Would you Recommend a Olympus Camera to Friends or Family.

Would you Recommend a Olympus Camera to Friends or Family.


  • Total voters
    0
Houseqatz wrote:

i love my pen, i have always used it for street photography, as that is why i bought it. it is a lovely camera, and the images it captures are perfect for what i need it to do, but it's not the general purpose camera that my dads d5100 is, nor is it able to handle the extremes like my 5dii does.
You may want to try the OM-D. You'll be amazed at how well it handles most "extremes" especially with little jewels like the 12/f2 and 75/1.8 lens. The big advantage, I find, is being able to have it with you many times you don't or can't haul a DSLR (whatever the make).
if an olympus meets their needs, and offers enough room for them to grow and develop as a photographer, and affords the option to branch out, then i would recommend an olympus to them. lately, it's been nikon dlsr's.. my dad keeps teasing me about eventually shooting nikon, as that's what he has always used
Amazing recent experience: having one guy like your Dad suddenly switch to mFT and a friend actually do so -trade in his D300s for an OM-D *against* my advice (because he shoots some sports and birds). Both seem very happy with their decision. I guess because, like most of us, photography is something that has to be done alongside other things, and that is where mFT really shines.
 
erichK wrote:

I have a friend who has half a dozen Nikonos cameras and Nikon UW housings -each of the latter of which cost well over a thousand bucks - that are completely obsolete. That was one reason I went from the Nikon F70 and F80 I was shooting to an Olympus C5050Z and housing -which together cost less than a housing for either Nikon would have- when I want to do a bit of it myself.

Unfortunately, UW housings have to be camera-specifics, and in our crazy world of endless new stuff and endless obsolescence and toxic waste, cameras go obsolete pretty quickly.
 
Olympus has provided far better legacy lense support than say........Canon!

Canon completly abandoned the FD mount leaving countless customers with unsupported glass!

I find it ironic that through the m4/3 system, I can enjoy my old glass all over again!



Thanks Olympus!
 
erichK wrote:
Houseqatz wrote:

i love my pen, i have always used it for street photography, as that is why i bought it. it is a lovely camera, and the images it captures are perfect for what i need it to do, but it's not the general purpose camera that my dads d5100 is, nor is it able to handle the extremes like my 5dii does.
You may want to try the OM-D. You'll be amazed at how well it handles most "extremes" especially with little jewels like the 12/f2 and 75/1.8 lens. The big advantage, I find, is being able to have it with you many times you don't or can't haul a DSLR (whatever the make).
i have, it's a wonderful camera, and if i was in the market for a jack of all trades, i'd consider it. i'm pretty platform agnostic, as i see it, cameras are tools. some cameras are better for certain types of photography than others. but that has more to do with sensor size, and focal length.. i have a compact that does macro better than any of my large sensor cameras.

as it stands, my dads d5100 is very competent as a jack of all trades, tho it's missing user adjustable WB, and it has a lot of other features that i never use, but i'm sure those things keep the cost down by opening up the camera to a broader consumer base.
if an olympus meets their needs, and offers enough room for them to grow and develop as a photographer, and affords the option to branch out, then i would recommend an olympus to them. lately, it's been nikon dlsr's.. my dad keeps teasing me about eventually shooting nikon, as that's what he has always used
Amazing recent experience: having one guy like your Dad suddenly switch to mFT and a friend actually do so -trade in his D300s for an OM-D *against* my advice (because he shoots some sports and birds). Both seem very happy with their decision. I guess because, like most of us, photography is something that has to be done alongside other things, and that is where mFT really shines.
i like olympus, however, i started looking for a more serious camera when i ran into limitations of the sensor in the e-p1, and went a canon based solution. this was years ago, and i know the technology has changed, but i'm actually quite happy with the results i get from the canon system i've put together.

for street, i still have my pen, which is fine for what i need it to do, for the time being. while the olypmus lenses are nice, some are fantastic actually, they're not nice enough for me to invest more into the system at the moment. maybe when i decide to upgrade my street kit.

also, the size of a dslr isn't an issue for me, nor are the perceived limitations of where one can't or doesn't take a dslr. if i can't take a dslr with me, i'm not any more likely to take a compact camera or ILC, and accept that the shot didn't mean enough to risk it.. by that, i mean; climbing out to the end of a limb overhanging a serious drop, stand on the running board of a moving vehicle, carrying it out into open water without an enclosure etc.

actually, i'll stand on the running board of a moving vehicle if i'm wearing proper safety equipment, like a harness, strapped in properly of course =]
 
dave gaines wrote:

There's an alternative macro lens for m4/3 that apparently a lot of people have not thought about yet. I recently purchased an MMF-3 and the 35 mm f/3.5 which fits the camera nicely and works pretty well. I got them both used for a total of about $240. Even the new price for a 50 mm f/2 macro and MMF-3 is going to cost less than the m4/3 60 mm macro.

I posted this below but no one commented. I'm surprised no one has mentioned this.

--
Dave
Thanks for the thought, it has me pondering what I meant... Personality, I have used the 50mm, the Sigma 105mm and the 70-300mm as close up lenses with the E-30 and have tried each of them with mFT bodies with mixed results; but, I don't like the handling of these lenses in close up situations with mFT and don't use them unless I'm absolutely forced to do it (it can be done.) I, again personally, like the working distance of the 105 mm lens which is why I haven't thought about the mFT 60mm which, from what I've seen, appears to be very nice in the hands of someone who likes that FL...The E-M1 with focus peaking may be a solution, I've yet to try focus peaking. I also don't do real “Macro” but I look for close focusing lenses and don't see many in the mFT line up. (I gather the new 12-40 is very good in that respect and if the new 40-150 is similarly spec'ed then I may very well change my mind.)
 
-I would recommend the lenses without any disclaimer and I feel that the bodies are a deal for the price. I love my gear and will wait patiently for a modern 4/3 body to match the micro line.


JAWilson
 
True, but the adapter for the OM system does not allow any auto aperture control so is not very convenient and really only suitable for static photographic subjects. Particularly with the dim viewfinders on many Oly dSLRs.
 
Actually I have liked all my Olympus cameras and lenses. Even my first E410 was a finely built entry level camera. It is enjoying a second life as my step daughters first DSLR.

Its Olympus business practice that gives me pause. Shortly after the new sensor (12.3MP) came out, I bought first and briefly owned an E620 which I upgraded to an E30. I didn't buy the E5, it seemed to be an E30 in better body and a ton more expensive.

Then nothing

No more E bodies, no new mid range or entry level bodies to back up the E5.

Just a newly invented system that was not compatible with my lenses.

I have read all the threads about the pace of technological change, things become obsolete faster and faster...etc .etc. In other words get over it.

But the E410 was released in 2006, the E5 in 2010. That seems a rather brief period to argue this was a the result technological change. Canon and Nikon users can use 20 year old lenses on the new bodies. In some case the lenses actually work better.
 
Because Canon and Nikon made money on their systems and Olympus four thirds was a commercial failure.

Luckily micro four thirds is currently doing a bit better so you should in the next year or so have several options to enable you to use your four thirds lenses.
 
Olymore wrote:

Because Canon and Nikon made money on their systems and Olympus four thirds was a commercial failure.

Luckily micro four thirds is currently doing a bit better so you should in the next year or so have several options to enable you to use your four thirds lenses.
 
Olymore wrote:

True, but the adapter for the OM system does not allow any auto aperture control so is not very convenient and really only suitable for static photographic subjects. Particularly with the dim viewfinders on many Oly dSLRs.
 
Olympus share of the dSLR had been steadily shrinking from around 2006.
Olympus was heavily discounting the E4xx and E5xx bodies before they were replaced.

And the final and obvious one. Olympus stopped producing dSLR bodies and new lenses for four thirds. Why would they do that for a profitable system ?

Coincidentally, most lower end APS-C dSLRs and many lower end mirrorless cameras are being heavily discounted now for exactly the same reasons. Sales are falling rapidly.

At the moment the big three can survive that because they have such huge sales compared to Olympus and because they have a comprehensive range of higher end cameras that are more profitable.

Eventually though they will have to look for alternative solutions. Arguably Sony has already started that with its new A300 which will be much cheaper to build than a dSLR.
 
Olymore wrote:

Olympus share of the dSLR had been steadily shrinking from around 2006.
Olympus was heavily discounting the E4xx and E5xx bodies before they were replaced.

And the final and obvious one. Olympus stopped producing dSLR bodies and new lenses for four thirds. Why would they do that for a profitable system ?

Coincidentally, most lower end APS-C dSLRs and many lower end mirrorless cameras are being heavily discounted now for exactly the same reasons. Sales are falling rapidly.

At the moment the big three can survive that because they have such huge sales compared to Olympus and because they have a comprehensive range of higher end cameras that are more profitable.

Eventually though they will have to look for alternative solutions. Arguably Sony has already started that with its new A300 which will be much cheaper to build than a dSLR.
 
Absolut recommanded, from E-M5 and up til now.
 
gfraser7 wrote:
eaa wrote:
Glen Barrington wrote:

Too much chaos, too much drama. And frankly, I don't fully trust Olympus. They seem to be floundering, looking for some sort of vision for the future. I might consider an Oly, but I could not recommend one to others.
Plain FUD!
Consider the case of the hobbiest who bought an e520 with the two lens kit for around 700. Gradually he ends up with an 11-22, 14-54, and 50-200. Imagine the hobbiest's chagrin when he discovers there is no upgrade path for him anymore...We're not all money bags, ya know?
And even if money isn't a huge problem, who wants to waste money? What you described was me, except I started with the E300 kit.

I can't imagine why anyone would recommend a dead lens mount for someone to buy starting out. With film it was different. You could use a 40 year old camera body and if the glass was good, the IQ was the same as the newest tech stuff. Not so with digital.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top