Why have you choosen E-410 over E-510?

To E-410 owners: why have you bought E-410 instead of E-510? Budget? Size? Appearance? AFAIK the only real differences are the stabilizer and the size, or?

I personally am waiting for the next E-1, but my GF takes with her Canon P&S nice pictures and I am thinking about getting E-(4/5)10 for her ... the 4 is cute, small, but lacks the IS and has different battery (I have plenty of BLM-1s) .. ?
Thanks ...
--
pka
http://www.karlach.net/
E-1, grip, some lenses, flash etc.

I went for the E-400 because I wanted a DSLR which could give me the maximum possible image quality in as unobtrusive a camera as possible... if I want to intimidate and/or alienate my subject, and attract unwelcome attention - I'll take out my D1x bazooka, otherwise I'll use the discrete E-400

If and when someone brings image stabilisation to a camera this small, I'll upgrade... but I'm not prepared to go any bulkier if I can help it.

Oh, and value for money was also a massive factor... otherwise I guess an M8 would have been preferable I think of the E-400 as an M8 without the primes (yet!)

Kind Regards

Brian

--
--

though if I had to do it all over again, I would think long and hard.

--
Raist3d
Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Vid Games Programmer

Size. I figure that if I need the IS for longer lenses I'll just buy a 510 too . So far I've been really happy with the 410 for my mountaineering trips. With 3 lenses it weighs less than half of what my D200+18-200 weighed! (14-42, 40-150 and 35mm) Since most of my pics are wide angle and outdoors, I really didn't need the IS and so far I've been more than happy with my decision.

--
Vern Dewit
Calgary, Alberta Canada
http://www.fresh-oxygen.com or
http://www.pbase.com/vdewit

Price and size. I wouldn't mind a larger camera, but my wife really loves the size of the 410.

I was originally planning to get the E500, Pentax K100D, Nikon D40, or Canon Rebel XT, and chose the E410 two-lens kit. I hadn't considered or researched it yet, but I figured every good thing I read about the 500 must apply to the 410 as well, so I brought it home and subsequent research and looking at shared photos on this forum convinced me it was definitely very good. It was a bit of a stretch to my original budget, but a substantial upgrade over those other three. So instead of focusing on what I didn't get compared to the 510 (IS), I focus on what I DID get compared to the others in consideration (10mp, two lenses). You really do have to draw a line at some point. I don't think IS is something I really need.

The real world difference in price between 410 and 510, at the time, was more than $100. MSRP is $899 for the 410 two-lens kit, and $999 for 510 two-lens kit. I got the 410 two-lens kit for $836, and didn't see any discounts on the 510 at the time. Circuit City didn't even carry the 510, and they had 0% for 18 months and a warranty that covers accidental damage. That was important to me because the whole reason I needed a new camera is the accidental damage of my old one which they refused to fix under warranty.

Isn't most of the size difference in the grip?

Also, am I correct in assuming that most size-conscious E-410 users are using the kit lenses (as opposed to larger, wider-aperture "pro" or "top pro" lenses that are likely to draw more attention than the camera body does)?

I bought the E-400, since it was a calling home from having used the old Olympus OM-1 and OM-4.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=23689406
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=23831209

pka said:

To E-410 owners: why have you bought E-410 instead of E-510? Budget?
Size? Appearance? AFAIK the only real differences are the stabilizer
and the size, or?
I personally am waiting for the next E-1, but my GF takes with her
Canon P&S nice pictures and I am thinking about getting E-(4/5)10 for
her ... the 4 is cute, small, but lacks the IS and has different
battery (I have plenty of BLM-1s) .. ?
Thanks ...
--
pka
http://www.karlach.net/
E-1, grip, some lenses, flash etc.

Click to expand...

-Size, for travel and day to day ... tend to have it with me more than a larger camera, can fit the body and the 2 kit lenses in a small belt pack while hiking.

-Availability ... 510 wasn't released when I thought about buying it.

-Cost ... think it is a great bargain for the price.

Love shooting with it, it really is a fun little camera.

Robert Kinsell
http://www.robertkinsellartist.com

Below are the features missing in E410 menu (apart the IS). "P number" references appropriated E510 PDF manual page.
***************************
Underwater Wide and Macro shooting modes - p. 30

Flash intensity and Exposure compensation can be set at once - at bottom of p. 42.
Flash Bracketing - p. 43
Shutter release priority - p. 51
Compression rate of [HQ] - p. 58
WB bracketing - p. 60
Shading compensation - p. 62
Light box display - p. 65
Up to 4 AEL/AFL modes (E400/410 max. 2 modes) - p. 77

The EV step interval can be selected from 1/3 EV, 1/2 EV or 1 EV. - EV step (P. 78)
ISO limit (P. 78)
Flash Speed synchronization settings - p. 78
Customizing the control dial’s function - P. 79
My Mode setting - p. 80
Reset lens - p. 80
Focus ring - p. 80
Priority setting - p. 80
QUICK ERASE - p. 81
Erasing RAW and JPEG files - p. 81
EDIT FILENAME - p. 82
Button timer - p. 84
Auto power off - p. 85
arrow pad lock - p. 85
Switch the functions of the AEL/AFL button and the FN button - p. 85
--

Most of the "missing" features are just productivity and ergonomic enhancements, that were "sacrificed" to make the E410 menu "simpler" and more "entry level". Silly marketing move, because I would gladly pay the the E510 for E410 with all these missing options. And no, I will never buy E510, because it's bigger. I bought E400 almost immediately when it appeared here in my country and I would buy it again, because it's just great little camera. But all these disabled/not allowed features drives me mad.

pka said:

To E-410 owners: why have you bought E-410 instead of E-510? Budget?
Size? Appearance? AFAIK the only real differences are the stabilizer
and the size, or?

Click to expand...

Size/weight and can't deny it, appearance. I have an E-1 and really wanted a smaller/lighter camera and thought there would be no point stopping at midway (E-510) so I got -the- smallest/lightest.

Also, I profiled my shooting habits and found out that I don't have too much use for IS. That might be partly because I don't have longer lenses. I shoot in good light at high shutter speeds or lower light with flash or tripod (at shutter speeds no IS could compensate for, talking about several seconds). I have marginal use for high ISOs and/or IS.

My requirements and habits may change.. or not. I'll worry about it then..

• Sampo

I am glad I did not buy the 410 on impulse waiting for the 510. I was unaware of the missing features assuming it would the same except for hardware differences. If the 410 body had IS and everything being equal, I would choose the smaller body without the grip, although I might change my mind after using some of the larger zooms on it. It is comfortable for someone used to an older SLR without the grip and autfocus weight and bulk. I think there is a good market for a full featured camera in this body, perhaps a nostalgia OM camera like Pentax is making.

Steve

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/knoblock/

Film will only become art when its materials are as inexpensive as pencil and paper. -- Jean Cocteau

Well put, Sampo. Ditto.

svuori said:

Also, I profiled my shooting habits and found out that I don't have
too much use for IS. That might be partly because I don't have longer
lenses. I shoot in good light at high shutter speeds or lower light
with flash or tripod (at shutter speeds no IS could compensate for,
talking about several seconds). I have marginal use for high ISOs
and/or IS.

• Sampo

Click to expand...

I'm really agonizing over which one to get. I'll be headed to the Himalayas for a few months where I'll be backpacking, and weight and size are absolutely crucial. I've looked at the e-410, and I'm going to take a look at the e-510 today. A main consideration is that I won't be able to recharge batteries for weeks at a time, so I'll have to carry extra batteries. The e-510 battery is larger, but it also takes more exposures compared to the e-410 battery. I'm wondering if anyone has calculated the number of exposures compared to the total weight of the battery and/or system. What I'm thinking is that although the e-510 is a few ounces heavier, it will also take more exposures on each battery. And that is how I will justify going with it. One of the main advantages pertains to both cameras - the new kit lenses are very light and small. But, I still haven't decided which camera. When you've done much backpacking, it just goes against the grain not to get the very lightest camera...

And this is it! Almost nobody knows about these "missing" features..even sellers are unaware of such small but sometimes important differences. And this is why I don't understand why they were not allowed in E400/410 menu? Almost everyone thinks the differences are only in larger grip, bigger battery and IS, which is not true.

knoblock said:

I am glad I did not buy the 410 on impulse waiting for the 510. I was
unaware of the missing features assuming it would the same except for
hardware differences. If the 410 body had IS and everything being
equal, I would choose the smaller body without the grip, although I
might change my mind after using some of the larger zooms on it. It
is comfortable for someone used to an older SLR without the grip and
autfocus weight and bulk. I think there is a good market for a full
featured camera in this body, perhaps a nostalgia OM camera like
Pentax is making.

Steve

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/knoblock/
Film will only become art when its materials are as inexpensive as
pencil and paper. -- Jean Cocteau

Click to expand...

Imboden said:

Isn't most of the size difference in the grip?

Click to expand...

You could go on forever like that - is the D80 THAT much bigger than an E510, is a D200 or 5D THAT much bigger than a D80 etc etc ..

You have to draw the line somewhere and Brian Drew it at E4xx size and I have to agree, BTW the 400 is overall smaller than the 510 bar height I think - the other factor with the E400 for me was PRICE (as it's not a Primary camera) - it was £300 whereas a 510 single lens kit is more like £500 or was at the time.. Brian got a great deal on a 400 twin kit.

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

I actually have a quite a few BLM 1 from 8080CZ, e300 and e330, and it makes far more sense to get the 510 for the IS, battery compatibility, better fit with my 11-22 and 14-54 etc.. However, I got the E410, for it's looks, handling, how it makes for small and unobtrusive package, and it's what I reach for time after time, with it's tiny but excellent 14-42 kit. The E330 just sits there, 14-54 loaned out to a friend, and only 11-22 gets used on the E410 very occasionally.. Will I go for the 510 in future? Or should I reach for the E3 instead
--
Equipment in profile
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cjeng/
http://picasaweb.google.com/chuanren.ye/

I chose the e510 over the e410 because of IS and the Battery size is the same as my E1, E500 and the next E-whatever....
--
Chris

pka
http://www.karlach.net/

I see it this way. E-510 would just offer me better battery compatibility, selectable EV-stops, lens reset and dedicated control buttons (for ISO etc.). I couldn't use the E-510 IS with most of my lenses so the missing features just didn't justify the weight, size and price difference compared to E-410. E-410 makes a very nice second body as the lack of grip makes it fit very small places when not fitted with a lens.

It all comes down to personal usage in the end. i would have bought E-510 though if the IS worked with legacy lenses.

--

E-410, E-330, 11-22mm, 180mm F3.4 Apo-Telyt-R, 250mm F4 Telyt-R, 60mm F2.8 Macro Elmarit-R, 135mm F2.8 Elmarit-R, 90mm F2.8 Elmarit-R, 35mm F2 Summicron-R, 14-45mm F3.5-5.6, 40-150mm F3.5-4.5, 35mm F3.5 macro, FL36, 2x Leica-R extender

I just bought the 410 today (but with the 14–54 lens). Main reason was same sensor as 510, and I always shoot Raw, so some of the missing features are not important to me.

410 because of small body (reminded me of a small Leica D2, but better ergonomics and light weight: this is what I will take walking).

The other reason I bought the better lens is that I am hopeful of the successor to the E-1 will be out some time soon .

I have a bunch of other cameras for the heavy lifting, and I am sure that the 410 will be like the D2: with me all the time, including in the car.
--
Kit Laughlin
http://www.pandf.com.au/ , http://www.bodypress.com.au