If the E5 Deserved To Win, It Would Have

I just think that pointing out things on one direction only is a bit double standardish. You would expect someone to point out the same thing when praising the wonders of new equipment for their photography.

--

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo

light_bulb said:

Believe what you want to believe in.

There have been numerous threads that have clearly demonstrated that the E-system/E-5 have advantages over other systems that have not even been touched upon in the REVIEW.

Click to expand...

No one is disputing the advantages. The advantages however, do not negate the disadvantages, and are just as real as the advantages. I don't see numerous people claiming that talking about the advantages is a waste of time.

light_bulb said:

light_bulb said:

light_bulb said:

The whole misery started with opening up this trollish thread that essentially nobody needs.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Well, why exactly did you open this thread?

light_bulb said:

light_bulb said:

light_bulb said:

Good luck with the further whining!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The luck will likely improve in direct proportion to your absence. The whining you are hearing is the whining done by the subjects of the OP, both before the review, and now, after.

Robert

CharlesB58 said:

...Lie with neither the testing, nor brand loyal fanboys, nor opposing brand fanboy-trolls.

The flaw lies with the attitude of a very small demographic of the digital camera market thinking they should have a much greater impact on Olympus' design and marketing strategy.

Click to expand...

Apparently a large enough demographic has had a great impact on Olympus' marketing strategy.

CharlesB58 said:

The flaw lies with people who don't understand what makes for profitable equipment in the current market and economic climate.

Click to expand...

Who are these people who don't understand? The proof is in the pudding.

CharlesB58 said:

The flaw lies with people who think that Olympus doesn't know these facts better than "enthusiasts". Hence the flaw of said "enthusiasts" who seriously think that a company which has limited resources should throw the lion's share into developing a camera that will sell to less than 5% of the customer base.

Click to expand...

Why would an excellent piece of equipment sell to less than 5% of the customer base? What is the underlying problem that is responsible for the lack of sales?

CharlesB58 said:

The flaw lies in the en masse attitude of so many dslr users that their photography will inevitably be substandard if they don't have the latest DXO Darling sensor in front of their faces.

Click to expand...

I don't think people are responding to DXO ratings as much as real-world experience. As I explained earlier, not everyone is aspiring to be a world-class photographer. There is a certain class of people that get enjoyment out of preserving memories. They don't care if their photography is critically acclaimed. What they want is a piece of equipment that will focus on their kids playing in their livingroom or blowing out their birthday candles. They want their equipment to capture their son's hockey game or their daughter's dance recital.

CharlesB58 said:

I've seen these flaws present since I first became seriously involved in photography over 30 years ago. There will always be people who are fixated on a particular brand because for them, it's not about the photography: it's about assuming they are better photographers than others by virtue of owning better gear.

--

Some people operate cameras. Others use them to create images. There is a difference.

Click to expand...

I don't know too many people that operate cameras without aiming to create images. Once again, some people's images may not float your boat, but they are taking images for their enjoyment, not for others criticism. Look at the number of people who have left Olympus and this forum not because of what was on paper, but because Olympus wasn't meeting their real-world needs.

Robert

Raist3d said:

I just think that pointing out things on one direction only is a bit double standardish. You would expect someone to point out the same thing when praising the wonders of new equipment for their photography.

--

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo

Click to expand...

Very true.

I did this myself. I was very pleased with the viewfinder and AF of my E3. I posted about it.

The E-5 looks nice. It is everything I reasonably need. With the E3 I don't see a difference in sharpness between my HG and SHG lenses. The E-5 might change that. The $1700 price will be offset by seeing the quality of the lenses I already own.

But quality of my pictures is, sadly, not just limited by sharpness.

--
Jon

CharlesB58 said:

The flaw lies with people who don't understand what makes for profitable equipment in the current market and economic climate.

Click to expand...

neither does Olympus looking at their current figures regarding imaging.
--
Maggie Thatcher, your boyz took a hell of a beating

Raist3d said:

Rriley said:

Raist3d said:

I wonder why people are wasting $1700 USD on an E-5, instead of shooting with their e-330, e-420, e-30 or e-3.

Click to expand...

surely less like 'wasting money' by leaving the thing on the backseat of a taxi cab and then having to replace it with a half dozen something elses

Click to expand...

Another vain attempt at a personal attack that says far more about you than you are trying to say about me

I realize it's easier to try to come out with a personal attack than thinking.

Click to expand...

well 'wasting money' is as unnecessary as it is inflammatory. After the most logical and deliberate debate one can have with themselves their friends and acquaintances, who are you to say what suits someone else, when for you your own carelessness actually makes purchase decisions for you

Member said:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=37728803

But in the end you end up looking worse.

Click to expand...

worse that what

the images are self explanatory, that you do not find much advantage in a very good jpeg engine or lower iso shooting against your own exaggerated specification is once again leading you to dictate terms to everyone else. That i dont habitually contest your responses doesnt make you the holder of all wisdom here, its more like a method of saving this place from your tiresome self serving argument

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended

I actually think functionality is the main improvement you get from newer cameras i.e. the ability to shoot in a wider range of situations with more keepers. In many respects, the E-5 is a champion here (e.g. it's tremendous programability and ruggedness).

I own the Olympus E-30, the 12-60mm SWD, the 50-200mm SWD, the 8mm fisheye, the 50mm f 2, and the 25mm f 1.4 (Panasonic Lumix-Leica) and I am delighted. I hear the criticisms of poor high ISO performance, but it bothers me not in the least (if it's true) since I NEVER shoot above ISO 800. I hear that Olympus cameras are characterized by lower dynamic range, but careful metering makes blown highlights a rarity for me nowadays. I suppose I'm expected to look at the dxomark.com sensor ratings and cry...and then run to another brand.

No, I am very pleased with my gear and my photography.

Maybe in 2012 I'll think about the E-5. It seems unnecessary to me now.

(I expect to be insulted for this post as I was when I last posted here about a year ago...)

Kurt Petersen said:

Oh goodie, another 'Anti-fanboy crusader' here to cleanse the forum.

Click to expand...

Cleanse the forum from what? Do YOU know?

Robert

Oh, but it did win in several categories. If those represent my highest priorities, then who's to say that it's not a winner for me? Why do we read the comments of reviewers "conclusions" as if they were the statements of gods?

Drawing my own conclusions about DSLRs now for 6 years,

Seth

--
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?

--
wallygoots.smugmug.com
wallygoots.blogspot.com

How about challenging ourselves to be better photographers, to further craft our inner vision. Now that is something I'd like to win, although we never will because we should in fact always be challenging ourselves to be better, and there is no end to that.

SirSeth said:

Oh, but it did win in several categories. If those represent my highest priorities, then who's to say that it's not a winner for me? Why do we read the comments of reviewers "conclusions" as if they were the statements of gods?

Click to expand...

I agree. It is key to realize that what constitutes a winner varies by the criteria the subject is judged on, which is why I feel the E-5 may be for me.

If I am judging the high ISO performance against the Sony sensored models, I may find the E-5 not placing as well. Of course, I am not. That is Dpreview's job.

If I am, (and I am) judging the E-5 against the criteria of my personal needs, the E-5 at this point seems to be able to fulfill them, including low-light performance. To be honest, I do have a backup plan, but I honestly hope that it is not necessary.

SirSeth said:

Drawing my own conclusions about DSLRs now for 6 years,

Click to expand...

Your above statement aligns with the purpose of this thread. It's not about bashing fanboys or Olympus equipment. It's about restoring this forum to a place that helps facilitate the drawing of educated conclusions. It makes it difficult when you are limited to only discussing the pro's to the exclusion of the con's.

Robert

Greetings Robert,

I like to try to be objective, but I also keep my subjective priorities in sight. I know the Oly cons and can live with them easily because of the strengths. For example, I like the layout, look, and performance of the K5 very much. But the E-3/E-5 is a close second in all these areas for me and I simply prefer the Zuikos over the Pentax lenses. The whole system weather sealing, dust buster, and pixel mapping is more important to me than slightly cleaner ISO3200 as well. So sure the E-5 isn't as clean at high ISO, it isn't as fast as the 7D frame to frame, and video is not and E-5 strength. The K5 has a size and layout advantage. But so what. The E-5 is more rugged than the rest. It has a great 100% viewfinder too. Lastly, there are IQ pros besides super high ISO that can be seen as strengths with the Oly system.

Good luck with your decision.

Seth

--
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?

--
wallygoots.smugmug.com
wallygoots.blogspot.com

That's great. The reason you see the OP posting what he did is because many whinned like vampires exposed to sunlight when the reviews didn't put the camera where they thought it would be (or still think it is).

The best camera int the end for an individual is the one that matches his/her needs, preferences, budget, etc.

--

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo

SirSeth said:

Greetings Robert,

I like to try to be objective, but I also keep my subjective priorities in sight. I know the Oly cons and can live with them easily because of the strengths. For example, I like the layout, look, and performance of the K5 very much. But the E-3/E-5 is a close second in all these areas for me and I simply prefer the Zuikos over the Pentax lenses. The whole system weather sealing, dust buster, and pixel mapping is more important to me than slightly cleaner ISO3200 as well. So sure the E-5 isn't as clean at high ISO, it isn't as fast as the 7D frame to frame, and video is not and E-5 strength. The K5 has a size and layout advantage. But so what. The E-5 is more rugged than the rest. It has a great 100% viewfinder too. Lastly, there are IQ pros besides super high ISO that can be seen as strengths with the Oly system.

Click to expand...

I definitely share all the likes you listed. I think most people here do. They are really what has caused me to wait for the E-5 rather than try and go elsewhere. The pros are also what probably causes so much contention concerning the cons. Olympus is so good at what it does well that it is a hard system to walk away from, even if its shortfalls prevent it from meeting some people's needs. That very fact has "forced" me to pass on the E-3, waiting for it to improve in some areas.

The largest part of my photography involves taking candid shots in natural light, (as much as possible) most often at churches, receptions, etc. I strive to get the shots that accurately portray the subject's "personality", those non-posed smiles and expressions that are typical during a conversation or as a reaction to what may be going on at the event. The added challenge is to simultaneously catch those expressions with flattering natural lighting. Seeking and capturing the combination of a good subject, flattering expression and interesting lighting affords me the same satisfaction that I imagine some others get capturing a rare bird in flight.

The way my "lowly" 510 accurately and crisply captures skin tones and colorful clothing, combined with the sharpness of the 50-200 (and 12-60) leaves me with little to complain about when there is good lighting. There are times however, when even though the ratio of light to shadow is perfect, the overall level of lighting is less than ideal. I have of necessity gotten used to shooting wide open, 1600 ISO, 1/30 or longer shutter speeds. As a result, I sometimes miss good shots due to slow focus, banding and motion blur. (though not as often as one may expect)

Based on what I have read and seen here, I've grown pretty confident that the E-5 will prove to have the performance improvements that will help me do what I like to do. They say it's not the gear, but sometimes the gear certainly helps.

SirSeth said:

Good luck with your decision.

Click to expand...

Thanks,

Robert