Gidday Wyatt
I have been planning on picking up an E-30 or an updated E-40 next year (I need to upgrade because my 520 has severe front focus issues with my 50-200, otherwise the 520 is a wonderful camera; I say this to help define my expectations in a camera). However, on a whim, I handled a 620 today (I didn't think I would get one because I do tend to like larger cameras with well defined grips, as I am a fairly big guy). As a result of that, I am seriously considering getting one of these over the 30 / 40.
The reason I am considering it over the E-30 is as follows:
- Size. I don't mind larger cameras (in fact, I prefer them when I am going out to shoot an event or something). But, there have been a number of times recently where I didn't bring my camera because it was too large, even just with the 14-54. (I am still kicking myself over one of these trips, as I missed some very rare shots). Of course for the larger lenses, the difference in camera size is negligible, but for the small kit lenses, the 620 makes for a very attractive travel camera; for the times when I really want a larger body, I can get the HLD-5 for less than the difference in cost between a 620 and a 30.
The size is an issue. I kept my E-510 and E-1 when I got my E-30 recently. The E-510 with f2.8/25 is minute. With both kit lenses and the pancake, my light carry bag weighs just 1.4 kgs with spare battery and cards ... I used this to good effect yesterday and today. My E-30 + f2/50, 14~54, 50~200, battery, cards, FL-36R etc in my Lowepro Slingshot 200AW is much bigger and heavier (around 5 kgs).
- Cost. I can get the 620 for about $350 less than the 30. That is a considerable difference, over half again as much as the 620 costs.
The E-30 price differential is worth it if
only for the following things:
- OVF is far better
- AF system is far better and adjustable
- Top display is wonderful to use, once you have it you will understand. I already had this on my E-1. It also allows you to turn off the rear display totally for times when this will cause problems.
- The two control wheels are excellent in use. Again, I have these on my E-1.
- Better balance with HG lenses.
- Better ergonomics.
From what I know of the E-620, it is an excellent camera (I have never actually held one, even though I have seen one). However, I believe that the E-30 is a considerably superior camera in the ways mentioned above.
- All 'required' features that I am looking for are present in the 620 as well as the 30 (most notably the AF adjustment, plus from what I can tell, it has clean-enough ISO 2000 for printing with a bit of cleanup). This is about a stop higher than the 520; while that alone is not reason enough for me to get it, it is definitely nice.
- As many have pointed out, the DR appears to be just as good as on the E-30 (DPReview says that the JPG DR is even a bit better, but you wouldn't notice that tiny bit of difference).
I suspect that this tiny difference is a measurement artifact; or possibly sample variation.
What I am expecting to give up?
- Double control dials / top LCD. Both would be nice to have, but I have not had them on any camera so far, so I can't say I would actually miss it (can't miss what you never had!)
Oh yes you can! These help one's photography in a severely practical way. You can do without them, but they are surprisingly useful ...
- Faster shutter / flash sync (while 1/250 second flash sync would be nice, I can't say that I need it, FP mode is fine for almost everything I do, and as for shutter speed I don't often even reach 1/4000 - Canada is too dark! ;-)).
- Nicer autofocus system. The extra points are not a big deal (I only use center anyway), but from what I understand the E-30 is a bit more sensitive in low light (not a necessity, but it would be nice) and is likely a bit faster (again, nice, but I am happy with my 520 AF speed).
From what I understand, the E-30 is a
lot more sensitive in low light ... this is also my experience compared with both my E-1 and E-510.
What else am I missing? For those who have used both the 620 and the 30, do you feel that, given my expectations and needs, I would be making a mistake going for the smaller body?
IMVHO, yes, from what you have said.
If money was no concern, I would love to get a E-30 for dedicated shooting (when I go out with the sole purpose of taking pictures), with a small 420 or 410 with kit lenses for travel; unfortunately, money is a concern, and that is not going to happen! Plus, having IS in my 'travel' camera is definitely a nice thing!
This is exactly how I am using my E-510 and E-30. Your E-520 can be used as a "substitute" for the E-410/420. I bought the pancake for my E-510. It is a gem of a lens, and
tiny . For the uses that one would routinely use this lens, one will rarely notice its imperfections (when compared with say my f2/50). IMHO, the pancake is at least as good IQ
for most purposes as my 14~54. I suspect that in some circumstances the 14~54 will cane it, but generally speaking it is excellent.
Keep your 14~42 and 40~150 as light-weight kit to use when you do not want to carry your E-30 and HG lenses all of which are larger and heavier.
I am finding that this strategy is working even better in practice than I thought it would in theory!
Any and all comments welcome!
Hope this helps, rather than further confuses, mate!
--
Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
-- -- --
The Camera doth not make the Man (or Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...
Gallery:
http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/main.php
Bird Control Officers on active service.
Member of UK (and abroad) Photo Safari Group
(see my profile for all my current gear)
