Olympus E-P2 Review

February 4, 2010 | Gavin Stoker | |

Your Comments

17 Comments | Newest Oldest First | Post a Comment

#1 English Correction Note

Would you kindly correct you English on one point. Company names are deemed to be singular in nature when use as the subject of a sentence. Such as: Sony has, is , was etc not have are were. Just a minor complaint but a complaint just as well

John R. Spurr

7:26 pm - Thursday, February 4, 2010

#2 Jake

I’m guessing John R. Spur is American.

10:51 pm - Thursday, February 4, 2010

#3 David Mayer

How ironic that your comment has at least four errors in it.

As an owner of an EP-1, I can’t disagree with anything you have reported, though I would caution anyone looking at this vs the Panasonic GF-1 to look carefully at the features, e.g. the very low GN of the built-in flash.  No camera will appeal to everyone.  While I thought I would miss the flash, I very rarely would have used it since acquiring this camera; the few times I would use it, the low power would make it next to worthless.  I do have the accessory flash, but have found the low light capabilities so good that I rarely bother with it.  The high ISO noise, incidentally, is mostly finely granular luminosity noise that few would fine objectionable. My Nikon D300 has similar noise characteristics, maybe up to 2 stops better than the EP-1/2, but the trade-off is small portable vs 5 lbs of conspicuousness.  I can’t say the same for any small sensor camera that I have tried or at least seen samples of.
As a final comment, I would highly recommend the Panasonic 20mm lens to anyone purchasing any of these micro 4/3 cameras.

12:40 am - Friday, February 5, 2010

#4 cheap r4i

It still doesn’t address the no build in flash problem, esp it’s either the EVF or ext flash, wonder Pana will shoot back with a GF2 soon….

8:10 am - Friday, February 5, 2010

#5 matt

why no high iso samples?

5:07 pm - Friday, February 5, 2010

#6 shep

I have an E-P2. Its small size and weight are particularly attractive—it has the best weight-to-performance ratio of any camera in the world. (Panasonic m4/3 cameras come close, but when you factor in Olympus’ wonderful ultra-compact lenses—now including the new collapsible 9-18mm—it is tops for me).

I am amused at complaints of no built-in flash. This is a serious camera. A built-in flash has a very low GN, lots of redeye, plus shadows around the subject’s head. This ain’t a point-and-shoot! Nevertheless, I did buy the FL-14 just in case—it’s also tiny, and with a slightly better GN than a built-in would be. The E-P2 is not cheap at the moment (its price will surely come down in a while) but it’s outstanding.

5:02 am - Saturday, February 6, 2010

#7 nick

I have never used the built in flash on my G11. Seems superfluous, well done to Olympus for leaving it out. Anyone buying a £899 camera probably doesn’t want to shoot happy snaps anyway.

Nice looking camera but wow, is that expensive or what?


4:54 pm - Sunday, February 14, 2010

#8 zapfa

thank you for that review - i will definitly go for that camera and use it with my contax g2 lenses

could you please remove the video olympus_ep2_01.avi - it does not respect the babies individual rights of integrity and privacy. This is a no-go in a camera review.

12:10 pm - Tuesday, March 23, 2010

#9 nick

I am not sure babies (plural) care much about privacy. If you are worried that this baby’s (singular possessive) video is some kind of free gift to paedophiles I think you are being overly PC and hysterical.

6:24 pm - Tuesday, March 23, 2010

#10 BobBill

I am B+W film guy reluctantly sliding into digital. I shoot TriX and scan or print with old Kodak florescent enlarger via Nikkor lenses.

I acquired the Pen EP-2 and find it has been getting more use than my three Nikon 8008s, which seem huge in comparison.

Thus far, aside from getting familiar with a very complicated instruction set and functions, the little camera has provided no bad moments.

I have yet to compare output, but will shortly.

10:12 am - Wednesday, December 22, 2010

#11 nivk

The 8008s ARE huge. Mind you, I use a Nikon F2 mostly and that’s both huge and heavy. I carry a Canon G11 for digital.

I still think you cant beat Tri X and chemical prints for images that really have something indefinable. I can spot an analogue B&W from a digital any time, the range of tones and of course the grain.

Am I alone in finding grain aesthetically pleasing whereas noise is not?

12:26 pm - Wednesday, December 22, 2010

#12 Jim

I’ve been blown away by the quality of my existing E-P1 and weighing up the merit of spending on an E-P2 as well, particularly with that Olympus VF-2 electronic viewfinder in mind. The ‘Diorama’ art effect also intrigues, though I’d like a more detailed exposition of what it does!

5:35 pm - Monday, February 14, 2011

#13 BobBill

Like anything, this particular camera and related equipment should improve in time and will certainly improve as one becomes familiar by using it.

One hopes the user can be as good as the camera…

5:53 pm - Monday, February 14, 2011

#14 nick

I think you’ll find that the EP camera will be landfill in a year! Today’s £800 camera is tomorrows £80 ‘Buy Now’ on eBay.

You can barely get through reading the manual before the next model comes out!


5:56 pm - Monday, February 14, 2011

#15 Sinclair

“I think you’ll find that the EP camera will be landfill in a year! Today’s £800 camera is tomorrows £80 ‘Buy Now’ on eBay.”

Just picked up and E-P2 body for £90 and a MkII 14-42 for £59. Not bad for a 3 year old camera that was around £800 as Nick said.

Still getting to grips with it. Rather more portable than my trusty old E-1


2:16 pm - Saturday, January 4, 2014

#16 Nick

Funnily enough I picked up a Nikon D1X body for £135 last year. Down from £3000 in 2001.

I use old manual nikkors on it and it’s a great camera producing film like images

I know it’s low MP but really does anyone care? It does A4 fine and who wants larger than that? No magazines that’s for sure

And of course the latest PShop can work wonders on these old files.

4:53 pm - Saturday, January 4, 2014

#17 Sinclair

I agree with Nick. I think too much is made of megapixel size (and look at the space on your computer the large files of something like a 24 or 36mp take up). And indeed who needs to print larger than A4 in normal everyday situations? It’s what a camera manufacturer does with his megapixels that counts.  A friend of mine and I have a response when people look askance at the 5 mp E-1: “But they’re ‘Olympus’ megapixels!”  And as long as you keep within the E-1’s comfort zone,it’s fine.

I have an adaptor to enable me to use my old Minolta and Tamron 35mm lenses on the E-1. The Minolta mount Vivitar Series 1 90-180 flat field macro(180-360 on 4/3 of course) is a particular gem.


6:15 pm - Saturday, January 4, 2014

Entry Tags

hd video, hd, 3 inch LCD, 720p, 12 megapixel, RAW, olympus, DSLR, micro four thirds, EVF, PEN, e-p2, Olympus E-P2 Review, ep 2, e p2, ep2

Tracker Pixel for Entry