Olympus E510 - Functional gap to D40x and XTi?

Grainbelt

I'm looking at purchasing my first DSLR, and the feature set of the E510 is stunning. With sensor shift IS, the two-lens kit has an IS range of 28-300mm. This is impossible to achieve in any other brand for less than $1000, new.

35mm/1.4 lens would cover the fast prime requirement. Wide zooms and macros are also available. Flashes, battery packs, etc are also widespread. As an amateur, I struggle to see how Nikon and Canon can sell at the same price point, or higher, especially given the widespread disdain for the Canon kit lenses.

Any words of wisdom here? Happy Olympus owners?

hamster

I can't speak to the Canon or Nikon, but I have been using Olympus SLR's for 15 years. I have the E-500, the predecessor of the 510, and both the kit lenses (although I have purchased 4 more lenses since I got the E-500). The kit lenses are pretty nice. You will hear that Olympus higher ISO noise is unacceptable. I rarely shoot over ISO 400 (and don't need to), and even then it's a little too noisy. This is in part due to the size of the 4/3rds sensor.

Anyway, I'm pretty happy with Olympus and their range of lenses. I guess it all depends on what you want to shoot. I shoot a wide range of subjects (see my smugmug if you want to see some samples) and I have never wished for a different brand of camera. I recently got the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, which is the fastest lens available for Oly (i believe) and it's spectacular.

Good luck with your choice!

jtfrazer

Hi Grainbelt,

I'm a happy E-510 user. I started with the E-500 and went to the E-510 a few months ago. The kit lenses work very well for the price of the camera and the in-body image stabilization is a real bonus. I recently added the 70-300mm lens for an effective reach of 600mm. I highly recommend the E-510.

ziggy53

A digital SLR (dSLR) is a simply a photographic tool. To make it work requires lenses and memory (at a minimum).

The lens choices are functionally at least as important, and in many cases more important, as the camera body choice.

Since you are purchasing a dSLR, you will be setting up a camera "system" and, with a few exceptions, system lenses and accessories are either not interchangeable or may not be preferable to interchange. Third party lenses, Tamron, Sigma and Tokina primarily, may or may not be available in the type or quality that you need as well.

Do consider your current and planned needs carefully when selecting a new system. Price alone may not be the best determinant.

While the Olympus camera you mention may seem like a tremendous deal because of the low initial price, if it doesn't do what you want it to, it will not result in a tremendous value over time.

Look especially carefully at the lenses in question. Are users generally happy with the results or do they leave the user wanting more and better quality? While in-camera I.S. systems are intriguing, would faster aperture lenses be a better solution overall?

Olympus has some extraordinarily good lenses, but I assure you that the best in the Olympus line are not cheap.

Some Olympus lenses are reviewed here:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html#olympus

I encourage you to look at all the components of the system, and that should also include electronic flashes because many times you are better off creating your own light instead of accepting whatever is available.

Feel free to ask questions as you learn the many options available.

Do also look at Pentax as they have better support of their older lenses than any other manufacturer. Both the Pentax K10D and the K100D have I.S. systems on board, and Pentax glass compares well with all of the major manufacturers, including Olympus.

Grainbelt

All good points. It still seems odd to me that the XTi and D40 command a premium with an identical feature set, but I understand the system vs. unit purchase issues.

The most likely result is that I won't buy until spring or summer, and continue to work with the S5 IS for some time. I'm flash shopping, and will pick up a 430 EX when I find a good price on one.

I would very much like to see the XTi replacement announced, as I can see myself going that direction eventually.

BikePilot

Also, I'd recomend trying all the cameras in a store as some feel a lot better in my hands than others. Some of the olympus models are really small and sorta hard for me to get a grip on and the XT/XTi is also too small for comfort for me. Also, with a sorta heavy lens the XTi made some disconcerting creaking noises when I picked it up by the handgrip with one hand. Of all the cameras I tried I liked the canon 40d/5d (the bodies are very similar) the best with the pentax k10d a close second. I didn't try any nikons, but tried all the current canon offerings from the 5d down, a couple of olymps models and the k10d. Of course this sort of preference will vary a lot from person to person. My wife really likes the XT and couldn't stand the feel of the bigger canons. The K10d is priced similarly to the XTi but in terms of fit and finish is much closer to a 40d imho. Of course the selection of lenses is smaller, it doesn't have live view and its burst is slower, but it does have supposedly better weatherproofing and built in IS.

swintonphoto

I am a happy owner of 2 E500's, and would recommend the E510 to anyone. I have been using my brother-in-laws E510 this week, and it is great. The sensor shift is nice.
In regards to the noise - I use 800 and 1600 iso images all the time from my 500. If you properly expose they look great. Plus, I ran some tests printing them off, and the noise people see on computer screens dont show up in print nearly as much.

I would endorse the E510 to anyone. It is well built, has a zillion features, and the kit lenses are amazingly compact. If you want to see some of my pics, go to my art site: jswinton.smugmug.com
The pictures from England are all with my E-500s. All shot at ISO 400+.
Good luck!

marlof

ziggy53 wrote:

Olympus has some extraordinarily good lenses, but I assure you that the best in the Olympus line are not cheap.

As always a thoughtful response, Ziggy. Although you're right that the best in the Olympus line up (the top pro lenses) are quite expensive, the middle line (the pro lenses) are actually not that expensive. Especially the optically very good 14-54 2.8-3.5 (35mm FOV of 28-108), that sells for little over $400.

As an Olympus owner (the E-1 and E-3), I like the E-system since I don't go out for photography reasons alone, I carry my camera everywhere I go. Having a dust and watersealed body and lens lineup, where I can go from 28-400 mm in two fastish lenses that don't weigh a ton is very helpful to me.

But I am well aware that I'm just a hobbyist. If I'd be planning my professional future around photography, especially in the wedding business, I would probably not choose the E-system. The Canon and Nikon systems have a little more to choose from when it comes to that, including the niceties that full frame gives you.

But as allround cameras, the E-system can compete with all other brands out there, especially now the system lineup is more and more expanding and improving, with more stuff coming next year.

Internaut

I've been using the E-510 and its two kit lenses for the past few months. Pretty much everything has been covered above so I'll just add a few random comments:

- Noise: Olympus have done a lot to close the gap with Canon and Nikon to the extent that it probably shouldn't matter to most users (and the Olympus approach to noise management is flexible).

- IS: I've found the IS to be very effective. A recent firmware upgrade has further improved this.

- Usability: I don't regard the E-510 as a camera for beginners. If you're already used to shooting RAW and using the manual or semi automatic exposure modes of the camera, the E-510 produces results on par with the competition. If it's JPEG straight out of the camera that you want then I prefer the output from my D40.

- Kit lens: Watch out for lens barrel distortion at the wide end.

Brascole

Ziggy makes a compelling analysis of the true cost of the system. I had the 510 for a short period of time. Rented for test purposes as I was curious about the in body IS which is intriguing. If I were to go with an Oly it would be the E3. Back to the 510 and a nice camera it is and if you stay with the low end lenses than you'd be happy. If you add the better glass and you will want to, then here is what your lookig foward to. My choices:

12-60 $950
35-100 $1950
50-200 $1199 or 70-300 $399
50 $425
Wide ?

Because the 510 has IS you could switch out to the Sigma 50-500 a wopping 100-1000 FL. I have this for my Canon 20D and it's not that bad $999.

Get the body only because the kit lenses supplied are like the Canon and Nikon kit lenses, worthless. Body only $550 (on sale all over) with the two lens combo $750 (on sale). Camera bodies come and go but the lenses will always give you a better return on resale especially if it's good glass.

Ditch the idea of the speedlite untill you decide on the system your going with.

Don't feel alone we have all gone thru this. I have an old Oly C770UZ and bought a underwater housing and now I use it for watersports. My Canon gear well I kept certain lenses for the particular style of shooting I will do with it. I just got the D300 and I'm buying three lenses for the type of shooting I will use it for. And I still have my "Robert The Robot", nothing goes to waste in my home :ivar

Good Luck

DoctorIt

Lot of talk about lenses here, and not much about what I see as a pretty inferior sensor. Nevermind the noise issues at higher ISO, just look at the ISO 100 sample images on this page, compared to 400D and D40x, the E-510 is the hands down worst quality. Sharpness, noise, color balance, contrast, in all cases, it's the loser. What gives?

marlof

DoctorIt wrote:

look at the ISO 100 sample images on this page,

On that page they compare with settings which are not that great on the E-510. On page 17 that you quote:

Olympus E-510: Default Parameters (Normal), High ISO NR (Normal), JPEG Large / Fine

On page 18, the following page:

The best compromise we found was that from ISO 100 to 400 you could get away with turning the Noise Filter Off and setting Sharpness to -2 (right hand image below).

Later on they compare the E-510 with other cameras while using both the standard settings and the optimal settings. Things improve with the better settings, even when the camera still has its downsides (sharp transitions with highlights for example).

DoctorIt

marlof wrote:

On that page they compare with settings which are not that great.

Isn't it a bit of a shame that standard settings are so poor? That to even just come close to competing with Nikon and Canon, special adjustments/parameters have to be made? Especially for a camera geared towards the more casual shooter who probably has no idea what "image-processing parameters" are.

I guess I'm just commenting here because I want to like the Oly, sound feature set, great design/ergos... but in the end, it's about the images. Take the three cameras out of the box and the Oly is at a distinct and consistent disadvantage when it comes to final results.

marlof

DoctorIt wrote:

Isn't it a bit of a shame that standard settings are so poor?

Yup, that's quite poor judgement. I think that Olympus and Panasonic listened too much to people complaining about noise, meaning they have too much filtering (and compensating (?) by extra sharpening) going on out of the box. At least it's not as bad as the total smearing happening in some other (consumer) cameras, but that's still not to say that it's a good thing. The results you found plainly show that.

DoctorIt wrote:

Take the three cameras out of the box and the Oly is at a distinct and consistent disadvantage when it comes to final results.

I don't know, I still hope that the kit lenses that usually come with this kind of cameras make a difference: the Olympus ones are very good compared to other kit lenses. Hopefully that compensates a bit. But still, it's an error in my opinion shipping the camera with these standard settings. They should ship with the settings Dpreview found to be much better.

Brascole

marlof wrote:

Yup, that's quite poor judgement. I think that Olympus and Panasonic listened too much to people complaining about noise, meaning they have too much filtering (and compensating (?) by extra sharpening) going on out of the box. At least it's not as bad as the total smearing happening in some other (consumer) cameras, but that's still not to say that it's a good thing. The results you found plainly show that.



I don't know, I still hope that the kit lenses that usually come with this kind of cameras make a difference: the Olympus ones are very good compared to other kit lenses. Hopefully that compensates a bit. But still, it's an error in my opinion shipping the camera with these standard settings. They should ship with the settings Dpreview found to be much better.

Don't hold your breath. There cheap plastick lens and I would rate them fair. My point is why even get them. Put the $200 plus savings for body only in the 12-60 SWD or even 70-300 SWD. TJMO

Grainbelt

re: the sensor: I read some reviews and noted that after some settings were adjusted, the results were quite good. I could do that.

Regarding kit lenses. Something strikes me as odd here.

1. My S5 IS, filters, adapter, etc: $500
2. XTi, D40x, E510, kit lenses, bag, UV filters, etc: $1000
3. Above body, couple of 'good' lenses: $2000+

But where is the image quality jump? I would think the jump to SLR, even with a kit lens, would be a pretty significant move for a n00b like me. I don't disagree, based only on viewing the results here, that better glass makes for a better picture.

Dropping an extra grand or three on lenses down the road might make sense, depending on how involved I get. Dismissing kit lenses altogether and suggesting that $2k plus is the 'entry fee' to dSLR photography seems a bit short sighted, does it not?

MarkR

Grainbelt wrote:

re: the sensor: I read some reviews and noted that after some settings were adjusted, the results were quite good. I could do that.

Regarding kit lenses. Something strikes me as odd here.

1. My S5 IS, filters, adapter, etc: $500
2. XTi, D40x, E510, kit lenses, bag, UV filters, etc: $1000
3. Above body, couple of 'good' lenses: $2000+

But where is the image quality jump? I would think the jump to SLR, even with a kit lens, would be a pretty significant move for a n00b like me. I don't disagree, based only on viewing the results here, that better glass makes for a better picture.

Dropping an extra grand or three on lenses down the road might make sense, depending on how involved I get. Dismissing kit lenses altogether and suggesting that $2k plus is the 'entry fee' to dSLR photography seems a bit short sighted, does it not?

There's a lot of FUD that goes on about kit lenses. Yes, they tend to be cheap, and generally not highly regarded by those who spend $$$ for better glass. OTOH the way some people talk you'd think they were made of crushed glass, rusted springs, and veneral disease.

The reality is that you can take perfectly good pictures with a kit lens, and no gallery is going to refuse to show your work because they checked your EXIF and saw you used a kit.*

I view a kit lens as an excellent stepping stone. Shoot with one for a while and you might say, "this is ok, but what I really want is ..." faster glass, less distortion, less vignetting, macro capability, whatever.

Oly's got a good reputation for their glass. Actually, all the manufacturers have a good reputation regarding their glass. I would be moderately concerned about the scope of lenses available for it, but I think at this point they and Sigma have most of their bases covered.

*I may be wrong about this. Maybe gallery owners exclusively check EXIF data and automatically exclude kit lenses ... but I doubt it!

anwmn1

I think whenever these discussions arise there are disconnects on many levels. Many of you that comment have significantly more knowledge in the technical aspects of photography and often the availability to spend significantly more money on equipment.

For people without this knowledge and disposable income this choice is significantly more difficult.

Here is the advice I give anyone that asks about making the transition to DSLR-

1. What are you willing to pay? Once that is established find all the cameras that fit into the price range and limit your choice to only those. If willing to buy used than obviously more options open up.

2. What are you shooting and why? If someone is looking to get a dslr primarily for family functions & vacations their thought track is different than someone looking to shoot bands, auto racing, or someone looking to enter into photography as a business.

3. Do you have any old film cameras with interchangeable lenses? If someone has Canon, Olympus, or Nikon lenses I often encourage them to stay with the same system if the lenses can be used on the DSLR. This immediately gives them more glass without any extra costs.

4. Go see and hold all the cameras! Go through the camera menus and functions. Your going to be holding the camera for long periods of time and have to learn the functions- this needs to feel right to you. If the counter person tells you brand is significantly better than the other- ignore them! All of the top brands are good and all have positive and negative features.

My jump to dslr was to get a camera for family events and vacations because I was tired of dragging the film cameras and changing film. I had a very small price point I was working with. I went with Olympus because I was getting 2 kit lenses instead of only one with Nikon & Canon, but more importantly the E-500 felt better in my hand and I liked the menu layout and astetics. I have since added higher quality lenses to improve image quality but I have personally blown a photo up to 30x40 that was taken with one of my kit lenses and it is sharp and crisp.

I have seen the limitations in high iso but have also seen the difference in pictures I get compared to my friends that have the xti and other comparable cameras. If I had more disposable income may I have chosen something else? Sure- but know that Olympus has continued to add lenses and a new pro model camera, E-3, I believe I will stay with this brand no matter what. It works for me and that is what matters for me.

Who cares what the camera takes in Auto mode- once anyone gets a dslr and shoots for a while they switch to shooting partial or full manual anyways.

Purchase the camera that works for what you want to shoot and for what you want to spend.

Best of luck

DoctorIt

anwmn1 wrote:

Who cares what the camera takes in Auto mode- once anyone gets a dslr and shoots for a while they switch to shooting partial or full manual anyways.

Wait a second... switching the mode has no effect on image processing parameters, if that's what you're referring to.

I do agree with you on most points, however, I still go back to my argument that out of the box, at essentially the same price range, all with "kit" lenses, the Oly, with its sensor, takes inferior photos.

I keep stressing that point because this conversation keeps heading towards lenses. Something the entry level shooter should know about, but not get hung up on.

BikePilot

For about the same money the pentax k10d ($529 after rebate at amazon right now) gives you the IS that the e510 has, but adds a larger sensor, better image quality and weather proofing. You don't get live view, but imho live view as implemented on digi slr's at the moment isn't of much use (just imho, if it matters to you then the e510 is the only real option in that price range). Anyhow, I'm also looking to buy my first dslr (I've been shooting with my wife's) and I'm personally down to either the k10d or a 20d or 30d (40d is nice, but out of my price range). In the end I think all these cameras are a heck of a lot better than I am and ergonomics/comfort and convenience are probably as important a factors as any.


have fun

MarkR

DoctorIt wrote:

Wait a second... switching the mode has no effect on image processing parameters, if that's what you're referring to.

I do agree with you on most points, however, I still go back to my argument that out of the box, at essentially the same price range, all with "kit" lenses, the Oly, with its sensor, takes inferior photos.

I keep stressing that point because this conversation keeps heading towards lenses. Something the entry level shooter should know about, but not get hung up on.

I don't think the Oly takes inferior photos, and neither does dpreview.com -- check out their conclusions. Yes, they did find that the out-of-the-box settings were not optimal, but there are plenty of entry level SLRs of which that could be said. And, "not optimal" != "inferior photos," nor did dpreview try to hide what they found the optimal settings to be.

The Oly has several other things going for it: small size, effective image stabilization, and there was a link floating around somewhere to a study which showed that the Oly had the only worthwhile (i.e. actual effective) sensor dust control system available.

timk519

All this babbling about how good or bad the Canon XT "kit lens" is needs to take into account who'se using the lens and what they're doing with it. I went from a Kodak Easyshare to a Canon XT, and the image quality of the XT right after I got it just blew me away.

That was a year ago, and I still have the kit lens, and it's done a wonderful job for the kind of shooting I do. I've since gotten a 28-135/IS, and a 17-55/2.8 IS, and am looking at more lenses for more specialized work, but I can still see using the stock 17-55 for certain work, particularly when I want to be as un-obtrusive as possible and the lighting's reasonable, which isn't easy to do if the lens you're carrying could double as a police baton.

swintonphoto

Well, people who don't use Olympus cameras like to criticize them. As an Oly owner and user of many years - I LOVE THEM! I successufully own and run a photography studio using two E-500's. I have some great lenses to go along with them. I have been extremely pleased with the quality of the images I get from these cameras. I have also used a Canon 30D and a Nikon D80, and still prefer my E500's. I also prefer the 4x3 dimension to the 2x3. I use to shoot square medium format with film before I made the jump to digital years ago, and feel more comfortable with the 4x3 shape. The 4x3 dimensions are more similar to most prints my clients order (8x10, 11x14, 16x20, etc) than 2x3.
I think we should be careful about criticizing too strongly those cameras we don't personally use. Plus, these critical discussions don't seem as common in the Canon and Nikon threads - In my opinion because people want to convince others to choose what they chose. I feel this way. I like it when others buy Oly because I think it makes me feel more confident about my purchase choice. Nikon and Canon do have a larger share of the market, so, it would be likely more people will want you to go their way. I admit my bias, I just wish others would too.

Maybe I am too sensitive, but as an owner of one of the "other guys" (I think that's what we are officially called here) I often feel like this is how discussions go on this site:

Canikon :beatwaxEveryone else

Can't we all be friends?

ziggy53

swintonphoto wrote:

... I successfully own and run a photography studio using two E-500's. ...

That statement alone is a tremendous testimony to the capability of the cameras and the Olympus system. clap

(... and a pretty good indication of your capabilities as well.)

keepright

Sorry for reopening a thread that seems safely stalemated, but after some consideration, I wanted to add some thoughts.

I'd been using the E-1 for a couple of years when the E-510 came out, and already owned some of the best and most versatile lenses in the system. 35-100 f/2, 7-14, 50 f/2, 14-54, 11-22 -- I was pretty much covered for any need. I still bought the E-510 with the 14-42 lens, and might have bought the 2-lens kit if it was available. The 14-42 doesn't get much use, but it's my lens of choice when I want something smaller, lighter, and less conspicuous. While I'm not sure that the Canon and Nikon 18-55's deserve their reputation -- but look for the new models with IS designed to combat the sensor-shift cameras -- people I trust have said that the Olympus kit lenses are better. Personally, I haven't been disappointed, and the 14-42 has a favourite place in my camera bag.

Grainbelt wrote:

I'm flash shopping, and will pick up a 430 EX when I find a good price on one.

That would be a mistake, unless it's a really good price, like $50. For one thing, it will start to lock you into a system, and generally TTL flashes are very expensive. Save some money and pick up an automatic (non-dedicated) flash from Vivitar or Sunpak instead. Because they don't communicate with the camera's metering system, they can be used with any camera. And because they will encourage you to shoot in manual mode, you'll have fewer obstacles to getting the flash off the camera and creating better light. For the cost of a dedicated flash of the same power as the Sunpak 383, you can get a pair of flashes and some basic radio triggers. In the long run your photography will be significantly better, and who cares about using an f/5.6 kit lens when you're carrying your own sunlight?