Big Camera Purchase Decisions Coming Up

Noel Carboni · Oct 5, 2000

For those of us trying to keep the very best hardware but also stay within a serious hobbiest's budget, some big decisions are looming.

Specifically, the Oly E-10 is around the corner, but alas the decision for one who has been through a D-500L and C-2500L isn't quite so simple...

1. The Canon EOS D-30 is also about to pop out the tube. It sports the oh-so-desirable (and oh-can-be-so-expensive) interchangeable lens capability. On the other hand, the E-10 fixed glass is touted to be top notch, and I have to agree, looking at the samples. Will Oly make a serious telephoto teleconverter available? Will it work worth a damn?

2. Owing to Canon's desire to compete with the Nikon D1, it has a raw-mode capability in which you get the imager's output in 12 bit per pixel compressed but LOSSLESS form. Oooooh. No raw mode from the E-10, near as I can tell.

3. At 4 megapixels, you can SERIOUSLY crop an image and still win a contest with it.

However, 3 megapixels isn't really THAT much smaller when you consider the image dimensions - D-30: 2160 x 1440, E-10: 2240 x 1680.

4. Visual noise levels are down across the board. Three cheers for image quality. All the choices are good!

5. The E-10 is limited in a couple of ways... For example, 1/640 second shutter speed. What's up with this? Couldn't pack a 1 GHz processor in there?

6. I imagine the E-10 will shoot a lot like the C-2500L. This is a plus for someone who doesn't want to unlearn a whole bunch of operating details every year or two.

At this point, being a long-time (in relative terms) Oly digital SLR user, and because of it's slightly lower projected price, I'm leaning toward the E-10.

What's a guy to do? Buy both? Wait until 100 MP cameras come out?

-Noel
http://members2.clubphoto.com/noel190777

aee · Oct 5, 2000

Noel Carboni said:
Will Oly make a serious telephoto teleconverter available?

I don't know how serious it is but there's the 3x TCON-300S.

Noel Carboni said:
No raw mode from the E-10, near as I can tell.

Yes, it does raw. 10-bit A/D. Yes, I know there are 12-bit cameras. Don't shoot me; I'm just the messenger.

Erik Ehudin · Oct 5, 2000

aee said:
Noel Carboni said:

Will Oly make a serious telephoto teleconverter available?

Click to expand...

I don't know how serious it is but there's the 3x TCON-300S.

Just posted a new thread on this, but seems like this one is headed my way. Think the B-300 would work on the E-10? There is a step down from the 62mm thread on the E-10 to the 55mm camera end of the B-300, but that doesn't seem like a huge obstacle. Anyone have an idea?
-Erik

ps Hi, Noel!

Joe Hawblitzel · Oct 5, 2000

I feel your pain. I've got an E-10 on order. Then I look at the Canon D-30 samples (smooth blue skies) and drool. But it would cost me $1500 more to get into a D-30 and I just can't convince myself anyone in my advanced amateur universe would be able to tell the difference. At least that's what I think today. And both cameras meet my requirement of having more than a six month life span (before I grow restless). At least they look like real cameras. I never worried about my Nikon 990 being stolen, because I figured a thief would have no idea what it was ;-)

Joe Hawblitzel

Noel Carboni said:
For those of us trying to keep the very best hardware but also stay
within a serious hobbiest's budget, some big decisions are looming.

Specifically, the Oly E-10 is around the corner, but alas the decision
for one who has been through a D-500L and C-2500L isn't quite so
simple...

1. The Canon EOS D-30 is also about to pop out the tube. It sports the
oh-so-desirable (and oh-can-be-so-expensive) interchangeable lens
capability. On the other hand, the E-10 fixed glass is touted to be top
notch, and I have to agree, looking at the samples. Will Oly make a
serious telephoto teleconverter available? Will it work worth a damn?

2. Owing to Canon's desire to compete with the Nikon D1, it has a
raw-mode capability in which you get the imager's output in 12 bit per
pixel compressed but LOSSLESS form. Oooooh. No raw mode from the E-10,
near as I can tell.

3. At 4 megapixels, you can SERIOUSLY crop an image and still win a
contest with it. However, 3 megapixels isn't really THAT much
smaller when you consider the image dimensions - D-30: 2160 x 1440,
E-10: 2240 x 1680.

4. Visual noise levels are down across the board. Three cheers for
image quality. All the choices are good!

5. The E-10 is limited in a couple of ways... For example, 1/640
second shutter speed. What's up with this? Couldn't pack a 1 GHz
processor in there?

6. I imagine the E-10 will shoot a lot like the C-2500L. This is a
plus for someone who doesn't want to unlearn a whole bunch of operating
details every year or two.

At this point, being a long-time (in relative terms) Oly digital SLR
user, and because of it's slightly lower projected price, I'm leaning
toward the E-10.

What's a guy to do? Buy both? Wait until 100 MP cameras come out?

-Noel
http://members2.clubphoto.com/noel190777

Noel Carboni · Oct 6, 2000

Joe Hawblitzel said:
And both cameras meet my requirement
of having more than a six month life span (before I grow restless).

Interesting perspective. I've shared it, but without coming to grips with it directly. 3 years ago I bought my first digital camera (an Oly D-500L), secretly hoping it would last 2 years. It did. Last year I bought my second (an Oly C-2500L), also hoping to get 2 years. I probably could, but where's the fun in that when sexier hardware becons?

Six months... Seems pretty realistic. Perhaps I need to shorten my horizon a bit.

-Noel
http://members2.clubphoto.com/noel190777

Eric T · Oct 6, 2000

Hello Noel,

I would feel sory for Olympus if you choose not to upgrade to them.
E-10 still has some shortcomings, but seeing from the sample pic,
the images are crystal clear.
Did you see the pic with the yellow Spitfire MK IV...

It is nice to see you post here again.

Eric T.

Noel Carboni said:
Joe Hawblitzel said:

And both cameras meet my requirement
of having more than a six month life span (before I grow restless).

Click to expand...

Interesting perspective. I've shared it, but without coming to grips
with it directly. 3 years ago I bought my first digital camera (an Oly
D-500L), secretly hoping it would last 2 years. It did. Last year I
bought my second (an Oly C-2500L), also hoping to get 2 years. I
probably could, but where's the fun in that when sexier hardware becons?

Six months... Seems pretty realistic. Perhaps I need to shorten my
horizon a bit.

-Noel
http://members2.clubphoto.com/noel190777

Noel Carboni · Oct 6, 2000

Eric T said:
I would feel sory for Olympus if you choose not to upgrade to them.
E-10 still has some shortcomings, but seeing from the sample pic,
the images are crystal clear.
Did you see the pic with the yellow Spitfire MK IV...

Yes, image noise appears WAY down compared to the camera's predecessors. That's almost got me sold by itself.

One of the things I like to do is digitally "push" shots, to see what cameras deliver in the nearly dark areas. That Spitfire shot held up pretty well to the operation.

Something I noticed with the C-2500Ls... Image noise was not constant from camera to camera. Some were better and some were worse. Thankfully, mine is on the better side, though it's not as clean as the sample E-10.

An anecdote: Phil's preproduction Nikon D1 took better images than the production models. A camera company that would ship a prototype that took lousy pictures would be stupid indeed. I don't expect production E-10s to take better images than those we see on this site, though we can hope.

Eric T said:
It is nice to see you post here again.

Thanks for the welcome back, Erik, and hi, other Erik.

-Noel

Lin Evans · Oct 6, 2000

Noel Carboni said:
For those of us trying to keep the very best hardware but also stay
within a serious hobbiest's budget, some big decisions are looming.

Specifically, the Oly E-10 is around the corner, but alas the decision
for one who has been through a D-500L and C-2500L isn't quite so
simple...

1. The Canon EOS D-30 is also about to pop out the tube. It sports the
oh-so-desirable (and oh-can-be-so-expensive) interchangeable lens
capability. On the other hand, the E-10 fixed glass is touted to be top
notch, and I have to agree, looking at the samples. Will Oly make a
serious telephoto teleconverter available? Will it work worth a damn?

On the E10, I think we can expect a 3x, but that's probably going to be as far as it will go. Olympus has a history of producing excellent teleconverters, so if they predict a 3x, I suspect it will be excellent glass. Coupled with the native 4x, this should give approximately 12x capability which for most purposes should be sufficient.

Noel Carboni said:
2. Owing to Canon's desire to compete with the Nikon D1, it has a
raw-mode capability in which you get the imager's output in 12 bit per

pixel compressed but LOSSLESS form. Oooooh. No raw mode from the E-10, near as I can tell.

Apparently not. But then there is the serious additional costs of the necessary lenses for this one.

Noel Carboni said:
3. At 4 megapixels, you can SERIOUSLY crop an image and still win a
contest with it. However, 3 megapixels isn't really THAT much
smaller when you consider the image dimensions - D-30: 2160 x 1440,
E-10: 2240 x 1680.

I guess it's all relative, but at over 650,000 pixels difference, this may be the amount cropped and still get 3 megapixel resolution - who knows??

Noel Carboni said:
4. Visual noise levels are down across the board. Three cheers for
image quality. All the choices are good!

5. The E-10 is limited in a couple of ways... For example, 1/640
second shutter speed. What's up with this? Couldn't pack a 1 GHz
processor in there?

I don't think they are aiming this one at the "action" shooter. Probably more oriented toward studio work, though this shutter speed is fast enough to capture action by panning, in many cases. I found that my little C2000Z does better on action shots with its lower speed than my CP950 or CP990 do with faster shutter speeds because of the faster lens.

Noel Carboni said:
6. I imagine the E-10 will shoot a lot like the C-2500L. This is a
plus for someone who doesn't want to unlearn a whole bunch of operating
details every year or two.

Plus it will have a "live" TTL LCD like the Sony DSC-D770.

Noel Carboni said:
At this point, being a long-time (in relative terms) Oly digital SLR
user, and because of it's slightly lower projected price, I'm leaning
toward the E-10.

I think the actual price, when lenses are thrown into the mix will be closer to half that of the D30. The 4x is worth at least $800 or so, and I'm sure the 3X teleconverter will be under $400. You can't get a decent 500mm for the D30 for any where near that.

Noel Carboni said:
What's a guy to do? Buy both? Wait until 100 MP cameras come out?

No, but a six megapixel with D1 features would sure be nice!

Noel Carboni said:
-Noel
http://members2.clubphoto.com/noel190777

Jim Popenoe · Oct 6, 2000

Erik Ehudin said:
Think the B-300 would work on the E-10? There is a step down from
the 62mm thread on the E-10 to the 55mm camera end of the B-300, but
that doesn't seem like a huge obstacle. Anyone have an idea?
-Erik

Thread size is not the issue.

The eyepiece (inner) lens of a B-300 teleadapter has a diameter of about 36mm. I suspect this may cause vignetting on the E-10's big lens. I have read that the E-10 will have its own set of accessory lens adapters. Some accessory lenses for the C2000 and C3000 series cameras may not work well on the E-10.

Jim

Erik Ehudin · Oct 6, 2000

Those IS Olys look to have a pretty decent-sized lens, and the B-300 was apparently designed for them. I hope the 300 would at least be useful at full zoom. The wide would probably be more problematic, as if you had to zoom to avoid vignetting you'd be right back around 35mm. Thanks for the reply!
-Erik

Jim Popenoe said:
Erik Ehudin said:

Think the B-300 would work on the E-10? There is a step down from
the 62mm thread on the E-10 to the 55mm camera end of the B-300, but
that doesn't seem like a huge obstacle. Anyone have an idea?
-Erik

Click to expand...

Thread size is not the issue.

The eyepiece (inner) lens of a B-300 teleadapter has a diameter of about
36mm. I suspect this may cause vignetting on the E-10's big lens. I
have read that the E-10 will have its own set of accessory lens
adapters. Some accessory lenses for the C2000 and C3000 series cameras
may not work well on the E-10.

Jim

Doug W · Oct 6, 2000

Lin Evans said:
Noel Carboni said:

For those of us trying to keep the very best hardware but also stay
within a serious hobbiest's budget, some big decisions are looming.

Specifically, the Oly E-10 is around the corner, but alas the decision
for one who has been through a D-500L and C-2500L isn't quite so
simple...

1. The Canon EOS D-30 is also about to pop out the tube. It sports the
oh-so-desirable (and oh-can-be-so-expensive) interchangeable lens
capability. On the other hand, the E-10 fixed glass is touted to be top
notch, and I have to agree, looking at the samples. Will Oly make a
serious telephoto teleconverter available? Will it work worth a damn?

Click to expand...

On the E10, I think we can expect a 3x, but that's probably going to be
as far as it will go. Olympus has a history of producing excellent
teleconverters, so if they predict a 3x, I suspect it will be excellent
glass. Coupled with the native 4x, this should give approximately 12x
capability which for most purposes should be sufficient.

Member said:

2. Owing to Canon's desire to compete with the Nikon D1, it has a
raw-mode capability in which you get the imager's output in 12 bit per

pixel compressed but LOSSLESS form. Oooooh. No raw mode from the E-10, near as I can tell.

Click to expand...

Apparently not. But then there is the serious additional costs of the
necessary lenses for this one.

Member said:

3. At 4 megapixels, you can SERIOUSLY crop an image and still win a
contest with it. However, 3 megapixels isn't really THAT much
smaller when you consider the image dimensions - D-30: 2160 x 1440,
E-10: 2240 x 1680.

Click to expand...

I guess it's all relative, but at over 650,000 pixels difference, this
may be the amount cropped and still get 3 megapixel resolution - who
knows??

Member said:

4. Visual noise levels are down across the board. Three cheers for
image quality. All the choices are good!

5. The E-10 is limited in a couple of ways... For example, 1/640
second shutter speed. What's up with this? Couldn't pack a 1 GHz
processor in there?

Click to expand...

I don't think they are aiming this one at the "action" shooter. Probably
more oriented toward studio work, though this shutter speed is fast
enough to capture action by panning, in many cases. I found that my
little C2000Z does better on action shots with its lower speed than my
CP950 or CP990 do with faster shutter speeds because of the faster lens.

Member said:

6. I imagine the E-10 will shoot a lot like the C-2500L. This is a
plus for someone who doesn't want to unlearn a whole bunch of operating
details every year or two.

Click to expand...

Plus it will have a "live" TTL LCD like the Sony DSC-D770.

Member said:

At this point, being a long-time (in relative terms) Oly digital SLR
user, and because of it's slightly lower projected price, I'm leaning
toward the E-10.

Click to expand...

I think the actual price, when lenses are thrown into the mix will be
closer to half that of the D30. The 4x is worth at least $800 or so, and
I'm sure the 3X teleconverter will be under $400. You can't get a decent
500mm for the D30 for any where near that.

Very true. But given the 1.6 multiplier, you'd only need a 260mm lens to get the same apparent FL as the 420 equivalent of the E-10 + 3X converter. So let's see - Canon has three 300 mm L series zooms. The f4 versions is $1040, the f4 IS is $1300 and the f2.8 IS is $4800. Kinda reinforces Lin's point, I guess.

take care

dw

Member said:
Member said:

What's a guy to do? Buy both? Wait until 100 MP cameras come out?

Click to expand...

No, but a six megapixel with D1 features would sure be nice!

Member said:

-Noel
http://members2.clubphoto.com/noel190777

Click to expand...

rob26812 · Oct 6, 2000

Eric T said:
the images are crystal clear.
Did you see the pic with the yellow Spitfire MK IV...

But the cat picture is just so BAD. There is just so much noise in that photo.

Rob Whapham · Oct 6, 2000

Similar to you, Noel, I went from Oly's D-600L to the C-2500L; pretty much as soon as the C-2500L came out. And having crossed a fair bit over the magic $1000 mark for the C-2500L, it's going to take a little more than the E-10 to spark my interest. Even being a toy guy myself.

For me, the only wants I have with my C-2500L are for more "camera-like" manual controls (a real focus ring, etc.), more extensive manual controls (more f-stops, more focual length steps), more lens options, and MUCH better low-light cabilities.

While it looks like the E-10 would handle the first two, it obviously falls short on the third. Regardless of the quality, adding teleconverters and wide angle add-ons really don't compete with actual telephoto and wide lenses. (IMHO) As far as low-light shooting, the samples indicate that the E-10 IS a great improvement over the C-2500L. But at top ISO of 320? Now the D-30's ISO 1600 might be quite noisy, but it at least gives you the option.

I guess I'm holding my breath for the $2000 interchangable-lens SLR. The one with all the features you expect in a good film SLR. I feel your pain.

Rob
http://www.whapham.com/Rob/

Noel Carboni said:
For those of us trying to keep the very best hardware but also stay
within a serious hobbiest's budget, some big decisions are looming.

Specifically, the Oly E-10 is around the corner, but alas the decision
for one who has been through a D-500L and C-2500L isn't quite so
simple...

1. The Canon EOS D-30 is also about to pop out the tube. It sports the
oh-so-desirable (and oh-can-be-so-expensive) interchangeable lens
capability. On the other hand, the E-10 fixed glass is touted to be top
notch, and I have to agree, looking at the samples. Will Oly make a
serious telephoto teleconverter available? Will it work worth a damn?

2. Owing to Canon's desire to compete with the Nikon D1, it has a
raw-mode capability in which you get the imager's output in 12 bit per
pixel compressed but LOSSLESS form. Oooooh. No raw mode from the E-10,
near as I can tell.

3. At 4 megapixels, you can SERIOUSLY crop an image and still win a
contest with it. However, 3 megapixels isn't really THAT much
smaller when you consider the image dimensions - D-30: 2160 x 1440,
E-10: 2240 x 1680.

4. Visual noise levels are down across the board. Three cheers for
image quality. All the choices are good!

5. The E-10 is limited in a couple of ways... For example, 1/640
second shutter speed. What's up with this? Couldn't pack a 1 GHz
processor in there?

6. I imagine the E-10 will shoot a lot like the C-2500L. This is a
plus for someone who doesn't want to unlearn a whole bunch of operating
details every year or two.

At this point, being a long-time (in relative terms) Oly digital SLR
user, and because of it's slightly lower projected price, I'm leaning
toward the E-10.

What's a guy to do? Buy both? Wait until 100 MP cameras come out?

-Noel
http://members2.clubphoto.com/noel190777

Noel Carboni · Oct 6, 2000

Rob said:
But the cat picture is just so BAD. There is just so much noise in that
photo.

I think we have a case of increasing expectations here...

Actually, that cat picture impressed me. Here's why:

I am fairly happy with my C-2500L (though new toys have me excited). The C-2500L has noticeable noise, especially at the higher ISOs, but has worked out in practice to be a very good camera. In any case, I'm naturally eager to compare it to the E-10.

By coincidence, when first I unpacked my C-2500L, I happened to take a pretty good closeup shot of my cat's face, a bit like Steve's, and at ISO 200 to boot (one step up from the "natural" mode in the C-2500L, just as Steve's image is one step up at ISO 160). My exposure was only 1/30 second, but:

1. My photo is noticeably fuzzier. I attribute this to the lens and possibly to improved "push" software in the E10.

2. My photo shows significantly more grain than Steve's cat.

3. It has fewer light pixels than Steve's, but other 2 second exposures I've taken actually have more.

-Noel

Johnny · Oct 6, 2000

Hi,

Is there an issue that the E-10 doesn't have a stabilizer or is it just needed at extreme zooms such as 10x? There has been some talk of not being able to use more than 2x zoom reliably without a tripod (or a stabilizer), maybe you guys have an opinion about this.

Thanks,
Johnny

Noel Carboni said:
For those of us trying to keep the very best hardware but also stay
within a serious hobbiest's budget, some big decisions are looming.

Specifically, the Oly E-10 is around the corner, but alas the decision
for one who has been through a D-500L and C-2500L isn't quite so
simple...

1. The Canon EOS D-30 is also about to pop out the tube. It sports the
oh-so-desirable (and oh-can-be-so-expensive) interchangeable lens
capability. On the other hand, the E-10 fixed glass is touted to be top
notch, and I have to agree, looking at the samples. Will Oly make a
serious telephoto teleconverter available? Will it work worth a damn?

2. Owing to Canon's desire to compete with the Nikon D1, it has a
raw-mode capability in which you get the imager's output in 12 bit per
pixel compressed but LOSSLESS form. Oooooh. No raw mode from the E-10,
near as I can tell.

3. At 4 megapixels, you can SERIOUSLY crop an image and still win a
contest with it. However, 3 megapixels isn't really THAT much
smaller when you consider the image dimensions - D-30: 2160 x 1440,
E-10: 2240 x 1680.

4. Visual noise levels are down across the board. Three cheers for
image quality. All the choices are good!

5. The E-10 is limited in a couple of ways... For example, 1/640
second shutter speed. What's up with this? Couldn't pack a 1 GHz
processor in there?

6. I imagine the E-10 will shoot a lot like the C-2500L. This is a
plus for someone who doesn't want to unlearn a whole bunch of operating
details every year or two.

At this point, being a long-time (in relative terms) Oly digital SLR
user, and because of it's slightly lower projected price, I'm leaning
toward the E-10.

What's a guy to do? Buy both? Wait until 100 MP cameras come out?

-Noel
http://members2.clubphoto.com/noel190777

Lin Evans · Oct 6, 2000

Johnny said:
Hi,

Is there an issue that the E-10 doesn't have a stabilizer or is it just
needed at extreme zooms such as 10x? There has been some talk of not
being able to use more than 2x zoom reliably without a tripod (or a
stabilizer), maybe you guys have an opinion about this.

Thanks,
Johnny

That's just not true (not being able to use more than 2x without tripod, etc.). It depends entirely on the aperture and shutter speed - and somewhat on one's ability to hold the camera still.

I shoot hand held at 575mm (15x) and sometimes at 977.7 mm (25.5x)without adversely affecting the image with my Nikon CP950 and CP990. I've also done it with my C2000Z. If the subject isn't moving and you can get 1/250th on the shutter speed with reasonable light, you should routinely get satisfactory results.

Lin

Search

Big Camera Purchase Decisions Coming Up

Noel Carboni

Senior Member

aee

Well-known member

Erik Ehudin

Guest

Joe Hawblitzel

Senior Member

Noel Carboni

Senior Member

Eric T

Well-known member

Noel Carboni

Senior Member

Lin Evans

Guest

Jim Popenoe

Guest

Erik Ehudin

Guest

Doug W

Well-known member

rob26812

Well-known member

Rob Whapham

Member

Noel Carboni

Senior Member

Johnny

New member

Lin Evans

Guest

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts