[ OFFICIAL RELEASE 2010.09.14 ] - Olympus E-5
- Thread starter headfonz
- Start date
didn't i just post the same info? :bsmilie:
Yes you did. but it could've happened that it didnt get refreshed before i did post mine.
Last edited:
NazgulKing
Senior Member
If they do sell the camera without kit lens, the GH2 might be cheaper. Remember that the kit superzoom lens is worth over a thousand.
I agree,even the 3200 with the noise reduction in camera as well as the 6400 isn't too bad either, but of course, its only last resort than 3200 and 6400 will be used :bsmilie:
Wah, so many pages on this thread already? This young kid here feels old.:sweat:
Haha, I think the photos taken by the E-5 don't do it justice. For one, I can see the improved details, but these photos are either badly exposed or badly metered.
I'm still reserving my opinion on the E-5 until someone actually uses the PRODUCTION model and NOT the PRE production model to make a comparison. Besides, the E-5 has been touted to fully utilize the potential of the SHG lenses.
Can we have someone make the necessary sacrifice please?:sticktong
Haha, I think the photos taken by the E-5 don't do it justice. For one, I can see the improved details, but these photos are either badly exposed or badly metered.
I'm still reserving my opinion on the E-5 until someone actually uses the PRODUCTION model and NOT the PRE production model to make a comparison. Besides, the E-5 has been touted to fully utilize the potential of the SHG lenses.
Can we have someone make the necessary sacrifice please?:sticktong
...
Maybe they already do? Then it should be, they need to hire newer younger more creative minds,hahahahha, What you said makes sense, but the bulk and weight doesn't really bother me if grip is right, the E-3 is lighter than the D200(without grip on the D200 but with grip on the E-3) from what I feel and yet the E-3 feels more comfortable to hold. Even the D3 wasn't very nice to hold despite me enjoying the weight felt by the right arm
...
As strange as it may seem, having used the E-1 + 50-200mm almost constantly in 14 hour days, I don't want to add extra weight because it feels like a perfect package to me. The extra size may not bother me.
Nikon's bodies take a while to feel comfortable, but the D200 is a lousy model, so if the grip isn't right and it falls to the floor, I wouldn't care, though I would protect the D300/D300s, as if it was my E-1. Nikon's designers became so much better with the smaller bodies in the 1980s. Before that, it seemed as though the body was still in the box and they were as difficult to hand hold as medium format. Their models probably made the Mamiya 645 so popular and they were the battle cry for the OM-series' small and light advertising.
Come on man,you're just a year younger than I am,hahahah. When we have a handson session,keep a look out for that, I find some images to be well taken, though most that are available to date are not really so much so to be called nice
I'd like extra size, weight maybe not so much so now thinking about it, especially when you said 14 hours, reminded me of my first and so far only assignment of shooting nearly nonstop from 3 to 1am, not as long as you, but still tiring, I'd like size for easy grip though
Not sure if its D200 problem, I can't remember my experience with a D80, but the D200 and D3 felt weird for me, my Canon EOS 1n feels better
1980s huh... I was born in the final year of the 80s so not really sure what happened then :bsmilie:
Those pictures posted on the internet right now are not supposed to be released for public viewing as they were taken with pre-production set and are not representative and definitive. There are improvement and refinement that need to be done before the first production set roll out of the factory which is scheduled at October.
I don't care about the JPEG files at this point of time. I'd viewed over 300 E-5 ORFs over a computer LCD monitor. Generally, the image quality is a big improvement as compared to E-3. Those pictures were shot with 12-60mm SWD and on factory default settings. To me, ISO 1600 is impressive, 3200 is good.
From the official press release, E-5 is designed to "Maximize the Outstanding Imaging Capability of ZUIKO DIGITAL Lenses". That includes HG and SG lenses as well.
For me, when I shoot with E-3 on RAW format I'd turn off the Noise Filter and set Sharpness to -2.
Last edited:
I believe most everything is based on the N200 body now. That was a huge change from those big, boxy things.
I can hold the E1 + 50-200mm on my fingertips, but anything else, not even close.
*sigh* I dunno if I'll be free then. Seems like me always got no luck for the 4/3rds gatherings! ='(
Those pictures posted on the internet right now are not supposed to be released for public viewing as they were taken with pre-production set and are not representative and definitive. There are improvement and refinement that need to be done before the first production set roll out of the factory which is scheduled at October.
I don't care about the JPEG files at this point of time. I'd viewed over 300 E-5 ORFs over a computer LCD monitor. Generally, the image quality is a big improvement as compared to E-3. Those pictures were shot with 12-60mm SWD and on factory default settings. To me, ISO 1600 is impressive, 3200 is good.
From the official press release, E-5 is designed to "Maximize the Outstanding Imaging Capability of ZUIKO DIGITAL Lenses". That includes HG and SG lenses as well.
For me, when I shoot with E-3 on RAW format I'd turn off the Noise Filter and set Sharpness to -2.
Hmmm... :think:
So, I'm already complaining about chromatic aberration on my 14-54mm MKII. Does that mean I'll complain MORE on the E-5? :bsmilie:
Hahahha, I guess I'll really be tempted to get the 14-35mm by then.
*sigh* I dunno if I'll be free then. Seems like me always got no luck for the 4/3rds gatherings! ='(
Hmmm... :think:
So, I'm already complaining about chromatic aberration on my 14-54mm MKII. Does that mean I'll complain MORE on the E-5? :bsmilie:
Hahahha, I guess I'll really be tempted to get the 14-35mm by then.
wow there really is that much CA in the 14-54??
*sigh* I dunno if I'll be free then. Seems like me always got no luck for the 4/3rds gatherings! ='(
Hmmm... :think:
So, I'm already complaining about chromatic aberration on my 14-54mm MKII. Does that mean I'll complain MORE on the E-5? :bsmilie:
Hahahha, I guess I'll really be tempted to get the 14-35mm by then.
Haha,it would seem so, make time then :bsmilie:, if you're complaining, can always sell to me
But I never really take notice of CA, anyway, 14-35 is out of my budget and would probably the least used lens if I own itwow there really is that much CA in the 14-54??
I haven't seen a problem after 6 years. Compared to the OM-series lenses, there couldn't be much. Still, it doesn't have an ED element in it.
I'm surprise to learn that 14-54mm MK II produced chromatic aberration images. This is one of the best Zuiko Olympus has ever designed and build in HG category. Is it visible, pronounced? Which body have you mounted this lens to?
My dream lens. :lovegrin: Saving very hard to get one...Hahahha, I guess I'll really be tempted to get the 14-35mm by then.
Last edited:
This this is the 3rd time I've seen this :bsmilie:
Its alright,its understandable from this kind of threads :bsmilie:
Similar threads
