A decision has been made...

Forst off I want to thank everyone that responded to my questions about the E500 and Nikon D50. Despite numerous recommendations to look at an E1 (I simply cannot fit into the budget) I'll be picking up an E500 with 2 lens kit tomorrow.

I still have a few reservations about the E500, but no tool is perfect and it really the photographer that makes the difference anyway. The major factors in my decision ended up being...

• The E500's outstanding combination of features for the money
• The image quality (although I still think it underexposes a bit)
• The value of the kit and the fact that Olympus has gone to the effort of making the kit lenses better than average
• The fact that I can I can use the B300 I have had since my Oly 2100UZ to increase the reach on my lenses (with limitations)
• The fact that I can use legacy OM lenses on the E500 (with an adapter)
• I guess I am a sucker for innovative approaches

and finally...

• The terrific community on this forum

I'm still not completely sold on the 4/3rds design, I wish it had better control of noise at high ISOs ( I've been using a Fuji 602 for years so I should be used to it) and the lenses could be MORE affordable, but I am confident that the E500 will be a wonderful photographic tool for my project. I'll upload some of the images of local urban wildlife I get as the project progresses (for feedback and critique of course).

I'm off to hunt down an OM 50mm 1.8 (and maybe some bigger glass) on the used market.

Thanks again.

Kevin

well, congratulations! I just bought my e500 kit last friday.

Good decision. The E-500 is capable of producing some stunning images.

Less noise at high ISO will come, it's only a matter of time. Good luck.

--
Michael KD

let us know how it works out and please post some pics.

Most of the reviews and my own personal experience is these E cameras have a tendency to overexpose. Noise is less of an issue than you may think at this time.

Do a search on 'Oly Color' and you'll see why most of us are believers.

I made my decision to go for Oly based on the high level of owner staisfaction as compared to the others - originally I was going to buy the D70.

Good luck.

overexposure can be easily overcome. If you are shooting in P, A, or S, just switch to M mode and ajust the speed and f.
George

--
http://www.highsee3.smugmug.com

'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.

Thanks, I look forward to playing with it and posting some images. I'll likely be spending a good deal of time here.

Kevin

dixeyk said:

(although I still think it underexposes a bit)

Click to expand...

I thought so too, to begin with. Reducing the contrast to -1 or -2 brings back a lot of detail in the shadows, which I thought was a bit too dark before. Saves some blown highlights too I guess.



Robert

Thanks for the tip, I'll try that out.

Kevin

dixeyk said:

Forst off I want to thank everyone that responded to my questions
about the E500 and Nikon D50. Despite numerous recommendations to
look at an E1 (I simply cannot fit into the budget) I'll be picking
up an E500 with 2 lens kit tomorrow.

Click to expand...

Congrats, I think you'll like the E-500. I bought an E-300 after using a Digital Rebel for a few weeks and a quick (1 hour) experience with the *ist-DS; I have no regrets about my choice. I do wish I'd had a chance to try the Nikon D50, but it was too new at the time, and not really available.

dixeyk said:

I still have a few reservations about the E500, but no tool is
perfect and it really the photographer that makes the difference
anyway. The major factors in my decision ended up being...

• The E500's outstanding combination of features for the money
• The image quality (although I still think it underexposes a bit)

Click to expand...

You'll be able to use exposure adjustment to correct this to your taste; I often use -0.3 EV to make sure the highlights aren't blown. I also have the flash set at -0.3 EV most of the time. To each his own, I guess; I find I like my images a little dark. When it's important, I shoot RAW and then pull a more detail out of the shadows when I develop.

dixeyk said:

• The value of the kit and the fact that Olympus has gone to the

effort of making the kit lenses better than average

• The fact that I can I can use the B300 I have had since my Oly

2100UZ to increase the reach on my lenses (with limitations)

Click to expand...

You know, if you still have it the UZ it might be a good second camera for your project... IIRC, it's an f/2.8 10X zoom image stabilized 2MP with great image quality; I see nice images from the 2100UZ all the time on the Oly Talk Forum.

dixeyk said:

• The fact that I can use legacy OM lenses on the E500 (with an

adapter)

Click to expand...

Be careful here; not all glass that worked on the OM works well on the E-series. I have a 50mm f/1.4 that's too soft especially at f/1.4 (but very good for natural light portraits at f/2-2.8), a 200mm f/4 that theoretically should be great but I keep having trouble with focus, and a 300mm f/4.5 that is the best of the bunch. Check out http://biofos.com/cornucop/omz_e1.html for some examples and analysis of the OM lenses on an E-1. I use the 50mm the most right now. For your stated purpose ("rafts of birds at sea" - I'd assume during the day?) the 300mm f/4.5 plus or minus a 2X teleconverter might be a useful choice with a tripod. IIRC, others on the forum have liked the Tamron 350mm mirror lens.

dixeyk said:

• I guess I am a sucker for innovative approaches

and finally...

• The terrific community on this forum

Click to expand...

...blush....

dixeyk said:

I'm still not completely sold on the 4/3rds design, I wish it had
better control of noise at high ISOs ( I've been using a Fuji 602
for years so I should be used to it) and the lenses could be MORE
affordable,

Click to expand...

Don't we all?

dixeyk said:

but I am confident that the E500 will be a wonderful
photographic tool for my project. I'll upload some of the images of
local urban wildlife I get as the project progresses (for feedback
and critique of course).

Click to expand...

I look forward to seeing your images - Good Luck!
ECM

dixeyk said:

I'm off to hunt down an OM 50mm 1.8 (and maybe some bigger glass)
on the used market.

Thanks again.

Kevin

Click to expand...

ecm said:

You'll be able to use exposure adjustment to correct this to your
taste; I often use -0.3 EV to make sure the highlights aren't
blown. I also have the flash set at -0.3 EV most of the time. To
each his own, I guess; I find I like my images a little dark. When
it's important, I shoot RAW and then pull a more detail out of the
shadows when I develop.

Click to expand...

I would not recommend underexposing if shooting RAW. With RAW it is better to err on the side of overexposure if anything. This is due to the concept of linear capture in digital. Half of the available bit depth (resoultion if you like) is contained in the first stop. The next stop contains 1/4 and so on. This means that if you are underexposing, you are relegating shadow detail to a restricted resolution. This concept was first espoused by Thomas Know (AFAIK), the original creator of Photoshop and designer of ACR. Pick up Bruce Fraser's book on Camera Raw for details. There is also mention of this on Luminous Landscapes.
--
Nigel

Equipment in Profile

Check this thread and E B's responses:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=16015255

I would agree that you want to push the highest exposure possible, short of blowing highlights, they are much more difficult to recover than shadows.

It will also depend on how you are using the camera (ie. exposure mode), but most often, on a well lit day, I am almost always EV-.3. It's all a matter of suiting you own needs.

nigeljking said:

ecm said:

You'll be able to use exposure adjustment to correct this to your
taste; I often use -0.3 EV to make sure the highlights aren't
blown. I also have the flash set at -0.3 EV most of the time. To
each his own, I guess; I find I like my images a little dark. When
it's important, I shoot RAW and then pull a more detail out of the
shadows when I develop.

Click to expand...

I would not recommend underexposing if shooting RAW. With RAW it is
better to err on the side of overexposure if anything. This is due
to the concept of linear capture in digital. Half of the available
bit depth (resoultion if you like) is contained in the first stop.
The next stop contains 1/4 and so on. This means that if you are
underexposing, you are relegating shadow detail to a restricted
resolution. This concept was first espoused by Thomas Know (AFAIK),
the original creator of Photoshop and designer of ACR. Pick up
Bruce Fraser's book on Camera Raw for details. There is also
mention of this on Luminous Landscapes.
--
Nigel

Equipment in Profile

Click to expand...

but to do you best to "pile" up the histogram on the right side without blowing out the highlights- easier said than done in many cases though.

What the article implied is if you leave the right side of the histogram flat then you are loosing a large percent of your image data.

Gene

Just spent two weeks reading & rereading reveiws as well as posts on this forum as to an upgrade from my C8080 will it be a E500 or E300. Found A camera store with both & had a look, a feel & a few quick shots. In the end it was not contest the E300 won hands down

aussiedavid said:

Just spent two weeks reading & rereading reveiws as well as posts
on this forum as to an upgrade from my C8080 will it be a E500 or
E300. Found A camera store with both & had a look, a feel & a few
quick shots. In the end it was not contest the E300 won hands down

Click to expand...

Well, there weren't many places that carried Olympus here where I live and of those none had an E300. It looks good, but I'm happy with my choice. The E500 feels good in my hands and I'm looking forward to getting out with it.

Good luck.

Kevin

dixeyk said:

Well, there weren't many places that carried Olympus here where I
live and of those none had an E300. It looks good, but I'm happy
with my choice. The E500 feels good in my hands and I'm looking
forward to getting out with it.

Good luck.

Kevin

Kevin That was one of the probs the E500 was just too small for my hand & a bit on the light side also felt the 14-45 was the better lens for my use the rest is about 95% identical — plus the E300 was better value for money. Just had to travel 150 miles round trip to find one.

Click to expand...

My wife is an artist so we had to shoot a house for a commission drawing so the first out door shots I tried were the classic PF shots, trees against sky I felt my 8080 was good in this area, the E300 c 14-45 kills it, no problems at all!! Hope Calico Cat reads this!

You should enjoy the E500 it seems to be a nice camera! I use an E300 and like it. No camera is perfect. There are things I like better on the E500 and vice versa. I will say that I would not trade my Pentax DS for my E300. But I don't have too!
thanks
--
barondla