Oly-curious

[RichSnyder]

Hi,

First off, I'm not trying to be a troll in any way. I currently shoot a Sony F828 that has plenty of faults to poke at...

I've been holding off on getting a dSLR. Maybe I'm stuck in the "wait for the next model" mentality too much. Honestly, I never really gave Olympus much thought. Seemed like a fringe group. Noticed the announcement for the E-500 and did some diggin around and had my curiosity piqued.

I have no existing SLR glass to bias a decision towards Nikon, Canon, etc so I'm starting from a clean slate. I understand the benefits of the 4/3 system but worry that it will end up like betamax - a better product with less market share that ends up dying. Sure, 4/3 is an open standard and there is a consortium of companies, but it only looks like Olympus with a few Sigma lenses thrown in at this time.

Going over the pros and cons of each manufacturer, in my thinking:

Nikon: You can't go wrong. It's like buying IBM. A safe bet and you know that it will get the job done. Nice flash technology.

Canon: Sports! IS lenses are sweet if you don't mind paying for them. High ISO smoothness. Safe bet also.

Minolta: IS in the camera is compelling. But, I'm not sure they will be around making bodies 5 years from now leaving me with useless lenses.

Olympus: 4/3 system give the promise of smaller, cheaper lenses. I agree with smaller, but cheaper doesn't seem to be the case although comparisons are difficult. Also, there is the concern that Olympus will drop the 4/3 at some point in the "betamax scenario". The 18-180 is nice.

So, if I could look in my crystal ball and predict the future, the choice would be easy. I guess it all comes down to not really caring about the body so much as caring about the investment made in glass. Will less expensive full-frame sensors dominate the market? Will the benefits of 4/3 lure away people tired of high tech stuck with limitations of 35mm legacy? Or is it not a case of one scenario winning, both will survive? Who knows?

Anyways, it will be interesting to see the reviews for the 500. In particular, I'm interested in what I perceive as a weakness in the 4/3 system - smaller sensor and much higher noise at 800/1600 than Canon or Nikon. It would be nice to see a Foveon 4/3 Olympus. E-3, maybe? ;-)

Look forward to the reviews of the 500 and I'll do some more homework on the 4/3 system.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Hokuto]

Rich, as many other posts have made clear, noise is a relative matter--there are solutions, like Neatimage and Noise Ninja. I've shot at 800 and 1600 and been pleased with the results (after pp), and I've seen E-1 results at 3200 that are plenty good for me. It all depends on your shooting style and needs.

--
'And only the stump, or fishy part of him remained'

http://www2.gol.com/users/nhavens
A Contemplative Companion to Fujino Township

 

[Cephalotus]

Welcome to Oly world

I've been holding off on getting a dSLR. Maybe I'm stuck in the
"wait for the next model" mentality too much.

Defintly not the worst thing in digicam world...

Honestly, I never
really gave Olympus much thought.

View do.

I have no existing SLR glass to bias a decision towards Nikon,
Canon, etc so I'm starting from a clean slate. I understand the
benefits of the 4/3 system but worry that it will end up like
betamax - a better product with less market share that ends up
dying. Sure, 4/3 is an open standard and there is a consortium of
companies, but it only looks like Olympus with a few Sigma lenses
thrown in at this time.

There is a announcement taht panasonic will introduce its first 4/3 DSLR in spring 2006. Panasonic is quite huge...

Going over the pros and cons of each manufacturer, in my thinking:

Nikon: You can't go wrong. It's like buying IBM. A safe bet and
you know that it will get the job done. Nice flash technology.

Are you 100% sure that the Nikon F mount will survive? It is an old mount which has some disadvantages againt full electronic mounts like Canon EF, Sigma SA (and 4/3)

Canon: Sports! IS lenses are sweet if you don't mind paying for
them. High ISO smoothness. Safe bet also.

Sure.

But sfae bet on which crop ?

1,6x, 1,3x or 1,0 ?

Changing the crop does mean that you cahnge the angle of view of your lenses. This is not a problem with all lenses, but propably with some of them.

Btw, only some of the Sigma lenses made before 2001 for EF mount will work on a current body.

Minolta: IS in the camera is compelling. But, I'm not sure they
will be around making bodies 5 years from now leaving me with
useless lenses.

That mount survived the last 20 dark years of SLR world, why shouldn't it survive now, during the booming time of SLR systems ?

Olympus: 4/3 system give the promise of smaller, cheaper lenses. I
agree with smaller, but cheaper doesn't seem to be the case
although comparisons are difficult. Also, there is the concern
that Olympus will drop the 4/3 at some point in the "betamax
scenario". The 18-180 is nice.

Who knows.

Read the forum 2-3 years ago wgen 4/3 was introduced and you will find hundreds of postings that this system is death born.

It survived, it has grown extremly fast and Olympus (I'm sure they know their market chances better than we do) has developed the F2 zoom lenses.

You would not do so, if you think that your system will not survive for many years to come.
Those lenses are made to stay here for many years to come...

At least in my opinion.

So, if I could look in my crystal ball and predict the future, the
choice would be easy. I guess it all comes down to not really
caring about the body so much as caring about the investment made
in glass. Will less expensive full-frame sensors dominate the
market? Will the benefits of 4/3 lure away people tired of high
tech stuck with limitations of 35mm legacy? Or is it not a case of
one scenario winning, both will survive? Who knows?

Your F828 is a "dead sytem" if you would call it so. No more additional lenses for it and you can't use your current lens on your next (Sony) body.
Is this really a problem for you ?
I doubt so.

Anyways, it will be interesting to see the reviews for the 500. In
particular, I'm interested in what I perceive as a weakness in the
4/3 system - smaller sensor and much higher noise at 800/1600 than
Canon or Nikon. It would be nice to see a Foveon 4/3 Olympus.
E-3, maybe? ;-)

Nobody knows.

It would always be interesting to have this or that...

Most people believe (myself included) that their pictures would be more intersting if they just would have this and that.

But in reality it doesn't.

The E-1 is an excellent camera. The one I like most from all cameras I ever had (and btw, that includes a Canon DSLR also).

But hey, thats just me.

If you want to swim with the crowed go with Canon (or Nikon). Just like Microsoft. Olympus is somthing like Apple.
Not better or worse. Just different.

I woudl recommend to buy that, what suits your needs most.

Future in digital technology ? Never care about that... That's wasted time (in my opinion)

Good light !

(btw, my first digicam was a F717 and I still use it. Really nice thing, too.., Can take excellent pictures, if just the photographer would be a bit better. ;-)

 

[Bob Rheaume]

Hi, Rich! Welcome to the Oly SLR forum. I can understand your interest being piqued, as the E-500 announcement has already generated a fair amount of buzz, much of it favorable and probably deservedly so I admit to being an unabashed Olympus partisan, as I've purchased and happily used five different Oly digitals. In my experience, the Oly's have quality lenses, accurate and reliable autofocus and autoexpopsure, and yield photos with great natural color. I also believe that Oly photos are at their best when printed, and I personally haven't found high ISO noise to be a serious limitation in my shooting.

As to investment in glass, there is simply is no "need" for any substantial investment. You can currently purchase the E-300 two-lens kit for less than you might have paid for your 828! Oly doesn't make bad lenses - they make good, better, and best and price them accordingly. Oly is about to expand the "good" category (which currently includes the 14-45 and 40-150) with a 35mm macro ($229) and an 18-180mm ($499). I have lots of shots at Pbase using the first two budget lenses, which I would encourage you to check out. Here's a link to a gallery of shots from a Caribbean style carnival I recently shot, and you can check out my "recent" galleries for more samples:

http://www.pbase.com/caseus/kendall

Kind regards,
Bob

 

[RichSnyder]

Good pics!

P8288610a.jpg on page 10 is my favorite. That would make a nice poster.

Also like P8289008a.jpg for obvious reasons. ;-)

The more I look at Olympus, the more I like it.

 

[RichSnyder]

I know too much about noise --- DSC-F828.

 

[RichSnyder]

As a mac owner and avid linux professional, I strongly agree that the "different way of thinking" has very much appeal.

 

[Bobby J]

Bob Rheame said it in his post. When available buy the E-500 two lens kit.

Or possibly the E-300 kit currently available. Of course that's after checking out the cameras and assuring yourself that they suit you .

You will have a relatively minor investment as these things go, and you will quickly decide if it is a system you can love. If not, sell it or trade it and although it will cost you something it won't be huge. If you like it a lot, then you can upgrade to an E-whatever and high dollar glass.

You might be perfectly happy with the two lens kit (a lot of folks are) and need nothing further.

Is 4/3 going to be successful? I think it's too soon to really know, but those of us who use it seem to be pretty happy. I think a key to survival of 4/3 could be if Panasonic actually does jump in as they have indicated. If that happens I would be greatly encourage.
--
BJM

 

[Bob Rheaume]

Thanks, Rich! 8610 is a shot of the Stata Center at MIT, designed by Frank Gehry. 9008 is a little fuzzy due to subject motion blurr Good thoughtful post, by the way.

Bob

 

[terdonal]

the cam, doesn't matter which one and what you want to do with the results once they are on your computer.

I use, E-1, 20D and E-300 with a variety of lenses. Take a look at my pbase to give you an idea what I can do with them and then remember you can do better.

--
Terry
http://www.pbase.com/terdonal
dpreview supporter
pbase supporter
FourThirdsFAQ -> http://www.fourthirdsFAQ.com

 

[dslrenvy]

I made the switch about a month ago and let me tell you, it's well worth it.

It cost me less than $200 (after selling my 828 while prices for it are still good) and got the E-300 2 lense kit. Gives me 28-300mm EFL.

The camera is in a totally different world when it comes to performance, ergos (except for the swivel which was handy) and image quality. The images when printed just have so much more depth, film like quality to them. I just recently printed an 8x10 that looked good on screen, but when I looked at the print I was just blown away!

Even my wife, who really doesn't care about cameras as long as they work when you press the button, was impressed with the print. First thing she said was that it looked like it was done professionally in a studio. I never got that from my 828.

I have no worries as to the long term of the 4/3 system. Oly will be coming out with new cameras in 06, a new pro level EX, most likely a new semi-pro EXX to go along with the E-500 and maybe even the E-300 as they haven't said it will be discontinued.

The lenses are great with the kit. Especially the 40-150, worth at least $500 in N and C lenses, at least to me.

As for the system, I can have (for me anyway) a complete system with 2 lenses, 2 adapters and a flash.

My plans are to first acquire the 14-54 for better low light/indoor shots. Then the 50-200, then the EX25 extension tube for the occasional macro and the 1.4TC for a little more reach on the 50-200 and the FL36 for better looking flash shots.

No need for half a dozen lenses, hoping the you get a good copy, or front focus, back focus, digital or not digital etc.....

Plus if you got the money Oly got the lenses. I will dream of the 35-100 and the 90-250.

Right now you can get the E-300 2 lense kit for about $650 from Dell or about $750 from B and H. Best deal in camera land.

I'm just a beginner, beginner and only since getting my E-300 tried anything other than family shots, but if you want to see what truly amature E-300 photos look like than take a look at my E-300 gallery. Nothing great by any means, but something for you to look at.

Most images straight out of the camera jpegs.

http://kini.smugmug.com/gallery/756550

 

[SirSeth]

I don't think Oly is going to croak anytime soon. They are not looseing money (though decreased profit earnings due to unsustainable growth has been reported). And if they do croak in 5 years and it's only Canon and Nikon dukein' it out in the DSLR realm, I'll buy one of them. My E-1 will be weary by then (maybe).

It sounds like you are weighing the pros and cons without too much bias. Cool. Noise is an issue with smaller sensors, but 4/34rds will always be significantly better than your Sony 828. Still we want less noise, and so are hopeful that the user controlled noise reduction in the E-500 will be implemented very well. We are also looking forward to improved sensor technology in the next Pro E.

Don't underestimate the advantage of the dust buster. Changing lenses is key in my photography and one compeling reason to own an DSLR in the first place. The lenses are a real plus of this system. It is true that Oly dosn't make a bad lens. Overall they are a great value in my mind (and I agree, they are difficult to compare accuratly with other systems). I have dropped my E-1 and 14-54mm in a marsh with about 3 inches of water. Some things about the system are uncomparable at this price no matter who is contesting.

Looking into the future, we are all pretty sure that Oly will offer stabilization of some sort. Most likely AS type, though that is not confirmed. And the bodies will likely always be less expensive then equivalent C or N due to the small sensor. I've owned Canon, Nikon, Minolta, and Olympus SLRs, and the E-1 beats them all for build quality and picture quality for a price that I can afford. It's still my dream camera. But if I were shopping right now, the E-500 with 18-180mm + 35mm macro would be just beautiful for value. As it is, I'm saving for the 50-200mm, 35mm macro, and then the E-3. Guess I'm hooked.

It's life great!
Seth

--
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?

--
http://www.wallygoots.com

 

[highsee3]

As a mac owner and avid linux professional, I strongly agree that
the "different way of thinking" has very much appeal.

Then you will fit in here!

I'm a mac user and an E-1 user.

The E-system is forward thinking and they took some risks. That makes some people uneasy.

I wouldn't worry. The Olympus lenses are top notch and work as they were designed to.
--

'A camera maker that simply copies others' idea has no right to call itself an original
maker in the first place.' -Mr. Maitani, creator of the OM photographic system.

 

[n4got]

Hey man,

you should caption some of those e-3oo beauties you have at smug mug

--
Later,
les

http://photosbyles.smugmug.com
I use a Mac,Oly e-1, e-3oo, Canon G-5

 

[nine44]

Alot of your concerns depend on how long you generally keep your cameras. The Olympus glass is excellent and I don't believe that Olympus will have any difficulties in the coming few years (especially with the E500 coming and a new pro camera next year).

I have used Nikon all my life (F3, F4s, F5, D70, etc) but found that the cost for me to own a nice Oly system is much lower than an equivalent system in Nikon.

I can see myself happy with 8-12 megapixels for years (Olympus will surely achieve beyond this)--even if the 4/3 system goes away in a few years, I feel confident I will get many additional years of good use from my investment.

I am a recent convert to Olympus and am pleased I did so.

Hi,

First off, I'm not trying to be a troll in any way. I currently
shoot a Sony F828 that has plenty of faults to poke at...

I've been holding off on getting a dSLR. Maybe I'm stuck in the
"wait for the next model" mentality too much. Honestly, I never
really gave Olympus much thought. Seemed like a fringe group.
Noticed the announcement for the E-500 and did some diggin around
and had my curiosity piqued.

I have no existing SLR glass to bias a decision towards Nikon,
Canon, etc so I'm starting from a clean slate. I understand the
benefits of the 4/3 system but worry that it will end up like
betamax - a better product with less market share that ends up
dying. Sure, 4/3 is an open standard and there is a consortium of
companies, but it only looks like Olympus with a few Sigma lenses
thrown in at this time.

Going over the pros and cons of each manufacturer, in my thinking:

Nikon: You can't go wrong. It's like buying IBM. A safe bet and
you know that it will get the job done. Nice flash technology.

Canon: Sports! IS lenses are sweet if you don't mind paying for
them. High ISO smoothness. Safe bet also.

Minolta: IS in the camera is compelling. But, I'm not sure they
will be around making bodies 5 years from now leaving me with
useless lenses.

Olympus: 4/3 system give the promise of smaller, cheaper lenses. I
agree with smaller, but cheaper doesn't seem to be the case
although comparisons are difficult. Also, there is the concern
that Olympus will drop the 4/3 at some point in the "betamax
scenario". The 18-180 is nice.

So, if I could look in my crystal ball and predict the future, the
choice would be easy. I guess it all comes down to not really
caring about the body so much as caring about the investment made
in glass. Will less expensive full-frame sensors dominate the
market? Will the benefits of 4/3 lure away people tired of high
tech stuck with limitations of 35mm legacy? Or is it not a case of
one scenario winning, both will survive? Who knows?

Anyways, it will be interesting to see the reviews for the 500. In
particular, I'm interested in what I perceive as a weakness in the
4/3 system - smaller sensor and much higher noise at 800/1600 than
Canon or Nikon. It would be nice to see a Foveon 4/3 Olympus.
E-3, maybe? ;-)

Look forward to the reviews of the 500 and I'll do some more
homework on the 4/3 system.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[RichSnyder]

After seeing the prices for the E-300 2 lens kit, maybe a lot sooner than I was thinking.

In reality, I think I'll hold off until the E-500 is oficially out and make my decision at that point (it's looking very favorable in Olympus' direction). Then I'll drool over the "cool" lenses...

 

[dslrenvy]

Hey man,

you should caption some of those e-3oo beauties you have at smug
mug

Sorry, don't mean to be ignorant here, but by caption, you mean writing a brief description of the photo?

I'm new at this so.......

If that is the case, one reason I didn't or don't is that the galleries are private, mostly for me to post photos to this site or Dgrin etc....

I'm kind of leary, or you can say paranoid about putting photos up that are open to everyone. Maybe I need to relax, but I work in law enforcement so I'm this way because I "get" to see the "best" that society has to offer on way too many occasions.

Thanks for the suggestion and comments though.

 

[mmditter]

because you appear to be new to this forum. If I hear one more post from someone who is afraid to buy an Olympus E camera due to concerns about noise I think I will lose my mind.

First of all, anyone who has this concern in mind when buying a new camera needs to first ask themself do I really shoot a lot at high ISO? If you truly can answer that question "yes, most of my shooting is done at 800 or higher," then perhaps there are better choices out there for you. Most people (and I reckon that is AT LEAST 90% of photographers out there) cannot honestly answer that question with a yes.

Second, if you think Olympus digital cameras are noisy and you have a 35mm film camera laying around, dust it off and load it with either a roll of fast color print film or even a fast roll of slide film which you will shoot at high ISO and have push-processed. I suspect you will be very surprised to see what was considered "acceptable" only a handful of years ago before the stampede to digital.

Lastly, the supposed noise problem is not even a problem. Just do a few searches on this forum. There are many, many threads by photographers shooting at events such as concerts and other low-light situations with their E-1's and E-300's set at high ISO's where the results are not just acceptable, but arguably even outstanding. The so-called high noise can normally be easily fixed in post-processing.

Rich, unless you plan to routinely shoot at 800 or higher, don't be afraid at all to buy an Olympus. You will not be sorry if you do.

 

[RichSnyder]

But what about the noise? (Just kidding.)

It probably comes up a lot because when you consider a camera, the first thing is to check out Phil's review. Invariably you end up on the photo test pages and the conclusion. That's where you see more noise (digital grain, we'll call it) than the contender to which the Olympus is compared.

But there's more to a camera than noise.

 

[shinndigg]

Hi,

I've been holding off on getting a dSLR. Maybe I'm stuck in the
"wait for the next model" mentality too much. Honestly, I never
really gave Olympus much thought. Seemed like a fringe group.
Noticed the announcement for the E-500 and did some diggin around
and had my curiosity piqued.

I was waiting (and waiting, and waiting) on Minolta to come out with their first DSLR (as I have Minolta glass) when I came across this website. The Oly's piqued my interest also. When KonicaMinolta (finally) came out with the 7D, it was over priced (in my opinion) at the time. So, I decided the slate was clean, and finally decided on the E300. No regrets.

I have no existing SLR glass to bias a decision towards Nikon,
Canon, etc so I'm starting from a clean slate. I understand the
benefits of the 4/3 system but worry that it will end up like
betamax - a better product with less market share that ends up
dying. Sure, 4/3 is an open standard and there is a consortium of
companies, but it only looks like Olympus with a few Sigma lenses
thrown in at this time.

Don't know if that's a fair analogy. Will the 4/3rds camera still work with the lenses provided? Yes. Will they still work with the CF cards? Yes.

Going over the pros and cons of each manufacturer, in my thinking:

Nikon: You can't go wrong. It's like buying IBM. A safe bet and
you know that it will get the job done. Nice flash technology.

I considered the D70.

Canon: Sports! IS lenses are sweet if you don't mind paying for
them. High ISO smoothness. Safe bet also.

Too many formats. FF, 1.3 crop, 1.6 crop. To me, Canon can't decide who they want to be. At least Oly is DEDICATED to a format.

Minolta: IS in the camera is compelling. But, I'm not sure they
will be around making bodies 5 years from now leaving me with
useless lenses.

In my opinion, KM will be around I might consider the KM 5D (the first and true 5D, Canon robbed the name).

Olympus: 4/3 system give the promise of smaller, cheaper lenses. I
agree with smaller, but cheaper doesn't seem to be the case
although comparisons are difficult. Also, there is the concern
that Olympus will drop the 4/3 at some point in the "betamax
scenario". The 18-180 is nice.

See above. Time will tell.

Anyways, it will be interesting to see the reviews for the 500. In
particular, I'm interested in what I perceive as a weakness in the
4/3 system - smaller sensor and much higher noise at 800/1600 than
Canon or Nikon. It would be nice to see a Foveon 4/3 Olympus.
E-3, maybe? ;-)

Foveon, intetresting... Things that make you go HMMMM...

Look forward to the reviews of the 500 and I'll do some more
homework on the 4/3 system.

Thanks,
Rich

Like I said before, I am very content with the Evolt E300. The only niggle for me is noise at above ISO 800. 800 is doable if processed through NeatImage of NoiseNinja. If you would like to see some results, check my pbase page.
--
shinndigg
http://www/pbase.com/shinndigg