E3 versus E30 Kit

[mactigasuku]

That is my question. Why is this a mid range and the E3 top of the range? Where is the E3 in comparison to the E30? Pardon me if this is getting a bit long in the tooth.

Apart from a superior body I really cant see the E3 standing out and find it difficult to understand why the pricing would be higher for the E3. Like you have mentioned, Oly would still market this as mid range probably only because there was not a lot of R&D involved.

This body is more mobile than the E3 , lighter and a wee bit smaller, offers better resolution, new software as well (??).

I am looking from a consumer's perspective and why choosing the E30 over the E3 is justified...

I do agree with you here.

I think (haven't seen the evidence yet) that the IQ from the E30 may be better than the E3's.

There have been too much hype over "Pro", "midrange", "high end" etc etc terms. In the end both the E3 and E30 are just tools. And they serve different needs. As mentioned, even with the E3 being so called "better" than the E520, I actually choose NOT to buy the E3 because it is too bulky and to a certain extent unwieldy.

As it is the E30 is already better speced than the E3 despite all these talk of cannibalising the E3 guts for the E30 .... yes the E3 was so called "top of the range" .... in terms of specs but I guess no more. The E-X just serve a different photographer. It is not necessary the top of anything.

Now if the E30 really delivers on the premise of better DR and ISO performance .....

 

[microcosm]

Dear all,

Before we go into a serious argument for no apparent reason... Let's wait for the E-30 to be made available before commenting...

Talking something so heated and passionately when it is not even available simply don't make sense...

Take a simple comparison...

If one compared the E-400 with its CMOS sensor and the E-1 that was released about 2-3 years earlier, the E-400 would seems super spec-ed MINUS the weather sealed body right?

The problem was the type of sensor used and the algorithms in the processor and speed of the processor... the difference in image quality was miles apart. And knowing Olympus, this will be the same issue again.

Also, the smaller viewfinder makes a world of difference to some.

The list goes on... and the list goes on...

Let us suspend or cool down on the discussion on the difference and NOT get into the habit of talking about something based purely on specs. Haven't we seen many super-spec cameras only to be disappointed by its imaging quality?

Olympus is NOT stupid. The CEO is old but not senile. He would not create a product to kill another. This I am so sure about Olympus. The E-Business people are not crazy. There will be obvious differences when the camera is out... so let's wait for it.

Don't rush into buying the new body or old body. Wait for the body to be out and let the masses play with it and for a fact confirm the differences. OK?

Chill everyone. Getting so heated up is not what I enjoy seeing the people in here do.

 

[spidey89]

Dear all,



Olympus is NOT stupid. The CEO is old but not senile. He would not create a product to kill another. This I am so sure about Olympus. The E-Business people are not crazy. There will be obvious differences when the camera is out... so let's wait for it.
.

:sweatsm:

 

[microcosm]

:sweatsm:

:bsmilie: Spidey, you very naughty ah... :nono:

:kok:

 

[mactigasuku]

....... Chill everyone. Getting so heated up is not what I enjoy seeing the people in here do.

No beer-mah .....how to chill out :dunno: Ok-la ... kopi also can .... :bsmilie:

Anyway, interesting discussion so far ... i think ....

Just a query here ... anyone knows what this means " ..In-Body AF Focus Adjustment lets you use the AF Sensor (when set to Hybrid AF or AF Sensor) to fine-adjust the focusing position to a range of +/- 20 steps." From here.

 

[srinivasanj]

Let us suspend or cool down on the discussion on the difference

Chill everyone. Getting so heated up is not what I enjoy seeing the people in here do.

Didnt realise the posts were taking up such a tone! :think:

I was trying to more question the marketing strategy and how one would assess the new product in comparison to the existing ones. Part of the reason for this thread, I believe, is to speculate...though I wouldnt be surprised if the same discussion happened after the release as well.

In any case, just to remove the foot off the pedal as far as this discussion goes.......I would take the E-30 over the E-3 because, in my opinion and for my requirements, I feel the 30 offers more than the 3........phew!

 

[mactigasuku]

Heh! It is coming ..... and pretty soon I guess ......

As it is I LOVE my 14-54 ... I am really curious how Oly can supposedly improve the lovely bokeh of this superb portrait lens ....

 

[spidey89]

:bsmilie: Spidey, you very naughty ah... :nono:

:kok:

:cry: i want to be good,than stanta claus can bring present,better will be miss claus

Heh! It is coming ..... and pretty soon I guess ......

As it is I LOVE my 14-54 ... I am really curious how Oly can supposedly improve the lovely bokeh of this superb portrait lens ....

same here...i wonder what are the improvements in them

 

[drakon09]

That is my question. Why is this a mid range and the E3 top of the range? Where is the E3 in comparison to the E30? Pardon me if this is getting a bit long in the tooth.

Simple.

Come this time next year, the E-3 wouldn't be the top of the range anymore. Oly at least has the common sense NOT to intentionally cripple the E-30. It also indicates that at the point when the E-30 is released, Oly is unconcerned that it'll eat into E-3 sales; no more E-3s would be produced and the E-3 components would be now E-30 components.

So where is the comparison between the E-30 and E-3 you ask? The E-30 IS effectively a non-weatherproofed E-3. Digital cameras are basically sophisticated electronics with lenses, and by Moore's Law, electronics of the current day would be made obsolete by the next 18 to 24 months. In that perspective, the E-3 will soon be obsolete.

But it will still take good pictures, just like the E-30 will, come 2011.

 

[drakon09]

same here...i wonder what are the improvements in them :think:

Circular aperture blades and a micro-motor to assist contrast-based AF.

Everything else would be the same as the old 14-54mm.

 

[spidey89]

Circular aperture blades and a micro-motor to assist contrast-based AF.

Everything else would be the same as the old 14-54mm.

yea,jus saw it,kinda sad,was hoping for something like SWD,than again,it will eat into 12-60 profits :bsmilie:

 

[srinivasanj]

Simple....

Word.

 

[drakon09]

yea,jus saw it,kinda sad,was hoping for something like SWD,than again,it will eat into 12-60 profits :bsmilie:

I think we're beginning to see two separate lines of lenses.

1. Contrast AF-capable lenses to support micro 4/3 and features such as face detection.
2. SWD lenses to support 4/3.

This would help keep the line between 4/3 and micro 4/3 clear and distinct. Of course this smacks of intentional crippling, but hey... ;p

 

[spidey89]

I think we're beginning to see two separate lines of lenses.

1. Contrast AF-capable lenses to support micro 4/3 and features such as face detection.
2. SWD lenses to support 4/3.

This would help keep the line between 4/3 and micro 4/3 clear and distinct. Of course this smacks of intentional crippling, but hey... ;p

yea,have to agree with that :bsmilie:

 

[olymac]

Simple.

....... where is the comparison between the E-30 and E-3 you ask? The E-30 IS effectively a non-weatherproofed E-3. Digital cameras are basically sophisticated electronics with lenses, and by Moore's Law, electronics of the current day would be made obsolete by the next 18 to 24 months. In that perspective, the E-3 will soon be obsolete......

1. The E30's body is different from the E3's.
2. The E30's sensor is superior to the E3's.
3. The E30's engine is Truepic III+ whereas the E3's is Truepic III.
4. The E30 is capable of Contrast AF and hence FD and better LV performance.
5. The E30's AF is enhanced with the ability for individual fine adjustment.
6. Multiple Exposure.
7. The E30 has a bigger and ?better LCD.
8. The E30 has a different OVF to that in the E3.
9. The E30's IS is also superior to that of the E3.

Simply put, the E30 is a different dSLR from the E3.

Ohh ... btw, by Moore's Law the E3 is already obsolete

 

[drakon09]

1. The E30's body is different from the E3's.
2. The E30's sensor is superior to the E3's.
3. The E30's engine is Truepic III+ whereas the E3's is Truepic III.
4. The E30 is capable of Contrast AF and hence FD and better LV performance.
5. The E30's AF is enhanced with the ability for individual fine adjustment.
6. Multiple Exposure.
7. The E30 has a bigger and ?better LCD.
8. The E30 has a different OVF to that in the E3.
9. The E30's IS is also superior to that of the E3.

Simply put, the E30 is a different dSLR from the E3.

Ohh ... btw, by Moore's Law the E3 is already obsolete

Whatever...

 

[dorts]

I think we will see three distinct categories, like the other brands, when the next E-X is announced.

Entry-level : E-410/E-510/E-420/E-520 (D40/D60)
Mid-range/Semi-pro: E-30/E-XX (D80/D90)
Pro: E-3/E-X (D3)

I believe the E-30 is suppose to sort of "take over" the place of the E-3, and the next E-X will be another grade higher, to compete with D3/future Dx. :dunno:

 

[olymac]

I think we're beginning to see two separate lines of lenses.

1. Contrast AF-capable lenses to support micro 4/3 and features such as face detection.
2. SWD lenses to support 4/3.

This would help keep the line between 4/3 and micro 4/3 clear and distinct. Of course this smacks of intentional crippling, but hey... ;p

IMHO the micro 4/3 and 4/3 lenses are differentiated from design ground up. Check the fundamental reasons why micro 4/3 came into being. As it is I doubt the 4/3 system can take ALL micro 4/3 lenses but not the other way round because of the physical limitations of the mirror box and need to keep a shorter flange as well as the need for telecentricity.

SWD is just a "motor" innovation. Doesn't exist for Panny. Or they will call it something different. E.g. USM and HSM for other manufacturers. You can certainly have SWD lenses for ANY line, 4/3, m4/3 or non-4/3.

Contrast AF is at the level of the main sensor so the lenses need to be able to "talk" and "take orders" from the main sensor. I don't think it is a deciding factor in differentiating lenses, e.g. for PannyLeicas.

For Oly there is distinct THREE lines, SHG, HG and ZD. And I think they differentiate along IQ, performance and construction differences rather than ability to contrast AF ......

just my 2 cents ......

 

[egnaro]

I think we will see three distinct categories, like the other brands, when the next E-X is announced.

Entry-level : E-410/E-510/E-420/E-520 (D40/D60)
Mid-range/Semi-pro: E-30/E-XX (D80/D90)
Pro: E-3/E-X (D3)

I believe the E-30 is suppose to sort of "take over" the place of the E-3, and the next E-X will be another grade higher, to compete with D3/future Dx. :dunno:

Just my own suggestion, I think we shd'nt compare E3 with D3 or even new E3 replacement body with D3, reason being D3 is a FF body.

Maybe right now E3 shd compare with D300. next new E3 replacement shd compare with D300 replacement?

Btw I dun think D700 is replacing D300.

what u guys think? btw I may not be right in such comparison.

 

[drakon09]

Just my own suggestion, I think we shd'nt compare E3 with D3 or even new E3 replacement body with D3, reason being D3 is a FF body.

Maybe right now E3 shd compare with D300. next new E3 replacement shd compare with D300 replacement?

Btw I dun think D700 is replacing D300.

what u guys think? btw I may not be right in such comparison.

dorts isn't trying to compare the E-3 with the D-3, he's just giving his opinion on Oly's product lines and is using Nikon's product line for illustration.