Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Olympus E-510  (Read 16359 times)
Quentin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1119



WWW
« Reply #20 on: July 03, 2007, 02:58:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
A considered and sensible reply as ever. Stop immediately and go and take pictures of men wearing makup and dresses .... (and enter the Kodak challenge you slacker!)

I will be interested to see if the "I doubt I'll buy an E-P1" comment will stand the test of time if you find you are happy with the fourthirds IQ and when you finally get to fondle one. I don't find the E1 body alone THAT much bigger and heavier than the 510 (its the lenses that do it), however the ergonomics and sheer 'class' of that camera are in a different league. For a few ounces more, the new pro camera will offer everything the 510 will and a lot, lot more.

Right ... got to fix my eyeliner and pop my lipstick on ....
XX
G.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126197\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You are such a tease, Gareth  

Quentin
Logged

Quentin Bargate, ARPS, Author, photographer entrepreneur and senior partner of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2013
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5163


« Reply #21 on: July 04, 2007, 04:26:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I guess my point is I did not think I'd like the 510 as much as I do and I would be interested if Michael had a similar reaction to my own.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126084\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Perhaps you have a point: Michael is perhaps amongst those who expect that part of the trade-off with a smaller format should be a smaller, lighter kit (body with lens), but that previous 4/3 bodies like the E-1 and E-330 did not achieve this. However with recent E system bodies and kit lenses Olympus seems to be addressing this goal, with the E-510 and 14-42 easily the lightest DSLR kit offering in-camera stabilization, where by "in-camera" I include both the in-body and in-lens approaches. (And for those who do not care for in-camera stabilization, the E-410 kits are the lightest so far.)
Logged
John Sheehy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 838


« Reply #22 on: July 04, 2007, 08:49:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I didn't. Its possible its just less prone to dust, as there is not so much as a speck of dust so far. I don't plan on pouring dust in the front of the camera anytime soon, but a German mag did a comparative test where they did just that and the Olympus system worked better than "other brands"
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124852\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I just tested my Canon XTi for dust today.  I last cleaned the sensor in December, and shooting an OOF white wall at f/29 today, I saw no specks or fibers, not even weak ones.

I would say the XTi system works, but your sensor must be free of lubricants.

Out of the factory, something was on or splashed on the sensor, but once I cleaned it thoroughly, nothing has stuck to the sensor.  I've taken about 15000 shots since December, changing lenses on the beach, in the wind in the city, and in the peak of pollen season.
Logged
John Sheehy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 838


« Reply #23 on: July 04, 2007, 09:05:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
My only concerns so far with the comparison images I've seen is that Olympus tends to blow highlights, implying a narrower dynamic range, but this may only be slight sensor sensitivity differences between it and the comparison model (usually a Canon 30D). I'm starting to think that straight comparisons with the exact same exposure settings may be misleading.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125168\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The way I've come to think about noise and sensitivity issues is that in any given camera and ISO, there are two distinct aspects; how much noise there is at various absolute exposure levels, and how far below RAW saturation the "noise floor" is (what the RAW DR is).  The former is most important to me at the camera's highest ISO, where I may be forced to under-expose or at least use a weak absolute exposure.  The latter is most important to me when shooting with lots of light at the lowest ISO, where I am mainly concerned with taking advantage of the DR and have no need for any specific absolute exposure level.
Logged
PeterBCarter
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6



« Reply #24 on: July 14, 2007, 10:53:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm curious to know what kind of weather / water resistance this camera has. For me, one big attraction of the Nikon D200 is its metal body and weather resistance. How does the 510 compare to the Nikon in these respects?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, I have the previous  E-500. I took the camera with me to Tweed Ontario this year, during the May-24 weekend. This is an 'adult camp ground' with lots of dune buggys, rock climbers and monster trucks. In short there was ample amounts of smoke, dust, mud and water. With many lens changes, not even any dust on the sensors. I saw a few with Canon and Nikon and were complaining about the level of dust. I noticed my Olympus was covered in dust when I returned. A simple surface clean and all was fine.


As far as quality, see for yourself...... [a href=\"http://tweed07.blindally.com]http://tweed07.blindally.com[/url]
« Last Edit: July 14, 2007, 10:55:22 PM by PeterBCarter » Logged
BrianS
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #25 on: August 15, 2007, 11:27:32 PM »
ReplyReply

More experienced photographers may not like this post since it lacks any sophisticated analysis, but less experienced users like myself need to know what they are getting in for.

I have had my E510 for over a month, and have been disappointed after moving up from my Canon A620 P&S.  The IQ isnít noticeably better (just bigger pictures).  The Image Stability wonít compensate for my shaky hands.  I get large dark patches, or over exposure when compensating, compared to my friendís xti.  The 14-42 kit lens is not very sharp, and the 40-150 is only sharp fully extended (150mm) Ė which is better than the other way around, for me.  Since the LiveView LCD wonít tilt, you have to crouch down to use it low, so itís even less useful than the dark viewfinder.  Also, the shutter delays for a full second before clicking when using LiveView.   So, manual focusing is almost impossible in many conditions, and AF isnít that dependable, especially in low light.

On the plus side: the body feels great, thereís every shooting option you could ask for, knobs and buttons are well placed (the OK button is a little soft), and of course, itís a DSLR so you can upgrade the lenses.

This is not a bad camera, however, it left me disappointed in several important ways.  I expected better, after all the hype.
Logged
Marsupilami
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 75


« Reply #26 on: August 17, 2007, 01:39:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This is not a bad camera, however, it left me disappointed in several important ways.  I expected better, after all the hype.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133552\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Seems like you have got a "Monday" camera, or an optic not perfect. I have bought the 510 + kit lenses for my wife and also for me when we are hiking and apart from many nice features I wish I had on my Canon 5D, I sometimes wonder if I have a faulty Canon camera or lens, because the picture quality comes so damn close in side by side comparisons. Certainly the 5D still has better DR and better high iso, also the AF is better, but the screen for example is better, more usable on the 510. So certainly not an replacement for my high end Canon gear, but for those walks, hikes, mountain bike tours and for cross country skiing it is an ideal companion. And the picture quality is good, at least good enough also to place good shots to my stock agencies (and these are major ones here in Europe, no microstock).
1100 gramms for the whole package for 28-300 mm incl 70 mm macro 2x lifesize. I can live with some limitations. One tip: try adobe bridge in CS3 for raw files, I get much better results than with the jpg (not sharper, but better tonalty).

Christian
Logged
BrianS
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #27 on: August 25, 2007, 12:41:11 AM »
ReplyReply

I canít stay with this post to answer any questions right away, but I wanted to post some of the quirky things that have happened with Olympus service.

In mid August I emailed Olympus service about image quality concerns.  After no reply for a week, I emailed them again, but got no reply.  Finally, after a lot of experimentation with my E510, I decided see about sending the camera in to be checked.  I made an 800 call and got a reference number, the needed forms, and was preparing to pack up the kit and send it off.  Suddenly, I got an email from Olympus service.  I expected it to be about sending in the camera, but no.  It was a letter about some posts I had made at various sites concerning the picture quality with the E510, including a poor rating on Amazon.com.  I was happy that they were actively seeking me out to determine what was wrong.  In response I sent them an email of explanation, and one of my best shots (along with a comparison picture from another camera).  Since Yahoo only lets you send a couple of photos at a time, I had to try and send my more typical (problematic) images in a separate email.  However, when I tried it I got this msg back.

The MessageLabs Content Control service has identified that an
email sent by you may contain inappropriate content
according to the policy rules established by either your organisation
or the intended recipient's organisation.
  The recipient address of the email was: -
 
    CustomerSupport@olympus.com

Sending a couple more pictures returned the same message.

The next day (this morning 8/24) I got this msg from them

Dear Brian,

What format are the image files are you attempting to email? How many? Are you trying to send them uncompressed or compressed?
 
Please email some unedited, uncompressed sample JPEG images showing what you are describing.
 
Regards,
Olympus Imaging America, Inc.

I replied that I tried sending the files in uncompressed JPEG and included the censor msg for them to seeÖ  and I havenít heard from them again.

These people seem really weird.  It may be an over reaction but Iím concerned that something might happen to my camera now, if I send it in.

Iím not looking for advice in this Ė only wanted to pass along my experiences.
Logged
Quentin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1119



WWW
« Reply #28 on: August 25, 2007, 05:17:23 PM »
ReplyReply

My E-510 is sharp.  It does seem that there are a handful of problem units, as seems to happen with just about every camera manufacturer.

Quentin
Logged

Quentin Bargate, ARPS, Author, photographer entrepreneur and senior partner of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2013
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad