

So yes, it's easy to figure out. No argument. But there are lots of ways it could have been made better. For a hobbyist it's fine. For a pro user it will seem cumbersome.

"you can’t expect a Pentium IV nor PowerPC processor with 1 GHz memory installed in it, can you?"

Well no. And frankly I don't care about numbers. It could be hamster-driven for all I care. I just need to be able to run through the images quickly. As a purpose-specific device, I expect it to do its core functions exceptionally well, especially given the premium price. It is passable, but it's not convenient.

"but hey, it’s not to difficult to do a fast-forward is it?"

And this is the crux of the matter. No, it's not hard, but where does that stop? You have to demand better from these kinds of devices (and companies) or they'll take liberties with your time left, right, and centre. There is no reason why it shouldn't do certain things that are, 80% of the time, predictable.

Admittedly, my "review" was from the perspective of a photographer who demands a lot from their gear. It's not a "gadget" to me, it's an important tool. As a gadget it's very clever. But if Epson wants this device to be considered a professional tool then it should behave like one.

9:28 am - Monday, November 7, 2005

#12 geek

Adam,

I think you're too pampered by your laptop or desktop.

I can see where you're coming from because I support users like yourselves (albeit in another kind of application) everyday. Users expect features based on their old ways of doing things, or their pre-conceived ideas on how a functionality should work. Designers of software/gadgets/phones/cameras/etc., however, have to cater for the 1,999,999 other people who also purchase the product. So, their design has to be "one-size-fits-all" in order to generate sales. So probably what this kind of gadget needs (for you and others who share the same concern) is customizable functionality/buttons/tools (we customize our software in our company).

I've been scouting around to see if anyone has done any add-on or patch on the P-2000 Operating System but it seems that none exists as of now. :(

It's easy for us to pick on certain features that do not meet our pre-conceived ideas (I've stopped asking questions on why certain things are designed the way they are), but rather than moaning about it, I often get around with some customization, or I put up with it and learn to make it work for me. Sometimes, it's just a matter of changing certain old habits or learning a new trick - it works for me all the time. I have also learned to live with manageable flaws - since I can't be perfect myself, I don't expect the world at large to be as well.

And, I think a little waiting isn't too bad at all. Take a look around while you wait - you might capture something that you might have missed earlier on.

cheers!
geek

5:32 pm - Monday, November 7, 2005

#13 Adam PW Smith

Just for the record, Geek, my other career is in software design and user interface. It's precisely that work that has made me more demanding of the software and hardware I use. I've seen too many companies design based on what they assume to be the most useful functions. You are correct in saying that it's impossible to fill every need of every user, but some companies have been shown us that with careful research and good instincts you can meet the needs of 80% of the people 80% of the time.

My point is that this device is good, but given the premium price and the few things that it needs to do, it should be designed much better. There are enough annoyances and hassles to make it a pain. And there are a few major design flaws that make it dangerous for serious photographers.

I'm glad you're able to modify your behaviour to make this device work for you. Others will undoubtedly feel the same. But for some of us, working around dumb design mistakes because someone else couldn't take the time to do it right is just not acceptable.

"Take a look around while you wait - you might capture something that you might have missed earlier on."
I don't have time to look around when I'm babysitting my P2000.

I maintain that this is a fun gadget for people with money and time on their hands, and who don't need completely reliable gear. If your needs are greater than that, wait until someone else gets it right.

adam

8:03 pm - Friday, November 11, 2005

#14 GARY POGODA

Very interesting. Would we know of any of your GUI work?

8:35 pm - Friday, November 11, 2005

#15 Adam PW Smith

Unlikely, but not impossible. I've done hardcore UI design for a company that makes software for video editors and television broadcasters, telephone companies, and some odd stuff like tools for Shopping Centre managers, as well as a pile of new media including various Enhanced CDs back when they were all the rage. I've been at it for a bit over 12 years now. My company is called datapanik - I'm assuming you can figure out the URL from there.

[If anyone is really interested in that side of things, please contact me offline using either of my Websites.]

8:40 pm - Friday, November 11, 2005

#16 GARY POGODA

Upon viewing your website, I see now why you are so anal retentive
(I mean that in a positive sense ) when it comes to the P-4000 UI.

Your resume mentioned some early work with SuperCard. My guess
is that you started with HyperCard, but switched to SuperCard so you
could port your stacks to the PC.

I also enjoyed your photography website. Flash free photography is
an interesting idea. From a technical standpoint, I would like to have
seen camera and settings information included with the photographs,
but maybe that is outside the scope of your website.

9:51 pm - Friday, November 11, 2005

#17 Pierre Emmanuel

Does anyone know if the Epson P-2000 or P-4000 enable the storage and viewing of movie files prepared with the software Microsoft "Windows Movie Maker" ? These video files are windows media video (.WMV). If not, is there a software to convert the .WMV files into the formats supported by the Epson P-2000 or P-4000 ? Where is that software available ? Does Epson furnish it with the P-4000 ?

3:04 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#18 geek

Unfortunately, for P-2000, Epson doesn't provide any video converter. I use Dr. DivX 1.0.6.105 to do the conversion into a AVI file, choosing the "DivX Portable Device Profile". Works for me.

4:14 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#19 Pierre Emmanuel

Hi geek,
Thanks for your quick answer.
Do you mean that it is possible, with this DivX software you mention, to convert video files from WMV into AVI format that can be viewed on the Epson P-2000 and P-4000 ? Just want to be sure before buying the product. Thanks

4:31 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#20 geek

Pierre,

Kindly email me at geeky.p at gmail.com for offline discussion.



geek

2:44 am - Saturday, December 3, 2005

#21 graphicsman

I've been reading these comments and I can certainly understand them. I think for thoses of us who are frequent computer users, a more streamlined interface would be better(I had the same initial frustrations when I bought mine and got discusted with the lack of familiar filing structure).

But for me, I've opted for the Archos AV4100 instead. 100gb, CF slot, USB, 3.8" screen (not as goos as the P-2000), great interface and portable. I've got my life on this thing. Check it out! http://www.shoparchos.com/product.aspx?sku=2624300&culture=en-US. Hope this helps.

Graphicsman

8:55 pm - Thursday, December 29, 2005

#22 Michael

I bought the 4000 and really like it ... except that it seems to rename all the images when they come from the compact flash card. Anyway to tell it to use the same name? And, I really like the slide show. Anyway to tell it to output the slide show to a file on my PC? Or does anybody know what software is used to generate the slide show?

Thanks,

Michael.

10:58 pm - Monday, January 9, 2006