Reading mode: Light Dark

AP UK E3 review seen yet?

Go to last post
...and take all of them as it is- like gospel truth?

A reviewer which opined that the E3 can't hold a candle againts the perenial C & N heavy weights is biased to say the least. There are a lot of situations ( macro photography for instance) where the extra reach and DOF of APS-C and 4/3 is superior to the full frame wonder DSLR.

For real world credible reviews on the E3, one need not look further than by these forum regulars-Jono Slack, Julie Poole and Brian Mosley.
Regards,
Alfred
 
I got my first DSLR camera (E-300) in 2005 at that time I knew nothing about photography at all. (Still do not know much!) I chose the Olympus system because I liked the 2x crop, price, the IQ and ease of use over anything else.

Then I started reading "Tests" from magazines. And one of them really bashed everything from Olympus. They said the live veiw was a gimmick. dust is not an issue, one even said the larger screen the 510 had could be a detriment on a Pro camera because of the harse environment the pros work in. A larger screen could easily get broke and put the camera out of commision. Yet in the same magazine they were praising the Canon XTi for its larger screen. Now most all new cameras have live veiw and larger screens. Yet they bash Olympus for it like it was bad and praise everything from Canon.

Basically that whole magazine was a 145 page advertisement for Canon, lately they have been promoting Nikon. In any case any magazine that takes advertising dollars their "Tests" must be taken with a grain of salt.

One other thing to take into account even right here on this forum is it takes a while for anyone to get ANY camera set up to where it takes pictures like you want. It takes a while to learn what settings work best and how to use it.

The fact is no matter what any "Tests" say is the E-3 is a good camera once you learn to use it. As is the 1Ds, 5D, D3 or whatever your flavor of the day is.

They each have a different feel, personaility, pros and cons but they are all good.
--
Bruce Dodson
AireTex Compressors
 
Not joking, just repeating what I have read on another forum about the AP review. I don't have a copy in my hands right now so can't confirm it myself.

Hopefully someone on here who does have the current issue of AP will confirm or deny it.
dunkreid said:
Paul Shields said:
It complains of colour fringing from the f/3.5-f/5.6 14-45mm lens.
This is the cheapo kit lens, though I don't think it comes with the
E-3 surely! As the review puts the E-3 up against cameras that cost 2
or 3 times the price then uses one of the cheapests zoom in Olympus's
range it makes the whole review seem like an assassination job. Very
odd...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
my blog
http://photocamel.com/forum/blogs/paul-shields/
 
I hope there's been some kind of typo or misunderstanding, and, for the sake of AP's reputation, that they've used the 14-54 at least.

Cheers
Duncan
Paul Shields said:
Hopefully someone on here who does have the current issue of AP will
confirm or deny it.
dunkreid said:
Paul Shields said:
It complains of colour fringing from the f/3.5-f/5.6 14-45mm lens.
This is the cheapo kit lens, though I don't think it comes with the
E-3 surely! As the review puts the E-3 up against cameras that cost 2
or 3 times the price then uses one of the cheapests zoom in Olympus's
range it makes the whole review seem like an assassination job. Very
odd...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
my blog
http://photocamel.com/forum/blogs/paul-shields/
Click to expand...
 
malcolm farrar said:
Why is the A700 not attractive..I'd be genuinely interested to know?
Click to expand...
Reasons that have me drooling over the E-3:
  • Live View + articulated LCD screen (I want LV for about 10 different reasons)
  • True RAW mode (no NR applied)
  • 11 cross AF sensors (instead of 1)
  • 100% viewfinder
  • Proven dust protection
  • Real seals (who are Sony and Canon trying to kid by calling the A700 and 40D sealed?)
  • External WB sensor (though unfortunately, not supported in Custom WB yet. Hopefully this will change with a future firmware update).
  • The 12-60 and 50-200 are terrific lenses that are priced right. They have no direct competition in A-mount (and other mounts for that matter).
I prefer the E-3 over the 40D and D300 for some of the reasons above, but mostly because it offers a built-in stabilizer which I value highly coming from a KM 7D (and unlike the A700, the E-3 stabilizer also supports panning). The pixel remapping feature is also nice, though the Sony probably does it in the background (the KM DSLR's did).

Reasons that keep me from jumping ship to Olympus just yet:
  • My existing lenses are A-mount. It's going to be a very expensive ordeal to switch to an equivalent set up. Waiting for an improved A700 is going to be a more economic option.
  • There is no budget ultra-wide angle lens (the rumored 8-16mm lens may change this).
  • There is no equivalent lens to the 50/1.7 and 50/1.4 (the 50/2.0 macro comes close, but is a bit pricey and not as fast).
  • The A700 user-interface is a definite regression from the ingenious user-interface of the 7D, but it still looks better to me than the interface of E-3.
I’m going to wait until one of the following things happen: 7D dies, A700 is replaced with an improved model, E-3 price drops ($1200 USD would make it even more tempting than it already is).

Prog.
 
Hi folks,

for those of you still interested let me shed some light on this thread..as I have a copy of the review on my knee right now. Ask me anything yo like..

Firstly it is unfair for some of you to 'bash' Angela, the reviewer. The test was done with the 12-60 lens and she said she used some of the none ED lenses too. The fringing she mentioned was only with the 14-45, but she said that all ED lenses did not fringe at all and that all E3 images had pleasant colours.

Apparently Olympus could not supply any pro lenses (the new 50-200 for instance) so tests were done with 12-60; 14-42;14045;14-54;40-150 and the 50macro.

Seems Olympus should have delivered better than that, but in my opinion it is representative of what most 4/3rds users use.

She also said that anyone upgrading from an E1 is going to be very pleased with the E3 as would E510 users enjoy the flip out screen.

The reason she compared it to the Canon EOS-ID mkIII and the Nikon D3 is because Olympus promote it as a professional model and not enthusiast. To be fair I think we can't argue with that becaus ethat's what Olympus do..look at all those Pros promoting it on all international websites.

I still can't help thinking it is a balanced and fair review. I suspect if AP review this later alongside the D300 et al then the E3 would come out on top.

She says the flip out screen is more suited to slower forms of photography and may not be a big selling point with the pros.

Really one must get the context right in this review. I respect AP because they are not pro Canon/Nikon or Leica they can be quite to the point with all brands unlike some other reviewers.

And the context of this review was (I think) 'They say its a pro camera; so let's test it like one'. I think if Oly had supplied her with some serious lenses then the result would have been different.

Hope this helps..and calms you down!

Malcolm
 
malcolm farrar said:
The reason she compared it to the Canon EOS-ID mkIII and the Nikon D3
is because Olympus promote it as a professional model and not
enthusiast. To be fair I think we can't argue with that becaus
ethat's what Olympus do..look at all those Pros promoting it on all
international websites.
Click to expand...
Nikon also calls the D300 a "professional camera":

http://press.nikonusa.com/2007/08/nikon_introduces_the_new_d300.php

Don't you think that the D300 is a more logical comparison target than the D3 (considering the price)?

As a side note, I personally find the E-3 more appealing than the D3 and EOS 1D MkIII bricks - regardless of price.

Prog.
 
Hi Prog

thanks for taking the time to give us feedback on the A700.

I was aware of the NR applied to RAW files but if I were shooting at 3200 or 6400 I would probably aply some NR inacr or Noise ninja first anyway, before my workflow begins. At lower ISOs I doubt I'd notice.

The info you've given on the lenses is good — I was thinking about the really wide end and for that reason have calmed down a bit on the A700.

By the time I get to handle an E3 (no dealers stocking it in Cumbria and I've tried them all) the price will have fallen anyway (just kidding)... hope you can get the E3 — the lens system is really well thought out..but you know anayway!

Malcolm
 
Thanks for the clarification.

Does this mean that AP will never make comparisons between the D300 / 40D and the E-3, seeing as they've made an arbitrary decision on what is and is not "professional".

Given that Oly's famously leaked E-3 PDF had it squarely targetting the D300 / 40D, AP's decision for comparison models does, as I say, seem "arbitrary", based on the word "professional". And we all know about the ambiguity around the word "professional". AP have totally f* ked up here in a laughably incompetent and ignorant way.

Cheers
Duncan
malcolm farrar said:
Hi folks,

for those of you still interested let me shed some light on this
thread..as I have a copy of the review on my knee right now. Ask me
anything yo like..

Firstly it is unfair for some of you to 'bash' Angela, the reviewer.
The test was done with the 12-60 lens and she said she used some of
the none ED lenses too. The fringing she mentioned was only with the
14-45, but she said that all ED lenses did not fringe at all and that
all E3 images had pleasant colours.

Apparently Olympus could not supply any pro lenses (the new 50-200
for instance) so tests were done with 12-60; 14-42;14045;14-54;40-150
and the 50macro.

Seems Olympus should have delivered better than that, but in my
opinion it is representative of what most 4/3rds users use.

She also said that anyone upgrading from an E1 is going to be very
pleased with the E3 as would E510 users enjoy the flip out screen.

The reason she compared it to the Canon EOS-ID mkIII and the Nikon D3
is because Olympus promote it as a professional model and not
enthusiast. To be fair I think we can't argue with that becaus
ethat's what Olympus do..look at all those Pros promoting it on all
international websites.

I still can't help thinking it is a balanced and fair review. I
suspect if AP review this later alongside the D300 et al then the E3
would come out on top.

She says the flip out screen is more suited to slower forms of
photography and may not be a big selling point with the pros.

Really one must get the context right in this review. I respect AP
because they are not pro Canon/Nikon or Leica they can be quite to
the point with all brands unlike some other reviewers.

And the context of this review was (I think) 'They say its a pro
camera; so let's test it like one'. I think if Oly had supplied her
with some serious lenses then the result would have been different.

Hope this helps..and calms you down!

Malcolm
Click to expand...
 
malcolm farrar said:
I was aware of the NR applied to RAW files but if I were shooting at
3200 or 6400 I would probably aply some NR inacr or Noise ninja first
anyway, before my workflow begins.
Click to expand...
Try working with NR'ed RAW files (e.g. those from the Panasonic LX2) and you'll see how bad this concept is:

1. You can't apply effective NR (in pp) if the image is already NR'ed. Doing so only gives you worm-like artifacts and lack of fine detail.
2. PC-based NR programs are far better than the mushy NR applied in the A700.

3. You can't get the look of filmlike grain (high chroma-NR, no luminance-NR) with the A700, while you can with the E-3 (and other competing cameras).

To me, the NR'ed-RAW is a deal breaker, not a deal maker.

Prog.
 
Prog

yes I do think the D300 is a more logical camparison with the E3. But then I think Olympus need to bring out a really serious camera (new format?) if they are wanting to compete with the pro market.

It depends what kind of pro user you are..sport...weddings..dogs..whatever. If I were making my living from photography I would probably go for the E3 and the Nikon D3. I think they do two different jobs..and yes, unfortunately I'd have to lug those big bodies around! I see no problem with running two or three or four systems if I were 'pro'. But I'd hire some, maybe.

The E3 colours wouldn't matter then (because they'd be for the client and would be good enough, brilliant maybe). But the E1 has spoiled all that for me. Pick up an E1, a 50 f2 macro go out take some pics and you'll see what I mean.

Maybe I'm just getting boring in my old age.

Malcolm
 
I have been losing confidence in AP reviews for some time now as they seem to focus on strange aspects of the camera.

For example on the E-3 there is a throwaway that the IS works very well but the main criticism of the review is the ISO3200 performance. Now which is more use to the majority of shooters: IS (on all lenses) or ISO3200 performance?

And it seems to being judged in terms of the only professionals being sports shooters.

There are only a few comments (positive but overlooked in the overall rating) that at lower ISO's it produces nice images.

If I want 9 fps and high ISO performance then sure I will buy a top of line Canon or Nikon not the E-3 BUT for the type of shooting that I am sure 95+% of AP's readers do the E-3 produces equivalent results at 1/3rd price and less weight.

The E-3 is a great camera - and at the price there is nothing to touch it for robustness and weather proofing and the Zuiko lenses are fantastic - I have no hesitation in using them wide open. Don't let the AP review put you off the E-3.

I am also an EOS 30D and 5D user but don't regret for one moment my choice of the E-3.

--
Derek
 
Prog,

what I meant was if I had a camera that didn't have NR applied in camera first (such as the E3) then I'd aplly NR.

I am aware that one should never apply NR to NR or sharpening to sharpening, etc. But NR is a good idea as the first step.

I like the E1's noise at up to 800 after that Noise ninja helps a bit. But I rarely get it of iso 100.

I wish Olympus had an S-works divison (leica a la carte). You know, we order what WE want not what they think we want. Thta'll be an E1 sensor in an E3 body without flippy screen no live view and real titanium please with a one touch white balance button and a 3 inch monitor (like the Sonys). Yum.

Malcolm
 
malcolm farrar said:
what I meant was if I had a camera that didn't have NR applied in
camera first (such as the E3) then I'd aplly NR.
Click to expand...
...and by applying controllable NR yourself (to a true RAW file) you'll get better results than the A700 can with its mushy NR.
malcolm farrar said:
I am aware that one should never apply NR to NR or sharpening to
sharpening, etc. But NR is a good idea as the first step.
Click to expand...
I agree that NR in high-ISO is a good first step, but only if the photographer does it - not if it's left for the camera and certainly not if the camera does such a poor job at it as does the A700. The whole point of RAW files is that you get the RAW data from the sensor, not data that was irreversibly butchered by the camera.
malcolm farrar said:
I wish Olympus had an S-works divison (leica a la carte). You know,
we order what WE want not what they think we want. Thta'll be an
E1 sensor in an E3 body without flippy screen no live view and real
titanium please with a one touch white balance button and a 3 inch
monitor (like the Sonys). Yum.
Click to expand...
Personally, I'd keep the E3 sensor. It produces lovely output that is competitive with any in its group. The E1 colors are nice, but otherwise its images are too noisy for my liking. From what I've seen, the E3 has at least 2 stop advantage over the E1 when it comes to noise. And the level of detail in the new camera is also way better (as is expected, with twice as many pixels).

Prog.
 
Thanks for clearing that up Malcom.

I still find it surprising that part of the review refers to the fringing of the 14-45mm lens. This all adds up as part of the feel of the camera for anyone reading the review. I guess they didn't test the Canon 1D MK III with the 90 quid EF 28-90mm f/4-f/5.6 ?
malcolm farrar said:
Hi folks,

for those of you still interested let me shed some light on this
thread..as I have a copy of the review on my knee right now. Ask me
anything yo like..

Firstly it is unfair for some of you to 'bash' Angela, the reviewer.
The test was done with the 12-60 lens and she said she used some of
the none ED lenses too. The fringing she mentioned was only with the
14-45, but she said that all ED lenses did not fringe at all and that
all E3 images had pleasant colours.

Apparently Olympus could not supply any pro lenses (the new 50-200
for instance) so tests were done with 12-60; 14-42;14045;14-54;40-150
and the 50macro.

Seems Olympus should have delivered better than that, but in my
opinion it is representative of what most 4/3rds users use.

She also said that anyone upgrading from an E1 is going to be very
pleased with the E3 as would E510 users enjoy the flip out screen.

The reason she compared it to the Canon EOS-ID mkIII and the Nikon D3
is because Olympus promote it as a professional model and not
enthusiast. To be fair I think we can't argue with that becaus
ethat's what Olympus do..look at all those Pros promoting it on all
international websites.

I still can't help thinking it is a balanced and fair review. I
suspect if AP review this later alongside the D300 et al then the E3
would come out on top.

She says the flip out screen is more suited to slower forms of
photography and may not be a big selling point with the pros.

Really one must get the context right in this review. I respect AP
because they are not pro Canon/Nikon or Leica they can be quite to
the point with all brands unlike some other reviewers.

And the context of this review was (I think) 'They say its a pro
camera; so let's test it like one'. I think if Oly had supplied her
with some serious lenses then the result would have been different.

Hope this helps..and calms you down!

Malcolm
Click to expand...
--
my blog
http://photocamel.com/forum/blogs/paul-shields/
 
malcolm farrar said:
for those of you still interested let me shed some light on this
thread..as I have a copy of the review on my knee right now. Ask me
anything yo like..

Apparently Olympus could not supply any pro lenses

Hope this helps..and calms you down!
Click to expand...
Calms me down ... CALMS ME DOWN !!

I'm sitting here seething at the incompetence of a company that supplies what is probably the UKs most read camera magazine with its flagship camera to review ... and it can't supply any pro lenses to go with it ?!?

What the HELL is going on ????
 
Louis_Dobson said:
This we know already.
Click to expand...
Yes, but THE AP REVIEW for gods sake. I will almost certainly be swinging my E3 around this coming year shooting events and if 2008 proves to be the same as the others, I'm bound to get a myriad of Uncle Bob camera enthusiasts coming up to me and peering at what gear I'm using.

Most are almost bound to be Canon shooters, but I'd much rather have had them read a glowing review of the E3 when it was coupled to a 7-14, 35-100 and maybe even a 90-250 because anyone who knows anything about cameras is going to get a huge WOW factor from these lenses and I'm wiling to bet a large (for me!) sum of money that any review would turn out with a different slant or attitude if you have pro lenses of this caliber bundled as part of the review package.

Yes they still might have slapped on a 14-45 to see what happened. But the first things they would have used would have been the pro lenses and any 'issues' then are in the context of how fantastic it can be with the superb high end Zuikos and what do you expect when you put on a £50 ebay lens.

Still stunned.

G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Maoby
APS-H Does this ring a bell?
2
Replies
28
Views
23K
Maoby
Maoby
MrAndreas
TTArtisan AF 75mm F2 and Samyang 75mm F1.8
Replies
18
Views
58K
MrAndreas
MrAndreas
P
Need help going to photo store prepared
Replies
3
Views
5K
ahaslett
ahaslett
left eye
P645Z has it
Replies
10
Views
3K
avalvo
A
X
Shoten XTZ Fujifilm X to Nikon Z adapter, first impressions.
Replies
18
Views
17K
mrburger
M

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top