Some of the things I would want would be the following.

Definitely more focussing points. Three is ok but not enough. I would want at least four new points added to take into account the four intersecting points in the viewfinder in keeping with the rule of thirds. Increasingly, I am looking for these points and require a fast focussing responce for some of the compositions I have been seeking recently. Also, as someone who bought the grid focussing screen at extra cost to me, I would ask Oly to include this in the cost of the camera and not as an extra. The grid screen really is a necessary requirement imho.

I would also like a higher pixel count that does not obviously comprimise the quality of the system. I would hope to move into exploring digital art this year and this extra would be nice to have and also if one wanted to print larger the odd time it would be nice to have a bit to spare.

Just some initial thoughts. I'm sure more will come along. I look forward to reading your thoughts!

I agree with you Eugene! This must be solved because sometimes E1 seems to be very primitive in that term. Another main point for me it would be much lower noise under ISO 400. I never use above but if you want to retouch in PS CS is always better to work with clear images. It would be great 10 mpixels. E1 has serious problems uploading the images to PC desktop. Recently, I have bought a Transcend 20 GB PhotoBank device due to my LEXAR 1 GB PRO card is not enough for going to foreign countries and take photos in RAW format. I have been testing this unit and I can upload my LEXAR card from this device through USB 2.0 in 2 minutes 49 seconds. If you download the same content from E1 it would take the double. I miss a lot multispot metering used in OM 4Ti. I am pretty sure they´ll include this tool in the new camera. Much detailed and fine histogram display. E1 histogram is very coarse. Faster noise reduction algorithms. Better knowledge of remaining battery. Maybe in % it would be much better. My Transcend PhotoBank keep me informed in realtime of remaining battery in %. TFT screen with better midtone range. When you take some type of scenes, it seems they are burnt due to high contrast TFT screen and then after in the computer they are perfect. Firewire 1394b Hey Olympus if you are reading this, take note!!! ;-) You can project a realtime histogram into the viewfinder maybe with a 25% transparency and then by the time you overexpose or underexpose with your exposure compensation dial you could optimize your dynamic range without having to take the picture and look to TFT screen!!! It would be great. You could also add the idea I reported to you many years ago. PIXEL-LOCK TECHNOLOGY!!! At least Olympus Japan told me they will store it with future plans ;-)

Releasing any "E" camera without a grid focus screen is dumb. And I agree with Eugene on all points, but want much less noise too. David's suggestion of 10 mp is about right, even 12 pm if possible. Perhaps, and I hope our wait is worth it. I also want to be able to select much lower ISOs, around ISO 25 would be nice. Please, please, please give us an advanced histogram, instantly available. Am tired of the process of retrieval... . . . .

. .

I haven’t tried myself, but I hear several people say you get less noise when using Olympus Studio (not only less, but very little – also when using ISO 800 and 1600. Some more when using ISO 3200, but still better/finer noise than other cameras give). Have any of you compared Studio vs other RAW converters?

For an E-3 I would also want what you mention; mega pixels, more focussing points, faster (for sports pictures), easier access to histogram, ISO 25 and 50. I wouldn’t mind having a grid focusing screen included (but it’s OK to buy it separate too) and I’m sure the price will be competitive with prices of other brands. They were and still are for the E-1. When I bought mine in November 2003 the price for the kit was 2.700 Euro (which was OK compared to Nikon D100, Canon 10D and 300D, and Pentax *istD which came a little later). Now the price for the E-1 kit is around 1.500 Euro and if you don’t have to have more than 5Mpix it can compete with Nikon D70 and Canon 20D and 350D.

Why would you want more focussing points? I only use the central one. Maybe a very very fast central one would be good for me ;-) I just bought mine 4 months ago and I think I haven't even grasp the possibilities of this camera.... I 'm not even sure that I get better pictures than with the c8080 but the E1 is much more fun to use. I think a few more pixels would be good but the ONLY three (40x30cm) pictures that I have printed so far came really great; so unless you have very specific necessities 5-8 Mb is plenty but 10-12 would be nicer. I don't really understand this megapixel race. Very few comparatively speaking were shooting medium or large format before and they did offer better quality than the "tiny" 35mm negatives. I agree that the uploading speed should improve. I don't think I will jump to the E3 too soon but in the other hand I bought my E1 in the States because it was really a bargain but I have added lens, flash... and the total amount is already too high to justify taking in account my poor skills but you never know when you get the gadget virus a trip to the states could be necessary. The price in Europe is a rip off!! that could be another thread. I got my E1+ 14-54 +FL-20+50-200+FL-50+ 11-22+Ex25 and EC14 for 2800 Euros compare that to the European price!

Carles, I am just speechless that you got all that just for that price! I agree with you about the rip off in Europe if these are the prices. Phew! LOL!

A quick comment - the SHLD-2 battery holder seems to speed up focusing significantly. It's a little expensive (I got mine for about $340 on e-bay) but worth it for the increased battery life, the vertical grip with shutter button it gives you and the quicker focusing. The big trade-off is how bulky it makes the E-1.

Eugene, I was not kidding about the necessity of more focusing points? I just don't see a clear advantage. Yeap, not a bad price, regular mail order in the US!!!

I have to agree with Carles. Why the need for more focusing points? Maybe I learned the old way by manual focusing, but I trust my judgment better by focusing where I need to using the central point, AF or MF, and then recomposing the picture. It reminds me of the time an old die hard National Geographic photographer walked into my local camera shop and the enthusiastic young salesmen showed him all the new focusing points on the Nikon F5. The old guy looked at him and just mentioned the system I described above. So, focus on what you want, then compose the picture.

Does it take longer? Not really. especially since one's trusting the focusing points to hit where you want them to. I'm quite happy with the three points the E-1 has and have it set to the central focusing point.

Now, faster AF, that the E-1 needs. More mp's? You'd have to 3x it to have something substantially different.

Definately a higher pixel count and better focussing system, the comments here have prompted me to look at getting the focussing grid. As to price, I agree with the previous observations about buying in the States, I went to New York in January, with the specific intention of buying the E1, and the prices in B&H are unbeatable. (I actually bought the E1 body, 14-45, FL50, and SHLD-2 in Dixons Duty Free at Heathrow for £850 the lot, but that was pure luck because I think they were clearing their stock!) I bought everything else at B&H in New York at typically less than 2/3rds the UK price. It is even cost effective to order from the States via the web, providing you keep a careful eye on the shipping cost for small items.

The one thing I would like to see most is an overhaul of the review/histogram/info setup. Display of the last image taken should be instantaneous - it should be cached! - with an immediate histogram/highlights option. Frankly the current info setup with two cycles each with three options is just clunky - easily the most confusing and least easy to use area of the E1 controls.

Less noise at higher ISOs would be nice, of course, as would faster AF (but not at the expense of accuracy!).

And I wouldn't mind a slightly lighter camera.

I don't really care about frames per second, megapixels, or any of that.

Most of the things I'd like to see are in lenses, not in the camera body: image stabilisation, faster focus (some kind of USM?), etc.

I want the E-3 to be compatible with the E-1 parts, that is the SHLD-2 Battery should be able to attach to the E-3. The FL-50 should also work flawlessly with the new body.

Without saying, the new body should have higher mp and lossless compression of RAW files like the competition offers.

I don't understand the focusing points either, but maybe this is just my downfall. I too just use the center focus point.

I don't mind the frame rate, as for me, the E-1 is fast enough, I find that I am waiting on other things in the system, i.e focusing, flash, etc.

The price of course will need to be competitive within the market. I feel in general, that Olympus overcharges for accessories.

For my money - I can already post incredible web images and print very large photo's with the megapixels I have, so the poll has missed the mark completely. It's lower noise we want, and a focus screen to use all the luverly manual focus lenses around cheap second hand.

Cheers

More of a sports-grade AF (speed also with more points) and less noise, faster fps and more megapixels less needed (but generally in order to succeed more mpix is a must - for marketing reasons mostly). All existing feats. must be kept (sealing, sswf, pix mapp...)

Hi Justin

Missed the point completely?! Lets not lose the run of ourselves here :-) I have added a less noise option for you. I did ask people to signal if I had mised out on anything but I cannot agree that the point of the poll was missed. Have you read the comments above and examined the replies on ticked options? Noise is not an issue for me as I rarely go above 400 but I do respect if its an issue for you and thanks for pointing that out.

For my personal use, I find the 5 Mpix. I use lenses to do the "cropping", and have not had the need to extract a small part of the picture. Also my largest prints wer to A4, and I am sure one can get higher from all the reports. If I look at the download and file handling/storage requirements for an 10-12 Mpix camera, I want Olympus to stop at 8 Mpix for the E3. 3 Focus points are fine. I only use one. When Objects move, you have to either switch to another focus point ( which costs time, and the object may be too fast for that, also I would like to still have the moving object framed in the center.) or you anable them all, which may result in focusing wrongly on background objects or unwanted foreground objects. The only use Isee for this is if you shoot from a tripod with heavy equipment, and do not want to move the lens to refucos on an object which is not in the center. Even then, I think 3 is just fine.

I would like to have faster AF even without the grip !! And also with Continuous focus. 3 Pics per second are fine, however, with CF, this goes down to almost 2 ! Wheras 5 pics per sec might be nice, I think a reliable 3-4 pics also with CF would siuit me better. I have no problems finding the histogram, although I agree that the menu has a weak point there. I would like to set through firmware ( Menu) a limit to the focusing range for my 50-200., like you can by hardware in the bigger lensen 150 and 300 mm. It does hunt too much if I try to shoot flying birds, and goes back to close focus all the time as a default. I would like to have a screen enabling manual focusing better, and as bright as my OM4 (Physically possible ???).

A little bit less noise: No objections, but I have learned to live with this for my rare > iso 400 shots. But ISO other than 100 or a user defiend standard should show up in tehe viewfinder.

My priority would be more megapixels 4000x3000 for 12Mpx. Mainly to give more options for cropping and to satisfy magazine editors who, in Australia at least, seem to insist on 300dpi images. A 5Mpx camera can't deliver an A4 cover shot (natively) with that stipulation: a 12mpx camera could. On the negative side, this pixel capacity would require a good beef up of the processing and storage capability. Lossless RAW compression also sounds like a smart (easy to implement via software) feature.

...the increased megapixels (say 12) would only be justiified if the Zuiko lens technology is capable of resolving to that level. I don't know whether it is. Does anybody know? For certain, it would have to be much sharper glass than the best 35mm lenses to resolve the required number of lines in an area much smaller than a 35mm negative.

For the new E-series body I would like to see several improvements. However, I want those improvements without losing out on the functionality and handling of the current camera. IMO the E-1 is a real camera and a great photographic tool and not a handheld "Windows-PC" which accidentally can make photo's like some other brand camera's. The improvements I would like to see are: 1) More Megapixels. I do agree withRob Smith here about his suggestion to go to 4000x3000, resulting on 12 Mpx. I also agree that the lenses should be able to cope with his resolution. 2) less (digital) noise. Without this, improvement 1 is of no use at all. I rarely use higher ISO's than 200, but that is because of the noise too. If I were able to photograph without to much noise on ISO 800 or even 1600 I could use the flash with lower output, giving faster recicling times in sports photography. (Ever noticed that when flash is anabled and the FL-50 is not charged you cannot trip the E-1?) 3) Improved 4/3 adapter. This is something I missed completely in former sugestions. I would like to see at least auto-stop down when using my beloved OM-lenses. This cannot bee too hard to accomplish. It would also be nice if the apertures setting could be transferred to the camera to calculate shutter speed. 4) OTF metering. I would like to see this kind of metering re-introduced as I like it quite a lot on my OM-2n and OM-4Ti. I can immagine that this function will only work in Aperture mode, but that is just what suits me. Introducing this option would make the usage of MF OM-lenses a lot less cumbersome. The metering patterns/options (ESP, AVG, Spot) that are used now could stay for me. 5) In line with option 4, I would like to see multi-spot metering back. Now if I spotmeter I also decide on exposure. That's not what I want. Also the Highlight/Shadow of the 4Ti are very handy in combination with the multi-spot metering. 6) A bit more speed (AF, FPS, writing to card/buffer) To make action photography a bit better. Together with this option more AF-points come into mind. I would probably rarely use them, but I can imagine many others would, so please add. 7) More focussing screens for MF lenses. I would like to see some more focussing screens on the market to be used with MF lenses. I have difficulties focussing my long telelens (OM-Zuiko 300mm/4.5) on my E-1. Especially together with my wisched on the 4/3 adapter this would make the use of the older lenses much more practical. I know there are some people in MFT that have adapted old OM-screens to suit the E-1, but I dare not to do this. I would like to see screens for normal, tele and for macro work. I especially like the microprism screens for focussing. 8) I would like to see more (prime) lenses for the E-series, but Olympus is working on that. I also hope that 3rd party manufacturers will make more lenses for the 4/3 system, since I will probably never own the Zuiko Digital 300mm/2.8 for it's price.

Well, I believe my wish-list is long enough by now.

For the new E-series body I would like to see several improvements. However, I want those improvements without losing out on the functionality and handling of the current camera.

IMO the E-1 is a real camera and a great photographic tool and not a handheld "Windows-PC" which accidentally can make photo's like some other brand camera's. The improvements I would like to see are:

1) More Megapixels. I do agree withRob Smith here about his suggestion to go to 4000x3000, resulting on 12 Mpx. I also agree that the lenses should be able to cope with his resolution.

2) less (digital) noise. Without this, improvement 1 is of no use at all. I rarely use higher ISO's than 200, but that is because of the noise too. If I were able to photograph without to much noise on ISO 800 or even 1600 I could use the flash with lower output, giving faster recicling times in sports photography. (Ever noticed that when flash is enabled and the FL-50 is not charged you cannot trip the E-1?)

3) Improved 4/3 adapter. This is something I missed completely in former sugestions. I would like to see at least auto-stop down when using my beloved OM-lenses. This cannot bee too hard to accomplish. It would also be nice if the apertures setting could be transferred to the camera to calculate shutter speed.

4) OTF metering. I would like to see this kind of metering re-introduced as I like it quite a lot on my OM-2n and OM-4Ti. I can immagine that this function will only work in Aperture mode, but that is just what suits me. Introducing this option would make the usage of MF OM-lenses a lot less cumbersome. The metering patterns/options (ESP, AVG, Spot) that are used now could stay for me.

5) In line with option 4, I would like to see multi-spot metering back. Now if I spotmeter I also decide on exposure. That's not what I want. Also the Highlight/Shadow of the 4Ti are very handy in combination with the multi-spot metering.

6) A bit more speed (AF, FPS, writing to card/buffer) To make action photography a bit better. Together with this option more AF-points come into mind. I would probably rarely use them, but I can imagine many others would, so please add.

7) More focussing screens for MF lenses. I would like to see some more focussing screens on the market to be used with MF lenses. I have difficulties focussing my long telelens (OM-Zuiko 300mm/4.5) on my E-1. Especially together with my wisched on the 4/3 adapter this would make the use of the older lenses much more practical. I know there are some people in MFT that have adapted old OM-screens to suit the E-1, but I dare not to do this. I would like to see screens for normal, tele and for macro work. I especially like the microprism screens for focussing.

8) I would like to see more (prime) lenses for the E-series, but Olympus is working on that. I also hope that 3rd party manufacturers will make more lenses for the 4/3 system, since I will probably never own the Zuiko Digital 300mm/2.8 for it's price.

Well, I believe my wish-list is long enough by now.

My wish list: 10MP or more, with maintained or improved dynamic range and image quality. If image quality and dynamic range would suffer compared to E1, I would say no to higher MP count.

LZW compression on the raw files

Maintained or improved image buffer, shooting speed and buffer writedown times.

Improved autofocus speed and accuracy

Less noise, but with detail preservation. If there must be a choice between the two, image detail must not suffer.

Split prism focusing screen. Manual focus is a pain without it, especially with the small viewfinder.

Histogram on image preview, and also an option of R+G+B+luminance histogram

"Expose to the right" option on the light meter. Also a smart bracket (expose for left, center and right).

BTW, compliments and thanks to Olympus for the improved Viewer. As for the E3, I think it's imperative to keep the E1 strong points while improving its weak points. It would be a shame if we lost image quality for megapixels, or if we lost its build quality. Personally, I'd be ready to write off ISO1600 and 3200 completely if I could get cleaner ISO 400 and 800.

For me the megapixels is more a matter of marketing strategy than of true technical or artistic need, but it's important nonetheless. We all want the 4/3 system to succeed into the future, and to be fully supported with lenses, accessories, and latest technological developments. The sad truth is that too many buyers have a size complex and look at megapixel count as THE defining criterion. I don't agree with that but I think Olympus will need to offer a 12mp 4/3 system to remain competitive.

The same probably also goes for the on-board flash. I just bought the FL-20 to give myself a front fill option (mostly for outdoors heavily backlit situations), and will purchase the FL-50 later. I know it's not aesthetically ideally, but I think when people compare the E-1 with the D-70 or the Rebel line they tend to regard the lack of flash as an omission and therefore making the camera as less of a value.

(But I don't think the new E system must include Quicktime capability!)

Along the lines of marketing strategy, Olympus needs to work to get the word out. Phil Askey notwithstanding the E-1 is a terrific product and the company should fight to tell that story. I actually think it should not be positioned against the Rebel line but matched up against the 20D and above -- but going back to my first point that will be hard to do without addressing the megapixel straw man.

No. We will not see the inbuilt flash if we want to keep the splash proofing.

I think me and 95% of other E1 owners choose the splash proofing.

Additions:

E1 successor should not include inbuilt flash etc. "trendy stuff" - only PRO features, because it will or at least should battle against the likes of 1D(mII), D2H(s), 1Ds(mII), D2X... Trusty old E1 might be now compared to D70, 300D and 20D, but it's features and design are lot more like those in 1D&co.

There is E300 for those who want a start-up DSLR with inbuilt flash etc.

The release of ultra-high standard (& price) constant F2 aperture zooms should be a reason enough to release the best body they can make.

Good points. I did not know that the inbuilt flash would conflict with the splash proofing, which is one of things that makes the E-1 a rugged professional camera.

Now: Can Olympus tell that story?

Yes I agree. No inbuilt flash. Splash proofing is an important aspect of the system

Tops on my wish list is a split prisim focusing screen. I don't care whether it has a grid or not. I've been told that a split screen is "technically impossible" for the E-1, but I have no idea why.

Second, I'd like to see the focus mode lever redesigned to make it harder to flip inadvertently.

Neither more pixels nor less noise are big concerns for me, though both would be nice.

I have no need for a built in flash (nor any flash at all) and would not like to see the moisture seal sacrificed to produce this.

Even satisfying all my wishes would probably not motivate me to purchace another body at the same price as I paid for the E-1. I would rather invest the same money in more glass.

joe

If a 12Mpx E-3 was released, I would find it very hard to resist for magazine publishing quality work. And one minor point that I'd liek to see, and which would be EASILY implemented via firmware...the ability to name my custom settings with a simple alphabetic hunt-and-pick facility. Instead of naming them 1, 2, 3 & 4 I'd love to be able to name them something that is meaningful to me for the custom settings I have chosen. For example: 'Action', 'Time exp.', 'Max. quality', 'Bracket'

Pixels are not everything it is the images that counts. I was lucky to test prototype 6 M digital camera a few years before launch and they were rubbish in comparison to the E1. I have also been able to try most of the first 4/5/6 M pixel camera and they all have good and bad points so I feel the E1 is in a good position currently ( I am ex Nikon). As a professional the E1 gives me more than enough to create 20"x16" print through photoshop. We have a few of them and they are brilliant. It would be nice to have extra focussing points as this can be a fight in low light but overall better than many that are already out there. Extra pixels would be handy at times when cropping. I even bought an E300 and the images are very good indeed . We have been testing it along side Hasselblads and surpirsing the digital files were better than the scans (10mb). It retains alot of information but has to be used in RAW to pull out the fine details lost in shadow/highlights. The JPEG will not show anything like the detail that has been captured. We use the Studio software which is good but the new photoshop raw is even better. Upgarde the firmware on the E300 it does make a difference.

I'd suggest a higher megapixel CCD, as long as it is based on the one in the E-1 and not the E-300's which is not by all accounts, the same chip fabricating technology. More accurate and faster focussing, rather than more focussing points. It's not much good having more points without the other! Maybe the greater DOF of4/3rds over other larger chips, has something to do with this? A more pronounced DOF preview button, and AF & AE buttons which have a menu option of either [a|a] remaining locked until you press the button again, or [b|b] only remain locked whilst you keep the button depressed.

I wish the veiwfinder & CCD image preveiw screen were bigger, but both would make the camera more bulky! I also wish that when auto bracket was switched on, there was a menu option that offered 'Auto' so that the camera took the 3 exposures rather than having to depress the button for each one. A much faster on-board processor, and tripling the memory the current E-1 holds for internal image processing, would mean it runs faster, and maybe more sophisticated sub-menus could be applied.

Softwear-wise, the addition of a noise reduction program and a cut-down version of Genuine Fractals program:

The last two I have used demo versions of, and they really make things a lot easier when editing.

Finally, and this really is going the whole hog on my wish-list ... I would suggest what Kodak are offering on their professional DSLR ... being able to upgrade the CCD to a higher spec version, rather than buy a completely new camera. Oh look! a herd of pigs have just flown over!

Ever since I can remember, the facility to use other than the makers lenses, Hence the T2 & C mounts used on 16mm Cine and the ability to use earlier lenses on more modern mounts, has been a facility which photographers have always demanded. The OM1 to E1 mount means that certain bits of kit which are as yet still not available for E1 and specialist equipment such as bellows and coupling the body up to telescopes, microscopes and lab equipment], via OM1>E1 adaptor into which optics/test equipment that uses a T2 or C mount, means that the E1 is then accepted in these fields which otherwise it would be excluded from. For instance, the OM1 is used by astronomers and in laboratories attached to microscopes - which Olympus are justly famous for! Olympus do do an adaptor to attach an E1 to a microscope, but at well over £1000, this bit of kit is far from cheap! The OM1 lenses may be a compromise, but no more so than 35mm film lenses on a digital body! Many people in the abovementioned situations could well take their business elsewhere which would cost Olly far more dearly than not bothering to make an adaptor mount.

...concerning focus...I would want stronger autofocus lock on. Especially in lower light/contrast areas. A little more noise control would be nice, but not at the expense of image detail. I would want the "Oly color, and film like" qualities to be there but mostly focus lock on being snappier, and more robust.

I have only read one other comment from members on what I consider to be the weakest feature of the E1-the 50%(100%/crop factor 2) viewfinder. Is this not an issue for anyone else?

" the weakest feature of the E1-the 50%(100%/crop factor 2) viewfinder. "

You have really lost me here. What are you trying to say? The E-1 is an SLR and does not have a viewfinder. And what you see through the lens is just what you see in the digital image, at 100% (or close to it). So no, the "viewfinder" is not an issue for me since there is no viewfinder! Perhaps the new Leica is more your camera if you want a camera with a viewfinder... ?

I call the thing you look through a viewfinder, just like the Olympus literature does. Olympus states that its viewfinder magnification is 100%. If I look at an object through the viewfinder and then look at the same object from the same distance with my eye, those objects are nowhere near the same size. The viewfinder does not "see" at 100%. It probably does cover 100% of the CCD. That's still an issue for me. The Pentax istD and Minolta 7D have very large viewfinders by comparison. Anyway, the question was what we'd like to see in an new E1. A higher magnification viewfinder is at the top of my list.

Ah, a larger view through the eyepiece is what you desire. That I understand and agree with you that more would be better, but I did not understand what you meant by crop factor in the viewfinder. The angle of view through the "viewfinder" is determined not just by the apparent size within the viewfinder, but also by the focal length of the lens. Using the 14-54 mm lens at 14 mm, you see a reasonably wide angle of view through the eyepiece, much wider than what the eye sees as far as angle of view is concerned. The total view is compressed (for lack of a better term) within the field by the wide angle of view. But if you set that same lens at 54 mm, hold the camera to one eye and keep your other eye open, you will find that the angle of view is very close if not identical to your eye's view. At this focal length you have true binocular vision with objects appearing the same size.