why have you bought an olympus?

[nottipiglet]

The part about built better than Canon 450D having a plastic feel,that i strongly agree,when i hold the E-510,it feels solid and nice to hold,the Canon 450D is also solid but feels very plastic and feels like it will break if i hold it too hard

I have used the 450D for quite a few months now. I know different people have different priorities, but the plastic housing is one of the few reasons why I picked the 450D. Plastic is very light. Therefore, the 450D and the 500D are extremely light. Also, as a non-pro, I do not take my camera to extreme environments. So, the weight of the magnesium alloy housing is in fact a liability to me. Plus, the plastic housing of the 450D is very cheap to replace in case of damage (I have checked before).

Also, within the 450D, is a very capable APS-C sensor which performs well in low light.

If the plastic housing is an issue, how about the very capable Nikon D90? That's also a very good camera.

 

[shaoken]

Why Olympus?
Here's my point of view.

1. Somehow, I don't know why, most shots taken with Oly lenses gives a whiter tone as compared to the other brand of lenses.
In other words, a cool feel.

2. You get better zoom with 2x crop factor. I'm using an Oly 70-300mm lens, which gives 140-600mm on a 4/3 body. This is good for wildlife/bird shots.
For that focal length, I pay only around $500. If you want this focal length from other system, it will costs much more.

3. In-body image stabilizer in Oly bodies (except for older bodies such as E-500).
You save a lot on IS as compared to other brands which is an in-lens IS for most lenses.

Don't know does anyone share the same view as me? :dunno:

 

[spidey89]

Haha,Olympus E-510 is using plastic as well,therefore,it is also light,it's just the feel of it

 

[egnaro]

I mentioned my story somewhere before.. cant remember where and when...

I am a total newbie to DSLR and got zero knowledge abt it!!!

how I make my purchase?

I didnt look at Canikon becuz it is everywhere on the street and everyone is using it... I just not used to be a commoner.

Y not Sony?
before deciding which to go for, I tried Sony system... maybe I tried try on a damage 70-300 lens... which it never get in focus... (dun noe y) as I say I have 0 knowledge of usage as well. that turn me off!!! 2 reason why sony turn me off is the design of the lens, to me it is So UGLY!!! (well this is personal too)

Y not Pentax?
becuz I couldnt find Pentax at that time. My brother who selling camera told me pentax has the similarity of hard to buy.

Y Olympus?
During that time when I purchase Olympus has this E510 twin lens kit at a reasonable price. Design of the camera and lens look far nicer then Sony... (well, that personal too)


another word, IQ is not the main issue for me cuz I dun care at that time. haha

 

[wonglp]

OLY Colours Rock!
was a noob 2 yrs ago (now i'm a learning noob) to dslr when was shopping for one.
had used oly mju 35mm and 3MP digi cam, loved the colors, then upgraded to canon ixus 5 ,the noise and canon colors turned me off as i was taking mainly pics of my newborn then, i couldn't use flash.
did some research on clubsnap and reviews sites and hands on plus some good sales talk by harvey norman sales on oly e410 , so started looking at oly e410, liked the weight, size, colors and the price was not exorbitant with the features then (sswf, live view, small size) not found on similar nikon d40x, canon 400d...din really think abt upgrading lenses then or noise level or focus speed or dof etc, must say i never regret a bit!
I sometimes compare my fren's nikon d90 canon 450d and still prefer oly's colors. tho i must say their low light performance and noise is better than my e410. i can live with that.
2 years down the road, still using my e410, and still OLY Colours rock!

 

[drakon09]

Why?

Less post-processing.

Well, A LOT less post-processing.

 

[Fotophilic]

Why i bought an olympus?

They are the only maker of a good looking interchangable-lens camera body in a compact retro-camera size!

Long live micro 4/3... :devil:

 

[napalmdog]

Why?

Less post-processing.

Well, A LOT less post-processing.

agree. for me its easier to clean up noise than "chasing" for the correct color in post-processing

that's why im unfazed by people putting olympus down because its said to be noisier. admittedly noisy, but still manageable. and with the IQ produced by the Trupic V as seen in EP-1, things are looking better for upcoming bodies

 

[drakon09]

agree. for me its easier to clean up noise than "chasing" for the correct color in post-processing

that's why im unfazed by people putting olympus down because its said to be noisier. admittedly noisy, but still manageable. and with the IQ produced by the Trupic V as seen in EP-1, things are looking better for upcoming bodies

Heh, I normally don't bother about noise reduction unless I'm firing at 1600, and even that is at default mode.

Truth be told, NOBODY (pixel-peepers aside) would pay attention to noise if the image is well-taken.

 

[wire]

Why i bought an olympus?

They are the only maker of a good looking interchangable-lens camera body in a compact retro-camera size!

Long live micro 4/3... :devil:

:think: Exactly my reason!!

Not to mention that I have it with me 95% of the time.

 

[nottipiglet]

The part about built better than Canon 450D having a plastic feel,that i strongly agree,when i hold the E-510,it feels solid and nice to hold,the Canon 450D is also solid but feels very plastic and feels like it will break if i hold it too hard

Why?

Less post-processing.

Well, A LOT less post-processing.

OLY Colours Rock!
was a noob 2 yrs ago (now i'm a learning noob) to dslr when was shopping for one.
had used oly mju 35mm and 3MP digi cam, loved the colors, then upgraded to canon ixus 5 ,the noise and canon colors turned me off as i was taking mainly pics of my newborn then, i couldn't use flash.
did some research on clubsnap and reviews sites and hands on plus some good sales talk by harvey norman sales on oly e410 , so started looking at oly e410, liked the weight, size, colors and the price was not exorbitant with the features then (sswf, live view, small size) not found on similar nikon d40x, canon 400d...din really think abt upgrading lenses then or noise level or focus speed or dof etc, must say i never regret a bit!
I sometimes compare my fren's nikon d90 canon 450d and still prefer oly's colors. tho i must say their low light performance and noise is better than my e410. i can live with that.
2 years down the road, still using my e410, and still OLY Colours rock!

When I look at the E-520, which my friend bought... it has a smaller sensor which affects the picture quality. But it is bigger and heavier than the 450D. I find that a bit difficult to reconcile. To me... I need the image to be captured well, with rich information in RAW format. It's like I have a strong preference for inner beauty?

As for the superb colour and less need for post processing... If you make use of the functions of most better DSLRs these days, you can set the colour output you want the camera to process the images. This colour thing is very subjective. Some people like it more vibrant, while some like it more natural. So, the camera manufacturer just sets the default, which may not be to your liking. But it is tweakable. I can tweak the colour for my 450D... but I choose not to... because I do most of the tweaking in post processing.

I would also like to argue that post processing is a necessary part of making good pictures. In the good old days of our fathers, it cost a bomb to develop pictures because the colour labs do some post processing on your film before they develop the pictures. Photo enthusiasts in the past have their own darkrooms to control the output they want. Nowadays, post processing is so easily done on one's PC. If you want to make nice pictures, I would urge you to spend some time learning the digital workflow, from camera RAW to final output, instead of relying on a tiny on-camera chip to do the dirty work. In my opinion, none of the camera's chips get it right most of the time. The image can almost always be improved. Look... how can a tiny chip take over humans when creative elements are involved? We spend so much money and time on this hobby. Why not spend just a little more and make things right?

Mind you... post processing is not about correcting bad photography. It is about making good pictures better.

 

[drakon09]

I would also like to argue that post processing is a necessary part of making good pictures. In the good old days of our fathers, it cost a bomb to develop pictures because the colour labs do some post processing on your film before they develop the pictures. Photo enthusiasts in the past have their own darkrooms to control the output they want. Nowadays, post processing is so easily done on one's PC. If you want to make nice pictures, I would urge you to spend some time learning the digital workflow, from camera RAW to final output, instead of relying on a tiny on-camera chip to do the dirty work. In my opinion, none of the camera's chips get it right most of the time. The image can almost always be improved. Look... how can a tiny chip take over humans when creative elements are involved? We spend so much money and time on this hobby. Why not spend just a little more and make things right?

True.

But take six hours of shooting, 100+ images, and the dude needs the images tomorrow.

I like my sleep better than my photoshop thankyouverymuch.

 

[nottipiglet]

True.

But take six hours of shooting, 100+ images, and the dude needs the images tomorrow.

I like my sleep better than my photoshop thankyouverymuch.

Everyone has different workflows... but I would recommend people to at least read one good book on Photoshop or Lightroom workflow before forming their opinion. I have read a few... and most recently this one:

http://www.amazon.com/Photoshop-CS4-Workflow-Digital-Photographers/dp/0470381280/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1250227494&sr=8-1

I am an enthusiast, and I don't shoot professionally. So, I don't usually spend 6 hours shooting. But I usually get about 200-500+ frames for each event... like dinners, birthdays, outings. Out of which, I will select between 30-200 of my favourite. I find that I don't lose sleep over post processing. It's very fast. You lose sleep over it because you are prejudiced against it, and never quite mastered the workflow... or your PC needs to be upgraded.

My brother shoots professionally, and I know he spends some time in Lightroom before he sends the pictures over to his clients. He does it even faster than me because he goes through the workflow all the time.

I think the 'dude' who needs the images tomorrow would appreciate it if you would spend some time to process the images before sending them over. My company has hired some of these 'professional' photographers before. They can produce the pictures very fast. However, they never bothered to correct the colour cast, especially indoor tungsten or fluorescent. Tone and/or colour looks like it can be improved with just a bit of work... When we see such work, one wonders if the photographer prefers his sleep over producing good work.

... and it is definitely not true the Oly corrects colour cast better than other brands. My friend with the Oly has this problem... as with all brands of camera. and I can only urge her to do some work with with Photoshop, though I cannot force her. When people say the Oly's colour is better, it is usually for outdoor scenery shots, where the colours appear a bit more vibrant. That's easily achieved during RAW conversion... with very minimal time spent.

 

[boonsong]

Having shot a bit of events with olympus... here is my view, as an event shooter, what to love and not love about the e-3.

To love:
When there is adequate lighting, Olympus is very hard to beat. I love the Jpegs that it can give me.

As for white balance... there is no such thing call perfect AUTO-WHITE BALANCE. For single color cast, most of the time you can avoid it with white balance filters (e.g. zerocs, expodisc..)... nothing in this world can correct multiple color casts within camera. Olympus has the fastest means of setting custom white balance. I have experience with Canon, loan a Sony, and read thr how to set WB in nikon...

Of course... Sony gives u the exact K temperature.... you can set it fast if you working with 2 camera systems. Sony also grabs WB more reliably than an Olympus.
I give the advantage to the E-3 for having 4 presets custom WB that i can save to. I can move from room to room, selecting the preset based on my location... Not sure if other cameras give me this option.

Olympus has the fastest user interface for its flash system compare to Sony's and Canon's. Works really easy for compensation and stuff. This is something other camera makers should emulate.

What's not to love:
The failings of the E-system only happens when you have to shoot indoor exposures of something like ISO800/F4/1/60-80s type of light... E-3 and it predecessors has this color banding issue that occurs when you shoot high iso/slow shutterspeed.. The E-3 focus very badly in low light, even with AF-assist. I have consistent back-focus issues in very poor light... Too be fair, I think the latter cameras don't suffer from this, and the E-P1 looks promising.

You can spend lots of $$$ on the 14-35 F2 and the 35-100F2. I only have experience with the 14-35, and that lens doesn't cut it when it comes to focusing speed (shooting stills or non-action). It hunts like hell especially when the subjects are close. The lens is sharp wide open, true.... but sharp images of moments you didn't manage to capture is as bad as blur images.

Lastly, Olympus supplied softwares are a piece of joke, especially if you work with RAW. They should really learn from Canon when it comes to software--but too bad they have already charge poor users who choose to pay for crappy software like Studio...

 

[Andy AWFoo]

Hi guys,

I am one who uses an Olympus. No point discussing on all the technical aspects as it will not be conclusive. Ultimately it is the picture that you want and so far I think in my humble opinion it is comparable to other brands - otherwise I would not want to commit myself to 2 E3 bodies and a 520 with 300mm f2.8 lens/12-60mm/9-18mm/35mm macro just to name a few. I am not a professional just an ordinary person who loves photography. My humble site is at . You decide!

 

[osocan]

1. I like that it's a "digital" design from the ground up - no legacy or baggage to bring along.

2. I like the colours.

3. I like the SSWF.

 

[drakon09]

Everyone has different workflows... but I would recommend people to at least read one good book on Photoshop or Lightroom workflow before forming their opinion. I have read a few... and most recently this one:

http://www.amazon.com/Photoshop-CS4-Workflow-Digital-Photographers/dp/0470381280/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1250227494&sr=8-1

I am an enthusiast, and I don't shoot professionally. So, I don't usually spend 6 hours shooting. But I usually get about 200-500+ frames for each event... like dinners, birthdays, outings. Out of which, I will select between 30-200 of my favourite. I find that I don't lose sleep over post processing. It's very fast. You lose sleep over it because you are prejudiced against it, and never quite mastered the workflow... or your PC needs to be upgraded.

My brother shoots professionally, and I know he spends some time in Lightroom before he sends the pictures over to his clients. He does it even faster than me because he goes through the workflow all the time.

I think the 'dude' who needs the images tomorrow would appreciate it if you would spend some time to process the images before sending them over. My company has hired some of these 'professional' photographers before. They can produce the pictures very fast. However, they never bothered to correct the colour cast, especially indoor tungsten or fluorescent. Tone and/or colour looks like it can be improved with just a bit of work... When we see such work, one wonders if the photographer prefers his sleep over producing good work.

... and it is definitely not true the Oly corrects colour cast better than other brands. My friend with the Oly has this problem... as with all brands of camera. and I can only urge her to do some work with with Photoshop, though I cannot force her. When people say the Oly's colour is better, it is usually for outdoor scenery shots, where the colours appear a bit more vibrant. That's easily achieved during RAW conversion... with very minimal time spent.

Nope, never had problems with colour cast (psst.. helps if you custom your white balance properly... if your friend has a problem, I urge you to teach her to customise the white balance).

And nope, hardly ever need to Photoshop (really helps if you get it right when you hit the shutter).

And no, I don't use Lightroom (Silkypix works wonderfully for me).

And lastly, the 'dudes' are very happy with what I give them.

As for the photographers your company hired, well, I suggest that you suggest to your company never to hire them again.

 

[napalmdog]

think it all boils down to preference. there is no perfect system, what matters most is how you make the most of it. so if noise bothers a person a lot by all means get a canon/nikon. those of us who prefer good in-cam processing prefer olympus. in the end these are all just tools, it still depends on the photographer how to use it

need proof? here are some images from the pros yung E-system http://olympus-esystem.jp/gallery_e/index.html
never fails to inspire me...

 

[nottipiglet]

Nope, never had problems with colour cast (psst.. helps if you custom your white balance properly... if your friend has a problem, I urge you to teach her to customise the white balance).

And nope, hardly ever need to Photoshop (really helps if you get it right when you hit the shutter).

And no, I don't use Lightroom (Silkypix works wonderfully for me).

And lastly, the 'dudes' are very happy with what I give them.

As for the photographers your company hired, well, I suggest that you suggest to your company never to hire them again.

Customising the colour cast on the camera only gets it close... but no cigar, unfortunately. It really depends on what kind of standard you want to give your clients. Plus customising on camera takes time, and we risk missing those important shots. Why waste time on the field fiddling around the camera when you are supposed to be shooting? If you shoot RAW, you can always do it after... and you are not limited to those fixed colour temperature on the camera's preset. We can put on any colour cast at the comfort of your PC. You are only limited by your ability.

I'm glad the 'dudes' are happy... but I think they can be happier... and if they are happier, then you will get paid more... and you will be happier... but maybe you will be sleeping less. So I don't know. It's up to you.

Plus... if you use Silkypix... then you do post processing. So don't make it sound like you are dependent on the colour your camera gives you. With post processing, you can get to similar colours whichever brand of camera you use.

Of course we never hire those folks that give us unsatisfactory results again.

 

[Curry]

Hi guys,

I am one who uses an Olympus. No point discussing on all the technical aspects as it will not be conclusive. Ultimately it is the picture that you want and so far I think in my humble opinion it is comparable to other brands - otherwise I would not want to commit myself to 2 E3 bodies and a 520 with 300mm f2.8 lens/12-60mm/9-18mm/35mm macro just to name a few. I am not a professional just an ordinary person who loves photography. My humble site is at . You decide!

I agree with you. There will always be fans of either c or n camp - it is indeed true we are into a system and each system has both its merits and weakness. I have seen your flickr, indeed I am inspired to take more pics! :thumbsup::heart: