E-volt 510 or XTi

[jbloodwo]

well I am going to make the jump form film to digital... I am thinking i am down to 2 choices.

the XTi and the announced Olympus 510

what i like about Olympus

4/3 is intriguing to me

image stabilization built in to the body.

the 2x multiplier is much easer mentally than the 1.x of the aps sensor that Nikon Canon et all are using in most of their bodes.

the price point looks better.

What i like about the XTi

there is really one thing right now XTi has a Battery grip that allows easy vertical shooting. i do mostly nature photography and liked the feel of the grip when i was looking XTi.
I do have some Canon stuff that i can use.if i get this

 

[Mundaine]

I like the lens lineup from Canon more. Plus image quality is better on Canon's IMO. Depends on the size of your hands.

 

[Roger Schliefert]

I would go with the Canon due to it's superior ISO performance and lens selection. That and the fact that you have some Canon equipment already, hopefully EOS capatible, that would make it a no brainer for me.

I've got a buddy who swore by his Evolt until I shared a few high ISO captures and he was amazed and surprised that I didn't use a noise reduction program to produce those pics. Using a noise reduction program was something he used as part of his workflow. Needless to say he jumped ship and is all Canon now, and smiling.

Hope this helps,

Roger

well I am going to make the jump form film to digital... I am
thinking i am down to 2 choices.

the XTi and the announced Olympus 510

what i like about Olympus

4/3 is intriguing to me

image stabilization built in to the body.
the 2x multiplier is much easer mentally than the 1.x of the aps
sensor that Nikon Canon et all are using in most of their bodes.

the price point looks better.

What i like about the XTi

there is really one thing right now XTi has a Battery grip that
allows easy vertical shooting. i do mostly nature photography and
liked the feel of the grip when i was looking XTi.
I do have some Canon stuff that i can use.if i get this

--

 

[austinphotog]

I have an XT and a E500. I like both cameras, and hate some things about both. I bought an XT in hopes that a 40D gets some live view.

It depends on what lenses you plan to use, and what you shoot. The canon is much better on low light. It also offers you better lenses for portraits (50mm + 85 mm).

Most of the time I like the E500 better. I can set it up and use jpegs right from the camera, but haven't been able to do this with the xt (more post processing). That said the xti's picture styles may correct this. I also print mainly 8x10 and 16X20 so I prefer the aspect ratio. I also have just been able to buy lenses for the e500, but had to return 2 sigmas on canon (quality control, focus issues). The E500 has beter ergonomics for me, but this is a personal try it in the store. The E510 will add live view and IS, which is a big bonus. Look at lenses, and aspect ratios. This should probably make your decission.

both

I've got a buddy who swore by his Evolt until I shared a few high
ISO captures and he was amazed and surprised that I didn't use a
noise reduction program to produce those pics. Using a noise
reduction program was something he used as part of his workflow.
Needless to say he jumped ship and is all Canon now, and smiling.

Hope this helps,

Roger

well I am going to make the jump form film to digital... I am
thinking i am down to 2 choices.

the XTi and the announced Olympus 510

what i like about Olympus

4/3 is intriguing to me

image stabilization built in to the body.
the 2x multiplier is much easer mentally than the 1.x of the aps
sensor that Nikon Canon et all are using in most of their bodes.

the price point looks better.

What i like about the XTi

there is really one thing right now XTi has a Battery grip that
allows easy vertical shooting. i do mostly nature photography and
liked the feel of the grip when i was looking XTi.
I do have some Canon stuff that i can use.if i get this

--

 

[JHaagsma]

I'm facing the same choice as you. At the moment I favor the E-510, but I'll hold my judgement until there are some reviews. I'll have to see how much worse high ISO noise is.

Canon has more lenses than Olympus, but with the lenses anounced for release this year, Oly has a very interesting selection IMO. I want IS for all my lenses, this is where it gets more difficult for Canon. The 70-300 IS is a good tele, but for me there is no good IS shorter zoom with a nice wide range (17-85 not good enough/too expensive for what it offers). Oly on the other hand has a very interesting 12-60 (24-120 equiv) coming. IN the tele range there is the choice between a consumer grade 70-300 and a (semi-)pro 50-200.

I could also compromise quality a bit in favor of ease of use and go for a superzoom. For Canon that would mean the Sigma 18-200OS, for Oly the Leica 14-150.

Many products I'm interested in have yet to appear on the market, so I'm holding out until I've seen reviews.

 

[JHaagsma]

and to add to my previous post: the Oly lenses seem to be very good. What I notice in reviews on Photozone for instance is very even performance. From centre to corner, from wide open to stopped down. Little purple fringing and vignetting. Even the kit lenses are quite good and often amazing value when bought as a double zoom kit.

 

[misha]

well I am going to make the jump form film to digital... I am
thinking i am down to 2 choices.

the XTi and the announced Olympus 510

what i like about Olympus

4/3 is intriguing to me

Why?

image stabilization built in to the body.

That's a positive (though Canon offers IS lenses, but that's an extra cost)

the 2x multiplier is much easer mentally than the 1.x of the aps
sensor that Nikon Canon et all are using in most of their bodes.

That does not seem like a real factor - you just use a lens the way it works on your camera, no need to try to convert to 35mm equivalent.

the price point looks better.

I would 1) wait for a review of the 510 to see the performance and image quality; 2) price a full system - the camera and all the lenses, flashes, etc. you need, not just the camera.
--
Misha

 

[PeaceFrog]

I agree that the 4:3 system is pretty interesting and since they pretty much started from scratch with digital all the components of the system work pretty well together.

The in body IS is pretty interesting but I guess that means that you won’t be seeing too many IS lenses for the 4:3 system since it looks like Oly themselves won’t be making them but that is still yet to be seen for sure. If you plan on doing a lot of telephoto work IS lenses can be a very nice benefit. If you work mostly with shorter focal lengths then I think body IS will just great and could save you some money.

I agree that the price point on the bodies for Olympus looks pretty good but once you get into the higher-end lenses (especially the longer focal length lenses) things don’t look quite as appealing.

The main thing that would make me hesitant about Olympus right now is that their system isn’t as fleshed out as those from Canon and Nikon so if there is any sort of specialty lens that might want in the future that doesn’t currently exist in the 4:3 system you might end up switching systems later which can be expensive to do. For general photography I think the Olympus system is very capable. It is also a little concerning to me that Olympus has taken so long to replace the E-1 but they do seem to be doing pretty well keeping the lower end bodies up to date.

With the Canon you have a very well developed system that covers pretty much any photography task. You will also have lots of 3rd party choices for lenses and accessories. Canon also seems very committed to keeping current in terms of image quality and useful features.

Either way I think you will end up with a very capable camera.

I hope this helps,

Greg

--



http://www.pbase.com/dadas115/

 

[jbloodwo]

I do agree It the E1 just a tad long in the tooth ( still using a 4.1 mp sensor)
there are some lens based IS lenses that you can get from panasonic (Leica).
And i think that Leica may have some for therir own body.

this it one of the other things that is unusual about the 4:3 is if you want to use glass from one of the supporting partners is should work.

right now I thinking about at least a 3 lens setup

on the e-volt
14-42
40-150

with lens X
that would equal
28-84 (28-80 in a kit)
80-300
--
and a Macro lens of some type.
and maybe in the future a monster zoom 600 on canon side

 

[PeaceFrog]

Yes, I have actually played around with the Leica IS lens and thought it seemed decent enough. However at this point it looks like Olympus is going to go with in-body IS which means that they probably won’t be coming out with many IS DZ lenses. Of course they still could but at this point I haven’t seen or heard anything that suggests that they will.

Greg

--



http://www.pbase.com/dadas115/

 

[duartix]

I've been on Canon digital Point&Shoots for as long as I started taking pictures. The main reason I went for Canon was the clean blue skies that came out of the Ixus line, compared to the noisy ones of Nikon and Olympus.

Now that DSLR's have shrunk to reasonable sizes I'm going this way too. I was about to buy a XTi last Xmas but my life got too busy for some time and I lost momentum.

And then it happened: I walked into a store and put an E-400 in my hands. Now the XTi looks like a mammoth.

Then came the rumours about 410/510. The E-510 which will still be a little bigger than the E-400/410, is still smaller and lighter than the XTi.

For 999$ (E-510+double lens kit) you cannot come close to getting anything IS from Canon that comes close to a 35mm equiv of (28-84 + 80-300).

You would have spend up 3X that money with 2X the weight of the Olympus kit...
And don't even try to compare the kit lenses, Olympus wins hands down!

Other factors that have to be considered, going with the XTi:

You'd gain A LOT by being able to start shooting today.
You'd loose Live-View.
You'd gain lower High ISO noise.
You'd loose much better color processing.
You'd gain a faster AF. (but not that much, E-400 has come a long way!)
You'd loose by having problems with back/front focus.
You'd gain with a wider choice for prime lenses.
You'd loose with a narrower choice of wider lenses.

In the end my advice is wait for the first reviews on the 410. That should tell you all there is to know about IQ. The IS is proven to work (SP-550).

Unless anything goes terribly wrong wait for the E-510 launch and walk into a store and put them both to work.
Buy and be a happy shooter.
You can't be wrong with either of these cameras.

As a last note, for those who tout low high ISO noise, I can race you anytime, on how much time in PP you have to spend to get the colors right from a CRW file against getting the noise right from an ORF file.

Duarte Bruno

 

[iliask]

Leica's I.S. works only with the Panasonic Lumix L1.

Best of luck either way you chose.

--
http://s20.photobucket.com/albums/b207/iliask

 

[argasp]

And I thought that Pana's OIS works with all 4/3 bodies. ...?

Greetings
Gabriel

 

[SNGX1327]

well I am going to make the jump form film to digital... I am
thinking i am down to 2 choices.

4/3 is intriguing to me

this really shouldn't be a reason to buy a camera. any 4:3 photo can be cropped to 3:2 and vice versa. however, i have to ask why 4:3 intrigues you? 4:3 is everywhre. every digicam, and up until a year ago, every computer monitor and television screen was 4:3. by contrast 3:2 stands out, and it follows the "golden magical fantastical rule"

image stabilization built in to the body.
the 2x multiplier is much easer mentally than the 1.x of the aps
sensor that Nikon Canon et all are using in most of their bodes.

are you serious? this can't possibly be a real reason. you like the olympus better because you can multiply by 2 easier than 1 1/2? that's pretty lazy, man. you are one of the few people who is actually going to have to concern yourself with a lens conversion factor, but it's not like every time you go out shooting you have to multiply numbers in your head. it's actually very easy. 17mm is wide. 28mm is normal. 50mm is telephoto. bam. easy as that. and i didn't even have to multiply any numbers, i just know this off the top of my head. conversly, if you were using a 2x lens conversion factor it would probably be more like 14mm, 25mm, 40mm or the likes, but i don't know where olympus lenses' offerings start on their zoom lenses

the important thing to ask is what brand of camera are you using now? that is probably the brand of camera whose SLR you should buy. UNLESS you aren't happy with it. if you are happy with your film SLR, using that same brand's digital body will be almost an identical experience, plus some of your equipment might be able to cross over for use on your digital body

 

[duartix]

I forgot to say that as of this date Olympus SSWF is the only dust free DSLR system that has proven to be effective.

--
Duarte Bruno

 

[Russ2626]

I've been a Canon shooter for twenty years and have owned every model of the digital rebel. I currently have the Xti, Sigma 17-70 DC Macro, Sigma 50 DG Macro and the 420 EX Speedlite. The camera is wonderful, and the lenses tack sharp, but they're all going on E-Bay so I can convert to the 510 when it's released. The reason is in-camera stabilization and the fact that $ for $ Zuiko lenses seem to be every bit as good as Canon (and/or Sigma). The Zuiko 14-54 seems to be a nice WA lens & the new 40-150 fills the bill for a decent telephoto zoom -- particularly with the camera's IS. The live view and dust removal system seal (pardon the pun) the deal.

 

[PicPocket]

As a last note, for those who tout low high ISO noise, I can race
you anytime, on how much time in PP you have to spend to get the
colors right from a CRW file against getting the noise right from
an ORF file.

You may win hands down for you possibly better skills and experience, but my understanding is that color manipulation isnt a game about losing details as NR is

--
PicPocket
http://pictures.ashish-pragya.com

 

[JohnMcL7]

Not entirely correct, when the Leica lens is mounted on an Olympus body you only get constant IS, not the usually more effective mode which only applies IS at half shutter press. Here are a couple of shots taken with the Olympus E-330 and the Leica D 14-50mm lens:

1/8, ISO 400, 50mm (100mm equiv), IS off:



1/6, ISO 400, 50mm(100mm equiv), IS on:



While it might not be quite as good as when mounted on an L1, there is still a noticeable improvement.

John

 

[jbloodwo]

I only wish i could afford that camera it felt so solid. like one of those Classic SLR bodies like the F1 that defend yourself with and then take photos to document what took place. but alas 2k is not in my price range.

 

[JohnMcL7]

well I am going to make the jump form film to digital... I am
thinking i am down to 2 choices.

4/3 is intriguing to me

this really shouldn't be a reason to buy a camera. any 4:3 photo
can be cropped to 3:2 and vice versa. however, i have to ask why
4:3 intrigues you? 4:3 is everywhre. every digicam, and up until a
year ago, every computer monitor and television screen was 4:3. by
contrast 3:2 stands out, and it follows the "golden magical
fantastical rule"

I don't think you understand this properly - 4/3 or four thirds is the name of the standard which was produced by Olympus and Kodak. Unlike other companies, Olympus scrapped their film mount and decided to design a new system from the ground up as digital. Olympus have produced a series of SLRs using this standard and more recently Panasonic have produced their first SLR using the four thirds standard.

John