Thanks for posting. Seems like there are issues with AF, C-AF, ISO / banding issues. I am surprised that there is problem with AF working on that guys face. Should not be a problem. I rarely have issues with the AF, and I find that nearly 99% of my shots are in focus with rarely a AF problem. As for C-AF, I thought it worked fine, but I will find a chance to test it again to see that. ISO problem....I sorta agree. I think at high ISO, the image quality ain't that great, even when shooting in RAW. Perhaps I still have to learn silky pix. Banding....dun really see what he means. Any comments from anyone else?
E3 Camera Grade - Semi-pro or Pro??
- Thread starter Oly5050
- Start date
- Status
Thanks for posting. Seems like there are issues with AF, C-AF, ISO / banding issues. I am surprised that there is problem with AF working on that guys face. Should not be a problem. I rarely have issues with the AF, and I find that nearly 99% of my shots are in focus with rarely a AF problem. As for C-AF, I thought it worked fine, but I will find a chance to test it again to see that. ISO problem....I sorta agree. I think at high ISO, the image quality ain't that great, even when shooting in RAW. Perhaps I still have to learn silky pix. Banding....dun really see what he means. Any comments from anyone else?
For C-AF performance, a German magazine has done a test with the current crop of DSLRs including the E-3. It was translated by someone in Pentax Forums. Have a read here:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/...c-performance-vs-8-competitors-good-info.html
I'm sure AF performance mileage will differ for different uses and situations. No one uses camera to shooting speeding cars on the side of the road everyday. But it's a worrying trend for the E-3 should more reports like these surface.
thamks for the links. interesting reads. i wonder if there is a way to reconcile all this. clearly, the issue sensor dust is virtually removed with the e3. but it seems like they have some catching up to do in a few other aspects to the leaders. the way i see it, i think the d3 and the d300 are worthy dslrs. however, we have to take into consideration what limitations are present in these systems too. perhapa an objective comparative test would do. as for me, i dun think i have any regret at all. for a non pro, the e3 is prob the only camera that i would get. the d300 and d3 are prob too expensive for me to delve into. for that price, i believe e3 is terrific value. of course, for the rare few where money is no object, by all means, invest in the best. 
dorts
Senior Member
thamks for the links. interesting reads. i wonder if there is a way to reconcile all this. clearly, the issue sensor dust is virtually removed with the e3. but it seems like they have some catching up to do in a few other aspects to the leaders. the way i see it, i think the d3 and the d300 are worthy dslrs. however, we have to take into consideration what limitations are present in these systems too. perhapa an objective comparative test would do. as for me, i dun think i have any regret at all. for a non pro, the e3 is prob the only camera that i would get. the d300 and d3 are prob too expensive for me to delve into. for that price, i believe e3 is terrific value. of course, for the rare few where money is no object, by all means, invest in the best.
I've read problems with dust with the E-3, although it's the minority.
Isn't the E-3 of similar pricing to the D300? Just a little more no?
Much as an objective analysis is desirable, it seems that there is often some incapability of interpreting the results in an objective way. Moreover, not all objective tools are perfect. Remember the AA filter thing that made the L-10 the test camera of choice instead of the E3? I think most mass market users' buying decisions will still be based on hearsay, forum postings and "objective" reviews (hopefully). For the working pros, they likely know their needs and what to look out for anyway.
Gota agree with dorts, tho. The D300 is in a similar price bracket, and the D3 is worlds away in price, specs (like that ISO 25600) and weight.
Gota agree with dorts, tho. The D300 is in a similar price bracket, and the D3 is worlds away in price, specs (like that ISO 25600) and weight.
I know someone who shoots motorcycle racing just about every weekend.
Anyway if you do that type of photography (I have done car racing with a fully manual camera with manual focus when I was in my teens), for the most part you DON'T refocus each shot...you choose one spot where you will be taking pictures and you do a focus lock on that spot...then you disable the autofocus. When you're shooting you pan with the car until it reaches the spot you chose and then snap the shutter continuing to pan after the shot for a smooth transition.
If something happens away from the spot you chose (and you're able to photograph it), you'd have the SF autofocus programmed into the shortcut button, push it and then fire off a few shots...again you don't refocus for every shot.
Automatic features have caused people to lose their skills (or not learn them) and depend too much on the camera making the right decisions.
I had a lot of problems, but so what? Oly changed quickly my camera and problems solved. Can happen with any brand. It took years for Canon to admit focus problems, years for every other brand to realize dust is indeed a problem, so SSWF is after all not such a stupid thing. Just like Live view. Who needs it? Said quite a few after Oly introduced the E-330. Can you show me one pro camera without those today?
You mean a little more no on the D300? No weather sealing, no IS, no articulating LCD... So it really depends on which yes/no feature is important for you.Isn't the E-3 of similar pricing to the D300? Just a little more no?
Every camera has it's pros and cons, so has the E-3 and the D300.
BTW, the D300 is considerably cheaper in Sweden than the E-3.
dorts
Senior Member
There are of course pros and cons of every camera. I believe the D300 is weather-sealed. Correct me if I'm wrong.
No IS and articulating LCD, but you get better noise control and better low light performance. See what you need.
There are of course pros and cons of every camera. I believe the D300 is weather-sealed. Correct me if I'm wrong.
No IS and articulating LCD, but you get better noise control and better low light performance. See what you need.
This is what I got from DPreview.
Durable and Dependable
The D300 continues Nikons long tradition of sturdiness and durability. The camera body is built from a magnesium alloy, while the cameras shutter has been tested for 150,000-release cycles. The D300 is also designed for a high level of dust and water resistance.
Does this mean it is the same as weatherproof??
And I guess that is why people still think that the 4/3 systems are not full frames.
Compared to...
The air is very thin at the top of the SLR tree, and essentially the D3 has no directly comparable competitors. There are currently three full frame models on the market and each fills a different niche / category. The Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III is the undisputed king of resolution with its 21.1 MP CMOS sensor (and price tag to match), whilst the EOS 5D is a compact, relatively affordable model (at today's prices it's about half the price of a D3) that is aimed more at the serious enthusiast than the jobbing professional (although that doesn't stop them using them). And then there's the D3, which attempts to offer the benefits of both Canon's professional models; the 1Ds Mark III (full frame, low noise) and the 1D Mark III (ultra high speed performance); in a single camera.
Taken from http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3/page23.asp
Having spent a little time to review dpreview comparisons, I realized that many consider the E3 within the range of the D300, 40D, A700. Price range, it is a little cheaper than the D300, but more expensive than the Canon and Sony. It also has a 150,000 shutter count which lies in the range of the D300.
As for the lofty strata of the D3 and the 1DMIIIs, I realized that their shutter counts are in the rang of 300,000. They both have inbuilt battery grips and the biggest surprise for me is that lack of dust removal technology on the D3. I think that is quite unacceptable, considering that the D300 has dust removal technology. Also the sensor areas of these 2 DSLRS are 4 x that of the E3. (800+ versus 200+ mm3). For the Canon 1DMark3s, 5fps does appear to be slow for a camera of that capability. And lastly, I note for the first time that altough both their viewfinders are 100%, their magnifications are both below 1. Interesting...I wonder what it means. In any case, I have tried the D3, and I absolutely LOVE the viewfinder. It is SO BIG and SO CLEAR. I doubt that magnification issue is of any relevance.
So I guess that a good comparative range of the DSLRS are :
Top (Hardcore) : D3 1DMarkIIIS
2nd : E3 D300 40D A700
Compared to...
The air is very thin at the top of the SLR tree, and essentially the D3 has no directly comparable competitors. There are currently three full frame models on the market and each fills a different niche / category. The Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III is the undisputed king of resolution with its 21.1 MP CMOS sensor (and price tag to match), whilst the EOS 5D is a compact, relatively affordable model (at today's prices it's about half the price of a D3) that is aimed more at the serious enthusiast than the jobbing professional (although that doesn't stop them using them). And then there's the D3, which attempts to offer the benefits of both Canon's professional models; the 1Ds Mark III (full frame, low noise) and the 1D Mark III (ultra high speed performance); in a single camera.
Taken from http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3/page23.asp
Having spent a little time to review dpreview comparisons, I realized that many consider the E3 within the range of the D300, 40D, A700. Price range, it is a little cheaper than the D300, but more expensive than the Canon and Sony. It also has a 150,000 shutter count which lies in the range of the D300.
As for the lofty strata of the D3 and the 1DMIIIs, I realized that their shutter counts are in the rang of 300,000. They both have inbuilt battery grips and the biggest surprise for me is that lack of dust removal technology on the D3. I think that is quite unacceptable, considering that the D300 has dust removal technology. Also the sensor areas of these 2 DSLRS are 4 x that of the E3. (800+ versus 200+ mm3). For the Canon 1DMark3s, 5fps does appear to be slow for a camera of that capability. And lastly, I note for the first time that altough both their viewfinders are 100%, their magnifications are both below 1. Interesting...I wonder what it means. In any case, I have tried the D3, and I absolutely LOVE the viewfinder. It is SO BIG and SO CLEAR. I doubt that magnification issue is of any relevance.
So I guess that a good comparative range of the DSLRS are :
Top (Hardcore) : D3 1DMarkIIIS
2nd : E3 D300 40D A700
when you said it is SO BIG, ie. eg. the VF you're looking at is a 7" display, if it will do mag of 1x, the VF will be the size of a 10" display. This is where the .7x comes from instead of 1x. It will either be too big to fit into the cam or too big to the comfort of the eye.
I am talking about the optical viewfinder here. I am not fully clear about this. So in Oly E3, if the viewfinder is 100% and has a mag of 1.15, that means that I am seeing it at 15% larger right? So for less than 1, should not it indicate that it is smaller?
The VF magnification factor and field of view ratio is against that of the sensor; a 100% VF means you see what the sensor sees, and a magnification of 1.15 means the VF physically is 15% larger than the sensor.
I have what I need for now. Before buying my E-3 I considered the D300 but decided against it for several reasons. No regrets so far.See what you need.
Don't forget that DPReview is very much Nikon / Canon biased. They will NEVER set ANY Oly camera above a C & N. As for the price, the D300 is actually cheaper in most shops here in Sweden.
Sure, but do they have weather proof lenses for it?
ahhhhh....thanks for clearing it up for me. understand it now.
wat are your reasons against the d300?
dorts
Senior Member
Some, but not all. :bsmilie:
You're right, of course but the D300 is quite a camera body. It certainly has changed my thoughts about the E-3, not that I was so enthusiastic before it arrived but the feature set is a bit lower in some areas.
- Status
Similar threads
