E-3 or E-30???

I've been considering upgrading from my E510 and I'm a little torn between the E-3 and E-30..

Here's a link the the type of shot i take; http://www.betterphoto.com/Premium/default.aspx?id=287535&mp=V1 and maybe someone could help me decide which would be the best upgrade..

I'm aware Olympus isn't the best when it come to low-light situations and higher ISO isn't one of Oly's strong points. Just have to much invested to switch brands at this time.

E-510.. 50-200mm ED (non SWD) 14-45mm and 40-150mm kit lenses, 1.4converter and a bunch of different filter...

Thanks for all the help and input...

I decided on E-30, and have had it for a week now.

I could have choosen a E-3, but for me that is used to the E-510, the size and weight of the E-3 counted against it.

The body of the E-30 is not weather proof, as we all know by now, but it is well built. The doors and the locks looks to be quite a bit more solid than on the E-510.

Comming from the E-510 I found the E-30 to be a more complex, tool. There are som many possible settings.....

Plus for E-3
Weather sealing Build quality

Minuses for E-3
Weight ans size

Plus for E-30
Somewhat better image quality Better Live view (Larger screen, possibly better focus using Live View)

Minus for E-30

So many features I will not use much, if at all. (Art filters, shooting aspects, mulitiple exposure) Cheap On/OF of switch and small directional buttons.

If you read Norwegian......, I have written my first thoughts on E-30 on my web pages. You could always use Google translate, even if the translation often makes some pretty strange sentences.

--
http://www.ohb.no/foto
************
Torstein

but for someone in the Oregon/Seattle area surely the weatherproofing of the E3 has to be the deciding factor?

Loose the 510, 14-45, 40-150 and retain the 50-200 + ec14

Get the E3 + 12-60

--

• enjoy your camera equipment -

Just now I have both cameras side by side on my table, mine E-3 and E-30 got from Olympus for testing and evaluation. I haven't yet made a profound test, but still I can add a couple of words.

TorsteinH said:

I decided on E-30, and have had it for a week now.

I could have choosen a E-3, but for me that is used to the E-510, the
size and weight of the E-3 counted against it.
The body of the E-30 is not weather proof, as we all know by now, but
it is well built. The doors and the locks looks to be quite a bit
more solid than on the E-510.
Comming from the E-510 I found the E-30 to be a more complex, tool.
There are som many possible settings.....

Plus for E-3
Weather sealing

Click to expand...

Yes

TorsteinH said:

Build quality

Click to expand...

Not so obvious. By the way, the CF door is made better on E-30.

TorsteinH said:

Minuses for E-3
Weight ans size

Click to expand...

That's more theoretical differnce ruther than a practical one. For example, the feeling is E-30 with 12-60 is considerably heavier than E-3 with 9-18, and difference in size is also not serious.

TorsteinH said:

Plus for E-30
Somewhat better image quality

Click to expand...

Yes. From the first shot I feel that E-30 provides considerably better detalization with the same lenses and under the same conditions.

TorsteinH said:

Better Live view (Larger screen, possibly better focus using Live View)

Click to expand...

Yes, but difference is not critical.

What is really essential - the electronic leveling unit, that can be use both in live view mode and with OVF. That's a great option, guys! I had sooo many shots with a horizon inclined on 2-3 degrees due to the fact, that in order to look in the OVF you have to turn and incline your head not to punch the display with your nose. Together with the length of my hans that cased tyhe systematical inclination. Now you have the medicine to cure it, as well as mistakes made while using LV. Especialy that's great while shooting landscapes and panoramas.

TorsteinH said:

Minus for E-30
So many features I will not use much, if at all. (Art filters,
shooting aspects, mulitiple exposure)

Click to expand...

Probably I'll not use them too, but who knows...

TorsteinH said:

Cheap On/OF of switch and small directional buttons.

Click to expand...

Hmm... I liked E-30 on/off switch more than that of E-3 - its placed better, and provides swithching the camera with one natural movement of the thumb. All buttons in E-30 are organized in pairs, and between each button of a pair there is a small lug, making easier to understand what button to press without looking at it.

Directional buttons are really much worse, and located not in the best place (for my fingers) - but you can use them for selecting of focusing point without pressing any extra button.

--
From Russia with Love -
Andrey Sudbin, Offroad journalist

Get the E-30. Only lose out on the build and weatherseal of E-3, but E-30 has much latest gadgets for fun photography. E-3 is too serious, much of a pro appeal.

E-30 has many fun toys to play with: Art filters, multi-exposure, crop ratios, lens AF calibration, exposure offset for all 3 types of metering modes, x-y level gauge, mode dial, selectable LV functions, and face detection. The Hybrid AF is so cool, that it makes the E-3 LV function like a dead brick.

Btw, I shoot E-3 and definitely getting the E-30..

--
http://thru-the-zuiko.blogspot.com/

If like me you hate the clicky mode dial on the E-510 then like me you might well go for the E-3. Having said that I'm not that happy with the on/off switch on the E-3 but then nothing is perfect. And then again maybe it's only me who is fussy about these ergonomic or kinaesthetic issues...

sealing, go E-30. The camera has several improvements over the E-3.

That said the E-3 is great too, except to me the interface. Make sure you test it if you are going with it.

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

Please guys, be honest and tell me... I've read ton of reviews that compare E510 and E30 and say the IQ is "somewhat" better than e510.

Is it really "somewhat", "drastically", "much better" or none at all? Does RAW provide more tweaking than E510 or it's just more customizable JPG?

Because I don't consider E510 to be great at IQ. It WAS great for that time (early 2007), but with all D90/D300/40D/50D around with much better price, ISO, noise, RAW headroom, E30 should really deliver something extra in IQ.

Otherwise, there's really no point investing 1100 euros in a camera that's "somewhat" better in IQ and already surpassed by the competition's advanced amateur cameras that sell at much lower price.

And yes, If I leave Oly, I'll be crying over my newly bought 50-200 as it's the best glass I ever had, but I just have to buy the right tool (camera) and move on. I really don't want to invest large sum of money into something that produces 2006/7-era images. Yeah, optics are very important, but so is the sensor that records and processes the information.

--
ivframes.com

Hi

I have just bought an E30 and sold my E510.

I thought the E510 was a great camera. The E30 is a lot more complex for sure and for me it was a worth the money to upgrade. Lens wise I never liked the 14-45 and you need to change it for either the 14-42, 14-54 (my favourite) or 12-60.

Also it is a good deal smaller than the E3 which was just too big for me. I think the E30 is a real enthusiasts camera and more than competent enough for an all round shooter.

Best of luck....
--
Berni29

E30 & 14-54 previously E510 (much loved), E300, E1.

maboleth said:

Please guys, be honest and tell me... I've read ton of reviews that
compare E510 and E30 and say the IQ is "somewhat" better than e510.

Is it really "somewhat", "drastically", "much better" or none at all?
Does RAW provide more tweaking than E510 or it's just more
customizable JPG?

Because I don't consider E510 to be great at IQ. It WAS great for
that time (early 2007), but with all D90/D300/40D/50D around with
much better price, ISO, noise, RAW headroom, E30 should really
deliver something extra in IQ.
Otherwise, there's really no point investing 1100 euros in a camera
that's "somewhat" better in IQ and already surpassed by the
competition's advanced amateur cameras that sell at much lower price.

Click to expand...

A lot depends on what you mean by 'great IQ'. Agreed, Canon and Nikon offer better high ISO performance, but Oly has image stabilisation. I completely disagree that the E510 was 'great' for 2007, but that things have moved on. The best Oly for IQ (tonality/colour) is still the original E1 from 2003 - though if you read some reviews, the E1 wasn't that good even by 2003 standards!

It may well be that you're taking the Oly colour and tonality for granted, mistakenly thinking that Canon and Nikon offer similar colour/tonality with less noise and cleaner high-ISO performance. Maybe for some users that's true. But not for me.

I find the E510 offers superior colour and tonality. Personally, I prefer the 'look' of E510 images to those from the D300 and 40D - they look more natural and 'real' to my eyes. In particular, I dislike the 'flat' tonality of the D300. I just sold mine, and am glad to be rid of it. I like the D700 much better, and prefer the Fuji S5's IQ to the D300, retaining this model as my cropped-sensor 'Nikon'. Again, much better colour and tonality.

I shoot RAW with my E510, and process in Capture One 4, so that helps. Maybe if you pixel-peep the E510 is not as good as Canon/Nikon. The D300 is amazingly sharp and very clean - in these respects it is much better than the E510. But I find the rendering of subtle contrasts and colour is handled better by the Oly. However, you must look at the complete picture to appreciate this - zooming in to 100% won't tell you anything!

I recently bought an E3, and find it focuses much better than my E510 - it's faster, and more certain in low light. I haven't had much chance to compare images from the E3 to the E510, but (shooting Raw) my impression so far is - the difference between them (colour/tonality) isn't huge.

Both have excellent colour and tonality, though neither is quite as special as the original E1. The E3 deals with highlight overload more gracefully, and handles a lot better - I always found the E510's shutter button too light, and much prefer the E3 here. And of course the E3's build quality is in a different class.

If the E30's IQ improves on the E3's, it should be very good indeed. But - far too many users base their opinions on 100% crops when they compare cameras, rather than considering things like colour and tonality, and whether the camera captures images that look three dimensional and real.

As a result, there are lots of digital cameras out there that offer great specs, yet produces pictures that are less than the sum of the parts. It's like they've been designed to come out well in technical reviews, rather than designed to produce real-looking images.

J M Hughes

Kirasir said:

Kirasir said:

Kirasir said:

Weight ans size

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That's more theoretical differnce ruther than a practical one. For
example, the feeling is E-30 with 12-60 is considerably heavier than
E-3 with 9-18, and difference in size is also not serious.

Click to expand...

But that is due to the increased weight of the 12-60 over the 9-18, which is considerable. Actually the E30 is I believe about 25-30% lighter than the E3 according to Olypus stats. (Not sure of exact amount.)

Kirasir said:

Kirasir said:

Better Live view (Larger screen, possibly better focus using Live View)

Click to expand...

Yes, but difference is not critical.

Click to expand...

Only if you consider that the E3 does not have the same Live View focusing capabilities of the E30. If memory serves there is no CDAF on the E3.

Kirasir said:

Kirasir said:

Minus for E-30
So many features I will not use much, if at all. (Art filters,
shooting aspects, mulitiple exposure)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Actually I would not consider this a "minus". (1) You don't have to use any of them if you wish and (2) you will be pleasantly surprised if you do use them.

Steve

maboleth said:

Please guys, be honest and tell me... I've read ton of reviews that
compare E510 and E30 and say the IQ is "somewhat" better than e510.

Click to expand...

The difference in measured DR between the E-510 and E-3 is small but the practical differences while takeing pictures is immense. Also, the E-3 images have much better color and texture. I'd say that the E-3 image quality increase over the E-510 is very considerable in practical terms.

While there certainly many things to commend the E-30 as an advance over the E-510, if I were to be making a choice between buying an E-30 and E-3 I'd certainly select the E-3 based on the noise issue alone.

--
Good Shooting,

English Bob

berni29 said:

Hi

I have just bought an E30 and sold my E510.

Also it is a good deal smaller than the E3 which was just too big for
me.

Click to expand...

Actually the two cameras are about the same size. They have the same width, the E-30 is 0.1" thicker and 0.4" shorter. The only practical difference in terms of handling is that the E-3 is about 5 oz. heavier.

--
Good Shooting,

English Bob

But on handling it, and using it, it does feel quite a bit smaller ..

Nothing like the heft and bulk of the E3, despite the modest difference in actual size. Quite subtle.

--
Kind regards,
Rich Simpson

for you, the weatherproofing has got to be a big deal. even here in baltimore, it has opened up a range of options that were inconvenient at best with my e-330, which is otherwise a terrific camera. during the last 2 weeks we've had some crummy weather [actually, i like this kind of weather...] here, and i shot with impunity. snowy, drizzly, temps in the teens----never a problem.

noise characteristics up through 800 are fine. IS works great. don't really have any problems with the UI. slipped and fell on partially melted ground and went down hard and the camera hit at the lower lft hand back corner---no problems. fits in my hands great. use with gloves is ok, depending on the gloves---i'm hitting rei today to get a slimmer pair than my old leather dress gloves.

n/t

Just visited your BP.com galleries -- very good work! Your animal shots are excellent! Given where you live and the kind of shooting you obviously like to do, I would suggest either going for the E-3, or waiting a little and see what the E-3's replacement will offer. I think that the weather sealing and pro quality build of the E-3 would be of great value to you.

I personally get very tired of all the 'high ISO' banter I read on this forum. I use my E-3 professionally, as well as personally and have yet to hear anyone complain about noisy images in low light situations. Yes, Canon is quite a bit better, but in real world use it's just not that big an issue. Looking at what you've been doing with your E-510, it's obvious to me that you could do much more with an E-3.

Below are a couple shots done with my E-3 at high ISO -- I don't think they are too noisy, and definitely print well.

Keep up the excellent work!

God Bless,
Greg
http://www.imagismphotos.com
http://www.pbase.com/daddyo

@ ISO 1250



@ ISO 1000

it (the E30) just feels quite a bit smaller. And I did quite a bit of handling the camera on my visits to Adorama.
Steve

PRICE.
I did the math. I paid $500 CDN less for my E-3 than the E-30 (in a kit).

The E-30 is way overpriced. It doesn't have the E-3 viewfinder (great for my bad eyes).

Also, the extra weight of the E-3 seems to benefit the IS. I'm getting more keepers than previously with the E-510 and E-520.
--



Jeff.

it has roughly the DR of the E-520/E_3/e-420. There was a step up from 410-> 420 , 510-> 520 in DR.

You also get rid of banding at high iso.

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'