Why choose Olympus DSLR over other brands??

[OlyFlyer]

Huh?? You want something else instead??

Plastic, I think the poor guy means 'never been happier since then'. At least that's how I read it.

Anyway, if I read between your lines, maybe I should give up my dream about one day getting a Nikon, and should instead wait for the E-1 successor. Definitly would save me a huge amount of money, since I could reuse my old lenses with that also, unless Oly changes from fourthird to something new. Hopefully, Oly leavs that design miss of having all settings displayed on the left side of the viewfinder. I don't understand how the designer team thought. If right eye is used for focus, which normally is the case, then it is crazy to have settings displayed on the right side, since the right eye is looking leftwards. Simple fact of ergonomy which should be well known for a camera manufacturer.

I think there are downsides of Oly also, like I don't understand why there is no wire remote for the E-500. How much did they save in leaving that out? 5 cent? They should have thrown out the IR-remote and just fit a simple plug connected to the release button instead. Why using a special USB/video combined contact? To save 10 cent? Why not having an external power contact? To save an other few cents? Other than that and a few other minor issues, I think I will be very happy with my E-500 as my first digital camera.

 

[Zeke]

Huh?? You want something else instead??

hah...my bad...never been happier :sweatsm:

 

[plastic]

Sorry Zeke, I was being cheeky... :bsmilie:

 

[ch5800]

Plastic, that's a very indepth sharing session.

Yes I read somewhere that back in those day, Leica feels being challenged by Oly
in lens quality. Althought they drop their ball on the SLR business due to AF, Oly
has been top notch on lens technology all these years.

Even 4/3 lens is limited but are designed with the sensor size to give you the best match
E.g:
More Pro Killer combo 1, 11-22,14-54,50,50-200mm
Less Pro Killer combo 2, (11-22),14-45,35,45-150
is really enough to produce "Killer" photos.

And your last statement is truth to the bone.
(Only problem with Oly is at the highest grade, they cannot enjoy scale of economy
like N and C)

To me Oly is some what like Mac.

Interesting to see that you guys consider Olympus a cheaper solution to Nikon and Canon. I see Olympus as "affordable Leica" (High Grade and Super High Grade) but definitely MORE expensive than the Canon and Nikon lenses. Yeah, you can bitch and whine about the prosumer cameras. But what about the E-1? And the coming E-whatever (they say Photokina 2006 announcement). But the thing is, among the crop of Japanese lenses, Olympus far surpasses every one made by Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Minolta/Konica, etc. I know this claim is subjective, just like some like Carl Zeiss Planar and some Tessar and some Leica M series, but I am comparing lenses to the German grades, and believe me, Olympus is the only Japanese lens maker who can hold water again the German throughbreds.

....

Olympus is definitely NOT cheap, but truly a bang for the buck.

 

[VR Man]

To me Oly is some what like Mac.

I 2nd that :thumbsup:

So Canon = Dell and Nikon = HP/Compaq?

Pentax = Amiga?

Hasselblad = SGI?

Sinar = Cray Supercomputers?

 

[Hacker]

Olympians, please keep coming...I want to know more about the application of this brand on specific application, such as nature, bird, sports etc...are the bodies and lenses really comparable to the big boys?

The answer is yes, and it will cost you less (generally). I switched from film to digital a few months back and was hunting for the brand to buy and build a system. Oly won my heart because of the sharpness, the build quality and the colors.

The only thing I do not like is the cost of the Pro Grade lenses. It costs much more than C/N, but the build quality is there. The number of lenses are limited, but sufficient, though I would love to have a few more lenses in my collection which Oly does not make.

 

[student]

I use an Olympus E1 with the 14-53 lens.

No other lenses because this one lens is sufficient for 95% of the kind of images I make.

What do I like about it?

The colors. I love it.

But I do not agree with some of the comments made by several people.

For one, the size of the sensor immediately puts a lot of limitations on image quality.

For sharpness and overall quality, with lenses and camera combined, my E1 trails far, far behind the Canon 1Ds with the L-lenses and the Leica DMR with unparalleled Leica glass. The L lenses are also not in the class of the Leica. The latter equipments are simply in a different class! But of course, they also cost hell a lot of money!

For taking into consideration my needs, and my aversion to spending money on digital stuff, the E1, for me, was a very good compromise.

 

[jamestyemk]

I use an Olympus E1 with the 14-54 lens.

No other lenses because this one lens is sufficient for 95% of the kind of images I make.

What do I like about it?

The colors. I love it.

But I do not agree with some of the comments made by several people.

For one, the size of the sensor immediately puts a lot of limitations on image quality.

For sharpness and overall quality, with lenses and camera combined, my E1 trails far, far behind the Canon 1Ds with the L-lenses and the Leica DMR with unparalleled Leica glass. The L lenses are also not in the class of the Leica. The latter equipments are simply in a different class! But of course, they also cost hell a lot of money!

For taking into consideration my needs, and my aversion to spending money on digital stuff, the E1, for me, was a very good compromise.

I had been a Canon user, and still is. Olympus was an impulse buy 5 years ago with E-10. Mesmerised by its colour and usability (35-140 F2.0 lens with macro!).
Another impulse buy came along with E-300. And later, E-1.

I use both Canon and Olympus systems for different occasions. For events where I need fast reaction, Canon speedier focusing is helpful.

For 'serious' shoots such as portraits, macros, and slower pace events like awards ceremony, Olympus comes in. Not that Canon can't handle these, but the rich Oly colour looks better for these shots.

 

[mpenza]

Olympus lenses are really good value for money and not expensive at all if you compare apple for apple. The 2 kit lenses are superb, especially the 40-150mm and are almost L-lens quality. I say this because they beat my Canon EF 28-135mm IS and 75-300mm IS lenses hands-down in sharpness and image quality despite the fact that the Canon lenses cost twice as much and has IS.

The reason why the 2 Canon lenses are expensive is because of IS. They would have been much cheaper without IS.

That said, I must say Olympus did a good job with their ZD lenses Would have been an Olympus DSLR user if they released their "cheaper" DSLRs earlier.

 

[tomcat]

The reason why the 2 Canon lenses are expensive is because of IS. They would have been much cheaper without IS.

That said, I must say Olympus did a good job with their ZD lenses Would have been an Olympus DSLR user if they released their "cheaper" DSLRs earlier.

That's true. Without IS, these lenses would probably cost the same as the Oly kit lenses around $400+. That would still make them poor value for money since the Oly kit lenses have better colour, contrast and sharpness. Goes to show that IS is no panacea for image quality if the optical quality of the glass is not up to par in the first place.

 

[mpenza]

btw, are the color, contrast and sharpness partly due to the in-camera processing as well? Even the same lens used on different camera with different settings could have different colors, contrast and apparent sharpness.

 

[tomcat]

I think some of these problems could be partially corrected for during in-camera processing and post-processing. But I have used these 2 Canon lenses with my D60, 10D and 20D and the images obtained all have the similar kind of image quality ie low constrast, softness and bland colours.

So either Canon Digic I & II in-camera processing is not up to par or the optical quality of these lenses is the cause. I tend to think that the optical quality of these lenses 'cannot make it' in this case since I could get very satisfactorily images from my Canon EF 50mm f/1.8, Sigma 50mm EX and 105mm EX lenses on all my Canon DSLRs so much so that I am always using them instead of the 2 IS lenses.

 

[ch5800]

Sounds like "sniper" vs "machine gun"

I use both Canon and Olympus systems for different occasions. For events where I need fast reaction, Canon speedier focusing is helpful.

For 'serious' shoots such as portraits, macros, and slower pace events like awards ceremony, Olympus comes in. Not that Canon can't handle these, but the rich Oly colour looks better for these shots.

 

[plastic]

I am wondering if you guys have really used manual focusing on your Oly? The more I practise, the faster it becomes to get the focusing right... its getting more and more fun to manually focus...

 

[OlyFlyer]

I am wondering if you guys have really used manual focusing on your Oly? The more I practise, the faster it becomes to get the focusing right... its getting more and more fun to manually focus...

Yes, in spite of E-500 drawback on focusing plate. Autofocus is not very fast :thumbsd: (understatment) in bad lighting without the AF assist, which is just an irritating multiple flash, so I turned it off. AF might take forever, so I adjust manually when needed.

 

[VR Man]

I am wondering if you guys have really used manual focusing on your Oly? The more I practise, the faster it becomes to get the focusing right... its getting more and more fun to manually focus...

I use my E-1 like an FM2

 

[ch5800]

Do you have the FS-2 on your E1?

Or anyone know whether is it difficult to replace the original screen with
the grid FS-2?

I use my E-1 like an FM2

 

[nightpiper]

i have recently bot the FS-2 for my E1. the replacement is really easy, there's instructions written with the screen. absolutely no worries. the FS-2 grid is really nice.

 

[VR Man]

Do you have the FS-2 on your E1?

Or anyone know whether is it difficult to replace the original screen with
the grid FS-2?

I ordered an FS-2 and EP-2 from the Oly studio showroom 2 weeks ago. It arrived today.

FS-2 is the focusing screen with grid lines.
EP-2 is the eye cup.

Non of the camera shops keep stock anymore, I guess because the E-1 is discountinued. The other camera stores would have a 1-2 week waiting period while the SG Oly agent brings it in. I think the agent are the same guys that run the Oly showroom.

The Oly studio pricing is the most expensive but only by a few dollars and their technician would install the FS-2 for me FOC. I take it as buying a peace of mind.

Let you guys know the pricing later.

 

[seewhy]

Doesn't the smaller sensor size create some disadvantages, eg focal length will not be as wide although may be better for longer focal length usage, or reduce image quality (reason for having full frame sensor)?