So You Think The Grass Is Greener

I agree!

There is a lot I would miss about my E620 which so far I cannot get in any one single body from any other vendor.

• IBIS that works,
• Sensor cleaning that works... never had a dust spot on any Olympus image so far!
• Articulating LCD screen, that means live view is worth having,
• Compact system.

These are all good. I think though what people are not picking up on is the anger / disappointment is driven by how much people enjoy their E systems!

cathal gantly said:

There is a lot I would miss about my E620 which so far I cannot get in any one single body from any other vendor.

• IBIS that works,
• Sensor cleaning that works... never had a dust spot on any Olympus image so far!
• Articulating LCD screen, that means live view is worth having,
• Compact system.

These are all good. I think though what people are not picking up on is the anger / disappointment is driven by how much people enjoy their E systems!

Click to expand...

Yes, my feeling exactly.

I'd add equivalent lenses to the 14-54 to that list as well.

Definitely. Detail extraction, dynamic range, etc. Oly Jpegs are concidered better than others because there is generally little difference between Orfs and Oly Jpegs. With most manufacturers, processed RAW files look much better than Jpegs.

Greytop said:

To be fair there is a great deal more to a Jpeg engine than a tone curve. I believe Olympus has invested more in this area than most.

Click to expand...

The grass is not greener but most importantly for me the DOF can be more shallow at the other side of the fence, which is the only thing I miss with the 4/3 system. AF will probably never catch up with Canikon but for me this is not important.

The question for me is: will the e-5 give me a higher "return" on my investment coming from the e-3 (plus the most important HG lenses plus the 7-14mm) or will the return be higher for me with a sony/nikon FF paired with a 1.4/50mm or 1.4/85mm portrait lens. With "return" I refer to pictures I would not have been able to take with the e-3.

What will the e-5 give me over the e3:
-higher ISO (maybe really good up to ISO 1600),
-CD-AF in liveview with my old HG/SHG lenses, but will that be possible at all?
-more detail, sharpness

What will a FF / portrait lens combination give me over the E-3:

• shallow DOF when I want it
• more DR if I ever need it + more pp leeway

(I don't have much need for the better AF of the nikons).

klaus

dgrogers said:

Definitely. Detail extraction, dynamic range, etc. Oly Jpegs are concidered better than others because there is generally little difference between Orfs and Oly Jpegs. With most manufacturers, processed RAW files look much better than Jpegs.

Greytop said:

To be fair there is a great deal more to a Jpeg engine than a tone curve. I believe Olympus has invested more in this area than most.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Of course there is more to the tone curve with a JPEG, and I am sure Oly put a lot into the development, but then that's the same for others. The point is , as dgrogers had say, that is RAW is the way to go , but for JPEG shooter, the point on hand is C and N recognize the need for the control ( user controllable part ) and made the effort to place that control back within the user's hand with those soft tools instead of fixing only theirs.

Again Oly JPEg might be good for some, but its equally not good for others .. that's the same for other brand. The point again is the capability to customize and control that favor the C and N as benefit a JPEG shooters.

--

• Franka -