new DSLR buyer

I am looking for advice on for a first-time purchaser of a digital SLR. I've been shooting with an oly c2100 for five years or so and have gotten used to a camera with a lot of manual controls. It looks as though the UZI has fallen victim to the dreaded SDS, so I figure this is a good time to go looking, although I will probably attempt to get it repaired if it isn't too much money for it.

I prefer olympus products. For whatever reason, I've always gotten better results with them (I've got other brand's P&S). A year or so ago I tried out a friend's E-1 and I really liked the feel of it. I handled an E-500 recently, and while it seems to be an amazing camera, it didn't "feel" as good in my hands as the E-1. Plus, the layout of the E-1 and the controls really appealed to me. I've not checked out the E-300 yet though. I've followed the threads here for a while but I just can't make up my mind.

I probably shoot landscape/scenic 20%, portraits and candids for family and work around 50% and the rest travel and street.

I don't really need a lot of megapixels. The UZI has been fine for me up until now. I could always get great 5X7s and sometimes 8X10s with it, so anything in the 5 to 8 megapixel range is going to be fine.

My budget is around $1000, although I would go a little higher if I could find a deal that included a lens that did well in low light conditions. The lack of flash doesn't really bother me, as I rarely use it, even on my other cameras.

I guess what I'm asking is advice on a good camera purchase that will allow me to grow with it. I realize that I am a novice in this area, so I'm looking for any input you can provide.

Thanks!

Jerry Cobb
Texarkana TX

It sounds like you would be happy with the E-1, which is on for good deals right now.

Low light lens? The 14-54 is a good start. I suspect you could get the two parts for under $1000 and add a memory card or other goody. Check Cameta. The 40-150 (if offered) is a good longish zoom to get your kit started too, though not too hot for low light.
--
Barry

Equipment in profile.

Sounds like you've already sold yourself on the E-1; it's a great camera so go for it!
--
'And only the stump, or fishy part of him remained'

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

I saw the E-1 on Cameta; seems like an amazing deal.

Even with all control and handling preferences, I like the idea of camera that can take a little roughing up. I am notoriously tough on electronics, so having a camera like that is certainly a plus.

Really, the only reason I haven't purchased it yet is -- being a novice, I guess -- I'm afraid there are questions that I should ask first, but don't know enough yet to ask. Talk about a catch 22...

As someone said earlier, don't be drawn into the E-1 cult vortex. E-500 is a great camera; it is not just more megapixels - newer electronics inside, scrolling through pictures is virtually instant, the screen is huge.. the list goes on.

As for weather sealing - just my $.02 - most people would give up on shooting in conditions when the rain is strong. Light rain is not going to kill an E-500.

For your budget you could have the E-500 and the 14-54, or the dual lens kit + filters + tripod.

But in the end - you can't go wrong with either one.

Good luck on making the choice and happy shooting!

Yup no matter what, you won't go wrong with Olympus. There are many of us who have the E-300 and are very happy with it also. I have some love going on, but it is probably that cult thing. I knew the E-300 was the camera for me a year before I broke down and purchased it.

From what is sounds like, I would go with the E-1 and the 14-54 and add the 40-150 also. Though I am happy with my 14-45, the 14-54 is on my christmas wish list because of it's low light abilities.

--

Olympus E-300, 14-45mm, 40-150mm, 35mm Macro, Sunpak 383, Demb pro diffuser, 50mm 1.8

JC in TX said:

I am looking for advice on for a first-time purchaser of a digital
SLR. I've been shooting with an oly c2100 for five years or so and
have gotten used to a camera with a lot of manual controls. It
looks as though the UZI has fallen victim to the dreaded SDS, so I
figure this is a good time to go looking, although I will probably
attempt to get it repaired if it isn't too much money for it.

I prefer olympus products. For whatever reason, I've always gotten
better results with them (I've got other brand's P&S). A year or so
ago I tried out a friend's E-1 and I really liked the feel of it. I
handled an E-500 recently, and while it seems to be an amazing
camera, it didn't "feel" as good in my hands as the E-1. Plus, the
layout of the E-1 and the controls really appealed to me. I've not
checked out the E-300 yet though. I've followed the threads here
for a while but I just can't make up my mind.

I probably shoot landscape/scenic 20%, portraits and candids for
family and work around 50% and the rest travel and street.

I don't really need a lot of megapixels. The UZI has been fine for
me up until now. I could always get great 5X7s and sometimes 8X10s
with it, so anything in the 5 to 8 megapixel range is going to be
fine.

My budget is around $1000, although I would go a little higher if I
could find a deal that included a lens that did well in low light
conditions. The lack of flash doesn't really bother me, as I rarely
use it, even on my other cameras.

I guess what I'm asking is advice on a good camera purchase that
will allow me to grow with it. I realize that I am a novice in this
area, so I'm looking for any input you can provide.

Click to expand...

I have a still functioning C-2100UZ and an E-1, and too some extent they are different worlds. If you go into it expecting that any DSLR is just going to be the same as the UZI, you will will likely be frustrated.

I did a post last July in the Olympus talk forum where I compared using the UZI vs. E-1 for photographing renaissance faires. You might take a look at it:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=14149131

Note, since then, I have upgraded my long lens, first to the 40-150mm and then the 50-200mm, and I no longer set contrast to -2. I have become more expert at post processing.

The biggest difference is the zoom (38-380mm vs. 28-108mm). If you are used to longer zooms, you will need to consider getting a second lens. In your budget range, the 40-150mm might be the best shot, but the ability to do wide angle is eye-opening. I do recomend getting the 14-54mm lens over the 14-45mm if budget permits, particularly since you mentioned low light shooting.

The second difference is of course image stabalization, particularly at the long end. You do have to watch your shutter speed, and be prepared to go to a higher ISO (dealing with the noise) to shoot handheld, or get a monopod/tripod and learn how to use them (I still don't have good monopod skills, and I hate carrying tripods around, since I do a lot of people shooting).

One other thing to think of, if you want the convenience of an all-in-one shooting with stabalization, I would suggest looking at the Panasonic FZ30 or the upcoming FZ50. Yeah, they have a reputation for being somewhat noisy image wise, but I suspect a lot of that is pixel peepers, and it doesn't show up in prints, particularly if you get a noise removal package like neatimage or noiseninja.

JC in TX said:

I saw the E-1 on Cameta; seems like an amazing deal.

Click to expand...

It's an amazing deal for an amazing camera. Those 5 megapixels are the best 5 megapixels on the market. Paired with the 14-54mm Zuiko it's a sweet combination.

--
Cheers,

Jim Pilcher
Colorado, USA

I don't make stupid mistakes. My mistakes are always very clever.

SLR photography is not P&S photography. Do not be surprised if your initial DSLR efforts do not seem up to your usual standards. You have to learn the equipment and the techniques. To some people it all comes naturally. To others it involves a learning curve. If you end up in the second group, persevere and you will really enjoy your DSLR.

--
Cheers,

Jim Pilcher
Colorado, USA

I don't make stupid mistakes. My mistakes are always very clever.

JC in TX said:

A year or so ago I tried out a friend's E-1 and I really liked the feel of it. I
handled an E-500 recently, and while it seems to be an amazing
camera, it didn't "feel" as good in my hands as the E-1. Plus, the
layout of the E-1 and the controls really appealed to me.

Click to expand...

When you couple the E-1 with a 14-54 and the SHLD-2 battery grip, it feels even better, although you'll be rather impressed with the weight. For me, I appreciate the added weight from the grip as I'm not all that steady. The E-1 combination I just mentioned will cost you just under $1,000 via Cameta including shipping after the $50 lens rebate if you don't include the offered camera bag and 4 gig CF card. By the way, both of my E-1s were purchased from Camata, I highly recommend them as a trusted vendor, as most people do.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Olympus-E-1-Digital-Camera-Lens-SHLD-2-Grip-NEW-USA_W0QQitemZ160013580245QQihZ006QQcategoryZ43457QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem

I will agree that the E-1's controls are laid out much better than the E-500's, and there are more of them externally to use without having to peer through the viewfinder. Also, you get the nice LCD on top of the camera which I find to be invaluable. It's a feature the E-500 is sorely missing. However, after using the E-500 for a while, these limitations are easily overcome, and if you never had them to begin with as a comparison, you'd never miss them. With my owning two E-1 cameras, I truly miss them on the E-500. But the E-1 and the E-500 are two different target markets.

JC in TX said:

I probably shoot landscape/scenic 20%, portraits and candids for
family and work around 50% and the rest travel and street.

Click to expand...

The E-1 would figure in here. But while I have used the E-1 for landscape shots and achieved great if not excellent results, you will wish you had the extra 3 megapixels in the E-500, especially if there is a lot of fooliage. But since landscape only makes up 20% of your shooting, you'll get by nicely with the E-1.

JC in TX said:

I don't really need a lot of megapixels. The UZI has been fine for
me up until now. I could always get great 5X7s and sometimes 8X10s
with it, so anything in the 5 to 8 megapixel range is going to be
fine.

Click to expand...

I print 8x10 frequently with shots taken from the E-1 and the E-500 and if there's little cropping, I honestly can't see the difference in regard to pixel limitation. But if I seriously crop an E-1 image, then yes, I can start to see the difference. But it's not so bad that I cannot use them. When viewed from three feet away, you'll not see the shortage, at least with my eyes. I have learned to do most of my cropping in the E-1's viewfinder these days to help with this.

JC in TX said:

My budget is around $1000, although I would go a little higher if I
could find a deal that included a lens that did well in low light
conditions. The lack of flash doesn't really bother me, as I rarely
use it, even on my other cameras.

Click to expand...

See the Cameta link above. I would highly recommend the FL-50, and if that's too much, I'd get the FL-36. Trust me on this, you'll use it. It greatly assists in low light focusing, far better than the built-in assist lamp on either the E-1 or the E-500. There of course is no built-in flash on the E-1. The built-in flash on the E-500 is a joke IMHO; it simpy is inadequate for anything other than "Oops, I forgot my flash" situations.

As an aside, I find the jpeg engine in the E-1 to be vastly superior to what's in the E-500. I have always gotten great results in an SHQ jpeg straight out of the E-1 with very little PP. I do shoot RAW+SHQ though, just in case, and will admit I usually work with the RAW files just because that's what I do, but if I wasn't a RAW shooter, I'd appreciate the E-1 jpegs over the E-500 jepgs. I also shoot RAW+SHQ with the E-500 and I find I have to do a LOT more PP work to achieve desired results.

PDXguy said:

I guess what I'm asking is advice on a good camera purchase that
will allow me to grow with it. I realize that I am a novice in this
area, so I'm looking for any input you can provide.

Click to expand...

The E-1 is just now 3 years old. Yes, the technology in the E-500 is fresher, although even now with rapid advances in digital photography even IT is dated, but that's the way it works I'm afraid. What you buy today is obsolete tomorrow if you're a tech junkie. I will say that for me, the E-1 is not missing any technology whatsoever, other than more megapixels. I don't do a lot of low light shooting so that is not a concern. I will safely say the E-500 is better in low light focusing situations if coupled with the 14-54 and the FL-36 or FL-50 flash. I will also say the E-500 is faster in the auto-focus department in broad daylight than the E-1, but not by much, if at all, if the E-1 is using the SHLD-2 grip. Some people claim it doesn't make any difference, but I've used both long enough to say that indeed it does make a difference.

To me, the E-1 is still a valid high-performer for the consumer-hobbyist. For a pro shooting action sports, forget it. There is a reason why Canon dominates that field.

As far as noise goes, that's what you get with the four-thirds format. Both suffer, but never has this been either an issue or concern for me. Take a look at Louis Dobson's low-light beach fantastic photography and TRY to determine if noise is truly an issue with Oly. To me, it's not. It's funny, Nikon are also noisy, but why is this never brought up? Software corrects.

If I had to recommend just one, and considering this is your first dSLR and based on your above shooting situations, I'd recommend the E-1. The E-500 is an exellent camera, but in image quality I simply can't see where the E-500 is a better choice. As I mentioned, I have far less post processing to do with an E-1 image. Those pixels are of the highest quality. If you like to post process, then this isn't an issue. In the performance area, yes, the E-500 is a few notches ahead in the areas I already mentioned. The E-500 boasts a much larger review screen, but I never chimp my shots anyway, always preferring to review after I've downloaded to the PC. Speaking of which, the E-1 offers both USB 2.0 and firewire, the E-500 only offers USB, and that is NOT USB 2.0. Why? I cannot understand Oly's decision to do this. And, I find the white balance on the E-1 to be much better and more reliable than on the E-500. WB on an E-500 has always been an issue for me.

And of course there is the build quality. While I've never dropped the E-1 or the E-500, I'd rather have that mishap with the E-1, as I believe it'll survive it better. I, too, am notoriously rough on camera gear. My two E-1s bang into each other all day long as I scramble up and down hillsides, and not even a scratch is evident.

Truly, I like both cameras, they're both excellent products, you can't go wrong with either one. But having owned them both for quite some time now, if I had it to do all over again, I'd walk out of the store with the E-1...two of them.

My suggestion:

KIT...
E-1
14-54mm
40-150 - maybe (lighter weight than the 50-200, but darker - check eBay)
SHLD-2 battery grip
FL-36 or 50 flash
2 or 4 gig SanDisk Extreme III CF cards - TWO

Additional lenses and gear...
50-200mm
11-22mm
50mm if doing a lot of portrait work or macro
Tripod
Monopod
ball head

PDXguy said:

Thanks!

Jerry Cobb
Texarkana TX

Click to expand...

You're welcome

Kind Regards,

Steve

wow, I am really learning while reading everyone's suggestions.

FWIW, I stopped by a local shop today to give the E-500 another look. While I was there, the owner showed me a used E-1 with the 14-54mm lens; basically the kit it came with new (according to the sales guy). I had a great time playing with it. Changing settings came pretty easily, once he showed me how to use the wheel.

To make a long story short, I bought the E-1 and lens. It was $475 including tax. Based on what I've seen them going for new at Cameta or used on Ebay, that seems to be a fair deal, although I wouldn't call it spectacular. No room to negotiate, as the owner said he was just selling it for a customer who bought 2 Canons.

The only scratches are a few on the lcd cover; everything else seems like new including the lens. It was well cared for.

The real plus is that I liked purchasing from the local shop. I know many of you have great relationships with the online vendors, but being a newbie to the DSLR world, having a dealer 2 blocks from the house gives me some comfort, for whatever reason. Plus, these guys do all our corporate photography, and they've pulled my butt out of the ringer on a couple of occasions, so I like giving them business when I can.

I was almost sold on the E-500, but given that the faster lens came with the E-1, it doesn't feel as much of an impulse buy (I've seen what it sells for separately), even being used.

Thanks for all the assistance folks. I've gotten some great advice here now and in the past. Now lets hope I can learn to use this machine and take some photos worthy of display here...

--
Jerry Cobb
Texarkana TX

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=19426530
A nearly identical post.
--
Regards,
(afka Wile E. Coyote)
Bill
PSAA
Equipment in profile.
Eschew obfuscation.
The frumious Bandersnatch

You got a great buy!

I posted below before reading this reply but I think that you did what I might have suggested.

Until a week ago I was using only my E-300 kit lensed on my E-1/SHLD-2 combination but have been using a borrowed 11-22 on it since then. What a difference! My next purchase will be the 14-54 and then I'll be done for a while.

I don't shoot "long" so the 40-150 for those rare "long" shots suits me well. If the 14-54 is nearly as good as the 11-22, I'll be satisfied for quite a while.

--
Regards,
(afka Wile E. Coyote)
Bill
PSAA
Equipment in profile.
Eschew obfuscation.
The frumious Bandersnatch

I too came to the E1 from five years with the C2100. Absolutely no regrets. You will love the 14-54. You also got one great deal!

Best Regards,
Mark Devine

Just following up on my earlier posts. I've spent the last few evenings reading the E-1's manual and trying various settings (trial and error mostly).

I'm finding out that getting better-than-average photos from the E-1 is a lot more dependant on technique than in my C2100 (or other point and shoots, for that matter). But man, when I do get a good one, it just jumps out at me.

I took two of the same shot off a tripod of a flower in the yard. One with an 8 megapixel P&S and the other with the E-1. I tried to get roughly the same composition as well as aperture settings and there is no comparison. The colors from the E-1 are so much richer and just pop out at you. I realize this isn't scientific at all, but I'm beginning to hate that I waited so long to upgrade into a DSLR camera.

Thanks again for everyone's advice!

--
Jerry Cobb
Texarkana TX