opinions about Olympus dslrs?

sturisoma

sturisoma

Messages
2,908
Name
Summer
Edit My Images
Yes
ok so I need a 2nd camera and I am thinking about getting a Canon 450D because I loved my last one so much, mainly because it was relatively small and light.

I recently bought some Olympus binoculars and the optics are amazing, so I was wondering about getting an Olympus as a 2nd camera.

I used to have an Olympus L-1 slr and it took brilliant pictures, I couldn't fault it as an slr (except the tele was built in so you couldn't change the lens).

But I have no experience with their dslr cameras, and there seems to be very little info on the net.

Does anyone here have any experience? pros/cons? I don't think I'll be needing more than a kit lens and a tele up to 200mm, accessories-wise maybe just spare batteries and memory cards.

alternatively is there another (better) camera body which uses the olympus lenses?

thanks in advance :)
 
Olympus have always been able to make terrific optics.
They currently have 2 mounts:
4/3 - currently comprising 1 model & basically seems to be being pensioned off
micro 4/3 - their main thrust these days. The OM-D EM-5 is a very fine camera but possibly out of your budget?
Panasonic also share this mount so you can use micro 4/3 Olympus lenses on Panasonic bodies. Olympus use in-body stabilisation & Panasonic use in-lens so using an Olympus lens on a Panasonic body means no stabilisation.
 
thanks Scott, I've seen some 2nd hand E-510s with kit lens for £170 which is about as much as I'd pay for a 2nd camera. Do you think that's a good price?

I suppose it's always better to have a 2nd body to match your existing lenses, shame Olympus aren't more popular.

thanks for your reply :)
 
I have been using olympus for 6 years now and I am by happy might he 4/3 mount I have used the e500 which can now be picked up. Fro around 100-150 which is an absurd bargain I agree it's is a. Shame they aren't ot more popular . I am considering an e5 currently as an upgrade. But am now in the quandary to change to cannon or Nikon!
 
The Olympus lenses are very expensive compared to the equivalent Canon and Nikon versions especially when you move into the faster lenses.

A couple of reviews of the E-510
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E510/E510A.HTM
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse510/

Not sure why you would want to support 2 systems, wouldn't it be better to just buy a second Canon body. Think I would rather get a 40D or 50D as a second body rather than the xxxD bodies, but that's my personal choice.
 
thanks guys

I wouldn't want to get the same camera as a 2nd body tbh - and I liked the 450D because it was small enough to stick in my handbag - I believe the Olympus is smaller again. I was just considering an Olympus because of the optic quality.
 
Rumour has it that Canon are about to launch a very small DSLR so that may fit in a handbag.
Similarly Sony's A3x series are small bodies.

& then you have micro 4/3, NEX etc. which will too.
 
Hey Summer.
The kit zooms on any Olympus DSLR are excellent quality, especially the 40-150MkI, and they are really cheap to buy right now. (and small and lightweight)
The e-510 has rather decent stabilisation too, and all Olympus DSLRs make Jpegs of very pleasing colours.
You can google Wrotniak, Biofos and e-group forum for loads more info.
My first DSLR was an e-510 with short kit zoom.
Compared to most DSLRs the sensor is narrower (and a bit shorter) so everything's 4:3 ratio instead of 3:2, some folk don't like that.
One niggly thing always bothered me : Olympus DSLRs do not have a cheap fast-focusing 50mm, they have a slower-focusing awesome 50mm macro that costs about £250.

Hunt for a twin-zoom kit for £200 or less : you will enjoy.
 
Leenypoppins99 said:
I have been using olympus for 6 years now and I am by happy might he 4/3 mount I have used the e500 which can now be picked up. Fro around 100-150 which is an absurd bargain I agree it's is a. Shame they aren't ot more popular . I am considering an e5 currently as an upgrade. But am now in the quandary to change to cannon or Nikon!
Click to expand...

I changed to Nikon from an Olympus E410 about 18 months ago. At the time it looked like they were moving away from the 4/3rds system since the only the flagship camera was being made. I was looking to upgrade both lens and camera so a system change was not too much of a problem. I also didn't want to build up a lens collection if they were going to later pull the plug on it.

If you already have some cannon lens to fit a cannon camera body surely its best to get a cannon body. Then you can use both cameras with the lens you already have.
 
Last edited:
thanks guys

Rob that is my dilemma, I started with a 450D and it was small enough for my bag

but the reason I upgraded to the 50D was for image quality

so do I really want to go back a step?

The Olympus optics are amazing, I am so tempted...I have seen one for £170 with the kit lens, battery charger etc. I can get a 450D body for £200.

I know another Canon would be better for lens use, but would I ever take 2 bodies with me with a lens on each? Or would I usually take one or the other and interchange lenses?

I suspect I would rarely take both cameras out with me.

I am still leaning towards the Olympus I think :)
 
sturisoma said:
thanks guys

Rob that is my dilemma, I started with a 450D and it was small enough for my bag

but the reason I upgraded to the 50D was for image quality

so do I really want to go back a step?
Click to expand...

One thing that's helped me accept smaller camera systems is accepting that my images aren't going to be enlarged to 20 feet wide and displayed in galleries and only need to be good enough for me and a number of family and friends to view on screen or printed to a maximum of A3. Once that's accepted it also helps to try and avoid pixel peeping at 100% or more.

If you can do those two things, accept that images are for normal to close viewing but not microscopic examination and just for yourself, family and friends then maybe you're on the road to accepting that lots of cameras and lenses are capable of producing images that are more than good enough.

As I've said several times on this site, at low to middling ISO's my G1 produces images that are easily lost amongst 20D and 5D images and I can't easily and reliably spot them and neither can other people I've asked :D
 
all good points Alan. Not sure if it's me or the camera, but my Canon lenses all seem to have horrible purple flare on things like tree branches. I think I need good quality lenses rather than an expensive body for my 2nd camera. Trouble is I can't afford 'expensive' anything lol.
 
Yup, some lenses give more CA than others but I think it's generally something that you get at the widest apertures where there's a change at edges. It may be worthwhile Googling your way to some on line reviews to see if CA is a know issue (as in - worse than average) with the lenses you own.

I think some camera and lens combinations and some software do auto CA corrections these days so that might be something to look into. I think my G1 and 14-42mm kit lens does auto correction... but however it's done there's no sign of CA.

On the money side, I'm lucky in that I can buy pretty much whatever I want but to be honest I get more fun out of using my cheap Panasonic G1 and cheap manual legacy lenses than I get from using my 5D and much more expensive AF lenses. I have a Rokkor 55mm f1.7 that I love and it cost under £20 complete with Minolta to MFT adapter, I have a Rokkor 28mm f2.8 that I use that was cheap and also some cheap Olympus Zuiko legacy lenses.

Maybe a cheap CSC and cheapo legacy lens fun is something to think about?
 
Last edited:
Alan : your & my Lumix G1 does away with purple flare in treebranches when using the kit lens, 14-45 in my case. It is truly amazing : even better than Olympus' lenses.
There is some trickery going on but ... it's a real plus.
The Olympus DSLR kit zooms are very good though.
I would NOT recommend buying an Olympus DSLR without buying one of the 40-150 lenses at the same time : they are that good.
 
woof woof said:
Yup, some lenses give more CA than others but I think it's generally something that you get at the widest apertures where there's a change at edges. It may be worthwhile Googling your way to some on line reviews to see if CA is a know issue (as in - worse than average) with the lenses you own.

I think some camera and lens combinations and some software do auto CA corrections these days so that might be something to look into. I think my G1 and 14-42mm kit lens does auto correction... but however it's done there's no sign of CA.

On the money side, I'm lucky in that I can buy pretty much whatever I want but to be honest I get more fun out of using my cheap Panasonic G1 and cheap manual legacy lenses than I get from using my 5D and much more expensive AF lenses. I have a Rokkor 55mm f1.7 that I love and it cost under £20 complete with Minolta to MFT adapter, I have a Rokkor 28mm f2.8 that I use that was cheap and also some cheap Olympus Zuiko legacy lenses.

Maybe a cheap CSC and cheapo legacy lens fun is something to think about?
Click to expand...

One click in Lightroom and CA goes away, and works perfectly every time. So no issues there unless you are looking for them

sturisoma said:
thanks guys

Rob that is my dilemma, I started with a 450D and it was small enough for my bag

but the reason I upgraded to the 50D was for image quality

so do I really want to go back a step?

The Olympus optics are amazing, I am so tempted...I have seen one for £170 with the kit lens, battery charger etc. I can get a 450D body for £200.

I know another Canon would be better for lens use, but would I ever take 2 bodies with me with a lens on each? Or would I usually take one or the other and interchange lenses?

I suspect I would rarely take both cameras out with me.

I am still leaning towards the Olympus I think :)
Click to expand...

that's an interesting one! 450D probably had one of the better APS-C sensors at fairly sensible 12MP, and then it just went downhill - less sharpness and more noise, but MORE MP. 450D has rather poor ergonomics on the other hand, and it is painfully small to handhold.
 
daugirdas said:
One click in Lightroom and CA goes away, and works perfectly every time. So no issues there unless you are looking for them
Click to expand...

If you have LR and if it works, great.

I have CS5 and the CA tool can be pretty ineffective.
 
Ulfric M Douglas said:
Alan : your & my Lumix G1 does away with purple flare in treebranches when using the kit lens, 14-45 in my case. It is truly amazing : even better than Olympus' lenses.
There is some trickery going on but ... it's a real plus.
Click to expand...

Personally I rarely find CA to be an issue in a real world whole image or even in a reasonable crop. I've never ever had anyone say "That shot's ruined by CA."

A very heavy crop of a shot I took of a little darling at f0.95 is hanging proudly on the parents wall, CA and all :gag: :D I think it's only us nerds who care about CA :D
 
The E-520 is great little camera.

I had an E-410 and now have an E-620 they produce good images and the kit lenses are tiny and light (plastic mounts)
 
I have ordered one, collect Good Friday. I gave up smoking which is saving me over £200 a month so this will be my reward :)
 
woof woof said:
Personally I rarely find CA to be an issue in a real world whole image or even in a reasonable crop. I've never ever had anyone say "That shot's ruined by CA."

A very heavy crop of a shot I took of a little darling at f0.95 is hanging proudly on the parents wall, CA and all :gag: :D I think it's only us nerds who care about CA :D
Click to expand...

I think you are talking about purple fringing - this is not CA at all. CA is the cyan/magenta or blue/yellow contours around objects near the edge of a shot and happens at all apertures. Fringing - is well purple or green smear you get at the highlight edges at very wide apertures and to get rid of that you have to replace that particular color with something neutral - grey works sometimes...
 
I may sometimes use lazy language, this is just an informal chat forum so forgive me, but I sometimes have some idea what I'm talking about :D

From Wiki...

"There are two types of chromatic aberration, axial (longitudinal), and transverse (lateral). Axial aberration occurs when different wavelengths of light are focused at different distances from the lens, i.e., different points on the optical axis (focus shift). Transverse aberration occurs when different wavelengths are focused at different positions in the focal plane (because the magnification and/or distortion of the lens also varies with wavelength; indicated in graphs as (change in) focus length). The acronym LCA is used, but ambiguous, and may refer to either longitudinal or lateral CA; for clarity, this article uses "axial" (shift in the direction of the optical axis) and "transverse" (shift perpendicular to the optical axis, in the plane of the sensor or film).

These two types have different characteristics, and may occur together. Axial CA occurs throughout the image and is specified by optical engineers, optometrists, and vision scientists in the unit of focus known widely as diopters,[1] and is reduced by stopping down (this increases depth of field, so though the different wavelength focus at different distances, they are still in acceptable focus). Transverse CA does not occur in the center, and increases towards the edge, but is not affected by stopping down.

In digital sensors, axial CA results in the red and blue planes being defocused (assuming that the green plane is in focus), which is relatively difficult to remedy in post-processing, while transverse CA results in the red, green, and blue planes being at different magnifications (magnification changing along radii, as in geometric distortion), and can be corrected by radially scaling the planes appropriately so they line up."

and...

"As chromatic aberration is complex (due to its relationship to focal length, etc.) some camera manufacturers employ lens-specific chromatic aberration appearance minimization techniques. All Nikon DSLRs with CMOS sensors and all Panasonic Lumix DSLRs, additionally some Nikon and Panasonic compact cameras, do such processing automatically in camera for JPEG images. Nikon DSLRs additionally store correction-data in RAW-files for use by Nikon Capture NX, View NX and some other RAW tools. Due to the Canon EF lens mount all-electronic lens communication and coupling system, the Canon's Digital Photo Professional software has one of the most advanced chromatic aberration appearance minimization (also vignetting and distortion handling) systems that uses lens model-specific focusing distance, focal length and aperture information stored in the Canon RAW (CR2) files. Third party software tools such as PTLens are also capable of performing complex chromatic aberration appearance minimization with their large database of cameras and lens."
 
Last edited:
here's an example of green/purple 'noise' on the branches - only a problem when shooting into a bright background, especially when the shot is set up to expose the dark foreground.

I have noticed this to be a problem with all my Canon lenses. I am hoping that it is not a problem with the Olympus

I have also noticed this purple 'noise' when using my son's binoculars which are meant to be HD optics - but the Olympus binoculars have no purple noise. So fingers crossed eh?





handsome robin by moominmama, on Flickr
 
although a UV filter would probably help :)
 
sturisoma said:
...
8396896761_72ca84f656.jpg
Click to expand...
I can provoke some green with that kind of shot but nothing of your level shown.
The two kit zooms contain some 'ED' glass which helps a LOT.
Extra-low dispersion? Anyway.
You'll soon find out!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top